Yes?

Male voice: I can mock up anything and have it not be interfered by anything. . .

Mm-hm.

Male voice:. . . with respect to myself.

Mm-hm.

Male voice: But until just a few days ago if I tried to get it with respect to the body, it was completely intolerable. Now, I have since understood, now, that getting it near the body or even located with respect to it — doesn't have to be near or far — that I discovered that the body universe is something in itself, and tolerating masses in that universe is different than tolerating them from me. I can mock up anything.

What's he talking about? What is he talking about?

Audience: (various responses)

I think you've got proximities going here. I think you were having — you were doing mock-ups in a favorite piece of space, someplace.

Male voice: Yeah.

And the second you cracked out of that sector, you got in trouble.

Male voice: Yes, but I can still get them there and think clearly with them.

Well, fine. That's why we have them put before the body, behind the body, above the body, below the body . . .

Male voice: Yes, I know. This is very excellent.

. . . right and left of the body.

It ruins you, I bet.

Male voice: Yes.

All right.

Now you see, people have been asking me, "Why do you do that? Why do you do that?" We've got a wonderful example. You can do it, eventually.

Male voice: Yeah, I know.

You must have had a favorite zone. You probably had some little piece of the home universe you were still nursing.

Male voice: Well, I find this very valuable for mocking up things.

I don't know that it's valuable. I think it's for the birds — invalidation. Hasn't your auditor told you that?

Male voice: No, but I told him.

And then your auditor sat there and said, "Yes, yes," and was very agreeable.

Male voice: No, well I quit doing it because it didn't follow any command, and I find it very beneficial to follow a command.

God, it is good in auditing to follow . . .

Male voice: I mean, this is . . .

This is — this is a common — a common thing. You're not a leopard with green spots.

Male voice: No, I didn't think so.

Very common.

Male voice: My question is this — now, let me get it straight. That I find that it is useful for purposes of thinking that I have used, I can mock these up so far from me in some special sector of space somewhere.

Sure.

Male voice: Where other people, apparently unable to do this, didn't do it, or couldn't think it straight.

All right. All right. All right.

Male voice: But on the other hand, I would make a wreck out of my body because I was so — havingness for the body — because I couldn't tolerate a mass near to the body, or within something like several light-years or something.

It's fascinating. That's fascinating. That's fascinating. Well, does your auditor tell you how far in front of the body you should mock it up?

Male voice: No.

Well, all right.

Male voice: No, he's very good about it.

Has your auditor given you an idea of a gradient approach to that?

Male voice: Well, it's coming along fine.

Yeah, it's coming along fine.

Male voice: And he does very well, and I'm doing it and it kills me but. . .

What are you doing, using physical universe space to mock them up in, around the body?

Male voice: I was at first. It was totally awful.

I'll bet that — I'll bet that was a pip.

Male voice: It was. It. . .

I'll bet that was a killer.

Male voice: Yes.

You put a mock-up out without owning or taking responsibility for any of the space you put it in, you'll have a picnic, every time.

Male voice: It's murder.

Does that answer any part of your question? Does that clarify it?

Male voice: No.

You haven't answered anything yet.

Male voice: No. This is my point: It seems to me like there's three tolerances of a mass. One is with respect to the guy, and one is located with respect to the body, which would be just the body space.

Four tolerances.

Male voice: And one with respect to the physical universe which is . . .

Four.

Male voice: Well, I got three so far. . .

Four mass tolerances.

Male voice: That's real to me.

Thetan, mind, body, physical universe.

Male voice: I don't get the one with regard — seems to me if it's so far from himself, that would be a picture in your mind.

Aahh, aahh! You know in comic strips, where they have these electric light bulbs that appear . . .

Male voice: Yeah.

. . . above people when they get the idea? I just got one, just now. I see what this is all about. We're just going to let you find that one out. Yeah, there's something there to find out, for you.

Yes?

Male voice: It's this business of playing games with these mock-ups: Sometimes, you know, you set them out there, and after a while you feel darn certain you've sent — set them out there, and you keep them from going away and so forth, but the auditor asks you that question. Well, last week . . .

What did the auditor ask you?

Male voice: Well, just if you're keeping them from going away.

Yeah, all right.

Male voice: All right. Anyhow, I knew that they weren't going away, and I felt I was doing it, so I found some energy masses, hell and gone out — oh, I don't know — half a mile, three quarters of a mile, something like that. So I started sticking them in there.

Mm-hm.

Male voice: Well, I got a good certainty that I was making those things from not going away, holding still and making — and I got a resistance to making them solid, and it was a lot of fun.

Yeah.

Male voice: Found afterwards they dropped off the bottom of the E-Meter, but I still had a lot of fun.

I'm sure, I'm sure. That's all right. I'm not even going to comment on that.

Male voice: Okay. That's the answer.

Second male voice: You mock up an object as itself. The object that's being mocked up is null.

Right.

Second male voice: Then I move in close proximity to the body and it discharges like mad.

Well, what do you think would happen?

Second male voice: Well, as it discharges . . .

What are you reading? What are you reading? What's the E-Meter read?

Second male voice: Body resistance.

Ah.

Second male voice: The density of. . .

Yeah, and don't you suppose that a mock-up can alter that?

Second male voice: If a mock-up is there, makes a difference to it as opposed to being there.

Well?

Second male voice: I don't quite understand this.

You don't?

Second male voice: No.

Did you ever run Matched Terminals?

Second male voice: Yes.

Did you ever see the discharge between these terminals?

Second male voice: Yes.

Well, don't you suppose there's some little discharge between the mock-up and the body or something of this sort going on?

Second male voice: Yes, I realize that, but I don't see what polarity a mock-up has in relation to a body that will make a discharge.

You're going to have to find this out, too. I'm not being very informative today, am I?

Male voice: This is a general one. In regard to auditing on the outside, preclears who come to you, we have this procedure worked out now. It's sort of a whole-hog deal. You start out and you work toward Clear, and the end goal is Clear. Now the question is, suppose the guy just comes for a week and that's all he had — all the vacation he has or something. . .

I'm so glad you are asking this question.

Male voice: And you get him maybe three quarters of the way or...

You are so right in asking me this question.

Male voice: Is there a liability to this or...

This is a nice question, and one that I intended to cover in a lecture and so forth, and so far I hadn't put my finger on it, and we hadn't had it. And I'll give you the dope right now. This is the subject of a considerable amount of research: whether or not you should run your Clear Procedure whole-hog, straight out, against a pc that came in to get his hangnails cleared up, see, or a pc that just came in — whether or not that you should run this. We can do so many things; we have so many processes.

Now, we dropped back, by the way, to SCS and Connectedness suddenly and abruptly from CCHs, for one reason only: CCH belongs below the point where we are getting most of our pcs. It's way downstairs. Furthermore, run on a person in fairly good shape, it gives a variable result.

Say the auditor feels good one day and CCH works, and he doesn't feel good the next day and it doesn't work. Got it? So we drop back with a thud, back to one we knew worked whether or not the auditor was doped off or — what he was doing — he could still get a good gain, results and positive control by dropping back to this one for which we had, actually, hundreds of case histories done in the HGC. And we found out everybody found it was very successful, and everybody could use it. So here was a case of compromising with the reality that other people could use this. All right.

That was one burning question that got answered in this thing. We laid aside better processes, mind you, in order to pick up a constancy of gain. All right.

Now, it's with a sigh that we have to do the same thing, if we are really auditing a preclear, to get the best gain. Because if we are really going flat out to produce the highest possible gain in the number of hours we have to process him, we will use Intensive Procedure, and unfortunately just forgo the pleasures of tremendous numbers of processes that were lots of fun to run. Because test after test has demonstrated this horrible fact: that a preclear run only a third of a way to Clear on this Intensive Procedure as you are doing it, makes a higher profile gain, makes a higher IQ gain, and gets more psychosomatic change than one run on any other process we know about, except a fluky process called Rising Scale which actually belongs above the point.

Now, the auditor can change the preclear's postulates in Rising Scale, and so alter him all over the place, even though the preclear can't postulate. And we can do all sorts of weird things with Rising Scale Processes. We have neglected them. We have neglected them. We got interested in mass phenomena and so on. But Rising Scale is run on the buttons of the Chart of Attitudes — are really a wild one. Sometimes we don't do anything with it, sometimes we shoot the moon with it. It's always one to keep in mind.

Rising Scale is something an auditor can tailor-make. He can say, "Get the idea you're sick. Can you do that?"

And the fellow says, "Yes."

"Get the idea you're well. Did you do that?"

"No," the fellow says, "I could only get the idea I was not quite so sick." And you gradually work him up to the idea of where he can tolerate the postulate. And you're doing postulate erasures. And you can actually change a case around without changing his case level, with Rising Scale. So this, then, becomes highly admissible as a process for patch-ups, assists or anything else, but doesn't become admissible on an intensive if you're really going to do most for the preclear.

Therefore, time after time after time, now, I have practically beaten an auditor — who knew very well that something else was the best thing to run — into running control of the preclear, graduated at once into mock-ups: Keep It from Going Away, Hold It Still, Make It More Solid. Even though the preclear was just having the awfulest time — a foggy field, flubbing, unable to do it, failures, having to be coached carefully — guys that were way down below the bottom rung. And we still made more profile gain and more IQ gain.

And it doesn't much matter whether we finish it up or not. There's some kind of a halfway point. I don't know where the point is, exactly, but after he passes this point, he will continue to get clearer and clearer and clearer. And may even, after six or eight months, get Clear when you only ran him for about twenty-five hours on this Intensive Procedure that you're using, which is quite remarkable. You get him up to a certain level, then.

Now I wanted — I'm very glad you asked that question because you don't have to clear him to get there. You know, you really are not clearing him, anyhow. Clearing is a bystop on the road toward OT. And you know you have to process toward OT to get him to Clear. You didn't even go toward Clear.

We have a whole series of processes that process directly at Clear that don't get there. In other words you, in this case, have to go to San Francisco to get to Omaha. See, then he never runs into the arrival idea. You may be having a little difficulty in this Unit right here at this time with one or two cases who are trying to arrive at Clear. Well, just have them skip it entirely, get it out of the road and have them try to arrive at OT.

That's a very interesting question you asked there, thank you.

Male voice: Thank you.

Second male voice: If you're running a preclear on mock-up processes, do you think it would be advisable to find — if the preclear is doing the process very easily, you know, can get good mock-ups and everything — do you think it would be advisable to find something that gives him a bit of difficulty so that both you and the preclear can work together?

No.

Second male voice: No?

No. The gain you are looking for is an improvement in his ability to handle what he can handle. And any attempt to go into significant activities has now been pretty well damped out and proven. By the way, this is quite new; this is only in the last ten days that a definite decision has been made in this.

Second male voice: I didn't mean significances. I mean if above a certain . . .

You said "difficulties."

Second male voice: Yes.

And the way you get difficulties is significances.

Second male voice: All right. Check, check.

Got it?

Yes?

Male voice: The question of reading nulls, you ask the preclear to mock something up and keep it from going away and the needle starts to slow or is — continues to slowly swing up.

Correct.

Male voice: He then says, "Yes." The needle at that point may or may not jump off after he said yes. But you say to him, "Did you keep it from going away?" He says, "Yes," and the needle kicks, rapidly comes back. You say, "Thank you" and the needle kicks. In other words, apart from the fact. . .

I'd certainly research this preclear like mad.

Male voice: Yeah, well now . . .

Do you know why I would? You're picking this up out of the lie phenomena I mentioned in the lecture, aren't you?

Male voice: That's right. But we have already hit this confusion. Do you call that a null or don't you?

No, that is not a null, definitely.

Second male voice: How long do you persist on clearing the field until you go on to the other?

You can persist too long, that's for sure.

Second male voice: You keep beating the thing and beating the thing and...

You can certainly go too far. Yes, you can certainly go too far. I think — I'm trying to work out a better one for this. You've got — the only difficulties anybody's having is with fields and so on. And the better one that I've — in testing conditionally, not necessarily a better one — is to clear it up to a point where he can get mock-ups and actually see them and recognize them and handle them, you see — just clear it up that far. And then do this, handle them you know, and keep them from going away, and hold them still, and make them more solid and so forth, for a while. And then maybe crack at the field again, see? And then go into clearing the field some more. And that's the one that's being tested at this moment. That's the best answer I can give you.

Second male voice: Thank you.

You bet.

Yes, madam?

Female voice: I have a field behind the body where I keep pictures hidden from myself.

All right.

Female voice: Now, is it going to be quicker to clear up this field or simply run Creative Processing and get to OT?

Run what?

Female voice: Creative Processing. Just, you know, mock it up and keep it from going away . . .

It'll clean up. You see, both things clean up a field. Mocking up a chunk of field and pushing it into the body is actually no real difference from mocking up something and keeping it from going away.

Female voice: Yeah.

It's just another method of keeping it from going away, don't you see?

Female voice: Yeah. Well, then you think it'll be a shorter route simply to run the mock-up and keep it from going away than it would be to mess around with the field?

You can see it in front, can't you?

Female voice: Certainly.

Above?

Female voice: Yeah.

Below, to the right and left, and you just can't see it in back?

Female voice: I can see it in back; I just have a field back there.

Oh, so what? One of these fine days, why, you'll mock up a woman or something or other, and it's just null all the way around, and all of a sudden the sky will cave in. That I can tell you, for sure. Because all that field is doing is restraining a visibility on some type of mock-up. It'll cave in eventually, whether you do anything about it or not.

Female voice: Well, it's all right with me.

Sure. The monitoring factor here is what's the shortest route?

Female voice: Well, that's what I say.

I haven't found, really, what is the shortest route, but any route we've approached so far has been successful. And, very discouraging, on several tests that were made, we got answers in favor of clearing the field, and answers in favor of simply keeping mock-ups from going away, see? Wow.

Yes?

Male voice: Where would you classify Viewpoint and Consideration Straightwire on the gradient scale of processing?

Well, it's pretty low. It'll run on processes way downstairs. But here the auditor has a tremendous influence upon the bank. It really doesn't return to the preclear as much determinism as it should, but it is giving him a familiarity.

Male voice: Classified low.

Yeah, low. Yeah.

Male voice: Mm-hm. Fine.

Second male voice: In Creative Processing we do the six sides from the body. Why do we neglect the space of the body itself?

Well now, just a moment. Who told you "from the body"?

Second male voice: In front of the body.

Yeah, in front of the body, go on. You do six sides. In front of the body . . .

Second male voice: To the right side of the body . . .

Right.

Second male voice:... to the left, back, up and down.

Right.

Second male voice: From the body.

What's your question?

Second male voice: This leaves a space between those various areas. I'm kind of curious about getting in there and doing some work.

Audience: (various responses)

Second male voice: From my body I mock up to the front, to the rear.

That's what you said, from your body.

Second male voice: Right.

Why?

Second male voice: Because that's the space in front of my body.

Yeah, but why are you doing it from your body?

Second male voice: No, that's where I'm putting them.

Yeah.

Second male voice: I'm not doing it from any particular location.

Yeah.

Second male voice: My question is that after — we're working in a space . . .

Right.

Second male voice:. . . which encloses this body.

Yeah.

Second male voice: Why do we neglect that space? Why don't we put mock-ups in there too?

Audience: Why don't we put one there? That's right.

Yeah, but how far in front of that body?

Second male voice: Right at it, on the surface of it.

Well, you don't have to. You can put it eight miles out there, if you want to.

Second male voice: Right. And I can go on out for quite a distance.

As far as the neglecting of the space is concerned, you will find out that space is created . . .

Second male voice: Yeah.

. . . with a familiarity. A guy gradually takes over the space and begins to create it. And so far, an overt attempt to get spatial about the body, or actually construct space or handle space so that we can do something with the space, have all met with retardations. They are — that is a longer route. We found out it happens anyway.

All right, you say, "Now, why don't we just jump in and handle the space so he doesn't have space trouble, and then sail on from there?" Well now, it's been attempted, and it's only the research tests that were made on this that tell us. I mean, there isn't any other reason why — there is no real reason why we can't do this, don't you see, beyond this fact, and that is that tests made on it showed it to be a longer and more abstruse route.

Yes?

Second male voice: My point is that if the command should be changed to "in front of the center point of that body," then you would be using all of the space available. Because it's a no-dimension point in the center, you'll be doing mock-ups in all directions from a point, rather than from a body. No?

No. Might have some virtue, but. . .

Second male voice: I know some mock-ups do infringe on the body's space.

Oh, but for sure.

Second male voice: But. . .

Of course, that's what you're trying to do.

Second male voice: Guess so.

Right.

Second male voice: . . . figured any significance . . .

Right. Right. You do infringe on the body's space, until you can do so with complete aplomb. Of course, every thetan is invading the privacy of a body. And his difficulty with interpersonal relations is because he will not invade the privacy of other bodies. So obviously, we have him unwilling to do much about the body's space, unwilling to do much about other bodies' spaces, and it comes about in the field of familiarity. It's a gradient scale of familiarity that he runs into. As you put up a mock-up you, of course, have some space. Does that answer it in any way?

Second male voice: Yeah, it does.

All right.

Yes?

Female voice: I was trying to put my mock-ups in agreed-upon time, and I wonder if you're running into that with pcs. Might end up the agreed-upon time would be a component of exteriorization or something. In other words, I was trying to have the mock-up here and now with my eyes shut, you know? "Why aren't the walls there?" I'd say. Well. . .

Nobody asked you to do that.

Female voice: Nobody asked me to, I know.

That's right.

Female voice: That's — I promptly . . .

Her auditor had better notice this.

Female voice: Well, I must have decided that in some old auditing session.

Yeah. Well, it's just — it's just something more.

Female voice: Uh-huh.

We had a pc that was showing no gain, no gain, no gain, and all of a sudden went boom on one of these fields.

Female voice: I'm not sure what I said was true.

Yeah, I know, but I just — let me tell you this story. And this was HGC last week. All of a sudden, big field, big field you know, but pc was picking up objects, null objects, null objects, null objects. And all of a sudden this whole field went crash — thud, boom. He was picking up items in a room in France in the sixteenth century, carefully picking up item after item in that room. And of course, as he kept these from going away, he eventually built it up to a point of where he kept the whole room from going away, and the whole field blew — thud! You see that? So if a person concentrated on putting them all in present time, you might have a tendency not to blow the existing field. See that? That could be a slowdown, simply by an arbitrary interposition of a new idea.

Second female voice: Last year I was doing the Then and Now Solids and I was able to get very brilliant 3-D pictures.

Right.

Second female voice: Now I have a black field. But I just have a feeling that there — / know there are facsimiles there, sort of sneaking up on me. But I'm still working on clearing my field. I have a feeling that I can get mock-ups.

But nobody's asked you to?

Second female voice: No.

Well. . .

Second female voice: I was just wondering whether I should . . .

It probably needs that to be done at the moment, and the only sin that could be done is not to ask you sooner or later — sooner, preferably — if you can get a mock-up.

Second female voice: Well I have very little certainty about it now, whether I can get a mock-up.

You'll find out that many times a bank is very bright, and then turns black, and then goes gray, and odd things happen. A person who has brilliant mock-ups can very easily and suddenly find himself with a totally black field. And the process that turned it black, if run a little bit further, turns it on bright again. And you probably have hit some sort of an interim thing.

That's all the time we have anything for. Does that answer your question in any way?

Second female voice: Mm-hm.

All right. Thank you very much.