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

And this is November the 17th, first morning lecture, Second Unit.

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

We have this morning several things to do. One of them is to divide the black sheep from the white sheep. And another one is to get some sort of an idea on how we start co-auditing and so on; but, if anything, more important than this: what we are going to use for a technique. That has some bearing on the situation. So I want to see this Second Unit get into good shape in a hurry and dispense with the testing.

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

Now, with — the first group was processed and trained on the basis of "We're going to get into the experimental-technique line" — the first. And "I'm going to give you subjective reality on the techniques," I said to the First Unit going through, and carried forward that program. I overestimated, I overestimated. One, underestimated the techniques and overestimated — if any First Unit people here, please plug your ears — the auditing skill of those present. Because cases in the first couple of weeks just didn't move. Didn't move at all.

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

So we're going to start right off — right off here with this Second Unit, and we're going to put the throttle into the instrument panel, and going to hand out the (quote) "hot dope" right away quick, and expect you to apply what I give you to apply, specifically, and nothing else, and get these cases, zing! — good shape, and get that out of the road very early in the Second Unit's history. And that will leave us some time, which we didn't have with the First Unit, to process some outside preclears who react remarkably like human beings and not like Scientologists.

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

Now, just following that up, I'm going to give you right now a summary of what is important in technique, and the "last resort" sort of a technique, Step IV: waste, save, accept under duress — that's enforce, of course — desire, and curious about, in brackets. One takes each one of those things in brackets.

You say, "What color are the buttons?"

And now let me just make one little side remark on that step about brackets, is for God's sakes don't run half a bracket, because you hang cases up. You run part of a bracket and go to the next item on the list; and you run part of a bracket, the next item on the list; part of a bracket, and the next thing you know your preclear is — he's seven light-years out in the stratosphere and you don't quite know what happened to him. Well, what happened to him was, is you didn't run a full bracket.

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

Editor's note: The procedures LRH covers in these lectures were published in Journal of Scientology Issue 16-G, 'This is Scientology, The Science of Certainty" and Journal of Scientology Issue 24-G, "SOP 8-C, The Rehabilitation of the Human Spirit." Both of these articles have been reproduced for your reference in the appendix of this transcript booklet.

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

A bracket takes care of another factor: it takes care of the factor of agreement. And that is one of the most important factors in auditing. You run out the agreement on a case. If you could just run the agreement out of a case, the guy'd blow Clear. And that's a theoretical technique. I was doing that on the Second Unit yesterday. All right.

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

The other thing is, is you run — that's a basic technique; that isn't the best technique that we have, but that is a basic technique. And it is worked in this fashion: You just simply start — you got preclear, all right. You start at the top of the list, if you're just going to work SOP 8 without assessment and so forth (which can be, by the way, almost fatal on a very bad-off preclear), but if you're just going to dispense with assessment and E-Meters and everything, all you're going to have to do is just start at the beginning: Step I, doesn't react — couple of minutes on it, a minute on it; Step II, no reaction; Step III, can't; and here we go.

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

Now, the test on Step III is not given in that text. The test on it is: can he hold a ball motionless before him in mock-up form that neither walks in nor walks out — if he can do that.

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

And the test on Step IV, oddly enough, is the same old test there was, which is: does he get easily a mock-up of the childhood home? They'll — normally do. There are many other ways to handle a childhood home, but you just see if he ... Then you don't do anything else about it. You go ahead and run the rest of it. You figure out this guy is all fouled up on the track anyway.

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

And you do Step V just as it's given, VI, VII — in that order.

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

Now, let's say, that at Step I or Step IV or Step VI or something of the sort, you popped the guy out of his head. See? Let's just say you did that. What would you do now? Well, please, please don't ever come up with the wrong answer on this. Because what you do now is a very simple thing: You start at Step I on the exteriorized thetan.

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

Now, there are trickier ways to go about this, but this is the safest way. You just start with Step I on the person exteriorized. And you go Step I, and then you do Step II and then you do Step III and then you do IV and V and VI and VII.

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

Well, what do you know? Why do you do these things reverse on the thetan? Oddly enough, the easiest thing to do for an individual in a body is the hardest thing for a thetan to do. Why? The body is in complete agreement with these barriers called the mest universe. The body's in complete agreement with it, and so it very easily finds "What room?" The guy pats around for a while — "Yeah. Hey!"

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

Well, you got a thetan exteriorized — boy, he's got to be in remarkable condition, just remarkable condition, to be able to feel around and say, "What do you know — mest. Tff!" No, he doesn't. He says, "Nyaah. Oh, no, no. Huh, not today; tomorrow, when we're a little stronger." That's the fact of the case.

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

Now, there's many people who have been exteriorized, and who consider themselves in good condition, and who are in remarkably good condition — they know it. This is — be no shock to them. They know that they're looking — they're taking a facsimile, ping! and then looking at the facsimile. And that is the favorite way of a thetan to avoid contact with a barrier.

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

First place, he isn't sure the barrier is there. In the second place, you shouldn't even try to convince him it's there, for — because in the third place it's not there.

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

You see, what the thetan feels is the body feeling the wall. See? He — this is a different thing, rather than there being a "feel" to the wall. See, this is different. There is no "feel" to this wall. If the wall were there, without any second wall, and no other contact point, there'd be no wall. See, it takes a dichotomy. In order to be convinced of a barrier, you have to have something that will be convinced that it will stop when it runs into the barrier. That's the essence of all of this limitation, barrier stuff. So there is SOP 8.

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

Now, SOP 8-C is tremendously refined over this. But, believe me, SOP 8 works. It has limitations — it very definitely does. It is defined as the safest technique, broadly, in people's hands who are not specifically trained, that has been devised out of the material which we now have. It's the safest technique. That is to say, it won't get people in trouble — too much. It'll still get them in trouble once in a while, if an auditor really puts his mind to it.

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

But now, SOP 8-C is a more delicate sort of a tool. By misusing one step on SOP 8-C, which I did on purpose one day — I just did it on purpose. I had a case in a remarkably good condition, you see, and I practically spun him, see, and then unspun him. It's awful easy.

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

You start dealing with the dynamite which we can deal with now, and you can blow preclears up pretty easy. For instance, if you — all you've got to do is to start to handle the Assumption on somebody who has it somewhat in restimulation (and you handle it on some of these techniques, some of the expansions of SOP 8) — you just handle the Assumption and then forget about it. Oh, no, no. He'll be hot and cold, and have fever and chills, and think he's in the middle of Fac One and Easter and Christmas. And yet what did you do with the technique? It is very, very remarkable. You just — a process which is (well, we might as well give it a name and designate it, but that is — it doesn't need a name), it's "Being Space Processing." You just have him be the space in front of his face and be the space of his body, and the space back of his body, and the space in front of his face, and the space of his body; and now be the space in front of his face from the right side, be in the space in front of his face from the left side — uhhhhhhhhh, this gets real wicked.

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

See, if he's got an old Fac One body, you might say, he's — if he has — what they very often run into: I've had a person get out of five bodies. See, they get out of their head, and then they get out of the body they got out of their head with, and then they get out of this body, and they get out of that body and so on. I had a fellow do this three times one day in an Exteriorization by Scenery. He got out of his mest body, and then he got out of the body he got out of the mest body in, and then he got out of that body.

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

What was he doing? Well, he was just so sold on bodies, that he had three of them. Well, I've had them with as many as five of them. You see, you've got these layers and layers and layers. And this accounts ... A fellow can actually step out of his body, and very often does, in a complete rig-up. I mean, boy, you'd think Buck Rogers or something. A fellow will look around and say, "I'd better not be out."

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

"Why not?"

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

"Oh, I'm just an invader from space; I'm no good!" Bang! In he goes. I mean, he's really convinced, see. He's convinced on a negative line.

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

Well, you'll run into all kinds of phenomena like this. You don't have to worry about that phenomena. That isn't worrisome, it's just stuff you run into. There's a motto which you could have as an auditor which is: Be surprised at nothing.

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

That's an old family coat of arms that I saw down in Charleston, South Carolina. And this enormous rook, who is about eight times as big as the castle, is sitting on this little tiny turret, which is the castle, and the scroll on it says, "Be surprised at nothing." That's very good for an auditor.

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

And as far as discovering new phenomena is concerned, I'm afraid it's getting dull for me. For about two years now, we've been over this ground pretty thoroughly. When we got through with What to Audit phenomena — overt act-motivator sequence, all of this — once that ground was gone over, why, the stuff that shows up after that is just fabulous. But the second you evaluate it against whole track Theta Clearing, it becomes quite natural.

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

And these are the principles against which you evaluate phenomena. One: Knowingness exists above space. There is a condition of knowingness where a person really knows. He actually knows without looking, and so on. This is very easily mistaken by people who have been in mysticism, in terms of telepathy and other things. It is not like telepathy, it is just a high, crystal-clear certainty. That's all. He knows it without looking.

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

And then we get into the first echelons of perception. Now, the second we get into perception, we get into space. The definition of space is viewpoint of dimension. And that is easily our most important definition. What is space? Viewpoint of dimension. Dimension is made by anchor points. You have four anchor points and you have a piece of space. You arrange them as a tetrahedron, and you have a piece of space. Now, that — easily the most important viewpoint there is, as far as we're concerned, in terms of definition. The most important viewpoint definition: space.

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

And here knowingness, knowingness, comes into the first of the phenomena which (I almost said degenerated) — which regenerates or something, into the mest universe. That's the first phenomenon. Out of this, and the fact that there are three universes, we get the entirety of everything we're doing.

"To the store?"

Viewpoint of dimension: In order to have a viewpoint of dimension, you have to have the location of the viewpoint with regard to the anchor points. And this is a mechanical definition of location.

"Yeah, to the store."

Now, just pure knowingness has no definition. It is a feeling of certainty. You can best define this by knowing that one knows. And when we say Scientology, that's a science of knowing how to know; that means the science of knowing how to be certain, which actually is a track-back of the agreements which have culminated in the state of the individual at this level. Certainty is what marks this level of knowingness. It is unmistakable. You needn't ask me any more about it, because that's actually all there is to know about it, is it's unmistakable.

"Oh, to the store."

Now, we have prospectors and they go out, and they're always willing to laugh at the tenderfoot, because the tenderfoot goes and he pans gold, and he turns up some iron pyrites and looks at it fixedly and knows that he has gold. And he does this, and he pans fool's gold and saves it in a poke, fondly believing that he has gold, until one day he strikes — no matter how microscopic — a real "color" (what they call a fleck of gold picked up out of a gravel bed). He just is panning, and all of a sudden he sees a real color — he sees a real piece of gold, a real flake. He never makes a mistake afterwards.

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

How do you teach somebody to distinguish gold from iron pyrites? Well, you certainly could probably put several university courses together, and you could probably do an awful lot of analysis of iron pyrites, and you could say gold dissolves in aqua regia, and iron pyrites dissolves in both the aqua and the regia, and you could go through all sorts of chemical definitions and oh, back flips and high dives and deep textbooks and formulas and everything else, and you still wouldn't have taught the guy the difference. See? It'd be a big long communication system which you'd invented, so that now he was really confused. So just get this similarity between that real fleck of gold and certainty.

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

You'll be processing a preclear, and all of a sudden it's like something goes kind of click or flip or something there. All of a sudden, he knows something. How does he know it? Does he know it because it's been defined? No. Does he know it because you told him? Well, that's the time he won't know it. And you go right straight on through, and you'll find out that there — this thing is defying reason. And so it does. If you're going to define it any further at all, you would say: Certainty is something that requires no further reason.

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

When you've gotten into reasons, when you've gotten into reasons why, and when you've gotten into "who" — that's the end-all of — that's really in the slums, that's really back in the slums of knowledge: "who." And yet, we find all of our entire history and everything else is made up of "who." And it's "who, who, who" until they get everybody playing the "only one" and so forth.

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

A thetan can only have a good time when nobody knows who the hell he is. And when he's certain enough about existence and about himself, he doesn't have to have a name to be certain of it. He goes flying around . .. You can't get around this universe with an identity. The state police and the cops in general, and the FBI and the IBF and — oh boy, it's real, real cruel. They've got photographs and they've got fingerprints and they've got the wavelength of your breath, and they've got all sorts of fabulous ways and means, and one of these days they will probably have a "lie detector characteristic beat" or something. Be real good, see.

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

Well, way back on the track you'll find people being registered by their wavelengths — thetans were. That was a last-ditch attempt on the part of a society to get some law and order and some police action, regardless of what.

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

All right. An identity is going to crop up in the preclear continually, continually, continually. He keeps asking, "All right, but who did it to me? Who is God? Who? Who? Who? Who?" To hell with it. For every "who," listen — substitute "where." Not who are you afraid of, but where are you afraid of. Because you've gotten, then, workable — you've gotten it workable; and we get into the first Prelogic.

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

Now, you see there's no substitute for this thing called certainty. A person knows he has it. All of a sudden he becomes certain one day of something or other.

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

Well, one of the basic, base ways to make him certain is to hit him. And then he knows he's not there. And this is a certainty. You see how just insipidly silly this is — how an impact works, you see? Here the fellow is, and all of a sudden — he's got a face, see, and let's say this is his face, and a baseball hits him in the face — bam! it goes, you see? And makes a terrific impact, and just before the impact, he says, with all the force at his control, he said, "I'm not there!" See? That's supposed to stop the baseball and he's supposed to be out of there. First it's, of course, "It's not there. It must stop." And then, "I'm not there." And that's the sequence of a certainty by impact. It's — the certainty which is derived by impact is, in a final analysis, the certainty that one is not there.

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

And so we have — practically anybody in this room right here at the present moment, the first thing he would tell you as a thetan, is "I'm not there. My name is so and so, and I was born such and such a place, and . .." The devil he was. See? But he's playing straight through to the bitter end, "I'm not there; I'm not there; I'm not there. Here I am, see?" and he puts forward this body. See how cute this is?

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

Now, a body is composed 100 percent of other-determinism. A body has no self-determinism. It is shaped and molded: one, the criteria of aesthetic of the being who made it originally or designed it, as modified by the consideration or aesthetic of the thetan. But it is actually shaped and molded, even into its primary form, by impacts. And the body is other-determinism, but royally. It is being hit twenty-four hours a day by mest waves. It never turns back any of these waves. Real interesting, isn't it? And so it can only deteriorate, and you have the one-way cycle of the universe.

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

You just get a pinpoint being hit from 360-degree sphere — all angles, twenty-four hours a day — by photons, cosmic rays, light waves, heat rays; here we go. Now, the body does radiate, to some slight degree, heat. But it's radiating something else. Heat is radiated at it far faster than it radiates at heat.

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

Now, we have no real problem because of this — I don't want to give you the idea that a body is essentially a — very, very upsetting and very dangerous and something you mustn't have around. They're cute, and they do odd tricks and so forth, and they're interesting to keep along and make survive, and it makes a game.

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

But when it gets down to a point of "I am a body. That's who I am. And I can't be anything else. And when I'm dead, I'm dead, and that is the end of me and it," you have the end result phenomena — phenomenon of a thing which cannot be effect.. . This is real interesting, but a thetan, in the final analysis, has to have something before he can receive an effect to it. He has to have something.

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

He's got to put something there before he can get an effect. And a thetan is primarily cause. Oh, he can feel the effect and all that sort of thing — he can do all sorts of things. But he's primarily cause. And of course he joins something which is primarily effect, and so we have a communication terminal collapse which goes from cause to effect. A communication is essentially something that starts at cause and goes to effect. And so we've got the thetan as cause, going to a body which is effect. And somebody who is in his head too solidly, of course, has gotten the idea that he is the body, and he can only be an effect now. You see? It's very simple.

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

And it's very simple to unravel, in the final analysis of the thing. Well, how did he get this way? Well, he must have made himself this way. We all suspected that about ourselves, except we always are saying it was somebody else that did it. Well, it was somebody else helped it along. We did it — no question about that.

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

For instance, we ever slammed anything into a stone wall, we had to elect to be on the seat of it first. So cause precedes effect. And man goes along saying less and less "I'm cause" and more and more "I'm an effect" until he finally practically disappears.

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

Now, in order to have a game — and the highest echelon is a game — we have to have a balanced condition of 50 percent and 50 percent. An infantry force in a war is composed of 50 percent attack factors, and 50 percent defense factors. When it is not so balanced, roughly, it will be unable to hold those gains which it achieves, and if it's too defensive, will not be able to achieve gains to hold. And so the army will lose.

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

You can see that this imbalance of 50 percent is responsible, by the way, for many "who were they's?" to become past tense. The Greek finally got down to a point where he was about 85 percent holding force, you see, and about 15 percent attacking force. His phalanxes were very difficult to maneuver at last, because his people were getting weaker, and they were being more and more an effect.

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

The Maginot line was the death throe of France in 1940 — '39 and '40 — 100 percent defense. And they were surrendering... There we had a war which was an interesting, fast war in its early inception, because the Maginot lines — large sections of it and huge cities which it protected — were surrendering to a couple of Germans on a motorcycle. Just pang! The Germans come along, they had a motorcycle and a machine gun mounted on the sidecar and so forth, and they'd say, "Well, here we are. Surrender." And everybody would lay down their arms and run like hell.

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

That was that blitzkrieg. It was fabulous. Fantastic. Nobody could possibly believe a blitzkrieg. But they were up against people who had been indoctrinated, first in World War I, that all they could do was hold a ditch. And they had then developed holding a ditch into the finest piece of nonsense anybody ever had, and after that they had no mobility. So having no mobility, of course, they were imbalanced.

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

I want you to draw that parallel between the body and the person. The thetan has 100 percent attacking force. See, he's 100 percent attacking; he has nothing to defend whatsoever. And he goes from that down to 100 percent holding; no attack potential at all — just defend, defend, defend, defend, defend. Having a lot of vested interests for instance, may wind up — does not necessarily — but may wind up in merely defending and no longer attacking.

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

There are the two extremes. And there you have an example of plus and minus randomity. It's too much — too much entirely self-randomity — that is, one can engage in too much random motion, when he has nothing to defend, and one can engage in too little for himself when he has everything to defend. And neither state is desirable.

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

And we get, then, a condition where the environment — other-determinism — for the person who can attack anything, is insufficiently random. He can attack anything with impunity. He can't be hurt, he can't do anything else but survive, and so he attacks the entire environment — he can if he wants — but it's no fight. How is it any fight? And so you have a condition where you have minus randomity on the part of the environment. And that goes down to, when a person is only defending, it gets plus randomity to the point where people start blowing their brains out merely because somebody misplaced a period on the ration card. See, super-super plus randomity — it gets down to that.

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

Now, your individual who is getting defensive, who is very static, who isn't moving very much and so on, has merely come down to the point where he's too much effect and there's too much motion going on around in his vicinity. And he has to be on a cause line — more cause, you see?

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

All you have to do is build up his cause. And when you've built up his cause, why, he gets into better shape. So your techniques, actually, leveled on the lower echelons, are simply toward and directed toward building up causation on the part of the individual. You see that? All right.

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

We have, then — for the first three steps, we have somebody who is still capable of causation. In other words, he can put some distance between himself and a body and still control it, because he has sufficient causation . . . He has sufficient — he's sufficiently causative (let me use a word very properly); he's sufficiently causative to be able to control things at a slight distance — short distance. And then we get — in those three steps, we have people who can do this. And in the remaining steps, we have people who have — who are insufficiently causative. But remember this: it's a ratio again — it's how much randomity surrounds these people.

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

See, they probably started out being terrifically causative, and they built themselves up enough randomity to have whipped a small army, and they finally wind up defending everything bitterly on every front. And they've still got lots of horsepower left, but they're in the bad situation of having all their randomity, other-randomity — they're under attack from everywhere. So they've lost their causativeness and they can no longer attack, handle, control a body at a distance. They've got to be right inside, holding on tight, and guiding it very, very carefully. Because they've really got to defend this body, you see? Because if they didn't defend this body, all these random motions in their vicinity would put them in bad shape.

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

Actually, anyplace that you're processing anybody, your individual is too little causative. His amount of causativeness involved is too small. What's optimum? Well, optimum is somewhere around 20.0 on the Tone Scale. That's almost on a basis of 50 percent holding, 50 percent attacking. Here's where you have an individual who can spend half of his time in causative action and half of his time in defensive action. He has to have something before he is interested.

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

Now, how does a person get into this sort of thing in the first place? How does he ever start drifting down below 40.0, below 20.0 and so forth? Well, he starts drifting down below 40.0 merely because 40.0 is a condition where he is enormously random and there is no randomity, as far as he's concerned, exterior to him. He can do anything.

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

And you finally get a condition where — a wrestler who could whip every wrestler in the world, recklessly tying one hand behind his back and whipping people with one hand; and if he still whips them with one hand, he ties two hands behind his back and fights them with his teeth. He's got to have action, he's got to have motion. It isn't necessarily true that a thetan has to have action or motion as represented in this universe. Nor does he have to have an identity. But it is motion and it is fun.

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

You'll find out that when a thetan peels down to a point where he knows he is just a concept, he is — and he has not yet attained any huge certainty for himself, but he knows this now — that certainty he has attained in that he isn't a piece of energy, he isn't a thing, he has an identity.

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

And if he encounters this fairly low on the Tone Scale, there's only one thing really to do for him, and that's have him start mocking up ridges, and have him start mocking up anchor points, and pulling things in on himself, and building up piles of energy and masses of ridges and so forth. All of a sudden he's happy and cheerful; yeah, he's got something to do now. Boy, is he bogged down, see — relatively speaking, compared to what he is. Now, any being that can simply be where he wants to be, anyplace in the universe, it's just — phooey! See? I mean he — it's just nothing to do.

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

And probably the first concept he gets that makes him go a little bit off, is not the concept of "interested in something." The first concept he gets is undoubtedly — has to do with aesthetics. First, there is an aesthetic thought — just the thought is sufficiently aesthetic. And that degenerates down to an aesthetic object. And then that generates down to a contest amongst objects and individuals as to what is and what is not aesthetic, and this consideration carries solidly through to the end of track. But after a while, they don't even think they're thinking about aesthetics — they have to have reason. They've gone into effort and so on. Now, that's the highest thoughts on this.

And the big trick in this is exteriorization.

Well, boredom was the traitorous emotion. Somewhere up along the line there, he hit the emotion of boredom, and he became deathly afraid of boredom. And he thought that if he were to be completely certain and to know everything, he would be tremendously bored. And he's got these two things confused. He thinks that knowing everything and being able to do anything would, of necessity, bring about an emotional condition we know as boredom, and he's terrified of it. And there's the first fear.

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

And below that, he is afraid of being afraid. That's all he can be afraid of. But above that he is afraid of being bored. He's desperate. You start to take away from a thetan — even when the thetan is pretty badly bogged down and the body has psychosomatics and he can't generate any interest in anything else, and you start to take something away from him, he'll say — oh, the thought will suddenly strike him, "Oooh, if I — if I — if I lost that, I might not have enough random action." He'll say, "I'd be bored." And he gets a terror; he gets sick.

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

Now, a little test of this is to put a couple of people — mock — you have him mock up a couple of people, both of them being bored, in front of him. Don't do it just because I told you to, because people sometimes become deathly ill on this. Another thing is, is he got into contest with mest space — space. He got into contest with space, and space won. Because space was something, and he was nothing. And so the space told him he had to be something, and he has locked horns, you might say, with space and space has won. So he — the thetan believes completely that he is nothing.

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

But the trick that has been pulled on him — that he's pulled on himself — is: he doesn't have the right to be nothing. So, another thing that'll unlock a case every once in a while . . . Did you ever run across some girl that says, "My parents trained me and I went to school and I did this, and they had so many hopes for me; and everybody was so nice to me and they expected me to be a great pianist, and (sighing) I can't." And you search in vain for the Freudian symbols and so forth — just some clue to this person's character, some hidden significance, something of the sort — to account for this feeling of ennui and inertia and horror about life.

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

Well, she's already stated it. I mean, there isn't any hidden significance to it, beyond the fact that they expected her to be something — to be a thing, you see. And she tried and tried and tried, and she couldn't be a thing.

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

There isn't any thetan — this is the one impossibility, evidently, is there isn't a thetan that's ever been created or has ever created himself or just with a small puff, came into being — there isn't one of them who can be anything. You see, he really can't be a piece of energy. Why? Because he's causative — he generates energy. And every time he tries to be a piece of energy, he then has to be awfully quiet; because if he suddenly — suddenly huffs and puffs, he'll blow his house in — right away.

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

You get the worst V (resistive V level case, occluded and so forth) that you ever ran into, you get the very worst one and you start breathing a little bit — have him generate some energy — and he will find all kinds of emotions and reasons and everything why he mustn't generate any energy. Because he, you see, is being a thing, and that thing will be destroyed if he actually generates any causation. And there's his anatomy, you might say, right there. But he, being an effect, is convinced that he is the thing which has had the effect upon it. In other words, he is a thing which can be an effect.

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

He isn't any such thing. That happens to be impossible.

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

You get somebody who is getting electronics — electronics is keying in, keying in, keying in and he's got facsimiles flying all over the place. In other words, these energy pictures are slapping him all over — it's energy starvation. The energy starvation, however, on the part of a thetan is — he must be something. See, that's the — that's what makes energy starvation. He has to be something — he can't relax. He has no right to be nothing. And that sounds backwards, but that's what's — what's wrong with an energy starvation case. Anybody that's having trouble with energy starvation, you can even use as crude a technique as match-terminaling in brackets "the right to be nothing." And all of a sudden, "Gee, you know, I don't — I don't have to be anything. Gosh! I — I could be a — I could be a bum. I could be — I could walk down the street, I got a perfect right to lie down in the gutter and starve to death. I — I can go around the back doors and beg. I can wear rags. I can be impolite to people. It doesn't matter what I do, because I have a perfect right to be nothing."

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

Very often a case relaxes, just on that. Because that is an essential truth. And when he realizes it, of course, it is a piece of the greatest certainty there is.

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

And it — far from being terribly upset and discouraged and immediately afterwards becoming a bum, why, he immediately brightens up, and starts to comb his hair and clean his fingernails. Takes a little pride in things and so forth. But he's operating on a latitude.

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

I one time talked a fellow out of suicide when I was a kid, very interestingly. Talked him out of suicide simply by explaining to him that "Look, the death penalty — the death penalty is meted out to people who have done the extreme crime in the society. And it is the extreme penalty — they no longer torture people. And so that if you did the worst thing that you could do against law or society — you did the worst thing you could do — why, the worst they could do to you was give you the death penalty. Isn't that so?"

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

And the fellow says, "Yep."

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

So I said, "Well, what do you want to give yourself the death penalty for, without having earned it?"

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

And he thought that over. So he parked it on the time track. He had "committed suicide" in reserve. At any time now in the future he could, of course, complete the act; it didn't matter, you see? But he had self-determinism and a width of action for the future. He became very law-abiding. You see, it didn't matter anymore; whereas he'd had slight criminal tendencies before that time. He's been perfectly relaxed about the thing. He went on for years, and became quite successful as a radio entertainer. You might know his name.

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

Anyway, this man, you see, had achieved a higher margin of causation. You see, he was more causative. And these are just tricks, just tricks by which you all of a sudden make a thetan realize, one way or the other, that he is cause.

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

And a process falls short when it produces the thought and the conviction that the individual is an effect. And it wins when it raises his conviction about his being cause. What's a good process? What's a bad process? Well, there you are.

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

You could be very obtuse about it and talk about randomity and automaticity and so forth. But these are — that's bric-a-brac compared to this other: certainty.

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

Now, what's certainty? Causation. Now, here's a low-level certainty: A swordsman takes a rapier and is able, while he is standing some feet from the target, to pick up his right foot and drop the rapier immediately into a pinpoint bull's-eye. That is certainty. That is competence. In essence, that is the measurement of the efforts and locations and distances necessary to make two points coincide at a certain instant in time. And that is really a low-level certainty. That is certainty in terms of motion.

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

Now, there is above all this certainty in terms of motion and certainty of geographical location — you see, he has to know where something is before he can perform such an act — is the certainty of "whereness." And above that certainty of whereness, is the certainty of just being certain. Certain of being certain. Are you certain of being certain? And if there's any fast process under the sun, it is just simply the process of being certain that you're certain. I mean, if you could just all of a sudden adjust a setscrew or something in the left radar lobe of the thetan and he would then immediately become certain that he was certain, why, he would do all right.

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

So, things like prefrontal lobotomies, electric shock, automobile accidents and so forth, are tolerated in the society. Why? He at least gets the low-level — the lowest level certainty there is, of course, is the certainty of impact: He at least gets awfully certain all of a sudden that he's not there, see — which tells him he's not.

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

Now, if you have an occluded case, you can run this technique with some success on the case. It's quite interesting. "Now look into that blackness," you tell him, "and find four points where you are not." And of course, there's an infinite number of points in that blackness where he isn't. "I'm not there. I'm not there. I'm not there and I'm not there and . . . Gee, you know, I'm not there! What do you know! I'm not there."

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

Now, if you think about it for a moment, one doesn't do this well with MEST eyes, because mest eyes aren't too adequate as locaters. But nevertheless, you get a person who is real — real, real poor, real bad off, and you start to say, "What room?" and he all of a sudden has to look at the room, and he finds some real object in the room, what he's actually saying is, "Look, there is a wall, and I am not in it." You see, "I'm not in the barrier" is the game — "I'm not there." And this is the — in the final analysis, is the whole drill: "I'm not there. I'm not there. I'm not there. I'm not there. I'm not there." So on, so on, so on, so-and-so. Real simple.

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

Now, that of course gets him out of impacts. It also has a tendency to occasionally flip an impact through — swish, crunch — and he gets a lovely somatic. But the person who can't see as a thetan prefers somatics, because they tell him again where something is. He has a certainty that he has a somatic, and the somatic is that geographical direction from him. When he's real bad off he thinks he is the somatic. But even that is better than being nothing.

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

Anything's better than nothing according to his . . . He has become so terrified of being nothing — because he might be bored, because he has no right to be nothing — that he just overbalances the whole problem.

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

Now, the reason he doesn't remember past lives is again on this same vein: he doesn't because he's had to be convincing. And this is the other thing which everybody's demanded of everybody else — that they be convinced. "Convincing" is just a reason why. It starts originally as an impact and winds up as a logic. So we've got a reason why — a reason why of this, and a reason why of that and so forth.

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

And if you want to beat to death any piece of logic — I don't care if it is in the field of physics, I don't care where it lies, or if it applies to railroad bridges or anything else — it has an essential frailty: there is an unreasonable assumption at the beginning or the end of any chain of logic, completely unreasonable assumption. And you can take any piece of engineering, any piece of chemistry, and just run it back to the completely unreasonable assumption, and the fellow says, "Oh well, you're going too far!"

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

You say, "Well, just a minute," you say, "the science of physics is a science and so on, and it starts from this and that." And you just run it back one step further than they started it.

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

And of course they say, "That's unfair."

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

Why is it unfair? Well, it exposes the fact that it is simply a chain of assumptions. And what it is, is a chain of the agreements which we have come to realize — realize is reality. And that chain of agreements as it goes back, of course, is very beautifully laid out.

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

Physics is the study of barriers. If they — if anybody had ever classified it as the study of barriers, it would be about eighteen times as workable as it is right now. The study of barriers.

Male voice: It disappears.

You take weights and balances and so forth — well, what sort of a barrier is required to, and what sort of a mass is required to? In other words, what do you have to dream up to dream up something else so that you could dream up something?

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

The test of this is, is people who go into physics and science — all due respect to people present — people who go into it, keep going into this "There's got to be something; there must be something; there must be something and it must be reasonable."

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

Now, actually, a thetan is totally capable of doing this mock-up. I mean, thetans are good at it and bad at it, but they're totally capable of doing the most fabulous mock-ups in terms of agreements. And boy, can they prove things! And so we get this concatenation of logic which finally winds up as a very concrete science. But why is it concrete? It's because it's the science of barriers. It's, how do we agree to make agreements which will convince us at last that there are limitations and barriers, so we can have a game.

Audience: Here. Here. Here.

Now, as we go down in physics and we get down to the electron — they're being very careful these days not to look too hard, because of course there isn't any electron there. Have to be real careful of that one! They get down to the biggest something they have ever encountered and find nothing, you see. And a physicist is — if he's really convinced that physics is physics and that is all there is and so forth, he gets convinced that he's an effect of this stuff, and that it's real, and he knows he's nothing. And then he gets down and he starts looking for the basic somethingness, and he's indulging in a search for something. And it's always a search for something, rather than a search for nothing. And he gets down to the base of it, and he's up against that conclusion — he's got to conclude somehow or other.

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

Sir James Jean for instance, he "sciencifies" all of his life — lovely word, terrifically descriptive of such a guy. He "sciencifies" all his life and when he gets down to the final notch, he says, "Well, think I'm screwed up anyway — all must have happened on the explosion of an atom."

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

"Hey, where'd you get the atom?" you can say immediately. Only he never quite answered that question. He never dared wipe out that possibility that there was one atom. He'd reduced the whole universe to one atom. Well, where'd he get the atom? Where that come from? And you're immediately at the unreasonable assumption — even of Sir James Jeans.

Audience: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

All right. Oh, most scientists just toss in the sponge, buy thick glasses, try not to perceive anything real, and say, "Well, in the final analysis, the prime mover unmoved — God — started it all." They get to this point. They run through complete atheism finally back to an inverted eighth dynamic and lie there over their test tubes cowering slightly at having tampered with God's material. And there sits God right in the middle of the test tube — themselves!

Male voice: Mighty solid.

Oh, a thetan can do wonderful and marvelous things. What he survives that he himself does to himself is far more remarkable than what he survives that is merely done to him from some outside source. How he can survive what he does to himself — I'm very puzzled. I am. I've seen fellows going in for hypnotism and going in for this and going in for that; and then I pop them out of their heads, finally get them out, you see, and they don't like this. So they immediately start mocking up more machinery and more complication, and they're all bogged down about three days later.

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

That's why somebody took a license and said, "Well, now a fellow has to make up his mind to be Clear and then he's Clear. And if he'll just make up his mind to be Clear, then he'll be Clear, and that's all he can do. But at first he has to make up his mind to be Clear. And that's what's Clear."

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

Gave a talk on that one time — the first hour I said all you had to do was make up your mind to be Clear and you could be Clear, and there was no reason why you couldn't do this. And then spent the second hour of the lecture — which nobody has ever played since — and it's stating the innumerable reasons why one just simply can't make up his mind to be Clear and be Clear. Nobody ever listened to the second tape. (audience laughter)

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

Now, it hasn't very much to do with it. You'll find a person coming up the line sooner or later, if you process him, he'll make up his mind, "Yeah, why not!" He kind of looks around carefully and cautiously and he says, "There's enough randomity around. Yeah, I can sacrifice a little bit of randomity, little bit of identity. I'll be cleared — providing it isn't too unlimited." And then he says to somebody, "Now the trouble with clearing is it's an absolute term. And you've made an absolute term out of it."

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

Of course, anytime you try to move anything even vaguely resembling an absolute in on a thetan, you are moving nothing in upon nothing, and you've really got a bad time of it. All right.

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

Just giving you some basic essentials here as we go over this. Giving you some sort of an idea of the character of the beast and the direct target of processing. And that target is to increase the causation of the thetan. Not necessarily decrease the effect — we can just neglect that. If we really want to, we can just neglect it utterly, and our boy will be in good shape. But if we neglect his being causative and specialize over here in effect, we might as well just neglect the boy, because we'll bury him. You see that?

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

So let's take the first three steps and see that they're somewhat causative, and then they start concentrating on geographical locations and making space and so forth, and the last four are trying to get him out of being an effect. And the whole kit and caboodle is designated in one direction, is to give him some certainty. And the whole thing is characterized by the fact that in Scientology, we have various kinds of barriers. And as these barriers arrive, knowingness becomes lookingness, becomes feelingness, becomes effort, becomes thinkingness, becomes lookingness, becomes feelingness.

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

You get the DEI cycle as we go down this Tone Scale? See? Desire, Enforce, Inhibit. Desire, Enforce, Inhibit. Desire, Enforce, Inhibit. Each one: stage, stage, stage, stage, stage — we got the cycles of action there. Your basic cycle of action is in terms of perception and motion. And of course, perception is communication, because we have a transfer of particles. So we were right there on: Feeling is condensed looking. Effort is condensed feeling. Thinking is condensed effort. So far we go — we've got thinkingness now, but it's not very serious until thinkingness starts to get down here below 4.0. And boy at 4.0, you start in on the basis of looking with mest eyes, feeling with mest emotions — and here we go, see. Now we get thinking, and of course that's a circuit.

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

"Well, I get along all right," the preclear says, "but — except I hear my mother's voice all the time cautioning me, you know, about it."

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

And you say, "About what?"

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

"Well, just about things, you know. I say something and then this other little circuit tunes in and somebody says, 'Heh-heh-heh-heh-heh,' and repeats it."

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

So we get down that far, we're too deep into an effect. And you're trying to move a preclear — not at the top — to top at knowingness: you won't ever audit him up there. You won't audit him from 20.0 up. He'll be gone by the time you succeed that. He — one day, without probably even shaking you by the hand, he'll all of a sudden not be present. You'll call up his wife and — something of the sort, and you find out that — well, there's — he went on a trip and so forth.

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

I mean, everybody comes around and says, "Show us a Clear."

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

I say, "Well I've got one in a cage, right here. He consented to be in a cage and . . ." (audience laughter) Oh yeah?

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

There's two classes of this. On a lower harmonic — I don't want to give the idea all your Theta Clears will shove off, they won't. But on a lower harmonic, he's so anxious to get out of the body, and so frightened of being an effect, that he does — to be British — he does a bunk. He just scrams.

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

You say, this perfectly sweet girl; she's generally — generally — or boy, and generally they're a little bit nagging about life, a little bit plaintive about life, but you hardly ever suspect. And all of a sudden you say to them, "Be three feet back of your head" — there they go past Arcturus! And you'll sit there, pleading with them for a half an hour, "Move your hand. Come back enough to move your hand."

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

"The hell with it. I don't want anything to do with that body. It's a body. Somebody gave me a chance to leave and I'm gone!"

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

One preclear in particular, that — his auditor said, "Think of your child. Think of your child. Get your . . . You know, how will your baby get along if you don't come back?"

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

The body just — plop, see. Completely inert. Just completely deserted.

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

"Think — think of your husband. Think of your mother. Your father. Your obligation to the society." For half an hour, see, he goes on talking to this inanimate body that's just plopped, like it was stuffed with rags or something.

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

And finally, at the last, the auditor got a tremendous inspiration and he said, "Well, think of your poor auditor!"

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

And the person straightened up and said, "All right." (audience laughter)

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

That's doing a bunk. Nobody's done a bunk on us over here. But that doesn't mean it won't happen. Swish! Two light-years past Arcturus, and still going!

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

Another thing is, they very often — and this has happened over here, they — very often you say, "Be two feet back of your head."

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

They say, "All right." And then, splash! and they stick on the ceiling or something, and they get involved in the light fixtures, and they don't know which is right side up and which is upside down. And every time they start to move back toward the body or in any direction and so forth, the room will invert again. And their gravity — they've done an inversion on gravity, and up is down and so on, and they're having an awful time. That's real bad state of confusion — everything is inverted.

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

Those are the only things you're liable to run into that might be perplexing early in the course. If you run into anything like that, why, just give me a ring. I'm always available, and I can audit somebody back. Put the telephone up to their ears. I've done that often enough.

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

Well anyway, the next thing I want to give you here in a hurry is the immediate drill which I want you to take up today. We're going to break the class into two units, just to speed cases in general. But we're going to do, not Group Auditing on this assignment, we're going to do individualized auditing — team auditing. And we're going to do this drill. And we're going to do it until everybody in the Second Unit is perfect at it — and I mean perfect! And it may take us a couple of days, maybe three days, but let's get real perfect at this.

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

Put the whole Tone Scale as represented in the Handbook for Preclears — you know that chart in there? It has, over on the margin, it's got several extra emotions. Put the whole Tone Scale and feel it back from any and every mest object you could possibly contact and connect with. And hang out the window and throw it into — make, put that — emotions, various emotions, into people, and each time get it to a point where you can feel them back; until you're absolutely certain the emotion is in that person, and that you do feel it back. And so that one can put the second dynamic sensation into mest objects and people, and feel it back with such liberality as to leave no slightest doubt in his mind that it is really — there's lots of it and it's not scarce, and he doesn't have to hang on to a body until the end of time just because of it.

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

And that will speed up Theta Clearing like bullets out of a gun. That's right, because that's a lot of the reason people are being very careful of the body. And it's a lot of reason why people have bogged down, because of that doggone second dynamic sensation. It's a condensation of lookingness which inhibits people from perceiving.

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

I'm not knocking it apart, you understand. But I'm just saying the idea of trying to get this — trying to get it out of a body is, boy, that is — that's really a complicated problem for somebody. I mean, that was the silliest idea anybody ever had. The body has — it's fairly condensed, and lots of it. And the first time a thetan hit a body, pam! You see, that's the basic on blanketing. And an individual has to be very — you as an auditor have to be careful of that one, to make sure that the person is making it into these objects.

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

And how do you do it? You do it on just gradient scales. That's all. You just put a little bit of these various basic emotions, which are very easy for the preclear: center line — little bit of resentment — you know, take it easy. Little bit of resentment, little tiny bit of boredom, so on, until you're real — build it up. And then get the extreme emotions finally, like enthusiasm, apathy, terror and so on. Boy, what it does for a case to all of a sudden be able to look at a MEST object and it's radiating terror — but I mean radiating terror!

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

Of course, the final analysis of this is, you go down — you get real good at this, as good as you're going to have to get in the next two or three days. You get as good at this — I don't care whether you do it interior or exterior. If you can do it while exteriorized, wonderful; if you have — aren't exteriorized yet, well, do it anyway, because it won't mess up the bank. You can get to a point where you will suddenly look at somebody that's walking down the street and you say, "Terror," and feel it back.

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

(Recording ends abruptly)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Okay.