Русская версия

Search document title:
Content search 1 (fast):
Content search 2:
ENGLISH DOCS FOR THIS DATE- Appendix I. Booklet 18 - Entities (Complete) (HCL-18a) - L520310e | Сравнить
- Entities (Demo Cont.) (HCL-18) - L520310d | Сравнить
- Main and Sub-Theta Line (HOM-2, TTT-2, HCL-19b) - L520310g | Сравнить
- Organization of Data (HOM-1, TTT-1, HCL-19a) - L520310f | Сравнить
- Principal Incidents on the Theta Line (HOM-4, TTT-4, HCL-20b) - L520310i | Сравнить
- Running Effort and Counter-Effort (HCL-17) - L520310b | Сравнить
- Success of Dianetics (HCL-17a) - L520310c | Сравнить
- Theta and Genetic Lines of Earth (HOM-3, TTT-3, HCL-20a) - L520310h | Сравнить
- Training Auditors - the Anatomy of FAC One (HCL-16) - L520310a | Сравнить

RUSSIAN DOCS FOR THIS DATE- История Линии Тэты (КСПВ 52) - Л520310 | Сравнить
- Как Организованы Данные (КСПВ 52) - Л520310 | Сравнить
- Линии Тэты (КСПВ 52) - Л520310 | Сравнить
- Основные Инциденты на Линии Тэты (КСПВ 52) - Л520310 | Сравнить
- Сущности (ПК-18, D.Folgere, Т88) - Л520310 | Сравнить
CONTENTS Appendix I. BOOKLET 18 "ENTITIES" (complete) ENTITIES DEMONSTRATION SEMINAR QUESTIONS Lecture XVIII Entities Cохранить документ себе Скачать

Appendix I. BOOKLET 18 "ENTITIES" (complete)

TIME TRACK OF THETA / HISTORY OF MAN SERIES 3
[This is a complete copy of booklet 18. Tape HCL-18 is a fragmentary demo which has been identified as the start of the session in lecture HCL-27 and therefore is included there in the transcripts. Since the tape was short, D. Folgere took this opportunity to write a summary of Entities as he saw it. This occupies the bulk of booklet 18. The short demo session at the end of the booklet will be found in complete form in our transcription of lecture HCL-27. It is included here for the sake of completeness. Since this booklet was used as professional course material in late 1952, it seems appropriate to present this summary of the material on entities, as an indication of what was in use at this time.]

THETA AND GENETIC LINES OF EARTH

PROFESSIONAL COURSE LECTURE SUMMARY BOOKLET NUMBER 18Titled "HISTORY OF THE THETA LINE" in R&D 10.

A lecture given on 10 March 1952
Student's Name ____________

Lecture 20A of the Hubbard College Lectures (HCL-20A) of 10 MAR 52, also issued as the third cassette of the Time Track of Theta series.

Course Date _______________

The R&D transcript (new volume 10) was compared to the old reels. Only a few trivial discrepancies were found and are marked inside & & symbols. And there was one case in the second lecture where a phrase was in the R&D and left out of the tape, possibly due to splicing out a garbled section, and that is marked within && && symbols.

This is SCIENTOLOGY, the overall study which embraces DIANETICS, the science of human thought.


A student of this course, with reasonable intelligence and attention should be able to possess himself of the basic data of though and mind operation in a few weeks and to enable himself and his fellows to reach higher goals of civilization than have ever before been attained.

Want to talk to you a little more about the theta line, the MEST body line, perhaps give you a little insight, which, no matter how fantastic it may appear to you at first, is probably necessary to resolve some of the cases which you will be processing and will give you some insight, perhaps, into what may occasionally happen to you or to a preclear.


Any subject which is attempting to codify knowledge wants as little as possible to do with loose ends – with exceptions. I love these so-called laws which begin "Now, the following theory so-and-so and so-and-so is absolutely true." And then it lists exceptions and it lists practically everything that should have been covered by the law, and then it lists doubtfuls – everything else, We don't want any loose ends hanging out on this at all. As a consequence, I have to go into this subject to keep it in the MEST universe and to handle it in the second echelon, the MEST universe. I am not talking to you now, particularly, in the third echelon.

SCIENTOLOGY

You see, now there are three echelons: The first is simply considering the organism. First echelon, which was Dianetics, is considering the organism as it. It is just it, that's all. It's an organism. It is a body and it is a mind and it is a brain and it's all one. And it's a unit and it's an individual, and it gets conceived and is born and it dies and that's that. And it considers it as very much a part of the MEST universe. Now, considering it from that angle, you can still produce very good results.

Booklet 18 of the PROFESSIONAL COURSE
BY L. RON HUBBARD

The second echelon considers the identity or the description of – an accurate and demonstrable description of – thought itself as something which is not of the MEST universe.

Material from Tape Lecture
ENTITIES
Compiled in Written Form by D. FOLGERE

Now, the third echelon is a study of why did it all come about in the first place and why is it happening.


We are still very much in "how" when I start talking to you about the MEST line, the MEST body line – that is to say, the genetic line – its offshoots of the dead body line, and the theta body line.

ENTITIES

You will find cases to which you will have to apply the knowledge I am about to give you in order to resolve those cases.

1. Theta, operating in the physical universe, can be said to do two things: it can be said to BE, and it can be said to receive and record impressions of the physical universe. A mind, then, can be said to be made up of an initial and constantly reiterated decision to BE, plus many recorded impressions of the physical universe which are used in controlling the physical universe. This description, however, though useful, is misleading when applied to a living human being, since the mind of a living human being is apparently made up of more than one BEING and, consequently, of more than one set of recorded impressions.

It will sound, perhaps, mad and wild to you, but that's nothing compared to how it will sound to the preclear. And that is nothing compared to the confusion in which you will find the preclear because of this.

2. The beings which make up the mind of a human being are here called ENTITIES. They may be thought of as separate persons with separate past lives and memories though they may hold many memories more or less in common with other entities which are parts of the same mind. One entity may be the actor in a certain experience, another entity may be present only as an observer, while a third may not be aware of this experience at all, and still all three of these entities may be parts of the mind of the same human being.

Now, anything which tends to reduce the amount of confusion and upset in a preclear, in other words, to advance him further up the track toward knowingness, is legitimate processing – anything. Education, anything. You can teach a person Scientology and find them coming up in tone, just because it's closer to the truth than they have ordinarily been progressing.

3. We may begin our enumeration and description of the entities which make up the human mind with that entity which is least surprising, the somatic entity. The somatic entity is that being which carries on the evolution of an organism, following the genetic line. The somatic entity would include under its command all the epicenters of the organism. The somatic entity would be independent of the protoplasmic line, the undying organic line without which no organism but the simplest is brought into existence but it would follow the course of that endless flow of organic life closely in most cases. We might suppose that a certain somatic entity might be named Smith in many succeeding organisms.

In all of the fields of knowledge, a unification of knowables is desirable.

It is interesting to speculate upon the relationship between the somatic entity and the protoplasmic line. Probably the closest approach which can be made at this writing is that the somatic entity is like an individual running along a road, expertly rolling a great many hoops. He would be the captain of a company of little life organisms, the cells, and particularly the reproductive cells, of the body. Other somatic entities might be supposed to stand by the side of the road, waiting for some of these hoops to become detached by procreation, and expecting to take charge of them and roll them when they became detached from the hoops of the first entity. There might be a group of Smith entities which had charge of the Smith line so long as there were enough Smith hoops to go around, or who called in help from elsewhere or split themselves when too many Smith hoops were created by procreation.

And when I start talking to you about the individual and individuality, I have to take in factors which, when you look at preclears, you will find to be very, very much in evidence. These factors consist of the fact that one theta body can take care of several individuals and ordinarily does.

These hoops would, of course, have a certain amount of forward motion of their own. They would contain enough theta to continue their life briefly as cells, but their organization into more complete organisms would depend upon the guiding hand of the somatic entity. If left to themselves, they would soon slow and fall (the death of the cell.) If left to themselves as groups (human beings) they would slow down and break up (the death of the more complex organism.)

What happens on the theta body line is very interesting. You find the theta body line starting out as an individuality. It progresses a little way through the MEST universe and may unite with another theta body line or two more, and then spread out from that and become several lines again.

The somatic entity might be supposed to be quite similar for an animal and a human being. The difference would be only that the somatic entity of the human being would be "bigger" and would have more work to do.

In short, here you have your original theta body line, it comes along, it goes along fine, and this lifetime, it's one. And then it hits a lifetime strata and it becomes three or four. And then these three or four come in again to just one individuality again.

Those incidents which are run by pre-clears, the Boo-Hoo, the mytosis, the helper, etc, which are on the genetic line, are part of the memory of the somatic entity. 4. There are three or four other classes of entities making up the mind, besides the somatic entity. The somatic entity is far from being in command of the mind, although like any other entity it may take command under the proper circumstances.

The only conflict here is the fact that you're accustomed in the MEST universe to arithmetic. And of course when you're dealing with something which is out beyond the MEST universe, you are not dealing with arithmetic. Arithmetic is based on the MEST universe. Mathematics apply to this universe and nothing else.

5. The entity which is superior in the mind is called the theta being or THETAN. The thetan is the true "I" of the individual. It is the being which would be in command of the mind of an individual who had become completely self-determined. The thetan, however, is not in command even most of the time for most people.

Now, here you have this operation: this body line then, may go out as two bodies. You could actually track somebody back and find him living twice through the same age period. You can find him living twice in the past, through the same years. But more importantly, more important to you as an auditor, you can find a preclear living in four or six or ten entities right here on this universe at this moment. And you can demonstrate it in any way you want to demonstrate it, and even write letters to the other identities, if you want to go that far, and tell them what they had for breakfast.

6. How does the thetan lose command? It is a simple matter of postulating non-survival a subject about which a great deal has been said in earlier texts of this series. When the thetan encounters a situation which is very difficult, it may postulate that it cannot go on and it may simply "blank out" or "go to sleep" This is actually a death postulate in terms of the organism. If the thetan were the only entity operating the organism, such a postulate would presumably be followed by the death of the organism. However, the organism is immediately taken over by another entity, and so it continues to live.

Now, up above the line of knowingness – this knowingness is a sort of individuality; it's a sort of a manifestation in front of a curtain. Here, let us say, [marking on blackboard] is a curtain, and here is "I" over here, but back of "I" there's a lot of knowledge can be concentrated, and "I" sort of shuts that off and says, "Well, that doesn't apply to me." Well, very often it applies to him so strenuously that if he doesn't know about it, he's going to be a sick man. Now, that's no good.

7. The thetan apparently co-exists with an entity which is almost its equal, but not quite. This entity may be called the PARTNER.

So, we'll go down the line here, and we'll find this "I," let us say, in this life. That was one "I". Now, we take this span here with four lives, and we've got "I" here, and we've got "I" here [blackboard]. That's not back of each other, you understand; these are just curtains. And there's an "I" in front of each curtain, but actually back of this is the same theta line. Actually, back of this you have just this theta line going along; it's the same line. It just depends on how many individuals come off of it this time.

8. Any entity may take over the whole of the organism and may exist as the whole organism but each entity has a position of its own, where it may be considered to act, customarily.

You'll find a situation back through the evolutionary stretch where the "I" is dividing ∑, as in the Helper, And you'll find this division, division, division, division, then you'll find all the divisions sort of coming back in together, and then going all out and being different entities again and coming back in and – it's wonderful.

9. The Thetan occupies the head, facing forward.

It could be very confusing if you permitted it to confuse you. The only reason you could be confused about it is you're fairly low on the Tone Scale and you said, "I'm going to be me, and that's all there is to that," and "There's nobody else is going to share any part of anything I'm doing," and "I can't be anybody else but me."

10. The Partner occupies the head, facing backwards.

Well, that would be very nice if it would work out like that; however, it doesn't. If you notice on the column on the Chart of Attitudes, up at the top of the column, at some unimaginable number height way above 40 – you've got "everyone." You would have everyone; you really would have. It'd come back to the main theta body, the BIG theta body. And if you could back up the Tone Scale far enough or high enough, theoretically you could be everyone, theoretically. As it is, you only back up far enough usually to be a few. And very few people have backed up into "knowing" far enough to be more than a rather aberrated "me." So you see, it's just how many, how far you want to go up the line.

11. The next entity is the RIGHT INSIDE or RIGHT INBOARD entity.

Now, in the old days there used to be this sort of an arrangement: The mystic considered this would be a master. [marking on blackboard] You see, there would be a master, and this master had in charge this many individuals, and this master monitored those individuals.

12. The next entity is the LEFT INSIDE or LEFT INBOARD entity.

The second you start to clear up a preclear any distance at all, he will come up the line just about so far, and then he'll get to a point where he'll start short-circuiting.

13. The next is the STOMACH entity.

Now, you notice these are closer and closer together. Now, theoretically this master is a master line. It's very "knowable" – I mean, it knows a great deal; it's quite high up the Tone Scale. That's sort of like – it isn't a master. What you've run into there is your consecutive whole theta body as applies to the individuation.

14. Two more are the LEFT OUTSIDE or LEFT OUTBOARD entity and the RIGHT-OUTSIDE or RIGHT OUTBOARD entity.

You know, there originally, I drew this circle of theta, and showed you how this little bit broke off here and started down the line. Well, this is the little bit, really, and little bits of it are off here. And those little bits are "I."

15. Last in rank is the faithful SOMATIC entity.

Now, it'd be all very well if it worked out that smoothly, but it doesn't work out that smoothly. What happens is that they're at different degrees – they're different proximities, you might say, to this single master thing.

16. Now the question arises, if the somatic entity is the only one which is intimately connected with the genetic line of the organism, when do the other entities join the organism? The most accurate answer which can be given at this time is that the thetan and the other principal entities join the organism just before birth. The two outboard entitles, however, seem to be added after birth, although not much evidence has been examined on that subject at this writing.

So here's one that is very close in and here's one that's just a little bit out. And here's a line which is a spur line and has two. In other words, there's these various patterns.

17. Besides the thetan and the partner and these principle entities and the somatic entity, there may be a number of second-rate entities, called the IDLE ENTITIES.

Now, this one which has the two down here at the bottom, you clear up this preclear and you'll get him there. And as soon as he gets there, he can sense the fact that he's somebody else, too, somewhere else. And he'll become quite confused. And then he'll say, "I'm me, and that other person can go to blazes."

These join the organism at the invitation of some entity. They appear to be gathered up by the entity for the purpose of life continuum. If the individual, under the command of a particular entity, performs an overt act, killing someone, he may as that entity invite some entity of the victim to join his organism and be a part of his organism. This invitation would be for the purpose of continuing the life of the victim and "proving" that no overt act has been performed after all.

He may do that and as soon as he does that, you get a sort of a jealousy factor entering in between these two individuals who are the same individual. They won't admit their similar individuality. You can put a preclear on a machine and you can demonstrate to him how he actually has several personalities. Actually, he's in contact with several personalities which aren't aware of one another's existence at all. You make them aware of one another's existence and they'll start to demonstrate some jealousy, one to the other. One is going to be more powerful than another and so forth. Fascinating.

Idle entities are characterized by a certain decadence. They have apparently not enough force left in them to make them capable of running an organism, and so they drift about at the beck and call of other entities.

So here you have this fellow, and you're going to back this fellow up here until he lies across that line. Well, the next thing you know, he's going to start to run this person's engrams. Just like that. Well now, you're fairly all right if you go well back on the track to run engrams for this person, because then you'll run engrams which are mutual to each. What you do is run engrams that are sitting around in this, and it'll influence both of these and they'll come out to parity. They'll also come out into awareness of each other. They'll go through a symptom of worrying about "Let's see, Now, if I am me, and I am thee, too, then will I have to be aware of thee 100 percent or me 100 percent!" and "What are we going to do?" and "Supposing we're going to get all our thoughts tangled up." Well, actually, their thoughts were most gorgeously tangled up. They were really tangled, up to the time you started to process this person, because this person was being influenced from quarters he had no idea of at all.

18. Any of the principle entities may have another organism, or MEST body, besides the one which is the individual in question. As we have seen in the previous demonstrations, an entity may have a body on another planet.

For instance, every once in a while you'll find a preclear who will sit around and listen to advice from somebody. He will. He'll sit around and he'll get inspirations or he'll get something from somebody else or something else, and what he's doing there is about the same equivalent, but much different – a mind-reading act, sort of. He's over on the other side taking tips from what somebody else knows. And he says, "This is inspiration. This is my intuition at work."

19. Therefore, we have two kinds of sharing: one organism may be inhabited by many entities; and one entity may inhabit more than one organism.

And here's some other fellow sitting over someplace, working like mad, working something out and figuring something out. Well, that's where he's getting the data. Now, for instance, you take Kelly and Bessemer. This is a notable example – Kelly and Bessemer. One sat in England and one sat in Kentucky, and they invented – within two days of each other, completed the invention of – a process of making steel. And they call it today the Bessemer process. They might as well call it the Kelly process, because it was invented simultaneously in both places. Same guy.

20. Any entity which inhabits an organism is capable of producing a somatic in that organism. This should indicate the futility of embarking upon an auditing procedure of running out somatics, to the exclusion of thought, emotion and effort. Somatics can be run out, but there is an almost infinite number of them, since each entity may have millions, to be over-conservative.

There's nothing much to this. Alexander Graham Bell busily invented the telephone here; it was simultaneously invented all over the world. There was practically every country in the world had some facsimile of Alexander Graham Bell – wonderful transfer.

21. Different entities respond to different auditors. For this reason, a case which is being audited by one auditor, say a man, may turn into a very different case when being audited by another auditor, say a woman. If the auditor understands why this happens, he can do something to correct it.

What's quite remarkable about all of the research in which I have been engaged is it hasn't flashed up anyplace else. And that's remarkable! It has not come up anyplace else on earth. On earth. (laughter)

22. Sometimes the auditor will find himself auditing an incident in which the pre-clear is "out of valence" The pre-clear is an observer, watching the organism go through the experience. What is happening is that the auditor is auditing an entity which was aware of the experience but was not in command of the organism during the experience. This entity will have some charge on the experience as an observer and may be audited as an observer. The main charge will be on the entity which was in command, but that charge may have put that entity to "sleep", leaving some other entity in command. Auditing the observer through the incident will usually wake up the former command entity in the incident, and then the main charge may be run.

But this jealousy of identities was such, actually, that in the early days when I was working on this I was experiencing a terrific anxiety. I knew the next five minutes somebody was going to appear on the stands with this first book I wrote on the subject. You see, I knew somebody else knew. I knew somebody else was working on it too. And they were. But not here on earth. Anyway ... (laughter)

23. Second and third year students will readily recognize the same old phenomena with which they are so familiar being explained more profitably in the light of new phenomena turned up by later research. In all these theories as they develop, the mind remains the same. We are just getting a better and better picture of it as we go along. And as the picture improves, so do results.

Well now, what I'm talking to you about, you'll find applicable. There are preclears right here in this audience that are sort of vaguely "not me." And it's kind of "not me" a little bit. And they think to themselves, "Well, any moment now I'll be me." But you start them up the line, you get them going a little bit further and evidently something kind of bats them down again. You can't figure out what's batting them down. They start up Tone Scale and BAT – they'll go down again. Put them on the machine and simply ask them this question: "Is there somebody else holding your aberrations in place?"

24. Many of the phenomena which have been observed and then evaluated by former theories have now to be reevaluated by this new theory. Some of them are the File Clerk, Valence, Circuits.

It says "Yes" – bang, machine operates.

25. If the auditor asks the pre-clear to give the first answer which occurs to him in terms of yes-or-no, or a number or a name at the snap of the auditor's fingers, the preclear may give information which he has been otherwise unable to give. This phenomenon has been called the File Clerk phenomenon. Later research and theory suggests that "File Clerk" answers are solutions to problems which are being offered by the thetan, which is operating at a reduced level of awareness but which still retains enough awareness to overrule the commanding entity now and then, particularly when directly addressed by the auditor.

"Where is this person?" and there'll be a little twitch, and you'll ask him – well, according to continents, Earth, anyplace else, stars, so on.

26. A circuit is a theoretical item, described as a portion of the mind, compartmented by a postulate which is enforced by pain, acting as another person within the mind. (An even earlier definition substituted "phrase" for "postulate", but since a phrase is only a counter-effort unless accompanied by a postulate, the presence of the postulate was understood.) This definition has now been improved upon. It has been improved upon so much that the word circuit is not longer a necessary word in the vocabulary of the auditor. A circuit may now be considered an entity ("a portion of the mind... compartmented... acting as another person within the mind...") which is out of present time (under the influence of a postulate which is enforced by pain.) An entity which is out of present time. The new definition simplifies the old, clarifies it, and renders the word "circuit" obsolete.

All of a sudden, BOW, you'll get something. Maybe the fellow is in Birmingham or something of the sort, and you've got across on the line. Well, the second you get this awareness, two things may start to happen. You may start to pick up the fellow's engrams from Birmingham. And if you do, go ahead and run them. They're common engrams on the line. But all you're doing is running locks off of common engrams. You see, it's theta, it's facsimiles, and they've got, actually, banks in common.

27. Some entities are out of present time, When they take command of the organism or conflict with the entity which is in command, the postulates which are keeping them out of present time and which are present in the incidents in which they are caught are entered into the thinking of the organism.

Well, your preclear has never had, really, this feeling of "I am." He never quite had this feeling, "I am." He always has this feeling, "Well, I might be if ..." Well, that "I might be if," is he's just a little bit off the line back to the main individual. He's just a little bit off the line.

When an entity which is psychotic, because it is out of present time, takes command of the organism, the organism becomes psychotic. The thetan retires for the duration and we say that the "I" of this individual has disappeared.

You can put him back on the line again. You'll have to jockey him around a little bit, and the next thing you know, why, he'll be responding up as an individual. Nothing much to it. He will go through a period of worry.

28. A valence is a mimicry of another person. There is much in common between the vaudeville performer who imitates Lionel Barrymore and the individual who has assumed the identity of his deceased grandfather. The main difference is that the vaudeville performer has assumed the identity of Lionel Barrymore for a few moments, knowingly, for the purpose of entertaining an audience, and the other individual has assumed the identity of his deceased grandfather during a period of years (or even centuries) "unknowingly" for the purpose of continuing the life of his grandfather in order to prove that the overt act which he committed against his grandfather did not really happen, since grandfather is not really dead. This mimicry will be carried out by one of the individual's entities.

Anyway, here we have – here we have here an individual going down Tone Scale. Now, actually an individual could go down Tone Scale simply by having more and more things happen to him, and he becomes more and more individuated. And he becomes so individual that he doesn't even exist in the theta body at all; he's dead. And that's very individual, to be dead. It means simply that as long as you consider the MEST organism as the only identity a person can be or have, you get into terrific complexities, because how individual can it be? Well, when it's gone 100 percent MEST, of course.

29. A valence is, then, only a mimicry. An individual would no longer be said to be "out of his own valence" when his thetan was not in command, since the idea of entities relieves the word valence of double duty. (Formerly, "valence" meant both the mimicry and the entity which was doing the mimicry, a doubling which caused some confusion.) The individual does not mimic himself, he IS himself. Valence becomes purely and simply mimicry. Various of the individual's entities mimic various other persons. He shifts his valence by shifting entities. Or, if he is a vaudeville performer, he shifts valence by deciding to mimic first one person and then another.

Now, watching this, then, you'll find there are complexities in auditing for which you will be, sometimes, at a little bit of a loss to account for. And by the way, this is quite remarkable: There is a mystic practice of concentrating until you get a visio. And you'll get visios in far cities, in far places, without doing any teleportation of yourself or your soul or anything of the sort. You just lie down and concentrate and get a visio. And you'll get a visio of your – of doing something. Some of this is accounted for simply by, all of a sudden, being the other you – being the other you.

30. This subject of valence, in reference to the actor, has long been of high interest to many people. Just what does an actor do when he "becomes his part"? Why do some actors walk onto the stage or before the camera, do their part well and convincingly, and then walk off and immediately drop the character which they have assumed? Why do others "throw themselves into their parts" so deeply that sometimes traces of the character which they have played stick to them ever afterwards. We say of one actor, "Jones can play any part you give him. He is a good workman." We say of another, "Elsie is a great actress. She becomes the character. She lives her part." We say of another, "Ever since Jukes played the Corsican Bandit he wears a sword, even around the house." What makes these differences? We may, perhaps, come closer to an explanation at this writing than anyone has come before. We may say that Jones assumed identities consciously, like a vaudeville performer, and casts them off as quickly. He is good at mimicry. He has his facsimiles well under control. Elsie, on the other hand, may not have her facsimiles so well under control. Her "greatness" may come from putting an entity in command which has a valence or which IS a character much like the one she is supposed to play. This entity may continue in command throughout the production, changing Elsie's personality considerably for that period. After the production, she may say to herself, "Well, I'm through with that character! Whew! What a relief! At times I really felt that I was Lucretia Borgia! And she may succeed in getting her thetan or some other entity back into command. Poor Jukes, however, has given command to some entity in order to take advantage of the personality of that entity or of some valence of which that entity is capable, and then he has been unable to get that entity out of the driver's seat. He wears a sword around the house. Many actors do this. Sometimes it is a great success.

There are probably as many as four or five fellows on earth that are almost my duplicate, for instance, physiologically. Almost – poor fellows. Now, one of these fellows used to get me in trouble all the time.

31. The goal of the auditor is to restore complete self-determinism to the thetan.

I walked up the steps of the Cuban Embassy one day and – in Washington, DC, and there was a Spaniard coming down the steps and he said, "Ay, Pedrito, como esta?" And I said, "I'm very sorry, I'm afraid I don't know you."

32. All entities other than the thetan have been brought into the "family circle" by the thetan or by entities which were brought in by the thetan. The thetan has agreed to have these entities. If full self-determinism is restored to the thetan, he will no longer have to have these entities.

And "Oh, that's all right, Pedrito. I won't tell anybody you're here." (laughter)

33. When the auditor is auditing a pre-clear of whom a certain entity is in command, the auditor, is, in effect, auditing that entity.

And I said, "Well, that's fine"

34. The auditor may choose which entity he wishes to audit.

He said, "Well, you can even pretend you don't remember me. It's still all right, Pedrito, I'm your friend" and so forth and "I hope everything. comes out all right."

35. The purpose of the auditor in auditing an entity other than the thetan is to clear the way for auditing the thetan.

And I said, "Well, thank you," and went on into the embassy.

36. If another entity is in command, the auditor may have to bring that entity to present time before he can get very far with the thetan. This procedure will produce the effect of bringing the pre-clear from a more or less psychotic frame of mind to comparative rationality.

I forgot about it until one time I was in Puerto Rico, and I was trotting down a trail and three Brazilians – Brazilian engineers – were coming up the trail on horses. They took one look at me and they said, "Ay, Pedrito, como esta?" and threw their horses across my path. And they wouldn't let me go anyplace. And then this stuff – "You can tell us. We won't write anybody. We won't let anybody know we saw you" – a big routine. And they finally had me cornered so tightly that nothing would do but what I went over and drank brandy with them and played chess; and they sure figured out I was putting on a good act. (laughter)

37. Some entities will have elsewhere bodies which will have to be abandoned.

To this day, none of those fellows would do anything but claim that I was putting on a good act.

38. If an entity is stuck in an incident, this entity can be freed by running the incident in the ordinary way, with thought, emotion and effort. If the entity is too low in awareness to go through the incident, the thetan, working with the auditor, may be able to push this entity through the incident in spite of itself.

Well, a little more time went by – in another place down in Latin America, and a fellow walked up to me. I was sitting in a bar. He reached in his hip pocket, and if I hadn't kicked hard at his shins, I probably would have been a dead man.

39. Successful and unsuccessful self-auditing may be decided by this one factor: what is the intention toward the individual of the entity which is doing the auditing? What does this entity wish to accomplish? If it is the thetan which has learned to audit, some very good results may be obtained. But if it is some aberrated entity, who has been controlled and controlled and controlled until the only goal left for him is to control and enslave whatever organism falls into his clutches, the auditing results may be horrendous.

They threw him out promptly, and I scratched my head and I said, "I'm not in trouble with anybody down here that I can think of," Till all of a sudden I remembered, "By golly! I bet that fellow would have jumped if I had said I was Pedrito.

40. Any case which does not run easily for an auditor is most likely not under the command of the thetan. Other entities will have to be gotten out of the way before the case will run easily. It is not necessary to clear these entities. It is necessary to bring them to present time and help the thetan to take over their control of the organism.

Well, fine, fine. Until, one time in Panama – one time in Panama, a girl took one look at me (the most scathing, scorching look you ever saw) in the street, sniffed, put her nose very high in the air and crossed the street diagonally. So I said, "Pedro's been here." (laughter)

41. Some cases used to be called "out of valence" This meant that they were not "themselves". We would say now, of such a case, that one entity had been in command at one time, and now another entity was in command. The auditor is, perforce, auditing the entity which is now in command. If he tries to run the pre-clear through an incident which occurred when the former entity was in command, he will discover that the pre-clear recalls this incident as though he were only an observer --- which is just what this entity was.

I finally found out who Pedro was. He'd undoubtedly run into me, too. I finally found out who he was. He was the son of a rich Brazilian family and he had the wrong political color. And he had gone bad in an awful hurry down in Brazil, and he was being looked for by the police of about five or six countries, as well as the parents of several girl.

42. The auditor has to know which entity he is auditing in order to know what he is doing. Accuracy in knowing which entity is being audited will depend, in most cases, upon the use of an E-meter. The added view into the mind which the E-Meter gives the auditor will make it much easier to know to whom he is listening.

And during the war – during the war, I got a report that I had reported in at a place where I hadn't been. And my ears went up like a foxhound's, ha-ha-ha-ha, because Pedrito was a Nazi. And my picture was on file with the Federation Aeronautique Internationale as an international pilot, and those were in France. And full records of me were captured when the Germans took Paris. And, of course, all they had done was backtrack me, look me up, take ahold of Pedrito and cross orders.

43. In what used to be called "perceptic shut-off", the entity which is being audited is either stuck on the track or else it just did not experience the incident which the auditor is trying to run. The incident was experienced by some other entity.

I don't know what happened to Pedrito. I often wondered what would have happened if I'd ever met Pedrito in the line of duty during the war.

44. An individual, for this reason, might well be on his way toward self-determinism and still have poor recall on some incident which had happened to another entity. In order to find the data on that incident, the auditor would have to ask the entity which had experienced it.

I am sure, though, to this day – to this day, that there is more there than just a physiological resemblance.

45. An amnesia case may be suspected of operating on a data bank (memory) which is not from the present life.

Now, possibly many of you have had this experience. You've probably seen people who looked like you or who acted like you or something of the sort.

46. In a homosexual, an entity of the opposite sex is in command.

Oddly enough, when you meet them you are apt to be a little bit cross about it. It is almost a byword that people who have the same name will be hostile to each other. People who have the same looks may be hostile to each other if they meet themselves accidentally. And it is just in that wise that – it's just in that wise that people who have or are operating from the same theta line become jealous of each other. They will actually flick across and louse each other up.

47. Theta is creative. It can make new things. The rule which we have all heard so many times, that imagination is merely a recombining of old experiences, does not hold, evidently. The power of theta to create extends much deeper into the MEST universe than our former educators would have had us believe, It may be possible to give some estimate of the depth of this creativity in subsequent writing. As the relationship between theta and MEST is examined, the borderline between them becomes harder to find, and theta emerges more and more as CAUSE. It begins to look as though theta may be the cause not only of the organization of MEST but also of the very existence of MEST. Even this subject is within the second echelon of knowledge. We may suppose that the question "What is the cause of theta?" lies within the third echelon.

I am sorry to have to report that, because all should be sweetness and light. But you, every once in a while, will run into somebody on the theta line through the preclear. And if I didn't tell you this could happen, then I would not be doing well by you at all. I would be hiding something which you might need to have.

48. EXPERIENCE is a sort of MEST substitute for KNOWING, which is a function of theta. We have seen how some quick-thinking individuals can learn an operation so rapidly that they appear to have known it all along, while others may experience the same operation many times and still make mistakes in it. These differences between individuals are very great, even as we observe them in daily life. There is no reason to suppose, however, that these great differences account for more than a very narrow band of the spectrum of KNOWING. At the upper end of this spectrum, experience may be something which is just not necessary, or is necessary to such a slight degree that it could hardly be called experience.

And when you do, you or the preclear may think you have run into some manifestation similar to the guardian angel manifestation, which is entirely different again. And you will be apt to believe that the other individual is far smarter and knowledgeable than your preclear. Not so. They're both aberrees. And you will find that it's just as difficult to convince this other person to do something.

49. If this idea of the importance of experience is a valid one, then the value of facsimiles is also altered. The computation of courses of action by comparison of facsimiles comes under the heading of experience to a larger degree. Possible, an individual who KNOWS (who is at the upper end of the spectrum of KNOWING) would consider any facsimiles which he had bothered to keep as mere relics of something he had decided for the moment to call "past", and possibly he would not compute any courses of action from facsimiles but would merely look at present time and KNOW what course to follow.

Now, I don't know how successful you can be in running out somebody else's engrams while he's walking around, eating, sleeping and so forth. I don't know how this can be done at all, but I do know this: Your preclear can go back before the point of separation and run out engrams in common which will unburden the track. And that, as near as I know, is about as far as it can go.

It may be that the intellectual processes which we have come to regard as the highest possible activity of the beings which we are, admirable as these processes may seem to us, are merely aberrations and perversions of the true state of KNOWING. (This is not a new idea, of course, and many will recognize it from antiquity, It may be, however, that we have come to a point where we can do something about this idea.)

We have conducted an experiment of trying to run out all the engrams for the human race. That's right. We've actually sat down, with far greater thoroughness than would ordinarily be demonstrated in a laboratory, and tried to run out all the engrams of all the race.

DEMONSTRATION

Interesting experiment. And the only trouble is, after we had reduced these engrams which theoretically should have been in common to everyone, we still had aberrees.

AUD: How old are you?

And the point is there, do we all come from a common source and is this common source, at its first impingement upon the MEST universe, subject to an aberration which if run out would then loosen up the tracks for everybody?

P.C. Ages.

Nope. It's not a common source to that degree. You can't find the first engram in common to everybody, as far as I can find out at this time.

AUD: Is it worse than ages? How about trillions of years? Or millions?

Now, this may all sound very peculiar to you, but when you're exploring with new, efficient tools you're apt to find and come across data which is unknown.

P.C. Three or four trillion years old.

People are quite ordinarily afraid of the unknown. They would rather have a religion than a mysticism. That's right. They would rather have – by and large, broadly, they'd rather have it all codified and presented as being very finite and down to earth, and there's one God (except there's twelve). "There's one God, and we worship twelve idols and one God. And you bat yourself this way and that and that straightens you all out. And there's somebody that you tell all this to and that squares the rap."

AUD: Were you originally just one entity?

Now, that's good and simple, but it unfortunately does not make well people. So we have to look a little bit further for this line. And in all of this research, a very cold eye has been kept on fact – a very cold eye.

P.C. Yes.

What I've just told you about branch lines and so on may be something you may never run into in an auditor. Don't go asking for trouble. But you will have preclears come to you who will not be able to run their own engrams. They will start right out running somebody else's engrams. And then those engrams will promptly look, to them, highly unreal – something that couldn't have happened. And they will practically spin on it unless they know that they can run somebody else's engrams. Now, there may be a half a dozen people in the world whose engrams they can run.

AUD: (Begins to plot the theta time-track of the preclear on a blackboard.) What did you think of? (There has been a drop on the E-Meter.)

And it may be that you can get your preclear so far up the Tone Scale – way, way up the Tone Scale in all manifestations, registering very high on the machine and so forth – that you could bat around and pry into almost anybody's engram bank if you wanted to.

P.C. Some ancient buildings.

That would be something else entirely. But boy, a fellow would really have to be high to do that.

AUD: Are these in the theta universe or the MEST universe? (Watching meter) Between lives? Or before there were any between-lives? Is that where you live? In this planetary system?

All right. What you are interested in doing is returning to an individual all the knowledge of which he is capable as an individual. Where you want to stop his being an individual and start his being a saint, or something of the sort, is pretty well up to you and to him.

P.C. Very far away. I get an impression of a very bright star.

But I can tell you that the borderline is something that can be overstepped. It can be passed, and it will be passed with considerable upset and confusion unless you do have some inkling of what you can meet.

AUD: How long ago was this?

Now, all of our work is directed toward knowing more about more. There is a history, a complete history, to this theta line, as pertains to the inhabitants of the planet Earth.

P.C. Eight million years.

This line is very much in common, it has a certain history; its theta background is in common. Its genetic background is to some degree in common, but not to the degree of the theta line. The constant line is the theta line. The constant line is the theta line, and by the theta line I mean that line where the individual uses the genetic line to make one or many bodies that pass through time.

AUD: What happened there? Did things blow up? Is that whole civilization blowing up? Were you a slave?

And the theta body inhabits the other body from just before conception until slightly after death. And this theta line is subject to several individual bodies, and it passes very happily through time.

P.C. No.

Now, that body we have in common pretty well – I mean, its history. The history of your theta body and the history of my theta body has terrific, terrific differences, but it has its principal incidents in common. That doesn't mean that the incident happened to you and happened to me too, but it means that an incident happened to me like the incident happened to you.

AUD: Was that a point of high charge on your track? What happened to you there that was bad?

& And I'm now going to give you a talk on what these incidents are &

P.C. I just killed everybody.

(the old reel continues into the next lecture without a break)

AUD: Why? Was it a dull afternoon or something? Was there any cause for it than that? That's all right. That's the way we used to be.

P.C. I did something. I did an experiment, and the whole place blew up.

AUD: Get a good clear recall; get the clearest moment in that. Is there another moment that is real to you? Any part of that cycle?

P.C. A very tall man.

AUD: Is he real to you? How is your communication with this very tall man? Does he like you?

P.C. No.

AUD: Was that the trouble?

P.C. No, I just did something I shouldn't have done. I was fooling around with something I shouldn't have been.

AUD: Was this man related to you?

P.C. No. He was just the head of it. Not a ruler. Just in charge of the laboratory.

AUD: Do you like chemistry sets?

P.C. Oh, no.

AUD: Does your theta being (thetan) need education?

P.C. No.

AUD: How does it feel to be educated?

P.C. Not necessary.... the education.

AUD: Okay. Well, we have here, then, an incident that is a minor overt act on the fourth dynamic-would you say that it was the fourth dynamic?

P.C. Definitely.

AUD: Have you ever been put together with some other souls?

P.C. Yes.

AUD: When?

P.C. I did a damn fool thing, I Was curious. I don't get any visio. I was curious and cut off my nose to spite my face.

AUD: How long ago was it?

P.C. A long time ago.

AUD: What did you do, volunteer?

P.C. No. Somebody told me that I'd better watch out.

AUD: And you were curious?

P.C. I wanted to find out what would happen.

AUD: Is this after the civilization blew up?

P.C. A long time after.

51. This demonstration, though fragmentary, shows a little about procedure In establishing the time track of the thetan. The auditor is looking for overt acts and for a time when other entities were added to the thetan. The pre-clear has said at the beginning the thetan was alone.

SEMINAR QUESTIONS

Lecture XVIII Entities

1. Is a mind's memory limited to one sequence of past lives? Explain.

2. Can any organism exist independent of the protoplasmic line?

3. When can a somatic entity take control of the mind? What is its rank?

4. What past phenomena must be re-evaluated in the light of new theories ?

5. What is meant by auditing an observing entity?