This is October the 14th and the morning lecture.

And I just got through telling you I spent the morning auditing this case - part of the morning - which has been audited before.

[Clearsound version splices in the "This is" in the above sentence.]

In 1951 I released techniques to at least two of the auditors who have audited this case and as far as I know these techniques have not been utilized.

This morning I want to go into something very interesting, which - I hope you will find it's very interesting and - has to do with the lag of the MEST universe - the lag index.

One of these auditors I remember scolding severely for not using the next - what is now the next-to-the-last list of Self Analysis, "Remember something real."

Now, when we speak of communications in Scientology we are speaking of the transfer of a particle or a motion from one part of a space to another part of a space or from one space to another space. That's all we mean by communication. That's the reductio ad absurdum definition of communication.

Every once in a while I run into this. It's utterly maddening. How an auditor can take somebody who is a bit adrift and not make this simple test - knowing the test, knowing it is in existence and knowing it is workable - I'm sure I don't know.

We have a pencil at one corner of the desk and we move the pencil to the other corner of the desk - that's communication. Because why? Because one corner of the desk has now communicated with the other corner of the desk. That's the reductio ad absurdum of communication, definition.

But in this particular case, that test should have been used - oh, but thoroughly should have been used. He could have put in just hours and hours and hours and hours of the same list, just as it came out in 1951.

If you understand how absurdly simple this definition is, you'll understand all about communications. Communication doesn't have anything to do with one corner of the desk demonstrating the volition which moves the pencil to the other corner of the desk. Do you understand? You're not interested, then, in the volition if we're interested in communication.

And there's another thing in 1951, the other technique released - maybe you remember this, but I remember training two of these auditors in this. You put up - you have the preclear put his hand up in front of his face and feel the force of his words. And if he's above 2.0 or thereabouts on the Tone Scale, he of course recognizes immediately that there is no force in words. There isn't any force.

If there's going to be any motion at some time or another, somebody at least set up some form of automaticity which resulted in an arrangement whereby you got a communication point from one point to another point.

The second I had this preclear do that, she got explosions. Now, this says a great deal - this says a real great deal for these boys, doesn't it?

An anchor point which, severely defined, is not in motion - that's theoretical, but theoretically and for our purposes so far as practical considerations are concerned, the corner of this room up here is not in motion. You see, that's a practical consideration. But your glance between one corner of this room and over to the other corner of this room is your communication with two corners of the room or the communication of one corner of the room with the other corner of the room. Follow this?

Their acceptance level, obviously, must have been on well people. It just must have been, that's all, because this is too obvious.

One corner of the room is the source and the other corner of the room is the receipt-point of a what? Of an attention. So there's been communications between the two corners of the room. It didn't require any volition on the part of either corner of the room. But there is always volition involved wherever you look in this universe.

Now we come out with a technique: "What room?" "What room?" I've been talking about this for a long time - talked about it at the conference. But this preclear refused to have this run on her because it was a psychotic technique. And yet when she just touched one side of this room and walked across this room to the other side of the room and was asked, "Now, is this at a distance from the wall which you just handled just before you touched the wall you're now touching?"

Whether the volition was a long time ago or right now or whether or not it runs on an automaticity or not - this is beside the point. Any automaticity has a causation of one sort or another. And the causation is no different than thee. And it's not just even the same order of beingness - it's thee. And your level of communication, then, between these two corners of the room does have a double.

"Oh, yes. Yes, a different wall."

If you said "There is a communication between one corner of the room and the other corner of the room," and you have not made a communication or dispatched a particle or given an intent between these two corners of the room, you'll still have the "prime mover unmoved" causation even though it is now running on an automaticity. You get the idea? Any interchange, then, is a communication.

"How do you know?"

But we don't have to have the second corner of the room replying to the first corner of the room to complete a communication. We don't have to have any meaning or reason in the communication.

"Because I can see the facsimile of a wall I just touched right in front of my face."

So, let's just sort out this whole thing of communication because it's obvious that the wordiest and most wonderful letter which you ever received in your life just had reasons all through it, actually had no reason at all in it.

We go across the room again and touch the radiator; make sure it's real. And we come across to the other side of the room, touch the wall again. "Now, what did you touch just before you walked across the room?"

The circuit case asks you consistently and continually, "Why did God make this universe? What was the cause of this universe? Why was it made?"

"Radiator."

Well, we're coming close enough to it when we say cause and effect and attention.

"How do you know?"

Why? Because these things are observable, terrifically observable. Does there have to be a reason for attention? No, there doesn't have to be any reason of any kind at all for attention of any kind.

"I-I see this facsimile of it right in front of my face."

Now, if you don't think this is true, did you ever hear of a false arrest? Of course, the reason in there for the arrest is the fact that somebody has made a mistake. But actually, when we talk about an arrest, what is the reason behind an arrest? It is the impulse of life to duplicate and copy and it is the police impulse - reductio ad absurdum - of life imitating the MEST universe "having to stop something." That's all. There's reason behind it - yes, stop. So, we're very up close to the surface on reasons when we go into things like start, stop and change. And when we say, "What is the purpose behind all this?" well, you just can say "communication" and you're all set.

"Well now where is the radiator which you just touched?"

And this might sound very wise and a circuit case can go off and figure-figure-figure and he'll come up with the right answer which is the fact that it's communication, even within his definition.

"Right here in the facsimile."

A religionist can come in on this and he can say suddenly, "Why, yes! Well, how wise! How wise! That's true. Because you see - you see, it was set up so that God could communicate with each and every one of us. Isn't that wonderful?" And he can play beautiful sadness and sweetness and light on this and he's quite happy with it. The truth of the matter is, there's not this much reason in it.

People have been trying to run engrams on this case. People have been trying to run all sorts of things on this case.

I don't think God wants to communicate with anybody myself I'm - some people I know, and so forth - I know some of the things I have to say - I don't think he would want to communicate with me. I know an awful lot of people that, boy, he'd run if he thought he had to communicate with them.

The condition of a psychotic is so heroic, so bloody, so terrible, that of course it follows immediately by Q and A that one can only use, then, heroic, bloody and terrible techniques, doesn't it? And yet these are the people that have to be processed with a powder puff. Oh, how lightly. Oh, how lightly.

So, you see, it's in essence simply an interchange. And it's quite a trick to have any space at all. And it works out very nicely for anyone if you simply explain it to them on terms of communication.

But to show you how far you can go with a technique just as a case history: I actually had this person well exteriorized and blowing things up before I ran room contacts. A little bit rough at first but pushed her right on through it.

But remember what communication is - communication, reductio ad absurdum.

Now, this person is a cat person. There's some of that in the Doctorate tapes. There's seventeen or so races which have come down to us. There's the snake people. There's the bear people, the cat people. There's a dog people. These things key in simply on animals and the only reason we're calling them cats, birds, dogs, bears, snakes, something like that, is because that's as close as you come down here. There's a canary people. We just have a word and the word says "canaries" - it's not canaries. But it's something that vaguely resembles Earth canaries so there's your key-in.

There is some attention in any piece of MEST. It might have been - the MEST might be representing an automaticity. You see, it might have been attention set up to run it.

And this case was a cat person. With explosions and with actual room techniques, I changed the color and expression of this person's eyes. Took me two and a half hours, but I changed the color of her eyes from almost washed-out blue to hazel brown. So I knew I'd effected a communication change.

By the way, a wonderful button is setting up something to keep on going without attention. You double-terminal that damn thing and you'll find yourself being cursed more often and so forth. The fellow who set up this universe to run this way actually wasn't a fellow. He wanted the universe to run this way more or less because it's a good test of randomity. It makes lots of randomity.

Now, here is an acute state of energy scarcity, which is space scarcity, which manifests itself on what we call an "inverted dynamic." And today we're going to talk about these inverted dynamics (and I was right on schedule). And this case doesn't particularly exemplify this, but this person on explosions began to tell me, "Yes, I'm right up there." Now, just get that phraseology again. "Yes! I know I'm exteriorized - I'm right over there in the corner." We follow this?

Man versus the universe - that's a good fight. A beautiful button in this universe is "I have to have enemies. I must have enemies."

Boy, fan your ears for that on a preclear. Just fan your ears real well, because they're on an inverted dynamic. All right. Cover that later, but that's - that's terrific. That is just simply the best doggone psychometry you possibly could ever lay your hands on. That's Dianometry. That's Scientometry.

You see a lot of these people running around - hate, hate hate, hate, hate, hate, hate, hate, hate. They're just saying, "I must have enemies." They've got to have them. They'll make them any way, shape or form.

Here we have a case that is so swimming around in personally generated energy, and she's dodging her own energy much more than she's dodging her own body or MEST objects. Yet, this case is still moving, walking straight up and doing pretty well. Doing pretty darned good.

Well now, that, very high on the scale, is simply, "I must have randomity. I have to have something to interchange against what I am putting out to interchange with."

Computation on the case is, of course - I look at the case - cat people. She was auditing people at a distance: other people's problems. See what the computations are? How fast they come out? Why cat people? Her eyes look like cat's eyes, that's all.

See, so you have this problem if you get no motion without randomity. Simply moving a particle from one corner of a space to the other corner of a space is not in itself randomity. It just is moving from one corner to the other corner and it'd be very happy if all we did was move a little particle from one corner to the other corner and then move it back again and move it around into another space and then move it back again and move it around and move it back and shove it around here and there.

Well, how do cat's eyes look? They look just like a cat's eyes and you don't have to stretch your imagination a doggone bit. They're not necessarily the color of cat's eyes, but if you'll notice a cat's eyes sort of sweep up. The shape of the outer lid - that is to say, the lid of the eye, the amount of eyeball exposed - it's long and slitty and swept up at the end. Very recognizable.

Sometime, if you want to have a good time and understand what I'm talking about, find a pool table or just take your desk and take a match. And as you sit there over the pool table or over your desk with a match, just move the match from one corner of the desk to the other corner of the desk. And then move it to another corner and then move it to the center and just go on with that for a while.

I know four or five of these cases that are very extreme - keyed way in. Well, all these cat people have about the same computation, so it's awful easy. They - any adventure, misadventure they had with a cat when young - oh, there's a beautiful explanation for why they are cat people. And they had trouble with Papa and cats, or Mama and cats, inevitably and invariably.- It should strike you as rather strange that practically everybody has the same sort of incident but it only keys in on one person.

I'm serious. You really ought to make the test so that you get the emotion. There is actually a reaction to doing that. It's always best not to predict a result but I say you ought to satisfy yourself about this.

So don't-don't-don't get - don't - I know none of you would do this, but don't let some auditor you're training get super, super brilliant, let him draw this fantastic conclusion that the incident about the cat is the incident for which he's searching and is an incident, and that these people who are fascinated with cats and so forth... A cat person isn't necessarily fascinated with cats. They practically never talk about cats unless you push them. That's the difference between people who are just enamored with cats and cat people.

But you think you know what boredom is, well, do this for two hours. Just force yourself to do it two hours. Of course, it's not quite fair because you have a reason for doing it.

If this character, this auditor, dreams this up as an explanation, he will then run the incident and hang the case up on the track the like of which you never saw anything hung up on a track. A cat person will hang up on a track when the childhood cat incident is run. Now, you can think this is very, very strange, but the cat involved and the cats involved don't happen to be Earth cats. They are flying cats. And you can run flying cats on these people and it's quite shocking to them, to say the least.

But let me assure you that if you had two matches or two pool balls which is much better - why I introduced the pool table in the first place - you can actually spend a lot of time with two pool balls making one go around and hit the edges of the thing and bank and hit the other pool ball and billiard on it and so forth.

But they all have an incident whereby Papa drowned cats, Mama killed cats or they strangled cats. And when looked for, you find this incident and there it is and there - leave it alone. Just leave it alone. It's just a key-in. And if they're down the groove on this at all, they've got so much past history on it and it has happened so often and there are so many incidents under it and it will so confuse them to run it, they're in no condition to run it. There you go.

You put three pool balls in or three billiard balls and you've got the fascinating game of billiards. And even if you just use your hand and you just kick the ball around and it hit the other two balls and so forth, there is a nice satisfying click-click and they roll in various directions and when you hit one, it rolls off at an angle. It never goes away exactly straight. Hm! You've got your first definition of randomity.

A cat people, unlike the snake people - snake people are unauditable, practically, because they sort of slither around everything you say and do. They're very, very unmistakable people.

People have trouble understanding randomity and this is the series of experiments which you make to demonstrate randomity.

Well, you know, I'm talking to you here you think very seriously about these kinds and brands of people and you might, therefore, do well just to simply memorize all these people - this isn't the point. It doesn't matter whether there is such a thing as a cat tribe that got imported into this universe or not. But the computation is the reverse computation of the cat.

Your first randomity is with two particles. Now, you can take one pool ball and throw it around the banks but then immediately, every time it touches one of the banks, you have to realize that at that point it was touching another particle. To get any other action isn't an automatic characteristic of space. You wouldn't just throw a pool ball around inside a space. It would just fly out of the space which you had demarked if you weren't - because it would just go on making more space because the second it, as a particle, moved outside the plane of any of the four particles of the side, you would have a fifth particle and you'd have more space. It would become an anchor point for that space. And it would just make more space.

The cat's computation is "Oh, how independent we have to be." There is nothing quite as contemptuously independent as a cat. And there is nothing so frantically helpful as a cat person. They do not bear that personality characteristic. Call them cat people just because they have eyes like cats. All right.

This, by the way, is a basic game - making more space with one particle. You can make various shapes of space and so on. It becomes very interesting.

"Other people's problems”, you’ve seen that. That's quite a button. Well, when it becomes the case computation, thoroughly, a hundred percent, you realize that somebody must be trying to atone or pay for something which is impossible to pay for. And it's just hopeless. These poor cat people. However they got into this universe I don't know. But they're completely lost. They're completely helpless. They are utter final bait for anybody who wants to clip them or gyp them or swindle them - they're trying to help. And if you were to tell a cat person that he or she couldn't help, they'd spin. Just like a spinning top, away they go.

[Note that in the following, the clearsound version has phrases carefully chopped out from the middle of some sentences where Ron is stumbling around a little bit.]

You tell any psychotic that he can't help, if you don't find something for him to do, oh boy, you're liable to just pull the string on him. He's gone - round and round and round and round.

All right. Basic space, by the way, I call to your attention, is

I've seen three of them have psychotic breaks immediately following a hint from me that they couldn't help. So, after these things happen, and so on, I always find something for them to do. This is no clue to it at all, but I always tell them to do something. But remember, you don't have to be sequitur with such - such a case level, you don't have to be sequitur When they say, "Help," you just define help for them right then and there. And the best way for them to help is ____, and then you just define it. I don't care what you tell them to do. Make sure that people don't get parking meters overstuffed or overtime; have some nickels in their pockets when they walk down the streets and put them in parking meters for people whose parking meters have run over. Anything! Anything. Anything at all.

& three particles, not eight. I beg your pardon,

Tell them that the best movement in the country is the Boy Scouts or the Girl Scouts and the best thing they can do is go and take Dianetics or Scientology or something into that group or troupe or something. But give them something to do, for God's sakes! Just don't leave them standing there, because they'll - they'll spin on you.

- four particles, not eight. I'm giving you three sides -

You say, "Well, there isn't anything you can do here, really," so on and so on. Away they go. Wham-wham! Bad deal.

& what I was trying to say was that space is three sided, whereas three triangled

Conversely, you could take one in a terribly bad spin and if you had them in an emergency area of some sort or other where work was actually going forward like a hospital or insane asylum, if you just suddenly said to one of them, "Here! Give me a hand calming this fellow down!" They'd just snap sane right then. They'd probably stay sane. It takes an emergency situation to give them that much juice suddenly.

- one, two, three, four triangles is the basic space, rather than four squares.

Well, all right, I got away with processing out Papa and cats by not processing Papa and cats. I just simply had her blow up men and women and herself and cats and then I had her holding cats and the cats were cursing her. And they were going to get even with her and she had to throw them out away from her and have them explode. And she'd get another cat - she'd produce this new cat - and the cat would curse her and say he was going to get even and she'd throw him out and explode. Well, she really was grooving down the line on this, see? She blew up more doggone cats than you can count.

& I'm having a rough time here. I was trying to go back over dimentian geometry instead of just figuring it out, and then just giving it to you by looking at it, and I finally looked at it. It would be six. That's interesting as a trick. All right.

And in the process of this, I ran another technique I'll tell you about, whereby you get something to create something to create something to create something. The Quaker Oats technique, we call it - the mock-up within the mock-up within the mock-up within the mock-up. You know on those - some breakfast food boxes, you see a picture of the breakfast food box on the box of breakfast food. And it's got on it a picture and that's got a picture of a box of breakfast food on it and it runs on, on down. I think several artists have gone psychotic trying to get in the last box of breakfast food in the pictures.

You just take these - this match and you move it from one corner to the other to the desk, and you'll eventually get bored. Why do you get bored? Because you can predict exactly where it's going!

Anyway, here we have this case, which is just bank completely starved for energy. And yet under good auditing, energy was under complete obedience. So we found another - found a prime button, "Afraid to get old." And if you add this up, you'll realize what a button that is. It's in a lot, in fact, the majority of old people. How do you know it is? Because they go psychotic. How do they go psychotic? They turn into senility. They've been pushing the time track and locking themselves up in time so hard that they push themselves back into childhood and restimulate it so that they won't be old. Fighting age, fighting time. Time is the single aberration. Okay.

Now, you take two matches and by moving one against the other, you don't have enough to make much of a pattern. You can make a T or an L. But you don't have much to make a pattern with and they're not mobile. But with two pool balls you've gotten your first step of unpredictability - no predict. In other words, to have interest you must have a condition whereby there is a no-(hyphen)prediction condition.

Let's - let's see how we do this. All right. We blow up old people. We blow up old people and we blow up old people's voices and we blow up old people's sight and we blow up their hearing and we blow up their teeth. These - you know, teeth is one of the most intimate communication perceptions a person has - crunch! Very intimate.

Instead of getting mad at this universe, let's look at that: No-(hyphen) prediction is a very definite necessity in the field of interest.

Anyway, just keep blowing these up, see, in big quantity, way up in space and so on.

Now, putting it this way, we've got it in terms of motion rather than in terms of thought - putting it this way, in terms of motion rather than in terms of thought.

Well, before I'd done very... And then - then we turn around and we have little children in mobs with this great determination in them that they're going to grow up. And of course that's what's the maybe. For the first part of a person's life, he's got to be old. For the last part of a person's life, he's got to be young. And between these two when they lock up on the complete maybe you get senility. Okay.

And if you just think about this, this is obvious and you can philosophize on this, which is to say just think about it and so forth. But if you set these things up in terms of motion they become immediately visible.

Blew this up and what do you know? She was saying, "Well, we were five thousand feet up, see." And here she was saying, "Yeah, the mock-up is right out in front of me. And there's a platform under it. I've got this platform under it and there's this and there's that and so forth and ..."

Now, why did two pool balls form a no-predict? That's because when you slam one pool ball against the other pool ball, it'll carom off slightly. But you can get pretty bored just throwing one pool ball against another pool ball. What you need is two pool balls. Three - two pool balls, to throw one pool ball against. And these three pool balls, then, will get into a situation where the new pool ball will itself interact all by itself against the second pool ball when either or the other is hit with the first pool ball. There's a possibility of an interaction. And that's your first automaticity.

In other words, by the time we'd done what I've just described to you in various ways, and done nothing else but this, we had this person actually exteriorized. What do you know! They weren't exteriorized and detached from the exteriorization. They weren't on the - in other words, we'd inverted the dynamic. They were - this person was five thousand feet up, see?

Your first automaticity takes place, then, on a higher no-predict. In order to have interest we must have a no-predict.

They weren't here saying that - here over to the left - saying that the thetan is five thousand feet up having exteriorized it from the body. See, they are exteriorized already! Then they have to take something out of the body and send it five thousand feet up, see, and audit it. But this person really exteriorized and pam! went into valence as herself and was considerably easier and the color of her eyes flicked suddenly; it was quite an amazing sight. Her eyes kept going kind of flickery and all of a sudden - pow-pow!

& I'm talking against this traffic noise, a different position of the room.

And one of the techniques I use which I omitted there was I had her blowing up eyes - just lots of eyes. When she first tried to put up two eyes they kept slapping together, naturally - double terminal. But eventually got her blowing up eyes in tremendous quantity. "Eventually" - within three minutes. All right - from the moment she first began to have trouble with eyes to blowing them up by the billions - individually, collectively. At first she couldn't blow up green eye - blue eyes; she could blow up brown eyes. And we blew up the brown eyes and we blew up the blue eyes. And her eyes were evidently trying to keep from being brown eyes or something of the sort, which accounted to some degree for the color shift. All right.

All right. What, then, are the conditions of interest? The conditions of interest are no-predict and enough particles communicating one with the other (which is to say, hitting and clipping and going the other way) to form an automaticity. This is - I'm sorry but these two things which we condemn so hard are the first and second levels of interest. You see how that would be? You've got no-predict and then you've got automaticity.

Then we finished up with completely objective techniques. Now, these techniques - any of these techniques, you see, are quite valid for any level of any case. But these objective techniques particularly so. And if you want to get a line charge on a pc, you follow this technique.

You wonder why your preclear is bored sometimes, why he doesn't want any processing up above a certain point. He gets scared. He's afraid you're going to take away from him his no-predict and you're going to take away from him his conditions of automaticity.

How about you standing? You're handiest there, John.

The only thing wrong with him is that he himself has become a particle and he has no volition. He doesn't have hold of one of those pool balls. He isn't objecting to the numerous other pool balls on the table. All he's objecting to is the fact that he doesn't have a chance to bat one of the pool balls.

Now stand up over by the window and look inboard toward a spot here. Now you say to the spot here, "How are you?"

When he doesn't have a chance to bat one of the pool balls, then he is the effect of all of the no-predict and all the automaticity with which he's surrounded.

Male voice: Mm-hm.

And when he is the effect of the no-predict and the automaticity around, he becomes very, very unhappy. He could tell you various reasons why he's unhappy. But I am telling you the highest echelon that you'll get. It's just there's - it's utterly impossible for him to predict anything. And all the automaticity can use him for an effect.

Well say it!

Well, if this is the case, then he is in a perilous situation, he considers. But the main peril is, is that he's not interested. And that's really the only peril.

Male voice: How are you?

So, there is a, what we might call, a critical point on a case or any case. And this critical point is that point at which the preclear considers - you've got level of tolerance of randomity, it's in the Axioms, look it up in the Axioms there. Everybody has got a level of tolerance of randomity.

I don't know. Come over here. Turn around and face the window and refuse to answer. Okay, go back there.

Randomity is the introduction of no-predict and automaticity into the motions of particles in a space or in many spaces. See? It's a simplicity itself.

Turn around and face this spot again and say, "What's wrong with you?"

Now, his tolerance is merely his consideration.

Male voice: What's wrong with you?

Now, you'll find men are postulating the weirdest kind of an impossible situation with regard to randomity and no-predict. They say, "I want to get some farm with some orange groves and sit down and just let the oranges grow and that will be all I have to do."

All right. Now refuse to answer it.

Oh, no, no, no, no, no, no. Uh-uh. Nunca, nunca! Those oranges are being put out automatically by the trees. And there's probably not going to be enough wind around to even bother them. His goal is to do that. But he would be very, very upset indeed if there weren't a few worms; if there wasn't a little wind; if there wasn't a drought and a fight with the irrigation company. You see? These things have to be. If they aren't, he'll go.

All right, go back over there again. Now look at this spot here and say, "You've got to answer me!"

But if he gets to a point where the irrigation company is always right and the worms are always victorious, he is immediately in a situation where we have him the effect of the no-predict and the automaticity. Now, you see that?

Male voice: You've got to answer me!

So, what's the - what's the criteria here?

Turn around. Now say, "What do you want to know?"

He doesn't want too much self-determinism, which is to say, self-determinism is the right to push one of the balls that will interact amongst the other billiard balls - that's all. That's self-determinism. That's the right to throw this billiard ball into the midst of other billiard balls or at least, when a billiard ball is rolling along, to alter its direction slightly; but to predict you are going to alter its direction and which way.

Male voice: What do you want to know?

Now, if you depend exclusively upon the MEST universe to gain that effect for you, you have again entered an automaticity which is too great.

All right. Go over there again.

You say that a rifle bullet coming in through the window and hitting a cotton bale, here, will stop. And it will stop exactly so many umph-umphs deep into the cotton bale. And it will stop at a certain heat. And you know all this. And already there's the cotton bale sitting there. And you don't pull the trigger on the rifle bullet. And just - you know any rifle bullet that comes in through that window is going to hit. You've entered an automaticity in, real heavy There's nothing ever going to go wrong with that cotton bale. It's just sitting there. See?

Male voice: This is driving me ragged. I'm wearing out.

And you, by the way, I'm sure would not sit there for many hours, many days, many years, looking at that cotton bale. It won't hold your interest because the MEST universe itself by a basic law inherent in the universe is doing your stopping for you. And it's always going to stop the bullets and it's always going to stop in exactly that fashion and you know this will keep on happening forever. And this is real dull, isn't it? Real dull. It's not interesting.

Say - just say, "Are you all right?"

You're up against again a no-difficulty in predicting. You're up against the other thing: a complete predict.

Male voice: Are you all right?

So a complete predict and a complete automaticity or a no-automaticity and a no-predict are amongst them, all undesirable.

Now say, "I'm fine now that you started talking to me”.

So, let's get these things arranged better. No-predict goes with automaticity, which is working against one, and complete predict working with no automaticity make setups. And you work these things around and you push these factors around into various shapes and you can get a tremendous number of answers. In fact, you can get all the answers there are.

Male voice: I'm fi ... Yeah. Yeah. I'm fine now that you started talking to me.

You must have the right to put out and stop the particle or change its course, change the course of particles. You must have the right to do that. And you must also have the right not to have it do that all the time.

Okay, that's - that's - this technique, it just goes on along this line.

And when the MEST universe really gets pinned down and one of these super-machine-age societies is really rolling, boy! It has taken away from you your inheritance from God himself. You're surrounded by full automaticity. You know, after you get a house fully automatic-oh, but fully automatic-it's automatic at every hand. It does all the heating and it does the water softening and it does the air conditioning and it does the cooking and the washing of the dishes. And it does all of these things automatically. It draws your bath and pulls down the sheets. It doesn't even pull down the sheets - it just turns on the thermostat exactly right in the blankets. Oh, boy! You got this house all set and then you put somebody to live in there, see?

Okay, this is - demonstrates to you that you can very closely approximate mock-up Q and A on this line and it just works beautifully. Okay.

Will you please ask me why? Why don't you just make a doll, then, that is automatically running continually and forever and just have the doll in the house? And then go off someplace with the satisfaction that you've put together a fully automatic arrangement which fully automatically takes care of a fully automatic being. And you've done it. And you are no longer interested in it.

Now, did this, and came right on up the line.

I think God left sometime back. He just shoved off. He couldn't take it. This universe is really in a beautifully automatic condition.

Well, anyway, the techniques not to run on this case - actually, one was taking a chance by running explosions, because one saw that obviously we had an inverted dynamic. This case is not what you would call psychotic - not even vaguely. The case is on a balance, however, between what you might call "Theta universe" and this universe, to a point where the body - it's much more easier to substitute a mock-up for the body - you know, give the mock-up more validity than the body.

So, when you get too much automaticity and too much prediction, your interest alike fails.

Now, this case could be in terrifically bad condition and most cases, in that case's boots, are in bad condition. This case happened to be moving very, very well for this condition.

When you get a complete no-predict and no-automaticity, you fail. See? See what aberration is? Aberration would be a complete no-predict on some subject in some place of the case - a complete no-predict and a no-automaticity. See why that would be?

Now, an invalidation of the case had occurred which blew off in several different auditing sessions. And the invalidations were just the basis "Oh, that technique is too much for you." She wanted to run a certain technique, so - so on. "That technique is too much for you."

There'd be two things wrong with a case then: Either the case had everything all nailed down so beautifully, so gorgeously, that there was nothing else to be done for it or about it, or, on the other side, had everything agin him. Because if nothing is automatic for him, he has no opponent or he has to do it all himself which is the same thing. And if it's a complete no-predict - if he can never tell which way anything is going or even begins to approach the theoretical absolute of never tell which way something is going - oh boy, oh boy, oh boy, this is a real, real dumb deal.

And she came up to me, really, to find out whether or not she was all right. I told her she was all right and she was. Felt lots better. People had been worrying her.

So, what's our problem, Mr. Anthony? Our problem is a very simple one. Any case that is in trouble is somewhere out of the area of what he considers optimum randomity for him. You can't tell exactly what optimum randomity is for a case because it will vary from case to case. That fortunately is a variable. It's really the one variable in the problem. I mean, this is real grim to have just this.

Now, but this is an interesting session just from that basis. It took a long time to run from a basis of just time - two and a half hours' worth of auditing on this sort of thing and yet we were auditing with pretty good rapidity.

So, what - what would you do? What would be your basic theoretical therapy? Basic theoretical therapy is just merely to change the level of randomity of a case. Give him more or less automaticity, more or less prediction than he now has.

Gave this technique: The idea of the hand across the mouth and I had her say - oh yes, there was another technique I used - I had her say, "The terrible force of words" against her hand. And she agreed with me completely, "Yes, her words had a terrible force." She could feel them, right there. How do you like that? She never did get to the point where words did not have a terrible force because this case is running on a computation where she backs up every word with an energy flow. And she's sufficiently crossed up in universes that when she speaks, she speaks with beams to the mock-up of the person she has made to substitute for the mock-up of the person. Interesting, huh?

I think probably the sickest person you would ever meet is one who had a total prediction. That would be the sickest person you'd ever run into. And yet you don't think of that ordinarily. As we process here, you don't think of that as being an undesirable state, because we're all below the level. We're too close to no-predict. We're closer to no-predict than we are to complete predict.

So, of course, the terrible force of words was definitely there. And every time she would speak like that she would blow the mock-up up. She couldn't keep it from blowing up; she was having a bad time with it. So I had her put her fingers on her windpipe and feel the vibration of the windpipe with her fingers and she finally straightened out very well on that. She blew that and then I ran some Comparison.

Male voice: It would have to be a level of total predict with the additional postulate: There's only one universe to predict in.

But I ran another technique - a live technique, that is to say, not a mock-up technique - having her run this - none of these are psychotic techniques; these are just techniques - I had her say, "Dirty word" and then rush - jump out of the chair and - I'll show you.

That's right, of course. But what you've got to do in any case is take a look at it - if you're looking for basic aberration - just take a look at it and size it up to this degree.

Sit right there.

For God's sakes that is why people in Dianetics and Scientology are actually lousy preclears. You should understand that instantly. They're just terrible preclears. For all the damning and howling which I do occasionally about auditors and auditing and so forth, we're not up against a tough problem here. That damning and howling is just adding some randomity into the picture.

Turn your chair around. You - get your chair now. Turn your chair sideways.

It becomes very obvious why, then, a case which is deeply interested in the problems of epistemology - one person in Dianetics and Scientology will be tremendously interested in epistemology. He's just thinking too hard about knowledge and so forth. But actually, boy, he really gets revved up just on the subject of thinking. It in itself is a randomity. See? He's thinking about it without looking at it and all he would have to do is look at it and, gee-whiz, if he just looked at it, why, it would blow up on him as a - as an epistemological problem! He has to kind of keep from looking at it.

Okay. Now say, "Dirty word." Sit down in your chair. Now say, "Dirty word."

He's using his preclears and himself for basic randomity. There's absolutely no reason why he shouldn't. See? He should, but he makes a lousy preclear because he immediately starts playing a game with his auditor. He knows the answers and so he's - although he's below optimum randomity - you can't be in Dianetics and Scientology very long or even get audited very long in a coffee shop. Coffee shop auditors, even those today, can do such things as take away these cruel and punishing chronic somatics. They can. They blow up. So nobody who is really working with the field is in any real trouble - not today. That was true two or three years ago but not now. They're not in any real trouble.

Male voice: Dirty word.

Their real trouble is the fact that they have fixed upon and made a postulate about their future randomity. Their future randomity has to do with their own case and the cases of those around them. They don't want these things solved. If you solve these things you'd get a predict.

Now reach out and grab it.

You'll find every once in a while an auditor getting quite frightened at the idea of solving a case. He knows that he can get a complete predict. He could get a complete predict with a case. He wouldn't even consider it desirable or super-desirable. Therefore, he has a tendency to go toward the cases that are in the most trouble. These, for him, furnish the most randomity.

Male voice: Ho-ho! Like that?

Now, fortunately we have a great big universe here which in itself was set up to provide an enormous amount of randomity. And fortunately you get somebody up into motion - the tolerance motion of this universe - and he can actually find it; high level of randomity. So, let's realize that this condition of mind, that attacking the problem of attacking the case as a randomity in the field of Scientology is intensely spurious. That's very bad. That's quite, quite bad simply because there is so doggone much randomity available which is not yet perceived.

Yeah. And say, "It'll betray me."

Did you ever really get excited about organizing a party? Did you ever get real excited about, oh, I don't know, really, really violently excited about some terrific project or other in its original and new stages? Did you ever get that feeling you can recall of "Oh boy, oh boy, oh boy, oh boy!" See? Zing, zing, zing, zing!

Male voice: It'll betray me.

Well, optimum randomity for this universe is well above that point. Man is running way, way, way, way below the normal. Man is running so close to a no-predict complete automaticity again him that he's having a hell of a time for himself.

Now hide it.

And every time these condemned societies build a little more automatic car, they seek to add to the happiness of all of us, you see. And gee, it just bogs somebody down a little further. He's got to have this car and it's got to do all these things. It's very nice to free up all these hours for him, but as the Chinese said, "He saved two minutes on the trip, but what did he do with them?" The only thing he can do with these two minutes is simply get two minutes more of some other kind of randomity.

Male voice: I hid it.

When you've wiped the whole society out and you've got safety campaigns on every hand and side; when you have cops on every street corner; when you can't bump anybody off - actually you don't even dare hit anybody in this society - boy, they're - just got it reduced down and I guess they are trying to make a lot of new particles, is about as near as you can figure. They just must be trying to make a lot of new particles which themselves could be pushed around. And that becomes very grim.

Hide it!

It, by the way, is no-it's no accident that there are less people in Scientology than there were in Dianetics. The less isn't very much, but it's there. It's because we're really pulling away from the level of motion of the rest of the society. We're pulling away from their level of tolerance.

Male voice: Oh!

They've got an educated tolerance level. They know that cars should be driven, really, at 35 miles an hour. They feel comfortable at 35 miles an hour. They do not feel comfortable at 180. They're not at all comfortable. And yet randomity for an automobile would be about 110. That's good randomity. You're liable to hit anything. And you wouldn't quite predict which side of the road you would be on because of the structure of the automobiles to hand. And you wouldn't be able to predict a lot of things about it. So you've entered a bunch of no-predict.

Physically.

When you've got a car going down the road at 35 miles an hour, complete, new, good tires, excellent condition-nothing wrong with it, I'm afraid that you get into this strata of boredom. In fact, drivers have been known to go to sleep at a wheel in such cars.

Male voice: Okay, I'll put it in my pocket.

What's it got to do with communication? You want to change the communication level of your preclear is what you are trying to do. Communication level is simply his ability to move particles or move as a particle from one part of space to another part of space. So it's basically motion, isn't it? You're trying to increase his motion.

That's all right. Put it in your pocket. Now say, "Dirty word" again.

Well, if you can just move him from one part of space to the other part of space and demonstrate that he can do this and demonstrate it often and conclusively and convincingly to him, believe me, his level of motion and his level of communication are going to come up!

Male voice: Dirty word. You want me to grab it?

The reason he doesn't move out of his head is because he's got too much no-predict and too much automaticity. It's all being done for him. He has terrific dependencies on all sorts of things. He's got dependency on the body. He's got dependency on the MEST universe to hold out anchor points. He's got dependency on all kinds of things. Basically, he's got dependency on the MEST universe to hold out his anchor points for him; he doesn't have to hold out any anchor points.

And say, "It'll betray me."

Fellows by the way-cases will crack just on this: "Do you know that you don't have to hold out all the anchor points there are around you?"

Male voice: It'll betray me.

And the fellow says, "What are you talking about?"

And hide it. Now, say that again.

You say, "Well, compare one arm of the chair with the other arm of the chair." You watch him, he'll be like a bird dog, like a pointer. He'll look at that chair comparing one arm with the other arm. And you move over to a bookcase and you say, "Compare one corner of the bookcase with the other corner of the bookcase." He'll look at that and he'll compare those two things. "Now, get the slight differences between them," you say. And he'll take his attention off of that carefully And they look over to the window and you compare one corner of the window to the other. He'll take his attention off of that a little less carefully. And he'll look back at these things every once in a while.

Male voice: Dirty word. This can go here.

Well, you'll get cases at this level and you want to know what you are looking at. That guy thinks that he is holding apart these two corners himself He doesn't realize that it will be done for him. He's got his own universe and the MEST universe completely, completely coincided, you see, too much so that he still thinks he is in his own universe or has to be and he hasn't differentiated between his own universe and the MEST universe.

Well, when you catch it out there, say, "It'll betray me."

Well, how do you get this differentiation across? Very indirectly. He finds out all of a sudden, usually, and then the process, by the way, becomes useless when he is completely convinced of this: That that corner of that desk and that corner of that desk-table are going to remain apart whether he puts his attention on them or not. Those two particles are going to stay in position.

Male voice: Oh, yes. Dirty word. It'll betray me.

In other-in other words, he-you are showing him that the MEST universe is nailed down and that space is made that way and that the space will stay space.

Say it again.

He isn't sure that the MEST universe won't collapse. He has gotten to that point.

Male voice: Oh, this is goofy! Dirty word. It'll betray me. I'm getting my pockets full. Some more?

Now, let's look at communication lag and let's look at this very carefully. Your case which is in a level of "be a body" has bought large quantities of automaticity. Everything is being done for him through the body. Emotion is being made for him. And everything is being done for the body by automatic gimmicks out through the society. See, we've got this automaticity set up.

Go ahead.

But we have factors around him whereby he is educated to believe everything should be ethical and good and sweet and noble. The school does a good job on this. I mean, the . . . And the fiction of the country-a writer can't sell reality. He can't sell this universe. He's got to sell a terrifically fictionized version.

Male voice: Hm. Dirty word. It'll betray me. Dirty word. It'll betray me.

The stories in Collier's magazine compare with when knighthood was in flower-real sweet. It's all real sweet. Heroes are heroes and they're honest and they are noble. And the women are usually-they have become less so in fiction lately-but they're usually virgins, and so on. I mean, it's got no bearing on reality at all.

Go ahead.

And we take this kid who is supereducated by the movies, by fiction and particularly by his school which taught him he must be honest, he must be kind, he must be merciful, he must be all these things, he must be, you see, terrific restrictions, and not to be strong and not to use force. That's what everybody's got everything convinced with.

Male voice: Dirty word.

You can't have any randomity before you use-unless you're willing to use a little force. What's force? Force is just a change of a particle from one corner of the room to the other corner of the room or one corner of the universe to another corner of the universe. And that's what force is.

Now think the dirty word as you say "Dirty word" and make a substitute for it.

And you say to somebody, "You mustn't use any force," and by this you may mean one thing but he interprets it to the fact that he mustn't use strength.

Male voice: Oh, okay.

Just try and build a bridge sometime without using any force. Hah! It would be an interesting thing. A fellow would walk a tightrope of thought from one corner of the chasm to the other corner of the chasm. Well, the last time I saw anybody try to do this he fell in.

Think the dirty word.

So, the main difficulty we have then with your preclear is the fact he's got a no-predict on this level: He can't tell what people are going to say to him or otherwise because he's been sold, first, on certain conditions in the society which aren't true and then having come out of that educational period, is abruptly confronted with the fact that the universe runs some other way. And he's been taught in this fashion. And then he experiences in another fashion. And his education being intensely artificial does not then permit him to predict his fate.

Male voice: I'm going to get all mixed up here.

Therefore, you find fellows who leave school in the third grade and can't read, very often being fabulously successful in the society and very happy and extremely sane. It isn't how much they've studied. It isn't how much time they've sat in a chair or in a schoolroom. It's just the fact that what they've been taught is false! This is another method of entering a no-predict.

Come on.

You tell the fellow, "Well, the best way to be admired is to crawl around the floor and say, ‘Gah-gah, goo-goo-goo' and be naked and don't control toilet activities." This is the way to be admired. Obviously.

Male voice: Dirty word. Nah, they won't betray me.

And then, then you teach him that this is all frowned on. Well, that's what happens to every kid. He goes through these stages. All of a sudden they start toilet training him and he finds out that's not good, that's not good at all. That's not admired.

Okay. Go ahead.

Education could be said to be a superevaluation of what will be admired. In other words, what will vanquish force. Well, how do you get the force that's opposing you vanquished? See, it gets very simple if you look at it.

Male voice: Ahh! Neither will I.

Education enters a no-predict by teaching a fellow one method of prediction and then letting him experience in quite another series of randomities.

Okay.

Now, here is a better example of that. You take your billiard ball and you teach a fellow very carefully that all these billiard balls are resilient. They bounce, you know? And he throws his billiard ball down the billiard table and it hits the other billiard ball and it bounces and they go crack. And they spring apart beautifully and ably and they bank against good beautiful rubber cushions, you see. And they come back together again-crack-crack-and there's lots of motion. It's all so smooth, so-so nice.

Male voice: Dirty word. None of them will!

And then you say, "Now that we've trained you to do this, now you know all there is to know about that. Now, there's your billiard table over there."

Well! Turn around. None of them will, huh?

And he goes over to this billiard table and of course he finds one billiard ball is made out of cast lead and the other two are made out of putty. And one bank of the table - one bank is made out of steel and the other bank is made out of cotton. And the first time he throws that ball down there something goes squash! He didn't learn that. And he sinks into an apathy. You see how you'd do this?

Male voice: No, none of them will.

Now, the funny part of it is (and this is quite heartening to realize) if you had given him his own pool table in the first place and said, "All right. This is your pool table. You're going to form randomity with this thing," why, he would have made these basic errors and he, right away, without any experience, he would've said, "That's the way a pool table acts. Putty and steel and you have to kind of watch out for it." And even if you fixed it up so that every other game or every few games, why, you switched the character of the banks and gave him two lead balls to hit and a putty ball to throw with - if you did this to him a few times, he would merely form the opinion that he was up against a situation which was altering and that there was a certain amount of no-predict in it.

Okay. Do it a couple more times.

But if you've taught him that there is a complete predict, and then you lowered the level of predict on him, even slightly, he has a tendency to drop down Tone Scale.

Male voice: Trying to remember some more dirty words. Okay Dirty word. No, that one won't either.

Actually, you could train somebody so that the pool balls would shift without warning in character so that you could never tell which pool ball was going to be made out of putty, which one out of lead and which bank was going to be steel and which one was going to be cotton, and what do you know? He'd say, "Well, this is the way pool tables are!" and he would establish it at his own level as the randomity which he would have to embrace. And he would go ahead and embrace the randomity because he hasn't been convinced!

Okay.

What he's convinced of now is, "My God! Is there an awful lot of randomity here! There's no automaticity. I have to do practically everything there is done on this table! After I've hit the putty ball, I have to reach down and put it back in shape again," and so forth. He has to do everything on the table. There isn't an automatic resilience which brings it out into a sphere as the case with another ball.

Male voice: Dirty word. Forgot to think of one.

You see how simple it gets when you take a good solid look at what randomity is, what prediction is and what education is.

Well, what do you know. Okay, skip it.

Now, you take a fictionized society and we know in this that "all communists are bad." We know they are all bad. And then we send this guy to Russia. And we get a book of dull, surprised amazement, such as that written by the late Wendell Willkie called One World.

A person down the line - thank you - a person down the line... Did you feel any pressure coming off in any fashion whatsoever? Did you?

It startled him to find there was a similarity between Russians and Americans. And he completely missed all the finer points, merely because he'd been supereducated into the idea that Russians were beasts. You see? And Russians aren't quite beasts. So he just omits the "aren't quite" in their own civilization and he goes all out on the other side of the fence and they're saints. And so, you - well, practically - "They were just American businessmen handling their economics in some other fashion," if I remember it correctly. A commissar was just like anybody else that you find in a factory management position. There was - of course, he was under a little more pressure: If he didn't make the town run - if I remember the quote from many years ago - if he didn't make this town run well, turn in his quota, he'd be liquidated. Which meant according to Willkie, well, he'd be fired or maybe even shot as an extremity. But he knew this was what would happen to him and it was all routine and just like in Keokuk, Iowa!

Male voice: No, the only thing is that I just - the only thing was that I thought I might say one of them, and then I knew I wouldn't.

You see, he was trying to do a predict on the Russian scene against his other level but he had been told that you couldn't predict this and he'd found out a level of comparison where he could and so he was real proud and so that made the Russians good. Perfectly good line of logic, you see, except it doesn't happen to form a prediction level for anybody else.

Okay, now you know you won't.

All right. What's this - what's this lead to then? It leads to the fact that unless you've torn up some of the convictions of your pc with regard to his ability to move and make move - you know this "live and let live"? To hell with that; that's apathy. What we want is move and make move!

Male voice: Yeah.

"Stop and make stop" is the game the cops play. But it becomes a very dull game when nobody's moving. You know, playing cop is a - playing cops and robbers is a very interesting game. Little kids play this game. But playing cop depends upon there being criminals. And if the cops get too thorough on the thing it all becomes automatic. The fingerprints find the man, the - everything else. And the educational system prevents him from stepping out of line and so forth.

Well, you'd be surprised how far this would go with a person who is bad off. Every word they say they've got their hands mocked up, dancing in front of their mouth to grab the word and throw it away. They've got beams and things out in front of them to catch things that might - might slip, return them and put them away. They got all kinds of mock-up mechanisms by which anything which might betray them can be caught before it betrays them and then they can stow it. None of you are psycho. You don't appreciate this. But you'll see it. Words are objects to these people.

And I'll bet you - you know, when I say, "I'll bet you," I know cops quite well. I've sat around with cops and actually detected these long, drawn-out sighs on the subject of "There ain't no crime - no crime." I've seen cops training, training, training to fight criminals, you see, and there's no criminals. This is a hell of a note.

This girl, as she did that, had the words exactly located geographically at the time she caught up with them and had to really stretch a couple of times to grab them because they were slipping through the wall. And then after a while sort of decided the same way, you know, "They're not going to betray me. Ha-ha!" That's the only certainty you're trying to reach.

It's like telling this guy that, boy, this is, you've been trained, you know, and by fiction, they believe that there's nothing in that pool table, you see there. They've got a pool ball which is intensely subjectable to pain. And they're going to throw this ball around against balls that are made out of prickly pear spines and this is the life they're taught. And then they get to the pool table, see, and all they can find to hit is just empty space. And people have got them fighting nothing. There is no randomity there. Cops go kind of psycho because their efficiency has reduced their own level of randomity. They are still playing the game hard. That's what happens in any game. Somebody starts playing the game real hard to win! I don't care what you define win as. Win is just hitting a couple of the balls, see. And predicting them sometimes a little bit. And that's winning.

Well, that's a sane certainty. But that is the end product of psychoanalysis: "Words will betray you. We'll know all those vile and terrible things about which you're thinking. All we have to do is analyze what you're saying and you have betrayed yourself." It's just a typical MEST universe game. It has the same therapeutic value as the actual commodity which the betrayal represents. None! But it has a reverse value. It is destructive. Why is it destructive to have a person under inspection? Because he might betray himself so he's given the idea on Q and A that he has something which might be betrayed. Q and A, see?

And so, pang, down goes the cop against the table of crime and he simply swamps up all the other balls and there's no balls on the table which leaves him nothing to fight - he wins. He predicts them so well that he vanquishes them and he gets better and better on his prediction.

Everybody is waiting for him to betray himself with a word, which gives him the idea that there is something in his past which he may betray to you. You follow that? Q and A. You manufacture, then, a guilt complex in the person and he doesn't know what he has done, but he knows he must have done something, because he obviously is betraying himself with his utterances and actions. Right?

I think people who play expert pool must be terribly bored with the game. Willie Hoppe, when he shot that cue ball down into the - in pool - and shot it down into the triangle of balls and pocketed this one and that one and the other one and the other one and always pocketed them and so forth - well, he would get some admiration for this, but if he were - that's introducing another - another factor for his interest.

So, we have manufactured a guilt complex about a no-incident. And the incident doesn't exist, so we leave the patient fighting a zero. We leave him fighting nothing in his past. He hasn't betrayed himself because there's nothing to betray in the past. Think this over. I see you're laboring on it. Your wheels are grinding.

But as far as they were to go, if you were to put him all by himself in a house someplace with a pool table and he had nothing to do but that - uh-uh. His randomity comes about with showing somebody else how to do it and then their tremendous amazement and his interest that they can't. That's his randomity; it's exterior to the game.

Male voice: Has this ever been done for appearances as well as words?

So, what are we trying to do with a preclear? Well, look at the shape he's in. He's either in too damned much randomity for him; he's fighting on too many fronts in life or he isn't fighting on enough fronts.

Oh, yes! Sure, I mean, you could...

You can process a juvenile delinquent and you will know immediately that there's another kind of case. He isn't fighting on enough fronts. The guy's front or opponent saturation point has not been reached. And a person will get to a point where he will actually run around and be the opponent. He will go around - he can't get anybody to fight him, so he'll go around and fight himself He gets tremendously involved in this.

Male voice: Would you just have them mock up out there - a mock-up of appearances?

In arguments you will see people doing this. This is not an uncommon manifestation:

You don't mock up anything. You play it in real life if you possibly can manage it.

"You're a dog! You're just no good!"

Male voice: Well, what would you have the person do? Grab an object as an appearance and then...

And the other fellow stands there and he says, monitoringly, you know, kind of quietly, he says, "Well, really, we shouldn't get - we shouldn't get upset about this, and so forth. We can talk this over quietly."

Ah, I see what you mean, yes. You don't - you don't run this in a mock-up.

"Oh! You say I am raising my voice, do you?"

What I'm trying to put home to you is, you would have - a pimply face - you'd have him put out an array of a pimply face and he reaches out and grabs that, see, and hides it. And he reaches out - and you have him put up the mock-up of a poor or cheap or shabby shirt - and he reaches out, see, and grabs that and hides that. You get the idea? And the whole thought is when he grabs it, he must think "It'll betray me." See?

You get the trick? He didn't get enough bang back! He didn't get enough reaction, so he's real upset.

And the other thought is somebody holding a pimply face or a shirt or a dirty word out there - they run right into this immediately, because they get the thing going out and returned, and they finally decide that if they do anything it'll be returned to them. So you bring them up track and then you'll decide people will hold it out on them. And that's ridicule. So you get pimply face, ridicule; cheap shirt, ridicule. Somebody is holding these items out there. "It betrayed me" is the thought which follows with that. Simple, supersimple technique. Idiotically simple.

Now, you've heard - you've heard women do this around the house. Well, their level of randomity is quite poor. They stay home and the husband goes to work, the house is kind of empty. They have to straighten up this house. It's the same house, you know. It's always been the same house for the last ten to fifteen years. The same pieces get out of line. The same meals have to be gotten. The same butcher is bought from. And they get to a point after a while where they just do this. They've got to put randomity into life. They can't stand it!

The fact of the matter is, is everybody is putting out mock-ups all the time in terms of light waves. They can't help but put up these mock-ups in terms of light waves. And these mock-ups are consecutive and continuous and they're radiating out from their body in all directions, obviously, because other people are receiving them.

And you will actually see preclears who are just practically going through their roof! They just can't take this little level of randomity.

So a person gets the idea he continues to put up this mock-up and he decides he doesn't want to put up this mock-up anymore so he goes into occlusion and won't put up mock-ups. You should get that real clear. You should drill on that until you've really got that.

Now, I've had preclears show up who wanted an engram run. Was anything wrong with them? No. They just wanted something else to fight. So, you showed them this engram and they come up with another engram. Well, the hell with this. You run that engram and they come up with another engram. Boy, this is all right! They've got randomity.

Your face is putting up MEST universe patterns to somebody else, obviously, all the time. So therefore, you are putting out mock-ups which other people are grabbing. And they remember them so they hold them. And if other people keep telling you that they remember what you did or what you looked like - even if it's complimentary - it eventually will get on your nerves something fierce. Because it makes you aware of the fact that you're putting out a mock-up continuously and consecutively from your body out into the air and to the people around you, whatever else you're doing. So the obvious answer for this is try to keep from putting out a mock-up. In other words, become a priest and wear a cassock or something. No, what do they wear - hassocks?

Now, you take somebody's imagination. It's when these factors get extreme that they become very important in the society because a guy gets convinced. You take a lot of people down here in the insane asylum. They just started onto this line of insufficient randomity and then they just ran it into a hole. Now they've got - Western Union has wires plugged into their brains so as to inform the government of what they're thinking. And there are people going to shoot them through the window any minute and so on. They've just overdone the danger, you see, and they can no longer control this level.

Female voice: Cassocks.

But what is the pitch there? The pitch is a complete mock-up, a complete mock-up, of no-predict. I would say offhand their life became enormously predictable. Their life became too predictable. All right.

Male voice: Cassocks.

When somebody is trained then - somebody gets trained in one direction and then life gives him another pool table.

Well, you don't put out a mock-up if you possibly can help it.

You'll find if you want to uproot the past lives all the way up and down the track, you want to uproot the whole track on a preclear, you just work with this principle. And what is the principle? It's just shifting pool tables. Every time he turns around, somebody gives him a new pool table.

This is the hooded, occluded figure, see? It doesn't want to put out a mock-up. And this is the better way: Every time he sees light, he ducks back in; he's using it like radar. At the same time he's also keeping light waves from putting out a mock-up. Follow? You've got to stop those light waves and keep them from putting out a mock-up.

And I'll tell you, that's why space opera hangs up so fabulously in this completely dull society. I'll bet you no space opera was keyed in at all here a hundred years ago. You could always go out West and get shot or shoot somebody or be run down by a bull elk or... You could always get into trouble, always. And the police, boy, were they inefficient! No telegraphs to amount to anything and they have no fingerprint files and Bertillon, I think was - about then - was just starting to struggle up with something, if not a little bit later.

The fact of the matter is you could do that, but that's why and how you got into one of the genuses of mock-ups: facsimiles. Because you don't want to put out a facsimile, so you stopped facsimiles of yourself from going out. See how that is? Because other people receive them and if they receive them and remember them, they are obviously holding them, so they have something of yours which they are holding and it's out away from you and you can't get it back.

Then you just shaved - shaved your head a little bit different and you wore a different colored tie and you go into the same police station that arrested you yesterday and say, "I want a job as a cop," and they'd hire you.

Auditors fall into a dramatization of this when they're trying to run out facsimiles from people. They're trying to wipe out the mock-ups they have made.

I mean, life - life - you could change your identity. Well now, this society has got it rigged so you can't. If a guy finds a no-randomity situation in this society today, he is hung with it because he is hung with his identity.

You can make a preclear just happy as can be by saying, "Now, let's see, what restaurant do you go to regularly? Oh? What do your friends call you? Oh? Where - where do you live? Oh. Well, now I want you, one, to patronize an entirely different restaurant. Oh, you say one of the same kind? No, no - no. Patronize for two weeks a joint, just a joint. And make your friends call you by another name. And move."

They're not interested these auditors, at that level of the scale - they're not particularly interested in making a preclear happy or healthy. They just want to wipe out all the mock-ups they've made in the past which are being held by people which makes them, of course, ridiculed.

The guy says, "There's nothing wrong with the house I've got now. It's a beautiful house and I have - I have a lease on it, so..." Well you say, "Move."

This is not the universe of betrayal. That's obvious. Its waves go in - pound! pound! pound! pound! - and reduce the thetan to zero. And then they turn around and reflect back out and are held at a distance. And nobody wants that last. That last is really fatal. That is the return of the wave. And they're holding these images out at a distance and that is ridicule.

That's what we're talking about in the first book when we said shift environment. That's the factors of shifting environment. You change his level of randomity, you see, some way or another.

And when the sun shines upon Joe, its waves then turn around and reflect back to Bill, and give - whether Joe wants it or not - a mock-up of Joe to Bill. Bill will eventually get impatient about this if Joe shows any disposition not to like Bill. Therefore, this is the "friendly universe"; everybody has to be friendly. The best thing to be in this universe is friendly.

There are two things that will be happening in that environment: He'll either be hit - be hit too hard and too often or he won't be being hit enough.

What's happening to your preclear? Well, you'd better adjudicate which one it is. It's an either/or. This is quite important what I am telling you. You'd better adjudicate which one it is. This guy during his life had too much. This guy during his life had too little.

But past is not as important as present, ever. So, all the question you need ask is the pertinent ones. What are the real factors with which this person is surrounded?

& ...se [universe?] and then we see more and more and more that he only copied what he saw. In other words, he was obsessively in communication with a universe that was held in agreement with one and all.

Psychology gets hung up on changing environment and things like that merely because it doesn't resolve within itself this problem: Is it either/or? Is it plus or minus randomity? Plus randomity is simply too much.

& Now, the CDEI cycle begins at the moment he departs from his own universe. He's curious what would happen if. And if we just wrote that on every tombstone that was out here in every cemetery, we would have the only truthful inscription present. "Dear and loving mother of twelve mourning children," a usual inscription, "Departed from his beloved business and family," another inscription and so on. We look these over, sometimes they're dramatic.

& Like there's a couple out in Columbia, California that are very dramatic. One of them says, "Killed by a," this is not a direct quote, "Killed by a sniveling skunk that also tried to cheat him at cards." And the next grave to it says, "The sniveling skunk," erected by his brother, the first man's brother. Very interesting, but those things are not necessarily truthful. But if you put it on there, CDEI....

& ...and eventually becomes homo sapiens, OK? (Well, that's one of the attainments, stopping time...) Well how could you; what is time but a change of location of a particle in space? So if you change the pace of a particle in space, you'd stop time. (That's right.) That's right. And there's your time, time stops.

& OK. Now we've got this reflective quality down, I hope you recognize that. I want you all to do this little silly exercise. It's very silly, but I want you to turn around with your whole body to stop something, not just with your hands. Just turn around and face your whole body with that mock-up. You know, it's coming out radiation, and then your effort to stop that radiation. Do it a few times. Then get the idea, have somebody else stand up there and you just stand there and try to stop the radiation that's coming from him. He's not doing anything. Let's not go into speech or worry about speech. Let's just realize that this is a matter of a pretty solid mock-up, but it's mock-up, it's universe.