The lecture tonight is actually the first lecture of a series of twenty lectures which will be made in ten days. That is to say, there'll be two hours of lecture per night. Now, it may be that I'll - may even go to the point of jamming those up, make them a little faster.

This is a course in Scientology. That word might seem a little strange to you at the moment. It's a very beautiful combination of Greek and Latin, I am told, but then so is psychology. And I trust that Dianetics will get just a little further than some of its forebears, and it has already gotten into the field of Scientology.

Scientology would be the study of science, or the study of knowledge, rather than the small segment of therapy which has been, up to this time, Dianetics. Scientology actually embraces these axioms and embraces the various activities of man.

Now, you may not realize it completely, but man's activities have not been embraced. There are lots of things that man does that there's no accounting for: electing Democratic presidents; getting involved with Russia; inventing the means with which to go to the stars and then, for some peculiar reason, deciding to use it to blow up Russia and the United States simultaneously.

The study of knowledge would embrace not only how you went about creating a science which could be utilized in the derivation of the formula and the application of the formulae of atomic fission, but it would also embrace, Who's going to use it! Why is it! Where can it be employed! And how can you keep it from being employed! Scientology would step outside of the field of science as it has been known.

Science, as it's been known, has been the collection of data (almost a random collection of data), assembling it into piles of similar data and calling these piles "piles of data-ology.

A study of biology, let us say. Well, that started out to be "study of life": bio or biology - "study of life." Very, very interesting, but it wound up as the study of cells and small animals and that sort of thing and merely collected enormous quantities of data - observed, not particularly evaluated, and certainly not grouped and aligned into a form which could be utilized in the discovery of new data.

Each one of these ologies, one by one, has come into a dead end. That is not a condemnation of them. They have been carried forward as far as anyone could carry them forward and then they've stopped, stagnated, specialized and drawn themselves away from the body of knowledge. So that each one becomes a study of how you memorize a lot of unevaluated facts, and you put them together and maybe you get something and maybe you don't.

You can see how biology, for instance, has dead-ended. Great study; it was started with a lot of verve evay back. Francis Baconl was quite interested in this. Lucretius before him was very interested in this. In modern times, it has fallen away from its own definition. It's "biology," It's sort of a hopeless dead end. They are not looking toward any source of life, they are just looking toward new kinds and combinations of life that they might discover by happenstance.

The adventure of search has gone out of this field. Until this day, if you walked into a high-school biology class or talked to a high-school professor of biology and you said, "How is it that your theories of biology do not carry along with or parallel some of the material in the theory of evolution! How is it that the study of biology does not parallel its companion science, cytology! Why are these opposite in some respects!" He would say to you, "Oh-huh! We study out of this textbook," And you'd say, "Well now, do you realize if you went into the laboratory and you picked up a microscope and you started looking at these things - if you did some thinking about this - one of these days you might discover a great big piece of knowledge which would unify all of these fields: evolution, cytology, biology and many others!" "Oh-h-h, no" No. This is something that is taught in a codified way.

This is actually the history of any science, They push out into the unknown, they collect data, they formulate this data around a few theories and then they end. And they become stultified. And according to one of the very ancient Greeks, that mixture which is not shaken stagnates. And they don't go any further; they stagnate. And it becomes a codified, specialized subject capable of producing a certain effect in the material universe. There it stops.

It's rather a sad story, actually, because it's. the story of pioneers going out into the unknown world of data, phenomena - going so far, blazing a trail to a certain distance, and then one day getting very tired and sitting down and saying, "Well, all we'll do now is look at the back track. And if anybody tells us that all we're doing is looking at the back track, we'll protest. And we'll say,'Well, we have a truth here and you can't do any more about it, and from here on it's all complex and if you went from here on, you're liable to fall off a cliff.' " And then another subject comes up, another adventurer comes up, and he carries forward a little bit further into this wilderness. And he makes a few more marks on the trees. And then one day the rest of man pulls him down to some degree, or he stops, he runs out of data or becomes frightened, he sits down and he looks on the back track. This has been going on, to my knowledge, for thirty-five hundred years, and has actually been going on lots longer than that. Mysticism itself was once considered to be just about as pat and just about as well codified as biology is today.

Now, each new adventure that man undertakes goes out further into making the unknown known to man, Dianetics went a certain distance. It was mainly interested in aberration. It was mainly interested in why men's minds don't behave exactly right all the time. That was its main interest. It covered that field pretty well. It took the lifetime of one man and it said: "We will run down in this lifetime the causes of his unhappiness, his misery, his grief, his failures. And in this one lifetime, we will rehabilitate him - one lifetime of confusion. And if you want to be very precise, that is Dianetica

And everything that came out in the first handbook of Dianetics is workable. You can still do it just that way - you can produce these results. But it didn't embrace everything that could be embraced about man;: anyone would be a fool to think that he could at one fell swoop, I imagine. But the point is, it went this distance. And particularly in the last six or eight months, I've been going forward further and further and further and further, and all of a sudden we're up against a subject which can only be embraced by a word like Scientology, which is an embracing of knowledge. It's a study of knowledge, not a study of therapy. Makes it a very broad field.

It has a great number of logics, axioms, postulates, which concern themselves with knowledge. And emphasis, of course, is placed upon the knowledge which man can utilize here in this MEST universe - this material universe; what knowledge he utilizes in order to go forward.

Now, as soon as we start to study knowledge, we find out we're studying man's mind again. Very interesting, it's a sort of an endless circle. How do you know there is such a thing as knowledge? Well, your mind is a repository of knowledge, and it is something that computes knowledge or suspects knowledge or finds knowledge or uses knowledge.

Now, this may strike you as somewhat odd, but a therapy right now is no end. The end goal here is not a therapy; pretty well the end goal of Dianetics was a therapy, but the end goal of Scientology is not a therapy How can you work problems with an imperfect computer? Now, let's take an adding machine down here in a business and let's jim this adding machine so that one of its cogs slips every time. And every time you multiply anything by anything, you also get it multiplied by five. Now, your answer is always going to be wrong. You say one times five, you put one times five on this calculating machine, and the calculating machine comes out and says, "One times five is twenty-five." And then the next time you put something on it, you say, "Five times a hundred. Says right there, twenty-five hundred."

How can you work problems with an imperfect computer? You can't. How can you apply knowledge with an imperfect computer? Again, you can't. So it is merely a basic step in the field of Scientology to perfect a computer. That computer happens to be the human mind.

Now, how you can teach knowledge which will be utilized by an imperfect computer is the first problem in this course; because I don't think there's anybody present who is perfect, including me. Nevertheless, a great deal of this computer is alert and headed toward perfection, and there are certain things which keep it from being perfect and certain things which inhibit it from recognizing what it actually recognizes. Wonderful thing that a mind actually can know without letting itself know.

It is the task of anyone engaging in processing, then, to go out along the line of better working methods for others around him, and depend upon those others to help him up to that level. The initial step, then, depends upon the blind helping the blind. And anywhere that this fails, it is because the blind are too blind.

There are many complaints in the field of auditing - which is the process of processing people - many field complaints state, "Well, my auditor so-and-so" and "... won't do this, and I am still very occluded." Go and ask this man's auditor, "What are you auditing on him?" Oh, I don't know, "London Bridge Is Falling Down" or something of the sort, but not a therapy. "No, let's stay away from a therapy; let's not help him. Let's say we do, and don't."

Before you can use Scientology to its fullest extent, the computer has to be cleared. And that is just a technical computing term; you have to clear a machine before the machine will give you right answers. And right now we're in need of an awful lot of right answers.

It's fantastic that we sit here today with a technology capable of conquering a very large section of the material universe - we sit here with this technology and actually talk about blowing up our fellow men. How insane can we get? Well, that's pretty insane, and that's what we're doing. Unless somebody does something rather drastic about it, that's what will happen.

We have a guy who is crawling with fear and terror about capitalism and managers, managing a big country. Great! He's a manager who is afraid of managers, he's an owner who is afraid of owners, he's a slave driver who is afraid of slave drivers. And he's creating a very interesting piece of hell on earth today over in Russia - fellow by the name of Uncle Joe (Stalin), a raving lunatic.

But actually compared to the rationality which a human being can assume, the rationality which a human being can himself accomplish, there isn't a ruler in the world today or a manager of any corporation in the world today who could be considered anything else but a raving lunatic - compared to how sane he could be! But compared to the normal, compared to the normal that walk up and down the streets, these people are usually much saner than the average.

So what is your relative yardstick here? What is sanity? Well, sanity could be set up right now, if you were to consider it an absolute, to be an absolute perfection in reasoning which would resolve problems to the optimum good of all those concerned. And that would be an absolute of sanity. Absolutes are not obtainable. In the first place, a person who was absolutely capable of being sane would probably still lack data, and so you would have that small margin there of the unattainable. But it would be so much higher than anything which has been achieved to date that you practically can't recognize people when they have gone up this line.

A case the other day, somebody wrote in from California - this young girl and the typewriter, Well, that is not very peculiar. Young girl worked with this handbook for a short time and went down to a typing college, examined the chart for a few minutes and examined the keyboard of the typewriter - had never typed before - and sat down and started to type perfectly at twenty-five words a minute. That's the way you ought to be able to learn. Not grindingly, just - there's the information, you examine the infermation, you apply it. Without any physical reservations.

In other words, it shouldn't take the government down here a hundred and some thousand dollars to train a pilot. They ought to be able to go out and show the fellow and say, "Now, you - look. Here are the throttles and you have to have the flaps in this condition, and your oil temperature and pressure has to be up here. You neutralize these controls and the plane actually will take off by itself. You cut it down to landing speed so-and-so and head it in, and at this distance from the airport you'll level off and - comes back .. ."

And the pilot says, "Mm-hm, let me look at it a moment," figures it out, climbs in the plane, takes it off, and brings it around and lands it safely again. Do they do that now? Oh no, they don't, They study for months and months and months and months and months, and then take them out and crack them up.

Just look at the army air forces - or the US air forces, or whatever they're calling themselves these days - just look at this organization's crash record in the past week, and any day, Why is it?

Well, if it's mechanical failure on the part of those planes, it's because somebody out here at Boeing wasn't sane enough, or somebody at Cessna, or somebody at Beech didn't inspect the part he was told to inspect. And the felk,w who put the plane together didn't care whether it went together or not. That's mechanical failure.

And as far as dispatching failure, somebody tells this pilot, "You go out so-and-so and then you come back." And the weather's bad and he hasn't checked over the plane, he doesn't know how many flying hours this plane's had. Pilot goes out, obeys orders, climbs in - bow! It's no kind of weather to fly in. Something else is wrong. Somebody has slipped up. But every single one of these mechanical failures comes down to a human failure.

Therefore, Scientology in its widest application could only be applied by the very, very sane - only by the sane. So its first application is in the creation of sanity amongst the able. It is not a therapy addressed to the neurotic. (It can be - that's somebody else's job.) It's not a therapy addressed to the psychotic. (We can lick that problem - so what?) It's a therapy addressed to the able. But people don't realize how unable they are because they have no standard to go by.

If you were to get up and do any of the things which an actually able mind could do, in front of an audience, people would be signing you up for vaudeville and television. Why? Well, you could add and subtract various numbers, and somebody could read you the instructions on how you tap dance and then you'd tap dance and that sort of thing, and oh, you'd be phenomenal! Everybody would say, "Gosh! Genius at work!" No, not genius: sanity at work.

Now, how do you get sane? What are the component parts of sanity? How do you get there? Well, that's the first route, that's the first milestone. But that's only mile one! And there are ten thousand of those milestones out there. Just one. Until you get one - Milestone One, which is complete ability - it isn't very likely that,rou will be able to compel or reason or handle (manhandle it or otherwise) a world into a sane approach to the business of living, until that one step is accomplished.

Any one of you accomplishing that step can go on to step two and three and four and five. Any one of you all the way up on ability could so knock the spots off of anybody - anybody you talked to - that they would be very, very compelled to take your good advices on the subject. Now, there's nothing unreasonable about that.

The only question in your minds at this moment is "Can I attain the first milestone?" That's the reason I'm giving this course. The first milestone. That's the reason you have this book, Handbook for Preclears. That's attaining the first milestone.

Now, the first milestone does not include clearing up the prisons, clearing up the insane asylums or resolving the problems of cities like Los Angeles. Doesn't include these things. Those are up there at three, four, five; they're incidental. So there are nineteen million insane in this country - you didn't drive them insane. You can't solve this problem by taking them one by one, one by one. No. But by solid cohesion in your goals, with a solid forward push on the rehabilitation of you and the rehabilitation of the very able who surround you, those goals will be accomplished on an automatic backlash.

Rut right now what we've got to do is to carry forward far enough, as individuals, beyond the first milestone, so that some of the actual native goals of man can be realized in this universe. And we can do it, because every doubt which you have right this minute is just an aberration. Anything which is fighting you at this moment is within you. There is nothing - fire, swords, police, national governments, economic systems - none of these things could stop man once he started. And what we're trying to do is start man. Nobody has ever started him before; all they were interested in doing is controlling him and holding him down.

And that's Scientology: knowledge and its application in the conquest of the material universe. Scientology needs a crew, and with persistence and opening your ears, you'll be that crew.

Now, the history of this race, its genetic background, why it's here, what its intentions are, are all of them at this moment, to the society at large and to most of you, complete unknowns. There has been a pretense of having data, but it is a shabby pretense. Nobody knows where man came from. Nobody knows what he's doing here. Nobody knows what he's supposed to do now that he's here.

Well, I am talking now about the last two meters before you get to Milestone One. Any one of you knows inherently why man's here, what he's doing here, who put him here and why he is being held down. Anybody knows this, only they don't want to know they know it. It's really, actually, wide-open data - with a lid on it. And it's a heavy lid. And the first thing you come up against in processing is that iron cover. Try and lift it. Without being able to demonstrate to the individual that it can be lifted and that there is something under it which won't swamp him, you find it pretty hard to lift on most people. They fight you. They don't want this lifted. Are they fighting it for themselves? Are they fighting it because of their own self-determinism? Are they fighting it because they actually don't want to know, basically? What are the answers?

The enormous amount of phenomena that we have uncovered here in the field that is now Scientology - I've been working consistently and continually for about twenty-two years to pull an iron cover off. Well, it's off. And this course is going to give you the complete size, thickness, weight and nature of the handle of said iron cover. It's a secret. It's been a secret for a long time.

You get these boys in insane asylums and they start raving about knowing some sort of a secret, and somebody is after them and so forth. So the psychiatrists say, "Hmm, insane." So they put him in an electric shock machine, they go bzzzt! "Well, we fixed him." The yaps! Why didn't they ask once in a while? That's a fact; the guy did know! Grim jest, isn't it?

[At this point there is a gap in the original recording.] (the above note is at this point in the R&D but there is no perceptible gap in the reel, possibly indicating that it was made from an edited second master - FZBA)

They use the only techniques which will completely shut somebody off, But not even those techniques are good enough to let anybody keep this iron cover down, once you know the techniques of getting it off and where it is.

How tall are you? What are your mental capabilities? They're all underneath this iron cover.

If I come to you bluntly and abruptly and say to you, "Slaves, break your chains! - Liberty, fraternity and equality!" - all that sort of thing - parts of you suddenly say, "Nng. Nooo. No. No liberty. Because somebody else might get free; and then what would they do to me?" You have all sorts-of rationalizations.

Every time a person has gone out to help this human race, the human race has promptly hit him over the head, buried him in the nearest lime pit. Why? Well, he didn't know about this iron cover. And it isn't necessarily true that a person has to be thrown into the nearest lime pit just because he picks up this cover, that's superstition. We're not dealing with superstition: we're dealing with natural law.

[At this point there is a gap in the original recording,] (not only is there a gap here but the recording dynamics and background noise are completely different, as if this later section was recorded at a different time - FZBA)

.. there's only one - one memory of pain and unconsciousness sitting on top of you, and everything else on that's a lock. Sometimes the auditor has to hit a few locks, but not always. And he just starts in and he processes out this first engram, Facsimile One, we call it. (Some of you there think you know what it is; you don't.) Facsimile One - and it's processed out by thought, emotion, effort, counter-thought, counteremotion, counter-effort. Routine. Routine processing. And it will process much faster if scouted on that machine: a psychometer. And it is a process which should not take you twenty-five hours. The reason why I flounder around with this is very simple - why I have floundered around with it: I wanted to know every single solitary byroad, every cow-path, in the vicinity of target one. Well, no US Army artillery map is anywhere near as complete as the map we have right this minute of target one. It tells you how many mils and how much elevation and how much powder and shot you need. And it tells you exactly what this thing looks like and exactly what it'll do when you hit it. It's good news, isn't it?

But it's very, very peculiar that, like all good military engagements, we find this target completely booby-trapped. And it's booby-trapped with an insidiousness which is beautiful to behold. But the second you know what the booby traps are you can walk right through them, just like you can walk through any mine field after the mine boys have been in there. Well, I've been doing a mine squad for you. It's been very interesting work. I've still got both legs. But there have been a few times when I didn't think I'd have them anymore. (laughter)

No, when it comes to laying down your artillery barrage of auditing on this target, you want to know what you're doing. And by the time you start centering the main target, you want to know your subject. And that is something that not very many people bother to know. It's much easier to go flying off at some wide tangent and say, "Well, this is ... Hmm, I thought of something like this once: you take the lost Atlantis, and that's on the right-hand side of the slide rule, and it somehow or other must compare with bugology, and I studied that once. And what he says when he means thought is actually the left-hand side of a right-hand screwdriver."

No! I mean thought when I say thought, according to a very exact, specific definition. The definifions in Scientology and their meanings are actually clearer than the definitions in the science of physics - clearer! They are more capable of being understood because physics is built on a sort of a jerry-rig process - I know, I'm a physicist - and it's built on this jerry-rig process of: Once upon a time there was a fellow by the name of Archimedes, and there was somebody else by the name of something or other, and they had a hard time, and they went around and discovered certain principles and after they discovered these principles, they discovered other principles. And then all of a sudden somebody came along one day and said, "Hey look, there's atoms," and they said, "Great, there's atoms," and so they added this to the science - they didn't integrate it at the beginning of the science, they added this to the science. And now all of a sudden we have this great exact science of chemistry being completely out of gear with the science of physics. Here's your exact science of chemistry being much different in its laboratory as to atomic structure and the behavior of the material universe than the nuclear physicist's universe. They've got two different universes now, and they don't dovetail.

And in addition to that, there are certain basic fundamentals like weights and balances and that sort of thing, and they're very interesting. But don't add in too many question marks, because they're hair-trigger, a lot of those basic axioms in physics. They may be or they may not be.

Take acceleration: there are some fascinating things in acceleration if you want to go deep into acceleration. Why does a body have to accelerate to go around a corner? Well, it's because. Well, it says right there in the law it does, but don't question that law too closely.

Nevertheless, that's a very exact science, but Scientology is much more exact because there aren't any maybes. Up to the point of where we're applying thought as a static to the physical universe, which is motion - up to that level - I don't know of a single maybe. It's just like that. Its words mean what they mean, not something else. And in studying it, one should keep firmly in mind this fact and these factors: that something inside you is liable to defeat what you are doing. So you just find some self-determinism in you to take yourself with a good hard rein, and keep yourself going right straight at the target. And find yourself veering off this way and veering off that way, and all of a sudden say, "Well, let's all go down to someplace or other and play hopscotch because that's the way to get there" - no, you won't get there that way.

Now, when you've got Milestone One, and when you know you've got: it, when everybody else knows you've got it, you can do anything you want to do - anything - on your self-determinism. But the horrible fact of it is, is there's very little self-determinism until you get Milestone One, but there's a lot of circuit-determination. And that's something for you to remember. If you will just stay with me on this line, up to the first milestone in Scientology, and bring yourself up to a high level of ability and apply yourself to that, you will be free - free of me and Scientology too! (audience laughter)

It's quite remarkable that some of these people who have reached toward this goal and are now being called Clears (they're not there, by the way) are turning up stuff on a slide-rule principle; I mean, their minds work like slide rules. Their minds are developing things which everyone around them considers completely incredible. I mean, nobody could think this fast, nobody could do these things. They don't know it yet, but there're not there - they're not there. They won't relapse, but they're not there, because mental ability is about five times what any one of them is doing. It's a stageringly high level.

I want to demonstrate to you a couple of little odds and ends that would tend to confirm this. I won't tell you what aberration one - Facsimile One - consists of at this time. If I did, there would be more headaches out there and more sick stomachs than I care to take care of this evening. You know your subject and get that down pat before we take any further drives along the line. You're on a good, safe track.

At times you will consider that it definitely is not safe, though. Some preclear starts exploding before your view and you'll say, "Oh, my God, what am I doing to this man?" Oh, you're probahly making him well. If you're following what I'm telling you, you're making him well.

& and if not, well that's just too bad, we'll cross him off the books. (laughter)

Now, you know that any one of you will shine up on that machine as having at least three personalities - any one of you. You're aware of this; you're definitely aware of it. Your recalls contain many instances whereby you went out one day and you were going to do something, and then a little voice sort-of said to you, "Well, I don't think you ought to do that." And you went a little bit further and another voice said to you, "Well, I'd just fail anyway." And then you all of a sudden got the idea of failure and you sort of got quivery in the stomach - anxious about what would happen to you if you did this. You can remember sitting around and saying, "Should I?" "No, you shouldn't." "Oh, I think I ought to." These are personalities arguing with personalities - just that. Each one is as separate and distinct as a whole human being.

Now, some of you have a frivolous personality, let's say. And some of you have a serious personality. And maybe the same person has a frivolous personality and a serious personality, and they're always coming into conflict with each other. You want to be gay, happy, cheerful one day, and all of a sudden you say, "Well, this is not dignified; I shouldn't be doing this." It's just as though one person inside of you is stepping on another person.

You ever have this sensation? Well, there's a third one in there (audience laughter). You feel pretty noble in this third one, if you ever get it on and if the others don't turn it off. And it's actually adjudicating to some degree, or it's sound asleep.

And sometimes there's a fourth one in your stomach area. And the fourth one will argue with the third one, which will argue with the second one, and ... You're a mass of conflicts, in other words! That's what we know as conflicts. Just as we would take two people of opposite personality characteristics and demand that they get along, one with the other - just as we would take two people and then demand they get along together, but their opposite personalities would make it impossible for them to - well, you can imagine what they would be doing and saying to each other.

That's usually what's behind the eyes of most men. Conflict! One Side says, "Be," and the other says, "Don't be." And then, just for variety, the side that said, "Be" starts saying, "Don't be," and the side that says, "Don't be" starts saying, "Be" - almost any subject.

In Book One we had what was known as demon circuits. Well, these really are circuits, but they can be demonstrated to be - in an uncleared, unadjusted situation - to be personalities, very distinct personalities with distinct characteristics. How did they get that way? Well, are they there? And where are they? Well, it's very odd but they're always in the same place in the same people. And from person to person you can locate them.

Now I'll show you a little experiment, How about all of you shifting over until you're on the left side of your body. Shifting over to the left side of your body, looking at me from the left side of your body. Go ahead, shift over. Be a little bit of a shock to some of you. Be on the left side of your body for the moment. Now consider with the left side of your body. Now let's do a shift, and shift over to the right side of your body. Shift over to the right side.

Anybody get a little tremor? Little bit - apprehension, maybe? Something going on here. "How can he stand up there and... I actually do feel these things." All right, shift over to the left side again. You can do that, easily. Now shift center. Shift center - right center. Now shift over to the left side again.

Now shift center again - right center. Let's be alive in the center of your being, right here. (tapping)

Now, some of you can shift into your stomachs; not all of you. Try shifting into your stomach. Be in your stomach for a moment. Now come up and be center here again.

All right. Any of you feel just a little bit groggy when you started going center? Mm-hm.

Did any of you get a somatic right there when you started to shift into the center?

All those who got a somatic right here when you started to shift to the center, would you please raise your hand. Mm-hm.

Now, isn't that very interesting, this proportion out of this small audience? Hah! What is this thing? There is - potentially for anyone here - there's a somatic right there in the middle of the forehead. What is it? The mystic used to call it the "eye of the soul"; somebody says it's the pineal gland; somebody says it's the residence of consciousness - they say a lot of things. What is it? And what would happen if you kept it on very long? Well, you can keep it on. You can just shift into the center just like I showed you just a moment ago and turn it on if you want to. It'd be the first time you were ever even remotely resembling yourself if you did.

Now, it's quite interesting. This is phenomena. What is that center-of-the-forehead thing? Is it actually some sort of a mysterious eye? Or is it you as an individual? Or what is it?

Maybe it's an engram? And maybe your left side wouldn't want you to pick that up. Maybe your right side would argue about picking it up. And maybe your left side would argue with your right side about it. Interesting sort of a computation here, isn't it? To be very colloquial, there's obviously dirty work at the gas house. Why? Why do you get that somatic?

Oh, you could sit around by yourself and practice for a while and you'd get it on. Your stomach would start feeling kind of sick, probably, at the salne time, but you would have the mysterious mystic's "eye of the soul." By the way, he will practice for I don't know how many months or years to get vision with this center eye - he'll practice to do so, actually. And here some of you had it on for the first time just (snap) - just like that. Because anybody can turn it on. Anybody can do anything he wants to with this thing. And he will do anything with it except run it. And that's what I'm going to train you how to do: to become an integrated you. To become one person without conflict, without central argument, without one side trying to defeat the games and goals of another side, but just to be you without any neurosis or anxiety as far as the stomach is concerned or as far as any of these things are concerned. And you can decide right now whether or not you want to go along this track. Do you want to be you? Well, I tell you that you have to run this thing before you can be you. And right away some of you are going to feel a little quiver of "Oh, no!"

Well, it's not very tough. It was done with supersonic waves - no trick. There's more stuff, electronically right here in this room than what created that engram. But it was created a long time ago. And you don't know the history of your own race, and you don't know why you're here, and you don't know why you're not free, and you don't know why you have a left side and a right side - at this moment you don't know. But in the progress of processing with a co-auditor, you're going to find out. You are going to find out. And one of the things about not knowing is the fact that this engram says specifically not to know. "Mustn't know, mustn't think about it, mustn't do anything about it." Rats! It's just an engram! And the second that you know it is, about eighty percent of its aberrative force goes by the boards. And you will know and you'll want to know, and you'll stop dodging it. And the reason you're sitting in these seats this evening: actually, you do want to know. You can't go up Tone Scale without knowing.

Now, the map of how you get there consists of knowing, first, a language of some, let us say, fifty words. That's the terminology of Dianetics - this terminology. It's not very difficult terminology, but it's like a language. You know, if you ever had trouble with geometry, the only reason you had trouble with geometry is because you couldn't speak geometry. They started throwing triangles at you before they taught you what triangle meant!

If you were ever out on the high seas trying to communicate with another ship, you would know the nonsense of running up Able Boy Fox when he had no code book. You could run up Able Boy Fox (which means "Submarine under your bow; full speed astern," or something of the sort), and you could run this up and run it up and run it up, and he would - "Hhhuh, ha, fellow over there is airing out his flags." And that is basically what is wrong with anyone's understanding of the subject of Scientology. It says right here in the signal book, it says Able Boy Fox. And in your signal book Able Boy Fox means "flags" or it means something else, but actually, it only means just exactly what it says here that Able Boy Fox means - which is "Turn ninety degrees to the right," or whatever it is. Simple?

The way you learn the English language is the way you should learn a subject. Somebody comes along, he says, "Table. Table." And pretty soon you say, "Table." That sound means this object.

Somebody says, "Put down." (thump) "Put down," (thump) That's an action. So it's a phrase which denotes the action (thump) "Put down." That's what language is. A word is just a code. The only way your general semanticist ran completely off the rails, off the bridge, off the cliff, was by declaring there was such a thing as an undefinable. Maybe there was to him (God help him!), but there actually isn't such a thing as an undefinable, unless you're talking about something beyond the realm of the knowable. You might be way out into the blue someplace, along with Kant's transcendentalism - you might find some undefinables out there, but not in the field of finite thought, such as freedom. There is no doubt in anybody's mind what freedom means; it's not an undefinable.

Some political genius can turn around and change the meaning of the word freedom, so that it means "freedom from want." He can say, "Now, freedom - what freedom means now is 'slavery.' " Well, he's got to fool the school kids, because any time you want to know what freedom is, you can go and look in Tom Paine, Voltaire, Thomas Jefferson, Webster's Dictionary, the Oxford Dictionary - any one of these things will tell you what freedom means. And it's not freedom from anything, it's just being free - unrestrained.

The way people learn these things - they're MEST words; they're words of the physical universe. And the way they learn these things is very finite and very simple. Little boy's trying to raise his hand, he can't raise his hand. All right, his hand is held. Now he tries to raise his hand and he can; his hand is free. There is no doubt in his mind what freedom for a hand is As far as the English language, which we are using to transmit the code of knowledge which is Scientology, there's nothing undefinable; it's all very simple. But the first task in learning this subject is simply to learn what the words mean, so that you can use them freely, so that you don't have to think twice.

Don't be like the'signalman who goes up on the bridge of a battlewagon, and somebody points over to another ship and there's a flashing light over there. And the flashing light is going dit-da, dit-da and flashflash, flash-flash, flash-flash. And somebody sa)is to this signalman - this signalman is claiming he's a signalman now, you know; I mean, he says he is - and they say, "All right, what's he saying?"

"Well, just a moment, I have to give it some more study." Oh no, he doesn't. If he's a signalman, dit-da means "A" to him. And a whole string of dots, sort of read en masse together, mean a word to him. He has conquered the barrier of meaning of light flashes.

And the only barrier between this subject and you is your definition of the words as they are used. They don't mean something else. Dit-da means "A." And the first thing you have to learn is that dit-da means "A." When I say thought, it means a very precise thing - a definable thing; its definition is so-and-so and so-and-so. When I mean emotion, its definition is so-and-so and so-and-so. When I mean effort, its definition is so-and-so and so-and-so.

It's just like learning code. You could sit down and learn all of these words and their proper definitions probably in two or three hours of study. I doubt anyone in the subject studying it so far has actually grilled very hard on its language. That barrier conquered, nobody can swamp you on this. It becomes simple beyond simplicity.

Well, what we're trying to do here, then, is give you the techniques, processes and a map of how you can reach Milestone One - and that's just Milestone Qne - in this course. There's many, many other things that Scientology can embrace and that could be covered by other courses. And the first way to learn it is to learn its language, its definition, its processes. And then practice with them on mild incidents until you can do them perfectly. And all of a sudden tackle the hig target, blow it, and you're there at Milestone One. And it doesn't take very long to do it.

And if it takes a long time to do it, then there are only a few things wrong. Really, there's only one thing wrong: you didn't learn the language. Or you cannot bring yourself to agree witln the desirability of reaching Milestone One. One of those two things will debar you. And there's one more that might debar you, and that's thinking that eating carrots, sliced thin and cooked in vinegar for fourteen and a half hours, is a better technique than Scientology. That is just another method of avoiding getting to Milestone One.

Let's take a break now.

(end of lecture.)