. . . you graduate them right on upstairs. You have a hell of a time the first time. He doesn't do it well; he sweats and strains. An apple on Keep It from Going Away was perfectly easy, and by the time you got it into Hold It Still, you were — god, the whole first series of six on a total automaticity. And every time he mocked up an apple it went wiggle-woggle-waffle-boomp and started shooting out the windows and everything. And he managed to mock up a fish net and grab hold of it and bring it back and something like this, you know. Doesn't matter what randomity occurred. Now all of a sudden you're going to go on to the same object and you're simply going to blandly tell him to hold them still. Well, you're asking for some loses, perhaps, but the truth of the matter is you get there faster, rather than validating his difficulty with the automaticity.

Thank you.

So you ask him to hold them still. And you could even go so far as, "Come on, just for a minute, so that you know you did it — just for an instant."

How are you making out today?

And the fellow finally will figure out something: "Well, if I take a quick drag of breath like that, just for an instant, it'd stand still just for the instant I — and I did it because I did — yeah, I can do that. Yeah. Got it."

Audience: (various responses)

Male voice: You want a completely null object. No needle movement whatsoever.

I understand that it's with great anxiety that you're getting off of SCS. "Is it flat? Is it flat?"

What would you do if you couldn't find one? You would take the nullest object.

Male voice: Yes.

Okay.

"It's flat now, isn't it? Heh-heh! Heh-heh! Flat!"

Second male voice: Could this possibly be run without an E-Meter?

Well, today we are going to take up the procedure on which you will be operating, and I will give you a rapid rundown of this procedure. And this will be the first time that a lecture has been made on this particular procedure.

Yes, but I'm afraid that you would get eyestrain watching the preclear's reactions, trying to sort out the null objects and all of that sort of thing. I'm not going to tell you it can't be done because I have done it. And the processes were done originally totally without an E-Meter. And I found out an E-Meter did this: It gave us a greater security, let us get into less trouble and let me get into less trouble, you see. And in addition to that — in addition to that, ran so much faster. An E-Meter cut the time down by about two-thirds. You had to be so sure it was null that you often unflattened it and unflattened it and unflattened it. There are liabilities to running it without an E-Meter, but it can be run.

Now, it makes you believe that this is very new material. But it's actually not new, new material at all. What's new is going to be your understanding of it. And I'm afraid that's going to be brand-new here and there, mostly because of this: There's a new curve on this material; it has a new direction, it has a new goal. And that actually reevaluates all the material right from scratch. It's the 19th ACC Intensive Procedure.

Yes?

We have a great deal of background on this procedure. Now, nearly every ACC that has been run has been run to some degree on experimental processes. Nearly every one. I don't know of one that hasn't. Somewhere along the line we did some experimentation during the ACC. And that is not the case in this ACC.

Male voice: In picking the six null objects, would you pick all six before you ran the first one on Keep It from Going Away?

This is the first ACC which is going to go for broke. In other words, we're doing processes which we know all about; there isn't a single question mark anywhere along the line. There are some problems with regard to this Intensive Procedure, but these problems are of the nature of investigating the true nature of man. They are answered, to a marked degree, simply by what the preclear cognites on. So it isn't the procedure itself that is in question.

No. No, you do not. You pick them one at a time.

Now, much of this is old. There isn't any part of this that hasn't been vigorously and rigorously run at one time or another in the HGC and certainly it's been run by your Instructors, it's been run by various experimental auditors here and there, until there's a terrific amount of material here. Now, it's not true that one auditor has run this over and over and over himself, all by himself, many, many times as a rote activity. But all of its processes have been run. You understand that? This is the first time these processes have been assembled into this particular regimen. But the processes themselves are terrifically well-tested and the results of each one of them are unassailable. They are rather fantastic.

Male voice: You pick one, keep it from going away. Another one, keep it from going away . . .

I found out, by the way, the other day, quite by accident that I had audited somebody myself for about thirty-two hours, and I was tremendously amazed, yesterday, to find out I had made a Clear. We hadn't been investigating this at all, and this person required about two weeks to settle in to a digestion of what had happened. In other words, this person had not been aware of it or had spoken of it nor had I been aware of it particularly, but about two weeks after the fact, this person all of a sudden starts running around acting like a Clear, see?

Right.

Now, we've never discussed this thing — this person and myself — but this person's starting to give me the lowdown on things. And it's quite amusing — this person is starting to talk out of Scientology 8-8008. "Why don't people simply postulate what they want? I don't understand this," this person said yesterday.

Male voice: . . . and so forth?

Now, that, of course, is an upper-scale symptom of Clear. So this procedure here is getting results that haven't been gotten before on a more or less routine basis. That makes about six that have been turned out here just in recent weeks.

Right.

Now, the end goal of this procedure, then, is the state of Clear. And that is not the state of Operating Thetan. Please, please, please spring these things apart, huh? Let's not — let's not go space opera, let's not do a defense department all-out on this thing and expect that just because we've cleared somebody, why, instantly the electric lights won't work in his vicinity or something of the sort. Let's not look for outrageous phenomena, because the Clear is understandable within the range of human phenomena. In other words, any human being could understand a Clear. You get that?

Male voice: All right. Would you pick them according to increasing size . . . ?

Well, that's not true of an Operating Thetan. An Operating Thetan would throw a human being into a state of terror, to say the least. The one thing a human being is afraid of is something like an Operating Thetan. Practically every prevention that has been taken by religion on any other activity for the last two or three thousand years at least has been to make sure that no Operating Thetans could operate. Probably the entirety of the popularity of the Roman Catholic Church — small church, Johnny-come-lately sort of church, small outfit — was the answer to a thetan in good shape. This is true, and I'm not just giving a joke. If you look over the literature of the Middle Ages, you will find out that it is totally devoted to how nicely Catholicism overcomes all thetan qualities and manifestations. It's devoted, right along the line.

Yeah, you always ask for a bigger one.

The Inquisition was simply an anxiety state that the church got into, and the Inquisition itself was simply an answer to this problem of "What do we do about a thetan in good condition?" One of the things they did in the Inquisition when they burned somebody was to pack the person's throat and chest area with ice, so that the exteriorization of the thetan during the burning at the stake would be delayed as long as possible, thus giving him the idea that he couldn't get out.

Male voice: Okay.

The degradation of a thetan. An organization, then, totally devoted to the salvage of the human soul is found to exist solely on the expertness that it suppressed one. Now, I'm not being facetious here, what I'm saying is actually — it's not just one of Ron's cracks; it happens to be true.

So the guy gave you a universe the first time — he's sunk. Got it?

So, the human being — when a thetan gets down as low as a human being, he ceases to be able to understand or be able to cope with anything vaguely resembling an Operating Thetan. Now, that range, then, is not one that you can broadly talk about. A Clear can understand one. And one of the benefits of Clear is that no state of terror conies about at the thought of somebody prowling around without a head. Now, that's probably its most interesting benefit.

Male voice: Got it.

Now, when I'm talking to you about these states of Clear and Operating Thetan, that sort of thing, I'm actually talking to you about very high-power material that man has been sweating over and slaving toward and abusing himself most remarkably, about here, for a number of generations, to say the least. Twenty-five thousand years is probably a more exact period. He's been articulating these problems since the earliest days of the witch doctor, one way or the other. And he hasn't been able to cope with them. In Africa, right at this moment, in — well, particularly the Belgian Congo, someplace like that — you will find that nearly all tribal customs are leveled at the solution of problems regarding the human spirit. Now, religion has been having a wonderful time trying to handle problems with regard to the human spirit — having a wonderful time trying to handle this. They finally got the final answer as I said just a moment ago, and that is you simply suppressed all spirits to a point where they wouldn't notice. And you had it answered.

All right.

Now, these are not brutal words; I'm just saying the material that I'm taking up here and the state that we're trying to attain is not new or startling to man. It has been a primary concern of man for many thousands of years.

Second male voice: You mentioned different body locations with reference to the individual — you know, one in front of and one behind . . .

Now, our answer is different than the answer which the Western Church assumed, but not too much different from that which the Eastern philosophies assumed. Long before us, somebody said suppressing everybody so they can all live really isn't the best answer. And Gautama Buddha said that in about 625 b.c., and worked along that line. He expertly saw that if you suppressed everybody, you wouldn't have anybody left — a point which other people seem to have overlooked. Now, everybody doesn't have to be low-toned in order to live.

Right. Right. And the reason for that is a thetan is a 360-degree sphere — vision. And he's so used to looking through eyeballs that you get him out of this quite incidentally.

Now, do you see that as a specialized philosophy? You see that as a specialized philosophy? Well, as — this is based on the fact that man is basically evil, and I think the writings of Plato, if you look into them a little more carefully than most philosophic students have, will reveal to you a general opinion just before Christianity that man was basically evil and basically bad. And maybe he was going through some band on the Tone Scale that was evil or bad, but he didn't look very good to his fellow man, and as a result, this whole idea of suppression became rampant, and everybody started to work on it as a total theory.

There are, by the way, a tremendous number of side effects that are built into these processes. You're handling fifteen, twenty phenomena every time you handle one. This has really been grooved down, here, from the standpoint of side effects, you see.

Now, this is not merely an historical footnote to this procedure. I'm telling you this for this reason, is there isn't anyone here who hasn't been raised in the philosophy, knowingly or unknowingly to some degree, that the best answer is the suppression of the human spirit, don't you see? This is the prevailing philosophy for the last two thousand years. You haven't liked it particularly, or you wouldn't be here, but some of that is on automatic. You understand that? Some of that has been left on automatic. And as a result, an auditor occasionally makes a blunder which isn't a blunder. You see this? He's coming along fine. Clearly and analytically he's going to make somebody better, but right about the point where he would make him better, something happens and he, to be technical, louses up the case.

Yes?

Now, how does this happen? Why does this happen? That's because of this philosophy I have just been talking about, the philosophy, and it is as merely — please look upon it as merely a specialized philosophy, it hasn't any real, any more reality than any other thing, it's just a bunch of considerations — that the way to get along is to have everybody in bad shape. "If everyone is weak, then we're all set. If everyone is totally degraded, we're all set." You get the idea, which stems from the idea that man is basically evil and, therefore, we have to have all men weak in order to have a civilization.

Male voice: He said to the right or the left of the individual. You said to the right or the left, front, back of the body when you were speaking of it.

Well, a weak civilization based on that philosophy tends to succumb rather easily, and can be eaten up by somebody who has got a rather depraved viewpoint of some kind or another, so of course, the philosophy has been kicked along by all those who wish to make slaves out of everybody else. But in view of the fact that the making of slaves then brings about the dramatization of making slaves, we get into one of these vicious spirals without a bottom. And we get slavery being dramatized and so on, and nobody ever gets off the back of anybody's neck.

Yeah, body, body, body. Yeah. All right.

Well, I am not saying that this has anything to do with your motives at all because you wouldn't be here. I am merely remarking the fact that we have had training in this society at this time that we have to do certain ornery, mean and vicious things to people in order to get along. Now, the frailty of that philosophy will become manifest to you as you go along. And right now I insult you by even inferring that you don't already know this. I'm just pushing this home and giving you some of its source. This is where this came from — the idea of everybody weak, you see?

Yes?

Now, as soon as you get a preclear into pretty good condition he becomes ethical, which he never was before probably. If you're really successful with somebody, why, he starts to behave much more decently than before, don't you see? And if you were unsuccessful he starts to behave rather badly. If you didn't do anything for him or if you messed him up a little bit here and there, why, he became less ethical and his behavior less acceptable. The other philosophy, of course, which opposes "man is evil," is that man is totally and only good. And this is folly, too, because naturally a man can be evil, otherwise he never would have had such a thing as a Spanish Inquisition. See, he can behave in an evil fashion. All right.

Second male voice: Does he have to stay interior like that when he's putting them around his body? Or can he get out in back, and you know . . .

Now, if he can behave in an evil fashion and if he can behave in a good fashion, what is he? Well, he is what he is. But he only reacts badly and antisocially when he believes that he is surrounded by evil and when he believes that he cannot handle or control evil. And then he is reduced to dramatizing this thing called evil; thus, he behaves badly.

I don't know, I'd hate to run mock-ups inside a body.

Now, his state can be improved more easily than it can be reduced, which is one of the beautiful things that has come up in Scientology. It's one of the more gorgeous things that we have found out. It's lovely. I mean, it's just accidental. I mean, we couldn't have asked for it to be better, but it's no fault of ours. And that is that you can improve an IQ much more easily than you can worsen one.

Second male voice: Yeah, but what I mean is, can he get in back of the body and still mock these gadgets up around him ?

If you just turn loose somebody on a preclear and let him use a psychoanalytic brand of physiological hocus-pocus — you know, like they teach in the universities — you don't get any change. I mean, you can work at it — you can work at it. You can tell a man that it all stems from the fact that original sin — I think original sin, isn't that the basis of psychoanalysis, original sin? Religious philosophy, psychoanalysis. That it's because his little sister was tampered with when she was two that he is now in this psychotic state and so forth. All of this nonsense, this evaluative hocus-pocus, so forth, actually doesn't much depress anybody. It will, however, take a case which is on the edge anyhow and ready to go off, and it can tip him off rather nicely if he's very close to being tipped off, but it doesn't have enough power to, by itself, tip him off. Do you understand that, see? To have made him better is so easy that it's a wonder nobody tried it. Now if somebody had tried it, they would have found out something quite remarkable: that it's very easy to make somebody better and it's difficult to make him worse.

Why, sure.

You'll learn that very, very well in — if you don't know it to some degree already, you'll learn it in running this Intensive Procedure.

Second male voice: All right.

As long as you audit, then, straight at the goal of improving him toward Operating Thetan, you arrive at Clear. And the definition of Operating Thetan, well-worded or not, but understandable, is: an Operating Thetan can be at willing and knowing cause over life, matter, energy, space and time. Now, you audit toward that goal, cause over these things, and you get what we've had before in all this: you get his self-determined action, the preclear has to do it himself. You get all these various odds and ends that we have been finding piecemeal and stressing for years, and they all sum up into this other thing, which is just the goal of Operating Thetan.

Matter of fact, I've had so little to do with this body the last week or two that I — it's practically fallen apart. And in doing a little bit of patch-up and so forth, why, I started throwing mock-ups around it and found it was quite interesting: I found out I was getting a lash-back from the body, a rather definite lash-back from the body, which was restraining some facets of exteriorization, don't you see?

Now, you're going toward the goal of Operating Thetan, and you don't have to make one. In other words, it's not necessary for you to arrive at all to make a Clear. Because it's not a final state. It is simply a little byroad on the way toward one, and that's very satisfactory, too. Because finishing a case and ending a case is too synonymous in this society at this time with evil. So you are auditing straightly toward this high-flung, unimaginably tall, never-before-seen goal called an Operating Thetan. In other words, it's a hypothetical point. Now, the mathematician in several mathematics does this trick: proceeds toward an ultimate or an absolute in order to obtain a finite.

There's always a few more viewpoints stuck in the body, you got the idea? And if you don't work those viewpoints out of the body, why, the guy is still trapped. See?

Well, don't think you're doing anything else here. You're doing this same thing. You're proceeding toward an absolute. Now, someone comes along and tries to tell you that you are trying to produce an absolute in producing a Clear, why, laugh at him. That isn't the case at all. The absolute which you have to try to produce in order to get a Clear is Operating Thetan, which is one of the — one of the weirder things. A Clear happens en route to this unimaginably high absolute.

He's not here, and it doesn't matter — he was an HGC preclear, but on this putting it around in various places, this person was being run on Step 6 by a staff auditor. And he is a bow and arrow expert, he is an archery boy — he goes out and kills deer with them and so forth. And he got into more trouble last Thursday than anybody has gotten into for a long time, just on the same thing you're asking about. He all of a sudden started to plow into existence viewpoints, remote viewpoints, which were parked all around the body, and these things came live and could see much better than he could. As a result, when he went out on the range — I think Thursday night he went out and did a little bow-and-arrowing — he could see the bow and it looked like it was shooting over this way, you see, and from another viewpoint he was watching a target which was over there, but the target was way over there and the bow was way over here and he couldn't get a bow lined up with a target. And he had about fifteen or twenty remote viewpoints alive at the same time, so he didn't know whether he was back here holding the bow . . .

If that is the case, then what is the goal you will attain? Well, it's very simple, and this procedure is devoted to attaining that immediately. But if the same procedure were carried forward longer, you would attain Operating Thetan, theoretically. You see, you wouldn't have to use any other procedure to attain Operating Thetan.

Male voice: Shooting himself.

Now, Clear is a more subjective version than Operating Thetan. I told you that there were four universes, or four areas of interest with which a person must become familiar, and those were the thetan, the mind (the mental image picture and so forth), the body (bodies and so forth), and the material universe itself. There were these four things. And there weren't any more than these four things, because if you took the thetan and blew him up to a total, which would be Operating Thetan, you would have God, so you have the eighth dynamic, don't you see?

... or shooting at himself or what. And this all came about just by freeing remote viewpoints out of the body, by placing mock-ups in proximity to the body, not the thetan. Got it?

So we haven't excluded anything. If we take body here, we might as well have the bodies of dogs as the bodies of people, you see? As a matter of fact, the psychologist would much rather. And over here we have the mest universe. Well, that's you might say, the agreed-upon universe, and if it was some other universe than this universe, we were still in the class of universes, don't you see — the inspected, agreed-upon universe seen by more than one person. Now, all we're trying to attain here in the state of Clear is a very finite version of this. A thetan — the person himself, you see — not in control of all thetans everywhere, but just slightly in control of himself so that he's not totally dependent in all directions. And this universe called the mind — we're talking about his mind, you see; we're talking about his own mind. We're not talking about all minds, don't you see? This actually makes an auditor a higher state than Clear because an auditor controls other minds, don't you see?

Male voice: Yeah.

And over here, bodies — we're not interested in his wife's body, or the body of his pet or something like this — we're simply interested in his body. See, we're only interested in one body and we're only interested in this one universe — you see, this thing that we're sitting in and around and that surrounds us and that's baffling the Atomic Energy Commission right now, how to get rid of it.

All right.

Now, here then — here then we have this state of Clear looking straight at the person himself, not to make him a god or to make him a peer over all other thetans. We're just looking at himself, you see? His mind, his body and the universe in which he finds himself. So the state of Clear is a singularity of each one of these four universes. You're just dealing with one thetan, one mind, one body and one universe. Got it?

Male voice: Thanks.

Well, naturally if you audit toward all thetans, all minds, you see, all bodies and all universes, you can't help but sooner or later shake out one body, one mind . . . You see? It's very easy. The tougher trick is from Clear on. But you're already intellectually at a more advanced state than Clear in one sphere. You're controlling other minds. It's quite interesting.

Yes.

I've often known this, you know — just sort of known it like you kind of know things — that being an auditor was a higher state than many states we are trying to attain in processing. I've known this, you see, but I've never before been able to state it.

Male voice: About how long is this Step 6?

Knowing something, you know, and being able to state it to yourself is one thing, and knowing something and being able to state it to yourself and tell somebody else about it — boy, we've really walked up into the stars, now. There's a big jump between those two things. You'll find that all the time; it's very interesting. You try to give somebody a piece of Scientology, and he says to you, "Oh yes," he said, "I knew that all the time," or "That is true, isn't it?" The goop! He never was able to articulate it, state it and he didn't know it. But you articulated it and he could then articulate it and he suddenly understood it and he gets this odd phenomenon of " I knew it all the time," don't you see? You've had that experience very often.

About how long?

As a matter of fact, you'll have people go away because they knew it all the time. It's very amusing: sometime you've worked out something or you've been doing something that was quite expert with people, and you've just got this squared away and you're doing it very well. And you tell somebody what you're doing and this person pops up and says, "Oh, I've been doing that for years." You know that? That's a real cute one. Well, of course, I've had to work out a horrible rebuttal to that. I'll tell you what the reverse gambit is when they put one out like that — there's a very interesting one: make him explain what he has been doing for years. He can't tell you. Well, this is very interesting.

Male voice: How many hours? I mean, between what and what?

Now, let's get into this Intensive Procedure step by step. Now, we know where we're going. We're going toward a potential cause, willing and knowing, over all life — this is the absolute — all energy, all matter, all space, all time, you see? You're going toward a total absolute, and we attain willing and knowing cause over self, a thetan; mind, his own; body, his own; universe, the one he is in. All right.

In running Step 6? Well, it's run anywhere from — right now I can only tell you the existing figures.

And the first way we handle the case is to invite him into a state known as communication. There will be people that you will not invite into the state of communication without immediately and directly processing them, so the processing comes before the communication. You have somebody lying unconscious, you can use hand pressures and talk to him on a process, and after a while, why, he'll start to communicate with you — you get hand pressures back again and so forth. But the first state we can say in CCH 0 is a state of communication. Now, there is, then, a step below CCH 0, and that would be any process which invited or brought about a communication.

Male voice: Hmm.

Now, we are too prone to assume that verbalizing is communicating. Just because a person can verbalize back and forth is really no reason they are communicating. So here we find the auditor's biggest stumbling block and the blunder he most commonly makes. He believes that the preclear knows he is there because the preclear is talking to him. This is an unreasonable assumption. Just because the person is there, sitting there in the chair, talking, is no reason he knows you're there.

And they are from ten — a rather incomplete job, but it turned out to be a satisfactory one — and thirty-two.

All right, now, if we're going to an awareness of one thetan, one mind, one body and one universe, if we're going toward that state, it is very interesting to enter the problem on making him aware of another being, until we realize, as I told you earlier, that he is flinching from the existence of other beings, minds, universes to such a degree that he must deny himself and his own. So, the first step he must take is to unflinch. Now, we're not asking him to know us thoroughly. We're just asking him not to flinch any longer because we're there. Therefore we have to handle this fellow smoothly, we have to give him a familiarity of our presence. And he will then go into communication with us on a very specialized basis. He is not actually, as you suppose, becoming aware of another universe, another mind or another person. He actually isn't doing this. You are not asking him to become totally aware of you. All you're asking him to do is unflinch because you're there.

Male voice: Between ten and thirty-two.

Now, that's a little different, because unless he ceases to flinch he won't find out much about himself. We discover this odd phenomenon that unless a person finds the auditor, he then is not under control. Part of the whole scheme of control, part of the whole scheme of control includes knowing the source of control. Now, if he knows the auditor, then being audited cannot even vaguely damage him, because he's a willing and knowing effect of a known source. And that's not aberrative.

Yeah. On Step 6 only.

It's when he falls out of communication, feels he doesn't know the auditor, he feels he doesn't know what the auditor is doing and what the motives of the auditor are that he then feels he can be damaged by an auditor, don't you see? We're not trying to get him to know the auditor, know the auditor's universe, know the auditor's thoughts and convictions. That isn't what we're trying to do at all. All we're trying to do is to get him to unflinch because the auditor is there. In other words, find the auditor, and after that he will accept the auditor's control.

Male voice: Yeah. I was just sort of thinking, we aren't — if we don't have these E-Meters, are we going to get enough time in on this?

If you take the bulk of preclears who have just been audited and never trained, you will find out that they have a rather deified idea of an auditor. They have just simply been audited, they have not been trained or anything of this sort. They do not consider themselves in that same class at all and they tend to slightly deify the auditor. They do not conceive that they have confronted another run-of-the-mill universe, don't you see? They save their own face and they excuse the fact that they have followed some orders by setting up an idol, you get this? Well, auditing amongst us Scientologists becomes tough to the degree that we know we aren't. Therefore, in class auditing we have to overcome this point. It's rather easy to do.

Oh yes. You've got — I think it's seventy-nine hours per person, because we have allowed a factor of safety there of 100 percent. See that?

People often say it is much easier to audit somebody on the street than to audit a Scientologist. That's because Scientologists have tough cases. No, I'll clue you: They don't have tough cases. Their cases are actually better than the people on the street, but they don't deify you. They consider you another being just like they are. Therefore, you usually proceed without altitude. This — now, you can always make up for altitude with perfection of technique and action and procedure, don't you see? And I'm afraid that's what you're going to have to do here.

The only place you're liable to run into any real trouble is, there is undoubtedly somebody here who will make the process control the preclear, rather than himself. And he may have to go clear back to the beginning and do it all over again, because he'll get into Step 6 and he'll start running, and the meter will at once tell him there's something real random here. And the only real answer to that is just go right back to the beginning and carry on through again.

You just be three times as good as was expected and you've got altitude. It's the altitude of skill; that is the only respected altitude that there would be in this particular Unit.

You will probably be doing this on a patch-up basis on a twenty-five hour basis, when you get out of here. You'll just sort of drop it at the end of twenty-five hours and say, "Well, that's that," and then let the guy flounder on out of the rest of it in the next few weeks. Evidently that happens, see. It's interesting. I mean, after you've done this to somebody they kind of walk through the labyrinth afterwards just as though they were going on being audited. They get up to the conclusions that they would have gotten up to with another fifteen hours of auditing, don't you see? They eventually go. It's like starting to launch something — not at Cape Canaveral — but it's like starting to launch something, and it just keeps on going, regardless.

Now, we have to present, then, this thing called communication. We have to accomplish communication. And if communication is accomplished, auditing then proceeds. Well, in view of the fact that you're not going to be able to communicate from a Svengali standpoint to your fellow classmate, you will really have to establish communication and no fake.

Any other questions with regard to this? Yes?

Therefore I expect to hear, as we go along, this charming question, "What have I done wrong?" much more often than you would ordinarily use it as an auditor in your general auditing. "What have I done wrong?" And we will assume, whether it is correct or not, in this intensive as it goes forward, that when havingness goes down, the auditor got lost. When the preclear's havingness went down, the auditor got himself lost to the preclear, and it's the auditor's fault. See, we will assume that automatically. The preclear dopes off — inevitable on some of these processes — but if he dopes off hopelessly and goes completely out of reach, we will consider, then, the auditor was responsible for it. That he did something that caused the preclear to believe that the auditor was against him. See, he did something wrong.

Male voice: Yeah. On this Step 8 — Make Some Time — is that to stabilize a preclear or what?

Now, what is a wrongness in auditing? It's what the preclear thinks is wrong. Bad and good, good and evil, saintliness and devilishness alike are all considerations, and the preclear makes the consideration that you have done something wrong, brother, you have done something wrong — in his mind and his universe. So we're not going to argue with him on this point. But this is the only thing that he ever assumes. Now, whether he knows it very alertly or not is beside the point, but this is the one thing he assumes just before his havingness drops.

You didn't hear me. There aren't any; we look in vain here for a Step 8.

Havingness drops into restlessness or unconsciousness. Person becomes restless or a person becomes unconscious. Those are the two simple manifestations of a drop of havingness.

Male voice: I noticed in Clear Procedure that. .

And we're going to assume that people's havingness drops when he loses his auditor. And we're going to consider that he lost his auditor because he considered the auditor did something wrong. Isn't that arbitrary of us? I think it's downright arbitrary of us. Happens to be absolutely true, nevertheless arbitrary, because that is the point of view that the session will be monitored on. In other words, that it's the auditor's fault always.

Ah, you're not doing Clear Procedure.

That's a funny thing for me to stress that at all, but do you know we actually had a student here not too many eons ago who blew a session because the preclear wasn't acting right and argued with all the Instructors and said, "Well, preclears aren't supposed to act that way." A remarkable understanding of preclears. Hope that person never really gets hold of a hot preclear.

Male voice: Okay.

We're going to assume, then, that drops of havingness are manifested by restlessness and unconsciousness. Not necessarily true; true most of the time, you see, but we're going to assume that it's totally true. See, unconsciousness, dopiness, dragginess, disinterest and that sort of thing is a drop of havingness, and that the auditor did something which the preclear considered was wrong. Got that? And that restlessness and so forth stems same way.

If you've been listening to me in the last hour thinking I was describing Clear Procedure, look at it again. Because you are not even auditing out of the book Clear Procedure. It is not the same process.

So, I want to hear this alertness on your part first for this dopiness and restlessness and out-of-sessionness, see. I want you to be alert for that, and when it occurs I want to hear this "What did I do wrong?" Now, that's not included in this procedure.

Second male voice: What's Step 5?

You see why that is? That is to maintain this thing called communication. And we don't have any altitude, so we must substitute total communication for it. Got that? I know we don't have any altitude because nobody in the class has been telling people they're the best auditor in the United States. That's always present when we have a really good auditor.

In our intensive of the 19th ACC we are calling Step 5 — this can cause some confusion — it is Creative Processing.

You know, I'm privately amazed at the fact that there are two or three auditors around who have terrific public repute just because they say they're good auditors. I have nothing to back it up. Most of the good auditors around simply do a competent job. Some of them also mention it. But — there's nothing wrong with mentioning it, but I do know of some cases where people go around saying they're terrific auditors and they've just done terrific things, you know, and this is all they ever say. And they never have done any of these things, but people believe them. It's rather fabulous. That should tell you not to become reticent about saying it; it just should tell you to put your sign out and tell people how good you are more often. That's all.

Second male voice: Oh. So — okay.

Communication. And the total of CCH 0 is devoted just to that. Read it off your sheet here. One: CCH 0, the first step. Get the following agreements that there is an auditor, an auditing room, preclear, the session is starting and will end at a certain time, the preclear has one or more goals for the session. The basic operation there is communication. And if the basic operation is communication, these are the things most intimate to the session and so you communicate about those things. Have you got this? See, these are quite therapeutic points, all of them. They're right close in to the heart of auditing, but we want communication on these things. We don't want a definite settlement about them that will last for all time. We want them to be talkable — talk-aboutable. You got that?

I see what you're up against. You're comparing this to Clear Procedure. You went to a congress and you heard me lay it down the line at a congress, and then you come here and you hear me lay another one down the line, and you think I'm laying the same one down the line. And I'm not laying it down the line. I'm laying down a process here for a professional auditor; in the congress I laid them down for anybody. You get that?

Now, the one point that should or could be in there, of course, is help. The clearing of help. This is terribly important in many respects only from a basis of communication. Now, now understand this: if a preclear can talk about each one of these things — auditor, auditing room, preclear, the session starting, it'll end, the preclear has a goal and help — you see, if a person can — will talk about each one of these things, he is very auditable. Do you get this? So you don't have to settle anything in CCH 0 except PT problem, which follows this, and I'll discuss in a moment. You see this? That if he can converse on each one of these points, he can converse. Do you see that? And if he can't converse on two or more of these points, nyaah.

Audience: Yeah.

Now, it's outside what we're going to do in this class, but I would be prone to drop to CCH 1, which is, by the way, below this procedure that we're talking about here. "Give me that hand," something like this. Let's overwhelmp him. Let's snow him under. Let's get him grooved. Because if he can't talk, for instance, about help without frothing or going totally silent or something like this, if he can't talk about the existence of an auditor, you see, this tells you at once that he's badly out of communication. That is why we bring up these points, not to clear them.

You understand the difference, now, between what I laid down in Clear Procedure, the booklet, and what I talked about at the congress? That is couched at somebody out here knowing a few technical terms, no great training in auditing. They'll inevitably get hold of that booklet and they will have to go up those steps. And we have to have a good surety.

This is, then, diagnostic. Is he auditable? Can he talk about these things, one after the other? Well, if he can freely talk about them, you got it made. You'll have no trouble running control on this preclear or anything else. But if he can't talk about more — about these things, one or more of them: auditor, auditing room, the preclear; that he's there to be audited, you know, and that a session is going to start and end, and that the — that there's such a thing as a goal in the session, that people do help people, and help is slightly possible — if one or more of these things cannot be talked about, that's the rocky road, the rocky road that confronts you right there.

And that's something like you take this cylinder that's supposed to handle some gas, and the cylinder has been well tested and we know that it will handle this gas under pressure, so then we tape it up. And then after we've taped it up, why, we put an additional casting on the outside of it and we pack it down real safe in earth and then we say, "Here, it's safe." And we consider the naked cylinder safe in your hands. We pay you that compliment, don't you see?

And it doesn't mean that you would do anything else in this session here. It merely means you would have to be much more careful about control, you'd have to be much more careful about communication, and you would know that if you had the profile of this preclear he would be pretty well on the bottom where "unhappy," "dispersed" and other things are on an APA. He hasn't found an auditor. An auditor isn't there. If he can't talk about these things, he then is way out of communication, because these are the things he should be communicating about if he is there being audited.

But letting this other one out into the public, you might say, there are certain things that these people would have to be very, very careful of, that you would consider anybody absolutely nuts if they weren't careful of it, and it will be brand-new news to these people. See? "What, you don't kick a preclear?" you know? It's not the same procedure that's laid down. They will get there on Clear Procedure, but they won't get there that fast. That's for sure. Not by a ratio of five to one hours. See?

Now, the present time problem is something that we take up all by itself, but in this procedure if there's no blip on the E-Meter, we skip it. If there's a slight blip on the E-Meter, we skip it. And if there's a severe blip on the E-Meter, we use this process until the meter is null: "What part of that problem could you be responsible for?" In other words, we locate the problem. He said, "Yes, I'm having a terrible lot of difficulty. The house burned down last night, and I haven't had any breakfast," or something like that. He seems to be quite disturbed about some nonessential.

Any other questions? Okay. You know all about it now, huh?

And auditors quite generally — quite generally say, "Well, that wouldn't be a problem to me," so they don't audit it. Or the fellow says, "Well, my wife left me last night," they get no blip on the E-Meter, the auditor says, "That would be a hell of a problem to me," and audits it. Do you see that?

Very interesting that none of you have asked me anything about the only tough part of Clear Procedure. The only tough part is the delicacy and imagination which is required to clean up a field so somebody can see pictures. Now, that's tough. That requires real on-the-ball auditing.

Well, auditor adjudication — the dickens with it. Just let the E-Meter drop, and if it doesn't drop, why, it isn't a problem. It doesn't matter what it is, see. The fellow says, "I lost my job this afternoon," there's no drop on the E-Meter, you say, "That's fine" and go on and audit him. You get the idea?

Yes?

Now, why do we use "What part of that problem could you be responsible for?" Why do we use that? It chews up havingness, it's a very limited process. It's just because we're trying to get rid of one problem, we want to get rid of it fast, and that's a fast way to get rid of it. " Invent a problem of comparable magnitude" precludes that the person can invent a problem, and you might have to go into that and straighten that all out, and we're not interested in doing that, so we just say, "What part of that could you be responsible for?" This is a terrifically workable process. You just run it on the problem, which is bad; you just ask him to run a subjective look at it, which is bad, but it is only bad if it reduces his havingness. And this will run briefly enough, we trust, that it won't reduce his havingness or that you will be so skillful and so good as an auditor that his havingness would not reduce no matter what you ran on him. Do I make that very plain? All right.

Male voice: You made it sound so simple we just took it for granted we could all do it like that.

Then we go to this next condition, which is that we're not going to run any Locational. Well, why aren't we going to run any Locational? Well, you people have been located to death, anyhow, but just in a general state of affairs, why should we run Locational? Locational is itself — it is a process all by itself, simply spotting things and so on — and a lot of you are so habituated in its use that you will probably slip into it and use it regardless anyhow. And we're asking you not to use it because it becomes an allness in itself and is a sufficiently long, lengthy and involved process — it's apparently a very simple process but actually it's the longest, lengthiest and most involved process there is. And we're not going to get up anybody here running Locational hour after hour after hour after hour when we're supposed to be clearing people. Because Locational won't clear anybody. See that? It's a therapeutic process. It's perfectly fine, but you can get started with it and never finish it.

All right. You go ahead and do it just like that. But you'll find out that it is not something you will get off a sheet. That's something you've got to look at and be sensible about and work with and be very patient with, because an invalidation at that point can throw a guy into the basement.

If you start a somatic with Locational Processing, you know, you've had it, you've got to go on and flatten it. Well, we're just not going to take that chance — the devil with it. No Locational. We'll use Connectedness instead, which is later on, here.

Male voice: What would happen, Ron, if you had somebody who had a black field, and yet who had a good solid certainty of getting mock-ups even though he could not see them with the visual perceptics sort of a thing, and you went ahead and ran the Creative Process on him anyway?

The second stage of this Clear Procedure here is SCS, and that is old Start-C-S, and we run that until the pc is under the auditor's control. And we do that to improve the pc's control of the body to some degree but actually simply to get the pc under control.

Well, now, that hasn't been done. We have taken it on the basis that if he's got a black field he is obsessively keeping the blackness from going away.

Now, let me tell you, if you think that the process is going to get the pc under control and that you haven't got anything to do with it, the moment you start running another process he isn't under control, is he? Follow that? If you depend on the process to control the preclear, the moment you run some other process, that process is no longer controlling him. Do I make my point there? The process is no longer controlling him. So therefore he'd be out of control, wouldn't he? So, you'll just have to face it, these control steps and the Connectedness steps are totally based on the fact that you are going to control the preclear. Do I make that terribly plain? The process assists you, but the end product is his discovery that you are and can control him. Do you see that? You're not just sitting there to flatten this.

Now, the last field of blackness which I cleared up, I cleared up so spectacularly easily I don't think there's any use straining at it. And that is to say, I merely had the fellow mock up on six sides of the body a hand with a pinch of blackness between the fingers and had him keep the hand from going away and keep the blackness from disappearing. And we did it for about eight or nine passes and all of a sudden he says, "What blackness?" He was getting beautiful, flesh-colored mock-ups of arms and hands and so forth, and all of a sudden he said, "I'm putting those there. Heh-heh-heh-heh." And that was the end of the black field.

Now, these processes — SCS, and number three is Connectedness — and these two processes are themselves tremendously therapeutic. And if you ran them for a long time, you would come up with somebody in much better shape. They're not being used here from a therapeutic viewpoint. We don't care what they do to his profile or his IQ. You will learn before this class is over that you are handling something which is a fast rocket, not to the moon, but to the far galaxy. See, you're handling down here under Creative Processing the hottest stuff that we have ever had. And there's no reason to fool around with a kid's toy train when we're about to shoot the next galaxy. Do you understand?

This black field, by the way, had been resistive to every other process. You know, the person had been processed on all the Objective Processes, and he still had a black field. So it was one of those rough black fields.

So that SCS and Connectedness are beautiful. Well, you could run seventy-five hours of Connectedness in some form or another — Trio or any of these things — you could run this for seventy-five hours on somebody, he wouldn't be late for work anymore, his health would probably be in good shape. I mean, he'd feel fine, he'd be able to chew along in life and so forth, and this is fine. But look, that's seventy-five hours. Wow, what we can get done in seventy-five hours right now. See, just because you've got processes which are terrific, wonderful and so forth is no reason you should use them at this stage, because we've got a better process. Now, you're going to have to understand that it's a better process, much better process, before you'll totally believe that, so you just take it on my say-so and then look it over. I don't ask you to make up your minds now.

Male voice: I'm wondering — the picture you drew at the congress, how to repair the field when the guy's unconscious and the field has holes in it, and I missed on this one.

Now, SCS and Connectedness, then, are simply devoted to control of the preclear. The commands which are used there are the same commands as in

Well, it — there's no reason, particularly, to go over it. There's so many phenomena which occur in handling a black field that to even catalog them would be — would be a long job.

Clear Procedure or on our manual on control, and those are the same commands — nothing new, different about them. And Connectedness is "You get the idea of making (that object selected at random) connect with you." Now, this is actually Control Connectedness, and is a form of Locational, but is quite different than the Locational because it demands that the preclear be, thoughtwise, at cause. You see, Locational just leaves this to chance, and you're demanding that the preclear be at cause in order to run this version of Connectedness. You understand that? All right.

Male voice: What would I do with this particular case then?

And then we get to the fourth stage of this particular process and we get a Remedy of Havingness of whatever was cluttering up the field with terminals in the same condition as the pc's field. What do we mean by field? We mean that thing which the person sees when he closes his eyes. If he says "nothing" have him look again; he'll find something. And if that is chronic and if he cannot see a picture, you have him fix it up and you remedy his havingness — pardon me, you repair his havingness with that which is cluttering up the field.

You would just get a black terminal and have him shove it into the body. He would undoubtedly start going anaten, and you would keep right on running it.

In other words he sees nothing but masses of red, and that's all he can see. You say, "Can you get a picture?"

And the whole phenomena has come up twice in the last two weeks at the HGC. Fellow lay awake all night long trying to plug up the holes in his black field in one case, which — I consider this was very, very amusing. And every time one would "eat through," as he described it, floods of facsimiles would pour in upon him and he would plug the hole back up again. All night long he was at this. Came in the next morning to be audited, utterly exhausted. Had a remedy of black terminals, and the black field disappeared entirely. And no facsimiles poured in upon him, which left him very mystified.

And he says, "No, I can't get a picture."

Yes?

You say, "All right, mock up a red terminal in that red field and shove it into the body." Got that?

Female voice: When you say "cleaning up the field," just to what point do you consider the field cleaned up? To the point that he can make mock-ups easily or . . . ?

If he sees nothing but blackness, he can't get a picture; if he sees nothing but blackness, "Mock up a black terminal, shove it into the body." He sees nothing but pink skyrockets with green tails, you understand? You have him mock up some related terminal to that and shove it into the body. Doesn't matter what it is. You just make him Q-and-A with the bank until you get off that automaticity. And then you sail immediately into Creative Processing.

He's got to be able to make and see a mock-up.

Now, we don't know what success you will have doing these particular processes. We haven't a clue what success you'll have in cleaning up some of the fields, except that we can do it. And we don't find it very difficult; but we are totally prepared for other people to find it difficult. But the rest of it depends on whether or not you clean up the field. Now, there are guys around that say, "Well, my field is always black, and I can't have anything but a black field, so therefore the rest of the steps do not apply to me." I'm afraid there's always something that can be done about it.

Female voice: All right, but if he can do that anyway, then you wouldn't have to clean it up.

And now we get into, straightly, the Creative Processes, which are basically most germane to Step 6. And these are meter processes, and we run "Mock up (something the person can mock up) and keep it from going away." And we do that on six sides of the body until it's null again on the meter. In other words, we find a null object, like an apple; we have him mock up the apple and keep it from going away time after time after time. We use different areas of the space around him in which to do this. And time after time after time until it is null again on the meter. And then we have him mock up something else which is null and have him keep that from going away. The only thing we want to be sure of is did he keep it from going away? Did he do it? Did he keep it from going away? We want to be a little bit sure of that, but we still don't nag the preclear about it.

That's right. If he can make and see a mock-up you wouldn't have to clean up the field. That's right. But this is your point of judgment, see? And yet, what I've just said is not a law or a rule. See?

And we have that flat on six different null objects, we then have him have six different null objects and have him hold them still. And when we've got that flat, we have six different null objects . . . And, by the way, this can be run this way: You have an apple, a this, a that, a something or the other, and you can take the same series — and you better had, by the way — take the same series, six (the apple, so forth) and so forth, hold it still; then the apple and all the rest of them, make it more solid. You get the idea? But they're different objects, one from the next, you see? And we have him run that whole series and then we get six brand-new objects and we establish them one at a time. We don't all establish a list of six and then run it. We establish one object on Keep it From Going Away, we get six nulls and we do this all over again. We get six, the same six, we're going to hold them still and then the same six one after the other, we're going to flatten Make It More Solid. We just keep doing this. The horrible part of it is, if you went on and did this and did this and did this, you would have an Operating Thetan. We're only asking you to do it until a state of Clear has been attained.

Male voice: Ron, you made a point at the congress about a chap who was getting his mock-ups against a field; he was looking at them against his eyelids.

That is the Intensive Procedure, and actually all of the auditing, basic auditing rationale behind it, and I have merely laid this out today because you are on it now. This is not a drill, this is not a drill; this is the real thing. So, let's roll it, and I hope you have a good idea of it now.

Yeah.

Okay?

Male voice: In that case when you cleaned up a field, what would be the end result? He would be able to see the mock-up even from the beginning.

Audience: Okay.

Yeah.

Thank you.

Male voice: But when you got the field — cleaned up the field, he'd have the mock-up outside . . .

Mm-hm.

Male voice: . . . and does it matter if he's still got it against something?

No. You see, he's merely using the against-something to keep the mock-up from going away. He has settled upon a final answer on this. He says, "If I mock up a mock-up against an eyelid it won't go away; if I mock it up against a door, it won't go away; if I mock it up against the ceiling, it won't go away." You see, he's just got an automaticity. Well, as you start to run him on "Mock up a girl and keep her from going away," well, he'll mock it up happily against his eyelid, you know.

"Yeah," he'd say, "I kept her from going away. I mocked her up against my eyelid."

And that's all right with you and you go right on around and you say, "Mock it up behind you."

And he can't find anything to mock it up against and he finally — he finally says, "Well, let's see," and struggle, struggle, struggle. And eventually he keeps this girl from going away himself; and at that moment he quits this trick. You see?

Now, here is the variable point of the procedure, see? I wouldn't begin to catalog the number of odds and ends of phenomena that you will run into in trying to clean up a field. There's phenomena there. See, that's all weird. You clean up a black field and get a skyrocket field. And you clean up a skyrocket field and you get a red field. And you clean up the red field and you get a green field. And you say, "Aw, to hell with it, can you see a mock-up?"

The fellow will say, "Well, yes, I could always see a mock-up."

Now, although I could tell you the end cognition he comes to when it's safe to leave all this, there's no sense much in doing so. But there's no harm in telling you either. Because you could artificially come to this condition, and if it wasn't so and you just said, "I can do this," and you couldn't do it, why, it's very, very manifest. A person begins to be able to do all these things after a while by postulate only. Well, that's one state that is reached. And you know that, then, that you have walked upstairs a good long distance.

To get somebody to just be able to keep something from going away, just to be — and below that, just to be able to see something, and below that, just to be able to be under control enough so that he can do this on command, you see? These are all steps that are achieved.

You are all through when you can run the person on Keep It from Going Away, six objects, and Keep It from Going Away nice and easy, you know, without a single kick on the E-Meter. And Hold It Still on six objects without a single kick on the E-Meter. And Hold It — and Make It More Solid, six objects without a single kick on the E-Meter — that's it. See, that's it. For that state of Earth — you know, mest Clear, boy, that's good enough. You know, boy, that's really good enough.

So it doesn't depend on what he says at all. You couldn't care less.

Now, he could know intellectually what all these things are, you see, without knowing them subjectively. And that's fine. Any one of you at this moment could (quote) "mock yourself up as Clear." You see? And after you've audited it for a little while without it being audited on you at all, you could put up an awfully good front, you see, as being Clear. There'd be nothing wrong with doing that at all, but the truth of the matter is there would be no subjective backup. You might appear very positive, but you would have a doubt. You see?

Well, that grades on down to the point of where the fellow even thinks he's certain. You know? But fortunately we have a totally mechanical test for it. You know, we never had a test for state of Clear before. And I have just given you one, just now: Take any six objects and keep them from going away, any six objects and hold them still, any six objects and make them more solid without a tremor on an E-Meter. And if he can do that, why, you've got it made.

As a matter of fact, that probably will be a little better than the state of Clear which will be at once reached here in class. Because it'll smooth out from the end of your class — reach on. You'll probably get a kick on something. You could probably still get an E-Meter reaction from somebody on something. You could say, "Keep Ron from going away," or ... And the guy would get some kind of a kick, up or down.

Male voice: Would you clue me on Repair of Havingness for an unconscious preclear?

Pardon, now?

Male voice: Would you clue me on Repair of Havingness for an unconscious preclear?

Right. Repair of Havingness on an unconscious preclear is possible only when he has gone unconscious from Repair of Havingness. In other words, you cannot take an unconscious preclear, walk up to him and start to run Repair of Havingness and expect much to happen. But the person was awake and alert and you did start to repair havingness, and as you ran it he went unconscious. The funny part of it is he follows you all the way through. He doesn't give a quiver, he's so much out of control of the body he couldn't make it twitch, but he does follow the commands all the way through. As a matter of fact, if you just run it until he's conscious again and don't run it flat, he is liable to forget the session and still have a clear field from there on.

And you say, "Do you remember that session we ran on Tuesday?"

He'll say, "What session?"

"The one where you went unconscious while we were pushing black masses into the body."

"No, I don't remember any such session; you didn't do that to me."

That's because blackness is a symbol of not-know. That's why they go unconscious on blacknesses.

Yes?

Male voice: Will an E-Meter register on an unconscious person?

Oh yes. Yes. Yes. There's probably no such thing as an absolute unconsciousness. There's some thetan's wish. You know that if you tested the depth of sleep from person to person, it could be tested with an E-Meter. It's just how much do they register on an E-Meter while they're asleep.

And you know that you can strap E-Meter terminals to people's feet? It doesn't bother them; get the same readings. And you would find that some people registered and some people didn't, all in greater and lesser degree. And it would be a direct test of depth of sleep. How asleep is the person or thetan while the body is asleep. That answer it?

Male voice: Thank you.

You bet.

Okay. Do you know the difference between a Repair of Havingness and a Remedy of Havingness?

Audience: (various responses)

Well, a Repair of Havingness is simply "Shove it into the body," and a Remedy of Havingness is "Shove it in and throw it away." Both things accomplished. Do you know why we're not now talking about a Remedy of Havingness? It's because Keep It from Going Away takes care of the ability to throw it away.

I know one case that, had we known this, that person would be in good shape today. But that person's no longer with us. It's just totally stemmed on a Remedy of Havingness. The person could not remedy havingness easily. Could not. Pull them in, but not throw them away. Couldn't get rid of anything. Of course, I guess you should never feel bad about not knowing something back then. All right.

I'm getting very, very good reports on your class activities. And it has been said by your Instructors — who should know — that this is probably the best ACC that we have ever had in terms of people. So thank you very much for being here, and I'll see you tomorrow.

Thank you.