Thank you. Thank you.

Good evening.

I take it by this time you've found the congress.

Thank you. Thank you very much. And here we move into the evening of the second day of the congress. Is it?

Audience: Yeah.

Audience: Yes!

Good. Good. Well, I have too.

All right.

I have here a very, very, very impressive set of APAs. These were the Group Intensive APAs. And quite remarkable, quite remarkable the changes which occurred in that Group Intensive. Of course, these changes don't compare to an individual intensive, but that they changed this much is quite remarkable.

Well, this evening - this evening I would like to start out on this evening's lecture by getting down to business on this thing called Training Drills. And I'd just like to skip and skimp and skid over these Training Drills and CCH drills, not in the hope that you learn anything from them, but just so you'll get the idea that they're terribly difficult. Actually I gave you a session, a group session, in the last two hours of this afternoon that might have seemed to you different than other Group Processing I had given you. Seemed just a little different, didn't it? A couple of people around, they thought they'd do another command or think something else and they didn't.

For instance, I don't know whether you can see these or not, but for Group Auditing that's pretty good, isn't it? Can you see that? The blue line is the sordid wreck the person was. And the red line is where the person ended up at the end of the intensive. These profiles are quite deceptive, by the way, because people have a tendency to move on up a little bit as they settle out. And sometimes a person is on a total serenity, you know, totally serene, and they answer these things straight across the top. And then you give them five minutes of Tone 40 process and they go straight across the bottom. And then they start up. But it is quite remarkable.

Well, of course, I'm not the expert on this. I'm not the expert on this. The people who gave the group intensives are the expert on this. But that's actually Tone 40. And the only reason I modified it at all was - just at the beginning there and took it off of Tone 40 a bit - was to get a few acknowledgments through, get you used to the idea.

Now, you take a profile of this character; that is a fairly high profile already. You see the blue line there? I don't know if you can see it all the way back there; you'd have to have a telescope to do so. But there's a blue line here in the middle. Here's the divisional point. This person was well above what you might call a danger mark on an intensive profile, and has moved up here with several spots clear at the top. Quite remarkable.

But Tone 40 is, of course, indescribable. It is something that has to be experienced by an auditor. Now, at first you say, „Well, that's easy; it's just a high-toned - you know, you just audit high-toned and you ignore everything the preclear says and does.“ And of course Article 16 of the Code of the Auditor - that goes by the boards; there's no two-way communication there.

Now, to get a change in a high-toned preclear is more than we used to be able to do.

Article 16, if you remember, says remain in two-way communication with the preclear. And of course Tone 40 violates that, doesn't it?

Now, you take a profile of this character, which is still on the floor - see, that's down there, still down there. But this person moved up considerably, quite remarkably so for a Group Intensive.

Now, something's very odd. I will give you a drill you can practice at home and you will know what it is after you've done it for a few hours. To describe it to you just as such really is not feasible, because it is, you see. And for once we're auditing above verbal. And therefore if you audited above verbal you certainly wouldn't describe above verbal. Would you?

Now, a profile of this character is terribly interesting, because this was Tone 40 Group Auditing. And to have a profile of this character turn up on a Group Intensive is quite remarkable and is news. Because a person with that bottom profile would've come to your group or come to you, you'd have done some processing one way or the other on them and they would have said, „Well, nothing happened, nothing happened, nothing happened, nothing happened.“ And just to change the monotony, „Nothing happened.“ And then hideously enough the profile would have confirmed it.

Well, what's very fascinating is that we have managed to articulate in Dianetics and Scientology and verbalize existence. This is a rather fantastic thing.

But therefore, Group Auditing merits a little bit of a bow right here, because it has moved up. And using a Tone 40 type audit and the Tone 40 processes for groups, which were used on this particular group, you could be fairly sure that people coming into a Group Auditing session, which you as a Scientologist were conducting or which you as a Scientologist were interested in - you know you bring somebody to a group and you want to have something happen; somebody's auditing them, you're just as interested in something happening as the auditor - and this person is way on the bottom. Let me tell you that three years ago he would have still finished up on the bottom. And for cases that are all the way down to start moving up, that is really something. But it is so eclipsed by how far south we can go today with processes that we've just sort of overlooked saying anything about it. Group Auditing can pick people up off the bottom and do something for them and show them a remarkable increase.

Somebody who was an expert on semantics said to me, one day, he said, „That's impossible.“

How many hours of Group Auditing it would take to do something for this particular case, I would not be able to forecast since we've never made the test. But it'd possibly be something in the neighborhood of seventy-five hours of Group Auditing or something way up there. But this person changed quite markedly in just that.

And I said, „I know it. That's why I did it.“

Furthermore it's quite significant that this person is in the age bracket which was particularly stated to be impossible by - huh! - psychotherapy.

But there is one thing which does not verbalize, and that is Tone 40. We could just... I could stand up here and say, „Well, Tone 40 is so and so and so,“ and read Science of Survival. You could learn something about it in Science of Survival. Look it up, read it up... . Of course, serenity, you've known people in serenity before.

It's very fascinating here.

But it fortunately is not beyond the bounds of experience. You can experience it as a preclear. And you can certainly experience it as an auditor. So it is not describable, but it is experienceable. That's quite interesting. And in view of the fact that it is very easily experienceable and really rather easily assumed - after you've killed yourself a few times - there isn't any real reason to go at it and chew it up and describe it and formulize it and lay it all out cold on the table and so forth, because there's a Training Drill that communicates what it is to you. And that Training Drill is called Tone 40 on an Object. And we'll get around to that in due time.

This Group Intensive, by the way, it might interest you, had a curiosa: the IQs were either low or high. That's fascinating. The IQs were low or high. In other words, Scientology doesn't include one breed of cat. Some of these IQs were down around 70. And some of them were around 160. See, I mean they're just zzhhh.

The essence of modern auditing is intention. People wonder what an intention is. Well, intention is the command factor, as much as anything else. If you intend something to happen, it happens - if you intend it to happen.

Obviously people with that great a disparity do not associate with each other! But a great many of these people were... would have been described by an old-time Dianetic Auditor as impossible cases, or difficult ones to say the least. And several of these people who experienced significant changes in this Group Auditing were above the age level when any psychotherapy is supposed to act in any way. But we don't think they knew anything about it.

Somebody came around one day, and he said, „You know, after you've given the command with full intention, shouldn't you have a signal to tell the fellow?“

Here's an interesting intensive, here. I'm probably avoid... I wasn't an auditor of this group so I've just had this material handed us. So if you happen to see somebody's name on this or something of the sort, why, it's out of my responsibility. The group auditors could complain, but I wouldn't.

If you have full intention on an auditing command, I assure you of something - that the preclear does it. Now, it's more than just knowing the preclear is going to do it. Your intention itself puts it straight across. Well, the only reason I start out this dissertation - having already covered that dirty word control - the only reason I start out the dissertation on the Training Drills and CCH which we are now embarked upon with Tone 40 on an Object is that it as a drill imparts to auditing a rather new flavor. A British auditor said, „You've finally told us where to audit from.“

Now, you notice this profile was way down here, way on the bottom and moved all the way up to the top. Well, just to show you that that was no fluke in answering the personality questions and so on, the IQ of this person went from 87 to 126. Yeah, it's true. Thank you.

Now, there's an old method we used to use whereby we took the preclear on the Tone Scale - we matched the tone as an auditor - and we audited him. If he was a preclear in grief we found out we got along just fine if we sort of said, „Well, (sniff!) go over it again. (sniff! sniff!)“

This person, by the way, will have to be very, very careful around psychologists, because that's ... I think they're supposed to shoot people above 110. I think that's too bright, 110 is.

That was an old system. And we sort of pulled out of that and said: Well, an auditor's a rather disciplined individual, and he gives his commands in an orderly way, and he acknowledges what the preclear says, and he does this and that and the other thing. And we came up a bit Tone Scale - up a bit with our auditing, but we didn't expect to land at this new level.

But it's quite amazing the number of people here who moved up into genius level; and the number of people who were at genius level who moved up into ranges that nobody's ever looked at before. Well, that's the way it is.

Now, I don't pretend that a lot of auditors who are doing (quote) „Tone 40“ (unquote) auditing are auditing at Tone 40. They are maybe hitting 22.0 or 20.0 or 18.0 or something of that nature.

I just wanted you to know we had the... we had the - what's this? Haven't those things gone off yet? Here's some sparklers. Well, the glorious Fourth wound up, I'm told tonight on the radio. The glorious Fourth wound up with the explosion of the biggest atom bomb in history. „And it shook the earth,“ the news report said, „It just shook the earth. It just shook it. Oh, boy!“ How do they know that wasn't us coming to the congress?

At the ultimate if you with full intention from Tone 40 were to tell your chair to rise in the air, there it would go! Do you see that?

When better earth shaking is done it will not be done by the AEC. Thank you.

Well, we don't have to get that extreme to have this work.

Now, I mustn't get off into that particular line because I promised you that this congress was about you and that we are out of the business of what they laughingly call the third dynamic on earth.

Tone 40 on an Object is a very interesting process, which we will take up later. The essence of it is very simple. All you do is tell an ashtray, preferably not a clear and invisible one but a colored ashtray, to sit down. You thank it for having sat down. You tell it to stand up. And you'll thank it for having stood up. And because you're not quite to Tone 40, you use your hand to make it obey you. And after you've done this drill for a little while you will say, „Now, wait a minute. Intention is not the words.“ So there's a part of Tone 40 on an Object, while we're doing this, by which we just say gobbledygook, you know? We say, „Gobbledygook; gobbledygook; gobbledygook; gobbledygook.“ You see, anything like that. Or we say, „Psst.“ Or somebody says, „Eeny-meeny miny-moe.“ Verbalization is not the intention. The intention is the carrier wave which takes the verbalization along with it.

The third dynamic, as it is mocked up here on earth, governments that are at the throats of other governments and so forth - third dynamic - isn't too good an example of what a third dynamic should be. Nor do I wish to make any questionable or disloyal remarks with regard to any government on earth, because we couldn't care less.

So we've stopped counting totally on telling auditors that they must speak clearly - they must intend clearly, now. And if they intend clearly, how they speak doesn't matter. If you do a Tone 40 intention, you can give an apathetic command. It wouldn't make any difference at all. You know, sound apathetic. Give a Tone 40 intention and say, „(Sigh) Sit down.“ It wouldn't matter.

But it occurred to me the other day, something that I just must pass along to you. I promised you I wouldn't mention this, so I'll just glance over it and I won't mention it, see. Did you realize that the only people who can legally rob, kidnap, murder and commit other crimes is a government? If you don't pay your internal revenue the government can kidnap you and hold you for ransom. Did you realize that?

Now, just how high and how far Tone 40 goes has very little bearing on case. For a long time we said, „Well, that auditor couldn't audit well because his case was in bad shape.“ We don't care what kind of shape his case is in now. He can do it or he can't; and it's just as open and shut as that. He can do it or he cannot. And if he drills long enough at it he can do it; so QED.

Audience: No.

Now, here's something very peculiar. Somebody who has been drilled thoroughly in this and who has been practiced considerably in auditing gets to a very interesting state. He walks out and he says to a waitress, „Bring me a steak,“ and he gets a steak. His intention is sufficiently clear that handling of Homo sap becomes one of the easier things he should do.

Well, it's true isn't it?

And anybody who's worried about people and who studies and drills up on these various Training Drills, all by himself will discover with great subjective reality that auditing does not end in the auditing room, but how does one live without it? It's a livingness proposition.

Audience: Yeah.

For instance, I thought I was slipping here last night. It was quite late and I said thank you to a elevator boy. He opened the door for me and said something or other and I thanked him. I said, „Thank you.“ And I threw a thank you at him, you see, with his intention to receive it and so forth. And he just stood there and - you know, getting ready to shut the door. And so I walked out of the car and I turned the corner, and all of a sudden he stepped out of the car and he said to me, „Good night!“ How much circuit did that thank you have to soak through! Well, I didn't particularly intend to impress this man, I wasn't auditing him. And our mission and goal isn't to make every human being into a puppet.

All right. Now, every time they execute somebody, why, they're committing murder. I don't care what you call it. Murder is the violent death of another human being, premeditated. They certainly premeditate it, don't they?

Funny part of it is that you can take a preclear and get an acknowledgment through to him or get a command through to him; just one acknowledgment or one command. You're liable to change his case just like that!

And if you had neighbors that shouted at their neighbors to the degree that these nations shout at nations, you'd get the idea after a while that they were batty.

Well, a bunch of people going irresponsibly through the society giving people orders and thank-you's and that sort of thing and having these people wake up and say, „Hey, what do you know - a world!“ It'd be very damaging.

But I was very interested in this phenomenon that rage, psychotic rage, kidnapping, murder and all these other crimes are only allowable to a government. And I had that thought and I sat and looked at this thought for a little while and I said, „You know, we better get busy! We're getting... we're slowed down there.“

The psychological department of the Bide-A-Wee Social Agency, which runs up in Silver Spring in a state near here that is a traitor to the Confederacy... Never joined the Confederacy, you know. Us Southerners have never forgiven it. Even us Northerners think it should. And us Westerners know we got founded because as a result of. Very important state up here - Maryland. And this state - this state has a social agency with well Marxist-trained people running it.

Now, I've told you I would tell you something about the actual practice of CCH. And you have been experiencing some of this in your seminars. Want to show you something about how to do these various drills. Okay?

By the way, I'm sorry. I meant... I meant to keep sweet-tempered and Tone 40 all the way through this congress. And... But I read this in the paper last night and I'm sure you did too. Some people had a little two-and-a-half-year-old girl and they'd given her an intelligence test and she was so bright that the people were then not going to be permitted to adopt any other children.

Audience: Yes.

The people who were realizing her and her IQ were not associated in the minds of the - hah! - psychologists. See, they didn't think then that another child put in that atmosphere would increase in IQ or change in any way. And we know that a decent home life and that sort of thing can markedly affect children's IQs. If we can change them, then, there must be other things, such as mother's love and that sort of thing that can change an IQ. There must be other things.

All right. The first drill requires two chairs. (Get me two chairs.) This drill is totally devoted, 100 percent dedicated to just one thing, and that is to get a person over having to be or having to act in a peculiar fashion just because he has another human being in front of him. Got that? That's its total purpose. Total purpose.

Psychologist, because it best... I was going to say because it best suited the Kremlin. That's unfair. I know two psychologists in the United States who are not members of the Communist Party! They died before it was formed. I'm going to keep it hightoned, now, I give you my word.

Now, you'd be surprised how in the old days auditors used an auditing technique to cover up the fact they were nervous about facing somebody. We've learned this since I invented this and put it into the Comm Course. (That's all right, you can sit right there. Thank you.)

But they wouldn't let this couple adopt another child because their first child was too bright and the new child coming into that atmosphere would have probably been made unhappy. One of the former staff members of the FC went out to get a job out in - as they sometimes refer to it - the outside world, and went over to Skiplanger's... uh... Klipinger's. They publish a libel sheet, a slander sheet of some kind or another, here. I don't know, it has to do with senator's wives; I don't know what they publish. But this organization gave her an intelligence test before they would take her into employ. And she came back and the personnel director was saying, „Tsk-tsk-tsk-tsktsktsh-tsk. We really hate to employ you, you know. You're too bright for the position.“

We discovered, oddly enough, that this one was tougher to do than the rest of the drills, which is why the lamas - you know, they were the squirrels of Buddhism I've told you before; they took Buddhist stuff and corned it up - why they run this tremendous gradient scale. See, they have a terrific gradient scale which starts with human being and mind essence. You see? And those are the two steps on this gradient scale.

This is gorgeous, you know. I don't know what they think they're pulling by telling people they're too bright or could be too bright, or something like that. I suppose their idea of brightness ... It'll get worked around by the slave mongers yet, where brightness will be defined as „that ability to tell how bad it's going to be.“ That probably will be intelligence. At least that seems to be the trend.

And the way they get there is this process, modified somewhat. Now, all they do in order to do this process is simply sit here. That's all there is to it. He's been run on it.

But an individual, an individual who is in communication with the environment around him, can recognize the factors of the environment; he can observe; he can find out what's going on. And if he is capable of outflowing a high-toned intention, command and so forth, then he's also capable of communicating with those things in the universe which are not in too bad a condition. Don't you see? Out-in.

[to student] Flunk.

So I just wanted to tell you this so you wouldn't think you were going to go totally out of communication with your entire neighborhood. You go around and buy the morning paper and you say, „Give me the paper,“ and „Thank you,“ in a good Tone 40 way - not like that, I'm not trying to blast you out. And the next thing you know, in the next couple of days, why, the grocery man that you bought the paper from, he's saying, „Hello, how are you?“ you know? „Nice to see you.“ People are liable to get into communication with people in your vicinity.

Flunk. You laughed at the audience. Male voice: Oh.

Of course, we know that would be bad. We know that there's nothing but badness there to be communicated with. Psychology has proved... I'm going to keep this on a high tone.

Okay. You pass. That's all there is to it.

But there you see a new hope that has nothing to do with auditing at all. If a strata of the society suddenly came up here that the rest of the society would then get in communication with, boy, we'd have it made.

Now, move your feet around. All right. Now just start moving your feet, see. If I were the coach here, I'd say, „Flunk.“ „Flunk.“ They get this fixed look on their eyes sometimes. You know, get an absolute daze. That's what he's got now, whether he can see it or not, see.

So don't think of all of these Training Drills as entirely and completely dependent upon auditing. And don't think of auditing as a profession which cools down overheated skulls.

Well, that's it. That's confronting.

Somebody wrote me one time, said apologetically, „I'm sorry I haven't been doing very much for you. I meant to when I left HCA class, but I came back and the accounting business which I had kept increasing in volume and is now consulting with other accounting businesses, and we're in the organizational business of accounting. And, of course, we use Scientology in this all the time, but I'm awfully sorry I've failed you because I'm not auditing professionally.“

Now, I point out to you that necessary equipment in order to do these drills consists of two chairs, space in which to put them, something solid for them to rest on, such as an earth, and a couple of bodies. Now, that's actually not very much equipment. Almost anybody can drum this up one way or the other here on earth.

That's quite interesting. It's quite interesting to watch the curve of success of Scientologists. Well, nothing, nothing curves it up faster than these Training Drills I'm talking about right now. They don't leave very much to the imagination on how to handle people.

Now, the best way to do the process is just that way. One acts as auditor or student, and the other acts as coach. And for a coach to sit here... That is not the role of the coach. It's quite rough to be a coach, by the way; it takes hours and hours of this sort of thing to make a good coach. A coach is quite active. But a coach mustn't use his activity to mask the fact that it makes him nervous to see somebody sitting there. And you'll find some coaches doing that.

If you're talking to somebody who is a pretty comm-laggy sort of a fellow (you know, you say, “Good morning,” and he says, „Don't want any“), and you have to do business with this fellow; it's rather interesting to be able to talk to him in such a way that he will not comm lag on you and will answer your questions rather directly and then go off and do what you asked him to do. It's very interesting. It makes it possible for a successful sphere to operate even on Earth today.

Now, it really requires three to six hours of this confronting before it's fairly flat. And things happen while a person is practicing it. Three to six hours - fairly flat.

Therefore, the stress on this was at first auditing, because it does make a crackerjack auditor. All of the auditing drills we have now are all pointed - were pointed - at the direction of auditing. And they have all emerged into a training series on how to communicate and control and own things and have things and do things, you see? And it's just as though we had opened up a brand-new door that we didn't have any intention of doing.

Well now, if a team of two was doing this, one would be the student and the other would be the coach. And then they would do that maybe for three hours and take a turnabout, you see? Well, in view of the fact that if you were doing this by yourselves you wouldn't be going through it on a regular schedule - you'd be doing it evenings or something like that - you'd certainly better lay out a period at least three hours long in order to do this particular one in it.

Now, a person who doesn't know how to audit well couldn't talk to this comm-laggy fellow that said he didn't want any. In the first place you'd flip him if you didn't throw a comm bridge into your conversation. He's liable just to, „Whoow, what's happened here?“ and go completely out of communication, you see?

The only other process that has a demand on time... This has a demand on time, because actually the longer a person sits there, why, the worse off he's liable to get, up to a certain length of time; and that certain length of time is from three to six hours. But an individual... an individual who puts himself into this particular drill ought to have at least three hours to carry it on. Don't you see? The only other process that has this duress on it that I can think of at the moment is what we used to call Op Pro by Dup, which is old Book and Bottle, which is duplicative command. And if old Op Pro by Dup starts to bite, you don't stop.

You talk to people all the time without - well, I'm sure not you, but other people - who would not respond to anything less than an auditing technique. And if you give them something else beside auditing in your communication with them, they go thuuuuh, wobble-wobble, and they don't know which way they're going.

Somebody, the other day, took this literally. We're doing it again at the Academy. And somebody took it so literally that it started to bite on the preclear and the auditor wouldn't let the preclear go for the entire period of its biting, which was fifteen hours! That's pretty good. Give him a hand.

Now, of course, lots of you, being auditors - you being an auditor or you knowing something about it - may have a subjective reality on this from your own viewpoint. But you've got to be outside watching an auditor or two work on the public before you really get a full objective reality on this.

All right. Well, we've got the first one of that. Now, you've had a taste of the second one of that.

I'll give you an idea how things can change. There's another Training Drill called High School Indoc, which teaches mayhem. Its whole thing is to demonstrate that mayhem is feasible, possible and legal.

(Give me a book. You got a program or a book or something? Okay. Good.) All right. You can start there. You can start there - across there.

High School Indoc is very important because most people when they start to audit, they come out of the swamp and they say, „Well... look at the wall.“

Student: (chuckles) „That is the end of this issue. If you intend to take a subscription, let's get with it. Don't leave those intentions hanging around in the bullpen. They will hurt you and sure won't help you.“ That's the end of it. No more. Blank page.

They have a certain diffidence about all this. Well, you take somebody that's been in Scientology for a little while and he's run through High School Indoc and he says to this fellow, „Look at the wall.“ And the fellow who is a Scientologist goes over - clank!

LRH: Well, read the blank page.

„Now, walk over to the wall.“ There's the... there's the essence of the thing. He gets over his diffidence about touching things. Well, after all, touching is merely communication. The person must have been diffident about communication. Let me tell you, us old guys in Dianetics were practically licked when the preclear said, „No, I won't run it!“ You see? There he was lying on the couch suffering, and we said, „Go over it again.“ And he said, „I won't!“

Student: Oh... .

Well, you could persuade and plead and so forth and so on. Well, there isn't any way we knew of then to give the engram a tap on that side and slide it through.

LRH: Okay! All right, do it again. Read the blank page.

But this person wouldn't have us licked today because we wouldn't be running engrams on him until he could follow orders. See, we just wouldn't be running engrams on him. We just wouldn't be running a subjective process that we couldn't watch ourselves with great ease.

Student: All right. The cow came walking down the road.

All right. We take this High School Indoc. Well, you run into somebody in a bar and he's abusive. You walk in and he's abusive, rrrr-rrrr-rrrr-rrrrrrrr. The only answer we had in the past was if he took a poke at us was to take a poke at him. You get the idea? That was the closest man came to contact with each other - a good, swift uppercut.

LRH: Didn't say that. That cow he's got there isn't walking. All right. Just take any line here. Just read me any line. Now, read it as badly as you can read it. Now, go on now.

But I saw something fantastic in a restaurant in London. A little pint-sized girlauditor. It was a German restaurant. There was a fellow going „Rrrr-rrrr-rrrr-rrr. Rrrrrrrr.“ And she turned around and saw that he was finished with dinner and took him by the shoulder and said, „Get up, turned him around”. Said, „See the door?“ He said, „Yeah.“ He didn't have another word to say. He felt very cheerful. He probably - being in a sleepwalking state, he probably never realized that he'd been mad. But maybe he went outside and woke up, who knows? Now, there's an oddity.

Student: The thetan is a glutton.

Originally over in London, why, you'd see a couple of Scientologists - British are very polite - and one would open the door for the other outside of the headquarters and so on. Open the door, you know, and then follow through, you know - not touching him. Now, why, two Scientologists walk along and they walk toward this door and one takes the other by the shoulder and puts him through the thing. You see it all the time. I mean, you've gotten to think of this as totally ordinary.

LRH: No! No.

Those of you who have seen High School Indoc, have been through it and so on, you think this is very ordinary. It's not ordinary! Not out in the society! No sir, not a bit. Not ordinary at all. People are still going this way, you know, „Oh, excuse me.“

Student: No?

We're getting as bad as the Japanese who go „Hss-hss-hss.“ You know what all that hissing is about, by the way? You know it's not an outflow hiss. You knew that. It's a hss-hss-hss. It's an inflow hiss. And they mean by it, „I withhold my foul breath from your face.“

LRH: No. No. I won't pass that. Read it again.

Well, auditors even breathe on each other these days.

Student: The thetan is a glutton.

Well, what brings about such changes? Just Training Drills like High School Indoc, with which nearly all of us are familiar.

LRH: No. No. Now, listen. You pick up the sense off the page and then you get that as your own thought and then you say it to me.

But what brings about reality in any of these things? Well, the funny part of it is, is you could talk all day and all night to somebody in an actual auditing session, telling him - you know, prodding him along, coaching him and so forth. We did this years ago. We used to take tapes of people auditing and then analyze the tape and then put them into a new session and so on. Just groove them anyway we could, and explain how it is to them, give them examples and so on. Boy, that's the slow way.

Student: I understand. The thetan is a glutton.

What I've done here is take auditing apart into its various parts, which is to say take human relations apart into their various, tiny, fragmentary parts. Then you teach a person to do all the parts, and then progressively teach him to do two or three of the parts at once. And the next thing you know it's - there he is, see? And it's this type of synthetic drill which has made it possible for us to come up to a level and which made it possible for us to venture into this - well, from 1950 viewpoint - impossible height of auditing. We could have talked about this and probably did, all day and all night, back in 1950, about how an auditor should audit from a high-toned level, and that sort of thing.

LRH: Well now, that's better. But I'm sure you can do better than that. Now, let's try it again. Let's try it again.

But what was it? What did it look like? And how could anybody be taught to do it? Well, there are ten Training Drills. Deceptive because there's Training 0, which you did the other night and got a... just a little taste of; just hardly any. Confronting somebody doesn't get tough until about the second hour, then it starts.

Student: Got more beef than mutton.

These first ten drills also have some alternate drills or accompanying drills. They're training... like Training 5B, which is another Training Drill. For somebody coming through later, the first basic Training Drills teach a person to do the most important steps; and these others are sort of putting the parsley on it, you know?

LRH: More beef than mutton? All right.

There's Training 13, for instance, which is called Fishing a Cognition. That's how you fish a cognition out of somebody. Well, it can be phrased as a drill and it can be done as a drill. But this is not as important as being able to sit and confront somebody and audit them, you see? Therefore it takes a secondary importance.

Student: The thetan is a glutton.

Well now, the development of these drills began many, many years ago really. We worked them out and we did pieces of them, we set examples and so on. But they didn't get specialized until the middle of '56, and then it was just the communication end of it, which was 0 to 6 - Training 0 to 6.

LRH: Well, okay. That's better. That's better. That's fine. But you can do better than that. Let's try it again.

Training 0 is simply confront somebody.

Student: The thetan is a glutton.

Training 1 is Dear Alice. And getting a phrase or statement or remark across to a person, regardless of the tone, but getting it across to the person is the goal of Training 1.

LRH: All right. All right. Okay. All right. That's good enough. Read another line.

And then Training 2 is how to acknowledge. How to acknowledge a statement that has been made or an action that has been executed - how to acknowledge.

Student: For more than beef or mutton.

Training 3 is repetitive question. Then how to handle originations.

LRH: No. Okay.

And, finally, how to put these together in a nonverbal fashion.

Well, that's all we do on this Training 1, don't you see? The fellow picks up a line, he reads it as his own thought. And we don't care how... We're not going in the direction of elocution. Whether he says it with his little finger raised or not verbally is completely beside the point. What we want him to do is get some idea that it's his own thought and say it to us.

Well, these are quite elementary. A person ordinarily goes all the way up through - those I've just described constitute the Communication Course because those are the steps of communication. And they constitute no more and no less than the communication formula, and take the various parts of the communication formula in Scientology, which are important, and show a person that he can use each one of them. And then he gets a little practice using them all and the next thing you know he's doing a good job.

Now, run a gradient scale as a coach and don't keep knocking a fellow's head in when he's doing not too badly. You see? Give him a little bit of hope. And as he does it by the hour he will get better and better, don't you see? And then become more and more strict.

Well, we move then rather rapidly up toward Tone 40 when we get into the upper - what we call Upper Indoctrination - the upper steps. Now we get - as one of the Training Drills, the first one of those, we get Plain 8-C which is just plain 8-C. People in Scientology say, „It could not possibly seem adventurous to give direct orders to a body, telling it to walk around the room and touch the walls. That's just nonsense. I mean, easiest thing anybody ever did.“

Now, we don't worry too much about intention in a Comm Course until a person hits it the second time. He goes through it once, he can get through and he does fine, as I showed you that little stair-step. All right. The next time he hits it though he's been through Indoc and he knows about intention, so it's whether or not the intention gets across to the preclear that counts. But that is what you're coaching. And that is the only thing you are looking for. You want, of course, confronting, which is good posture and able to sit there, plus the ability to say a line to a preclear so it sounds real and natural. Now, you see how far we've gone there? All right. Now let's take the next step. (You're still auditor.)

But if you thought a little bit you could remember back to a day when this would have been a rough one for you to do. So we have to look at it from a student's viewpoint. A student comes in and he takes a look at this and he says, „You know, that's not quite as easy as it sounds.“ That's just verbal. That's just verbal; we just give him the orders and we hope he executes them.

Now, in this particular case, the coach does the reading of the line. And the only thing that the auditor is supposed to do is acknowledge it. That's all there is to it. And this is just a drill in acknowledgment. This is TR 2. Now, you see we've added up being able to sit there, being able to read a line and now being able to acknowledge. See that? All right. (Now, don't be any better than a student would be. Now, come on.)

Now, we move upstairs from this and we get into a much beefier sort of thing. Now is the first time that a coach gets his revenge - a Training Drill called High School Indoctrination. That was its name, is its name, and all of this training, all it consists of is somebody who will not do, in an orderly and decent fashion, 8-C. The coach gets a chance to abreact all of the boo-boos and nonsense that have been pulled on him by preclears. Very, very healthy to run that side of it as a coach. But that isn't what we're teaching people to do.

LRH: See you at the Freedom Congress.

And there the coach, in this particular case, and the auditor are, you might say, at tooth points. The only thing that's not allowed in there by modern rules is that the coach must not lie down on the floor. Anything else goes. The one reason why is because 8-C by definition is something that is run on a person who can stand up. That is actually today what we say is the necessary basis of running an 8-C process: the person must be willing to stand up. And that is the basis of running it. We have processes that undercut this.

Student: All right.

But we move up into that bracket and actually we have seen, then, all of and the last of what you might call „yak-auditing.“ „Interchange. We're all human beings here together. Let's discuss it all.“ Not really communication. But a person knows, then, these basic rules and we have a new style of auditing which surmounts this. But we have always had to some degree this yak, conversational, relatively informal - a lot of them excuse it by saying it's high ARC auditing; it isn't.

LRH: Let's try that again. See you at the Freedom Congress.

And we have two distinct auditing styles. And one of those auditing styles is just yak. But it isn't careless yak. It actually follows through all those early Training Drills. Pc originates something, says, „My God, my mother-in-law has just appeared in the middle of the room:” Or „I am eight feet back of my head,“ such as happened to some of you here at the last group auditing session. Now, he originates and the auditor takes it up and discusses it, understands it and acknowledges it and goes on about his auditing.

Student: Good.

Now, just as we leave High School Indoc, we get into this breed of cat known as Tone 40. And we get Tone 40 on an Object and Tone 40 on a Person as the two upper drills there. And these things are fascinating drills. They're very fascinating.

LRH: No. No. See you at the Freedom Congress.

A person can tell whether or not he's doing Tone 40 on an Object and is his severest critic. It really doesn't need much of a coach except somebody to stand there saying, „Come on, let's give it - give it the orders from Tone 40 now. Let's Tone 40 it now.“ And, you know, nag, nag. Or give him an idea, „Let's just stand there and put intentions into it; stop

Student: Fine.

talking to that ashtray.“ And we're up there to what I was talking about at the beginning of the lecture.

LRH: See you at the Freedom Congress.

We're doing this ordering MEST objects around. Bodies are an awful lot of MEST; and a person has to be able to order MEST around in order to get much anywhere with a body. But he gets the intention across; gets the intention across into that ashtray until he's completely surprised that it didn't stand up all by himself. Well, a person knows whether or not he can do it, and nobody can fake it. And that is the experience line.

Student: All right.

Now, we do that to a person on an 8-C level. And we walk the person around giving the commands with the intention at this tone of auditing. And do you know that it's a very, very interesting thing to find a good coach at Tone 40 on a Person. That's very fascinating. You can always find willing, ambitious coaches at High School Indoc. See, where the auditor says, „No, I don't want to walk over to that...“ I mean the preclear, you know, the coach, „No, I won't touch the wall, no. Make me! Your shoe's untied.“

LRH: That wasn't bad. That wasn't bad. I'll let it get by. The thetan is a glutton for more than beef or mutton.

The auditor in this case says, „Oh, it is?“

Student: Good.

The coach says, „Flunk.“

LRH: Okay. That got by in spite of him. He yearns for games and pelf for threats to home and self

The auditor running the coach in this is very, very - at High School Indoc - he's very, very prone to backflow, and so forth. The coach says to him, „You know, you're doing a pretty good job.“

Student: Thank you.

And the auditor says, „Thank you.“

LRH: All right. He loves a combat fair, on earth or in midair.

And the coach says, „Flunk!“

Student: Thank you.

Well, you can always find people who will wrassle around and resist and dig in their heels and walk too fast and walk too slow. But it is a little rougher to do a good job of coaching at Tone 40 on a Person, if the individual has successfully passed and has really mastered Tone 40 on an Object.

LRH: This is no fair. You're running Tone 40 now. Now, come on, come on.

Why?

Student: I'm sorry.

Because the body just simply goes on and does the commands. See that? I mean, that's the difference. A person auditing from Tone 40 says, „Look at that wall.“ There he goes. „Look at the wall. Walk over to the wall.“ You really have to put on the brakes. You know, you have to resist.

LRH: He loves a combat fair on earth or in midair.

The place to learn Tone 40 on a Person is in Tone 40 on an Object. Because I see people go into session all the time when the auditor is doing a good job of Tone 40 on a Person. They just go zzzp and into session.

Student: Okay.

That's interesting, isn't it?

LRH: See, that's good. Good average low tone. A problem he will find, no matter what its kind.

It means that a thetan is willing to respond to that high a tone no matter what low tone he himself is in. That's all it means.

Student: All right.

These are processes which are addressed to the thetan. Nearly every preclear a person has ever had was a computer and a valence. Anybody out in the society could be characterized as a computer and a valence. The computer is his IQ and the valence is his personality that he borrowed off somebody else. Computer and a valence. These things are both artificial and neither one of them are under his control.

LRH: Oh, do better than that. A problem he will find, no matter what its kind.

Now, a thetan does have and has mocked up on the whole track a personality of his own. And he is an individual. But out in the society he's never being the individual he intended to be at all. He's in one of these things where „I can't face it, so I'll be it,“ you know? Obsessive closure.

Student: Fine.

Well now, an individual then is behaving along behavior patterns, quite ordinarily, which have nothing to do with his own desires. He's just walking through life on a behavior pattern he never heard of. See, he's never heard of it, he just does it. It's now-I'm-supposed-to, you know? A car skids a little bit and a little tape goes across and says, „Now I'm supposed to scream.” - „Aaah!“ See? And he sees a table. And someone sits him down at the table and he gets down at the table and a little tape goes across and says. „Now I'm supposed to eat.“

LRH: No. A problem he will find, no matter what its kind.

He's taking orders all the time - orders which really aren't .. haven't any decent intention in them at all. Orders which probably have nothing to do with the present reality. They might have a lot to do with 1775 or something, but they have nothing to do with 1957. And the orders are all backtrack orders. Well, his thinkingness, his intelligence, is mocked up as a computer. It's like he has an adding machine or something, you know, and he says, „Let's see now, the multiplication table ...“ I told somebody, one time, „You know, it's possible to derive all multiplication. Are you aware of that?“

Student: Good.

And he says, „It is?“

LRH: You got to get it across. I got to get it. Now, come on, I've got to get it. A problem he will find, no matter what its kind.

I said, „Yeah. You can take addition or even on your fingers and derive the whole of the multiplication table.“

Student: Fine.

„No...“

LRH: I didn't get it. A problem he will find, no matter what its kind.

And I said, „Well, where did you get the idea you couldn't?“

Student: Thank you.

„Well,“ he says, „I memorized the multiplication table.“

LRH: Well, we'll let him squeak by on it. So long as it is snappy, the thetan is quite happy.

And I said, „Well, you did. Well, how much is six times seven?“ And he says, „Forty-two.“

Student: Thank you.

I said, „That's pretty good. Now,“ I says, „I want you to add up six sevens.“ I got him to do this a few times on eight times nine and other things like this, you know. And I finally - my parting question on the thing is, „How much is six times seven?“

LRH: All right.

And he says, „Uh...“

That is actually all there is to this. Now, you see what we've done: taught him to confront, to issue a line, you see, read it to the coach and then acknowledge. And that's... we re up there now to Training 2.

Well, believe it or not, he was in better shape counting on his fingers than he was listening to a machine out here. At least he was doing the multiplication! And if I could break down his machinery, believe me, life was in the process of doing so!

The reason we call it Training 0 is simply for the excellent reason that it got numbered that way.

And here's somebody years out of school. You say, „How much is six times seven?“

All right. Now, we go into the Duplicative Question. Training 3 - Duplicative Question. Now, it isn't ... doesn't require just a little skill, just a little skill, to duplicate an auditing question.

He says, „Yaah-ahh-uuh - I don't know; it's been a long time.“

For a person to say the same question over and over and over and over again - this is regardless of end of cycle or anything else - but for a person to say a question, repeat the same question over and over again usually taxes Homo sap most horribly. He can't duplicate it that much. And in some auditing session he all of a sudden pulls some awful boo-boo. He was saying, „Look at that wall,“ and he says, „Notice that wall.“ And then he doesn't like that so he says, „Well, take a glimpse of the wall.“ And he keeps varying the question. And we've found this is necessary... It enters a terrible amount of confusion to a preclear to have his auditing question that he is receiving not duplicated. Makes a very rugged, ragged session.

And don't think the Internal Revenue doesn't depend on this exclusively. They sent me a bill the other day; I sent it back. Unfortunately somebody paid it by accident somewhere along the channels and so forth. But the fact is they said my addition was wrong. I just think they have a stamp there. The addition on the Internal Revenue form wasn't wrong; and actually there's a little follow-up going through giving the proper addition on the thing and requesting the check be refunded. They just count on it. In other words, they have somebody - every fifteenth return they stamp on it, „Multiplication and addition incorrect,“ see? And nobody down there can add or subtract either.

Give you an idea of just the powers of a duplicative statement: Little boy, he's crying. (Now, this is not an acknowledgment; this is something else.) We say, „Hello. Hello. Hello. Hello. Hello. Hello. Hello.“

Anyway, here's an idea of a computer. In other words, husband leaves wife; answer is suicide. See? You know, one of these computers. See, it figures out the proper answer to all routine situations. And that's his IQ.

All of a sudden he says, „Hello.“ That's just the power of getting through.

So his valence is somebody else he's forgotten he ever knew - that's his personality And his intelligence is a computer that's giving him wrong answers. Neither machine can stand up to anything like a high-toned approach. These machines are pitched around .5 or 1.1 or - the highest level machine anybody ever had was at about 2.0. That's a pretty high-level machine; I'm being optimistic there. And you start whamming into the case from a high tone and the machines go da-da-da-da-da-du! And the thetan has to wake up and say, „What's happening? What's happening? What's happening? Did somebody talk to me?“

Now, the favorite Homo sap method of getting through would have been this: A little boy's crying. He'd say, „Hello. What's the matter with you? Damn it! Why don't you answer me!“ Doesn't work. It is totally unworkable.

You're auditing straight past his machinery. Every once in a while his machinery says, „I will not go on!“

But try it sometime. See somebody who's being misemotional one way or the other - you think it might sound funny maybe, if out in the workaday world somebody sailed into the office with a big snarl on his face and he hates the world, you know, and you say it'd sound very funny if you kept repeating, „Good morning.“ You'd say, „It would look funny to him.“

And the auditor says... And the guy does, unless the auditor himself has been dead drunk and stood on his head.

Listen, he's out of communication. You're making a mistake. You believe these people are in communication, that they can observe, they see things and so forth, just because you can. They don't. This person doesn't notice it; it doesn't seem queer to him that you do this. You say, „Good morning.“

But that is the situation. That is what one faces in preclears. And that's what one faces in training and processing - is the necessity to bypass all this. The next time you take a pass through the Communication Course and the lower Training Drills, having now understood and run the Tone 40 on an Object - see you go through them all again - you find out all of a sudden that those difficulties which you had previously in trying to get an intention across to somebody have just gone; they've just melted away. You see, you have to have the communication formula in order to know what to have an intention about. So it's absolutely necessary to take these things twice over. Hit them both.

The fellow, „Ynah-grrr-ynah.“

So the ladder one climbs these days in training, no matter how it's done... It might only be a copy of The Student Manual, which will be out in a month or so and which is... which are all the facts of Scientology. No opinions or data or theory; it's just fact, fact, fact. You know, scales and processes and axioms. You know, all the pertinent data is all that's in that book. Doesn't matter if he's only going through something like that, he would still be able to follow this track upwards. Of course, it is best followed under a very; very good Instructor.

You say, „Good morning. Good morning. Good morning. Good morning.“

Actually, the student starts down here and comes up through the Comm Course and comes up through Upper Indoc and says, „I've arrived.“

Actual case history on this is that one fellow had to tell his boss good morning, repetitively for over a month, before he finally got a cheery good morning back. The boss had never noticed that he was saying good morning repetitively to him. Quite amazing. So that all by itself has a therapeutic value. Well, now listen. Does acknowledgment have a therapeutic value? Does training on acknowledgment have a therapeutic value?

Yes, he has. He's arrived at Training 9, ready for Training 0. And he comes up through the next ten drills and he hits Training 9 again. He says, „Where did I think I was when I was there?“

Boy, I tell you. You ever hear of the Great Amen? Huh? The Great Amen. It just ended everything; everything quit right at that moment. Well, theoretically we're talking about something of the same order of thing. If you could give a good enough acknowledgment - if you could give a good enough acknowledgment - everything would stop everywhere and vanish. Because all an acknowledgment is, is an end of cycle, you see?

And you say, „You're here now.“

So this has terrific therapeutic value all by itself. You just tell somebody „Okay“ or „Good.“ You give him the great, not amen, but the Great Okay. And an individual is at once... an individual is at once ended on that cycle of action.

Well, usually he's in pretty good shape. But if he's not he can always go up this one, hit Training 9 again. And if he adventured up this staircase, I don't know where he would get to because Valhalla's plumbing is all busted.

Are you aware of the fact that if you can give a good enough acknowledgment the facsimile the person is working upon disappears in its entirety? Were you aware of that? That every place he's been halted on the track by the auditing process is swept away by that acknowledgment. It's a great big broom. It is so effective that a person can be sitting there running a problem of comparable magnitude to his job or something of this character - running problem of comparable magnitude to the office, see. He has a picture of the office, people moving around in the picture, he's all interiorized and introverted and everything else. And you've asked him the question, he gives you some kind of an answer and then you tell him, „Okay“ - phht - there's no picture of the office and he's in present time. Quite therapeutic, isn't it?

What we have here is a trail, a staircase, a series of levels which have no absolute height. And all levels reached via that are better than the lower levels a person's passed through.

Well, do you realize there's therapeutic value in having somebody speak to somebody? You know there's a lot of men died in this world because nobody would speak to them anymore. Well, there's value in just being spoken to. Ah-ha. And for somebody to sit down comfortably is itself havingness. Look at the number of processes which we have combined right up to this simple level of the repetitive question.

Here is a new look. Here is a new thing to do. Here is a new thing at which to practice. The best way to do it is at the Academy or the ACC, something like that. But you could do it at home, fool around with it. Get so snarled up that you have to be instructed on it probably. But it's something new for you to do. And it is yours. And it is well described. And I will take these steps up in detail in the next hour.

You see the processes? That somebody would give you his interest (which is confrontingness), plus somebody would speak to you (therapeutic), that somebody would acknowledge (ah-ha), and that somebody would make a question repetitive until it's thoroughly and completely answered - all these things added together in just the woof and warp of an auditing session accomplish miracles all by themselves. And you can use such an odd question as „Do fishes swim?“ Which is the one we're going to get at now.

Thank you.

(Go ahead - „Do fishes swim?“) This is merely the repetitive question, that Training Drill devoted to that.

Student: Good or bad?

LRH: Bad.

Student: Do fish swim?

LRH: Sometimes.

Student: Good. Do fish swim?

LRH: Sometimes.

Student: Good. Do fish swim?

LRH: No.

Student: Do fish swim?

LRH: No.

Student: Good. Uh, do fish swim?

LRH: No.

Student: Uh.... . do fish swim?

LRH: No.

Student: Yeah, okay. Uh .... do fish...

LRH: I think so.

Student: Oh. Do fish swim?

LRH: I don't know.

Student: Good. Do fish swim?

LRH: All right. Now, I want you to speak more loudly.

Student: All right. Do fish swim?

LRH: No, not quite that loudly.

Student: Do fish swim?

LRH: Yes.

Student: Good. Do fish swim?

LRH: Now, are you putting the intention across with that? All right. Let's put an intention across with this. Let's intend for me to wonder about „Do fish swim?“ at least.

Student: All right. Do fish swim?

LRH: Gee, I don't know. Oh, I'm the coach!

All right. Now, that's all there is to a repetitive question. „Do birds fly?“ „Do fish swim?“ You got the idea? A person gets to a point of where he can flawlessly utter the repetitive question and acknowledge the reply. That is all there is to it. And he just keeps that up and practice gets him good. See that?

The finishing touches on a perfect duplication is done by getting run and running on something like Op Pro by Dup. But we're not trying for these high ranges; we're just trying for the repetitive auditing question.

All right. Now, let's take the next one. Right with „Do fish swim?“ - the repetitive question - we have comm bridge. Now I'm going to give the fastest comm bridge on record. Now, I'm going to be the auditor and he's going to be the coach. Okay?

Student: All right.

LRH: Do fish swim?

Student: Yes.

LRH: Do fish swim?

Student: Yes.

LRH: Do fish swim?

Student: Yes.

LRH: Do fish swim?

Student: Yes.

LRH: All right. I'm finished with that process. Are you in-session?

Student: Yes.

LRH: All right. This is the next process. Do birds fly? Do birds fly?

Student: Yes.

LRH: Do birds fly?

Student: Yes.

We found... You see, we've gotten pretty smart here in the last seven years. We know a lot of oddities and odds and ends floating around. Such as, we know that a sudden change of process throws somebody into a stuck. A swift change of process sticks the preclear on the track. You can find a lot of old-time preclears who are stuck on the track merely because the auditor kept changing the process all the time. You know that?

To keep this from happening, when you change a process you use a communication bridge. And all a communication bridge is, is three agreements: an agreement to end the process we are running, an agreement to continue the session, and an agreement to begin a new process. It's three agreements, and that's all a communication bridge is.

Now, I'm very glad to have this opportunity to tell you that there's been a bad communication bridge drifting around. People have been saying, „I will ask this question five more times and then we will end the process. Is that all right with you?“ Boy, that certainly could never be all right with anybody because when do you end a process? Well, you end a process when the comm lag is flat or when an ability is regained or when a major cognition has come up. And you mean that if you re going to say „five more times,“ you will never really get the process smoothly ended, because it flattened on the second command and then you were pledged to do three more commands! And by that time it unflattened and you're stuck. So you say, „Well, can I run it five more times?“ hoping you come out even.

A proper communication bridge is always phrased „some more“ or „a few more.“ „Well, we'll run this process a little more.“ „We'll run this process some more. 'We'll run this process a few more commands. Is that all right with you?“ see, leaving it indefinite.

Now, if you're going to be terribly precise, you're going to throw in something like „This is the last command.“ You can risk one more command. Particularly since you've said it's the last command, the preclear usually doesn't execute it. All right. Then that's „a few more times.“

Now, I'll give you an example of a rather fast, crude communication bridge. But it's nevertheless a communication bridge. Now, the process we were running on the preclear or the conversation we were talking about to the boss or the salesman - it doesn't matter; what's the difference the process we were running on the preclear was „Do birds fly?“ And we want to ... change that because it's kind of flat - not for the old-time HDA reason that we're bored with it. I'm not being hard on HDAs. Do you know that your Validation Committee is working hammer and tongs, and they wanted to issue a new certificate on validation. And I think it's a direct insult to the old HDAs. We've got some old HDAs around in the operation; when they... whenever we move their offices the first thing that goes up on the wall - clank! - is an old Los Angeles HDA with a gold border, you know.

But we say, „Do birds fly? Do birds fly? Do birds fly?“ and then shift over, with this communication bridge, to „Do fishes swim? Do fishes swim? Do fishes swim?“ Now, I'll just run this - a crude, fast bridge. Okay?

LRH: Do birds fly?

Student: Yes.

LRH: Good. Do birds fly?

Student: No.

LRH: Good. Do birds fly?

Student: Yes.

LRH: Good. Now, I'd like to run this process just a few more times and then end the process. Is that all right with you?

Student: Mm-hm.

LRH: There's no reason I shouldn't do it?

Student: Hm?

LRH: It's okay if I do that?

Student: Yes. Yes.

LRH: That's okay?

Student: Mm-hm.

LRH: All right. Do birds fly?

Student: Yes.

LRH: Good. Do birds fly?

Student: Yes.

LRH: Good. Do birds fly?

Student: Yes.

LRH: Good. Do birds fly?

Student: Yes.

LRH: Good. All right. And this is the last command. Do birds fly?

Student: Yes.

LRH: Good. All right. Now, that's the end of that process. Now, how do you feel about this session?

Student: Good.

LRH: All right. Is it all right with you to keep on with the session?

Student: Hm-mm.

LRH: Notice anything happening that you ought to tell me about?

Student: No.

LRH: All right. Good. Then I'd like to run another process. And this is „Do fishes swim?“ Now, the actual wording of it is „Do fishes swim?“ And is it all right with you if we run that process?

Student: Hm-hm.

LRH: It's all right?

Student: Yes.

LRH: Okay. Now, here's the first command. Do fishes swim?

Student: Yes.

LRH: Good. Do fishes swim?

Student: Yes.

LRH: Good. Do fishes swim?

Student: Yes.

LRH: Good.

That's a bridge. You see all it was, was in essence three agreements. You got that?

Audience: Yes.

An agreement to end a process and let him down slowly, an agreement to continue the session, and an agreement to run a new process. You got that?

Audience: Yes.

Now that's a good, smooth bridge. And you can even take a preclear with a process not really very flat and shift him with a bridge and it doesn't upset him very much. Of course, I know you're not supposed to do that, but once in a while it's necessary. You're running a process on him and his Havingness is going down, down, down; he's going gug, gug, gug, gug, wug. And you say, „What do I do now?“ Well, don't keep on running the process because you'll be picking him up out of the cellar. Run a fast bridge on him, see, and bridge him into Havingness of one kind or another, then bridge him out of Havingness onto another process or flatten the same process. You see? But anytime you change a process you use this bridge.

Well now, that comes under the heading of a repetitive question simply because it is very easy and we are not trying an endurance run in the Communication Course. You got the idea? Now, he'll get his endurance run later on when he runs Book and Bottle, Opening Procedure by Duplication.

But a fellow has to be able to get this knack. And you'd be surprised how few people could really, at first glance, say this twenty-five times without stumbling. Just say one of these commands twenty-five times: „Do birds fly? Do birds fly?“ They get into all sorts of arguments. They get ways and means of shifting off the process. Let's show them one.

LRH: All right. You ask me the question.

Student: What? Do birds fly?

LRH: Yeah.

Student: Do birds fly?

LRH: Well, what do you mean by birds?

Student: Well, they have wings.

LRH: Oh? What kind of wings?

Student: With feathers in them.

LRH: Oh? I don't remember seeing any feathers around here.

Student: Well, the question was „Do birds fly?“

LRH: That was a belated yank back. See?

Now, people do that. They're not supposed to do that. They're just supposed to ask the question. It doesn't matter what answer. You get the idea? Because they're not doing the next one which is Pc Origination. You got it? So any reply from the coach is a reply. That reply gets acknowledged and the repetitive question is asked again. Do you see that? Now, we just add to this little house of cards just a little more steeply. You see, we've already got this now; we've got the repetitive question, we've got the comm bridge. And now we get Pc Origin and take care of this problem which we just mocked up here. See now, he was not supposed to have done this far out of session, you see, on the repetitive question. And the coach would have called him on it.

All right. Now, let's take this next one however; and let's take Pc Origin. All right. I'll be the auditor and you be...

Student: Okay.

LRH: All right. Do birds fly?

Student: Um, yes.

LRH: Good. Do birds fly?

Student: How come you have dragons in your auditing room?

LRH: Huh?

Well, as coach he would call me on such a thing, see. Now, that's a pc origination. You got it? Now, just exactly what I did is what usually happens with a green auditor. He gets some terribly surprising remark handed to him right straight off the cuff. He was sitting there minding his own business, and the pc wanted to know if he had dragons in the auditing room, see. And he goes glah!

Now, there are various ways to handle this. And we've had some arguments about it. It's still a debatable question. The first series we had on it would take care of this. Actually there are different types of origin; all of them come under the heading of „understand, acknowledge and get the pc back into session” - they all come under this heading. Now sometimes you have to state this variously; you have to say „answer it“ - „understand it, answer it, acknowledge it, maintain ARC and get the preclear back into session.“ And that would be the fullest description of it that you could possibly make.

So properly speaking, this should happen this way. This would be properly done. (Give me the same one.)

LRH: Do birds fly?

Student: Uh ... Yeah. But how come you have dragons in your auditing room?

LRH: We don't ordinarily keep them there. Do you see some?

Student: There's a little fire going in the eyes there and the mouth.

LRH: Okay. Where is that?

Student: Right there.

LRH: Oh. Good. All right. Is it all right with you if we continue the process?

Student: Yeah.

LRH: All right. Do birds fly?

Student: Yes.

LRH: Good. Do birds fly?

Student: Yeah.

LRH: Good. Do birds fly?

Student: Yeah. How many ribs do mice have?

LRH: I don't know. I don't know.

Student: Oh, all right.

LRH: All right. Is it all right with you if we get back on the process?

Student: Mm-hm.

LRH: All right. Do birds fly?

Student: Yes.

This is the most debatable of one of these. But to be safe, to be absolutely safe and to teach it so that it would always be well done, you would say „You answer it, acknowledge it, maintain ARC and get the preclear back into session.“ You see that?

Well, to answer anything you have to understand it. So actually this could be handled this way: „Understand it, acknowledge it and get the pc back into session.“ Now, those are the essential points. But sometimes they make a rugged, thud, crunch, thud!

I'll give you an example of how thuddy this can be.

Student: Same one?

LRH: Yeah. Do birds fly?

Student: Yeah.

LRH: Do birds fly?

Student: Yeah. But how come you have dragons in the auditing room over there?

LRH: Oh, yeah. Okay. Do birds fly?

Student: Yes.

LRH: [to audience] See, that's not handling a pc origin. Actually an origination not handled can throw a pc down into apathy very quickly.

[to student] Let's try it again. Do birds fly?

Student: Yeah. But how come you have dragons in the auditing room?

LRH: Where abouts?

Student: Right over there in that corner.

LRH: Oh? How big are they?

Student: About six, seven feet high.

LRH: Okay. They been there very long?

Student: Oh, for five, six minutes.

LRH: All right. Are they doing anything now?

Student: No. Just smoking.

LRH: Okay. Thank you.

Student: All right.

LRH: Thank you. That's okay. Are you doing all right?

Student: Yeah, I just wanted to tell you about that.

LRH: Okay, good. All right with you if we get back into session?

Student: Sure.

LRH: All right. Let's do it. All right. Do birds fly?

Student: Yes.

LRH: Good.

See? Now, that bridge would handle most anything. You say „you understand it, you answer it, acknowledge it, maintain ARC, get him back into session.“

You realize, don't you, that if you don't handle it adequately - if you handle it too choppily the preclear will go out of session, if you handle it too lengthily he'll go out of session. You want me to give you an example of how too lengthily to handle it?

LRH: All right. You ask me the question.

Student: Ask you the question?

LRH: Yeah. You be the auditor.

Student: All right. Do birds fly?

LRH: Yep.

Student: All right. Do birds fly?

LRH: Yep.

Student: Okay. Do birds fly?

LRH: I'm eighteen feet back of my head! Say, isn't it a funny thing!

Student: Um...

LRH: It's awfully hot in here.

Student: Is it?

LRH: Have you been very uncomfortable too?

Student: No, I haven't. Where are you?

LRH: Who?

Student: You.

LRH: Well, I'd said I was eighteen feet back of my head and it's terribly hot.

Student: Hot?

LRH: Say, have many preclears been... been hot that way?

You see? I mean, the guy is no longer in-session. He's just swap-pow and out he goes. And if the auditor mucks it up, you see, and doesn't catch it quick, why, we've got a bad deal on our hands.

Now, it would be preferable, rather than let him get out of session, to handle it with a complete chop.

Now handle that one with a complete chop. Go ahead.

Student: All right. Do birds fly?

LRH: Yeah.

Student: All right. Do birds fly?

LRH: Yep.

Student: Good. Do birds fly?

LRH: I'm eighteen feet back of my head. It's awfully hot...

Student: Good. Do birds fly?

LRH: Yep.

Student: Good.

That is the direction to err. But you should recognize it's an error.

Now, Tone 40 auditing doesn't admit of a pc origin at all. It's a different auditing style entirely. All right. I'll give you an example of that. We don't run this one on Tone 40, so I'll run Give Me Your Hand on you and you originate, okay?

Student: All right.

LRH: Give me your hand.

Student: Uh, all right.

LRH: Thank you.

Student: Say, you look nice this evening.

LRH: Give me your hand. (This is the wrong way to run Give Me Your Hand, by the way.) Thank you.

Student: What are we here for?

LRH: Give me your hand.

Student: How come you want my hand?

LRH: Thank you. Give me your hand.

Student: I didn't eat breakfast this morning.

LRH: Thank you.

Student: I'm starving!

LRH: Give me your hand.

Student: I have a stomach ache.

LRH: Thank you.

Student: Goodbye.

LRH: Give me your hand.

Student: I don't wanna.

LRH: Thank you.

Well, now you've actually covered the essential drills-the essential drills right up to that point - in the field of communication. We put these together on what we call Hand Mimicry, which you have seen in other years; but it is not necessarily a basic or important part of the Comm Course. It's not anywhere near as important in the Comm Course today because we have CCH processes which are quite like Hand Mimicry.

Now, we have covered, just as I've given you, the basic steps of communication. And these exact drills are done just as I've been showing you here - just as we've been showing you.

Thank you very much.

Student: Thank you.

The beauty of them is that they don't chop anybody up or ruin anybody to practice them.

Now, Tone 40 drills can be quite ruinous. Even High School Indoc can blow somebody out of a session.

But these are pretty easygoing.

What you would do if you were doing these just as a practice: you would simply make out a slip of paper and you would make them off as a checksheet, and you would do them with somebody, with him as auditor, yourself as coach for a few hours at a time on each drill until you really had them down and thought you could do them rather well. And you'd find out quite amazingly that even just with those, and even poorly done by you, that your communication level toward your fellow man would come up quite amazingly. Something would happen, in other words, just with that all by itself And it's a pretty good indoor sport; it's a pretty good thing to do.

And a fellow who has had to do an awful lot of auditing probably every now and then should get himself checked out. A couple of auditors ought to get together and check each other out on these things, find out how they're doing. Mostly to discover that they're much better than they've ever been before and much better than they were last time. Auditing doesn't damage you.

People used to think that auditing did damage you. Well, the only thing it damages is the valence and the computer. And it raises the devil with those. Modern auditing is non-restimulative. That's one of the big arguments in favor of Tone 40 auditing. And these drills have a tendency to knock out any factor of restimulation.

We've worked up to a point now where concourse with the human race is not aberrative in any way. That's pretty good. That's pretty good.

I'll take up some more of these tomorrow afternoon. And we'll go on upstairs with some High School Indoc and a few other things if you would like to go into that. Would you?

Audience: Yes.

All right.

Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you for being a good audience. Good night.