And this is the Saturday night lecture, December the 6th. Take up here in the first hour a few more of these axioms and logics. See what we can get out of these things.

This is the second lecture hour on December the 6th. You know I could talk to you quite a bit about logic. Talked a lot about logic, logic is oh… interesting stuff uh… there’s a lot of material. But possibly the best method of addressing this subject I would know of would be to go back over the formative steps which made Scientology and demonstrate it so that we could demonstrate at the same time the fundamentals of logic. And I won’t put very much time in on this, and uh… give you something else in this hour.

I’ve already covered gradient scales and found out that gradient scales had a considerable importance in auditing. The whole background of creative processing could be said to be the proper understanding and handling of gradient scales.

I just want to mention the definition of logic. Logic is a gradient scale of data, related data. And logic could be said to be the aligning of data by gradient scale. And anyone who tells you that mathematics is logical is crossing up their definitions. mathematics is symbolical, and as a symbolism carries forward all manner of impossible relationships, or nearly impossible relationships, which can then be applied with some approximation to the real universe or to any other universe.

And, really, a gradient scale would be a little more of what was. And then a little more of what was a little more of and then a little more of what was a little more of a little more of. And so we could reach out then from the tiniest point into the widest possible sphere.

It is all very well to say one equals one, but till you ask, „One what?“ It’s very nice to have an… have an abstract datum, „One“, and this abstract datum is a symbol that will represent another „One“, and that is the symbol which represents but… let’s say one what? And we say one apple. And if we say one apple equals one apple – oh no. One apple does not even equal itself. I give you Korzybski on all of that. He’s done good work on that, and we needn’t labor it any further.

Now, talking here in these logics about very shifty words, things like truth. You start talking about truth, uh… well, you start talking about truth. And you start talking about anything in this stratosphere of knowledge and it’s susceptible to many opinions and so on. A lot of people have been going around saying this was truth, and that was truth, and so forth.

But at no time should an individual make the mistake of believing that a symbol is the thing. And people who insist that the symbol is the thing are not only badly aberrated; they are insane. That’s just blunt. If you decide to hit a definition of insanity, the best definition of which I know would be: this person widely believes that the symbols are the things. And you would hit it. You could go into any insane asylum, you could have uh… manic depressive, schizoid tendencies, uh… or old-time dementia praecox, or any one of these things, and you could go straight across the boards on the thing, and you would find out this person thinks the symbol is the thing. I don’t care what type of insanity this is, whether you’re talking about a computing psychotic or a dramatizing psychotic or any other interesting thing. Because that is a characteristic of MEST, and MEST is itself insane. It is insane because it cannot determine or align itself. It has to do it according to a pattern determined for it. And anytime anything has to have everything done for it, you get an insane object.

We had two truths we were working with. The possibility of their being an infinite truth, but which to us at this time is not definable and so is itself a possibility. And the other is a workable truth, another kind of truth, just a workable truth. Therefore anything is true which is workable. And what is workable? Workable is… workability is the capability of starting changing and stopping. And the degree of capability of starting changing and stopping would demonstrate for this universe workability. And when you say, „Starting changing and stopping what?“ you have immediately gone too far and uh… you should just drop that and sort of back off rather abashed, because it’s… really applies to anything in this universe. This universe is built almost wholly upon the principle of start change and stop.

Sanity would be the ability to reason. Reason can be done in abstracts, and reason can be done by logic, but logic is not the thing. logic is a method of extrapolating from one datum and building a bridge of tiny gradients to another datum.

Well now, I don’t know what the workability of a truth would be outside of a cycle of action, unless it would be the workability of a postulate. So you say, „Let there be light“ and uh… there’s light. Well, that was a workable postulate, wasn’t it? And uh… you say uh… „Let there be uh… camels with spin-horned hectacles on them“ and uh… there are camels with horn-spinned rectacles on them and uh… you say, „That was a workable truth then, wasn’t it?“ Now we’re moving into some other little sphere here, aren’t we?

When first Aristotle marched upon the field with his uh… logic, man was uh… man… man didn’t have any logic. He had not codified logic to amount to anything, and so it was quite welcome to him. He was not so aberrated at that time but what he couldn’t handle this and know its speciousness. But when you find somebody has… has achieved a syllogism as a perfection, you have somebody who is very close to passing in his chips at the nearest spin bin. The symbol is not the thing. The shadow is not the substance. That doesn’t mean you can’t work with symbols, but it does mean very definitely that you should never mistake these two things. The symbol apple is not an apple; you cannot eat the symbol apple. That is the best test of it.

And so uh… you say, uh… „Let there be darkness. Let there be a god. Let there be a devil. Uh… let there be a General Motors and Westinghouse.“ Anything you care to say, and if that was immediately demonstrable as a workability, then by our definition, it is a truth. Quite simple, isn’t it?

Now in all of the lines of logic we have, then, therefore, this liability: that people can confuse an abstract with a reality. And when we say a reality, we could make it a reality for any universe. But the abstract is not the reality. Never.

If you were operating then in a vacuum of no space, uh… that’s a pretty trick thing, a no space vacuum operating in a no space area, uh… where there is no space, but only the capability and potentiality of space. If you had all these things then and you didn’t have anything there, and you had a true static, no motion, no wave length, nothing, why one could theoretically postulate anything and have it become a truth. Well, now it gets out a little bit further and it says a truth for whom? Well, for him. Now he’s operating from a uh… no space, no wave length, no mass, no velocity, no geographical location and he makes a postulate and it comes true. And who is it true for? It’s true for the individual that makes the postulate. Well now, oddly enough a fellow has to be in pretty good condition in order to make a postulate and have it be true for him. In creative processing uh… he’ll be found to have a little difficulty there then. You’ll make this postulate or you’ve made this postulate and it is either too true, or you can’t make it come true.

We could say all sorts of things about logic. We could say a lot about mathematics. But we could spend our time a little bit better elsewise.

Now there’s uh… there’s several squirrels – squirrel is a technical term, uh… a squirrel is somebody who in… who invents something that he knows won’t work in order to… to uh… uh… uh… get some nut to audit. Uh… and uh… that’s a squirrel and uh… there are some squirrels who go around and they pick up a fragment of the subject and they go around and they sell this thing like mad. And they’ll just overplay it. Well, one of these squirrels uh… not too long ago listened to the first half of a lecture tape. And this lecture was concerned with self-determinism and it tried to treat this whole subject of postulates and said there is no… really no reason why a person couldn’t simply say, „I am now a self-determined individual“ and it’d come true because that’s a postulate. There isn’t any reason why he couldn’t do that.

Let’s take the subject of Scientology and let’s see if there’s any logic involved with it at all. There isn’t a mathematics that can embrace the subject of Scientology, because it is an invented mathematics. It’s an invented mathematics that accepts gradient scales and „absolutes are unobtainable“. And it is a method of thinking about things. And is just as true as it is workable. And no truer. And is not, in itself, an arbitrary, fascistic uh… police force to make sure that we all think right thoughts. It’s a servant of the mind, a servo-mechanism of the mind, it is not a master of the mind. Scientology will decline, and become useless to man, on the day when it becomes the master of thinking. Don’t think it won’t do that. It has every capability in it of doing that.

And the first hour of this two-hour lecture was devoted to why you couldn’t simply say you were self-determined, be self-determined, speed up your governor and knock everything together the way you want it to and have tremendous effectiveness thereafter. And the second hour is devoted to why that can’t happen. Well, they threw away the second hour and uh… Machiavelli wrote a book once called THE PRINCE and THE PRINCE has as its first uh… part, How to become a Great Ruler, and the second part, it says How to Stay There. And Napoleon, Napoleon and Hitler and… and all sorts of people down through the lines have… have been saying… uh… well, they’ve been reading Machiavelli’s PRINCE and they’ve been putting it into action like mad, and… and they take the first half and then they never read the second half. They never have and they don’t stay there.

Contained in the knowable, workable portions before your eyes there are methods of controlling human beings and thetans which have never before been dreamed of in this universe. Control mechanism of such awesome and solid proportions that if the remedies were not so much easier to apply, one would be appalled at the dangerousness to beingness that exists in Scientology.

Well, the second half of this lecture is… was devoted to and contains some of this data. Devoted to why that postulate couldn’t suddenly stick. Ever since that time we’ve been having people spin like mad around the various locales. Uh… they… they say, „I’m a self-determined individual. Rrrrrr. You say I’m not? mmmomm rrrrrr.“ That’s what’s known as circuit determinism. A little bit different than self-determinism.

Fortunately, it was intelligently invented, and I say that without any possible bow; I say that because part of its logic was: the remedy should exist before the bullet. And that is just an arbitrary. There really is no reason for that, except for this: when you invent the bullet before the remedy, you have to invent the remedy under duress. It’s very hard to kneel alongside of a patient who is suffering from a super radioactive burn, and try to figure out in that moment what is radioactivity and how does it affect the human flesh. That’s not the time to figure the remedy. The time to figure the remedy is before the bullet.

What they do is set themselves up. You get this fellow and he drags himself out of this river and he’s just got through swimming steadily and solidly for eighteen hours and he’s all worn out, and he’s just about to… to… to uh… hand in his chips and so forth, and then just as he comes out of the river, you… you get ahold of him. You take him by the scruff of the neck and you say, „All right. Now tell yourself that you’re well, that you feel good, that you’re not cold, that you’re perfectly rested, and uh… come on out here; we’ve got a quarter horse for you to race.“ And in this he… he’ll say, „All right. I’m all rested,“ and he’s liable to agree with you and he’s even liable to do it out of agreement, but there isn’t very much going to happen. And that’s because he’s making a postulate while still holding on to the composite of postulates which bring him into the reality in which he insists on existing.

Now I want to throw no aspersions or criticism or… or anything else at the field of nuclear physics and my very good friends in nuclear physics; there are very few nuclear physicists in the United States that are really nuclear physicists. There are a lot of professors of English and so forth who are employed by the government under the heading „nuclear physicist“. It was very amusing, by the way, I was down at one of the big companies not too long ago and I took… took occasion to ask the boys in charge of three or four departments what they had their degrees in. One of ‘em had it in English and one of ‘em had it in Arts and the other one had it in Drama. And I agreed with the last one, because I said there’s sure plenty of drama in it, whatever else there is. But here we have, here we had a flagrant case of inventing the bullet and then wondering what the remedy was. They invented, the dopes – I, pardon me, I… I… I didn’t mean to become overwrought about that. These… these noodleheads uh… invented and manufactured – can you imagine a central government doing this?! I mean, it would have to be a central government that was just scraping the bottom of the tone scale! A central government that needed… needed rocket guns to shoot anchors up high enough to grab on to hold bottom! They invented an unlimited weapon without inventing any defense for it. They didn’t invent a force screen and then invent an atom bomb. They didn’t invent a method of controlling the people who would use atom bombs and then invent atom bombs. No, they just said, „Gee, we can make a lot of explosion! What do you know! Let’s all run around and be… be very, very explosive!“ And what do you find? They… they… they didn’t even go and look up in their elementary textbooks on… on national uh… the… the… the art of running a national government, and didn’t even find out this following line: „In the presence of an unlimited weapon central government ceases to exist, and has always ceased to exist.“ That’s interesting, isn’t it? It’s right in the textbooks.

Now if you make a postulate out of no motion, no space, no geographical location, or any other influence, why sure, you can make any postulate you please. But after you’ve made a hundred thousand million postulates and you’ve got yourself nicely stacked around with cycles of action and MEST and agreements and responsibilities and subject to forces and you own this and something else has you, why uh… then you suddenly say when you’re in that state, „Now I change my mind about this whole thing, and while still sitting right here and being very insistent on holding on to all that I have which I acquired solely by the process of making postulates, I’m now going to hold on to all that and I’m just going to sort of sneak over here covertly and I’m going to say – well, I’m holding on to that, but I’m going to say uh… „I am now self-determined as an individual. And then I’m going to make that stick.“ As long as the fellow held on to his havingness and the substance of the MEST universe, the identity which has been assigned to him and all these other things, he of course is holding on to a large mass of postulates. He’s holding on to an enormous number of them and insisting then by holding on to them that these other postulates have complete validity and while he insists on this complete validity he goes out and says sincerely, „I am now a self-determined individual and just by making a postulate I can make it come true.“ And he’s saying, „You better not invalidate me.“ Well, he’s invalidating himself. He’s insisting on going along and remaining in the unchanged status quo of being where he is, what he is, owning what he does own and responsible for what he has.

Any time there has been a weapon of unlimited scope and power against which there has been no adequate defense, the immediate result of the presence of that weapon on the national scene – not its use, but its continued presence on the national scene – has caused the disintegration of a culture and the central government. Uniform, it’s all through history.

Well, these boys found this out immediately, really, uh… only they didn’t observe what they found out. They found out immediately that all you had to do was postulate you were self-determined. And in the process of trying to make it stick you had to kick all your friends in their teeth; you had to leave the family; you had to change over any possible method of life in which you were operating. They did the same trick however in spite of all of these changes that would take place; they took place chaotically, catastrophically. The changes occurred because they couldn’t regulate the thing. They… they didn’t know what was occurring to them. And here suddenly they wind up in terrible condition.

The first example of this is the horse and the sword. He was the first unlimited weapon. He started coming out of the steppes of Russia in 1500 B.C., and he swept down upon a defenceless Europe which had only the most fragmentary type of infantry uh… formation. And the horse and the sword went through Europe like a lightning bolt. And there was nothing to stop him! Nothing! And the civilization which was Europe in those days – and it was that civilization on which the Phoenician civilization built, by the way – we know nothing of it today to amount to anything. Why? It was just swept away. For 200 years, from 1500 B.C. to 1300 B.C., we had a state of anarchy and chaos existing in central Europe which has never since been approached and it was done with a horse and a sword. And why did it stop? Because somebody sat down and did some real heavy thinking and came up with a brand-new idea: a wall. Came up with this brand-new datum: a wall. And they built walls around their towns, and walls around castles, and they built walls, walls, walls, and first thing you know you couldn’t have a cavalry detachment composed of bandits or militia or anything of the sort suddenly riding through every village and hamlet. There were always walls into which to retire. And the Phoenician then, with those walls, was able to push frontier posts out into the further reaches of a onetime civilization and reconquer it to some degree.

Well, this is the magician here, he makes a… he goes out and he says, „Well, let’s throw a… a little bit of spiders’ brains in here and a few threads of dawn and let’s mix them up with a frog’s cough and expose them out very nicely to this Diogean core of blackness. Say three chants over them and now uh… let’s see, what was I doing here? Oh yeah, well, let’s pour some of this on the ground. Well, look at that, imagine that, a tree starts growing. And uh… uh… well, well, it just keeps eating everything up and so forth. Well, isn’t that interesting?“ And uh… all of a sudden he says uh… „Gee, it’s getting dark around here, uh… wonder what’s taking place?“ and he looks up and he says, „Well, this tree is sort of swamping everything and it’s cutting out the sunlight in all directions. And I’d better find my cave, if I can find my cave. But no, it’s now too dark and there is no cave and – gee whiz, that tree so and so.“ And he goes on. And then he starts cursing the tree, and he says, „Look what that tree did to me. look how mean and ornery that tree was. Look… look… look at all these horrible things this tree is doing.“ And another magician sees him one day as he’s ruined, hobbling down along the road and this fellow complains to him bitterly about what the tree did to him.

And Rome, itself, and Greece could come into existence because of what? Walls. And finally this was improved on to such an enormous degree that we have the Great Wall of China. The idea even got out there, which was finished uh, the third or fourth century A.D. Walls licked the cavalry men. Now there have been a few other imbalances, but there has never been an imbalance to the degree that exists today.

He did several things wrong. The first thing he did wrong was to mix up a lot of things without postulating why he was doing it. He didn’t say what the end product would be. The second he failed to say what the end product – what his goal was and how… why he was trying to achieve that goal – he immediately abandoned the plateau of cause and stepped down to the valley of effect. The moment that he was there in effect, then what he had already caused grew up, shut out the light, and he said, „Well, I have no responsibility for it and… and it’s… I’m… I’m being affected by it badly.“ He goes downhill further.

But what kind of a government and what kind of a weapon is really serious? Not a weapon which destroys mud. A weapon that destroys minds, that’s serious. Out of the body of knowledge which lies before you a sufficient technology is to take over, seize and handle any government or people on the face of the Earth. You aren’t of an ethical level, even, that permits you to observe this. You wouldn’t think in these lines. And yet if only those principles were known, there would be people who could and would think in those lines.

Now if something else happens to him he complains about that, he complains about something else, he never makes a statement to himself what goal he is trying to achieve, what he is trying to do, he just goes on. One day he suddenly mixes up a Las Vegas, a little bit of furrow and a blond in New York and takes a train and says „Well, we leave it all the chance and I guess I got this job, I don’t know what I’m doing but I can hope“ and he is a member of Alcoholic Anonymous because they tell him he can live for the minute or I don’t know maybe they give him more than a minute, the Alcoholic Anonymous, maybe they give him 5 minutes or 24 hours or something the like, they ration their time – gosh, this guy is in terrible shape, he is become homo sapiens.

You can control men like you would control robots with those techniques. The implantation, black Dianetics, pain-drug-hypnosis are very mild methods of control. Do you know that the Sufi Mohammedan cult under Hashshashin controlled Europe for 300 years with the rather thin gadget of throwing hashish into some young man, suddenly making him appear, wake up in a beautiful garden where there were forty black-eyed houries to serve his every desire, where there were rivers of milk and honey – real milk and honey, rivers and fountains. And he could stay there for about three or four days, and then he would suddenly be told, „Now you have had your taste of paradise. In order to return to paradise it is necessary for you to return down to earth and carry out the commands of this order.“ And this young man would then find himself suddenly in the middle of some large town, and he would know that all he had to do was to walk up and kill the sultan of that town, and if he himself were killed in the same act, he would immediately appear in the garden of paradise. Hence the Assassins, and the Assassins controlled practically every breath Europe took for almost 300 years. How simple it was.

Now all… all his fellow has to do… he hears one day… he says, „Now all I’ve got to do is just postulate that I’m self-determined.“ Of course, he doesn’t know what self-determinism is – he has no definition of that, or anything of the sort. He merely says, he postulates, „It is a state in which I can do what I please without incurring any penalty. Therefore, if I say I’m self-determined, then I don’t have to take any responsibility whatsoever for anything bad that I do. Because it’s on my self-determinism. And that well worked out; that equates perfectly.“ Uh… he says, „That’s a wonderful state of affairs,“ and of course people keep hitting him with axes, and throwing him into gutters and throwing him this way and that way, and it’s all backwards.

All they had to do was write over the signature of the grand high assassin to the sultan of whatever they wanted to address and say, „Unless we receive certain camel loads of silk and so many slaves,“ and that sort of thing, „we are not going to be friendly.“ And believe me, those things arrived. Right now. Or, „We do not… Dear Royal Potentate Highness, we do not approve of your recent law uh… congress uh… Bill 862 uh… and we think it ought to be changed.“ Bang it was changed. Why? Because nobody could stop one of these young boys. Nobody could stop ‘em. The fellow’d suddenly walk out of the crowd right straight into the drawn scimiters of the guard, and before anybody could even make him halt in his tracks he had stabbed the royal high sultan in the breast most expiringly.

You get the difference then between a clear-cut series of postulates which could become truths and a clear-cut chunk of chaos which uh… most men consider their lives should be – not could be, but should be. There’s a big difference there so when you’re talking about truth, we’re just talking about another level of truth when we say postulates.

That was an unlimited weapon. But it was a weapon effected through using phenomena of the mind. If you release the remedy, and if the remedy is fast enough before the forces of evil can muster their machinations and use the overt act, it can’t ever be used. There is only one thing that could happen to Scientology, and that is to say that it would be buried. The remedy would be buried. If it ever went out of sight, this world’s done. All you’ve got to do is invalidate it and put it out of sight and hide it, and it’ll come up in the wrong place doing the wrong thing, and mankind will find itself a slave.

All right, let’s take another level of truth now. Let’s take the truth called MEST universe. This truth is composited out of a series of agreements. After this fellow’s made a few postulates he gets ahold of a few friends and for the sake of randomity they all agree that such and such is going to take place and that when so and so makes a postulate and when they all agree upon this postulate, then this postulate is there and then going to become common to all of them. And they think that’s grand, and that’s a good game and we can play this game with impunity.

So anybody that knows the remedy of this subject, anybody that knows these techniques, is himself actually under a certain responsibility – that’s to make sure that he doesn’t remain a sole proprietor. That’s all it takes, just don’t remain a sole proprietor. Don’t ever think that a monopoly of this subject is a safe thing to have. It’s not safe. It’s not safe for man; it’s not safe for this universe.

Well they can play it just so long, and then the randomity starts to set up.

This universe has long been looking for new ways to make slaves. Well, we’ve got some new ways to make slaves here. Let’s see that none are made.

The postulate then is losing its value as single truth and becomes relative to those agreements which have been made amongst them. Now this fellow one day says, „I’m now going to postulate… postulate that I’m going to have a new palace.“

Now it’s fortunate that we are able to make Clears as fast as we can make them. It’s very, very fortunate. Because black Dianetics, as most destructive things work in this universe, could work a lot faster than the old-time techniques – work really fast. Nowadays – get this – you can use creative processing; the process of using mock-ups will flip out a PDH without ever touching it or addressing it. Isn’t that fascinating. You can knock a PDH to pieces with fifteen minutes of processing. And it takes longer than that to put one in.

And the others say, „That’s out of agreement. You know very well that we invented a labor union and the labor union gets us so much money an hour and all that sort of thing and they have to go over it and we’ve got to have a quarry. And you’ll have to own the land to the quarry and you’ll have to get a permit in order to quarry stone. And you’ll have to get an interstate trucking license in order to haul that stone over here and we’ll have to hire masons. And there’s unemployment tax and there’s social security and everybody knows that you can’t pay anything like that for anything of the sort. And you don’t have any chips.“

Another condition could exist, a PDH could be so – a pain-drug- hypnosis – they knock the fellow out, they drug him – could be laid in with great rapidity. But it could be laid in so strongly that the individual is rendered dead. Or non compos mentis from there on and thus out of communication. That individual is no menace to anybody. He’s either complete ravingly gone, out of communication, and look… or he’s dead, and a bullet does the same thing. So it’s not a good weapon, really. Because if he’s able… if he suddenly starts acting peculiarly or doing things which completely alter any pattern he has had in the past, or if he is doing things which look like they are vaguely bad, then how easy it is. You can get ahold of him. You’ll find almost any preclear can be given creative processing. And you could get ahold at him and flip the PDH out. That’s interesting, isn’t it? In other words, you can take ‘em out as fast as they lay ‘em down.

And the fellow says, „Well, I’ll… I got here, not too long ago I used to say – well, I make a stack of money and so forth I could pay all these things with.“

Therefore we really do have the remedy before the assault weapon is produced. Did you ever read poor old George Orwell’s uh… 1984? Yes, yes, that’s wonderful. That would be, could be, the palest imagined shadow of what a world would be like under the rule of the secret use of Scientology with no remedy in existence. Well it’s all right in this offhand age to just brush things aside and say, „Well, it’s of no importance, no importance, really, and… let’s not be dramatic the way people are being about the atom bomb.“ Actually the atom bomb isn’t as serious as this subject. It’s just a MEST weapon. And, it’s all right to be very offhand, and very cheerful and so on, and – like the little boy whistling in the dark says, „No ghosts or boogymen exist.“ – Well, this boogyman does exist.

„No,“ they say, „on this agreement – why we’ve agreed that the only currency is that currency on which we’ve agreed.“ And he’ll say, „Well, I di… I didn’t agree to that currency; I wasn’t there.“ And they said, „You agreed to an army to protect our property, didn’t you?“

It’s a very simple remedy. And that’s just make sure that the remedy is passed along. That’s all. Don’t hoard it. Don’t hold it. And if you ever do use any black Dianetics, use it on the guy who pulled Scientology out of sight and made it so it wasn’t available. Because he’s the boy who would be electing himself „the new order“. We don’t need any more new orders – all those orders as far as I’m concerned have been filled.

And the fellow says, „Well, yes, I did.“ And they say, „Well, they protect the currency now. Let’s… let’s have no more of that.“

Now when it comes, then, to logic… when it comes to logic, the logic of putting this together had as its first criteria what? Application? What were we going to do? What were we trying to do? That was fairly well thought-out, we were trying to help beingness. What are we going to do? Well, we’re trying to help beingness. There’s a good cause and effect definition. We sit down and we say, „Now, what, what’s our purpose? What’s this all about? What’s the first statement made on that? Well, that was it.

And so you’ve got a cycle going in which the postulate… the postulate is actually as valid as it is related to the agreed subject. And after a while his postulate gets very weak indeed.

And uh… it wasn’t a slop-around of… well, let’s be scientific and let’s fool around and let’s see if we can make a lot of money, or if I could only do…“ No, it was just a simple clear-cut statement. It presupposed one thing: that something could be done. A presupposition. And it had to assume, also, that the something which could be done would be, basically, simple. These were unwarranted assumptions. But it’s a universe that’s made by postulates. So we just postulated that before we began, and it’s been going ever since. But uh… darned near, well, it’s a little over twenty years’ worth now. And for two-and-a-half years it’s been under heavy duress and test.

He says, „I think I will have a glass of water providing nobody objects and to have a glass of water the best thing to do… you walk over to a tap and you turn the tap on and you have a glass there, imagine it, you have a glass there to catch the water in, and you have to have a stomach and a mouth to drink it with and so forth, and you’re all set then.“

I was the most stunned fellow in the world when I found out that the First Book did not work fast and uniformly in the hands of auditors. I couldn’t figure out what I was doing that they weren’t. I didn’t learn that until a relatively short time ago. Very short time ago really. I was simply saying, „Now there will be light. Now there will be sonic. Now there will be somatics. Now there won’t be an engram.“ And I was doing it by a gradient scale that made it stick. It was a very very important omission. But, getting a communication level on it. Furthermore, I didn’t know how good it could get.

And this big agreement becomes what? Natural law or truth. That’s truth. What is truth for this land? They have a standing army and trade unions and all the rest of this. That’s truth.

With this series and with this training which we have now we have passed by the level where this could be more damaging than it could be beneficial. We have unbalanced the scale in the opposite direction. And when anybody did that, it was certain that it would do what? It would take this universe with it. I’m afraid that’s possibly happened. I’ve been very careful not to think of…

Now, an engineer comes along and he decides in this land to build a bridge. And there are so darn many agreements that he’s lost all track of, that the first time he puts up this flimsy structure and so on, why the first passenger as he starts to go across, the thing goes boom!

Wrote a ghost story one time, used to have a lot of fun writing stories, I love to write stories – uh… I walk around the circle every once in a while now, I… I think to myself, „Gee, I… I really ought to be doing something interesting like writing stories.“ Little fellow, Professor Mudge, Professor Mudge – all he had to do, he was supposed to have found in Spinoza the way to teleport automatically. And all he had to do was think of a place and he would be there. And if he thought of a place he would be somewhere else, and if he thought of another place he would be there, but he couldn’t get it under control. And he was having one horrible time; he was just having a dreadful time because he knew there was one place he mustn’t think of – one place above all others of which he must not think, under no circumstances, and he was just gritting his teeth for fear he would think of it before he found the remedy by which he could control this. And when it came all the way through to the end, he at last could think the thought: the sun. He musn’t think of the sun.

So the engineer says, „There are other natural laws which I now have to follow. And these laws must be this way and this way.“ And so he’s doing a blind job of tracking agreements about gravity, about wave length, about uh… strength of structure, about the growth of trees. A11 of these things – he’s tracking back agreements, and he’s working it out to find out what agrees with this chunk of whatever it is – alabaster, mud, whatever he’s trying to build uh… the bridge across uh… or out of – he’s got to find out what this score is straight through in order to build something which sufficiently agrees with the environment to permit its continuance in the environment.

Now, so it’s sort of like that in Scientology. I’ve often wondered if we aren’t playing tag with that thought we dare not think, because there would be a sudden creaking and cracking of the walls, and there it would go. But, we have done a very good crawl up the line, here, to a proximity to that point that isn’t dangerous. And I think we could possibly think of that thing, now, because we’ve got the bridge built to the back.

And his study becomes a study of, then, what has been agreed, although most of that has been lost. And so he does it by test. He puts the bridge there, and if it stands, it doesn’t stand, he… he’s investigating the environment continually; he’ll make little mock-up bridges and he’ll hit little mock-up bridges as nice as you please uh… to… to find out if they break, and then he… then he does a calculation to find out how much stronger he’s got to build the main bridge that goes across this stream. And uh… he finally works it out and how strong are the girders? What’s the uniformity of construction? What are the metals; what are the refining processes? Uh… how skilled do the workmen have to be, and what are all these things? And finally there he is. Then he falls into a delusion. He starts thinking, „Well, now look, I was agreeing with reality. This was really real because working out that bridge was a real tough job. And the funny darn part of it is, is every time I build a bridge, it doesn’t build according to different laws; it builds according to these same laws. There is the coefficient of expansion, there’s friction, there’s all these weights and stress analysis of structure, and… and there’s torsion and tension, and all these things. And there’s… there’s the vibration of foot traffic and the vibration of vehicles. And these things don’t vary and I built this bridge and that bridge, and another bridge. And gee!“ he says, „You know, we’re right here in the midst of a method of building bridges and we have agreed with natural law thoroughly and completely, and we can keep on building beautiful bridges so long as he keep on agreeing.“

What’s all this got to do with… with logic and processing? It doesn’t help an auditor too much to be logical. Because logic is a rather specious thing. Sometimes it helps an auditor to be most dreadfully intuitive. I used to do horrible things, I used to sit and process a preclear, and I’d… I’d look at him and see his… I’d look at his engrams and say, „Hey.“ And I was making a little demonstration not too long ago, and a fellow was running a DED-DEDEX, he was getting his own head knocked off, and he’d knock somebody else’s head off, and then a couple of other fellows’d knock their heads off, and we were doing these 1-2-3, 1-2-3, running brackets on it in each one in turn, and what do you know? The somatic he had wasn’t reducing very well. So I said, „Well, all right, get ahold of the girl.“ And he says, „What girl?“ And I said, „That girl in the cave.“ And he says, „What cave?“ And I said, „Why, the cave, of course, let’s get ahold of the girl in the cave,“ and he says, „Oh I, I think I’d better keep on running this other thing here.“ And I said, „No, no let’s get ahold of this girl.“ And he said, „Well, get ahold of her how?“ And I said, „Well go ahead, get ahold of her, now, now, bash her head in against the rocks.“ And he said, „Oh no, no, no.“ And he began to get rather ill. There was where it was, of course. But the trouble was is he was sitting there with his eyes sort of turned or his energy beams sort of turned away from the front ridge, which was right in front of his face, and which looked like a small motion picture going on. And all the time he was running the other he kept actually holding this facsimile off. And there it sat, him with his hands wrapped around a girl’s ankles, about to bash her head in against the wall. Well it’s pretty hard for an auditor to resist the temptation of auditing that way. But it’s very startling to the preclear. Too startling. An E-Meter does a better job than that. And you start looking at too many ridges, you’ll start going into communication with too much entheta or too much energy, so that’s kind of bad. But you can get a feel about a preclear. And the more you work with him, why the stronger you can get these hunches about him. As long as you can be certain about them, work with them. If you can’t be certain about them, don’t bother with them. Hit your own level of certainty with regard to preclears.

It’s a funny thing about his bridges. The only thing that happens – that’s a wonderful thing that he can do that – he then has… he then has a hatful of the most beautiful worked-out technology. And he has in his possession the only thoroughly tested technology which agrees with natural law. Because he’s working with the most basic natural law there is, and that is structure, gravity, materiel. And that’s as close as he can get to natural law and that’s about as close as you can get to the natural law of any universe, is with the very woof and warp of that universe itself.

It doesn’t do much good to be logical about a preclear. We know in Scientology there are so many things that can be wrong with him in this universe. We know he has so many can’ts on create, and so many can’ts on destroy, and so many can’ts on change in this universe on eight dynamics. And we know he’s got these various compartments of eight dynamics, and he can’t do some of these things. That’s that. You run mock-ups on these things, and your preclear’ll come out all right. There’s no sense in trying to be logical.

He should never, however, make the mistake of thinking that that is reality. That is agreement with the agreement which is the reality of that universe. It would be with a horrible shock that he would suddenly find himself in another universe starting to build a bridge which used the coefficient of expansion, which used this, which… and find out that bridge went down. Brrroom!

Never bother to ask him, „Why? Now why was that aberrative to you?“ Never ask him to evaluate, because the silliest trick of this universe is: beyond the progressive line of agreement there is no logic in this universe. That IS the logic of this universe. Therefore engineering, mathematics and electronics seem to be so certain and so true. But they are only the track of agreement – there is no logic beyond that agreement. You can make any kind of a logical series of exercises you want to make, and have a wonderful time with them, and amuse yourself no end. But logic was not used to work out Scientology. Logic was not used.

And somebody’d come along, some old man’d be coming along there and he’d say, „What you trying to do, bud?“

If this had been the simple job of putting together how do you make a universe, that job was done in 1938, and it was written about in a book called EXCALIBUR. But it didn’t work because everybody was in agreement with the MEST universe so you had to find out what this universe was all about, and you had to find out how it was put together and what all these agreements were and what the progressive scale of agreement was, and what happened on the whole line. And then you could make Scientology work. So it became a study of agreement, progressive agreement. But progressive agreement doesn’t really fall within the… the framework of logic. Logic is a progressive similarity.

The engineer would say, „I’m trying to build a bridge.“

Well, now I’m going to give you something which is a little less on the opinion level and a little less more in the sky, and I’m going to talk to you about something very specific in the line of processing, and make your Saturday night a little more worthwhile than it has been so far. And I’m going to show you about difference, association and identification. We’re going to look over here at the tone scale, and we’re going to have here… and then we’re going to have minus scale. And we’re going to work here with difference, association and identification. A=A=A=A. This is the behavior of the reactive mind. Everything is identified with everything on a certain subject. A spelling might be different, the word would be the same, the fellow would have it confused. The literal command value of an engram. That’s identification in the line of thought.

„You’re trying to build a what?“ „I’m trying to build a bridge.“ „Well, what for?“ „Trying to get across the chasm.“

Fellow walks down the street, and he sees a garden hose, he trips over the garden hose and he’s very upset about it. He’s got it identified, you’d think, with a snake. No, we didn’t say he was a Freudian psychoanalyst. Uh… he has that garden hose identified with what? Well, with the Battleship Missouri. And why has he got it identified with the Battleship Missouri? Well, it’s because he comes from Oklahoma. That’s not sensible, is it? Well, it’s sensible to this preclear! A=A=A=A, everything equals everything.

And uh… the old man would say, „Well, what do you need a bridge to get across the chasm for?“

Now this person is disassociating, and it is a strange thing about this tone scale, that the bottom of it is a mockery of the top. Things which are at the extreme bottom of the tone scale actually mock the capabilities of theta in a little tiny, tiny bit down there at the bottom. No, no, no force, no power to it. So on. For instance, there’s love and uh… good fellowship, protection, brotherhood, and so forth, is down just before the fellow’s dead, clear down here to 0.0. The nicest anybody is, is to a dead man. They say, „Look at the poor fellow,“ and all that sort of thing.

And the engineer would say, „Well, obviously it’s empty space.“

Sympathy is a mockery of actual assistance. It’s actually a mockery of good communication. It’s a perversion. So we get to the bottom of the tone scale, we find the great party of „let’s all bow down and worship Uncle Joe“ uh… is running around like mad using a group and is calling it brotherhood and yet each man there is using the group in which to hide. No man there will take responsibility for anything. They’re trying to say, „Five morons make a genius,“ they’re trying to say, „Because this is a big group we have the masses, we are therefore bright and we are therefore powerful and we are therefore wonderful.“

And… and the old man would suddenly say, „It is? For heaven’s sakes, I’ll have to go tell my father about that,“ and would walk across the empty space, uh… very neatly and very nicely and the engineer would be very puzzled until he found out that in that area… in that area, uh… the shoes of everybody concerned with everything was adjusted to core-gravity distance. That is to say, the distance to the core of any planet on which they were operating had an adjustment in their shoes. And the way this was put in was by baking up something that looked like a mass of taffy. And he says, „Oh no!“

This is nothing against communism as a teaching. Actually that can be a very high-level teaching, but there’s plenty about communism as a practice. It’s a bad practice where it is used to enslave Man. Any practice that enslaves Man ought to be shot down in its tracks. And that’s all that ought to be shot down. The men who do it are insane; they can be salvaged.

But that’s actually about the way it would be. Now it… it’s an incomprehensible thing perhaps to look at these things. And if… if you’ve ever run a car into a brick wall, or seen a train go off a girder, uh… off girders into a river, or seen any of these horrendous things happen, it’s sort of difficult to say it happened because of an agreement.

But here we have a brotherhood feeling just before you get to zero. And it’s a mockery of a feeling of very expansive uh… beingness with. One can be a terrifically high individual and yet feel an enormous, embracive feeling toward his fellow beings. One can do that, but he’s not MEST.

It’s… that’s… look, makes a flimsy look, but uh… very funny thing about the whole deal is, is that the engineer cannot obtain an absolute anywhere. And the harder he works, he just can’t obtain an absolute. He’s almost there, on any one of his natural laws, but not quite.

The MEST guy down at the bottom doesn’t love his fellow beings. He’s Just mocking it up in a last dog hanged effort to say, „Look, I’m a thetan! I’m a real being! I actually exist! I have life in me! Look, I feel this brotherhood! Please, please, please don’t kill me! Save… hide me, because I… I… I… I’m really alive.“ And so they take the highest capabilities there are and mock them down here. The MEST itself is sort of impersonating a brotherhood of life. But that’s not living, that’s dying.

Fortunately, there is never a hundred percent agreement. There’s always a hole in the natural law. There’s always a hole in the atom, always a hole in the structure. Uh… he starts into the actual complexity of this matter, and does he become complexed. He is complicated beyond measure because its consistency and so forth keeps shifting under his hands as he examines it. Now he… he becomes very puzzled after a while.

So way up at the top here you don’t have this A=A=A=A as a differentiation, but you DO have a level where a fellow can say, where a fellow can say, „The chrysanthemums are no submarine and somebody let the air out of the spokes.“ And he knows what he’s talking about. Actually it’s quite a trick, talking non sequitur. Uh… sometimes you’ll sit down and you’ll start talking to a little kid, and you’ll tell him something like that, and the little kid will look at you very intelligently and say, „Yes, but no shoes.“ And somebody down at the identification band almost goes mad. They look at them and then they try to creak these things together. They… they’re… they’re dealing in these inanities all the time, but they never notice it. So, there you have that level of mockery.

You know, it’s a strange thing that the search after truth, then, could lead some men to disaster and some to glory.

So up here we have differentiation. Now you could have enough differentiation to have a complete universe, a complete universe, a complete universe, a complete universe and then have these complete universes segregated or in communication with each other without destroying them. That’d be quite a trick.

It could lead uh… Newton into great renown. It could lead Hegel into disrepute. It could lead uh… Lenin into an early tomb. They’re all going after what? Different kinds of a datum.

Now. That’s spelled different because it’s supposed to be different. Now. Down here, we have what? We have association. And, as association – uh… fellows can link up and say, „Look. We’re all members of this team, and we’re good guys. But they’re all members of that team and they’re bad guys. So therefore all our actions are good and all their actions are bad. And we’re going to go through these strategy and tactics in order to lick them fellers.“ Something like that. Or, somebody comes along and says, „Now let’s see… water boils and this boils or that boils and it does something or other and you divide that by 212 and you get the square root of gophers.“ And uh… you… you… he says that’s very associative and it’s very logical. ‘Course, what is the most associative we’ve got? The most associative we’ve got is tracking the agreements, the gradient scale of agreement which is known as the MEST universe. So, we’ve got association; that’s linking this and that.

A truth is something which would exist without much contest, something which is triumphant. A champion who stands up after a battle with bloodied shield and sword and yet has won is himself truth in the force universe. A datum which itself sweeps all data before it, in another universe, is truth. It is that which works. And that which works most broadly to that which it is applied.

I’ve told you that story about the three fellows, one of them… they’re all riding in the subway train and the subway train’s making a lot of noise, so one of them says, „Oh… I have to get off at Wimbley.“ And the next one of ‘em says, „Uh… no it’s not, it’s Thursday.“ And the next one of them says, „I’m thirsty too, let’s get off and have a drink.“ Now that… that’s too differentiative or it’s too identified. It’s not associative. And of course that’s just nonsense, it’s non sequitur uh… and it… it’s just missing a few steps to be logical. And the logical thing is for the fellow to say, „Um, I’m getting off at Wim… at Wimbley.“ And the fellow says, „I don’t have to go there till Thursday,“ and the fellow says, „Oh, is… is tomorrow Thursday? Well I thought that uh… today was Thursday. I can’t have a drink.“ And you depend on that as being a sequitur situation. That would make it associative.

Don’t have pity upon some of your preclears who are still scrambling in some direction and haven’t ever classified the field of truth in which they’re searching for the truth. Some are searching for it in the MEST universe, and some are searching for it out in the stars, and some are searching for it in their own hearts, and others are searching for it in the lives of great men. And sure enough, they will, every one of them, find a truth. And all they need to do to find the ultimate truth, is simply find the winning truth by which all other truths proceed in that field.

Now some people believe you have to be logical. Those people who think you have to be logical are more or less located in that band. But those people only become militant and very, very ornery about all of this when they get way down here, and then the fellow… you’re going along in steps and you say, „Now you see, it’s this way.“ And you skip about eight steps in your logic, and you say, „Now there’s… that’s how we’re going to get the copper down that mountain.“ And the fellow says, „Yeah, but you said… now just a minute, how about this? How about that? How about something else? And how about something else? And how about something else?“ And you say, „Well that’s all included in there.“ And you explain it to him very patiently. „Yeah, but,“ he says, „how about this?“ And then he says, „And then there’s the tax on the sacks.“ And you say, „Well that… that only… that’s only one… one milreis and… and…“ He says, „Yeah but,“ he says, „you haven’t added that in,“ you say, „It’s not necessary to add that in, we’re working on a gross of 50% of the cost of the thing, and we’ve allowed for that.“ And he says, „Well you’ve got to figure these things out, you’ve got to be very careful, you got to be very cautious, you’ve got to figure all these things out and you’ve got to figure…“

And if you ever built yourself a universe, go park the truth on which it is built on the first piece of structure that you may build, and engrave it well, and don’t make it mysterious. Because the only way to make your universe survive forever and last forever, and be there and be at last in command of you, is to invent the truth that started it and then hide that truth. And if you were to do that, then neither you nor any inhabitant in the universe would be able to undo the universe or alter it in any way. But it would simply go out on an inevitable average proceeding from that truth. And that first truth would simply be a postulate made out of the zero of no motion, no space, no geographical location and without time. And it’s made there; it is not associated to any other times, places or agreements. Now it’s the first agreement on that sequence on which you would then compound all other logic. Oddly enough it can be any first statement.

It’s like the ensign goes out and he shoots the sun and then he… he gets a sextant that has an index error of 25 degrees, and he goes out and he shoots the sun and he figures it all out and he comes back in. And then he gets his tables and he figures the position of the ship out against that sight, he figures the position of the ship out to one-eighth of an inch. Taking the Pacific Ocean, he figures the ship out to one-eighth of an inch. And you got… you go in there and you find all the chart tables just covered, there’s masses of, just, oh boy, figures, and the guy has really got his position. And you say, „How about the index error of the sextant?“ „Well,“ he says, „that’s normally so-and-so and so-and-so. Well I haven’t paid any attention to that, of course,“ he says, „that is just the… that’s just taking the observation,“ he says, „we don’t worry about that.“ And you say, „Well just why are we sailing three miles north of Kansas City, then?“ Now he’s done a typical stunt down here. He’s become too thoroughly associative without being even vaguely logical. And just below that level the whole chain breaks up, and the fellow starts to disassociate.

You can go out here and construct a whole mathematics, a beautiful mathematics, a gorgeous mathematics, on the whole system that anytime Y and Y appear they are pluses and minuses. And that anytime they are used or equated in equations they will always be pluses and minuses. And if the action of pluses and minuses is, that they come together but repell them… from themselves… each one of themselves. Interesting mathematics.

Every once in a while you’ll get a preclear and she’ll be… she’ll come in and talk to you, or he’ll come in… he’ll be saying to you, „And, and all up and down the street, and when I parked it uh… the cows aren’t any on two sides, and I know that’s why they’re after me.“ And you… you say, „What did you say?“ He says, „Well I’ll get ‘em off of me in a minute, but…“ That’s dissociation.

Uh… the… another one. That every ten when divided by two equal fifteen. Anything… anything idiotic. It doesn’t matter what it is. Suddenly carved out of the nowhere of a beginning, you see there is no beginning before a beginning. But any one of you can assume in any field of ideas, instantly assume, that without recourse to any prior idea, we are now going to postulate that so and so is going to regulate and regiment a core of proceeding fact. And unless you forced it into agreement with some other body of information, you could have a tremendous body of data.

Now down here is a dent… and this, oddly enough, is exactly what it says: it’s identification. There isn’t a one of you sitting in the audience that doesn’t have a card or something on him which says that he has such and such an identity. That is a identification. It relates two completely contrary things together. It says your name is so and so and that you are a human being. Isn’t that weird? One of the reasons you pack a body around is because it’s a good identification card. But I don’t think it’s a good identification card. You have to… it, it weighs a lot of pounds and it gets on buses and off of buses, and you need all sorts of things to cart the thing around. But nobody would recognize you if you didn’t have it. Now that’s an awful lot of poundage to carry around just to have some fingerprints.

You say, it’d be idle – oh no, it wouldn’t be idle. It could keep on going to a point where it became relative to itself, and becoming relative to itself, could itself be a universe. It is symbolical, that line in the Bible; it says, „In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God.“

Well when I say identify, I mean identification. I mean that badly logical in every sense that Count Korzybski meant it. And it’s… it’s just horrible. The most terrible things stem out of that. Now when I say, „I am something“ well „I am something“ is up here in association – it says, „I am associated with.“ But when you get identification, you’ve got you, a producer of universes and a regulator and changer of all things, mixed up with being a piece of MEST. And the most identified a guy can get is buried. He’s been put into MEST, he is MEST and he has been slid into the MEST and covered up. And that’s identification.

The day when you state a postulate to begin a universe, you are creating a God as well. And it is the God of that universe.

So, if this is identification, is there any lower level than that? Yes there is. There are the levels of „I am not“, „I am… I, I am a body and I am less than me“ by -8.0. Because below that level an individual so thoroughly believes he is a body, he’s living the lie that he is something else than what he is to such a degree, that he is no longer himself – and what do you know? – he is even anxious about being something he is not.

Now relative truths would have then to do with a relative workability and what could be true in any field could be true for that field. But it’s not necessarily true for another field. What’s true for one universe is not true for another universe. What we have scouted in Scientology, what we’ve looked over, is the MEST universe parade of agreement stemming from the first capability, the first Q that we can discover which describes the capabilities of theta, as we can view them from this point.

He’s even afraid he can’t be that. He… he… he’s already conceded that HE doesn’t exist, that he is a body. That’s at 0.0 on the tone scale, that’s „being a body“. And then we go below that and he says, „I’m not even able to be a body. I’m so much lower than this that I’m not even a good body. I have to own a body. Or I have to control a body, or I’m very excited about a body, or I have to hide. I even have to hide the body.“

We see that from that all other capabilities could have proceeded which brought about the MEST universe. And we understand by that immediately that the capability of theta at the level of Q1 could consist of the ability to create space and energy and time or to locate energy and matter in time and space. We could… we could take this level of workability, then – we can cite that here – and we find out it applies through all of these various mechanisms in which anyone is engaged in this universe and so we have a senior truth. That truth is probably a little bit senior to any necessary for this universe. It’s probably just a little bit because this universe has immediately omitted creation of space as a capability of theta. It’s omitted that. And it is an enforced problem.

Now it’s just a lowered level of „I am“ at the top here above 40.0, then „I am something“ – you could say down about 20.0 „I am a member of the team and I am doing so and so.“ And then down below that you could say, uh… „I am and I run a body.“ And then it gets down to zero, „I am a body. I am a body named Jones.“ Something like that: „And I don’t know anything else than that. And if somebody walks up to me and says… says I am something else than this body named Jones, I can prove to him completely that I am Jones. I am only Jones. I even carry identi… I carry fingerprints, and I carry identification cards in my pocket, and I can prove to anybody that comes along that my name is Jones, that I am Jones, and that’s that. And that’s wonderful, and it’s very cute of me to be able to do that trick.“

Theta does not recognize… the thetan in this universe doesn’t recognize his capability of creating space. And yet he has a lot of trouble with space. You start to ask most thetans, „Now let’s create space. Let’s put out a couple of anchor points. Now, let’s swap them around.“

And down here, why the guy even isn’t… isn’t able to be a Jones when he gets below this level. These are the thetans you find hanging around the morgue who have been there for a number of years because they haven’t got any place to go and they couldn’t even be a body. They don’t even know they’re there, it’s very, very… it… it’s amusing or heartbreaking, whichever way you want to look at it. You go along and put your… put a… put a communication line on one of these characters and he sort of looks at the communication line, he’s already in apathy and he says… he says, „Look, a line.“ And you say, „Hey, what are you doing?“ And he says, „I guess something’s disturbing me.“ That’s about as alive as he is.

He says, „Oh no, no you don’t.“

So, what’s all this about? This is a related experience, then. So, we get something else. We’ve already noticed that we had cycles of Action. Cycles of action begin with creation and end with destruction. All right, if those things are the case, then let’s take a look at the cycle of differentiation. And as we look in this, we find the cycle of differentiation begins here with… the cycle of differentiation begins with „differentiation“, continues through „association“, and passes on through to „identification“. And that is the cycle of havingness, it starts here and it ends there. And it’s the cycle of reason, it’s the cycle of having (which is time itself) and it is the cycle of being. And that is the cycle of all things which measure cycle.

You say, „Come on, let’s put out these two anchor points, and let’s swap them.“ „Oh, no, no, I got them out there.“ And you say, „Well, all right. Swap them.“ „No, no.“

Now. It tells you that if these three conditions exist on this line that you have to reverse the cycle on the preclear. Now let’s look up along here and let’s find out if there’s any other cycles involved. Yes sir, there sure is, here’s your second cycle of action, which is „Start-change-stop“, and up above that level here’s another cycle, which is „Creation uh… alteration and destruction“. And up above that level you have, over here, „Space, Energy and Time“. And down below this level, monitoring all of these things, we have in human experience, we have „Be, Do and Have“. And those things are all related, and these are all related, and these are all related, and this is 40.0 on the scale, and this is 20.0 on the scale or thereabouts, and this is 0.0 on the scale. Interrelationships of reason, of experience, of the MEST universe – interrelationship of all the laws of motion, and of the law of the cycle of the universe itself are postulated, then, on this tone scale, and in order to raise an individual up the tone scale you only have to get him to reverse any one of these cycles and the others will reverse. Reverse any one of those cycles, the other cycles will reverse. In order to bring an individual up the tone scale, then, from the infinity of the MEST universe back up to the zero of the MEST universe, you would have to work him then from the low part of the scale up the scale.

I just had a rather amusing… amusing session a short time ago where we put out two anchor points which of course would be the first two points from which you would create the dimensions of space. You just postulate these two points.

Now there are many intermediate steps on each one of these scales, but these steps are each one of them a gradient scale of logic, and it is undone by tracing the sequence of agreement which came about and resulted in 0.0 and below 0.0. So it is in essence a workout of disagreement; it is a method of making an individual disagree with the MEST universe. And a man who can finally disagree more and more with the MEST universe and do it on a gradient scale so he is not grossly upset, is, of course, going upscale continually. But if you force your preclear to agree with the MEST universe you are in each case going over from differentiation toward identification because the MEST universe itself in the furthest reaches, is an identification of such chaos and confusion that it divides actually only into two halves, and that’s positive and negative, and the positive is have, and the negative is have not. This have and have not in terms of human experience makes positive and negative experience.

And I said, „All right, let’s turn those two points into black cats.“ And after a great deal of persuasion, we got those two points turned into cats. And when we got those two points turned into cats, we tried to turn the tail of one of the cats, just the tip of the tail, just one hair on the tip of the tail of the cat, a different color than the other cat’s tail. Noooo, siree. Uh-uh. And yet the preclear on whom this was being worked had a capability in mock-ups that most of you would envy. Isn’t that remarkable?

So, what’s the best way to get this preclear up tone scale? Well, there’s an awful lot of ways to do it, because there’s another cycle right here. And this cycle here is from serenity through sensation down to the emotional scale, and that again has your three points. So you run the emotional scale backwards. You run the emotional scale backwards and you’ll find your emotional scale fits exactly across that scale of differentiation- association-identification. Sympathy, low on the tone scale, is „I am being my fellow man,“ for instance. Anger is… is „I am holding again and with, thank you, my fellow man“.

The second that we started to put out the first two requisites of space, there was such an insecurity an that whole thing that the preclear couldn’t hardly bring himself to go forward in any way. And it took an awful lot of practice, it took an enormous amount of time, in order to get anything done about those two anchor points.

Now. Whenever we have emotional-sensational-serenity, we’ve got down here a tone scale with which we’re very thoroughly familiar. That tone scale goes from enthusiasm at 4.0, down to conservatism, down to boredom, to antagonism, to anger, to fear, to grief and to apathy. And therefore we know this little band in here very, very intimately, we are very, very sure of this little band in here between those two. But actually there are some emotions and conditions which are below that which are listed, of course, in our textbook and which we will have to cover later.

And the funny part of it is, is the GE is still operating on his anchor points. Any one of you have two points and the GE is working on these two points. If you want to locate them sometime just look out that-a-way from your head and look out that-a-way from your head and you will find a ball out there and one out there.

But uh… to bring your individual up the level, then, just this far, has been quite a trick with old techniques -4.0 to 0.0. But look at how you bring him up tone scale now. All you have to do is use creative processing to start making him associate and differentiate. „First let’s mock up Momma. All right. Let’s mock up Momma again. Okay, let’s change one of those mock-ups to the wife. What’s the difference between the two mock-ups? Oh – ya mean… you mean you’ve both got ‘em wearing the same dress? And they’re both wearing the same shoes? And they’re talking both in the same – now wait a minute, you’ve got to change one of these until we get some kind of a difference between them.“ And the fellow’ll say, „For heaven’s sake, I never recognized it before, but I DO have my mother and my wife slightly confused.“

You start to shift those around and you can just feel the whole beingness of the fellow just start to go to pieces. „You leave those alone,“ it says. „That… that… that’s space; that is how the space gets created so that we can have energy.“

You just create mock-ups until they can create mock-ups for mom and mock-ups for wife which are instinctively very different. You create mock-ups, then, on identification of various actions that they would tend to take in their life – what is the difference between driving here and driving someplace else? What is the difference between driving a car and driving a wagon? You’ll be surprised how some guys are fouled up like a fire drill, they’re stuck in something back in 1776, and every time they take the car out they wreck it or something of the sort. And uh… there weren’t any automobiles back then.

But actually, they’re just anchor points. That’s all they are – there isn’t any reason why you couldn’t have fifty or a hundred or one. And yet the preclear doesn’t want any of these. He has the self-imposed two in order to get an electronic flow.

You… you’ll get some of the most amazing identifications out of your preclear, and all you have to do is give him one mock-up of one, and one mock-up of another one and let him look at the two mock-ups. And if he can’t get up the scale to where he can do that kind of a mock-up let’s get the first basic elementary differentiation, and that is the difference between black and white. You get the difference between grey and very grey. Now get the… get him to handle and control at will grey and very grey, and then finally get him to handle and control at will black and white and turn them off and turn them on. Not only turn them off and turn them on, be able to locate them all over the place, and put ‘em in time, and put ‘em this way and that way – he’s got two things differentiated, he’s got black and white differentiated. Good, he’s got them differentiated? Now let’s break ‘em down and get various colors, and let’s handle those colors, because that’s breaking white down. And now let’s get the black and blacker, and get him to differentiate amongst the various shadings of black. The kind of blackness there is that has something in it, the kind of blackness there is that doesn’t have anything in it, what are the difference between these two things?

Well, now, therefore, we’re dealing just slightly above the MEST universe and we know the capability of theta is a little bit wider than that which we see encompassed here in the MEST universe. And knowing this then about truth and the primary postulate, we can also know that so long as an individual is willing to abandon havingness he can change a postulate with ease. But when he is unwilling to abandon havingness, unwilling to abandon the possession which accrues to him solely because of his agreement, then he is going at the same time to maintain and hold on to his postulates.

We get him to differentiate and differentiate, and we’ll find out, what are we doing? We’re coming right on up the tone scale toward 40.0. Now, he can’t do that very well, we have a bad time with that, let’s get him to stop and change things. Let’s get him used to being able to stop things and then change them. All right, now, for instance, there’s… there’s… there’s an example of that little drill now, „Mock up an automobile, have it passing from the right to the left. Stop it. Now. Change it into the Eiffel Tower. Okay. Now, as the Eiffel Tower have it move from the right to the left. Stop it. Now, change it into a human being.“ I mean, just a simple drill. You’d be surprised how many people it just keeps right on going, and when it comes to… They can’t stop anything. All right, they have stop, and back here to change.

And the trick in processing would be to keep your preclear there in this universe and yet let him slide sideways into the creation of his own. That’s quite a trick because he’s insisting on a continued havingness in the MEST universe and you’re… you’re trying to knock out postulates which are contrary to the MEST universe. And you can do that with mock-up processing, but you’re not likely to do it with much else.

Now we get somebody in destruction, and we find out this fellow, oh boy! Yeah, he can sure destroy things. In fact, it’s all so destroyed he has nothing but a black visio. Well let’s encourage him, then, on the destruction of things. Let’s figure it out, let’s get him so he can really destroy these things real good. „Now, you got that tower? Well blow the tower half down. You got tower half down now? That’s good. Remake it into a school house.“ You’re backing up the scale on him. You’re making him half destroy things and then alter then, half destroy things and alter them, half destroy ‘em and alter ‘em and so on and so on and so on. So, you’re getting destruction back to alteration.

All right, all of these data have been covered before. You’re quite familiar with them… Logic nine is „A datum is as valuable as it has been evaluated.“

Or making him destroy them. Destroy anything he’s got. He says, „I’m haunted by this visio that so-and-so and so-and-so, I’m haunted by this completely black visio. I am sure it is a black visio of my basement, but I’m not sure – it might be a black visio of the sky.“ And you say, „Well that’s just dandy, let’s take and throw a big black cloth over this black visio.“ And he thinks for a long time, and he finally throws a black cloth over the black visio, and he knows it’s a black cloth because it has a little feel to it. And you say, „You got that black cloth over that visio? Now… now be very careful, now, but close a great big cone of blackness down on the top of the black cloth. You got that now? Now, change it from a cloth to a carpet.“ Guy’ll think for a long time. Sometimes he can do it. Alteration of blackness. You’d be astonished how much you can alter and vary blackness. Don’t quit or give up because your preclear can’t do anything else. Or maybe he can put a black spot up on something with his eyes wide open, and then finally be able to shift that black spot an inch. Or turn it white, or do something or other with it. So, you’ve got him again, backing up towards 40.0.

Poor old… poor old homo sap. Where he was the sap beyond saps was believing that data as itself was worth anything, and data is worth absolutely nothing. Data is worth nothing until it has been evaluated.

All right, now we… this business of trying to handle time in human experience has been almost impossible. But we come to a very interesting series of processes when we come to the handling of energy, because his rehabilitation of force must be good, he must be able to handle force and generate force and receive force in all categories. And, more important than that, he must be able to handle and control space in all categories in order to back this up.

People keep coming around to you and they keep saying, „You know in Scientology there is a so on and so on and so on.“ And you say the so and so and so and so and so. „Well, do you know that there was a fellow by the name of Pittsquealer in 1726 said, and oh, how clearly, he said, „Yap, yap, golla walla walla,“ and he said the same thing that you’re saying today.“ And you say „What’s the same thing he said?“ And they give you some vague approximation. They say, „Truth is that for which every man thinks, uh… worthwhile,“ or „Truth is that toward which every man attains.“ Or… or he… he says something about this line, you see. I mean it will be… or it will be uh, „Self-determinism is the right of any man.“ And you say, „Well, gee whiz, he did, didn’t he?“ Uh… be very careful of one thing. The more you look at that line in that book be careful not to read the line above it or the line below it. Remember to read just that line.

All right, those are the various scales. They are the scales of logic, they’re the scales of experience, and they’re the scales of processing in Scientology. Thank you very much.

There sits the datum, but it has not been evaluated, and evaluation is relation to other datum… other data. And evaluation in our frame of reference would be how well in this universe it assisted survival. So your evaluation would be its comparison to other data and the magnitude of its ability to clarify, codify or… or permit the persistence in surviving. So we have evaluation.

Now, it’s very true that you can dive headlong into almost any text on any subject under the sun and look through it. Read a few billion words if you want to, but you will find practically everything that is worth knowing said by some man at some time somewhere.

Everything that has been said in Scientology, I am sure, has in some fragment or another been stated in the past. If you put that together, you would have a library there which would be a very big library.

Now, don’t make this mistake after you’ve got the library formulated. You know very well where those books are. You would have a slip in each book, you would have that perfectly underscored, you would know exactly where that line was. Now don’t… don’t let anybody come by and take those slips out. Because what would happen is, you would pass down the library stacks and you would pick out a book and it would be a book called Phronology, The Rise and Fall of the Human Coco. And uh… it would say in there… it would… you’d say, „I know there’s one of the data of Scientology in this book.“ And you open that book up and you look through it, „Well, I know it was in here someplace.“ Well, you put that book back and you go and you pick up another one of these books that you know very well had been marked and it would be German Imperial uh… Frantics: The uh… Phoneticism of Emmanual Kant, and written by his housekeeper. And uh… you… you would get in… you’d say, „Well… I… I… there was one in there too, but I’m sure we’ll be able to patch this thing up.“

That’s not the way to research, and you could walk through that library endlessly and endlessly and you’d never get Scientology back. And the reason why you’d never get it back is because the data was not evaluated. They weren’t related one datum to another datum, to an organization. The evaluation of a datum is, if anything, more important than the datum itself, because you can always get a datum.

We could sit here and make a postulate and then try to evaluate the postulate. We could say, „Why is it that blackberries are red when they are green?“ Or we could simply make a statement that „Hereinafter blackberries will be purple when they are green.“ And then try to evaluate that datum in the berry industry and get people interested in the culture of berries to finally force this into being. Uh… you’re just zzaaw Wrong Way Corrigan. What are we going to do then in order to construct a science for anything? The same thing you’re going to do in processing a preclear. You know I’m not just airing my teeth and talking about philosophy for the sake of philosophy. I’m talking about it very specifically with regard to auditing and in regard to learning material and data.

And that’s this: you’re going to take the highest truth which you can state understandably and with accuracy and which you can relate to the remainder of the body of data which confronts you, and you’re going to try to evaluate with that datum.

And if it has limitations and doesn’t expand the scope of what you’re trying to do, you’re going to have to find a higher level truth. You’re exploring a preclear. You want to take this preclear apart. You would find the highest level of certainty which you could then attain. The highest level truth which he could attain. And you would evaluate that preclear to a marked degree with that. If you wanted to put him together again, you could do that.

And let’s go look in the opposite direction; we find out we’re going to make him capable. What makes him incapable is an inability. So let’s just look him over and let’s find out the specific inabilities. If we remove those, his native ability should restore itself. So we’ve got the opposite way of looking at it.

Let’s look for the lowest level of falsehood we can find in the case. and that would be the falsest datum. And let’s turn it into a little bit truer datum, and a little bit truer, and a little bit truer until you had something sitting before you which much more closely resembled truth for himself.

We don’t want him much as truth for the MEST universe because that’s MEST and we’ve got plenty of MEST. Any time you want to go out here and dig a hole, you can get lots of MEST. So we want him for himself, not for the MEST universe, and he is himself a universe.

So the seeking for the highest level of workability would be seeking for the highest level of evaluation. What’s the greatest certainty in this case? Well, that greatest certainty will tell you the highest datum that the preclear can reach at that time. And if you can find that certainty for him you would be amazed. He’d probably turn on and glow like a Christmas tree and walk out of the place. And you’d say, „Now wait a minute, we haven’t done any more processing… we haven’t done enough processing. I mean he’s… he’s supposed to be… we’re supposed to go through this ritual and that ritual and some other ritual and do something else. And you haven’t done that.“

All you did was reach in somewhere in the vicinity of his beingness and found out that he knew one thing above all other things. He just knew that and you just all of a sudden showed it to him, and uh… he… he… he didn’t know that he knew this. And you say, „You know that you knew that?“

And the fellow looks at it and says, „My god!“ A guy can get pretty excited.

Now you get a lesser reaction when you demonstrate to him, „Do you know that you believe that uh… all coconut trees uh… all coconut trees have the Empire State Building in them?“ Uh… you could… some ridiculous datum that’s as silly as that and he takes a look at that and he finds out he’s been forming up a whole lifetime on it.

But that’s invalidation to go at it that way, really, So you just sort of take it by mock-ups and let it work out. But as you work it out, you will find that as you’re attaining recognition in him of a higher level truth toward his true capabilities, when you’re getting him up toward the higher truth of his own self-determinism, what makes his being tick, he’s becoming freer and freer and more and more of an individual.

A lot of people think in processing that the more you process an individual the less individual he becomes. Now you think he returns to the great swim, uh… the big dunk, uh… I use those reverent terms to describe Nirvana. Uh… this is a pool in which all individuality and identity, those two things not even vaguely being similar, but they’re put together with a uh… like that and then they’re dumped into this big pool. And uh… after that all is lost. One… one floats in complete serenity and peace with the universe. That’s right, with the universe. Only one difficulty with it: that’s perfectly true. There’s nothing truer than nirvana. But you’re walking on nirvana. It’s mud! And it’s mud from there on down!

Now any time that you want… any time that you want to fix up a preclear so that he joins the infinite allness of allness in this universe, why zap him with a zap gun or something and disable the thetan so he can’t even think himself elsewhere, junk the body and throw it in a lime pit. You’ve got him. That would be it.

And by the way, this is supported by empirical data. You go out here and you look. And you… it… you know it’s sorta hard, once in a while I run up against one of these communication breaks. Uh… I tell you, go out and look, uh… you. you’ll all be able to do this some day. But there is a point where experience gaps. Now I’ll tell you what I mean when I said you go out and you look.

Uh… I went to a theatre, Queen’s Popular Theater, one of the old theaters. I was sitting there. All of a sudden I felt vaguely uncomfortable uh… and realized what I was doing – I was uh… I knew what I was doing. I didn’t suddenly feel uncomfortable – what am I talking about? I just suddenly decided to fish around and feel all the lords and ladies that had been in this joint since the beginning of time. That was way back from Queen Anne’s time or something like that, this old theater.

And uh… I was fishing around and all of a sudden I fished through the floor of the theater. Just put a beam down through the floor of the theater. Neeooww. No! And I shuddered and kind of cringed into myself and I went home that night and I thought, „Boy, that… that’s really rough.“ And I did a lot of mock-ups and so on, and tried to get it straightened out and so on. Every once in a while I kept shuddering over this stuff. And that’s the first time that anything had made me shudder for a long time and I didn’t quite understand what it was because I didn’t stay with it long enough to find out what it was. And I finally asked one of the boys; I said, „Say, uh… what’s wrong with the Queen’s Popular Theater?“ Well, he thought. „Oh,“ he said, „in the days of the great plague that was one of the plague burial spots. They just brought them there in wagons and dumped them in.“

Well, here all this time later, the ground of the Queen’s Popular Theater, it’s not imaginarily at all, that is quite… this is a lot realer than looking at things with MEST perceptics, they’re pretty weak, is… is so soggy with… with agony and sordid putrification, and death, and so on, that it’s an awful jolt to come into contact with it.

You see, there’s a lot of livingness still there. How do you like that? I mean, that ground isn’t dead. That ground still has life. That’s one of the many nirvanas you can reach by going on into the MEST universe.

I say go out and take a look. You could go down here past one of the graveyards – amuse myself every once in a while – go on over to the graveyard and see how many thetans are stuck in the skulls. You know, they… they do this horrible thing these days – they embalm people. They take them, put them on the table, they cut them open and nobody… never occurs to anybody, I guess, really, to chop the tops of the skull off and empty the skull or do something about that or anything. No no! No, let’s pack them all full of formaldehyde and preservatives, and let’s paint the face so they look very alive, and let’s be very kind to the body after it’s dead. Particularly after it’s dead. Hell… And let’s take it out and bury it in a nice lead coffin which will protect our loved one from seepage.

And uh… the body is very lifelike and quite often a thetan cannot make up his mind whether or not that body’s dead or not. He knows it’s been sick, uh… but he… he’ll… he’ll be groggy himself and… and he’ll… it’s obviously still alive if the smell of formaldehyde is… can get pretty overbearing really.

But you go down past the cemetery and uh… usually most country cemeteries, where they sort of wrap them in a blanket and dump them in on their heads and say, „God be with you, rest in peace, uh… planted by his loving wife Agnes“ or something of the sort, now that… that’s really very calm. They’re no thetans left around there.

Uh… but you go in one of these modern cemeteries, one of these nice modern ones. Boo! There’s more trapped thetans around that joint than you care to measure up in a long day of Sundays. And if you want to amuse yourself, uh… put out a line on them and say, „Hey fella, why don’t you get on your way?“ And they sort of feel groggy, „Huh? Voice of God, huh? Must be the voice of God.“

So you want to play god? Well you ought to go down and do this sometime just for kicks. And uh… yeah, put a little bit of an energy beam on them and… or plant the thought, „You are now on top of the grave.“ Or, „You are now on top of the headstone.“ And if you really want to pour the juice into them – it’s kind of bad to hypnotize thetans; I usually feel sorry for them – if you want to pull the… if you want to pour the juice in on them and go just brrwhack! „You are now on top of the tombstone.“ There isn’t any doubt about your getting them out, truth be known.

You can put out enough energy. Beam in, sort of bore a little hole in the guy’s head and then… and then put the energy concentration flow into the center of his forehead, in in in in in in in, and his skull will go spatter, brains and all. This is no joke. I mean, I’m not joking about this.

So there isn’t any doubt about your getting somebody out of his head. It’s just how tough do you want to get as an auditor? So anyway, you go down and you fish out… you fish out a thetan or two and you feel real good. You’ve done your boy scout trick and the loved one then ceases to be troubled with seepage.

Another interesting place to go; we got on this last night, that’s why I was mentioning it – another interesting place to go is down to the morgue. They come in there, charred bodies, and they come rushing into the morgue with this and that and fragments and bits and bones and things like that and throw them into these big slabs that are on drawers. Open a big drawer, body size, and they dump the body in there. And they sometimes will lay them and sometimes on marble slabs and they tie a big tag on their big toe. And it has whatever identification, where the body was found. I don’t know why they insist on doing that to a body. But they… they do… they take the big toe and they tie the tag on there and put it on a slab. Well, anyway, in these drawers, they push the drawer back in again and people come in, weep, weep, looking for their dear Charles or something of the sort. And the attendant drags open the drawer – „Nope,“ next drawer. „Ouch,“ you know, slam! Next drawer – by the time she’s looked at four or five of them, she doesn’t care whether she finds Charles or not! And there’s rarely any refrigeration in these places to amount to anything.

But uh… you go in there and you talk about a bewildered lot of thetans! They come in, the guy’s still hanging around, saying, „Gosh, I’m dead; I’m dead, I… what about… what about the wife and kids, uh… uh… gee I… I… I haven’t paid the rent and uh… Oh why, oh why did I ever get mixed up with that steam boiler in the first place? And uh… I should have noticed the name plate on it was such and such an electric company, and… uh…“

And he… he gets… gets in and you say, „Hey, why don’t you… why don’t you shove off?“ And the fellow says, „Huh? Huh? Who’s talking? Somebody talk to me? I got ideas, I guess I’m hearing voices“.

Big confusion, see? He’s already real confused and uh… you push him around a couple of times. And you… you, once in a while you… you feel like telling him, „Look, why don’t you go back to the house and take a look? And if you’re so worried about where everybody is, just why don’t you go back and take a look?“

And they just – communication level – and go back and take a look. „I’ll take a look. The body’s here and I need the body to walk back with. And I couldn’t do that because here’s the body.“

Boy, that’s really idiotic when you come down to think about it. The guy’s got a charred piece of humanity, that’s got… just got through being blown up or something of the sort, and he knows very well it can’t walk back to the house and pat the wife on the head. So you argue with him for a little while, and in most cases, why, zip! He’s gone to some between-lives area. And back again you go over to the hospital and you say, „Well,“ you meet a couple of them around, and so on. And you think, „Well gee, you know, that’s real good.“

Uh… uh… they come in and you say, „Hey! Psst!“ And uh… they… question mark, question mark, „Who? Who? What’s this? What’s this? This isn’t on schedule. Uh…“

You say, „Hey, uh… uh… you uh… trying to pick up a baby here?“ Something like that.

Big guilt feeling. „Yeah, yeah.“ You say, „Why don’t you take that third one over there in the crib?“ Something like that, so on.

“Oh, are you the fella that’s supposed to tell us here? We didn’t know that, I mean…“

But mostly you… hard… you’d have a hard time attracting their attention. They’re very down tone scale and they just go on in saying, „Ah well, I gotta be a baby, I gotta be a baby, I gotta be a baby, I’m a baby, I’m a baby, I’m a baby“ – Bong! And there they go.

Fascinating. Very very interesting. But they’re pretty confused actually… the… actually a thetan can straighten himself out if he’s got the educational background of a few years as a stability. And he suddenly steps out on a gradient scale of reality. He knows he’s here. He just hasn’t been killed. Uh… he knows he’s here. He’s… he’s uh… walks out, he’s still got the body. He can make up his mind. He has a power of choice. He can carry on with it and he… he straightens out just fine. He doesn’t have any difficulty.

But you catch him off guard at times when he’s already shocked and upset. Well, what’s the difference between taking a thetan out when he’s in fairly good condition, and is there any relationship between that and processing a preclear when his body’s in pretty good condition? And doing something for a thetan whose body has just died? Or who has just got to have a body?

Well, yeah, there’s gradient scale. Uh… your thetan who has just lost a body – the highest level of truth which he thought he could attain was, „I am a body.“ And that’s pretty high compared to the state he’s been battered into as a thetan. So he’s… he’s’… he’s got a low-level actuality. A low-level decision, postulate or agreement, or whatever you want to call it, and… and he’s got a body. And that has not been broken. But if he’s… if he’s just died, he’s just LOST that low-level beingness. He… he… hi… his level of truth is just out – is just gone. He has no certainty. He hasn’t single datum of which he’s now certain. He knows he’s dead, somebody’s been telling him he should go to heaven, somebody else has been telling him for sure he ought to go to hell. He’s known all the time that he’s got to go to Station 862 and report in. But he’s… he’s in a complete state of confusion.

All right. Now what… what do you solve? How do you solve this… this terrible confusion? Well, there’s still another level of certainty much lower than the certainty „I am a body“ that could actually be contacted. You’ll have to figure out what it was.

You take a psychotic or a neurotic. There is still a level of certainty exists, and one could almost say that where a level of certainty ceased to exist, the life and beingness cease to exist as well.

Whether it’s true or false, a certainty is a certainty. And so there’s some terrific analogy then, isn’t there, between this word truth and the word life itself? And it all boils down to really one thing, one thing. When he’s completely free, actually the highest truth that one attains to is a truth of a certain sort. He can attain to higher truths than this, and they exist, but, before there is space for him, he does have a truth, and that truth is, „I AM“.

And as he goes down the line it becomes „I am something“. There’s still „I am“, but the „I am“ is less then and the „I am something“ – the „something“ becomes greater. „I am the something“ and the „I am“ becomes less and the „something“ becomes greater, until at last he winds up in the conviction that the „something“ is all the „I am“ there is.

But as long as there’s even a „something“ that you can contact and communicate with, you can still start him back up the line toward „I am“. But you take off to restore „I am“ or his high level of truth by restoring it on the gradient scale of the „something“. And so he’s less and less the „something“ and more and more „I am“. Until he finally comes up into full awareness and it’s very hard for somebody who’s saying „I am the something“ to realize that the „something“ is really one of the things which impedes his being „I am“. But that „he is something“ still and still knows that „he is something“ is enough to keep him from becoming „nothing“, and he holds on to the „something“ in lieu of being „nothing“. But as he goes back up the line, he gets more and more „I am“ „I am“ „I am“.

Now then, the highest level truth that you could attain with an individual would be the springboard from which you started out to reach the highest level that you possibly could attain for this universe, which is „I am“, with no need to be „something“. Let’s take a break.