This is the second part of the afternoon lecture. Giving these to you rather quickly so that we get enough in the brisket to digest here.

Okay. This is the second session, the — afternoon session, November the 17th, the first hour on it.

We have speed as the determining factor of the pc. And what do we mean by "speed"? Low on the Tone Scale, you get almost a complete stop. Once the person sits, he doesn't move very much, he talks rather slowly, and as we go up on the Tone Scale, we get faster and faster motion, and faster and faster motion. But all of this motion is controlled motion.

This morning I gave you some things to do with regard to putting emotion in things. And I found out that many — many were neglecting the "emote" and putting some "shun" in. Ha-ha, joke!

Now, we inverted from just sitting — it's very possible that a person goes into frantic and insane motions, which is not controlled. But as we go up the Tone Scale, we get faster and faster, until actually, at the top, we get speed as instantaneous.

And, it's a very funny thing. I'll tell you a operating — a operating principle, which you should "hoperate" with. And the motto of a case is, and the significance of and the reason why of a case is, is they can't look at it. And if you take any case anywhere, you'd think offhand it's a problem of "they don't know it."

Now, get the difference between instantaneous positioning — because one travels so fast between two places he's in two places at once, or meets himself coming back, (that's an inversion of it) — and being in one place stopped. You get the tremendous difference between these two points.

Now, this is not an attainable — an instantly attainable goal for people: they can't just suddenly, pang! for some reason or other, "know it" because they want to carefully let go of the stuff they've got their hands on, see? They want to let go of it very carefully.

I wish to impress this upon you, because you're going to run into, when you go out of here, you're going to run into people who claim they are operating very, very quickly and who are talking very, very quickly and so on, who are not running on a positive speed, they're running on another speed. It's uncontrolled speed. They say they — "Oh, yeah, I get mock-ups, mock-ups. Oh yeah, I get them, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah."

Now, for instance, there are a couple of techniques you can run on people which will just stop their clocks, completely. (I should tell you these for the benefit of humanity, some of which has been going on too long already!) But one of these is a button, it's a magnificent button, there's nothing wrong with this button at all except it stops people's hearts. And you could, of course, say that this was a fine button to have around, but watch who you're trying to treat with it. And if you double-terminal "constancy" — just that, just double-terminal "constancy" in a bracket for a while, ha-ha! All of a sudden the guy's ticker goes pocketa-pock, pang-pang, pocketa-pock-pock-pockpocketa-pock-pock, pang, pang-pang. Because he ordinarily is running it on his body, you see? And that's the one thing the heart does: be constant. That's the only order it's got, is "do-don't, do-don't, do-don't, do-don't." Only it says, "do-dup, don't-dup, do-dup, don't-dup." And that's all it does, you see?

You say, "What color are the buttons?"

Now, I'm not mincing matters with you — tell you that you can simply take the human anatomy to pieces and strew old bones around with what we're doing here. So you can go too far with one of these techniques. There's nothing to be afraid of with the techniques we have, but you can actually go too far with them. And one of them is this button "constancy."

"Oh, they're pink! Ha-ha! They went blue then. Ha! They're pink now! Yeah, yeah — green!"

"Persistence" doesn't process that way for some reason or other; the idea of persistence. But "constancy" brings in the second dynamic nostalgia, the genetic line — boy, it just runs on constancy. If you want to turn on beautiful sadness on somebody, just start running constancy. You'll find out that's the one thing that's been demanded of them all their lives — they must be constant. And this, of course, is persistence, and persistence is the one — anything that is not admired, persists.

Oh-oh. On terrific pieces of automaticity — almost anybody has some automaticity showing up with them because we're right now processing straight at some pieces of automaticity. But where we have this showing up on a frantic, hectic, uncontrolled speed, we're getting an automaticity running the person, so to speak.

But let's get back to simplicity — real simplicity. There aren't very many of these buttons, there's just constancy and two or three more — they're relatively unimportant. What you can say is the common denominator of all preclears is: they don't look, they think.

But remember this: person's goofy, they're real crazy, unmistakably crazy. You want to understand that; I mean, let's not just say — see somebody who is just moving fast, and he's sort of on a hectically — say he's on a manic because he's moving very rapidly, he's talking very rapidly. He's trying to get a lot of things done very quickly and so forth — like your high-pressure supersalesman and that sort of fellow. No, he's running on positive speed; he's usually a pretty bright boy. We're talking now about when this goes off — anybody gets some of this automaticity, but when the entire preclear becomes automatically fast, they're real crazy, they disassociate.

Now, there's a world of difference between thinking and knowing. Thinking is that process in which a person engages by which he hopes he will someday come to know. Now, the funny part of it is that he knows already, and the more he thinks the less he knows.

They'll talk about. . . They look in all directions fast and they're doing a dispersal and their attention isn't fixed anyplace, and they look at a window and they say, "Well, now the window and the radiator and the desk — uh — when we all have — do you know, I think it isn't going to snow." And it's just about as reasonable as that; just no justification at all. It's really crazy, you understand.

They used to talk about that non communicative owl — you remember in grade school, this noncommunicative owl. He must have been set up by the Fourth Invader Force in this universe. I think they invented the tune, and so forth. It was:

So let's not look at just a manic — let's not look at a manic state and consider it sane. And reversely, please, let's not look at a person in fairly fast motion and immediately brand him as a complete goofball. Because a person in very fast motion doing an awful lot of things is not necessarily justifying all of his actions either. So, there's an inversion on speed, which is that you can get a nice charge out of a preclear (I don't recommend you run any such a button — I say "constancy," other buttons; button running is kind of passe), because you get this very nice reaction on an individual who is sitting around, he's sitting very carefully around and he isn't moving very much — you just get him to double-terminal "repressing insane motions." Nyowdodododoh! — right away, see. I mean, his automaticity suddenly starts up. He has machinery to repress motions because they might be crazy: "repressing crazy motions," and that sort of thing.

"A wise old owl sat in an oak,

Almost anybody has got a tiny little bit of this, you see, because they have had to repress what their family considered to be "wild and uncontrolled motions." So that set in, to some degree, an automaticity.

And the more he saw the less he spoke;

But the big difference that we're looking for is the person almost stopped, up to the person being almost instantaneously.

And the more he spoke the more he heard;

Now, mest language does not keep up — does not keep up — with a person who is running at a really high, acceptable level of speed in Scientology. Can you imagine anybody auditing at this rate of speed: "All right, get a mock-up of your father. Blow him up. Now, get a mock-up of your mother. Put her behind your back. Put them in front of your face. Put them over your head. Put them behind your back. Now blow them up. Now, be in the childhood home. Be here. Be in the childhood home. Be here. Inspect the childhood home very carefully next time. Be in the childhood home. Here. Home. Here. Home. Here. Home, here. Home, here. Home, here. Home, here. Home, here. Okay." Imagine somebody auditing that fast. I hope you'll audit that fast.

Why can't we all be an effect?"

Because as you come up along the line, you monitor your auditing. . . Please remember this: Your auditing is not monitored by your own desire so much as it is monitored by leading the preclear slightly — always lead him slightly. You run him just a hair faster than is comfortable — just a hair faster. You wait for his "yup" and "uh-huh" but you give him the command on the "uh" not on the "huh," see that? You give him the command on the "y-" not on the "-up." And if you do that, he has a feeling of being under just slight duress, just slight pressure, which makes him quite alert — and which, by the way, speeds up his attention.

And this made him very learningful. We're assured of this — made him very learningful.

Now, by speeding up his attention, it is possible then to get him to look straight through ridges, straight past barriers, and you get a much wider scope of action.

And the only trouble is that unless you were talking directly on the line of agreement which brings people into the state they get into finally — where they're more effect than they are cause; unless you're talking on that, boy, there's really darn little excuse for education. But if you're talking on that, you are undoing — you are undoing the agreement.

The auditor who continues to audit at this rate of speed: "All right, now you got that mock-up? Mm-hm. Well. . . Mm, put it behind your back. Mm-hm. You got that now? Mm-hm. Well — uh — mm, put it over on the right side. You got that now? Mm-hm. You got it on the right side? Mm-hm. Well. . . Put it over on the left side." Preclear starts to slow down. The next thing you know, your preclear is incapable of running the stuff that he could run at the first part of the session.

Now, it's something like a large and complicated watch. And this watch has to be taken apart. It can be taken apart solely and strictly on the same basis of you take apart a — a baby takes apart a watch, you know? He takes it apart with a hammer. Well, anybody can take a watch apart with a hammer. If you want to take a watch apart — meaning you don't want a watch — with a hammer, why, I advise you to go down and find a big electric shock machine or something like that. That takes watches apart with hammers. And that's not the right way to go about it, because after the parts get that strewn around, it's very difficult to take the watch apart in an orderly fashion. And to some degree we are taking a watch apart.

A smooth personal relationship can be established by the most ordinary politeness — the most ordinary and routine politeness. I have, by the way, made another little test again. I test this every once in a while just to convince myself it's so because it seems so incredible to me that people can be shattered by something — the two "shuns": invalidation and evaluation.

The trouble — only trouble with this watch, however, is that it has four balance wheels, eight mainsprings and no handle to wind it; the handle to wind it has disappeared. And then people run down and we can't wind them up again.

Well, of course, you're actually evaluating for a preclear when you're moving him around. And that's all very well, because you're moving him around fast enough so that his speed is coming up swiftly enough, so he starts running at speeds which is self self-determinism; that's fine, that's fine.

So the thing we do, is actually start taking balance wheels and mainsprings and things — excess mainsprings and other things — out of it and all of a sudden we've got the neatest, best-working watch you ever saw in your life.

But every once in a while I invalidate somebody during a session by simply giving him more than he can do, or evaluate for him — say, "Now, I want you to think about this and give me the answer in the next session." They're always much worse — always! I mean, I do this every once in a while, once in a blue moon.

But if we take it apart with a hammer we don't get that effect, we just simply get — well, we get psychiatry or we get a lot of things. Atom bombs — that's taking a watch apart with a hammer. "The way to settle the political affairs of Earth is not to solve underproduction and overconsumption, and overproduction on the second dynamic and so forth. These are not the problems to solve. The way to solve that, is you get a formula, see, and it's got a lot of wild figures in it, but it all adds up somehow or other if you put enough figures in it. And then you put this to work on uranium and you get some plutonium, you put that all together and put it in the hands of an idiot and tell him to press the buttons." And the watches come apart. Believe me, they just strew their mainsprings all over the place.

Every month or two, I'll just take a little check on it, because I hope to find out someday or other some way that you can evaluate and invalidate against a preclear where it doesn't completely cave him in. But every preclear I've ever done this to has simply caved in. I'm very disappointing to people; I've tried to do it very lightly and it doesn't seem to matter how lightly I do it — crash! All right.

I saw a cartoon, one time, down at Cal Tech — one of these small trade schools on the other coast, they teach carpentry and things there. Anyway, they had a nice cartoon, and this professor is standing in front of a very large class and he's saying, "Gentlemen, I have here the end product of all science. In this capsule is enough explosive to destroy the universe." They haven't been admired for this, obviously, or they wouldn't go on persisting.

These things aside, slow auditing is the next big crime — it's a real crime. And that's why Step Is should audit Step Is — their speed is up there pretty good. And that's also why Vs should audit Vs, as long as they're Vs.

Well, it is not a very orderly thing to do, for instance, to solve a society the way somebody solved Arsclycus. If you want to run back on the track and examine facsimiles with "yes" and "no" on an E-Meter, why — it'd be very pleasant for somebody who's in good shape to do this, and very horrible to somebody who's in bad shape to do this, by the way, because they bog in it. You'll find that there are facsimiles floating around you or the GE and someplace, and you can contact them. They have to do with this place known as Arsclycus, which was just built without planets. It's just endless roads going through the sky, you see — they just went in all directions.

Of course if somebody sells himself on a step, and says, "Well, I'm that step" and tries to hold on to it desperately — it's been quite a contest getting techniques which really just take a scoop shovel and move him out of the classification he thinks he's in, and put him in another classification, but we can do that now.

And there's where we picked up boredom and monotony on this track. Oh, oh, oh! I mean, you could just run this for a couple of minutes on a pc and he just gets tireder and tireder and tireder. He has no idea why he's getting so tired. But it's the fact that nobody could ever stop working. And a person went about ten thousand lives there, returning back to a body and then using that body and wearing it out. And he — each time he'd come back he would be assigned — and he had a cross mark on him and they had him by the wavelength, you might say. And they had a piece of the body which they'd given him, and when he tried to escape, of course, they'd put pain in that piece, and that would hurt that part of the body so he would come right back. And when his body was worn out, or if he sassed a guard or something like that, they'd just knock off that body and he'd report back again and they'd say, "This is a Tilemaker, Third Class. He's all trained," see? And into the body — next body that's coming out of the vats — pang! out he'd go. Biological society, built in the sky.

But those things are all very well, but the most ordinary and routine politeness will carry you the rest of the way — no evaluation, no invalidation. Like, "Well, your mother probably cared for you anyway, you probably just didn't understand her" — something like that, you know? Evaluation and invalidation of his own decision and his own certainty. "Oh, I really don't think you are certain of that. It's quite obvious to me that you're not certain of that," and so forth. Well, you can shake somebody up this way a little bit.

Well, when that thing went to pieces because of an overdose of gravity, it really went. It scattered pieces all over the universe. And you sometimes run — get a tumbling sensation in a preclear. We're not going to audit facsimiles — this is just fun just to show you what might have been going on, on the track.

But it doesn't seem possible that this is so, but you'll find it to be so: that the third crime on the list that's a real crime — a real crime — is auditing slowly. Now, a V will audit a V at a speed which is comparable to what the other V is running, so that's not too bad. But a V starts auditing a I, and the I starts to go crazy!

Well, this made a person very insistent about being dead when he was dead. There is basic on being dead when you're dead. You're just not going to run any kind of nonsense about checking back in and being assigned a new number. You're going to have some randomity, see? And when a fellow's dead, he is the most insistent person you ever saw.

"Be there. (pause) You there?" (audience laughter) Hell! The I's there and been back and looked around and twiddled his thumbs and went up and took a look at the moon and came back down again and is waiting for the next command, and he's lost track of what you're trying to do — he's nuts, you see. Pang! There we go.

I dropped by a funeral parlor one day. I kind of sailed in one afternoon and I — I noticed lilies of the valley, and it was very nauseating all up and down the street and it was getting more and more nauseous. So I decided to pick it out for some randomity (I didn't have anything else to do), and I went in one window and so forth, and the thetan was still in the body — it was a funeral parlor.

So the test which you use on cases is communication. Now, communication essentially is this, it is ... Well, let's take and mock up a cube of space with eight anchor points and then somewhere in the middle of it draw a diagonal line, not parallel with the cube, but just a diagonal line, and name — inside this cube somewhere, just floating inside the cube — and mark one end of it "A" and the other end of it "B." Now we have a picture of the travel of a particle through space. Now, the travel of the particle is from A to B. It is not from A to B to A. The travel of the particle is from A to B, and that is basic communication.

They had a guy laid out on the table, and you could bat the body and get back an electronic reaction — pow, pow, see. And he was just absolutely frozen, see? And in a mad rage, "I'm dead, you understand! Dead!" Because they'd kept trying to revive him, evidently, with Pulmotors or something of the sort. The body was all scarred up — he'd been drowning or something and they'd keep trying to revive him and trying to revive him and trying to revive him and working over him and so forth. And that means he wasn't being convincing, you see? And boy, it was the deadest thetan you ever saw. Of course, when they finally embalmed and buried the body and so forth, he finally said, "Well, you're convinced!" Shove off!

Now, communication going both ways, both-way communication, is another line right alongside of the first line we drew inside the cube. Now, this first line — the upper, that is to say, the higher point of this little line — was called A, and the lower point B.

He hides this from himself by occlusive screens and so forth. He doesn't let his right foot know what his right frontal lobe is doing. He doesn't get these things into communication with each other. He has to break communication in order not to know. See that? Has to break communication in order not to know. See, he breaks communication with the body, and now he doesn't know anything about the body. And there's the system of breakdown which he uses. Now, he's gone through this system of breakdown constantly and continually.

Now, we'll draw this other little line right alongside of the first line, and we'll put at the bottom of it A and the top of it B, see, so we'll put A' is the lower A, and B' is the upper A. And your communication then, will go A-B; A'-B'. A-B; A'-B'. And the people miss the second side.

How does he do this? In order not to know, if he's already perceiving (see he gets into a perceiving band) — in order not to know, it's only necessary not to look. He can think about it and suppose about it.

A communication line has two channels, not one channel. If you insist on using one channel for a communication line, somebody just completely bogs — they just go batty.

Most everybody is going around — while they're traveling through life in this direction, their head's over this way. And they're going ninety miles an hour in that direction. Well, they can think about it and they can say, "Well, you know, I think there's a turn up here someplace." But that system comes all the way down the track.

That's probably what's wrong with Bell Telephone — they're always crowding that one line. There's probably more to that than meets the eye — we don't have to go into it very deeply to assume this — because look, you see, they use actually two lines for one wire and they're both in the same cable. That's — they just use that back and forth in an electronic flow. But there is still — there would be something — some improvement would take place if they had two lines.

Now, if they didn't look at, feel any emotion about, feel any effort about and finally, didn't even think about something on the Arsclycus band, why, once in a while they figured they might skip a cycle. That was — that's really true. They kept a vat full of stuff and when they gave the guy the body, they took a piece of this body and they kept it alive in a solution. (This is science at work!) They kept it alive in this solution over here, and that was a piece of a body and it matched him, of course, and all they had to do was torture this piece and he hurt.

Here we have a problem in repetition. All right. We say A to B. We send this particle from A to B. Then the same particle, the same identical particle, suddenly comes right back from B to A. Now, if you don't believe this is upsetting, try to be around somebody that talks like this: "Well, I guess you're going down to the store, aren't you?"

You can do that, by the way, if somebody is madly Russian-doctoring around sometime — we'll get a nice big laboratory. Be sure and get somebody that builds the Frankenstein equipment for the Frankenstein pictures, you know? The kind of big drums that go bzzz, bap, bzzz, bap — you get some of that in there just to convince the public of what you're doing. You can conduct all sorts of experiments of this character which are fabulous.

"To the store?"

You can hypnotize somebody and say, "All right, you are now Malenkov." Just like that, you can say, "You are now Malenkov. And be in the same position there as Malenkov, be in the same space. That's right." This guy is drugged — you know, drug hypnosis. "All right. Now have a terrible headache. You now have a terrible headache." You know that you could actually detach him to the point where he would go on monitoring Malenkov. You'd actually say, "Beat it," and he would leave enough in the body to keep this one tick-tick-tick, and go over and monitor somebody else's body. This is politics earlier on the track. Now, this has gotten to be almost a habit on the track line. All kinds of weirdities come up.

"Yeah, to the store."

Fortunately, we don't have to have anything to do with these weirdities. I mean, it doesn't matter in our processing today what these things are. I'm just talking about a laboratory lineup. If you really wanted to make a society stand on its ear and become completely fogged about the whole thing, you just start doing things like this and you would get these effects. I mean, Malenkov would have a headache. That's all there is to that.

"Oh, to the store."

Mysticism, by the way, is actually an effort to suppress this kind of technology by reversing it. You know, if you deny hard enough and if you resist evil and — that's not truly mysticism, that's Christianity more than anything else. That was the greatest invention of the last two thousand years, by the way — the resistance to evil. And I'll say a little bit more about that.

You say, "I don't feel well today."

But let's get back on this "look" thing. All right. As long as this preclear you've got drugged on the table doesn't know where he is, you can convince him he's someplace. You see that? See the principle? Well, the only way he can be convinced that he is someplace, is by not permitting him to look. You see that?

And they say, "I don't feel well today."

If he doesn't look, if he doesn't see, then he can be told he's anyplace, and he has to believe one. So hypnosis is just simply the matter of confusing a person to where he looks too hard at something, and then you don't let him look at it, and that loses him. There are any number of techniques can be born out of this "fix or unfix attention" hypnotically, you see?

Dzzzz! Then you start saying, "Well, I don't know, I kind of feel like I'm getting old."

The whole subject that we're studying is actually attention fix-unfix, where viewpoints and space are concerned. But that requires lookingness.

And they say, "I feel like I'm getting old."

So we can take a person and actually have him be someplace else when he is right there. See, he'll still keep this body, but he'll actually be and operate someplace else. Now, you'll run into this every once in a while with a preclear. We call this inverted dynamics.

Mmmm. It's like yelling into a well or something.

What dynamic are they inverted on — they inverted on one, two, three, four, five, six, or seven, eight? Actually there's about ten cycles of inversion. At least ten. They just keep inverting and then reinverting, and then inverting and then reinverting, and each time with less horsepower until you get them just completely run on down the line.

There's some — the greatest advancement that was ever made by psychology was a machine which repeated everything you said into it a fifth of a second later. And people talking to that machine used to get quite squirrely, and this was quite a development. There you're using the same particle flow, same particle pattern, and that essentially is "no randomity," you see. No, it's just — it's a question of randomity rather than the flow lines.

Now, any one of the oddities and the phenomena which you observe, below the level of knowingness itself — just spontaneous knowingness . . . How would you — what do I mean by that kind of knowingness? It is simply, you'd sit right there, you wouldn't look, and you'd know that there was a telephone number somewhere else. In other words, that is just instantaneous knowingness. Would you know by looking? No. It's a type of pervasion without perception. But boy, don't ever mistake it — a guy who can't see doesn't pervade without perception.

But a true communication goes A-B, A'-B'. Not A-B, B-A; A-B, B-A. Because a person has his own communication line, and when the other person starts using his own — the same line, why, you get a jam on the same line, just by contrary wavelengths. You start to work this out in electronics, you couldn't possibly see how you could get a reverse wave coming on the same wave. You'd have to alter the wave in some fashion or another, and as soon as you've altered the wave, you have actually a different pattern, so you'd have two patterns running on the same carrier wave — which is two waves, you see.

This fellow who can pervade without perception, boy, he's got Superman whipped the way he can look through walls. Oh, that's terrific, you see. And that's way, way up.

So your preclear actually could be marked on this little line we've just mocked up here as — not starting, see — he just A, A, A. And B — totally arrived — B, B, B. See? No flow, no motion. And then we get the fellow who has just left A, but he knows he'll never arrive at B. He's a message. He is not the cause of the communication, he is the communication. He has become the particle. And of course, you try to get flow lines out of this, it gets real silly.

Every once in a while you walk into some sad apple — pardon me, some gentleman — who is utterly convinced that he is telepathing all over the shop, see. Oh boy, he telepaths but good, he does. They sit down and they concentrate and they do this to influence other people's minds.

And the more a person is unable to get to B, and the less he is able to start at A, why, the slower his communication gets. Because each time he has to check through all of the circuits to get himself back up here somewhere, approximating some phony A — A prime, prime, prime, prime, prime, you see — in order to follow a circuitous route to get through part of this line or parallel it. And he finally will arrive not at B — he'll finally arrive talking to somebody in the next block. I mean, he's just missing — missing any communication.

I'll tell you how you influence somebody else's mind. That drill you were doing this morning will do more to influence somebody's mind, because you can transfer thinkingness the same way. And we'll do some drills on that later. You just simply handle and monitor somebody. He thinks what he thinks and so forth. That's all there is to it. That's telepathy. What do you care what he's thinking? Make him think something else.

Well, this slows a line down because you — essentially you have a problem there in speed. Now, that's basically the problem of speed.

Anyway, people who go around and practice telepathy so they'll know what other people are thinking tells — that tells you what? It tells you immediately the fellow must be bottom-scale, because he's interested in what somebody else is thinking. Well, boy, when you go around and listen at Homo sap thinking . . . This is really the most enjoyable thing you can do, is just sort of go down the street and — or drive a car or something of the sort, and pass a lot of people and pick up what they're thinking about. Most of them are thinking kind of a "mental-audio" sort of a"Dum-juh-duh-zu-zow — so you know, if I do so-and-so, and so on." Most non sequitur stuff you ever listened to. I mean, the fellow says, "Well, now, let's see ..."

How long does it take a particle to get from A to B? Well, of course, it's the shortest. . . The shortest line in this case would be the fastest line. And if you really had a superinstantaneous line, why, a fellow would be at A and B simultaneously, so that's a real fast communication without a particle. That would be "super-telepathy." And about the only way telepathy really works, is you're just two points at the same time, meaning the same thing in two different places. When you do that, believe me, you get messages through.

I ran across one, one day while I was driving into town, and I got so entranced with it, I forgot to get out of the car till I'd gone beyond my destination. But my body had turned, but I thought the body in the car was ... Strange. But this person was doing the most fascinating job of driving: "Now I step on the throttle." He was driving with all of his mechanical motions and so forth planned, audio, in advance. Oh. this is real fine. And I kept expecting the car to run into something. And I was minus randomity that morning and decided I'd love to see a good wreck. (audience laughter) So I just rode along. Very fascinating.

Or you just put a point where somebody else is, and you're at the point where you are, and you get those two points pang! simultaneously, although they're at different places in space.

Now, this sounds wild to you, but people do think like that. They just talkety-talkety-talk, bom-bom-bom-bom.

And the other one is a collapsed terminal: The person is a particle and he doesn't go from A to B; he says, "A is at B" and he says this all the time, "A is at B; A is at B." Now, this fellow, to communicate, thinks he has to be very, very close in. When they talk — such people talk over a long-distance telephone — they shout. They know they are talking from Boston to Los Angeles. And they'll stand at the phone or sit at their desk, and they can be heard five offices away just because they know they just can't arrive down there — that's impossible! See, so they just — fighting this impossibility.

Now, you listen to people talking and they — boy, they sure sound reasonable. You listen to people — two people talking across the store counter while they're buying something. And you'd — you just merely assume that those two people are being reasonable. The possibility is that you haven't listened to them. If you were to really sit down and listen to these two people talking across the counter, it's — just run-of-the-mill Homo sap today — you would hear some of the most fascinating non sequiturs you ever heard in your life.

When they come off the phone, you find hands wet, terrible strain, awful sweat, and complete certainty that they weren't understood at the other end. And they'll sit down and write a big letter about it, then they'd be doubtful if that got there. They'd be shaken for days, merely by trying to go beyond their level of distance.

Where do these non sequiturs come from? Now you've got "not look" on a symbolic basis. If a person can know everything, he can look at everything. And there's the test between the top and the bottom of the scale: If he's got instantaneous knowingness, boy, he's sure got instantaneous lookingness. He can do such tricks as look up eighteen pages deep in a phone book and read the whole column aloud to somebody else — relay it to a body and read it aloud. That's real high, see. And you can get perfect imagery, while exteriorized, on anything.

And it's — you've seen this sort of thing happen. If you were on a long­distance or transatlantic switchboard for a while or listened to monitored transatlantic call lines — I've done that, lines going down to South America and so forth — you'd see what I mean.

You start fooling around with this stuff very much, it keeps saying, 'There's a barrier. There's a barrier. There's a barrier. There's a barrier. There's a barrier." And you have to dim that down and keep it dimmed pretty well, in order to get any randomity or be anyplace.

The fellows who are very orderly and in pretty good shape and are getting something done abroad and all that sort of thing, these boys — oh, they just talk over the line, they're very sequitur and so on.

Now, what's "not looking" — not looking, not feeling, not effort, not think, see? First it's not look, so we feel. Now it's not feel, so we have effort. So it's not effort, so we think. So it's not think, on that band, you see, and it's again some lower order of looking, such as with MEST eyes. Now it's not look, and again a lower order of feeling, such as with a body, see? Well, then it's not feel with the body, so effort with the body. And then it's not effort with the body, so it becomes think with the body. And then it's not think with the body, and we got Homo sap. All right.

But these other boys that are yelling across the line and having an awful time and repeating four or five times — when the other fellow's heard all of it, the connection is perfectly good, you see — they're really in a frantic state. The things that they're saying are completely non sequitur, and the call itself concerns itself with some triviality or double-checkup of certainty, the like of which you would think any baby would be able to trust, but they're not able to trust it. So their line of trust, line of everything . . . Why? It's just a problem of speed; they can't arrive.

Now, a symbolical level takes up on this, you see, and it's just one of these cutting out, one right after the other, on that band. Now, we can just add up — to the side of the Tone Scale, up here — a scale which starts up at the top with "know." Complete certainty on everything and anything, anywhere at any time; that's just complete know. An almost unobtainable height if one stays in an area where, to produce any randomity at all, he has to pretend he doesn't know. Because we immediately cut down from that and go to 20.0 on the band. All right.

In this universe, it is synonymous . .. They get on this cycle: this is the cycle of creation, growth — of persistency in that state — and then decay and death, and that is the action cycle. So, from A to B, you have any action cycle you read about in Scientology 8-8008. All those action cycles actually fit from A to B.

Now, our next step, then, that we get interested in, as far as people and beingness is concerned, would be ... I mean, the highest step in which we really get interested, is in "look and not look." See, it would be "know and not know" way up at the top there. He'd have to not know on something and this produces a randomity. In other words, he's got to choose something out to fight it; and that gives him action and motion. And he gets into action and motion and he's happy about it.

Actually, A to B could be cut up in lots of little cycles, and you could put the inverted dynamics on from A to B. The closer he is to B, the more he is an effect, and the closer he is to A, the more he is cause.

It isn't true that everybody everywhere in every universe, you know, has action and motion. That's just a peculiarity in this universe. You have to learn all kinds of weird tricks, and these weird tricks are motion. It's real peculiar when you first run into motion; it's quite interesting because it produces emotion, which is quite different than you run into elsewhere.

A person who can start easily . . . Oh, by the way, this is an interesting test. A person who can start easily has third-dimensional visios with great ease. And a person who is finishing, or having difficulty about finishing, has flat visios. You can check it just that fast (snap) — you can tell just where he is on this A-B line.

I had a preclear one time, he would just sit and he wouldn't think or anything of the sort. And what he was doing, I didn't quite know. But I put him on an E-Meter and it didn't wiggle; nothing wiggled. And I started batting him with just random dates. Good old electropsychometry, you just start hitting them with dates — dates, dates, dates — billions of years ago and present time. And all of a sudden present time started to wobble around. I ran into a duality. Some kind of a weird situation of Lord knows where or what; there was someplace where everybody merely sat around and knew. And he was stuck there. So I unstuck him and got him in motion. Probably a terrible disservice.

Now you say, "Get the idea of starting something. Get a picture of you starting something," and for the first time in his life, he'll get a third-dimensional visio. This is very simple. "Now get a picture of you ending something," and it's flat. He'll think this is very peculiar indeed. It's not peculiar, it's just the fact that everything kind of piles up at B.

But the point is that not everywhere do things go into motion. But here in this universe they go into motion. If you could avoid just all motion and get a process that had nothing to do with any kind of motion, you'd be way ahead of yourself. But there is no such process that I know of, because you've got to track the line of agreement somewhat in order to take the watch apart smoothly.

Well now, if he's at B and he's trying to be cause, of course everything he does flops back at him. You get that? In order to be cause at all, he has to be on his own communication line shooting things somehow out of B and they hit A and hit him at B. You follow that?

So we've got a problem in taking the watch apart of, in some cases very low, and in some cases a very slight bit of "not look." In other words, "not perceive" — it's just a better phrase. It's the gradient scale of perception in reverse, then, which marks the Tone Scale band in which we're interested from 20.0 down. The gradient scale of nonperception.

Now, the test of this is every time he — you get him to throw a mocked-up ball out in front of him and it keeps hitting him in the face. This isn't because he's been hit in the face with a baseball when he was a kid; it's just the fact that he's at B — he's arrived one way or the other.

The essence of perception is the definition of "what is space?" Space is a viewpoint of dimension. Now, a viewpoint of dimension, then, requires some kind of a perception. Immediately we have space, we have some kind of a perception understood. As soon as this perception is understood, we are able to proceed.

You going to get this fellow out of his body? No, there isn't any depth, any distance, nothing of the sort — he's going to have a rough time of it. He needs space. He's short on space. He's short on comm speed. He's short on an awful lot of things.

Now, the less perception a person is able to attain, the lower he would fall on this band. But remember, this band inverts and then reinverts and then reinverts and reinverts on each dynamic. So it's not a smooth track down — I mean, it's a complex band. That is to say, for every level on the Tone Scale, you have one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight dynamics. And for every band down, they turn over again.

Now, we get some silly combinations work like this: the body is just in horrible condition — oh, it's really caved in, ridges and everything else — just because the body's in horrible condition. This fellow's lived a heck of a life and he's been banged around considerably and so on.

So that you have a fellow who is inverted — you'll see what I'm talking about a little bit later when you do some of this processing. When you invert an eight... We start out with a fellow at eight. What is symbolical of this superknowingness way up at 40.0? Well that's — superknowingness is, of course, what you would call "He's God and knows it." It doesn't necessarily mean he's God of the mest universe. That's a different thing. But as far as he's concerned he's God and he knows it. The eighth dynamic, sure. Seventh dynamic, he could make spirits, why sure. Sixth dynamic, he could make mest. And we go on down the line and we fall down again.

Well now, let's take a look at A to B with regard to this, and we find out that as a thetan he's in the middle of some kind of a theta trap, and he's really high cause but every time he gets a particle out it hits this body which is immediately there, which is effect. And you get an instantaneous effect, and the fellow can't back out of his body because the body is so much of an effect, it's kind of a vacuum. And he's tuned up enough on this vacuum so he just keeps snapping back into the body. Such a fellow very often will get out of his head and bounce back in. You know, you'll say, "Be three feet back of your head," and he goes zup-up! He was out for an instant. You see that?

And then we get to an inversion. And it goes in — now he slips out of one, so he becomes a particular god. Now, as he reinverted down, he'd probably get into the Olympus sort of a standard, like Athena or, well, Jove — that is a particular god of something, you see? We've particularized. Well, this is an inversion again.

And some of them, when they've hit too many things too hard, can be quite powerhousey, but they hit too many things too hard. Their body's convinced that they're at B, they're in facsimiles at the rating of B, their speed levels are at B, and here we go, you see. The fellow is — he can't move; he can't cause his own motion. So he has trouble doing that.

See, we've gone — we've gone — he's turned away from himself to be "the some­thing of something else." And in each case, as you go down, you finally get all the way to the bottom and you'll find fellows in insane asylums insisting madly and wildly, if they're pretty high on the band, that they are God; and pretty low on the band, so forth, why, you'll just have them merely praying to God all the time — just incessantly, incessantly. God is finally other-determinism again.

And all of this is indicated by communication speed — not reasonableness of the communication. That's a very, very poor test — whether it's reasonable or not — for the good reason is, that there isn't any reason.

They take over as they own things — to make this easier to understand — as they own and are things, they then unbecome them. So you've got an inversion of becoming and unbecoming and becoming again and unbecoming, each time in a lessening scale.

The — it's just like, the significance of the microphone is the microphone. Now, we do a lot of things for the sake of randomity. We have a microphone, it goes in and it puts some things on tape, and we use a voice to impel certain things into air, and it carries them along through; we do those things. That's a — that introduces a randomity. That is something to do, rather than the reason why we have a microphone. So again, we're back to motion of a particle as explanatory of something to do.

See, on the upper band he's God and knows it — this is in the psychotic bands and when we get to where one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight — eight inverts again; now we've got somebody who is the effect of God. So we get "become and unbecome." And in each one of these things he's cause — this should explain, by the way, a manic to you. He's cause, and then as it inverts, he becomes the effect now of what he was cause before, see? So he just keeps on going down this way, cause and effect, cause and effect. And as you go down the Tone Scale, he slides to the left, and he goes over to the right, and he slides to the left. He is something which he isn't. And then he unbecomes what he hasn't been — what he thinks he's been, but hasn't been. You get the compounding delusion? He is — you make that very clear — he is. See, he decides he is something.

There isn't any reason to have any motion beyond the fact that there's motion. They used to kill writers in my day by sneering at "action for action's sake." You get some perfectly good writer and start beating him around about "Well, he was all right, but he wrote action for action's sake." Well, actually, there's no better reason to write action, than action for action's sake.

Well, he isn't anything. I mean, he's himself, that's all he is. That's plenty. If he really were himself, that'd be terrific. But he becomes something else, and then as he is cause in that, he gradually involves himself until he has to unbecome it, and he becomes the effect of it.

No, what they wanted was something deeply significant. Symptomatic of this was a story called Big Brother, it was written in, I think, Dial Press about 1930 or '31 — '32, somewhere in that band, and Dial Press published this story. Honest, it starts slow, it moves slower, and it goes noplace — but boy, does it have significance! Gee, it's significant! It's so significant that you can think about it for hours without arriving at any slightest reason why it was ever written — real, real hidden.

The second law of magic is "Do not be hoist by thine own petard." In other words, don't blow yourself up with your own bomb. Don't knock your silly head off with your own wand. Because — cause and effect, cause and effect.

Now, what makes a person's speed deteriorate? That is agreement — continuous agreement on certain speeds. And continuous agreement on these speeds brings about a condition of running at the speed of his environment. And if he can't run faster than his environment, he will pretty soon be running slower than it. He has to run a little faster than the environment to be cause — not much faster. It's not quite as bad as Lewis Carroll said it was. He says you run like the dickens just to keep up, and run like everything just to get anyplace.

Well, this gives us inverted dynamics. This makes the fellow one, and then we go down a whole row of dynamics and we get to a point of where he's the effect of one. Now, this would start him out as a thetan in good working order and would finish him up on one cycle as a thetan who was being affected by a thetan that he had been. And this is a person's past sneaking up on him. This is people's avidity for studying this past.

Well, that isn't necessarily true; there isn't this much exertion, thank God. But if a person thinks he's just going to drop motion forevermore, and think a thought and all of a sudden be and blossom like a rose, he's going to have to at the same time desert this body and this universe and just sit on a pink cloud for a long time before he's really sure that it's sure. But he can simply walk back up the agreement track little by little, and shed a few of those extra balance wheels and cogwheels and throw out a few mainsprings that he was just sure he needed.

But unfortunately the past is nearly always up Tone Scale. A few generations ago, people were moving faster.

And the big trick in this is exteriorization.

So here we have "not look." Now, let's get how we get "not look" out of this "become and unbecome." It's very simple. If a thetan is looking at sixty miles an hour — now, just to be real crude about this, let's say his lookingness is traveling sixty miles an hour, and it meets something coming at him ninety miles an hour, his lookingness is coming back at him now thirty miles an hour. Is that right? It's real simple. If he's looking at an angle, he will simply get his attention brushed off. And the matter of fact, if he looks head-on on anything — he just starts to look head-on — his attention will be thrown off of it.

Too often an auditor puts a great deal of concentration on a technique which exteriorizes. You know, he really gets to straining, like this is a big goal. Exteriorization is a big goal; as a matter of fact, it — in some cases, it's a bit of a trick. But the case starts pretty much there.

Now, you can run this experiment with any individual. You can tell him simply to look around a 360 degree sphere ... You want to get somebody who is wearing glasses and tell them to do this, because he'll get it right in the face. You just tell him to look around at various depths until he finds an impression of something somewhere. And he'll say, "What kind of an impression?"

If you give anybody the impression that just by exteriorizing them, all is going to be well in their case forevermore and they will never have to be touched again and so forth, this is a little bit erroneous. Because if you just faintly exteriorize them after a great deal of trouble, they'll go back in — smack! See, you haven't shed enough balance wheels.

"Well, just an impression. Just search very carefully across this sphere, see, and look very carefully up this way and really look up there."

But the moment you exteriorize somebody, this is the single biggest leap that the case is liable to take. Why? You put him outside the environment of the body.

"What do you mean, look at the walls and so forth?"

But actually — actually, I lately have been working on a couple of techniques which simply vanquish a person right where he sits. You know, you don't ever say, "Be out of the body," you just tell the body, "Disappear for a moment" and — it's an interesting technique line. I've been working on that — I haven't got anything thoroughly developed on it yet, but it has possibilities.

"No. You know, kind of into the ether. You know? Just up this way." And just use some strange word so he won't look straight at mest. "And just search it very carefully."

There's no real trick to exteriorize somebody. But you're asking somebody to move himself or you're trying to move somebody, you see, that is reluctant to move. He's probably at B or something, and you — of course, you get a person who is exactly at A and isn't anyplace else, and you tell him to be out of his head, and this comes to him as a great surprise because of course he's not in it.

And he'll start looking, you know, and he'll look upon it all of a sudden, he'll look — bang, see? Right in the eyes. Nearly every time.

You'll find out, very peculiarly, if he was working in a factory or something of the sort, he used to — managerial position or something — he used to sit down and shove off. Put his body carefully in the chair of the office and shove off and go sit on the factory roof someplace for a while, and figure it all out and be calm and happy about the whole thing, and then come back and pick up the body.

I've done this on people and they've cursed me for an hour. "Look at various distances." There's stuff waiting out on the fringe of consciousness, you see? Perception has to do with impressions and particles and so forth. And when that velocity hits one of these ridges sitting out there — we don't have to know too much about ridges, that's just another barrier.

You'll also run into a bunch of people who are completely frantic about getting into the body. You see, they're trying to arrive. And they're completely frantic and they're very upset and they're saying, "You know, during operations and so forth, I'm never able to get near the body. I just can't get near it. And other times, it's almost as bad; I can only get within a couple of feet of it, usually."

People get happy about ridges, by the way, and they start validating ridges and validating ridges, and they just get more and more ridges, and the ridges get heavier and heavier and thicker and thicker and more of them. Anytime you start validating something too heavily it has a tendency to become real, because that's the way things are created. So this stuff up here can get solider and solider and solider and solider until, boy, a fellow can't move. He can make air — you can actually, by concept, make air so solid that you kind of have to walk through a room as though you were at the bottom of the sea. You can just get real solid, I mean, everything can get. . . What are you doing? You're just packing it up.

"And this guy has trouble?" you say. Well, of course, they're on the — they're completely upset; their information is very poor indeed. They think that getting into a body is — that makes them be a body.

All right. Now, this not lookingness — he gets off there and he takes a look up here someplace, and he looks up here someplace and he looks up here someplace, and all of a sudden he'll hit one of these ridges and it'll discharge. Because it's only his perception that can discharge it. It's set up there to discharge. When? Some past date. And he's just carrying it forward and he probably has a machine mocking it up all the time, see? Real smart. Real cute. New automaticity. And he looks at it, and he sets this thing off.

Well, I'd like to ask you how a thing which creates space can itself be energy. This is not possible! This is not possible for the thetan to be a piece of energy. He makes energy, but he can't be energy. Now, he can also say he's energy and that's lots of fun. Now he can be something — he can be an identity — but he can't be a thing! See, energy — something built out of energy; that's not possible.

Well, the way this thing was set up to operate was every time his perception went across a certain subject, he has a bunch of lighted relay stations ... If you figured out the perimeter around a preclear as the coast of the United States with the preclear in the center of it, and every time his attention went on certain subjects or looked in certain directions, that attention — because he saves energy, you see — is then shunted to every lighthouse on every coast in the United States and activates every machine that's there. And that's the way he triggers all these things off and keeps going. Oh, he's a complex piece of machinery, that's right. By blowing up the United States you would, of course, dispense with the lighthouses, but this is a little rigorous. Because he can't dispense with all these lighthouses instantly. You can simply get him to take over control of these lighthouses. It doesn't take too long to get them in fairly good working order. He's — there's only a few lighthouses that get him into trouble. He swears they're lighthouses, too — they're "real important," and they're "just what he needs," and so on.

And how a person manages to stay in a body — it becomes very puzzling to somebody who stays out of one for a while. "Ha-ha! How'd you ever get in that body? That's funny — very peculiar. You mean to say when they tell him to be three feet back of his head he isn't? What's the matter? Has he got chewing gum on him? Bubble gum? He couldn't have any bubble gum on him! It's incomprehensible. There isn't anything there to put bubble gum on." He's a spark, or whatever you want to call him. But he's causative — always causative. If the fellow's alive and even faintly warm, he's capable of more cause than a body ever will be. So, he's an individual.

But what do you know, that perimeter — if you could just set down a bigger United States, with bigger coasts, in addition to the first one, with a whole new set of lighthouses, they're getting slightly activated too. Now we get a bigger United States, you see, and we get more coasts — this is actually apparent if you get up above some preclear and tune up your wave band, you can see these things — get more coasts, and that's a third ring now. And they get slightly activated, too, every time he thinks some kind of a thought. But if he thinks a thought that is really in that direction, why, boy, these things are going around like a pinball machine. It's real, real interesting.

So speed is what you ask if you've done anything in the session. That's how you ask if an auditor is progressing, if a case is progressing. It manifests itself in two ways: one, aesthetic of motion, and the other way, rapidity and sequence of communication.

This is not anatomy, as far as the body's concerned, but this is actually a thetan's — to some degree, his anatomy. All right.

There's something wrong with a case where these do — don't improve.

We get a bigger United States, and we put it down on this whole picture, you could see how this goes. Because it goes out there a couple of light-years in both directions as far as he's concerned. I mean, it's not small. It's the area he's covering, because it's his own space. See, so this is pretty big — he's a big guy.

Now, speed and perception are, the way we can look at it here, almost the same thing; because you have willingness to let particles move. A person who's willing to let particles move can perceive and a person who is unwilling to let them move can't perceive. That's the long and short of perception. That's your people who are very deeply occluded very often — boy, they're still trying to hold still. See, they're trying to hold still like mad because they — it'd just be fatal, they figure, if they started moving in some direction; they'd just never come back. Something would happen that would be bad.

Well, now we get into this lookingness. Gradually he has to — in order to turn off the automatic machinery, he has to look closer. You get this? He can't look as far. Or if he has some automatic relays all set up electronically, right in close, he has to look way out all the time; he doesn't dare look up here. The second he does, he gets pinged. It's an actual physical blow that he would receive. But he receives just a trickle of it, you see. Just enough to take his attention away from it. Totally mechanical. It's as though you were asking somebody to look into the teeth of a fire hose. And this is just not going to work as far as he's concerned. So every time he starts to look toward some kind of a subject of any kind that has some automaticity and a relay station on it, his attention just goes zoonnnng, and he's off of it.

Well, the point is, then they start worrying about not being able to see. Well, they've got more barricades, barriers and machines to make them, that will stop flow and stop particles from bouncing around, than you could count during a session if you suddenly started counting them and treating them one by one.

So you try to explain to the preclear, "The trouble that is wrong with you, Mr. Verypretty is — the trouble is, that you are having difficulties domestically and this upsets our processing."

Because they've got machines to prevent other machines from being touched, which prevent other machines from preventing, which protect the machines which mock up machines in case any machines are lost out. They're real thorough about this whole thing, you see.

Do you know that you'll occasionally run across one — he could, see, have a black eye, he could have his shirt half torn off him every time you called on him. He could have the police over to quiet the riot three nights a week, and he just looks at you very calmly, and he says to you, "That couldn't possibly be the trouble with my case."

Well, they caused their own slow. But a "case of slow" was ordinarily a very fatal disease in the old West. They used to very occasionally, they — the boys would get out there and somebody would develop a case of slow. And they'd bury him naturally in Boot Hill. He was a fifth of a second back of the draw, where the other fellow had already fired three shots — and that was a case of slow.

And you look at this boy and you say, "God's sakes. Well, what's wrong with him?"

Well, it's not quite as deadly as that, what we're doing here, not anywhere near as deadly, but an auditor or a case that — an auditor who isn't auditing with great success and a case not progressing are both cases of slow. You can just add it up that way and it'll make sense to you.

Well, I'll tell you what's wrong with him: he's got so much commotion, every time he tries to look at it his attention flicks off of it. He's got a complete occlusion on it. You ask him what he had for breakfast — if he's having a rough time in the family or something like that, he doesn't know what he had for breakfast. "Well, all right. What gas station did you last stop at to fuel your car?"

And perception: a person whose perception is poor, is again, another case of slow. See, he just won't let those particles move. He won't put them out and get them back. That's the way a thetan looks. He actually has to put something there in order to receive something there. And he receives it on a different — if he receives it on a different channel as it comes back, then it's amusing to him. But if he just puts it out there on one lobe and gets it back on the same lobe, he's sort of spitting in his own eye.

"Oh, well down there at 9th and Chester, and I — and so forth. Attendant down there named Joe. Got 9.1 gallons and the cost was so many dollars and so many cents. Ha-ha! And it was 10:32 in the afternoon and the date was the 8th. That was a Wednesday."

Very often thetans have arrangements whereby they put out a beam, it makes a facsimile simply by taking a plaster cast, you might say, energy-wise — Lord knows how tinily thick, you know, just very thin — and they just make a cast of the environment and you call this a facsimile when they pull this back in. And they look at it instead of putting a viewpoint out and looking at the real thing. Nothing to it, they've just got a machine that makes it for them. They energize the machine instead of putting a beam on the environment, and then the machine puts the beam on the environment.

You say, "Boy, what a sharpie!" And then you say, "Well now, to take up your domestic affairs."

Every once in a while they forget about the machine and it runs out of energy, and then all of a sudden their occlusions start cutting in and then they don't know what they're doing. The machine can't make energy — they can.

"I'm not having any domestic trouble."

So, we'll hear in this unit probably more complaints about "I get out all right, but I can't see." We'll hear that more often than "I can't get out." "I can't see," and "I just don't perceive very well," and that sort of thing. But the person will normally be saying it, "Well, I get out all right, you understand, but I just don't perceive very well, you know, after I get out." That's just a case of slow. Speed of particles — he doesn't want them to move.

Well now, that is putting something in a highly extreme form — very extreme form — with a pc.

Well, when a case starts this sort of thing, he's got himself stacked up into a facsimile, and what you just do is you just do an assessment and find out where he's stuck on the track and knock him loose from it and generate a few other things. Or you do the kind of drills that speed him up.

But let's just narrow this down into what actually occurs with regard to this — I mean, that does occur, but this person goes around all the time — all the time, I mean, he's got this button. You just have to run the button on him. Just tell him, as an auditor, that he must run this button, see. We say, "All right. Now run this button of 'people's wives departing from them; people's wives and people's husbands departing from them.'And that's the button you should run on this next case. Now, when you finish up the session and so forth, want to make sure by the time you finish the session that you at least run that button."

What drills speed him up? The technique which I gave you to do this morning is an excellent technique; no doubt about it whatsoever. It's really a very excellent technique. It has one drawback. Any technique which too thoroughly validates barriers — a drawback.

He'll say, "Sure. You betcha. Yep. Yep."

So I'll give you the other part of this technique. You understand Validation Processing — remember Validation Processing — what you validate has a tendency to come true? That was years ago, a couple of years ago. Well, it's true that you can validate the sixth dynamic, MEST, up to a point where you're in better shape than you've ever been. But all you've succeeded in doing is inverting the sixth dynamic.

And you run against the preclear a couple of days later, preclear's walking around, "Huh, what wall, what room?" See? And nothing's been done for him, you see.

That's real good, you understand, that — all of this holding on to the two back corners of the room and so forth is doing that. It's a long technique, and it works good, and a lot of people exteriorize on it in an hour or so, and it's a perfectly good technique. But remember what you're doing: you're inverting the sixth dynamic. You're getting a person up to a point where he can perceive mest. He was below the level of being able to perceive it.

And you say — go out, get ahold of this auditor: "What'd you run in that session?"

Now that you've got him able to perceive mest, for heaven's sakes, take him on up the line. You're going to move him now into the fifth, fourth, third, second, and first. This stuff he can see again.

"Oh just what you told me."

People who are wearing glasses are below the level — they're having a hard time seeing this on an inversion line. They think they're not putting it — perception there. You see, they expect it to kind of do 90 percent of the perceiving. And they put glasses on, and then they put glasses on the glasses, and glasses on their glasses and get fancy light bulbs and go see their obstetrician and in short, foul up completely.

"What did I tell you to run?"

You see, they're just insisting, "Look, we just have got to hold on to this stuff somehow!" And of course, the harder you hold on to it, the more it disappears.

"Oh, you said to do a little bit of Straightwire, next-to-the-last list. And you said to run some Step I, Orienting Straightwire, and I did that. And then I double-terminaled his difficulty with his liver and so on."

I'll give you a little example of this — going to give you a good example of this. I want you to run this concept: How real that wall is. Just get that real determinedly, how real that wall is.

And you say, "Well how about husbands and wives departing from him?"

Good. Take a look at it. (pause) What did the wall do?

"Oh, I — I guess I just — there wasn't time in the session." Now we've got a reason, see? He's got to justify it. "There wasn't time in the session" — and he may even invent one to make himself completely right and say, "I tried to run it, but so-and-so."

Male voice: It disappears.

You can take auditor-preclear teams that have failed and get two E-Meters, and you can ask the preclear what the auditor's been running on him, and the auditor's machine will clong, clong, clong and the preclear's machine will sit steady even though it hasn't been run out.

To whom did it merely become more real? (pause) That's an inverted sixth.

The auditor, because of this — unless he's snapped well up the line — is always running out of preclears what should be run out of the auditor; because of this difficulty of lookingness.

Now, get an idea how imaginary it is — how completely unreal that wall is. (pause) Who'd it practically smack in the face?

Now, let's take lookingness in symbols. We can understand human behavior in terms of lookingness; we've advanced an awful long way — that's what I'm trying to show you here very briefly. We say to this person, "Where did you get that hat?"

Audience: Here. Here. Here.

And they say, "Oh, hats are brighter colored this year. And I asked my aunt about hats. And you know, she used to be in the style business. She was in New York and she — long time she was a dress designer. She has some of the loveliest dresses and so on, and she used to particularly take a great deal of pains in matching them up with shoes and so forth. And by the way, I think I've got to go down the street and get a shine."

That's what we know as an inversion, as an inverted sixth. Found in any case that that looks . . . You say how imaginary it is, how unreal. . .

What you said was, "Where did you get the hat?" See, this is real fun.

Now, get again — get again, just get with great determination that it isn't there, that wall. Determine that it isn't there. (pause) Did it appear good and solid?

Now, if you just look at this in Homo sap, it becomes very, very amusing as a game. You ask him, "Does this streetcar go to Poplar Place?"

Audience: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

"Oh, it's about twenty-five minutes."

Male voice: Mighty solid.

"Twenty-five minutes to where?"

That's what's known as an inverted sixth. A person gets into that and they get — mest waves start in reverse. Very often they start to put out flitter, out in front of them, and the flitter — their own flitter hits them in the face. Well, that very often happens.

"Well, it's about twenty-five minutes out on the line here."

The technique which you're doing right now is a terrific technique to invert, and that's why we're running it. But remember that "what ye validate comes true to some degree."

"What is?"

Now, early on the track a person can say, "I hate Joe" and Joe promptly and immediately dies, perishes and passes by the boards. This startles him into being less assertive.

"Poplar Place — oh, we don't go there, that's the other streetcar."

So when we get into a proposition of an inversion, you can run this technique that we have there, you can actually run the thing for an awful long time and it'll keep you real good and stable in this universe. But you're validating a barrier, validating a limitation. And limitations are necessary to games. A game needs first, somebody else to play with, and second, barriers — even though they're rules or just mental limitations.

You say, "Ahhhhhh!"

You can't have a game without having a limitation. You understand that? You ever try to play chess by yourself? You make a move and then you run around the other side of the board and make a move? This gets real silly. This is real dull. You have to be on both sides of the board and forget you're the other fellow, which is a sort of a "thetesque mitosis," or you just find another — somebody to play chess with you, and this provides sufficient randomity so that your interest in the game may possibly hold up slightly.

You've just asked him about something that he just couldn't look at, that's all, which is locational position. Locations, positions and so forth. So he went off into time and he went off into something else.

Now, if you work this a little bit further, you see that if you had somebody else to play with and you didn't have any game — the second we start making up a game we have to have some kind of a rule, so we have to introduce an arbitrary. This is one of the primary principles I ever encountered way, way, way, way back, fifteen years ago — a study of the introduction of an arbitrary.

Well, if you look at people who are real bad off, if this is their attention, they're going this way, here's the center of the case — here's the buttons and buttons and buttons. So we look at them and their attention . . . We say, "Look at the ashtray" (and we'll just say that "ashtray" is really what should happen on that case), "Look at the ashtray," and his attention — this hand line here, see — goes up here and psheewww! Over here is a connecting thing which says, "cigarettes," and he'll say, "I don't know. When I was quite young I used to play with matches."

What happens when you introduce an arbitrary factor into a problem? We have one plus one equals two. So we just introduce six into the problem. We have one plus one plus six equals two. Oh, let's take that six out and put it on the other side. One plus one equals sixty-two. No, it doesn't work over there. You can't get anything but a wrong answer when you introduce an arbitrary. In other words, no game ever produced a right answer. Do you see that? They just don't produce right answers unless you're trying to do the one thing that you can do in a game by artificial means, is recover and vanquish arbitraries so as to discover the rules of the game. Now, when you've got the rules of the game discovered, then you can unmake, to some degree, the position of people in games. You can shove them up the line into a higher echelon of game, and you can make a better game.

You say, "This is probably an ashtray. Now, take a look at this ashtray and let's see whether or not we can't pick up something about your mother, and get a little Straightwire on your mother and so forth. All right. Now, just let's recall a time . . ." See, his attention, all the time you're talking since the word "mother," is idling like this, you see. "Now, let's get a time when your mother spanked you."

But it's pretty hard to make a new game while the old one is still in full roar with all of its arbitraries in. This they discover in atomic physics. They have what they call quantum mechanics, which is laughingly supposed to be a mathematics. And quantum mechanics runs like this: C plus Q plus 8.269 equals psi. And these are all factors that mean certain things.

"Well, I don't think that's what's wrong with my case. Actually, it's a question of matches. I remember being punished and then afterwards I was sick for a long time."

You say, "Yeah, that's a very interesting equa. What's this 81269?"

Now, an auditor will do this. He'll have a case in progress, the case will be coming along very well, case will be doing all right in terms of communication. The auditor adjudication of the speed of communication of the case says the case is progressing. That's all an auditor needs to know. And boy, before very long we ought to know real well what this is all about, so we don't have to ask somebody how he feels. You ask people how they feel now, to be courteous, not because you don't know. You know and then you ask. Just to be courteous; just because man talks that way. Not because you have to find out. So we ask him, "Do you feel better today?"

The fellow says, "Well, I tell you impolitely what they call it; it's a "bugger factor.' " And he says, "This is a — well, you have to have that in there to get the equation to balance."

"Well, I don't know. I had an awfully bad night last night. I haven't had a bad night for a year."

"Well, does it always balance when you do that?"

Is he trying to be insulting? No, he sure isn't trying to be insulting. The fact of the matter is you've asked him about his condition and that's one thing he can't face. He's totally justifying, trying to look for some justification of condition. Why is he looking for justification? Because he's got logic machinery sitting around. And he flips in this direction and it shoots him off over in this direction, and he pings a couple of these relay stations and that clicks a couple more things and above all this — "How wrong can you get? Dead." So he has to be right somewhat, so he has to tell you he's alive and this means he has to be right, so he explains to you how right he is.

"Yes, except when psi is above two billion. And when it goes above two billion, then you have to have 1,873 in there instead."

And you ask somebody, "Are you going to the theater tonight?" And he'll very often tell you how alive he is. Just routinely. And you ask somebody if he's eaten yet, he'll tell you how alive he is.

And you say, 'Why? What — where does the figure come from, you know? Where does it — where'd you get that?"

But if he considers this discourteous, he will tell you about how dead he is, kind of threateningly, or needing energy or sympathy. In other words, he goes off into computations, pang! pang! pang! All of this thinkingness sets up because his lookingness collapses on a certain subject. So he thinks. And then he doesn't know what he's thinking about. And then that inverts and he finds himself looking at something else. And then eventually that other thing inverts, and so he's looking at something else.

And he said, "Well, it has to be there to balance." (He doesn't tell you anything about where he gets it, you know.) "Well, if you put that in, then you can make the equation say what you wanted the equation to say, and so you have a working equation so that you can work on atomic physics, you see?"

Psychology, our unlamented predecessor. We have nothing to do with psychology. Psychology is the study of the human brain and stimulus-response mechanisms, and its code word was, "man, to be happy, must adjust to his environment." In other words, man, to be happy, must be a total effect.

In other words, quantum mechanics is so far down the line that you even have to introduce arbitraries into arithmetic to get what is commonly supposed to be right answers. Now this is real weird! Yeah, we even have to take arithmetic and algebra to pieces and do something else with them in order to achieve any kind of a goal. Well, that's a game being added to a game being added to a game, and all we get at the end of that is an explosion. We sure take that watch apart.

It was almost fatal, by the way, to run into that and tell somebody he has to start making the best of it and putting up with things and taking a rest, and that'll fix him right up.

Now, when you try to use anything to straighten out — we're not trying to straighten out anybody's mind. You want to disabuse yourself right there, right now, then — nobody has got any mind to straighten out. He's a spirit with a bunch of automatic machinery trying to run a body. And all we want him to do if he's going to hang around bodies is not be so susceptible to, and to know a little bit more about handling them. And when he knows this, and when he can do that, his own communication speeds are better, why, he's in real good shape, and as far as Homo sapiens is concerned, why, you've got a much better guy.

Well, anyway, we have this problem coming up continually where you have distracted attention. This is one method of distracting attention. The other method of distracting attention, of course, is to pull it in, in some other direction.

But we're not straightening out anybody's mind.

Now, in psychology they neglect the factor of causation, because they neglect — they're treating the human body and trying to understand the human body. So they, of course, are not looking at that thing which monitors a human body. It's the thetan, so they never would have found the thetan. Furthermore, the thetan works like radar. Radar is much closer to it than MEST eyes.

We take psychotherapy now. Let's take the most basic and the best advancements that have been made in a couple of thousand years: Sigmund Freud. It was only by introducing new arbitraries that he could create a new game called "Freudian psychoanalysis." We had to have all kinds of arbitraries. And if you want to see symbols, boy, just start looking at Freudian psycho­analysis and they just go on page after page after page: there's "id" and there's "bid" and there's "sid" and "did." It's gorgeous!

Mest eyes depend on light coming in and hitting and agitating something or other for the GE to see. But what do you know — you never look at what the GE sees. I don't know why you use one. You don't feel what he feels, see what he sees, nothing. See, this is a real weirdie. You've got viewpoints dropped over the iris, and you've got hearing points over the eardrums and you've got feeling points over the fingertips and along the nerve lines you've got stations set up so that you can feel what he feels, but you never get a relay from the GE. That's real interesting, isn't it?

Now, you notice, is the closer we come to home plate the less language we're using. I mean, in all this talk I've been giving you, I've been using very common English words, extremely common. We're talking less and less in technical terminology.

You can monitor a GE if you want to and turn him into nip-ups because he's a total effect — practically total effect. So that you generate any kind of energy, you're going to affect him one way or the other. But you're not doing anything with the energy, normally, that you have to have in order to run the GE and that sort of thing. Once upon a time you could probably just run one. You know, it didn't have to eat, nothing — you just mock up a body.

Of course, when we have a technical terminology, it simply tells us there's something there to be solved, see. We don't know all there is to know about that because we have to call it something else than what it is. For instance, right now, we can put thought, emotion and effort together — we don't have to classify that, we know that's common English. Now, we don't have to reclassify it.

There's a certain shame — the first shame on the track, by the way, is when a person no longer is able to generate enough energy to run something — when he starts to eat and get the energy from someplace else. Eating is your first dog down; then below that level he can't make up new mock-ups just pang! pang! pang! so sex is invented as a substitute for eating and to continue lines of mock-ups.

Now, but look at this: look, feel, effort, thinkingness. Is there a single arbitrary word in there? No, these things mean just exactly what they say there. Now, we just get the idea of a beam of lookingness, and we suppress it and we've got thinkingness. See, it's that elementary. If you do shoot off at odd angles and so forth, it's because again, this is getting so simple that there must be a deeper significance to it. And that's just what the trick — there isn't any deeper significance to it: cause, effect, attention, look, feel, mote, body, thetan.

All right. When we look at lookingness, we are looking at the same time at its collapsed states, which is feelingness, effort, thinkingness, and not thinkingness. And every time we look at lookingness, we're looking at geographical position. And you'll get so darn sick and tired of geographical position. Because as far as this universe, and as far as three universes are concerned, the key to them is contained in the Prelogics.

All right, now we've got the question of anchor points, and we've got to take them over.

The first thing theta does is create space and time and objects in them, and — creates, see. And then the next thing it does is locate things. See, it just creates these things. But that is locational itself, and then it locates things in space and time.

So, we mustn't validate, however, any type of barrier; we want to get him to a point where he can invalidate barriers. So that tells you that right after you get this stuff so hot that it'll practically go up in smoke just because you're looking at it, tells you we sure have to learn how to unmock. And that's a type of validation too, saying something isn't there. So we've got to get a preclear up to where it doesn't matter whether it's there or not.

You get a preclear to start locating things in the barriers of the mest universe. It's just as valuable to get him to locate things in other people's universes, by the way.

There are people who have to walk — who when they walk, have to mock up the street in front of them. This is not undesirable. These people, when they get up that level are so capable they don't mind mocking up a few streets.

We have three universes, all locational. Viewpoint of dimension. The moment we're into space, we're into location. And the second somebody tells you that he is "lost mentally" or "feels lost," it's because he's not looking at something. You see, first he didn't know, and then he had to look. First he said he didn't know, and he said he'd look, and then he didn't know and he did look, and then he couldn't look, and then he decided that he'd better feel, and then he wanted to feel so he couldn't really look anymore, and he started on down — and here goes your pc. Each time he tries to look, his attention is shunted off someplace else.

Down scale, a person gets into the feeling like he's the "only one," you know? That all this is being mocked up for him by somebody else who suddenly disappears.

So I give you buttons to run this morning — that's what we're getting around to — and, of course, here and there you avoided running the key buttons, see? You run the Tone Scale buttons because they were all written down. Well, a very important button there is "ridicule." You see, you — here and there, in the offices over there, you dropped ridicule. I mean, it's very neat. That's — "Huuuuhhhh! No, not ridicule!"

I call your attention to the story Fear — it's quite a popular paperback these days in Great Britain, by the way. I had two novels in one book; one of them is Fear and the other is Typewriter in the Sky. And it came out in a paperback edition over there and it's been just having a fine time with sales records and so on.

Now, instructing on any such subject as this, using the symbols which comprise the English language, which of course is a symbol relay system itself (it's quite remarkable that we get across anything on a symbol relay system), we use these buttons and point them up and we get drills in progress, and the next thing you know we're running into one of these "not looks."

But in Fear it talks about the — that's ten years after the fact of writing it — there's a little section in there that talks about the fellow being the "entity." Well, that describes this business of being the "only one." I recommend it to you if there's a copy lying around anyplace. Maybe I'll dig up a copy of it and write it up. Because that was a spontaneous description of the feeling of somebody I had run into in the field of investigation. And it was right fresh in my mind at the time I was writing that. And everybody was putting the world there for him, and the people — the second that he turned his attention away from the people, he knew what they did — they suddenly slumped over, see, and they stood there, see. Then when he looked around, they came to life and went into motion, and went into action, and pretended they were buying and selling and hauling and driving taxicabs and so forth, but if you peeked right around real quick, see, why, you'd find them all stopped again the second that you weren't looking.

Well, you could be very, very uncomfortable if you simply were crushed into looking. Boy, we could bust the watch real royally — smash! And the way to really get a busted watch is to have somebody else look for you. You know, go around and clean up somebody else's bank for them. You can do that.

And he'd go down a row of buildings, he would always suppose there were backs to these buildings, but you knew very well, all of a sudden you look real quick, and you found out that they're taking the block down that you had just passed and putting it up way up the line, so that you would see it when you went past there. And no backs to the buildings and no rooms back of the windows and nothing under the manhole covers — didn't know what, see. Everybody was putting it there and changing it just for you.

You can go down the street and a little crippled boy is hobbling along and you all of a sudden turn his leg red-hot, stretch out the bones, straighten it up and he goes, throws away the crutch. You can do this if you're hot enough. But it — does it do him any good, really, in the long run? No, it doesn't. Wonder why? Boy, has he been an effect, but royally! You made him more of an effect than he was before; so you crippled his own self-determinism to some degree. He'll have a straight leg, but he'll wonder after a while if it isn't better to have a broken back.

Well, you see the degree of effect that is? Boy, look at that as an effect, see? The world being put there for you? Boy, that's a lot different than walking down the street and saying, "Well, I'd better put some more paving blocks."

So when you interfere with self-determinism to that degree you get into trouble. That doesn't matter, it doesn't mean you shouldn't do it. I mean, I'm just telling you what I know so ... You can sure produce an effect.

Why are you putting paving blocks there? You'd go on down the street anyhow, as far as you were concerned. You'd do an awful lot of things. But you put paving blocks there to be agreeable and you're off into the track of agreement again.

Now, we have, in any of this instruction, the process of reversing the line of agreement, which comprises a state not as able as it should be. Now, somewhere up the line, one attains a state of balance on cause and effect which gives him a sufficiency of barriers to enjoy the game. And not so many barriers that he's now not enjoying it, see. If you have too many barriers, why, it's being in jail. And if you have not enough barriers, why, no motion, no action.

It always takes a certain amount of agreement to get along anywhere or do anything, to stay in communication with anybody. In other words, to have other players. Too much agreement and boy, you're a broken piece.

So as we look up the line here, we're going up against the past. The past is running at higher speed than the present. Why is this? Let's take the fellow who runs a piano. He learns to run this piano; this is in the year 1722. Now, by the way, he's dead — he's wanted to be real convincing now — he died in 1745. He died real dead. Boy, was it convincing, his body was tramped by a horse and he was completely mangled. There was no doubt in anybody's mind he was dead. By the way, you'll find him holding on to this impact and so on, occasionally, when he needs to be reassured. See, it's: He's not there, he's there, he's not there, he's there, he's not there... You've got a "maybe" at work, but you also, between these two things, have the certainty of impact. No doubt in anybody's mind that they were hit.

You find people who are deteriorating badly — they're just "Mm-hm. Mm-hm. Mm-hm. Mm-hm." They go walking down the street agreeing, kind of... (audience laughter)

You can go back down through a person's lifetime and you'll find a lot of these impacts sitting around — boy, there's no doubt in their mind that they were hit. In other words, something produced an effect upon them. They're more certain about what they hit, though, if they're in pretty good shape, because they've certainly produced an effect on something else.

Well, many people a little bit up the line, they've had a hard time with this, see, so they're saying, "Disagree, disagree, disagree, disagree, disagree."

Well anyway, this fellow could play this piano back here in 1722, and he played the piano very beautifully and he was very fast — clavichord or something of the sort. And he — just gorgeous, you see. I mean he — artist. Real fast and terrific virtuosity, and the best there was and all of that sort of thing. And that life's all gone. That's laid away. Doesn't remember. We only live but once, the beautiful sadness of that. He's been very convincing.

And then we come to the Christian principle which is the one thing that was introduced into the society by Christianity. You will develop the idea as this course goes along that I'm not entirely Christian. Well, this is not true; it says right on my birth record that I'm a Protestant. And so I've taken that very literally and so forth, and I've been protesting ever since. (audience laughter)

Death is a sort of an accusation. You say, "Boy, did you produce an effect upon me and a bad effect too. And all of your effects are bad, damn you. Because look how dead I am." Of course a person who can remember is not dead, see? So, of course, a person who's dead is dead, if you want to really be convincing.

And here we have "resistance to evil" as the motivator back of religion. Oh, boy! How mest universe can we get?

So in 1940, why, Mama puts this person down to the piano and says, "Now, you've got to practice for two hours a day and you'll be a good piano player. And I've got a good teacher for you, and it cost a lot of money to buy this piano. We're paying five dollars a month for it. And we're paying umpteen dollars for the course of lessons. Now practice on the piano." And the kid — very happy, see.

We take this ashtray, and we take this ashtray: these two ashtrays can sit apart on the desk very happily, not in contact, not in conflict, and they would probably sit there for a long time. But all of a sudden we just say, "This ashtray now thinks that this ashtray over here is evil." (clank) Now we say, "This ashtray must resist."

And he starts monkeying around with the piano. Bum-bum-bum-bum, bum-dum-dum-dum. He starts monkeying around and they show him a piece of music he's supposed to play, and he looks at this music, and it sure doesn't look right to him — looks awful funny. He doesn't pay any attention to the music, to hell with the music. And he finally gets it down to where he's got a boogie beat down here, see, on the bass; and he gets this boogie beat and he's getting real interested and the piano teacher says, "No!"

Now, you just noticed this wall up here disappear when you said how actual it was and get real solid when you said it was imaginary. All right.

And Mama says, "My God! We're trying to teach you to be a concert pianist, Oswald." And he tries this a couple of more times, you know, kind of speedy, and he'll just have to slow down. He's supposed to read music and he's supposed to do this and he's supposed to do that. In other words, instructingly, they're making an effect out of him — crush, crush, crush, crush, crush, crush!

We say to this: "This ashtray must not approach the area of the second ashtray." And when you've got an inverted attention on it, here it goes — (clank) there it goes.

All of a sudden he starts to play the piano one day, and he gets sick! He gets real sick. He doesn't know what on Earth has hit him. Nobody else does either. But he doesn't look at the piano; he can't tell anybody it's the piano. He doesn't know it's the piano. And this is your mechanism of the hypnotized subject unable to look at the tie signal of the hypnotist, as you'll find in Book One. You know, the fellow says, "When I touch my tie, you'll take off your left shoe." The hypnotized subject never sees the motion; he just doesn't look at it. All right.

"Crime. You must fight crime." What's the best way to make criminals? Fight crime. Oh, yeah? Well, what's the best way in the world to make juvenile delinquency? Get all the kids fighting it. You'll have the next generation so darn delinquent nobody will be able to bail them out. They'll have to start penitentiaries for the two-year-olds. See?

We have this poor kid there, sitting in a fast ridge of terrific automaticity. Oh, if just left by himself, he could have sorted through so he could have learned a piano without ever contacting that ridge. But now, by being an effect — this "he has to learn" — they've got to set up all of his piano playing automatically, and as soon as it's being set up automatically according to music, in comes the old ridge. And the second we've got an old ridge coming in on him, it's moving faster than he is, and it goes boom! And boy, don't think it doesn't go boom. All of the automaticity about piano playing — he can't play that fast.

You get the — get this resistance to evil. There is a Devil, and he is much more powerful than God obviously because we have to fight the Devil, and we could completely neglect God. He merely says, "Be good" and "Be nice" and so forth. "That Devil, he's real mean, see, and we're not quite sure what he's mean about, but it has something to do with fire. And fire is light, and so I guess the best thing to do is be a fireman so we can fight the Devil." And that's something peculiar. (I ran into a preclear one day who was being a fireman just so that he could fight the Devil, and he was a very bad fireman.)

Then we get, every once in a while, a child wonder. He sits down at the piano, two years old, and pangity-pang-pang, Mozart and Brahms, zing-zing-boom-bong.

Anyway, we get this principle of resistance to the Devil, and wind up as devils. See? (clank) There we go — clunch! And this is the principle of resistance to evil in the mest universe, and this universe is a religious universe.

Or you get a kid four years old, and he all of a sudden starts talking ancient tongues. Somebody listens to him for a while and says, "My God, do you realize that you're talking algebra?" And he doesn't see anything peculiar about it at all. Just some old automatic ridge.

Now, one of the tricks is, they take the best spirit that happened along — that anybody is writing about in the last few thousand years — and you take the best spirit that happened along, and we find out that this spirit was crucified, couple of thousand years ago we're told, and they keep displaying his body on a cross! Rurrrhh! Isn't there something funny with this? They keep putting this body on a cross. So everywhere you look there's this body. Well that says — kids, that says, "You done it. You done it."

Well, sometimes they can handle them; mostly they can't. And when it caves in, it caves in but hard. It's running faster than they are. All right.

You'd be surprised the amount of sexual excitation, for instance, which is motivated by Christianity — terrific amounts of it. Because you mustn't have that too — you must resist that. And you see, that's — eating is the basis on sex, and that's dead bodies and so we're — (clap) here we go.

In the course of study, as we go up along the line, we are continually pushing the preclear to look at things which are running faster than we have the preclear running. So if your cases hang fire at any time, you're just auditing too slow, and using too slow a technique. Speed has everything to do with it. So that the fellow can't look quickly, you see — he doesn't look speedily, he doesn't carve through anything, his attention goes off in some other direction.

But here, for God's sakes, is a body. Why, they've done that in every religion that they've invented here on Earth: They've given a god a body, hoping that the thetan would simply move in and he couldn't get out. And that way you could keep bodies from being zapped. And it's a highly efficient system. But the only trouble is that sooner or later somebody's going to come along and bust it to smithereens. And I'm afraid somebody after that is liable to get zapped. But that's not your lookout or mine either, we're just victims, all, of the same thing — no responsibility for this.

Techniques, as they are developed, make a very integrated picture. Extremely integrated, actually, since they are all designed to pick it up at the easiest end and reclaim with the least excitation of unhandled automaticity.

The last period where there was any kind of a real renaissance on Earth — where things were really running good — they still had plenty of thetans on the loose. But the period before that when things were running but royally, they had lots of thetans on the loose. And just before that, in the Greek civilization, the place was practically monitored by thetans. Everybody said, "Please, can I spit?"

You know, a fellow's memory starts going to pot by handling automaticity and so forth, unless it's being handled by an auditor, and handled very well.

And the thetan would say, "Well, let's see," check over the altars, sacrifices and so forth, "let's see. Well, I'm not too sure. Not too sure about that. Now, my brother, you didn't put anything in — during his holiday, you made absolutely no gift." Crunch! Lightning bolts strike.

(Recording ends abruptly)

And now we're told that this is all myths and fairy tales, see? It's just going out of sight forever. I don't know what count they're going down for just now, but it's sure not the third.

Well, we won't talk about that particularly, because that of course, is on the lines of self-determinism, morals, ethics, responsibility for the society, deep significance of societies, deep significance of culture, deep significance. Actually, we're not interested too much in deep significance. We want to know the "wheres and why-fors" of life, and have a little more to each of us and roll along. And I'm afraid that things will all work out for the worst in this worst of all possible worlds; but that's somebody else's lookout, not ours.

If you are very motivator-hungry, though, and you got to thinking it over very hard, you'd find out that you would approach with grave misgivings any idea of turning loose a bunch of thetans on this society — grave misgivings. And the way to solve that is to run enough motivators on yourself till you're no longer motivator-hungry. That settles the moral aspect of it.

There isn't any great harm, however, results from this; but you will get people up the line to a point where they will pop back in the body. They'll be pretty cruel. They're up the line where they will pop back into the body, though. They're only up the line that far. If they're basically very cruel and very inverted on that, and they're very mean and sadistic and so forth, they'll do a high dive back into the body.

I know. I've worked some real lulus and so on, and you couldn't bail them out very far before they took another dive; unless you simply just bailed them out until they were pretty relaxed and thought the world was a pretty good place and people weren't so bad. And when you got them up to that state, what do you know, they stayed very stable. Why? Resistance to evil — they think a body is evil, they think people is evil, they start resisting the body, and the next thing you know, flip! in they go again. Okay.

We have then, resistance to evil as one of the prime motives of not Theta Clearing but "theta sticking." And we needn't study "theta sticking" beyond as it will assist us in Theta Clearing. But the body is essentially nothing, if not a good theta trap. And this theta trap is something we are solving. It's just another way for a thetan to get too much randomity for his own sake. Now, we can solve this and we are solving it. Okay.

Resistance to evil. He who thinks bodies are evil and thinks that everything is going to go to hell if anybody gets exteriorized and so forth, and bodies are evil and they ought to be fought, and the reason he wants to get out of his body is to kill somebody — it's very, very amusing: pop! in he goes again. It's no kind of a mechanism that is a punishment mechanism, it just happens to be built that way. He's just built that way; it just happens that way.

So it means that the worst people on Earth disappeared first. What do you know? A lot of you are going to have a lot of moral connotations with regard to this sort of thing. Does a person become a better being because of clearing and that sort of thing? Think about it, wrestle around with ethics, wrestle around what is ethical, what is unethical?

I tell you the only unethical thing I have ever been able to discover is for an individual to deny himself. And if an individual thoroughly enough denies himself, believe me, he's unethical because he'll wind up by denying himself and everybody else and everything across the eight dynamics, pang! So that's real unethical — also immoral.

And you'll find out the downgrade of everybody was when he denied his own strength, truth and power. And so you have to solve that. But it's a solution that comes rather easily.

There are even many people just say, "Well, is it right to be cruel?" And they will writhe around and they will beat their skulls in, and that's the answer they finally come up with.

Okay.