Thank you.

Thank you. Good!

Well, here we go, 24th lecture, 1st Melbourne ACC and the basic thing I was talking to you about, I better talk to you some more about and just make you confront a static real good.

Now, you can recall your applause because I haven't got anything to talk to you about today. Because I forgot my notes — forgot to read a book. Should have studied up. Big flap on the lines here. I was on the Road Safety Com­mittee in — or was asked to take part in the Road Safety Committee in Sus-sex, you know. And I was about to slow it down, you know, and kind of refuse and that sort of thing. And I sent a letter out doing this and then received the clipping — there's been a front page newspaper story spread all over the place, that I'd been appointed! So I — one of these flaps, so I kept you waiting. So, I had to unrefuse, quick!

All right, I'll stop wandering around now and give you some gen. Who's having a hell of a time?

All right. And I think we're on the twenty-third lecture of the 1st Mel-bourne ACC, November 24th, 1959. And there's very little to discuss because I've told you everything I know. There isn't anything else, particularly, one could go over. Because, after all, we're merely dealing with a mind and a thetan, a body and a physical universe. And this is a very, very elementary subject.

Audience: Me!

And while you're sitting there thinking, "Well, that's a lie," and so forth, well, what passed through your mind at that moment is all the complexities of the subject that you'll get over. That's about the size of this situation.

You're having a hell of a time, huh?

Mind composed of facsimiles, circuits, machines — and these are circuits — and machines are simply complexities of postulates, matter, energy, space, time and forms. And the only thing that doesn't have matter, energy, space, time and forms, in spite of all the experts on the subject, is a thetan. Now, he can (quote) have them (unquote) in a processing sense but he really hasn't got very much to do with them because they aren't him.

Male voice: That's right.

And I haven't talked to you before, particularly, about this first universe, a thetan, because there's so very little to say on the subject and everything that there is to say on the subject is, more or less, said in the first three or four axioms.

All right, come up here. We'll unhell-of-a-time you.

Nevertheless, you might be curious what you're processing, might be curious about what you're processing because you think you're processing a mind and you're not. And you think you're processing machines, really, and you're not. And you think you're processing circuits and bodies and you're not. You're processing a thetan. And might be very remiss to miss saying something about a thetan.

Male voice: Ah! Yes.

And let's just take it from scratch, shall we?

LRH: Okay. Now, sit down. Now, we're just going to do a little auditing job here if it's all right with you?

Audience: Mm-hm.

PC: That's all right.

All right. The word itself is derived from the Greek letter, theta, which in Greek symbology is what they generally use to represent thought. Now, first and foremost, that's an error because a thetan isn't thought. A thetan is the source of thought.

LRH: Okay? It's all right if we start the session?

And although the animal psychologist of 1879 and other nineteenth-century activities would have you believe — don't groan that I am plastering those guys again — I'd just as soon talk about witch doctors. In fact, much more, as soon talk about witch doctors, because this was a wild operation, the one that began in 1879. It was basically to convince man he was an animal. And nobody quite believes that yet but if I say it often enough I may get somebody to look at it and see that that is a fact.

PC: Yes, sir.

A thetan is not thought. A thetan is the source of thought. There's a great deal of difference between those two things.

LRH: Okay, start!

He is not located. He is a source of locations. Why do you think TR 10 works? TR 10 works by putting a thetan over at cause, at cause over loca­tions. It makes him (quote) "invent" or spot locations but it puts him at cause over locations and one of the dirtiest tricks you can play on a thetan is to totally locate him. And if you don't believe that, why, just watch how people dodge. You see, people don't like to be fixed and they very often get dispersed. And the worst off case there is, a case that's in the most terrible condition, is the case that is totally separated and detached from having been located, see. Believes he should be here but has gone over there. Got the idea? He's on a total dodge and this is the detached, individuated case. That's a very rough case for people to handle.

What goal would you like to set for this session?

As a matter of fact, for Freud or anybody else to say that this was a case he couldn't handle, inferred he could handle some case and he couldn't handle any case. That's a big bunch of balderdash. All you'd have to do, you see, is be — totally reverse the Auditor's Code and you'd have the code of operation of a clinical psychologist and a psychoanalyst.

PC: Well, see nice pictures.

You think I'm kidding. None of you people ever really go and look at these things, you know, and I say these things, then you say, well, I'm riding a hate or something like that. I'm not riding a hate. But the particular present time environmental propaganda to which you are continually sub­jected in newspapers, magazines, radio, anything, is all based on all of these nonsensical nonsenses that sprang up in the nineteenth century. And they're very interesting nonsenses and they do have a source and it's part of the environmental (quote) "know-how" now.

LRH: See a picture?

Even the little high-school kids in the Untied States are forced to take a year of psychology which teaches them for a year they're animals. And let me tell you, you get one of them for processing afterwards and you've got a mess on your hands because it's total reverse, whole bunch of lies. And what they've done is become the effect of a tremendous amount of twists, you see. And it's just a lie, a lie, a lie, plus a lie, a lie, a lie, plus a lie, a lie, a lie, which adds up to no understanding at all and so forth, and someday you're going to get a psychologist. You're going to be processing him or you're going to get a psychiatrist and you're going to be processing him.

PC: Yes. Three dimensional.

Oh, I tell you, you just better go look at the local witchcraft. I'm telling you. I'm telling you straight! I'm not kidding you because nearly everybody thinks I exaggerate and so on. Well, that's because you don't go look. And you actually ought to go to a meeting of them. You're perfectly welcome. As a matter of fact, they probably — you'll probably wind up addressing the whole works yourself But go and — go and listen to them talking about cases and (quote) "research" and so on. And you'll find these guys — these guys are deal­ing with problems that you've had wrapped up for so doggone long that you just live with these solutions, you know, and there's nothing to this and bang, bang, you know. And these guys are going "Well, I don't know, you know, and oh-da-di-da" and "Had an awful lot of trouble with this patient, terribly dis­associated case, you know," and long words, none of which mean anything, you know.

LRH: Nice three-dimensional picture?

And you listen to one of them saying, "Well this fellow just kept throw­ing his possessions out the window, you know, and throwing his possessions out the window and there wasn't anything you could do about it you know, of course, except bar up the window." And along about this time, why, you'll say, "Aw, come off of it," you know. And you'll say, "You know that guy you're talking about, well, he just can't have anything. Now why don't you find something he can have, you know, amongst his possessions and stack him back up again." And the psychologist, or something, will look at you — "Yeah, yeah. Hm, that's a remarkable idea. Have something, you know, somebody could have something, hm." Next thing you know, you're tearing the whole place up.

PC: That's right.

A lot of Scientologists wander into these places and they just wind up putting all the people down in chairs and telling them what the score is, you know. And these people are not antagonistic. They just get awfully stupid, and so forth, when you're talking to them sometimes but they're not antago­nistic to you or what you're doing. And the trouble with you and us and we is we don't take responsibility for them. And one of the reasons we don't take responsibility for them, is they kind of have elected themselves out from the human race. You haven't elected yourself out but they have. And they go on some kind of a regimen that says man is an animal and he's worth ninety-seven cents worth of chemicals. And I think the inflation has taken care of it. I think he's worth at least a dollar twenty-nine. And they give you all of this stuff and they have just wandered into vast labyrinths of incomprehensibility and they're just about twice as lost as any of their patients — they're in trouble.

LRH: You ever been in space opera?

Now, they don't know what they're processing. They haven't a clue. Because the moment that they are asked to conceive a static, they're usually so bad off that they get quite ill. Just look in your Creation of Human Ability on the — under the heading "Conceiving a Static." Not recommended as a process! That's a rough one. Now, to ask somebody to "Confront the idea of a thetan" is liable to restimulate ghosts, goblins, demons and things that go boomp in the night, don't you see. Because it's a very, very decayed, long ago degraded subject because they degraded thetans a long time ago, you see. And they have just ceased to exist in common literature and that sort of thing.

PC: Yes, sir.

The world of "science" (quote) (unquote) — that very individuated, stuck in the back corner of the university thing, the world of science — has long ago proven conclusively that there is no such thing as a spirit. They understand that. As a matter of fact, science is the inheritor of the vacuum of thetanism brought about by religion.

LRH: Good. Okay, well I acknowledge that goal. Let's see what we can do about that, huh?

And if you care to read the early history of religion, you'll find that the church at Rome owed most of its success in reaching into the far provinces to telling all the farmers that the diseases, and so on, to which they were sub­ject, are the result of demon possession of one kind or another. And they are the owners and arbiters of good demons — pardon me, saints, and — and they'll chase out (for a certain amount dropped in the collection plate, and building a church, and turning over the revenues of the state to them and, well, a few other minor considerations — such as your soul) that they'd be very happy to get rid of these demons, see.

PC: Yes.

Well, and again I'm not exaggerating. This is how the early Christian church made its first progress — by totally degrading the idea of a spirit and then kind of inventing a thing called your spirit, see, that's an inversion of it. And then happily sending your spirit, for which you are responsible in some weird way — Lord knows who you are, you see — but your spirit has got to go to heaven; which was an invented place that some thetans are still wandering around trying to find.

LRH: Okay?

And if you weren't good — this is the oldest witch doctor trick there is, this is — wasn't pulled off by the early religions in this last couple of millen­nia. The oldest witch doctor trick there is, is if you can't reach a thetan while he's "alive" (quote) (unquote), why, you've got to have some means of reaching him after he's dead. When he doesn't respect being tortured to death and when he can just shuck the body and skip, you see, you haven't got a good control over this situation, so the best thing to do is to have a very nice con­trol. And this very, very nice control would add up of course into a life after death which is too horrible to confront, and that would be hell.

PC: Yeah.

And it's very interesting that the first versions of hell came from Persia. They're in the earliest records of this sort of thing. Zoroastrism, I think, that sort of thing. And the Christians had to tidy this up and really make some-thing about it. What they meant originally was quite intelligible and that is to say that Rome was going to disappear in a burst of flaming lava. Now that was the basic promise of Christianity and it was dreamed up, more or less, as a revolutionary movement against Rome. And Lord knows, about that time, Rome was depraved and decayed enough to be revolted against by almost any-body.

LRH: All right. Now, you realize that the processes I run on you are probably not necessarily therapeutic?

True enough, she'd sat there doing nothing but take-in, take-in, take-in, and the provinces supported her and she got to be one of the major prosti­tutes of earth, if you'll pardon my statement of fact. And she was pretty dec­adent. So they had lots of enthusiasm on every hand in caving in Rome. But what they were going to do was burn Rome and they finally managed it under Nero. Only it didn't burn up.

PC: That's quite all right.

And the whole general plot and pattern there was a revolution. It was a revolution against all kinds of things. But everything that was good in Rome reversely became bad to the early Christian: bathing, eating, sports, any-thing, you see it was just a total inversion — their revulsion against the supercontrol of it.

LRH: That's quite all right?

Actually, Rome succumbed because she was guilty of the first strike against Jerusalem. And the first time that Rome ever oppressed religion and made religion the subject of Roman spears was when Rome removed the citi­zens of Jerusalem out of Jerusalem because they were being too tumultuous and too this and too that according to Rome — the Roman government. And this was a mistake. This was a mistake. This was an overt act from which Rome never recovered. But it led to a great deal of mishmashes in the field of the spirit.

PC: Yeah.

Now, in the days of Rome and Greece, you find all sorts of discussions of thetans. There's a lot of discussion back in that literature. It's not a closed subject, all grooved and typed in very neatly.

LRH: All right. Okay, let's just have this out here for a moment. Now, have you been having any difficulty communicating with your auditor?

For instance, you'll find in the Socratic Dialogues, for instance, Socrates referring to his demon. He was probably a pretty inverted, figure-figure sort of a guy and he had a demon that told him what to do. Well, Lord knows what this was, a machine or a this or a that, but we find a great deal of respect for this sort of thing.

PC: Yes, sir.

Furthermore, we have the idea afloat in those times, of a mountain where thetans went to and sat down and got together and figured out who should win the battle, and so forth. And it amounts, in Grecian times, the goddesses on this side and that side and doing this and doing that. And there probably were thetans around who were monkeying up Greek politics. Maybe some of you were. But it didn't pay, didn't pay because Greek politics were already too muddled to get very serious about. But, it was quite a game.

LRH: You have. As your auditor — you feel that your auditor has not accepted your communications?

We find many of the mysteries and religions of Rome had some little tiny bit of gen connected with them, as Greece, you see. Well by the time we'd moved up into Rome in full stride, we already had a worship of force and a forgetfulness of spirit. So it was already on the slide before the priests came in and started putting the finishing touches to this sort of thing.

PC: Yes, very often I don't find him.

But it's quite remarkable, the campaign which went on through the first thousand years A.D. and extended somewhat into the second thousand years, on the suppression of any idea or semblance of a spirit. Now this became very, very unpopular. And you've been subjected to all of that all the way along the line one way or another, I'm sure. And the unpopularity of being a spirit, the unpopularity of ever being able to detach yourself from a body, the — and so on, finally culminated in the idiocies of 1879 at Leipzig, Ger­many, which says that man is a brain — this proves it conclusively — and makes "science," you see, (quote) (unquote), which only means truth, after all, which makes it the inheritor of the debris scattered around by this early earth down-curve, through depravity and so forth.

LRH: Oh. Now — you recall any overts against this auditor?

So, it's gone to a point now where the popular thing is not even getting rid of thetans — or earlier, the total methodology of depraving thetans or something of the sort. Now it is, they just aren't. There is no spirit, there is no life after death and there is no this and there is no that. This is raising hell with things.

PC: Yes, sir.

One of the reasons is — you'll pardon me for the pun — because here exactly is what's happening: it permits anyone to run a total irresponsibility on the third and fourth dynamic. They just can be as irresponsible as they like. Like the old physics teacher who told me (and died the next year). He told me, he says, "Well, I shouldn't worry" he says, "about atomic fission or atom bombs or anything like that. I shouldn't worry about that because, after all, I'll be dead in a very short while and might as well be dead from one thing as another," you know and no responsibility. And here he is, pushing up a baby right now, you see. And he'll be — he'll be probably playing with his toys or riding his bicycle and so forth, and whoomph. Well, one of the reasons a whoomph could take place is because this person, in a position of responsibility as chair of Physics in a major US university, never once said to any member of the class, "You should be responsible for your creations and inventions." See?

LRH: You do?

The reason he didn't is directly traceable to this decay of the idea of a thetan, you see. He had no responsibility for it because he'd never be there to see it. And yet, there he is, right now, someplace in America, pushing up a baby! See, it's as simple as this.

PC: Yes.

Well, people get more and more fogged in and more and more occluded and more and more this and more and more that and they eventually just shove off. That means that all of their know-how, all of their experience, all of their familiarity with life, and so on, as a thetan, disappears. And they come up from scratch again.

LRH: All right. Well, have you told the auditor about these?

Only, coming up from scratch and learning arithmetic for the umpteenth consecutive time can give people an awful headache. It can. You're learning arithmetic again, you know, only this time you don't learn it so good!

PC: Yes, I did.

And you're learning how to write again and you don't learn that so good either. And if you want to take just a glance back along at the calligraphy of the twelve-year-old student of schools back over the last two or three dozen decades, the level they could reach at the age of twelve, you will see the decline rather easily. It's an easily traceable decline. A kid in this particular generation, God, he sticks his tongue in his cheek, you know, and he takes a pen and he grinds out some horrible scratch of some kind or another! This is writing. Well, he just learned to write too often, that's all, on the total mys­tery and nowhere of never knowing how to write, you know. Well, his experi­ence isn't available to him and although this makes an interesting game of it, it certainly raises the devil with his judgment.

LRH: Did it straighten them up?

Now, people reading Dickens are struck by the correctness of English and the quietness of behavior of the children characters in Dickens. And they don't believe them, in these modern times, and they don't believe that it's possible. They think it's something that's totally unreal and Dickens knew nothing about writing about children. Well, isn't it strange that writers con-temporary to Dickens wrote about, more or less, the same kind of children? You know, quiet and sensible and so on. Well, that's just about a century ago.

PC: Ah, most of it, yes.

A kid, these days, he's a nervous wreck; goes out of control rather easily, gets very hysterical, so on. Parents are always standing around saying, "These children now, they're, well, they — just playing, you know, they're just playing." The hell they are, they're spinning. I can prove it to them. I've taken a little kid every once in a while, in some kind of a hectic, high, crazy, wild-eyed fever, you know, that's "just playing," you know, and going far beyond his actual point of exhaustion, you know, unable to go to bed or to sleep or something of this sort. And just take and sit him down and ask him how he's doing, you know. And he can't pay attention to anything, you know. And run some kind of a simple process on him, you know, like, "What's that?" and point at the rug, you know. And just get him to spot some spots and, all of a sudden, he says, "Pheeew," you know.

LRH: Most of it, but not all of it? Maybe there are earlier overts against earlier auditors?

What he's in is a plus randomity of some kind or another that he can't stop. Well, child psychology today says you mustn't take any responsibility for that plus randomity of any kind whatsoever because it's just natural and the child shouldn't ever be inhibited and the child should do as he pleases. In other words, we can't control children, we can't control children, we can't do anything about children — that's their motto, you know.

PC: That might be possible.

You can do plenty about children. But children, of course, are thetans that just got bumped off and have a lot on their conscience. They're nervous. That's what children are all about. And it's just another phenomenon in the development of a new cycle of existence.

LRH: Well, has your auditor looked for them?

Well, these cycles of existence are not necessarily getting shorter but they're getting very hectic. These cycles of existence are — need, these days, more and more complexities, and more and more and more complexities, and more and more and more complexities. Golly, a seven-year-old boy today has got to have complexities the like of which he never heard of. And it's always the song of the older generation, "When I was a child, I didn't have ..." you know, and so forth and so on. Well, all right. He didn't need it either. Get the idea? There's more complexities that have to be added to the line, more things to be interested in, and so forth.

PC: I didn't get that.

But, if you sort it out, you'll find out that a child is somebody that's just trying to get over a death which might have been easy and might have been violent. He's just trying to recover from having shed all of his responsibili­ties. He's trying desperately to reorient himself in existence.

LRH: Has your auditor looked for these earlier overts against other auditors.

And, it's a very tough thing being a parent if we don't know how to orient anybody in existence. Because you don't have to do anything extraordinary with a child except acknowledge he's there, make him feel he's wanted and let him accustom himself and familiarize himself with his new environment. And that's about all you can do for a child. But, boy, that's plenty of control — that's fit.

PC: No, he didn't.

I see you've got notes there and nobody has written that down, particu­larly, but that's actually about all you could do. That's about all you could know to do — would be the same as any other. thetan in any other state. A fellow's had a tough experience, his anchor points have been driven in totally. Well, the only thing you can do is get him to reorient himself and get his anchor points out again and show him he's wanted, acknowledge he's there, give him some wins. Actually, when he reappears again in a body, you know, I mean, he — that's a pretty big win all by itself!

LRH: He didn't?

Fantastic what you can do to a little kid — not run him through birth or anything of the sort, although Scientologists do that and do it very success-fully. But just say, "Well, what do you know," you know. "Glad you're here." Kid, right over — gets over the idea of being a thief. He gets over at once the idea of committing an overt act against you by appearing in your family.

PC: He didn't look for nothing, that's the bloody trouble.

And I can remember my oldest girl — you know, there's something very strange about this, when I talk about children, I'm not following the tradition. You see, the tradition is, to be an authority on children you must never have any, you see, and must have forgotten that you had ever been one. Those are two requisites.

LRH: Yeah, yeah. That's it. All right.

But anyhow, as soon as my oldest little girl came along (she's about seven now) — boy, has she been putting on the pressure to learn, you know. Got to be sent to school, got to be doing this. Just one, two, three, you know, supposed to be the way it is and that sort of thing. It's very, very interesting. She was probably all of two, three days old or four, five days old, or some-thing like that, and I said to her — something that's remained, it's — always gets a rise out of her — I said to her, "Well, we're glad you're here. We're going to keep you." Which, of course, you'd say would be a holder and would be a hard thing to lay in on a child but I said that, you know, and there she is lying in the crib, you know, and she, "Haah pheeeeeew!"

[to Instructor] Do you hear that, Instructor?

And as time has gone on, why, she's always been very happy to hear this again. I say it to her once in a while. A year or two ago, why, she started telling me that she was going to keep me. It's a big joke.

[to pc] I'll break out of the session here a moment.

These four little kids, right now, just get along just fine. Little Arthur, ARC Hubbard, is so much younger than the youngest above him, you see, that he's quite a baby in comparison to the older children; about a four-year gap there, and — three-year gap — and they're very proud of him, you know. And they're very happy with him and they're tremendously amused by what he does. And they're always acknowledging him, like mad. And he's quite a steam engine, anyhow. And you can always get a rise out of him, one way or the other. One day, however, I found them all in tears because he was being mean to them. Fantastic state of affairs.

[to Instructor] You hear that, Instructor? You hear that? All right. Grrrrr.

So anyway, the little boy, he's pretty tough, and so forth, but he'd had a lot of — kind of a bad time of it — not as good a time as he should have, evi­dently. And I don't know how he got knocked off, haven't asked him yet. I know what happened to the rest of the children but I don't know what happened to him. I suppose he's so much there and he's so much accepted and everything is fine that he doesn't very easily call much attention to him as a case.

I don't expect you to be brilliant. Just do the obvious, huh?

And the thing about it is, that if they have a nannie or an atmosphere around them whereby they feel they're wanted and it's okay, and so forth, they're fine. But, if they get any kind of activity going around which makes them feel guilty of overt acts, and so forth, they bust up quickly.

[to pc] That's all right. I'm not trying to ARC break your auditor ...

And, I can say, from that observation, that training which is based on making the child guilty of an overt act is probably that thing which has been spinning in the race faster than any other one thing. So, a child mustn't be trained into how easy it is to commit an overt act against Mommie or Daddy or the family at large or each other. He mustn't be trained into that. Quite the contrary, and so forth.

PC: No.

And that would be a point to remember. Now if you're running victim very heavily, you see, that only means that overt acts can be committed against you very easily. Which means overt acts will be committed against you very easily. That really makes you a good victim.

LRH: ... or call your auditor down.

But, overt acts don't happen to you unless overt acts are cultivated to you. For instance, it's basically true that it'd be very, very difficult to commit an overt act against me. Not because I don't have overt acts against you but because it's very difficult to commit an overt act against me, that's all — that I would consider an overt act, you see. You'd have to — it'd have to be pointed out and people would have to draw pictures and you — occasionally you will see some-body in my office, and so forth, pointing out endlessly with diagrams and descriptions to demonstrate how some auditor's conduct, someplace or another, was an overt act against me. Or something they had said about me was an overt act against me or something like that and I just never wind up believing it. I can be helped very easily but overt acts, that's something else, you see.

PC: No, no.

And basically, I see that they commit overt acts against themselves when they chop up Scientology or do something against Scientology or against their fellow auditors because I've seen too many of them wind up in the scrap heap this way, I mean, very secondhand — terrible condition. It's not something that could be lightly regarded. This isn't a piece of propaganda, it happens to be a fact.

LRH: What I'm trying to do right now is just give a little demonstration here and give you some auditing in the run and show you that something or other could happen. That's what I'd like to do. That's my goal for the session. Whatever it's interested in. Now, you say you'd like to see a picture?

But, they should also reassess what an overt act is or how an overt act could be committed against me. It would be practically impossible to commit an overt act against me. It's not that I'm tough or I am a no-effect proposi­tion but I merely wouldn't consider it so! Now that's just an attitude of mine.

PC: Yeah.

Well now, a little kid — and maybe something else — but a little kid, he's just committed the overt act of withholding his death, see. And he went through a big pretense of dying and here he is again and so he's all occluded. And this, itself, is a major overt act, as I told you in an earlier lecture. And, boy, is it easy to commit overt acts against children in their consideration unless you break them out of it.

LRH: Is that right?

And, you can break them out of it in various ways. Not by arguing with them or something of that sort, but the basic way to do it would simply be to not go into a victim valence every time they started screaming, you know. Like, "Oh, what am I going to do? I don't know. Why did I ever become a mother (or a father) da-di-da-da" or any other version of the same tune, you see.

PC: Yeah.

That fixes it up so when he's sixteen, fifteen, fourteen, that child is going to hate your guts but thoroughly! And they find the normal reaction in a generation so "normal" (quote) (unquote) that the clinical psychologist con­siders it inevitable that the child in his teens will do some kind of an individ­uation or separateness from the family by hating everybody in the family. And this is considered to be routine. Well, it's only routine if everybody in the family has set it up so the child has committed innumerable acts — overt acts against them. Don't you see?

LRH: All right, well can you get and hold ideas?

So, a society in which a thetan could live and actually could live, would have to be a society where the overt acts were real, not a bunch of trumpery.

PC: Yes.

Now, you'd have to figure out what you can do to a thetan, and just come off of it. What can be done to a thetan? Well, you say nothing can be done to a thetan. That isn't quite true because you can do something to his having­ness or you can influence his zone of control one way or the other, or you can blacklist him in some kind of a weird fashion, to himself and others — break his communications lines up. This can be done, you know, because he is in a coexistence in an environment. Well, that's about all that could be done to him, however. You can't kill him: he gives himself his own death engrams.

LRH: Hm?

Imagine my surprise, I mean, when — the last time I had a very violent death. I mean I finally recovered the actual circumstance of this sort of thing, and I'd just taken that car and thrown it into the wall. That was all. Head-on at about a hundred miles an hour. I just took the body and pitched it out — just sick, sick of the whole thing, you see. I was mad. And then didn't even have the good graces to stay dead. Well, nobody else had a hand in it at all. When I finally looked it over there wasn't a single soul I could find had a hand in any part of that (quote) (unquote) "death." It wasn't my obsessively being cause, either, because when I did look it over and found out who really had done it (me) you see, why, immediately, it went poof. Picture wasn't so bad anyhow but it certainly did go poof.

PC: I do that.

So, a social atmosphere which has a whole bunch of dreamed up deca­dence on the horrible things that can be done by people, to people, and has a tremendous rationale of unrealities, you see, and a bunch of made-up mumbo jumbo, superglibness about the horrible things that are done and so on and how everybody has suffered from it all, and so on, would be about the only thing that would keep thetans going downhill.

LRH: All right. Now, we're going to run something called Rising Scale Processing.

Now we could, on the third dynamic — and, we mustn't forget that what we know of the third dynamic is going to influence the living daylights out of the coming third dynamic. You should realize this. We're influencing it enor­mously already.

PC: Very good.

I picked up an isolated Western novel the other day and my golly, here's a cowboy running an engram on somebody else, you know. Fact! The whole characterization was straight out of Book One and it used to be out of Freud, that sort of thing. It was very interesting to hear cowboys talking to each other about their libido, how they had been offended against by — some minor incident in their childhood and have the villain be subject to schizophrenic paranoia, and that sort of thing. It was very interesting because it was straight out of Freud. Well, it's straight out of Dianetics now; guys are stuck all over the track.

LRH: Okay?

Now, we're already influencing the third dynamic much more widely than you'd think. Basically, because we're about the only cause-point in the third dynamic that is a live cause-point, you see.

PC: Yeah.

Nations are getting much like Rome: tremendous inflow. And most of these -ologies and -isms that are being proposed are simply to the end goal of trying to beef up governments. And governments go almost psychotic when they — or they go psychotic — when they learn they are no longer sovereign states. Definition of a sovereign state is to protect the land and the people. And, when you can't do that, brother, you're no longer the sovereign state.

LRH: All right. Now the first — the way this is going to go is I'm going to ask you to get an idea.

And what violates that? Mr. H-bomb violates that. Anybody can point an H-bomb into the middle of any government and wipe it out — and what's the government to do with it? They stand around with their hands in their pockets planning their air raid warning system for 1940. But they're not going to stop an incoming guided missile. So they are no longer capable of protecting the land and people of the state; and they know they're not sover­eign states anymore, they're not sovereign governments.

PC: Yeah.

And, as a result, you see them crumbling in various lines, and trying to make themselves very massive and trying to grab ahold of any kind of an ideology or -ism that makes them seem more powerful, and increasing taxa­tion and doing this and doing that and trying to do more for the people, if they can take more from the people and trying to get important again. Because right now they're not important. You're going — just going to see cen­tral governments going, blaah.

LRH: See, just — just think of this idea and then change the idea as much as you can to another idea. Okay?

You demand almost anything of a central government today, it'd give it to you. No matter how odd or extreme or outrageous it might seem because they've sort of given up, and will stay that way until they've got an adequate defense against the weapons which could be used against the land and people. And if they had that defense again, then they would get back up to a point where they were sovereign states and were the governments of the land. You see? They've got to solve that point and they haven't solved it. And while they're busy not solving that point, we're alive.

PC: Mm-hm.

Now, we're not in any contest with governments. As a matter of fact, there's no organization on earth means better, probably, toward governments than we do. I am saying that broadly, not as my idea, but what I've seen of Scientology. But they'll get upset about, Scientologists will, about the brutal­ity of a government, or something like that. They get upset about a govern­ment's being very extreme on the subject of minority groups or majority groups or something of the sort or — or lousy legal structures of some kind or another or governments that are trying to govern by psychiatric hocus-pocus or something like that. And they get pretty upset about this. Once in a while I have to call them off in some quarter of the world, say, "Aw, leave — leave a couple of stones up on the palace, for heaven sakes!" You know?

LRH: You understand that?

Government is not a natural target, particularly today. But a third dynamic is pretty easy to influence where none is being caused. And we're therefore influencing the third dynamic all out of proportion. And you'll find that practically every screwball -ology or -ism, or something of the sort, will sooner or later draw its sword and try to hack your head off, you know. Urmmph! You're in the road, you know. You're cause, they're saying. And you are! So there's no reason to stand up and offer them a target.

PC: I understand that.

About the only thing that you could influence to the good in — very directly, and are influencing right now, is sighting up the actual targets against which overt acts can be committed. Instead of a bunch of phony ones, you see. You've got a reality on this already. You've already knocked apart popularities of certain victim types. These are all — these have been falling to pieces for years under our comm lines, you know — the corny victim.

LRH: All right. Now, by the way, you don't — you don't feel too comfortable sitting there being audited by me. Am I going too fast for you?

Well, one of the corny ones you haven't seen anything of at all for a long time is — is the suffering mother. Getting passé, it really is, you know. "How much I was troubled when you were born," sort of philosophy, you know. "What a horrible act you did to me when you were born." This is kind of going by the boards, you know — not totally because of us but certainly — we're certainly helping it out. One of these fine days we'll make our point in this particular zone. But, while we're busy making our point, obstetrics in general are practically going to pieces, by the way.

PC: No, it's a bit, I'm not quite — a bit uncom — uncomfortable, that's right.

But a third dynamic where the overt acts, that were actual overts, came to be considered overt acts, you see, and the phony overt acts were sort of dropped away, would all by itself, lift the tone of a society and lift the tone of thetans in general. It's just that easy.

LRH: You are, huh? All right — has something to do with the — with the people there?

You know, these so-called offenses against the state that people are dreaming up, and so on, like take the Russian state. Lord, I guess you could stand around by the hour and read off possible overts against the Russian state. Man, they're not going to last long. You can just make — you can break more laws! Just open your yeep once too often about the commissar and you've had it, don't you see? That's an overt act — to talk! That's an overt act, you see, to do this or do that or be critical or something of the sort. Well, what the heck, they're not long for this world. They've only been around a few years but they'll be utilized, the Russian communist philosophy will be uti­lized by states as a last-ditch effort to bolster up their sovereignness, which they find ripping there. They can rob everybody then, you see. They can own your wallet and your hair — not propaganda I'm giving you. I'm just showing you.

PC: Probably so.

But governments will go in the direction that more and more overts can be committed against the government, see. And they'll get heavier and heavier and heavier on how many overts can be committed against the gov­ernment. The more freedoms they drop out — press, speech and all the rest of this sort of thing, of course, that's more overts against the government and the overts against the government can then be piled up rather easily. And what happens when people can pile up overts against a government? Of course, they just individuate from the government. That's it. The government ceases to exist.

LRH: All right. Okay. Well, what's it have to do with?

Now, if a society is so constructed that thetans can pile up overts against that society, of course they wind up very individuated. So you could say that a thetan's biggest liability is an environmental atmosphere or operating con­dition which is susceptible to his overts, see. Now that — that's — that's really about all a thetan runs into, factually. And, of course, this being the case, then he gets influenced, through his havingness and his third dynamic ARC, he becomes influenced into further separateness and he gets further and fur­ther individuated.

PC: I think a bit of restimulation from the last process.

But it is theoretically possible to erect a society in which a thetan could stay relatively free and go up grade without any processing. You just spot the overt acts that are overt acts as the overt acts, you know. It's an overt act to break up somebody's ARC pointlessly and stupidly with his — individuals in the group, you see. That's an overt act. It's an overt act to take somebody's possessions away from him, needlessly and ruthlessly, see, that's an overt act. Overt act to fix somebody up that the obtaining of possessions is so intri­cate and is so mired down in some -ologistic philosophy, you know, like com­munism or something of the sort or conservative economics or something else — obtaining of havingness is so difficult and jumps over so many hurdles and has so many vias that he can't possibly have anything. Well that's a soci­ety that a — that would be an overt act, you see.

LRH: Yeah. Well, tell me this, do you think that I suddenly will look into your mind and see something you don't want me to see?

Actually, tariff in Australia is an overt act against the people of Austra­lia. And everybody says, well, that's so we can build up local industries. Out of what? Sand and kangaroos' tails? Well, just look it over. It takes something to start an industrial society. It takes a lot of construction materials, it takes an awful lot of machine tools and it takes a people who are fairly well equipped while they're doing it, you know. It takes these things and you're not going to drive a society into being productive by erecting a wall which permits nothing to come into the country. Therefore, the biggest liability, right now, that the third dynamic faces in Australia is simply the tariff. There shouldn't be one. Here is a great big beautiful country that's just got all kinds of space and raw materials and everything else in it, tremendous country. What they going to do, leave it empty? See.

PC: No. You can look at everything. That's all right.

It's not necessarily necessary that everybody fill it all up at once but at the same time man is now educated into needing automobiles and popsicles, you know. You're getting up to the Coca-Cola age! And if a girl can't have nylons then she considers she's a pretty poor girl. And a housewife figures out that she hasn't got an automatic washing machine, and so forth, that she's being very passé. And that's absolutely right, she is.

LRH: I can?

And it's an overt act on the part of any government to deny havingness to this degree unnecessarily. Don't you see? And you'll get some internal mishmash or social tensions of some kind or another that will eventually bring about a whole new series of potential overt acts, see. There'll just be more and more overt acts build up that are possible in the society and you mustn't do this and you mustn't do that, and if you do this, you'll get that, and so on. It gets all very complex, and so on. It just built up out of the basis of denial of havingness.

PC: Sure.

Well, it isn't necessarily true that just because somebody's standing there, somebody ought to come along and put a Cadillac car under one of his arms and a washing machine under the other one, see. That isn't true, either. Because that's actually snowing him under. That's actually piling him up which in itself is an overt act. Standing up somebody and throwing missiles at him at some kind or another, or pushing possessions off on him or forcing him one way or another to obtain possessions in order to keep up with his neighbors or something of the sort. This is — this is also for the birds. See, it can go two ways.

LRH: That's all right. Do you think there's something that you should tell me that you haven't told me or mentioned it — you shouldn't?

For instance, you could totally crush Russia just by shipping Russia everything Russia needed. Just ship it, don't even make a charge, you know. Costs less than a year of war, any day. Matter of fact, the only time that Russia was ever beaten, hands down, and wiped out utterly was just by that method about the time of Julius Caesar. The Chinese started exporting all the luxuries they could think of to the existing lords of Russia and they washed them up, they finished them. And the Russians got so caved in and so defeated by all this, that those fellows retreated into what Russia — what is now European Russia and drove before them all the hordes that attacked Rome. And that — that is the operation which finished Rome, by the way — just in passing, which is practically unknown historically. The Chinese defeating the Russians with goods and then battle, drove the existing Rus­sians into Russia and drove out the barbarian hordes which in their turn inundated and collapsed Rome. You think the world is not connected one way or the other by various overts but that certainly was.

PC: No, I just thought I met you before.

Now, a thetan then — a thetan then is liable to certain dynamic actions and reactions. He's liable on the upper dynamics, one way or the other. He's liable to such a degree that after a while, he begins to believe it is not possible to have one or another of the dynamics. And believing that this is not possible, he drops them out of his curriculum. He drops them out of his activities entirely and he gets more and more separated, more and more individuated. He gets less and less part of the dynamics and more and more a part of some dislocated, aberrated condition that is him. And so science describes him today.

LRH: You think you've got it? You think that's right?

Its aberration is a matter of all the dynamics, not just one. It's a matter of the coexistence of beings. It's a matter of the agreements and the beliefs and the interests, the various havingnesses of all living things. And various things start fitting into the lineup and squaring around in the lineup and you eventually get a rehabilitation of dynamics.

PC: Yeah.

So, completely aside from processing, it would be very, very easy to do a great deal for thetans. You could do a great deal for a thetan, you see, just with an environment, just by the rehabilitation of the existing dynamics as they exist; just by realignment, reeducation and various other factors. It isn't a matter of just sitting him down in a chair and making him chew on his own mind, you know. You can go further than that. You can provide a condition or an operating circumstance where living is possible.

LRH: You sure there's something you shouldn't have told me?

But I haven't told you very much about a thetan but I've tried to bring before you that a thetan is not a negative, missing, first dynamic that is sort of on the seventh that sort of is out the window.

PC: No, that's all right.

You're dealing, today, with eight dynamics. And you were dealing, thou-sands of years ago, with eight dynamics. And just because those eight dynamics have gone different or gone wrong here or there is no reason they don't exist. And it's apparently true that the dynamics are rechangeable, more alignable, and so forth, right in themselves. And it is not true that living is totally aber­rative. Living could be rehabilitative as well as aberrative, you see.

LRH: You're sure there isn't anything else you want to tell me before we start this?

You've driven over into — on this subject of a thetan — you've been driven over into a (quote) "scientific viewpoint." You run into it all the time. You try to explain to people what the devil you're talking about and they don't know what you're talking about, see. They've bought the idea that man is an ani­mal and when he's dead, he's dead forever and all this mishmash philosophy exists out on the third dynamic right this minute.

PC: No.

And its continued existence is actually a libel and slander against the thetan, you see. It keeps him not-ised, it's some kind of a control slave mech­anism of some kind or another that exists as a huge cancer on the third and fourth dynamics. And gets up to a point where a thetan doesn't believe it's possible to live and you get more and more preclears. Only the preclears aren't well off and don't go on forward, you see, and so forth. They just get worse and worse and they're more and more difficult to process. And there's less of you to process them. Get how it goes? So, the existence of a thetan is the first thing that you have to establish in processing or on the dynamics.

LRH: You sure?

And you establish the existence of a thetan, you have a guy there, you see. And if you have a thetan established on the third dynamic, why, you have a third dynamic. And if you have the existence of a thetan established all up and down the line, why, you have a society in which a thetan can live. And so he doesn't have to keep getting fished out of the fireplace all the time, you know.

PC: Yeah.

In other words, there are conditions, there are aspects and so forth, to being a thetan (and thetans in general) that we haven't thought about very much. And a great deal of thought and discussion, and so forth, could be put in on these lines. What is an optimum third? What's an optimum fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth? What are these things? You see.

LRH: Well, you know what it is that you could tell me?

And certainly, we're an awful long way from dreaming up an optimum second. That's — we're a long way from that.

PC: No. I think that's — I would tell you everything — what's there.

Now, thetans — thetans are an all-dynamic situation, right?

LRH: You would?

Audience: Yes.

PC: Sure.

And some attention has to be given this subject on all dynamics. And unless you do that you get nowhere in processing because the end goal of processing is the rehabilitation of a thetan. So, the end product, of course, would be a good eight dynamics. Therefore the target is all eight dynamics, not just the first. Okay?

LRH: You're sure of that?

Audience: Yes.

PC: I'm pretty sure.

Thank you.

LRH: All right. You're pretty sure or real sure?

PC: Real sure, sir.

LRH: You're real sure?

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Okay. Now how do you feel about it? Any different?

PC: Yes, I feel better.

LRH: Feel a little better?

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Do you realize you could tell me most anything?

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Is that right?

PC: Sure.

LRH: All right. Okay. Now, I'm just going to ask you to get one idea, and then ask you to get another idea — old Rising Scale Processing. Okay?

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Still a good weapon. All right. Here we go. Now, the first idea I'm going to ask you is to get an idea that you couldn't ever possibly ever get a picture. Let's get that idea.

PC: Mm-hm.

LRH: Got that?

PC: Mm-hm.

LRH: Never!

PC: Yes, that's fine.

LRH: All right. Good. Now change that idea to "I can get beautiful, three-dimensional pictures."

PC: Yeah.

LRH: You didn't find that too easy to believe, did you?

PC: Well, I just had the concept of that.

LRH: Yeah.

PC: I could do it but not 100 percent sure.

LRH: Well, that first idea you got, was — that was pretty factual, wasn't it?

PC: Yes! Oh, that was real good.

LRH: Now, all right now. Let's get the second idea as factual as the first idea. Okay?

All right. All right. Here we go.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: All right, now you get the idea you couldn't possibly ever get a picture or see one.

PC: Mm-hm. Yes. That makes sense.

LRH: Got that? All right. Now, change that idea — that you could get beautiful three-dimensional pictures.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Was that a little easier?

PC: Bit easier but not as good as the first one.

LRH: Ah, that's right. That's right. All right, we got that one. All right. Here we go again. All right. Now, just get the idea: never, never, never under any circumstances would you ever be able to get a three-dimensional picture.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: All right. Good. Now, change that to, you can get beautiful three-dimensional pictures.

PC: Mm-hm.

LRH: All right. Now, could you get that idea better now?

PC: A bit better.

LRH: A little bit better?

PC: Yeah.

LRH: A tiny bit, all right.

PC: Yes, but still not as good as the back — first one.

LRH: Good enough. Good enough. All right. Now, let's get that first one again.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Just, boy, could I — never, just rrrrr — fog you know and ... Under no circumstances.

PC: Mm-hm. Okay.

LRH: All right. All right.

Very good. Now, let's get the idea that you can get beautiful three-dimensional pictures any time you want.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Good. All right. Now, is that idea just a little stronger that time?

PC: This first one is a bit weaker now.

LRH: Oh, it's weaker! Oh, all right. All right. Here we go. Here we go. Here we go again. Now get the idea that you'd never be able to get a three-dimensional picture.

PC: Yes!

LRH: All right.

Very good. All right. Now, let's get change on that now.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Get your next idea which is: very easy to get three-dimensional pictures.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: All right. Now, is that weaker still or stronger again?

PC: Well, the first one, it's now getting weaker.

LRH: Uh-huh.

PC: And the second one is getting a bit stronger.

LRH: That's-a-boy. That's-a-boy. Good. Now here we go again. Now, get the idea you'll just never be able, not in your whole life, not if you lived to be billions of years old, would you ever be able to get a three-dimensional picture.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Good. All right. Now get the idea: three-dimensional pictures, poof!

PC: Yeah.

LRH: All right. Now, is it still working thatthe first one's getting weaker?

PC: Yes, the first is pretty weak.

LRH: All right. And the second one is getting stronger?

PC: Yes.

LRH: All right. Good enough. Now, let's take another crack at it? Now, let's once more get the idea: never any first — three­dimensional pictures, never, never, never — never be able to get any.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: All right. Now, get the idea that you'll always be able to get three-dimensional pictures, that's the easiest thing you do.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: All right. How's that? Getting better now?

PC: Yes, I realize I got already a three-dimensional picture when I look at the environment.

LRH: Oh yes!

PC: Yeah.

LRH: You mean the environment is a three-dimensional picture?

PC: Sure.

LRH: Oh, all right, okay, yeah. Here we go again. All right. Now just get the idea that you'll just never be able to get a three-dimensional picture.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Good. Now get the idea that you — always able to get three-dimensional pictures, that's the one thing you can do.

PC: Mm-hm.

LRH: All right. Now how is it now?

PC: Half and half

LRH: Half and half. All right. Here we go. On some more. All right. Now get the idea that you'll never, never, never, no matter what I do ...

PC: Yeah.

LRH: ... you'll never be able to get three-dimensional pictures.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Good. All right. Now get the idea that not even I could stop you from getting a three-dimensional picture.

PC: Yes.

LRH: All right. Now how you doing?

PC: Well, it's still about half and half The first idea that — now that weak.

LRH: Mm-hm.

PC: And the second idea, that's stronger. It's about half and half

LRH: All right. Now, has it just been staying that way? Or is it getting better?

PC: The last two commands it seems pretty even.

LRH: Uh-huh. All right. Now, here we go again. Now, let's get the idea you'll just never, just never be able to get a three-dimensional picture.

PC: Yes.

LRH: Good. Now, get the idea — just always able to get three-dimensional pictures.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: All right. Now how was that one? Still even?

PC: No, the second one takes over now a bit.

LRH: Ah.

PC: Now a bit, a little bit stronger.

LRH: Ah! That-a-boy. That-a-boy. All right.

PC: A tiny bit.

LRH: Here we go. All right. Now get the idea now, you just never and have never been able to get three-dimensional pictures.

PC: Yep.

LRH: Good. Now, let's get the second idea: three-dimensional pictures, poof, they're the easiest things you do.

PC: Yes.

LRH: Good. Good. All right. Now, how was that one?

PC: The second one seems easier now.

LRH: Seems easier?

PC: More real ...

LRH: All right.

PC: ... than the first one.

LRH: Good enough. We're going to do this just two more times.

PC: Sure.

LRH: All right. Okay. Now, that all right with you just two more times?

PC: Yeah.

LRH: All right. Now, get the idea that you just have never been able to get three-dimensional pictures, it's utterly impossible.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Good. Now get the idea you can just always get them any time you want.

PC: That's fine.

LRH: All right. Very good. Now how you doing now?

PC: The first idea, it's very, very weak now.

LRH: Mm-hm.

PC: And the second idea is much more real to me.

LRH: All right. Very good. And we're going to do this one more time, okay?

PC: Yeah.

LRH: All right. Now, get the idea that you'll never be able to get three-dimensional pictures.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Good. All right. Now, get the idea that you can just always get three-dimensional pictures, you just don't know what anybody's talking about, of course you can get three-dimensional pictures.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: All right, how is that?

PC: Well, I think I can get one-dimensional pictures.

LRH: You think you can get one-dimensional pictures, huh?

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Well, all right. That's real good. That's the end of that particular process.

PC: Thanks. Yeah.

LRH: All right.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: All right. Now, we're going to run another process.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Is that all right with you?

PC: Sure.

LRH: All right. Now, I'm just giving you ideas now. All right. Now, we're going to take a look at that wall over there, see?

PC: Yeah.

LRH: And I'm going to ask you to get the idea — don't do this until I tell you to do it.

PC: Mm-hm.

LRH: I'm going to ask you to get the idea that you're going to put up a picture as big as that whole wall, beautiful and three-dimensional.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: And then I'm going to ask you to get the idea that if you did it, it'd spoil the game, so you're not going to do it. Okay?

PC: Yes.

LRH: All right. Here we go. All right. Now, get the idea that you could — you're going to put up a picture as big as that whole wall! See?

PC: Mm-hm.

LRH: Beautiful, three-dimensional. Get the idea of it.

PC: Yes.

LRH: All right. Now get the idea that would spoil the game if you did it, and don't do it.

PC: Yes.

LRH: All right, now what happened as you did that?

PC: That the idea to get a picture was very strong.

LRH: Mm-hm.

PC: I nearly had it — had — had it there.

LRH: All right. That's good. That's good. All right. Now let's do it again. Now get the idea that you're going to put up a picture the size of that whole wall there in three-dimensional.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: All right, now get the idea that would spoil the game if you did it, and don't do it.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: All right. What happened?

PC: Well, I — start already to see something.

LRH: Oh, all right. All right. Here we go. All right. Now, get the idea now you're going to put up a picture the size of that whole wall, three-dimensional, beautiful.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: All right. Now just say, "Well, that'd spoil the game," and stop it.

PC: Yes, that's right.

LRH: All right. Very good. Okay. Here we go again. Now get the idea you're going to put up a picture as big as that whole wall.

PC: Yes.

LRH: All right. Now say, "Oh! Oh! Oh! That would spoil the game," and don't do it.

PC: Yes.

LRH: All right. Now what did you get that time?

PC: Well, I got — got some forms there in the center.

LRH: Mm-hm. All right. Good. Let's go at it some more times, okay?

PC: Yeah.

LRH: All right. Now, you — get an idea that you just had this idea, you know ...

PC: Mm-hm.

LRH: ... that you just had the idea that you're going to put up a picture the size of that whole wall.

PC: Mm-hm.

LRH: All right. Just stop yourself now almost physically, stop yourself ...

PC: Yeah.

LRH: ... that would spoil the game.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Yeah, okay, that's right. Now, here we're going to do it about two more times, okay?

PC: Mm.

LRH: All right. Now get the idea there, you're going to put up a picture the size of that whole wall.

PC: Yes.

LRH: All right. Now get the idea: mm-hm, that would spoil the game, don't do it.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: All right. What did you get that last time?

PC: Well, a few green pictures, in the middle some — something — round thing there.

LRH: Yeah? All right. And we're going to try that one more time here. All right. Now get an idea that you're going to put up a picture the size of that whole wall.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: All right. Now get the idea: boy, that would spoil the game. I'm not going to do that.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Okay. All right. What did you see that time?

PC: Not much more, just about as the last time.

LRH: Just about the same?

PC: Yeah.

LRH: All right. That's good. Now, have you had any kind of a picture up there?

PC: Mm, yes.

LRH: You think your pictures are going to be any better?

PC: It would improve.

LRH: You think they could — there's some improvement possible? Huh?

PC: Yes, I think so.

LRH: You think so? All right. Well, that's the end of that particular process. All right?

PC: Yeah.

LRH: All right. Now, how do you feel right this minute?

PC: Oh, a very nice experiment. I liked it.

LRH: You liked that?

PC: Yeah.

LRH: All right. Now, here's the main thing that we're bucking right this minute, is you've got an emotional charge on something here that I want you to tell me about.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Yeah. What is it?

PC: ARC breaks.

LRH: Mm-hm. Where?

PC: The auditor.

LRH: Mm-hm.

PC: Overt acts?

LRH: Hm.

PC: Overt acts against the auditor.

LRH: Mm-hm. All right. Are you guilty of another one because you told me?

PC: No, I have a feeling it was the first ones.

LRH: All right. Okay. Is that what the charge is on?

PC: I don't think so, must be something else. LRH: All right. What is it on?

PC: Must be some kind of restimulation from the last process, some kind of plus randomity after running through a long stretch of minus randomity.

LRH: Mm-hm. Well, can you tell me more about it?

PC: Yes. While running Create on a terminal — a receiver ...

LRH: Mm-hm.

PC: ... while I have been wireless operator...

LRH: Mm-hm.

PC: ... and had pictures there of minus randomity of some dead planets there and nothing happening at all. Every ten years a bloody spaceship come by and was hitting the area .

LRH: Mm-hm.

PC: ... and after running through that one, suddenly start some plus randomity.

LRH: Mm-hm.

PC: But that did happen on Confronting.

LRH: Mm-hm.

PC: You know, Confronting.

LRH: Mm-hm.

PC: Nothing did actually happen on Create.

LRH: Right. Well, now, has anything been happening to your case on Confront?

PC: Yes, it did.

LRH: It did. Are you — were you running Confront today?

PC: Today, yes that's right.

LRH: You were. And was the thing starting to go back together again?

PC: Yes.

LRH: Mm-hm. And what auditing commands were you being run on?

PC: "What could you confront?"

LRH: Mm-hm.

PC: "What would you dislike confronting?"

LRH: That's right. And how was that working?

PC: It's worked very well.

LRH: It was working?

PC: I'm all over the place.

LRH: You just get all over the place ...

PC: Yes.

LRH: ... on this thing? All right. Now, you're talking about a three-dim — . Thank you.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Good. How do you feel about it now? Anything else you want to say about it?

PC: Nah.

LRH: Hm?

PC: I don't think so.

LRH: How do you feel about it now?

PC: I feel all right about it.

LRH: All right. Now, here's — here's a very interesting thing. I'm going to do another little experiment here with you, all right?

PC: Very good.

LRH: Okay. It works like this.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: You say you're all over the place.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: You evidently had something to do with space opera, huh?

PC: Yes, it looks like it.

LRH: Looks like it. Well, how do you think a space jockey feels about space?

PC: Hm! Bloody awful!

LRH: Pretty bad, huh?

PC: Mm-hm.

LRH: Well, how — how would you think if he — if he saw some space?

PC: I didn't get that.

LRH: What would you think if he saw some space?

PC: Well, he gets mad.

LRH: He'll get mad if he saw some space, huh? Well, good. What would be about the right amount of space?

PC: Well, from here to the E — to the moon.

LRH: That would be about the right amount, huh?

PC: Yes.

LRH: All right. Good. Tell me again now, what would be the right amount of space?

PC: Yes. Mm, well, from here to the moon.

LRH: All right. That's about the right amount.

PC: Yes!

LRH: All right. Okay. And once more, what would be about the right amount of space?

PC: Here to the next planet.

LRH: Go from here to the next planet?

PC: Yeah.

LRH: All right. Good. That would be the right amount of space?

PC: Yes, it would.

LRH: Yeah. Would that be better than the space in this room?

PC: Mm, actually, that where I would start counting space.

LRH: Mm-hm. Where would you? Out? Or in the room?

PC: Out.

LRH: Out?

PC: Yeah.

LRH: But not in the room?

PC: Well, you're losing the concept of space after looking at this amount of space. If you confront a little space ...

LRH: Not — not enough — we're not ...

PC: ... there is not much space there, that's right.

LRH: There's not very much space.

PC: That's what I say. That's right.

LRH: Well, let's take a look at it here. Let's just look around, just look around at the space here, just as space.

PC: Yes, it's space.

LRH: It is space.

PC: Yes, but very little.

LRH: Well, how about this much?

PC: Less.

LRH: Well, that's — that's ... Now is there a lot of danger in that little space? Not — not in the room, this little space? That much space, little cube of space?

PC: There's no danger in it, no.

LRH: It's not dangerous. What is it, uncomfortable?

PC: Not enough.

LRH: Can't go anyplace in it?

PC: That's right.

LRH: Is that what's the matter with it?

PC: Yes, not — not enough. You can't do anything with it.

LRH: You can't do anything with it. I get it. What's about the range of a good space gun?

PC: Seventy miles.

LRH: Well is that space?

PC: Yes, that's about space.

LRH: Yeah. Well, would safe space be more than seventy miles?

PC: Yes, this would.

LRH: Is that right?

PC: Yeah.

LRH: It's a fact, isn't it, huh? All right.

PC: Yes, it would.

LRH: Yeah, all right. Okay. Well, what would happen in that much space then?

PC: It's not safe, isn't it?

LRH: That's right. Okay. Now, I'm going to ask you this same question I was asking you.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Now, all right, what's a right amount of space?

PC: Well, I've got it mixed up with time now.

LRH: Mm-hm.

PC: It's the amount you can go in one year.

LRH: Ah-ha! All right. Very good. Very good. That would be safe, too, wouldn't it?

PC: Yeah.

LRH: All right. Okay. All right. And let's answer it again. What would be an all-right amount of space?

PC: Yes. Well, a circle around the su — around the Earth, up — around the moon.

LRH: Mm-hm. That would be the right amount?

PC: Yes.

LRH: All right, very good. But it would be safe?

PC: That's pretty safe.

LRH: Pretty safe?

PC: Yes.

LRH: Not really very though?

PC: No, but fairly safe.

LRH: Where would the gun be placed if it's not safe?

PC: Just in the center of that space.

LRH: Yeah, right in the center of it, huh? Well, what would that do, put you on the perimeter of the gun range?

PC: Ah, not in that amount of space, no.

LRH: No, that wouldn't.

PC: It's fairly safe.

LRH: Fairly safe.

PC: Yes.

LRH: All right, very good. All right. Now, I'm just going to ask you one more time here. What's an all-right amount of space?

PC: Ah, I don't mind if it's more. Up to Mars.

LRH: Up to Mars?

PC: Yeah.

LRH: All right. Very good. All right. That's a very satisfactory answer. How do you feel about this now? Feeling different?

PC: Yes, my tolerance with space did improve. The tolerance did increase.

LRH: It did improve, huh?

PC: Yes.

LRH: All right, now we're going to ask you another — that's the end of that process.

PC: Yes.

LRH: We're going to ask you an entirely different process here, for just a few questions if it's all right with you.

PC: Mm-hm.

LRH: All right. Now, how much space would be okay in a picture?

PC: I didn't quite get that.

LRH: Yeah. Now, how much space would be okay in a picture?

PC: Don't understand that.

LRH: Hm. I'm talking about a mental image picture ...

PC: Yeah.

LRH: ... a facsimile ...

PC: Hmm.

LRH: ... how much space would it be all right for it to have in it?

PC: Mm, it would be a fairly big picture.

LRH: That would be pretty big, wouldn't it? Huh? Would be pretty big. All right. All right. Do you have an invisible field usually? No pictures or something?

PC: I think so.

LRH: You think so?

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Close your eyes. All right, what are you looking at?

PC: Black with white.

LRH: Black with white. Where's the black?

PC: Oh, I think it's more or less a picture.

LRH: Yeah, of what?

PC: Of the sky with stars and ...

LRH: Oh, it is?

PC: Yes.

LRH: You think so? Oh, yeah. Now, can you see some stars in it?

PC: Yes.

LRH: Huh? All right, now just sort of pick some out and tell me their names.

PC: The picture dims down now.

LRH: Gone!

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Oh, come on. Well now — what — what are you looking at now?

PC: Getting more black.

LRH: It's getting more black? Is there a star at the other end of that space? You're just not looking out there far enough. Now, go on, look out the other end of that space there, and tell me the names of some of those stars in lingua spacia or whatever it is.

You see them?

PC: Centaura Marc, I think Centaura — I don't know ...

LRH: That's good. That's good. Fine. Give me another one.

PC: Jupiter.

LRH: All right. Very good. Very good. Give me another one.

PC: Vidio.

LRH: Very good. All right. All right. Now how are you doing now?

PC: I see a picture — a picture did come back.

LRH: Oh, it did, huh?

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Well, all right. All right. How do you feel about that? Did that scare you?

PC: Didn't get that.

LRH: Did it scare you? Frighten you?

PC: No. No. But, it wasn't very real.

LRH: It wasn't very real?

PC: Not too real.

LRH: No, not too real. All right, okay. Anybody telling you to make it real?

PC: No.

LRH: All right. Okay.

All right. Now let's look around this room and spot some spots in this room.

PC: Yes.

LRH: Good. Spot another one.

PC: Yes.

LRH: Good. Spot another one.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Good. Spot another one.

PC: Yes.

LRH: Good. Shut your eyes. All right, tell me the names of some of those stars.

PC: Leo.

LRH: Very good.

PC: Centaur.

LRH: Very good.

PC: Jupiter.

LRH: Very good. All right. Fine. Now, open up your eyes. Now spot some spots in this room.

PC: Yes.

LRH: Good. Another one.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Good. Another one.

PC: Yes.

LRH: Good. All right. That's fine. Now, how's — how's that make you feel?

PC: I feel easier now.

LRH: Easier?

PC: Yeah.

LRH: All right. Well, shut your eyes again. All right, now, have you still got that picture? Can you get it back? Still got it?

PC: Yes.

LRH: All right, now let's spot those stars again.

PC: Yes.

LRH: Good. Spot another one.

PC: Yes.

LRH: Good. Spot another one.

PC: Yes.

LRH: Good. All right, that's fine. All right now. Spot some spots in this room.

PC: Yes.

LRH: Good. Another one.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Good. Another one.

PC: Yes.

LRH: Good. All right, that's fine. Does that give you a different sensation?

PC: The spots?

LRH: You have a different feeling about this now?

PC: Much easier. Much more comfortable. Not as restimulated as before.

LRH: Yeah. What do you suppose that's all about? Did you ever have a nightmare?

PC: Didn't get that?

LRH: Did you ever have a nightmare?

PC: Not very often. Sometime, yes.

LRH: How's it feel?

PC: Ah, I'm pretty well in control of this nightmare, sometimes I just turn around, just look at it, just enjoy them.

LRH: You do?

PC: Yes.

LRH: Did you ever have a nightmare you felt uncomfortable in, just like that?

PC: But that's a very, very long while ago.

LRH: A very long time ago?

PC: Yes.

LRH: But was it the same discomfort that you were sitting in right here?

PC: Yes.

LRH: Yeah. How long ago was that?

PC: Ah, it was before I know about Scientology.

LRH: Yeah, that was quite a while ago?

PC: Yes, years ago.

LRH: Years ago?

PC: Mm-hm.

LRH: All right. Did you decide you never wanted that one back again?

PC: Mm. No, I don't think so.

LRH: Well, what was your reaction to that nightmare?

PC: It didn't affect me very much.

LRH: You made sure of that?

PC: Yes.

LRH: All right. Is there any similarity between that nightmare you had and the way you felt when you came into this session?

PC: I would say yes.

LRH: You would say yes?

PC: That's — that's the way you feel.

LRH: All right. All right.

PC: Just a bit nervous and a bit out of control.

LRH: Hm. Hm. All right. All right. Now, what do you ordinarily do to people in space?

PC: Kill them.

LRH: You kill them. Yeah. All right. All right. How many do you suppose you killed?

PC: Mmm. Must be the thousands.

LRH: All right.

PC: Seventeen thousand seventy-nine, something like that.

LRH: Yeah? All right. And how many times did you refuse to get killed?

PC: Hm. Hm. I can't recall any.

LRH: You can't recall ever refusing to get killed?

PC: Might be one.

LRH: Maybe once, huh?

PC: I'm not too sure about if I have been killed then.

LRH: Yeah. All right. Okay. All right. Now what do you make this out — what do you think about all this now?

PC: Well, I feel much easier about it. I did have a look at a few things ...

LRH: Mm-hm.

PC: ... which make sense.

LRH: Mm-hm. Made some sense?

PC: Yes, did clear up a lot of things.

LRH: Mm-hm. What do you suppose it did to the pictures these guys had, the 17,000 people you killed there at least? What do you suppose it did to their pictures?

PC: Well, we'll fix that. LRH: Good. Fix that. Suppose they ever had two-dimensional pictures afterwards or ... ?

PC: It's very unlikely.

LRH: What do you think — what do you think they would have had afterwards?

PC: Just wouldn't get any pictures. LRH: They wouldn't!

PC: No.

LRH: Why not?

PC: Because you did use his picture to destroy such things.

LRH: Yeah, well how did you do that?

PC: Well, by just giving them a nice implant.

LRH: Mm-hm. All right. And what would that do to their pictures?

PC: Just wouldn't get any.

LRH: They just wouldn't, huh?

PC: No.

LRH: All right.

PC: Or, this fear.

LRH: All right. Have you been able to get pictures?

PC: How you mean this question?

LRH: Oh, you came up with the goal of the session, you said you'd like to get better pictures.

PC: Yes. I get better pictures.

LRH: Yeah, but does fixing up other people's pictures have anything to do with your pictures?

PC: Hm. Never looked at that one.

LRH: Never did?

PC: No.

LRH: All right. You look at it right now.

PC: Yes, I think so. Might be possible.

LRH: Might be possible?

PC: Yes.

LRH: Mm-hm. All right. Well, you understand, I'm not telling you it's necessarily wrong or you've done anything wrong, I'm not being cen — .

PC: No. That's all right.

LRH: All right. Now, that made you feel uncomfortable again, didn't it?

PC: Yes, a bit.

LRH: Just a little bit?

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Do you realize I'm not accusing you?

PC: Oh, that's quite all right. That's — I know what's ...

LRH: You say it's quite all right. Well do you know I'm not accusing you of anything?

PC: I know that.

LRH: All right. Okay. Now let's take a look at all this again of fixing up people's pictures and that sort of thing, and then let's just take a look at it.

PC: Mm-hm.

LRH: Did you?

PC: Yes.

LRH: All right. Now, get a look at refusing to have your pictures fixed up the same way.

PC: Yes.

LRH: Good. Now get a — something there? All right. Get the idea of fixing up their pictures.

PC: Yes.

LRH: All right. Get your own refusal to have yours fixed up that way.

PC: Yes.

LRH: Good. Get the idea of fixing up their pictures.

PC: Yes.

LRH: Good. Get your own refusal to have yours fixed up that way.

PC: Yes.

LRH: Good. Now get the idea of fixing up their pictures.

PC: Yes.

LRH: All right. Get your own refusal to have yours messed up.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: All right. How do you feel about that?

PC: Well, they did fix me up, too.

LRH: Oh, they fixed you up, too?

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Is there any change going on as I ask you to do that?

PC: Yes. I realize that I did do most of this, fixing other people's pictures.

LRH: Mm-hm. All right.

PC: But later on, they do the same with me.

LRH: All right. All right. Overt — motivator sequence, is that what this is?

PC: Yes. Looks like it.

LRH: Looks like it?

PC: Yes.

LRH: What do you think about this now?

PC: It might be the trouble with my pictures, I reckon.

LRH: Hm? You think so?

PC: Yes.

LRH: All right. Now, what's an auditor doing with your pictures?

PC: Doesn't pay much attention to it.

LRH: Yeah, but what does an auditor do with pictures?

PC: What he does do with pictures? Hm. What an auditor do with pictures?

LRH: Yeah, what does an auditor do with pictures?

PC: Tries to turn them on.

LRH: Yeah. Yeah. Does he ever try to turn them off?

PC: No.

LRH: No?

PC: No.

LRH: All right. Now, what do you as an auditor try to do with pictures?

PC: Turn them on.

LRH: Good. And what do you usually do with them?

PC: I just turn them on more and more.

LRH: Is that so?

PC: Yes.

LRH: As an auditor you turn on the pictures more and more?

PC: Yes.

LRH: Is that right?

PC: Yes, that's right.

LRH: All right. How about turning them off?

PC: Well, I bring them more or less under the control of the preclear.

LRH: Yeah.

PC: Instead of turning them on.

LRH: Ah, yeah, yeah — that's — that's a textbook answer. Come on.

PC: No! Looks that's what I'm doing.

LRH: Is that right?

PC: That's right! Right.

LRH: All right. Okay. All right. I'll stop invalidating the pc ...

PC: No, that's ...

LRH: That's — that's ... All right. Now, I want you to get the idea of just tearing up somebody's pictures — here's another process. Okay?

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Just get the idea of tearing up somebody's pictures and throwing them away.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Good. Now, get the idea of turning them on — somebody else's pictures.

PC: Yes.

LRH: Good. Now get the idea of tearing up somebody's pictures and throwing them away.

PC: Yes.

LRH: Good. Now get the idea of just turning somebody's pictures on, just, wham!

PC: Mm-hm.

LRH: Good. Now get the idea of tearing up somebody's pictures and throwing them away.

PC: Mm-hm.

LRH: All right. Very good. What you got?

PC: It's very hard the second command.

LRH: All right. What's the command you just did there?

PC: Turn on somebody's pictures and then throw them away.

LRH: All right. Okay. That's all right. Now, you listen to my auditing command.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: You hear me now?

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Listen to my auditing command now and don't start blinking. I'm not going to beat you, not right now. Okay, now you listen.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Completely aside from anybody or anything in the world ...

PC: Yeah.

LRH: ... you just get one idea.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: And that is taking somebody's pictures and tearing them all up and throwing them away.

PC: Yes.

LRH: Got that?

PC: Yeah.

LRH: All right. Now, completely aside from that, and forgetting all about that one, just skip that one.

PC: Mm-hm.

LRH: Get this idea.

PC: Mm-hm.

LRH: Entirely different idea.

PC: Mm-hm.

LRH: Okay?

PC: Yeah.

LRH: And that is turning somebody's pictures on just so they're walking around all the time in solid walls of pictures.

PC: Yes.

LRH: All right. Good. Now what do you think about those two?

PC: The last one was easier to do.

LRH: That was easier?

PC: Yes.

LRH: All right. Very good. Very good. Here we go again now. Get the idea of taking somebody's pictures and tearing them all up and throwing them away.

PC: Mm-hm.

LRH: Good. All right. Got that now?

PC: Yes.

LRH: Do you feel I scolded you?

PC: No.

LRH: You sure?

PC: Yeah, I'm sure.

LRH: All right. You just telling me that defensively?

PC: No.

LRH: You can tell me anything you want.

PC: Yes, that's — that's all right.

LRH: Okay. All right. Now give me the other one. Get the idea of making somebody

walk around in pictures that are practically solid walls.

PC: Yes.

LRH: Good. All right. Now, of those two ideas which is easiest?

PC: The last one.

LRH: The last one?

PC: Yes.

LRH: All right. Now, here we go again. Get the idea — well, maybe if tearing them up isn't quite the right command, maybe it's gun them down or something?

PC: Ah, that — that would be easier, might be.

LRH: That would be easier?

PC: Yeah.

LRH: All right. Let's get the idea of going, rrrrrr, smearing everybody's pictures all up so they won't have pictures.

PC: Mm-hm.

LRH: Did you do that?

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Well, that was real easy. Well, let's do that one again.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Now get the idea of going, rrrrrr, with something and knocking everybody's pictures out.

PC: Yes, that's much easier.

LRH: Oh, that's much easier. All right. Get the idea of doing it again.

PC: Yes.

LRH: Good. Get the idea of doing it again.

PC: Mm-hm.

LRH: Good. Get the idea of doing it again.

PC: Mm-hm.

LRH: Good. What happened that time?

PC: Bloody gun didn't go off

LRH: All right. Well, let's do it again. Allright. Let's do it again now.

PC: Yes.

LRH: Good. Let's do it again.

PC: Yes.

LRH: All right. Let's just get an idea of just gunning them in such a way that their pictures all go boom! Come on, do it again.

PC: Yes.

LRH: Good. Was that easy?

PC: Yes.

LRH: Has it gotten easy again, now, huh?

PC: Yes.

LRH: Huh? Ah.

PC: I did have — I did have this other gun which didn't work, you see, then I had to find some other gun.

LRH: Oh, you did, huh?

PC: Yes.

LRH: All right.

PC: Because it doesn't work.

LRH: It doesn't work worth a nickel.

PC: No.

LRH: All right.

PC: A failure there.

LRH: Yeah, all right. All right. Now, let's get the reverse idea ...

PC: Mm-hm.

LRH: ... now, of making somebody walk around in pictures that are just feet thick, just tremendous heavy pictures.

PC: Yes.

LRH: All right. Is that the same as it was before or has that gotten different?

PC: That's fairly easy, too.

LRH: That's fairly easy, too?

PC: Yes.

LRH: Both of these are fairly easy?

PC: Yes.

LRH: All right, now which is the best action between these two actions?

PC: Best action for the people concerned or...?

LRH: Yeah. The people concerned.

PC: Rather no pictures than too solid ones.

LRH: Better no pictures than solid ones?

PC: Yes, yes.

LRH: All right. Fine. Good. All right. You feel I'll be critical of your answer?

PC: No, that's all right.

LRH: All right. Is that all right?

PC: Sure.

LRH: Okay. All right. Now how do you feel about this?

PC: I feel more confident in getting pictures.

LRH: You do?

PC: Yes.

LRH: All right. Do you think we have in any way accomplished the goal of this session?

PC: Fifty percent.

LRH: You think we did something ...

PC: Yes, I think so, sure.

LRH: ... about it?

PC: Sure.

LRH: We have a win?

PC: Yes, we have.

LRH: It wasn't a total loss?

PC: No. It wasn't a total loss.

LRH: All right. You feel a little bit better about it now?

PC: Yes. I feel much better about it.

LRH: All right. Just one more time then, we're going to do one more auditing command. Okay? Before we close this session.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: All right. Refuse to put a picture on that wall over there.

PC: Yes.

LRH: What happened?

PC: I didn't put one there.

LRH: All right. Good. Put a picture over on the wall over there!

PC: Yes.

LRH: All right. That work a little better, huh?

PC: Yes.

LRH: What was it a picture of?

PC: I did see kind of a sun.

LRH: Yeah.

PC: And about half of a planet.

LRH: Yeah. That wasn't too bad then?

PC: No.

LRH. Was that better?

PC: Yes.

LRH: Was there any space in it?

PC: Yes, was space in it, plenty.

LRH: Ah, there was?

PC: Plenty of space.

LRH: Plenty of space. All right, now how do you feel about this, now?

PC: Well, I'm more easy about getting pictures.

LRH: You think you're easier about it?

PC: Yes.

LRH: Now, have I just beaten you into it, or did you ... ?

PC: Oh, no, no, no, you could have pushed harder.

LRH: I could have, huh?

PC: Yes, you could have.11E LRH: All right. Okay. You're okay then?

PC: I'm very all right.

LRH: You have anything you'd care to say before we end this session.

PC: Yes. Thank you.

LRH: All right. Very good. End of session.

PC: Thank you.

LRH: You betcha.

[to audience] Okay, any technical errors that you see and imitate are imitated at your peril.

Okay, that's it, see you tomorrow night.

Audience: Thank you, Ron.