And I just got through telling you I spent the morning auditing this case - part of the morning - which has been audited before.

In 1951 I released techniques to at least two of the auditors who have audited this case and as far as I know these techniques have not been utilized.

We can get into this - we can get into randomity much more thoroughly than this but I'm trying to add it up against cases and against living.

One of these auditors I remember scolding severely for not using the next - what is now the next-to-the-last list of Self Analysis, "Remember something real."

There is a very interesting process which is a - merely an investigatory process. You have somebody be in one spot, you see, and ask a question and then have him be in another spot and answer the question.

Every once in a while I run into this. It's utterly maddening. How an auditor can take somebody who is a bit adrift and not make this simple test - knowing the test, knowing it is in existence and knowing it is workable - I'm sure I don't know.

Now, when I say that, I don't mean do it with his mind. Should differentiate this very carefully.

But in this particular case, that test should have been used - oh, but thoroughly should have been used. He could have put in just hours and hours and hours and hours of the same list, just as it came out in 1951.

You give the preclear two chairs - don't get off into psychodrama. That's a - that's a bunch of bunk. That's just an opportunity to dramatize an engram without being criticized.

And there's another thing in 1951, the other technique released - maybe you remember this, but I remember training two of these auditors in this. You put up - you have the preclear put his hand up in front of his face and feel the force of his words. And if he's above 2.0 or thereabouts on the Tone Scale, he of course recognizes immediately that there is no force in words. There isn't any force.

You put him in one chair and you say how - and you have him say, aloud, "How are you this morning?" Then have him move to the other chair and say, "I am fine, thank you." And while he is sitting in that second chair, you say - have him say, "What is wrong with you?" to the other chair. And then get into the other ch- just that phrase, by the way - and have him get into the other chair and have him not answer.

The second I had this preclear do that, she got explosions. Now, this says a great deal - this says a real great deal for these boys, doesn't it?

And then have him get into the first chair again and say, "But what is ailing you?" And then get into the other chair and not answer. And you will work out the valence problems of the most violent schizophrenic you ever had.

Their acceptance level, obviously, must have been on well people. It just must have been, that's all, because this is too obvious.

The only thing wrong with a mind is that it is there. I hope we can really learn that as we go through this. The only thing that's wrong with a mind is its thinkingness. The mind is the substitute of predict.

Now we come out with a technique: "What room?" "What room?" I've been talking about this for a long time - talked about it at the conference. But this preclear refused to have this run on her because it was a psychotic technique. And yet when she just touched one side of this room and walked across this room to the other side of the room and was asked, "Now, is this at a distance from the wall which you just handled just before you touched the wall you're now touching?"

Now, a person goes too low on no-predict and then he can't look and see what is going to happen, he gets into a situation where he figures what is going to happen. And he's pretty good at this. He can use his past experience and so forth.

"Oh, yes. Yes, a different wall."

But, let's get exactly why he does that. A preclear can run this as a concept quite interestingly: "I don't know what's going to happen. I'm looking around to see what's going to happen." Those two levels, see? The first level, "I don't know what's going to happen." And you will have him run through all sorts of thought things.

"How do you know?"

You are not trying to solve very much about how the mind is thinking. The mind will think all right if its problems of randomity are solved. Exteriorization and motion through space solve problems of randomity much better than thinking about them. The fellow will suddenly throw out tremendous quantities of circuitry without even looking at it if you just teach him that he can move and that he can make things move.

"Because I can see the facsimile of a wall I just touched right in front of my face."

Well, of course you've got to bring him way up scale before he can move anything else. But you teach him he can do this. And you teach him that with a drill, just like you would teach a soldier or something. Not to make him obedient but to show him he can move. And you move him from one corner of space to the other corner of space and you move him here and move him there. And have him move mock-ups while he's there and blow up mock-ups and change mock-ups.

We go across the room again and touch the radiator; make sure it's real. And we come across to the other side of the room, touch the wall again. "Now, what did you touch just before you walked across the room?"

You see, explosion is beautiful because, boy, is that making a lot of particles move in a lot of space and - in a very short time. Boy, that's real good, see! Gee, that's real good. All right.

"Radiator."

Here you have a condition in this universe as I told you yesterday - the perception lag time of the universe. If you see by use of this universe's perceptions (waves) something will happen and then afterwards you will find out about it, because sound traveling at eleven hundred feet per second arrives with you sometime later. See? So simple. It arrives with you sometime later. Well, damn it, that's a condition of no-predict!

"How do you know?"

But it is slightly desirable. Don't ever overlook the fact that it's slightly desirable. It is desirable, really. I say slightly and you could take a lot of this. Of course, you've got practically nothing but a spotlight.

"I-I see this facsimile of it right in front of my face."

Now, this gets keyed in on speech this way. You go in; the person that you're talking to is apparently in good spirits. And you go ahead and you say, "Blah-blah-blah-blah-blah. And a beautiful morning. And the birds singing. And everything is going along."

"Well now where is the radiator which you just touched?"

And the other person simply says, "To hell with you!"

"Right here in the facsimile."

"Jesus," you say - baaahhhhh!

People have been trying to run engrams on this case. People have been trying to run all sorts of things on this case.

You go in. You just made 82,672 dollars in a terrifically clever way and it didn't spend any of your future at all. And you've got all of this money, you see? And you say, "You see?" And tremendous enthusiasm. They don't admire it at all. But you look at them. They look like they're going to admire it. And they say, "Money is the root of all evil."

The condition of a psychotic is so heroic, so bloody, so terrible, that of course it follows immediately by Q and A that one can only use, then, heroic, bloody and terrible techniques, doesn't it? And yet these are the people that have to be processed with a powder puff. Oh, how lightly. Oh, how lightly.

People who do this are in two conditions. They, one - neither upscale nor downscale actually; they are both aberrated conditions. They don't have enough randomity so they - they just don't have the capability of making any randomity. See? That's kind of what they've lost. They don't have enough randomity, so they try to make it with speech. Or they're deathly afraid to admire anything you've got because it might set up some randomity. And they can't be predictable! And there's a center pin.

But to show you how far you can go with a technique just as a case history: I actually had this person well exteriorized and blowing things up before I ran room contacts. A little bit rough at first but pushed her right on through it.

They don't dare be predictable. That takes care of both cases. The back of both cases is that. And both cases have this: The environment is dangerous.

Now, this person is a cat person. There's some of that in the Doctorate tapes. There's seventeen or so races which have come down to us. There's the snake people. There's the bear people, the cat people. There's a dog people. These things key in simply on animals and the only reason we're calling them cats, birds, dogs, bears, snakes, something like that, is because that's as close as you come down here. There's a canary people. We just have a word and the word says "canaries" - it's not canaries. But it's something that vaguely resembles Earth canaries so there's your key-in.

They have been hit, not spoken to. They have been hit often enough in the MEST universe where they didn't know they were going to be hit. That's all it takes.

And this case was a cat person. With explosions and with actual room techniques, I changed the color and expression of this person's eyes. Took me two and a half hours, but I changed the color of her eyes from almost washed-out blue to hazel brown. So I knew I'd effected a communication change.

All it takes, actually, to shatter the morale and spirit of a small boy or something like that is, without any causation in his environment, no - no ability to predict it and so forth, without any change of relationship, with no guilt or any of these reasonabilities that are used for prediction and so forth, and without his seeing the forewarning motion of preparation for the blow, have him standing in front of you and then just suddenly hit him very hard while you're smiling. You'll shatter him. And you'll find incidents like that on a case. It's an actual impact, see? He's been hit without warning.

Now, here is an acute state of energy scarcity, which is space scarcity, which manifests itself on what we call an "inverted dynamic." And today we're going to talk about these inverted dynamics (and I was right on schedule). And this case doesn't particularly exemplify this, but this person on explosions began to tell me, "Yes, I'm right up there." Now, just get that phraseology again. "Yes! I know I'm exteriorized - I'm right over there in the corner." We follow this?

Now, don't think that the automobile accident, then, is the tremendous trauma. Birth isn't the tremendous trauma. This is just a slow grind. It's hit without prediction. The automobile accident was only a severe automobile accident if the fellow was driving along the road and then he wakes up in the hospital. He's hit on an oblique angle. He never saw the incoming car. And you'll find this is what they complain about in the emergency wards: "But I never saw it coming. I never s-." If you find anybody who is in a terrible condition, terrific psychic shock, that's what he's saying over and over. And the other thing he's saying, "Where am I?" or "Where was I?" Locational, you see? Both of them are the same thing: is "What the hell was I doing there?" And he's trying to look for some future method of predicting such an occurrence. See, he's got to have a better answer. He knows it now, because he can't predict. And he's just shattered.

Boy, fan your ears for that on a preclear. Just fan your ears real well, because they're on an inverted dynamic. All right. Cover that later, but that's - that's terrific. That is just simply the best doggone psychometry you possibly could ever lay your hands on. That's Dianometry. That's Scientometry.

And then all of a sudden he'll begin to find out he can predict things a little better. How do you teach him that he can predict things?

Here we have a case that is so swimming around in personally generated energy, and she's dodging her own energy much more than she's dodging her own body or MEST objects. Yet, this case is still moving, walking straight up and doing pretty well. Doing pretty darned good.

You say, "What is the realest thing in the room to you?"

Computation on the case is, of course - I look at the case - cat people. She was auditing people at a distance: other people's problems. See what the computations are? How fast they come out? Why cat people? Her eyes look like cat's eyes, that's all.

"Oh, the ashtray."

Well, how do cat's eyes look? They look just like a cat's eyes and you don't have to stretch your imagination a doggone bit. They're not necessarily the color of cat's eyes, but if you'll notice a cat's eyes sort of sweep up. The shape of the outer lid - that is to say, the lid of the eye, the amount of eyeball exposed - it's long and slitty and swept up at the end. Very recognizable.

"All right. Reach over and touch the ashtray."

I know four or five of these cases that are very extreme - keyed way in. Well, all these cat people have about the same computation, so it's awful easy. They - any adventure, misadventure they had with a cat when young - oh, there's a beautiful explanation for why they are cat people. And they had trouble with Papa and cats, or Mama and cats, inevitably and invariably.- It should strike you as rather strange that practically everybody has the same sort of incident but it only keys in on one person.

And you will find that these people very low on the Tone Scale will wait a long time before they touch the ashtray. Why? They're not sure it will be there when they arrive. They're not sure that it won't move. They're not sure that it isn't a billiard ball that is going to be struck in some mysterious and invisible fashion.

So don't-don't-don't get - don't - I know none of you would do this, but don't let some auditor you're training get super, super brilliant, let him draw this fantastic conclusion that the incident about the cat is the incident for which he's searching and is an incident, and that these people who are fascinated with cats and so forth... A cat person isn't necessarily fascinated with cats. They practically never talk about cats unless you push them. That's the difference between people who are just enamored with cats and cat people.

There is why people are very upset in this universe about religion and God. They're upset about hidden things, invisible things. And that's why they use, continually, the hidden standard. In all their arguments and everything else, you'll - they work on this thing called the hidden standard which I'll go into. Remind me sometime, I'll tell you all about that hidden standard. That's a really tricky one. It doesn't belong in this morning's frame.

If this character, this auditor, dreams this up as an explanation, he will then run the incident and hang the case up on the track the like of which you never saw anything hung up on a track. A cat person will hang up on a track when the childhood cat incident is run. Now, you can think this is very, very strange, but the cat involved and the cats involved don't happen to be Earth cats. They are flying cats. And you can run flying cats on these people and it's quite shocking to them, to say the least.

You've got to teach them that they can be there when something reaches them and that when it reaches them it won't kill them and that they can reach something which will remain there long enough to be reached because these people don't think their environment is going to be here two seconds from now. And that's the condition of mind they're in.

But they all have an incident whereby Papa drowned cats, Mama killed cats or they strangled cats. And when looked for, you find this incident and there it is and there - leave it alone. Just leave it alone. It's just a key-in. And if they're down the groove on this at all, they've got so much past history on it and it has happened so often and there are so many incidents under it and it will so confuse them to run it, they're in no condition to run it. There you go.

If you want to understand the mind of a psychotic, that phrase will do it for you. They're not sure that any of this or you will be there two seconds from now; that you're either going to be here, which accounts for the collapse of the line, or you're going to be gone, so forth. And they live on this kind of a perpetual level. So we get again this technique called comparison - corner for corner. This corner stayed there while he looked at that corner. That's the first thing a psychotic will notice. And that's the first little jump up the line he will do.

A cat people, unlike the snake people - snake people are unauditable, practically, because they sort of slither around everything you say and do. They're very, very unmistakable people.

"Look! The corners stayed there ha-ha-ha!"

Well, you know, I'm talking to you here you think very seriously about these kinds and brands of people and you might, therefore, do well just to simply memorize all these people - this isn't the point. It doesn't matter whether there is such a thing as a cat tribe that got imported into this universe or not. But the computation is the reverse computation of the cat.

I've actually had one laugh just like that, I mean, terrifically relieved, see? He didn't dare look at any of that stuff because it wouldn't be there by the time his gaze reached it. Oh, this is real low, real low. You find it - you find yourself stretching your imagination a little bit to embrace how low you can get on something like this.

The cat's computation is "Oh, how independent we have to be." There is nothing quite as contemptuously independent as a cat. And there is nothing so frantically helpful as a cat person. They do not bear that personality characteristic. Call them cat people just because they have eyes like cats. All right.

And the other one is, is something has started a long time ago which is going to hit me any second and it's traveling at a speed which I can't see. And a fellow gets that in space opera and that's why space opera is so deadly.

"Other people's problems”, you’ve seen that. That's quite a button. Well, when it becomes the case computation, thoroughly, a hundred percent, you realize that somebody must be trying to atone or pay for something which is impossible to pay for. And it's just hopeless. These poor cat people. However they got into this universe I don't know. But they're completely lost. They're completely helpless. They are utter final bait for anybody who wants to clip them or gyp them or swindle them - they're trying to help. And if you were to tell a cat person that he or she couldn't help, they'd spin. Just like a spinning top, away they go.

Going faster than the speed of light, an object reaches you before you see it, if you're using MEST universe perception.

You tell any psychotic that he can't help, if you don't find something for him to do, oh boy, you're liable to just pull the string on him. He's gone - round and round and round and round.

You're going along just as nice as you please and everything is just swell and there is a dull feeling. The body isn't there anymore. And very often they didn't even find out what hit it. Do you see why this universe forms - if a person is in it too long - forms too much no-predict?

I've seen three of them have psychotic breaks immediately following a hint from me that they couldn't help. So, after these things happen, and so on, I always find something for them to do. This is no clue to it at all, but I always tell them to do something. But remember, you don't have to be sequitur with such - such a case level, you don't have to be sequitur When they say, "Help," you just define help for them right then and there. And the best way for them to help is ____, and then you just define it. I don't care what you tell them to do. Make sure that people don't get parking meters overstuffed or overtime; have some nickels in their pockets when they walk down the streets and put them in parking meters for people whose parking meters have run over. Anything! Anything. Anything at all.

But the only thing really wrong with a case is your no-predict and your automaticity, if something must be wrong with a case. It's his level of randomity has been violated - plus or minus - been violated. He expected this damn thing to get to him last week and now it's this week and it isn't here. Now that's a no-predict on the slow - the minus side.

Tell them that the best movement in the country is the Boy Scouts or the Girl Scouts and the best thing they can do is go and take Dianetics or Scientology or something into that group or troupe or something. But give them something to do, for God's sakes! Just don't leave them standing there, because they'll - they'll spin on you.

You take some fellow who has customarily been waiting for somebody else's decision and the guy is kind of batty. The ultimate in "too slow" is an absolute nothing. It never gets to him. That's the ultimate in "too slow."

You say, "Well, there isn't anything you can do here, really," so on and so on. Away they go. Wham-wham! Bad deal.

Don't, because of the drama in it, assume that an impact is all there is. There's that nothing, too. But what is the best thing to aberrate a nothing? It never arrives and there was nothing to arrive. That's the worst nothing you can get.

Conversely, you could take one in a terribly bad spin and if you had them in an emergency area of some sort or other where work was actually going forward like a hospital or insane asylum, if you just suddenly said to one of them, "Here! Give me a hand calming this fellow down!" They'd just snap sane right then. They'd probably stay sane. It takes an emergency situation to give them that much juice suddenly.

"And I didn't see it at all and I didn't know when it hit or what it was!" is the other one. But you don't have to add "what it was," because that's just form and an aesthetic.

Well, all right, I got away with processing out Papa and cats by not processing Papa and cats. I just simply had her blow up men and women and herself and cats and then I had her holding cats and the cats were cursing her. And they were going to get even with her and she had to throw them out away from her and have them explode. And she'd get another cat - she'd produce this new cat - and the cat would curse her and say he was going to get even and she'd throw him out and explode. Well, she really was grooving down the line on this, see? She blew up more doggone cats than you can count.

Now, for God's sakes, solve this in a case that's having trouble. Any one of these factors solves, but solve this little one I'm going to give you now in a case that's having trouble: "Who done it?"

And in the process of this, I ran another technique I'll tell you about, whereby you get something to create something to create something to create something. The Quaker Oats technique, we call it - the mock-up within the mock-up within the mock-up within the mock-up. You know on those - some breakfast food boxes, you see a picture of the breakfast food box on the box of breakfast food. And it's got on it a picture and that's got a picture of a box of breakfast food on it and it runs on, on down. I think several artists have gone psychotic trying to get in the last box of breakfast food in the pictures.

I know that sounds idiotic but we're dealing with Homo sapiens. And we'll soar right now down from anything that will embrace the whole track to something that applies immediately and intimately to Homo sapiens is "Who done it?"

Anyway, here we have this case, which is just bank completely starved for energy. And yet under good auditing, energy was under complete obedience. So we found another - found a prime button, "Afraid to get old." And if you add this up, you'll realize what a button that is. It's in a lot, in fact, the majority of old people. How do you know it is? Because they go psychotic. How do they go psychotic? They turn into senility. They've been pushing the time track and locking themselves up in time so hard that they push themselves back into childhood and restimulate it so that they won't be old. Fighting age, fighting time. Time is the single aberration. Okay.

They read detective stories, not because they like detective stories or their acceptance level of "baby murdered" and so forth - a lot of explanations if you want them - but it's, who, who, who? Who was the fellow? And you just ask - you just put - preclear on a case-and I want you to do this today while you're processing - just put it on the dial and just ask him, "Now, who did it?"

Let's - let's see how we do this. All right. We blow up old people. We blow up old people and we blow up old people's voices and we blow up old people's sight and we blow up their hearing and we blow up their teeth. These - you know, teeth is one of the most intimate communication perceptions a person has - crunch! Very intimate.

And those that are very wary and very differentiative and so forth will ask you coolly, "What are you talking about?" You see.

Anyway, just keep blowing these up, see, in big quantity, way up in space and so on.

And fend around, "Well, who was responsible?"

Well, before I'd done very... And then - then we turn around and we have little children in mobs with this great determination in them that they're going to grow up. And of course that's what's the maybe. For the first part of a person's life, he's got to be old. For the last part of a person's life, he's got to be young. And between these two when they lock up on the complete maybe you get senility. Okay.

And your other phraseology will kick it because they're carrying one like that right in present time. There's hardly anybody who isn't. "Who was responsible for it?"

Blew this up and what do you know? She was saying, "Well, we were five thousand feet up, see." And here she was saying, "Yeah, the mock-up is right out in front of me. And there's a platform under it. I've got this platform under it and there's this and there's that and so forth and ..."

But what you want to find out is not "How did you place the guilt?" The actual identity is the one you're looking for. And they have fought identity so long that identity has gotten awfully important to them and it's why the guy is hanging on to a body. The fight with identity. "Which identity was it?" You see? "Which - which - which was it?"

In other words, by the time we'd done what I've just described to you in various ways, and done nothing else but this, we had this person actually exteriorized. What do you know! They weren't exteriorized and detached from the exteriorization. They weren't on the - in other words, we'd inverted the dynamic. They were - this person was five thousand feet up, see?

And so they'll cling on to this identity because identity has gotten very, very scarce. How'd it get scarce? Because he couldn't acquire identity? No. Because he didn't dare acquire identity? No. It's just because those that operated other particles in his vicinity were not identified. And that's terrifically specious and spurious and it's very low toned.

They weren't here saying that - here over to the left - saying that the thetan is five thousand feet up having exteriorized it from the body. See, they are exteriorized already! Then they have to take something out of the body and send it five thousand feet up, see, and audit it. But this person really exteriorized and pam! went into valence as herself and was considerably easier and the color of her eyes flicked suddenly; it was quite an amazing sight. Her eyes kept going kind of flickery and all of a sudden - pow-pow!

What the hell difference does it make who pushed the rock? The fact is the rock was pushed. And your preclear who's having a hard time has to come into some kind of a recognition of this: that the "who"...

And one of the techniques I use which I omitted there was I had her blowing up eyes - just lots of eyes. When she first tried to put up two eyes they kept slapping together, naturally - double terminal. But eventually got her blowing up eyes in tremendous quantity. "Eventually" - within three minutes. All right - from the moment she first began to have trouble with eyes to blowing them up by the billions - individually, collectively. At first she couldn't blow up green eye - blue eyes; she could blow up brown eyes. And we blew up the brown eyes and we blew up the blue eyes. And her eyes were evidently trying to keep from being brown eyes or something of the sort, which accounted to some degree for the color shift. All right.

You'll find that the trouble with the "God complex" is simply the trouble of "Who is God? What is his name?" You might... You see, it's - this is the reductio ad absurdum. There's no sense in this. And you'll never find any sense in it.

Then we finished up with completely objective techniques. Now, these techniques - any of these techniques, you see, are quite valid for any level of any case. But these objective techniques particularly so. And if you want to get a line charge on a pc, you follow this technique.

All you have to tell somebody is, "God is a fellow by the name of Caterwump and he lives on Mount Sputtergut." Gee, if you say it loud enough and with enough conviction and so forth, you'll have an enormous religion going immediately. That's all you have to say, you see, because of this terrific anxiety of "Who done it?"

How about you standing? You're handiest there, John.

So we get this thing, "Who made the universe?" And what have you got there? You've just got the ultimate of uncertainty. Obviously the thing is made, so they want "who" made it.

Now stand up over by the window and look inboard toward a spot here. Now you say to the spot here, "How are you?"

Well, when you're asking for who, you're finding nothing because that's an identity. You see? You haven't solved anything merely by saying, "This is a lighter," if you're talking to a Swede. You've solved nothing.

Male voice: Mm-hm.

He says, "Who is this?" And when he's saying, "What is this?" he means purpose. But if he were asking "Who is this?" and you said "Joe," he would be satisfied. Why the hell should he be satisfied? Well, that's so he could say "Joe" next time.

Well say it!

Well, I don't know that anybody is really excited about God today the way they used to be. But they all have the feeling like they're going to meet him or something and they'd like to know what name to call him and this is very - this is very upsetting to them. And they want to have enough - this who is simply - and they want to have enough responsibility hung on this person so they can go and look this person up and have some randomity.

Male voice: How are you?

You'll find out some person who is really fixed on "Who done it?" is – “they just haven't got enough reason to punish and it runs right off into reason to punish." So that's the next thing you run on a case. You get a drop on the meter, "Who done it?" Then you run "reason to punish." See? Just do it and you will understand a lot more about it than I'm telling you right now - "Who done it?"

I don't know. Come over here. Turn around and face the window and refuse to answer. Okay, go back there.

Your preclear finds that it is enormously and horribly important to have a name. Here he is a poor little defenseless baby and someone comes along and hangs the name "Aloysius" on him. He's utterly defenseless. But this is it. This is a thing. This is a particle. It's a valuable particle of some sort or another which can move around and he can do things with and so on. Terrifically valuable particle.

Turn around and face this spot again and say, "What's wrong with you?"

Why is it so valuable? Well, it identifies him. It gives him an importance. When you don't have an identification you don't have an importance.

Male voice: What's wrong with you?

I want you to subjectively examine that because your preclear is very often not hanging on to his body. He's hanging on to his name. Hm - boy! That is the third stage removal, you see, in terms of thought. You can't hang on to a name. You can't get attached to a name. You detach him from his name and he can detach from the body.

All right. Now refuse to answer it.

One of the ways of doing this with a child - this is the simplest process in the world. Kid comes in, his name is Johnny Jones.

All right, go back over there again. Now look at this spot here and say, "You've got to answer me!"

You say, "Say 'Johnny Jones.'"

Male voice: You've got to answer me!

He says, "Johnny Jones. Whatcha talking about?"

Turn around. Now say, "What do you want to know?"

You say, "Say 'Johnny Jones' again."

Male voice: What do you want to know?

And he says, "Johnny Jones. Well, what are you talk - getting at?"

All right. Go over there again.

"Well, just sit there and say the name Johnny Jones now twenty-five times. I'll count them."

Male voice: This is driving me ragged. I'm wearing out.

He says, "Johnny Jones, Johnny Jones, Johnny Jones, Johnny Jones..." All of a sudden he'll say, "Who am I?"

Say - just say, "Are you all right?"

You've shaken him into his first questioning attitude on the conviction which has got him beautifully nailed down.

Male voice: Are you all right?

You actually can take a preclear and practically exteriorize him on that. He's nailed down by his name. "Who am I?" he will say. And then he will start to find other names. He's got to find a lot more names now. To hell with that! He's him! And that's the first thing he's got to learn.

Now say, "I'm fine now that you started talking to me”.

He only asks "Who am I?" when he loses his own sense of identity. He only loses his own sense of identity when he identifies himself with space. He's got to go back through and be perfectly willing to identity himself with space. And then he won't have to be space anymore. And then he won't have to have a name, because he wants exterior designation that says, "You're not nothing."

Male voice: I'm fi ... Yeah. Yeah. I'm fine now that you started talking to me.

Now, what do you do after that? "Desire to punish." There's one more step instantly, immediately following.

Okay, that's - that's - this technique, it just goes on along this line.

You've got, "Who did it?" Then the "desire to punish," that's the first reason that shows up in the thing. And then you've got desensitization of name and this flies apart on "the right to be nothing." You'd better run that. See, you're moving him closer and closer to reaching it - the right to be nothing. And this is run with concepts, brackets, matched terminals and so forth. That's one of these a - haaa sort of a technique.

Okay, this is - demonstrates to you that you can very closely approximate mock-up Q and A on this line and it just works beautifully. Okay.

Okay. Will you please investigate this and look over its subjective reality. I don't expect you to integrate all the theory I've been giving you this morning in a lump sum. But there are ways that you can use it and you should figure out there are ways that you can use it.

Now, did this, and came right on up the line.

"I don't know where it's coming from" as a concept will put a guy immediately in a - into thousands and thousands and thousands of engrams. I mean it's the little handy jim-dandy one.

Well, anyway, the techniques not to run on this case - actually, one was taking a chance by running explosions, because one saw that obviously we had an inverted dynamic. This case is not what you would call psychotic - not even vaguely. The case is on a balance, however, between what you might call "Theta universe" and this universe, to a point where the body - it's much more easier to substitute a mock-up for the body - you know, give the mock-up more validity than the body.

But just recognizing that you are on a mission of demonstrating to somebody that the universe is predictable to some degree will do an awful lot for you as an auditor when you're auditing Homo sapiens. And if a person is terribly bored, showing him that it's not predictable in every way and shape and form. And those are the two sides. It's not entirely predictable. You're really not going to be here for the next seventy-five years keeping this house, missis. There are other things going to happen.

Now, this case could be in terrifically bad condition and most cases, in that case's boots, are in bad condition. This case happened to be moving very, very well for this condition.

Well, all these things resolve by exteriorization because it's motion of particles through space and moving particles in space. See why exteriorization works out as your ultimate therapy.

Now, an invalidation of the case had occurred which blew off in several different auditing sessions. And the invalidations were just the basis "Oh, that technique is too much for you." She wanted to run a certain technique, so - so on. "That technique is too much for you."

Okay?

And she came up to me, really, to find out whether or not she was all right. I told her she was all right and she was. Felt lots better. People had been worrying her.

We've got let's see, now if we did the assigning yesterday and so on. You grabbed a brass ring last night I understand, Bill. De Young. I understand you grabbed a brass ring last night. I trust you have been in your body very thoroughly all during this lecture. (...) Well I hope you have, it's a very serious lecture.

Now, but this is an interesting session just from that basis. It took a long time to run from a basis of just time - two and a half hours' worth of auditing on this sort of thing and yet we were auditing with pretty good rapidity.

Gave this technique: The idea of the hand across the mouth and I had her say - oh yes, there was another technique I used - I had her say, "The terrible force of words" against her hand. And she agreed with me completely, "Yes, her words had a terrible force." She could feel them, right there. How do you like that? She never did get to the point where words did not have a terrible force because this case is running on a computation where she backs up every word with an energy flow. And she's sufficiently crossed up in universes that when she speaks, she speaks with beams to the mock-up of the person she has made to substitute for the mock-up of the person. Interesting, huh?

So, of course, the terrible force of words was definitely there. And every time she would speak like that she would blow the mock-up up. She couldn't keep it from blowing up; she was having a bad time with it. So I had her put her fingers on her windpipe and feel the vibration of the windpipe with her fingers and she finally straightened out very well on that. She blew that and then I ran some Comparison.

But I ran another technique - a live technique, that is to say, not a mock-up technique - having her run this - none of these are psychotic techniques; these are just techniques - I had her say, "Dirty word" and then rush - jump out of the chair and - I'll show you.

Sit right there.

Turn your chair around. You - get your chair now. Turn your chair sideways.

Okay. Now say, "Dirty word." Sit down in your chair. Now say, "Dirty word."

Male voice: Dirty word.

Now reach out and grab it.

Male voice: Ho-ho! Like that?

Yeah. And say, "It'll betray me."

Male voice: It'll betray me.

Now hide it.

Male voice: I hid it.

Hide it!

Male voice: Oh!

Physically.

Male voice: Okay, I'll put it in my pocket.

That's all right. Put it in your pocket. Now say, "Dirty word" again.

Male voice: Dirty word. You want me to grab it?

And say, "It'll betray me."

Male voice: It'll betray me.

And hide it. Now, say that again.

Male voice: Dirty word. This can go here.

Well, when you catch it out there, say, "It'll betray me."

Male voice: Oh, yes. Dirty word. It'll betray me.

Say it again.

Male voice: Oh, this is goofy! Dirty word. It'll betray me. I'm getting my pockets full. Some more?

Go ahead.

Male voice: Hm. Dirty word. It'll betray me. Dirty word. It'll betray me.

Go ahead.

Male voice: Dirty word.

Now think the dirty word as you say "Dirty word" and make a substitute for it.

Male voice: Oh, okay.

Think the dirty word.

Male voice: I'm going to get all mixed up here.

Come on.

Male voice: Dirty word. Nah, they won't betray me.

Okay. Go ahead.

Male voice: Ahh! Neither will I.

Okay.

Male voice: Dirty word. None of them will!

Well! Turn around. None of them will, huh?

Male voice: No, none of them will.

Okay. Do it a couple more times.

Male voice: Trying to remember some more dirty words. Okay Dirty word. No, that one won't either.

Okay.

Male voice: Dirty word. Forgot to think of one.

Well, what do you know. Okay, skip it.

A person down the line - thank you - a person down the line... Did you feel any pressure coming off in any fashion whatsoever? Did you?

Male voice: No, the only thing is that I just - the only thing was that I thought I might say one of them, and then I knew I wouldn't.

Okay, now you know you won't.

Male voice: Yeah.

Well, you'd be surprised how far this would go with a person who is bad off. Every word they say they've got their hands mocked up, dancing in front of their mouth to grab the word and throw it away. They've got beams and things out in front of them to catch things that might - might slip, return them and put them away. They got all kinds of mock-up mechanisms by which anything which might betray them can be caught before it betrays them and then they can stow it. None of you are psycho. You don't appreciate this. But you'll see it. Words are objects to these people.

This girl, as she did that, had the words exactly located geographically at the time she caught up with them and had to really stretch a couple of times to grab them because they were slipping through the wall. And then after a while sort of decided the same way, you know, "They're not going to betray me. Ha-ha!" That's the only certainty you're trying to reach.

Well, that's a sane certainty. But that is the end product of psychoanalysis: "Words will betray you. We'll know all those vile and terrible things about which you're thinking. All we have to do is analyze what you're saying and you have betrayed yourself." It's just a typical MEST universe game. It has the same therapeutic value as the actual commodity which the betrayal represents. None! But it has a reverse value. It is destructive. Why is it destructive to have a person under inspection? Because he might betray himself so he's given the idea on Q and A that he has something which might be betrayed. Q and A, see?

Everybody is waiting for him to betray himself with a word, which gives him the idea that there is something in his past which he may betray to you. You follow that? Q and A. You manufacture, then, a guilt complex in the person and he doesn't know what he has done, but he knows he must have done something, because he obviously is betraying himself with his utterances and actions. Right?

So, we have manufactured a guilt complex about a no-incident. And the incident doesn't exist, so we leave the patient fighting a zero. We leave him fighting nothing in his past. He hasn't betrayed himself because there's nothing to betray in the past. Think this over. I see you're laboring on it. Your wheels are grinding.

Male voice: Has this ever been done for appearances as well as words?

Oh, yes! Sure, I mean, you could...

Male voice: Would you just have them mock up out there - a mock-up of appearances?

You don't mock up anything. You play it in real life if you possibly can manage it.

Male voice: Well, what would you have the person do? Grab an object as an appearance and then...

Ah, I see what you mean, yes. You don't - you don't run this in a mock-up.

What I'm trying to put home to you is, you would have - a pimply face - you'd have him put out an array of a pimply face and he reaches out and grabs that, see, and hides it. And he reaches out - and you have him put up the mock-up of a poor or cheap or shabby shirt - and he reaches out, see, and grabs that and hides that. You get the idea? And the whole thought is when he grabs it, he must think "It'll betray me." See?

And the other thought is somebody holding a pimply face or a shirt or a dirty word out there - they run right into this immediately, because they get the thing going out and returned, and they finally decide that if they do anything it'll be returned to them. So you bring them up track and then you'll decide people will hold it out on them. And that's ridicule. So you get pimply face, ridicule; cheap shirt, ridicule. Somebody is holding these items out there. "It betrayed me" is the thought which follows with that. Simple, supersimple technique. Idiotically simple.

The fact of the matter is, is everybody is putting out mock-ups all the time in terms of light waves. They can't help but put up these mock-ups in terms of light waves. And these mock-ups are consecutive and continuous and they're radiating out from their body in all directions, obviously, because other people are receiving them.

So a person gets the idea he continues to put up this mock-up and he decides he doesn't want to put up this mock-up anymore so he goes into occlusion and won't put up mock-ups. You should get that real clear. You should drill on that until you've really got that.

Your face is putting up MEST universe patterns to somebody else, obviously, all the time. So therefore, you are putting out mock-ups which other people are grabbing. And they remember them so they hold them. And if other people keep telling you that they remember what you did or what you looked like - even if it's complimentary - it eventually will get on your nerves something fierce. Because it makes you aware of the fact that you're putting out a mock-up continuously and consecutively from your body out into the air and to the people around you, whatever else you're doing. So the obvious answer for this is try to keep from putting out a mock-up. In other words, become a priest and wear a cassock or something. No, what do they wear - hassocks?

Female voice: Cassocks.

Male voice: Cassocks.

Well, you don't put out a mock-up if you possibly can help it.

This is the hooded, occluded figure, see? It doesn't want to put out a mock-up. And this is the better way: Every time he sees light, he ducks back in; he's using it like radar. At the same time he's also keeping light waves from putting out a mock-up. Follow? You've got to stop those light waves and keep them from putting out a mock-up.

The fact of the matter is you could do that, but that's why and how you got into one of the genuses of mock-ups: facsimiles. Because you don't want to put out a facsimile, so you stopped facsimiles of yourself from going out. See how that is? Because other people receive them and if they receive them and remember them, they are obviously holding them, so they have something of yours which they are holding and it's out away from you and you can't get it back.

Auditors fall into a dramatization of this when they're trying to run out facsimiles from people. They're trying to wipe out the mock-ups they have made.

They're not interested these auditors, at that level of the scale - they're not particularly interested in making a preclear happy or healthy. They just want to wipe out all the mock-ups they've made in the past which are being held by people which makes them, of course, ridiculed.

This is not the universe of betrayal. That's obvious. Its waves go in - pound! pound! pound! pound! - and reduce the thetan to zero. And then they turn around and reflect back out and are held at a distance. And nobody wants that last. That last is really fatal. That is the return of the wave. And they're holding these images out at a distance and that is ridicule.

And when the sun shines upon Joe, its waves then turn around and reflect back to Bill, and give - whether Joe wants it or not - a mock-up of Joe to Bill. Bill will eventually get impatient about this if Joe shows any disposition not to like Bill. Therefore, this is the "friendly universe"; everybody has to be friendly. The best thing to be in this universe is friendly.

& ...se [universe?] and then we see more and more and more that he only copied what he saw. In other words, he was obsessively in communication with a universe that was held in agreement with one and all.

& Now, the CDEI cycle begins at the moment he departs from his own universe. He's curious what would happen if. And if we just wrote that on every tombstone that was out here in every cemetery, we would have the only truthful inscription present. "Dear and loving mother of twelve mourning children," a usual inscription, "Departed from his beloved business and family," another inscription and so on. We look these over, sometimes they're dramatic.

& Like there's a couple out in Columbia, California that are very dramatic. One of them says, "Killed by a," this is not a direct quote, "Killed by a sniveling skunk that also tried to cheat him at cards." And the next grave to it says, "The sniveling skunk," erected by his brother, the first man's brother. Very interesting, but those things are not necessarily truthful. But if you put it on there, CDEI....

& ...and eventually becomes homo sapiens, OK? (Well, that's one of the attainments, stopping time...) Well how could you; what is time but a change of location of a particle in space? So if you change the pace of a particle in space, you'd stop time. (That's right.) That's right. And there's your time, time stops.

& OK. Now we've got this reflective quality down, I hope you recognize that. I want you all to do this little silly exercise. It's very silly, but I want you to turn around with your whole body to stop something, not just with your hands. Just turn around and face your whole body with that mock-up. You know, it's coming out radiation, and then your effort to stop that radiation. Do it a few times. Then get the idea, have somebody else stand up there and you just stand there and try to stop the radiation that's coming from him. He's not doing anything. Let's not go into speech or worry about speech. Let's just realize that this is a matter of a pretty solid mock-up, but it's mock-up, it's universe.