I want to talk to you this morning about the processes which we will use in our course here. This isn't really a course, but it's hard to find the right word sometimes.

The processes which I have been using and which I have found to be highly efficacious are SOP 8, SOP 8-L and Six Steps to Better Beingness, Admiration Processing and Explosions.

I'll give you a very definite word of warning: One of these processes is very dangerous and that's Admiration Processing. And although it is very dangerous, it is tremendously effective. And because you have heard, possibly, tests run on Admiration Processing, I don't want you to shy off of it. It is, as far as I know, the best "open sesame" (if you're going to run anything on anybody in the body) to a very bad-off case. Admiration Processing is a very interesting process and has a lot of variations but it is of the essence.

And you will find your very occluded case going over a roller coaster. They go up a little bit and down a little bit and then up a little higher and then down a little bit. And it's a very slow process. And there isn't much of a way to rush it up.

Now, you can think of fantastic methods of speeding it up, maybe. They just - it's just not true - let's get this straight right now: It's really - with all the investigation I have done and tests that have been made, it is just not true that there is a tiny little button somewhere in the case, which, if pushed, will suddenly turn a person into Clear. This just isn't true.

You will find yourselves, as auditors, rushing time on cases. And on rushing time you will find, inevitably, invariably, that you might as well have taken the time in the first place. Don't rush time on a case. You just use the process which you know will eventually work it out. And let the case go on and flounder and scream and fuss, and so forth. If you know what you're doing with the processes, for heaven's sakes, just continue with the process. Don't let, in other words, the hysteria of the case turn around into an hysteria of auditing.

Psychiatry has done this for too many years. The psychotic is frantic and the psychiatrist gets frantic. This works, then, with any human being. This person is in a hurry; they're rushing time, crowding time; they can't get enough on the time track, and so forth. So you, watching that, are liable to assume that you, being a body and a human being, should be the answer to it, which is the same amount of hysteria or the same amount of time rush or the same amount of franticness. And this, in essence, is restimulation itself and is the mechanism of restimulation.

And by the way, going into that - why is Q and A - we'll take this up several times, but I'll say it in processing, why does Q and A work? why does it work? Because it ties up, not into a specialized or a strange package; it ties up into a very neat package - very, very neat, very precise. It's - I - first, "I will never get my anchor points back," and first, "I have to have my anchor points back." And then the very occluded case is running the satisfaction of having his anchor points back. He's running the satisfaction of having his anchor points back. Let's - let's don't miss that one. He's running the satisfaction of having his anchor points back. According to him, he's completed a cycle of action.

Now, Q and A - Q and A is the question and answer, actually, on "How do I get my anchor points back?" That's about all. And that's what the Q and A is all about. Now, we can go into that much more precisely and lengthily, but it goes - Q and A goes immediately into anchor points, instantly.

Now, every case has its own computation. Every case has its own computation. You can work this computation out in numerous ways. The worst way is to evaluate for the case and tell it what its computation is. Even though it's written all over the case, if you tell the case, it won't do the case any good.

So, you use techniques which blow the computation into view for the case. That's the neat one. You just use techniques which all of a sudden make it totally self-revelatory. Thu didn't have anything to do with it, you see? Your preclear thought it all up himself and it does him some good.

Well, Acceptance Level Processing does this. You start running Acceptance Level Processing and you say, “All right, now let's put out..." You can do this in a snide sort of a way. (I very often do, by the way. It's bad auditing.) You do it in a snide sort of a way. You say, "All right. Start offering up sick children and see to whom they appear acceptable. Now, let's just have sick children and see who accepts sick children, sick children, sick children. Go on, let's see to whom they're acceptable."

All right. That's the wrong way to run it. The right way to run it is to say, "Go on, keep offering up these sick kids." The next thing you know, why, the preclear says, "My parents! My grandma!" And the ally of the case is the one to whom the sick child was acceptable. That's the most vital button that you could possibly run. If you're going to fool around with the past at all, that's going to be your vital button: "To whom was a sick child acceptable?" "To whom was a sick person acceptable?" And sure enough, you'll get the ally.

Now, "To whom was a combative child acceptable?" And you run into the "don't fight" computation on the case.

"Just nobody." The preclear will just tell you, "Nobody. Nobody."

"Now, let's run a child that won't fight and find out who that's acceptable to."

"Gee, that's acceptable to everybody. Gee. Gosh!" But particularly acceptable to somebody on the case and this is the one - and this person, oddly enough - you learn this very quickly: The noncombative child, completely noncombative child, is most acceptable to the member of the family who can't work. See how effort just jumps there; effort crosses. The person to whom noncombativeness was essential also can't work.

Fighting requires effort and energy. And if fighting requires effort and energy, work also requires effort and energy. And the person who won't fight, won't work. See that? People substitute and often get mixed up on - they substitute anger for fighting. That fighting - anger is way down Tone Scale from fighting. People who just get mad and flare up, see - they just won't fight, that's all. People who fight simply fight.

I told someone rather recently when they were throwing a bunch of anger at me, one way or the other - they were being very, very hostile, and so forth - "Well, why are we doing this now? I tell you what: I'll get - I'll send down to a sporting goods store and we'll get some six-ounce gloves and we'll go a couple of rounds and then we'll feel better. But there's no reason to run me into a symbol like anger on this thing, that's all."

And this person, being a girl, she couldn't quite figure this, but that was in essence that - that's sensible. So, she's a girl; and that's too bad. She has to use - men had taught her - anger rather than blows, because her shoulders hinge differently and she doesn't strike the same blow as the man.

Women, by the way, very often go in for sword play, and so on, if permitted to do so (in the past) simply because this is better than running in a symbol for it. By the way, in running this you occasionally find, way back on the track, the women being the combative characters - tremendously combative characters. And the fellow just can't understand how he could be upset about women today, see? Because he has never fought with women today. Women have never done him any damage. That's way back on the track someplace, and so on.

Very often, as a little child, this is keyed in because older sisters, something like that, will have a habit of beating a little kid up, and so forth, and he never quite gets over it. But the rest of the society tells him he can't beat up women, so there is no interchange of effort. And you will find the interchange of effort as a - the vital point at which you're striking because you've got to rehabilitate the person's ability to run into effort.

Now, the reason I've been talking to you about it is so we can get into "What are we trying to do with these techniques?" Well, we could go over this with great rapidity: We're trying to rehabilitate the preclear's ability to create, manufacture in any way, shape or form, use, direct, locate energy of the effort variety, see - energy of the effort variety. And we're trying to rehabilitate his ability to admire broadly, and his best ability is admiration. That's his best ability. Effort is not his best ability; effort is downscale from that. Because everything - all force dissolves in the face of admiration. I give you the universal solvent there: it's admiration.

So the two kinds of processing which are extremely basic, of course, are Explosions and Admiration. And if you get hung up on a case and it's sticky and it doesn't exteriorize, and when it exteriorizes it starts out and goes spungingggg and goes back in again, you're up against a proposition of insufficient admiration and an inability to create or handle effort, which is energy. This is awful simple; it's a mechanical problem. It is not a problem that has anything to do with thought. It's strictly mechanical.

Now, if you want to hit somebody in the nose sometime and observe him - just walk down here on the street, walk up to a guy and, slam, hit him in the nose. Now, if this fellow is fairly low on the Tone Scale, he'll stand and think about it. And then he'll talk about it. The fellow who is high on the Tone Scale will simply slam you in the nose. He'll just return the motion, right now - pam! Simplicity. Very, very simple.

Now, this business about "If he's low scale, how did he get low scale?" Well, he's been slammed in the nose often enough and then told that he mustn't return the action. All right, how is he told? Well, it's by being slammed in the nose the second he started to return the first slam in the nose. And then when he tried to return the second slam in the nose, he got the third slam in the nose. And when he tried to return the first, second and third slam in the nose, somebody hit him with a sledgehammer. And after that he thinks!

Parents are always standing around saying to little Willy, "Now, you must think before you act. You should think things over. You shouldn't be compulsive, and so forth." Well, why don't they just take him out and chain him up to a post like an animal or something? Or just hang him? It would be kinder! Because the fellow who has to think before he acts, has to key in for himself a number of impacts, so that he can think.

Now, feeling is condensed looking, and thinking is condensed feeling. And so you'll see what a circuit looks like.

Feeling is a fellow being hit with a tack hammer - his lookingness being hit with a tack hammer. If you can just envision somebody standing there looking - that's a couple of beams going out and a couple of beams coming in, see - and you take these beams as they go out and they come in, and you take a tack hammer and you just knock them down a little more condensed so they aren't quite as long but they have the same mass in them. He would start feeling rather than seeing.

Now, if you took this little condensed mass that you finally left with the tack hammer and started hitting it with a sledgehammer and really knocked it down real condensed, and so forth, you'd get thinking. And that's what - would be what a circuit looked like in the essence.

Now, how do you get rid of this? This is obviously force, isn't it? The beams of perception are beams of force. So how do you get rid of this?

You have to uncondense thinkingness. And it isn't done by getting the preclear to think. It could be done, theoretically, by getting him to feel. But it is best done by getting him to look. Then if you - therefore, if you get thinking up to feeling, what have you done then? You - if you run it, in terms of engrams, the engram that's causing him to think, see, will start causing him to feel. You turn on the somatic.

Now, if you'll notice in Effort Processing, if you run a lot of effort, postulates come up. Now, it's true that postulates very high on the Tone Scale regulate this sort of thing and they're above effort. A person is free to make an independent postulate. And don't think - don't make the same mistake that psychology did, saying that all thought is derived from aberration, all creative work is the result of a neurosis, all sorts of things. A person is perfectly competent at doing this.

But their thinking freely gets interfered with and now here we go. And we get this confounded cycle of impact and the impact produces the thought. So certainty is impact to a low-scale preclear. And certainty is simply knowing to a high-scale preclear.

And this knowingness, however - this level of knowingness could be called a lot of things, but he just knows. Well, how's the best way to know? The best way to know is to pervade. The most knowingness you could have would be a complete pervasion. If you really want to know about that wall and everything there is to know about the wall, the last place you would go is to a scientific textbook because that would merely put into words somebody else's experiences. Oh boy, are we into a complex system of communication! Has very little validity.

But if you were able to pervade and be the wall, you would get every pattern it had. If you could do this very, very well, you would get every kind of a pattern that could possibly come out of walls - molecular, chemical, and so on. You see, experiencing, which is to say, perceiving in its completeness an atom would be very superior to merely knowing that this formation of structure existing in space was called an atom. And education very easily goes down scale to a point where it simply makes nomenclature.

Some of the more debased scientists are really in terrible condition. When they can't do anything about a subject, they name it. And then they make everybody memorize all these names and they say they know about the subject. Oh boy, that - you can't even argue with this; it's just beyond argument. Because this stuff is completely loony.

All right. So, on evaluation of techniques, then, the first and foremost thing that we will try to remedy is looking. That way we'll get lookingness. And therefore, that tells you you've got to rehabilitate the number of viewpoints a person has, see? He's got to have lots more viewpoints. And every one of these viewpoints have got to be able to admire. Why has it got to be able to admire? That's so it can dissolve any force that's standing in its road.

And the next thing you have to rehabilitate is force. What is called force, energy, effort - what do we mean by force? We mean an exerted, directed foot-pounds of push or pull. Brush off. See? This is force, see? Push out this way, pull in. Now, force can even be exerted in a balance, whereby you have the fellow - he's apparently in a static balance, and that is what, in the past, physicists have been calling a static.

Boy, that's just gorgeous. They said this word "static" and then gave it a dictionary definition and then gave it this other and then it merely meant forces in balance. That was their apathy about the fact that there could be no - about the fact that they couldn't resolve force, so there always had to be force. So, a physicist - if you're explaining it to him, you're just trying to say, "A static is so-and-so and so-and-so." No. No! No! He knows what a static is. A static is a very interesting thing. It's... We haven't changed this word, by the way, because it runs right straight into physics. This is the one word that we have around which has a double definition.

He says, "That wastebasket's a static."

"Why?"

"Well, it's not in motion," he says.

Well, that wastebasket is traveling one thousand miles an hour simply by virtue of being on the surface of the Earth which revolves twenty-four thousand miles in circumference, and it's twenty-four thousand miles, and it takes twenty-four hours to go around, more or less. That's a thousand miles an hour the wastebasket is going in one direction. And then there's seven other Earthly motions that make that wastebasket go. It is not even vaguely in a balance of forces. And in addition to that, internally, it is in a tremendous amount of motion. So we don't even vaguely have a static. I mean, if a guy says static, it means something at rest.

Well, the only thing that could be something at rest... You just had to get down and figure this out. You get the same definition for static as you get at zero: no wavelength, no motion, no mass, no position in time (quite important) and no relationship to other objects, which is to say, no location in space. Now, that is zero. And that would be a static.

And sure enough, this really works out, by the way: Absolute zero has no resistance electrically. So you see, we weren't just reaching for the moon, see. We've just had it right there. I mean, this is a proper physical definition. We are not off the rails. We've really discovered something brand-new to physics, although not brand-new to the whole track, and that is the definition of a static - what is a static.

Now, life itself is this nothingness only so far as this universe is concerned and is not necessarily, in itself, a nothingness. See, it can be a nothingness elsewhere. But in this universe it's a nothingness. It has an ability in this universe and so we get a paradox.

Well, what can it do in this universe? It can look; that's the best it can do. And it can reach and withdraw; it can grasp and let go. With what? With force, effort, energy. That's - it can use this.

But what can it do about its excess force and energy? It can simply say it doesn't exist and it won't exist. Now, that's high-scale postulates. Or at the lower part of the scale, it simply has to have, just has to have, a sufficient admiration and it goes whoooh! And all these tons and tons of energy stored up - they just go.

Now, the big imponderable was "Where did thought go?" You thought the thought and then it went someplace. That was the big imponderable. Well, that is an imponderable only brought about by a misconception on the part of physics of space. All space is new space; space is being manufactured all the time - pampam-pam-pam-pam-pam-pam-pam-pam! Your thetan can expand space and contract space. And he can put space into, not the past, but he can just put it into other space. And this is - you see, he's manufacturing space the whole time.

Space is - there isn't such a thing - well, a guy says, "There's space." And everybody has been able to look into a box - a shoe box or something - and he's seen that there's a space. He looks in this wastebasket and he sees there's a space there, so he thinks that's a static space. My God, that space, as best as I can see here, is changing at the rate of 1/c - just this terrific whir. Every tiny shift in their relationship of the particles of perception, of course, would bring about new space. You've just got continuous new space. But this isn't just changing the pattern of space; it's just new space, that's all. Well, that's time. Time is actually space-space-space-space-space- space-space-space-space-space-space-space-space, and the last space is a different shape than the next to the last space.

And what is a particle of light? Is a particle of light, starting from the sun, the same particle of light which arrives here? Now, this is an epistemological question. And for our purposes, nope: 1/c later - that's a very clumsy fraction, by the way; it's very puzzling. If you sit down and figure it out and scratch your head for a while, you get all confused. That's why I use it. There's this infinitesimal - you see, it's traveling at the speed of light. Well, the speed of light is only relative to other particles. So if it is traveling at the speed of light, that's real great. That is - that's real great. It is.

All right. There isn't any reason why it even exists. But you get this manifestation and every 1/c in time - infinitesimal fraction of time - you've got a new particle sitting there. Therefore, you have a new space sitting there because the space doesn't exist amongst the particles; it's just a demarcation of space. And we're off into the realms of epistemology.

But we can do this; we can do this. We don't have to understand this because it'll fall - all fall out in our laps. There's no reason to be upset about it, one way or the other, or even get confused about it. Because actually, we could sit down and argue about this and argue and argue and argue about this. Because we're at a ceiling - we're at the ceiling of our knowledge when we start talking about the construction of MEST universe space. But boy, we're sure at a higher ceiling than they have been in the past, because they just figured, well, there was space see, and that was it. That was just one chunk of space - which made thought impossible.

Thought, in its behavior - forgetting and remembering, thought, and so forth - would depend on continuous acquisition and disposal of anchor points. So that you've got new space, new space, new space, new space. You get your new space and then make it old space; new space, old space. How does it become old space? Well, it just becomes old space because you say it's old space, that's all. And it's still there. And all the energy deposits there are, are actually in present time. And this is the most horrible thing for a person to discover. Because if he discovers this with no further assistance or therapy, and so on, he'll jam his track instantly, of course. Because he'll look around and he'll see that all the thought he has is with him. You get ridges and so on.

All right. What's a ridge? I'm not inviting you to pull all your thought in. Because you see, after you've realized it's there, you're liable to bring it in and take a look at it and inspect it and say, "Well, what do you know! I have the past after all." And you're answering the question: Where is the past? Here is the past. Well, that's nonsense too. Because you don't have all the anchor points you always had - not by a long ways. They've deteriorated.

If you don't believe this, try to go back in time and recover your 1932 car or something. It just isn't there anymore; it rotted away. So the anchor points have changed. You could find it today. You can find your 1932 car as it was brand-new - in a facsimile. The facsimile is the answer to "Where is the past?"

Well, a fellow could get very upset about this if he didn't realize this orienting schedule: Feeling is condensed looking. Well, what's a ridge? What's a ridge? A ridge is just condensed anchor points.

Well, what then is a beam of energy? Condensed anchor points. Why should you stay out of using energy, actually? Well, you don't have to, because you have to condense anchor points, so that condenses space, in order to have any energy. But you can still make beams of energy and use beams of energy. There's nothing against this.

All right. What happens here when you get this fellow - the second he starts to put out a beam of energy he is swept from one end to the other by a terrible feeling of degradation. What's this one? Because you will run into it. You coax this person to put out a beam of energy and they put out a beam of energy - boy, do they feel degraded. The energy is too condensed. It's thick. It's like glue or soup or something.

Another thing is, is the body happens to be this type of anchor point held together by life type of energy and you can melt it. Let's imagine a man built out of wooden blocks. There's a man built out of wooden blocks. And there are all the wooden blocks. Now, these wooden blocks that he's built out of is this type of anchor point. It's a force anchor point. It's a unit of force and has various capabilities.

Well now, let's assume these - this man has got these wooden blocks - this type of anchor point - glued together. What are they glued together with? Glued together with a slightly different type of anchor point. Now, if we'd take all the glue out of the man with wooden blocks - built out of wooden blocks the wooden blocks will all fall apart, won't they? If you took all the life - anchor-point type of glue out of the human body, it would simply fall to pieces. Let's say the molecules of calcium and the molecules of silica, the molecules of this, the molecules of water, and so on - they would simply fall to pieces. So the body is glued together.

And if you want to make a test of this sometime - I will never make a test of this in demonstration, but you can actually run it. It's very frightening because you can just feel the body start to skid.

Male voice: The glue is a kind of affinity, isn't it?

Mm-hm. Exactly. So you get this - this body is held together... What life has done is convinced (quote) (unquote) the anchor points that they were all alike and had certain functions and had an affinity one for another, whereas they don't. So you could actually, you might say, melt down the preclear. And we get to the next stage.

Now, this is different than simply making him vanish by using up all the effort. This is different. You just melt him down, that's all. If you could turn on enough admiration on the bank, you would melt down your preclear, just like that. Take an awful long time, probably, and a lot of strong admiration, and so on, but the net result of it would be melting him down. That's what I'm trying to say.

And the only point I'm really trying to make all through this dissertation is that it's these anchor points held together with another type of energy and affinity. They're kept in communication over a thing called admiration - all these admiration particles - what we're calling admiration particles; that's the best designation for them, preclear to preclear. They're held together. They're in close proximity and held there by condensed admiration, not by condensed force. These are force particles held together by condensed admiration.

That which is not admired tends to persist. So a guy keeps pulling in these - admiration, and so forth, so as to stay together. And if he doesn't make admiration easily, and so on, why, he'll really persist. Boy, will he be persistent. This comes under the heading of "indomitable will" and all kinds of other things.

But force can go a long way until it runs into that fatal thing called admiration. And if it ran into a small quantity of admiration it would dissolve. Particles of force only exist as beams of force because of cohesion from admiration. And so you admire them and you get space, because they come to pieces.

Now, let's take a little, little gadget here - a little tiny cube. And it's got eight anchor points. And this little tiny cube is all together. Well, what's holding it together? We'll say it's affinity. The expression in auditing for that is admiration. It's an energy. It's a particle. All right, it's all held together very nicely. And boy is that a tight little cube, real tight! And you hold it up there. It's persisting - go on and on for a long time. And you hold it up there and you say, "My, that's certainly lovely." And what do we get? We get the expansive feeling which people get in behavior when they - somebody tells them they have done a good job or something; they get an expansive feeling, see. Well, that's actually these little particles coming to pieces.

Why is it that the cells, bone structure and so on, of an old person are smaller than in a young person? Why is it that people, as they get older; have smaller cells and smaller tissue patterns, and so on, than they had when they were younger? Why is this? The difference then between an old person and a young person is the size of the cell, and this actually is in terms of micromillimeters, it's a, you might say, a measurable size. It's distinctly different. What is this?

It's just the same thing. A little tiny cube: eight force particles. All right. That's a basic unit of mass: eight force particles. And these eight force particles are less admired and less admired and they're just tighter together. This person, throughout his life, has run into less admiration than he thought he should encounter and he shrunk. You see, so you get a tightening-together process in the face of non-admiration.

Tells you that you possibly, theoretically, could monitor how much mass there was in something by monitoring and actually denying it admiration; then you'd get more mass in it. I suppose if everybody hates the atom bomb enough, it will really get condensed. You'd probably get much better atom bombs.

But we're not going out on that we monitor the physical universe with such great ease; it's a big universe. All right.

Now, I'm not being theoretical, oddly enough. I'm being intensely practical when I'm telling you this. Because every preclear who's having trouble with his case, if you asked him, would have this as a common denominator, amongst all such preclears: "It's too tight." He's in too close. His body feels too tight. Things are too close up to him. See? The second that somebody complains to you about the fact he has a constriction in his left knee and the tendons of his left leg are insufficiently long, you can just count on the fact that there is in suspense, in that area, force particles which are cohesed too tightly. There's been admiration there that was not refortified. Postulatewise, there's an expectancy of further admiration. And the thing was constructed on this basis: "I get admiration for this, therefore I can expect further admiration about this."

So it's built on so much quantity of admiration per unit of tendon. That was its design. That was the design of the somatic, if you please. "I get admiration for this and I will then, of course, be able to expect this much admiration for this." Then he doesn't get it. And so, having been built on that postulate or expectancy, he gets a constriction of the force particles and it gets worse. See, it gets tighter and tighter and tighter and tighter. It's horrible that a child who has had tremendous quantities of admiration when very young, builds on that basis and then finds out what is admired, what's accepted, what's appreciated - orients itself completely on this - and then later on finds out that these qualities are not admired.

Now, all of this is built on the basis that one has to receive everything from the exterior. And the interior admiration is all that's going to do it any good in the first place. The fact that he was admired in the first place simply restimulates what admiration he is able to whip up, see? We aren't dealing now with an interchange of energy from exterior to interior.

And so, when he sees that this is no longer admired he stops admiring it. But you'll find everybody making some sort of a feeble effort to admire something enough when they start going by the boards. They do this feeble effort. "Well, there wasn't anybody in the hospital as lame as I was." You see? They're trying to boost it up. It's still there.

This is the same computation as "How do I collect my pay?" Money is the accepted medium of admiration in this society. And the person, when he's paid, turns on, then, some admiration for himself. He permits money to monitor his own ability to create admiration. And if he isn't paid for something... You can just run this on some fellow. You can run this on a workman who is really bogged down and you can get enough rebound just with this so he'll really go back to work. And you just run this "Now, let's get the feeling of not being paid for the work you've done."

And the next thing you know, why, the guy says, "You know, that was real tough," and so on. And the beautiful sadness of how he's been wronged, which the Communist Party loves to turn on - how these people, and so on - turns on and there he goes. He feels - it runs off and he feels better. He feels fine. He gets a sufficient expansion of particles so that he's - again feels it's safe to use force.

Now, the reason he feels it's impossible for him to use force anymore is because he's already too tightly packed with force and he's afraid that he won't get any admiration for the force he does supply and so, if he doesn't get any further admiration for the force he supplies, oh, brother! He's in terrible condition. He's just horrible. Real bad off. Because he'll have masses of energy, masses of ridges and he won't be able to get rid of them.

Another thing is, it tails him in to a point where tiredness is that blackness in the explosion and it is merely a certain proximity of space.

All these emotions come about as a certain proximity or a flow characteristic of space - in space. And all these things tie together very neatly. So, on the one side of it there, the fellow gets afraid of using force because he doesn't think it'll be admired. And if it isn't admired, then it'll be stuck with it. So he can't blow things up anymore; it won't be admired. He's scared to!

There's an actual, practical reason, as far as the body is concerned, why he'd better not use force. See, practical. This actually will happen to the body. If he uses too much force and it's not admired exteriorly, why, he'll be in bad shape.

Well, what's wrong with the computation is that it has to be admired exteriorly. That is what is wrong with the computation; and that is what is wrong with the mind; and that is what is wrong with condensed looking; and that is what is wrong with feeling and thinking and so forth. And the only thing that's wrong with it is the feeling that the admiration must come from exterior. Now, it's never been admired that admiration must come from the exterior! See? So, there is your basic persistence. Nobody has ever admired the fact that somebody expected admiration. And so we take the problem apart on its own basis. See? And there's where the mind goes wrong. And that's all there is to it.

And the other one is, the guy is so scared of using force of any kind that he'd rather wonder what the significance of a relatively innocent black mass is than to look at a big white mass. No, those big white masses bite! They're full of force. Those black masses, they're only laggardly painful, and so forth.

Because you see something white, then afterwards you get bitten. See? There's nothing - flash! And then as the particles fly through the air, fly through space - pam! - whatever mock-up you've got there to feel. And you were looking at this thing, so what did you get? As you looked at the whiteness, you've got condensed space.

See, you looked at the whiteness and it was a spreading whiteness and it came in your direction and so you expected some whiteness to come from the exterior. You didn't realize the only reason you saw it is because you had a viewpoint up next to it. And you think that as it travels through space that it's going to do this and it's going to take these viewpoints, you see, and it's going to drive them all back and it's going to give you, perforce, an energy beam; whether you like it or not, it's going to give you an energy beam.

You were looking at the explosion - let's say, you were a light-year away from the thing - and you looked at the explosion, and you looked at it with a viewpoint. And if you looked at it with a viewpoint, then you got into this kind of a silly situation, see? The viewpoint with which you looked at it was probably a point of mass and it got driven in and so you got condensed looking as a reason for. And there is your explosions. And there is your blackness.

The only blackness that anybody has got hanging around is - it's just reading; reading is a lock, see, on it. Just reading wouldn't do this; reading is just a lock on it.

Motion pictures, fixed distances, are just locks. And they're locks on what? They're locks on nothing but and nothing but, at all, the phoom! and condensation of an explosion. See, the explosion characteristic. All right - phoom! You've got condensed space. And as it condenses, the fellow first starts feeling - feeling good about the explosion and then feeling damned hurt by the explosion and then running an emotional and finally a thought about the explosion. Now, you see how that thing compares and how you get condensed looking out of explosions.

So you handle these two potent forces - these two potent things, rather - and one is the force of energy and the other is the force of admiration. You do this with Admiration Processing for admiration, but you're running explosions in brackets for the other one. And that is about the limit of good, sensible mental processing. Now, I gave you yesterday - gave you yesterday some class processing as a group. I didn't give you Group Processing as we do it.

The concepts I gave you came under the heading of understanding. You see? They were concepts. And we were running these things as concepts. Now, they do things to a case. There is no doubt about this; you can get a change of behavior and all sorts of things on a case.

But you run these for a little while and then you, if you are not exteriorized - it's a different proposition if you're exteriorized sitting down here, way across the line, or something of the sort, and you're a couple of miles away and running this process. That's - it's very easy to do, because that's all a thetan does: change his mind. And a concept - he runs it for a moment; he says, "That's silly," and suddenly integrates it. It isn't that he runs anything out or runs anything in; he just changes his mind. And the concepts show him how to change his mind.

So you see, such processing is very beneficial to a thetan exteriorized; because that's the only process he's got.

But the other case, the very occluded case - I checked this in the class yesterday, and so on. Some startling things happened for a moment, but there was no persistence in the startling thing that happened for the moment.

So the fellow in the body - a fellow in the body - does not benefit from Concept Processing. He has momentary changes but in our terms of what we're doing, for heaven's sakes, don't think that a guy in a body is going to benefit from Concept Processing! He's not! All you may succeed in doing with him is just nailing him down tighter, because he keeps expecting something to happen.

Now, the one thing that he's doing is "It must not happen." He's gotten to an interlock of "The explosion mustn't reach me" and "I mustn't reach the explosion" which is satisfactory to him. It's quite satisfactory, because it doesn't hurt. But it mustn't happen again, or it mustn't happen further, because if it did it will hurt, or he'll lose it.

And he's running, at the same time, the satisfaction of having gotten his anchor points back; he's at least gotten them back in facsimile form. He got them back, all right. The explosion drove them back. But by the time they got back to him, they were black.

You will just have a dreadful time with this guy to get him to do this if you don't watch it very slippily: All you've got to do is to get him to look and he'll really exteriorize.

But he's got to have something run on him before, probably, he will go into this very, very far. He's got to have something run on him.

He's got to get, either by Admiration Processing or the processing of explosions, some sort of an idea that his black pattern can shift. Now, you can even do that with Reach and Withdraw, Formula H, which you will have.

Now, there is an argument here. There's two schools of thought possible at that point. And the other one is that you should never permit him anything that permits him to dabble around with thinkingness. Never! Shouldn't do this. And I've had this reported by auditors, so I'm just warning you.

The luck I've been having is I clip it with Explosions and clip it with Admiration Processing and then hit it with Six Steps to Better Beingness and away he'd go.

And when he was outside, I would immediately run Step I in such a way to turn up his ability to manufacture admiration - and then concentrate like mad on his ability to manufacture admiration. And then he finds out he can dissolve unwanted force in his body and he'll regain his perception. His perception is condensed by an absence of admiration and the feeling that he cannot admire.

Now, do you understand this occluded case a little bit better? We'll go over this many times, but I hope you understand this case a little bit better.

The thing for you to do is to get some reality on your processes. That would be a very good thing for you to do, a very good thing.

And because I have been using them now for months and have had very good luck - uniformly had good luck with these techniques that I'm telling you about - I don't think there will be anything at all wrong with you just sitting down, if you wish, and just memorizing SOP 8, SOP 8-L and the Six Steps to Better Beingness. Why, they're just that rote. It's the same thing of how to drive a taxicab; how to clear a human being - same thing!

Gee, you know, SOP 8 has now been in existence for about - actually, it's been in existence for about eight months; but to my satisfaction it's been in good shape for about five months. And it's just been coasting along. This is an unheard of thing in Dianetics and Scientology, unheard of; it just goes on and on.

Now, the only way we're varying this is with SOP 8-L, which takes the occluded case at Level V and runs in Six Steps to Better Beingness, Explosion and Admiration on him - pam! - and at Step IV puts in Acceptance Level Processing - just educational. See, that's SOP 8-Learning - 8-L: learning. He's got to learn something about life before he's happy about doing anything about it.

And you give him Acceptance Level Processing at Step W and he says, "My God, that's true. I have to be a certain level of sickness." All these things come through to him with great truth. "Holy God!" he says, "I would rather..." (If you will excuse me, I'll be outspoken in this class, because you'll really run into things.) He says, "You know, that horse manure is much more acceptable to me than cream puffs!" He won't be able to understand this until all of a sudden he sees that that's true. So, he says, "Well, all right, so it's true! So it is!" And then he remembers - then he remembers his dog being beaten, when he was a little kid, for having eaten horse manure. And he's still been trying to protect and defend the right of the dog to eat horse manure.

Well, this is what happens to your computations. I didn't just introduce that just to be risque' this morning. I introduced that as the climate of operation on Acceptance Level Processing. Boy, the stuff that is acceptable is the stuff that's been resisted. And we'll go over this cycle of resistance and breakdown before we get through here, very much so.

When a man has resisted, resisted, resisted, resisted, resisted and all of a sudden - aahh - he isn't resisting so much, you see, his level of look comes back in view of the resistance. And his level of look comes back again and then his level of think starts in on the resistance. And his level of think turns, then, to a level of accept. A man that will think about something will accept it.

You go down here to a city official. You pull out a hundred dollar bill and say, "Well, I'd like something illegal."

"My dear sir, I will have you know I am a civil servant! Get the hell out of this office!" He didn't think about it, did he? But the next guy that you went in to see, he says, "Well, I don't know. That-that-that's - that's an awfully adventurous step for me to take. It's - it's - it's very illegal for me to falsify a car registration." He'll take it. You see, he'll think about it. A man will accept what he'll think about.

Only I don't say that just baldly, I just give you that as a practical demonstration of it. So you get people who read books about perversions and so forth; they may never have practiced a perversion but they're right on the borderline. And you start to run Acceptance Level Processing on bad perversions and the most terrific relief comes over your preclear - huh-huu! And he'll finally say, "You know, that's probably - that's probably a terrible thing to do." He will suddenly wake up to this, you see? He reverses the process. Now, how would you run Acceptance Level Processing to extend looking? Be a cute little trick is - wouldn't it? Run Acceptance Level Processing to extend looking. Well, you keep putting out the things he'll accept, making him get them further and further away from him.

So, you have disease. All right, now, the first time you start to run disease, boy, it's right up on him, see? And you get him to accept disease - easier, easier, easier and all of a sudden he's going out. Now, that's the purpose of the bracket, more than anything else, is to get those things out there, see - put a person out there and get him to accept it. You're just extending his looking.

Now have two other people - one to the other - and you're out there further, with more people doing it, remedying more scarcity of viewpoints there. Here he goes. Because anybody that runs his body doing anything is running another person doing it. Don't worry about life all being tied up together. He's all tied up together with something that isn't him already.

All right, then, how do you run Acceptance Level Processing? What variation? Or how do you run Explosions? You get them further and further away, and then you get them tolerated closer and closer, and then further and further away. But remember, we've got distance and location with which we're working. We're working with distance and location - distance and location, continually.

SOP 8 which you find in 16-G, SOP 8-L (and I've told you just now what a variation it had) and Six Steps to Better Beingness - these are the processes we're going to use. SOP 8-L includes Admiration and Explosion.

The most important thing to do for a case is to rehabilitate his ability to admire and to handle force. If you can do this, he comes clean.

The least important things to do for the case, while he's still in the body, is change his mind; that's the least important thing. If he's in his body and he can't get out easily, you've got to make him look. Six Steps to Better Beingness does that.

Now you touch it up a little bit with Admiration Processing, something like that, it'll vary his looking patterns slightly and he'll see that something can happen interiorly.

But he's willing to run a concept and he's not willing to run a look, so you give him a little bit of concept and slide him out into looking as fast as possible.

And as far as an exteriorized thetan is concerned, all you do with an exteriorized thetan is, in effect, run Rising Scale concepts. You just get him to change his mind upwards. Get him to get into happier and happier and happier shape about the same thing. See?

Now, those are the processes we're going to use here for six weeks. And you're supposed to come up with an optimum Group Process.

Let's take a break.