I am going to go over a type of processing with which you may be familiar already, but I think the extent to which this processing will go might startle you. It probably won’t startle you till you start to use it.

Self-auditing is a tremendously dangerous, highly aberrative, depressing practice which many preclears fall into, and out of which they do not easily walk.

There is evidently a thing called theta. Theta gets enturbulated — gets mixed up with too much MEST and so forth — and becomes entheta. And theta has a very funny manifestation: A little bit of theta will attack entheta and try to drive it out. They are opposite polarities.

A man can go around auditing himself on phrases, and his sense of reality gets lower and lower; sometimes his sonic will turn off and his visio shut down, and his track becomes nothing but entheta from one end of it to the other. I wouldn’t make anyone start self-auditing; I wouldn’t really do that to anybody.

Entheta will try to attack theta and drive it out. This is actually a death mechanism we are working with, but it is also a survival mechanism.

The funny part of it is that the fellow who is built out of solid granite, after he has been at it for about a year and a half, has some slight possibility of getting enough anaten and enough phrases off his case to knock out some of his chronic somatics. But he will have put himself lower on the tone scale.

If a fellow comes around who has a lot of free theta and sees things badly disorganized, his hands just itch until he can start bringing organization to it. That disorder, of course, is entheta. When it gets organized and nicely aligned it becomes theta.

I know of a case which self-audited for one year; at the end of that time he was able to force himself to repeat the phrase as many times as necessary in order to reduce it, but he was worse off mentally and physically than at the beginning of that year. A whole year is a long time for anybody to self-audit. In a month of self-auditing your preclear can so thoroughly louse himself up that you as an auditor may take two months to straighten him out. It is very serious.

Now, the amount of theta which that person tries to put into the thing gets kicked back against by the disorder, and he gets enturbulated too, to a certain degree. But theta will follow the natural law of attacking entheta. They attack each other, definitely.

You don’t stop people from self-auditing simply by saying to them educationally “It’s very bad. You must not do it.” That won’t stop them. They have triggered into some kind of a phrase that tells them they have to do it themselves and so on. There are all kinds of phrases which can cause self-auditing. These phrases get triggered and the next thing you know, the stuff starts piling up; they are up and down the time track and then one day they strike a grouper or something like that, the track collapses and then they audit phrases at random. The phrases are always available in present time.

In the business of living you will very often find a theta person matched up with an entheta person; they are partners in business or some such thing. Actually, they can be joined up in several ways. The theta partner, who is well above 2.0, is providing the amount of theta necessary for the below-2.0 person to survive. But the below-2.0 person is bringing death in small quantities and failures and so forth to the upper-tone-scale person. Furthermore, you will find the entheta person attacking, one way or the other, the theta person. There doesn’t have to be any wide framework of cause or reason; there isn’t any apparent cause to it. A lot of causes are stated: “I’m doing this because . . .” and then there are twenty-five specious reasons on the part of the entheta person. But the entheta person simply will attack a theta individual.

When people start this there is only one reason for it. I am talking about the mechanical aspects of it when I say there is only one reason for it.

An entheta society will attack a theta subject — inevitably.

A person has a reactive and an analytical mind. There are two ways his attention can go. There is the interior world — the world of the time track, the world of memory, the world of perceptics — and there is the exterior world, the world of the environment and of present time. Which way is the person going to go?

The theta comes in over an entheta area and tries to damp out and convert the entheta; the entheta will move over to a theta area and try to enturbulate the theta. There is a constant conflict going on between these two substances.

The analyzer is mainly dedicated to resolving problems in present time out of collected data to solve the future or present environment. That is what the analyzer does.

Naturally, if you take 1.9 entheta and 2.1 theta, they are so close together on the tone scale that they are practically mingling. But you take 1.1 entheta and 3.0 theta, and they will really come together and try to mix up — one trying to do one thing, the other trying to do the opposite. The entheta says “Succumb!” to the 3.0, and the 3.0 says to the 1.1 entheta, “Live! Get organized, get reasonable.”

The reactive mind is solely concerned with the prevention of pain, bluntly, and past pain is supposed to keep an individual away from certain present time environmental things. Left in balance to some degree, a person can pack around a lot of engrams and still be successful. The second we begin to really restimulate this interior world, though, something happens.

Most of the arguments that you will run into could be resolved — as far as you, who are wondering why those two people are arguing, are concerned — just by looking at the two people who are arguing and at how they stand on the particular subject about which they are arguing. You will find out that it is probably theta hitting entheta one way or the other, because theta will go into agreement with theta at its approximate tone level, and entheta will go into agreement with entheta.

Here we have a matter of where the attention is focused. Are this person’s attention units devoted to the exterior world or are they devoted to the interior world? In order to be devoted to the exterior world, they have to be in present time. In order to be devoted to the interior world, they have to be back on the track. Obviously, a person is back on the track in the environments of yesterday when he is interiorizing, or introverting. He is back on the track. He can latch up more and more and more attention units back on the track, and he can really fix himself up; or an auditor can do that by running him halfway through this engram and halfway through that engram. This is the corny idea of “getting him restimulated so that you can find an engram to run.”

Of course, it will try to go just a little bit further: entheta, being entheta anyway, turns all MEST into enMEST and disorganizes everything, and it is going happily down toward succumbanyway. So theta and theta going together reinforce survival, but entheta and entheta going together, although they are in perfect agreement, agree that what we have to do is succumb. The only way they keep a balance, then, is entheta and theta going one against the other — an interactive principle.

The person will be back there looking at an interior world; his attention units are back on the track, so they will be devoted to yesterday. They are not remembering into yesterday; they start running into yesterday. And the exterior world gets neglected. The analyzer is then not up high but is operating very, very sub-optimumly.

This does not depend on reason; it can be demonstrated. There is almost a laboratory demonstration of this possible.

You want your preclears extroverted. Don’t get them worrying about what happened to them just so you can do a job of processing on them. In other words, don’t stir them up and introvert them just so you can find more engrams. If you could pull the trick of keeping your preclears extroverted continually, you would have well preclears.

Someone asked a little boy, “Do you remember somebody in the fourth grade that you liked a lot?”

A somatic turns on when attention units are fixed upon an old injury which causes that somatic, and they are fixed upon the time that injury took place. We are right there in fundamentals, basic fundamentals. The attention unit is back at the time he was two years old getting his leg broken, so he has a pain in his leg. Also, the aberrative content, the phrases, the perceptics and so forth are being viewed by the very attention units, evidently, which are viewing the pain in the leg.

The little boy thought for a moment and said, “Oh, yeah — that Billy Jones. He’s a good boy; I had a lot of fun,” and so on.

Now, it so happens there are two sides to this. There is the one concerned with aberrative content as far as thought is concerned, and the one concerned with aberrative content as far as MEST is concerned — the two sides of the organism, theta and MEST. The theta can be aberrated or the MEST can be aberrated. When the MEST is aberrated you have physiological upsets, you have physiological somatics. When the theta is being looked at — viewed interiorly — of course you have mental aberration taking place. These are two sides of the organism — theta and MEST.

“Can you remember somebody in the third grade that you liked a lot?” “No, but I sure remember one that I hated. Oh! I hated that boy!”

When theta gets enturbulated it drives against the computational devices of the mind that such- and-such has got to take place. This is the anatomy of an engram. If it can’t do that anymore, if it can’t drive out, then, theoretically, the somatic is there to force it. If the entheta side of an engram cannot be expressed on the thought level, then the enMEST side of the engram tries to force it to be.

This doesn’t become significant, perhaps, until you see the frequency with which it happens. You go into a deposit of theta and release a little bit of that theta and the next thing it does is attack entheta.

When a person is a little bit interiorized it means that the entheta side of the engram is operative. But suppose the environment drives harder, forming up a lot more locks and so forth about the interior environ — in other words, refuses to let this person dramatize the engram, refuses to let that entheta thought pattern take place. The environment says no. The engram says, “You can’t eat.” Obviously, in the environment, he has got to eat, so he keeps on eating and the entheta side of the engram keeps getting kicked back. If it gets kicked back thoroughly enough, it comes right on over into the enMEST area and turns on the somatic. That is basic theory on it.

This is Validation Processing. What you are actually trying to do is build up a sufficiently high potential of theta in the case in order to get the entheta attacked almost automatically and knocked flat. The skill involved on the part of the auditor is in letting a high enough potential build up, and in working with the preclear until that high potential is built. He can build a high enough potential of theta on the thing to bring a person right on up the tone scale, and the person will get up out of the band where he will attack entheta. In other words, instead of 3.0, the preclear can get up to 3.5 or 4.0, and low levels of entheta which are very far down and close to death and so forth can then be ignored. However, if you take a normal and pick up just a little bit of theta here and a little bit of theta there, the next thing you know, he will crash right straight into the entheta of the case.

In other words, in order to get this chronic somatic off, you have to get the attention units first off the enMEST side of the engram and then off the entheta side of the engram and into present time.

It is hard to keep people out of it. You watch this; maybe for the first session or two this person can run theta moments without skidding badly, and then he is liable to go straight into entheta.

Now, there would be more ways of doing this, more ways of skinning an engram than one.

Now, if you can build up a high enough bolt of lightning, a high enough “wattage” of theta, you can just knock the entheta on the case galley-west. But if you don’t build up very much theta, of course that theta that you have just gotten free from the case will tear right back in and get itself enturbulated again.

We have the entheta side of the engram. There is merely enturbulated theta over on that side. The guy comes down the tone scale to a point where he is resonating at the level of the engram, so he starts thinking in its level, and then the environment won’t let him think that way and the enMEST turns on — in other words, the somatic turns on — and he has a chronic somatic.

The most ambitious thing in the world is a little bit of theta. It sure gets ambitious. And it is a funny thing, but there has to be a considerable volume of theta before it can ignore entheta. So, if you get a considerable volume of theta it actually will ignore entheta, because if the entheta comes anywhere in its vicinity, the entheta straightens out and becomes theta.

Bad auditing will do the same as the environment. He is trying to express the thought, he can’t express the thought, it gets all snarled up computationally and the somatic gets turned on. You as an auditor are sitting there and the next thing you know, you have a chronic somatic turned on by auditing. You can do this. Or you get an engram that isn’t ready to reduce — it is too overcharged and nothing can be done about it — so you go away and leave it. If this happens to the preclear too often, he will get a whole series of somatics.

Theta coming in the vicinity of a large deposit or a large amount of entheta will become entheta. Entheta coming into the vicinity of a very much larger amount of theta will become theta.

Certainly, if we use this postulate of introversion and extroversion, we start to get results. What you want to validate on this case is present time and the analyzer — reality, affinity, communication. This not only picks the person up the tone scale but extroverts him, and extroversion of the preclear is tremendously desirable. Introversion of the preclear occurs at those times when the interior world has so much threat and enturbulence and menace in it that when the attention units go back to take a look at what is happening they then don’t leave.

The reason you have to go over an engram time after time after time is that you have so doggone little theta to invest that it takes many times over an engram to erase it. You understand that your time span is stretched when you are running an engram. If you had a lot of theta available when you started to run that engram, it would go out quickly.

This is a self-auditing case. But a self-auditing case has introverted to an exaggerated degree, even more exaggerated than the usual introvert. It is a tremendous exaggeration of introversion.

We are getting into something which has a measurable potential. I hope one of these fine days somebody measures it. It is sitting right there. Here is a whole universe full of stuff for somebody to look over. But regardless of that, we don’t at this time have to know that much about it, its structure and anatomy, to know how to do Validation Processing.

How do you cure this person of self-auditing and cure him quickly? Validation Processing will do it. All you do is start picking up analytical moments on the chains presented by the file clerk or analytical moments on the chains of his chronic somatics, and keep running those analytical moments and keep him from going into the entheta and the somatics which turn up. In other words, don’t start re-auditing him on an entheta-enMEsT basis; keep auditing him on a theta- MEST basis, and the next thing you know, he will extrovert. It is something that happens almost suddenly. He will extrovert and he will stop this self-auditing! You just get the chains and scan or Straightwire the theta moments of those chains. You want the analytical moments on those chains.

Most auditors go at a case as a theta unit, and what do they naturally attack? They attack entheta. The preclear looks like entheta to them, the preclear looks like engrams; they attack the engrams, the secondaries and the locks. If your auditor was up around 4.0 he wouldn’t do this. He would sort of smooth out this preclear and all of a sudden dust him off and the fellow would be sane. They used to do this with faith healing — just say, “God bless you, my child,” and the fellow would stand up and walk away. We are not that good. So it requires a considerable amount of restraint on the part of the auditor — an educational restraint — for him to build up any kind of potential at all in the preclear, because the auditor will find himself sitting there with a sixteenth of an erg of theta, and he gets enthusiastic and takes the two cents’ worth of theta he finds on the case and dives for basic-basic or a big secondary. That little bit of theta goes in there — it’s perfectly willing — and gets crushed by an overwhelm of entheta.

As an auditor you are going to have a hard time with this person at first. You will pull up a little tiny erg of theta and it is going to go right into that enMEST, and you are going to have to pull up another one and another one and another one, and all of a sudden you will start to get this chain in some kind of shape.

After the auditor has done this a few times he starts to get a little bit leery of what he invests. Before this time, we didn’t realize thoroughly what we were doing in terms of investment — and it is investment. An auditor has to be a very good investment banker if he starts playing around with Validation Processing.

The chain itself has been turned inside out by the breaking of dramatizations of engrams. You turn it around, outside in, again.

Your preclear starts to get the idea after a while, but at first when he starts to run through some pleasure moments — just starts to run through some pleasure moments, scanning — he will go right off the line into entheta: “No, I can’t remember a time when I was happy, but here is this time when . . .” and so on.

That is what you are doing. You are turning on the analytical side of the chain and you are turning off the reactive side of the chain. When the reactive side of the chain is on, the person is introverted. When the analytical side of the chain is on, he is extroverted.

You say, “Let’s remember something pleasant now.”

Now, I have been asked whether a person could do this on himself — self audit this Validation Processing. It won’t work, because if all the theta this fellow has is being attracted into his enMEST continually, think how much less chance he has of keeping that theta out of the enMEST if he does not have an auditor and the group theta body which is present between the two. If he doesn’t have that, then every tiny little bit of theta that he gets up just goes right back into the entheta.

“Well, all right.” So he goes along and builds up a little more theta, and then he crashes into the entheta again.

This is why your preclear can’t remember happy moments. Actually, he can remember happy moments, but he may remember them only for a millisecond — not long enough to record the fact that he remembered them. He can remember a happy moment, but then it is gone.

You take a case that is pretty low on the tone scale and you have a terrible struggle. In the first place, it is an awful struggle trying to find what was considered to be a pleasure moment; that is a tough struggle right there. You will play around with just giving the guy the idea of what you want, and if you give him the idea that that’s what he wants, he will invest that thought. It’s not even his own theta, but he will invest it!

The more minute the quantity of theta is and the more massive the quantity of entheta, the quicker that theta will dive into the entheta. Or vice versa: the more massive the body of theta and the more minute the body of entheta, the quicker that entheta will try to dive into the theta. Of course, that is a fatal dive; the other is also a fatal dive.

You never saw such profligate investment in your life as what a preclear will make when he is fairly low on the scale.

So there is your modus operandi. I want you to fix that well in your minds because there are too many preclears walking around who are self auditing, and I imagine there are even some auditors who do self-auditing.

You will occasionally run into somebody who has terrific engrams on the manic level about being happy, and you start to scan pleasure moments and the whole thing will reverse on you. You will find yourself scanning over stuff that you shouldn’t be monkeying with. You are really scanning entheta that has represented itself as theta, and you scan this for a while and the preclear gets unhappier and unhappier.

Now, the case of the chronic somatic is really no different. The chronic somatic means that some chain of aberration on the case has been turned inside out, or introverted. A single chain has been introverted so thoroughly that not only is the entheta flattened down but the somatic itself is on. This means that it must be a pretty thoroughly turned-on chain. It is up to you as the auditor to find out what chain the chronic somatic lies on.

So entheta can be in many guises.

You may find that the chronic somatic has four, five or ten chains, each one furnishing a portion of it, the somatic itself having restimulated some other chain. So what you do as an auditor is take these chains and by Straightwire or Lock Scanning run them one by one on theta analytical moments until you get each piece of them extroverted.

Validation Processing is called so for another reason. There is a principle of postulating a reality with creative imagination: That reality will come to pass which is most agreed upon and postulated for the future. If lots and lots of people agreed that something was going to happen in the future, the chances are it would happen. This is not very esoteric. If we suddenly agreed that the great thing to do would be to paint the front of the Foundation a bright purple — if we all agreed on it — one of these days I suppose that it would be bright purple. That is postulating a future reality.

Each chain has two sides. Every chain has two sides. It is an unlucky chain indeed which has minimal analytical and maximal entheta, maximal reactive. That would be a rough deal, and that is a rough deal to turn inside out. But in a case like that what you do is work other things on the case and other related material until you finally do get up enough theta to knock the whole chain out of restimulation.

Now, if you postulate a creative reality for the future, there is a better chance that the future will have in it a creative reality. If you postulate gloom, unhappiness and bad tidings or war with Russia for the future, chances are that is what is going to happen. If everybody in the United States agrees that the future isn’t worth living anyhow and so on (this is lower-tone-scale stuff), they are of course 0.5 and they are agreeing that the thing which is going to happen is death.

Knocking things out of restimulation is a very, very important step. Here at last, with Validation Processing, we may have a very good technique for that. I hope it will hold consistently and I certainly want your data on this from the field so that we have a greater volume of data than we have now, because the data is not as great as it should be. We have only checked it on about fifteen cases. It is keeping up with a kind of consistency, though, so that you can just extrapolate it on out.

You as an auditor are really practicing and playing with this principle. You can say if you want to, and seem to feel, that your preclear is going to be sane, happy, cheerful and well and so on, and then all you do — doggone it — is pay attention to his reactive mind! You seem to be agreeing that sanity is what you want from your preclear, but what you are validating is his reactive mind.

I know this technique turns off self-auditing and I know additionally that it will sure pick up tone, and I know you can pick up tone high enough with it for the whole case to collapse. You can watch a preclear go clear on up the tone scale — and he is really up the tone scale — then all of a sudden he dives back down.

Of course, you are playing the same trick of attacking entheta — theta attacking entheta — and you naturally attack the entheta and try to disenturbulate it.

By the way, with this technique you are doing black-and-white, Aristotelian two-valued logic. For instance, if you have a chain of rejections, you run all the times the person was accepted. You accentuate the positive.

There is nothing wrong with doing that unless the amount of free theta on the case is too slight to be invested. So Validation Processing actually occupies the sector up to about 1.5. Above 1.5 it starts to lose efficaciousness; it isn’t as effective above that level. You don’t get this sudden chain lightning response.

Now, the chronic somatic lies on a chain. What you do is just pattern Lock Scanning — except you take the reverse, analytical side of the chain. Let’s say the chronic somatic is in his left foot; you want to know where this left-foot somatic is. Maybe it is on the birth chain, maybe it is on the broken-glass chain. Where did the broken glass lie? It lay in roads and it was in green grass. So you pick up, and keep consistently to the analytical level, times when green grass was around and was very agreeable. Pick up all the times when green grass was pleasant.

With very low-tone-scale people and people that are hard to work and so on, you really have gold in your hands with this Validation Processing — if you have enough restraint yourself to work it out. It requires restraint.

Or maybe you take the birth chain. A birth is a composite chain; it has to do with sex, it has to do with doctors, it has to do with nurses, it has to do with water, it has to do with a lot of factors. You can take any one of these chains, or maybe take every one of them that you can possibly think of that was contained in birth, and turn each part of that wrong side out. Ask the preclear for all the times the doctor was a good guy and all the times the nurses in this fellow’s life were nice and all the times when water felt good, and so on — all on the analytical side of it.

For instance, the fellow starts running into theta moments but then he says, “I’ve got a terrible headache.”

You are not interested in pleasure. You can badger the devil out of a preclear asking him to get pleasure, and there he is at 1.1, and he finally confesses to you that he had a little puppy dog one time and it got run over, but it was still alive and he was able to pick its eyes out! That isn’t going to get results.

Your immediate training-pattern response is to say “Who said that? (snap!)” But that is also your mechanical response as theta, tackling the entheta in him.

Now, you may run into grief on the chain of the chronic somatic. For instance, a woman may have a chronic somatic that prevents her from carrying children through a whole pregnancy; she has miscarriages.

Now, on upper-tone-scale processing you have enough theta between you to really do something about the case. The preclear and the auditor, together with the group theta, can process the devil out of this case and just really roll it along. But down in the lower band of the tone scale, frankly, the amount of theta which has to be brought into being before you can do some good, effective processing is considerable.

If that is the type of case you are running, you simply have to keep jockeying the case on its miscarriage chain. There are obviously pleasure moments during pregnancy, there are obviously pleasure moments around and about sex and so on, and this will be all on the same chain. You just start picking up all the analytical side of the chain and keep her on it. She will probably still try to dive in, and she will probably try to cry, and if this case is not too low on the tone scale you may find yourself suddenly saddled with a secondary that you didn’t know existed. Of course, at that moment you would run the secondary if the case was able to run a secondary.

So what do you do? You validate the analyzer. You refuse to have any truck with anything which is not accepted as good reality by the preclear. You validate the analytical mind, you validate the reality level. You don’t want reality which the preclear does not accept as reality.

Let me give you that caution again. When a case is at a level on the tone scale chronically — by behavior and so forth — which makes it impossible for him to run an engram or a secondary, don’t suddenly essay to run engrams and secondaries when you are doing Validation Processing. Keep your processing where it belongs according to the tone scale; don’t change that just because you are using Validation Processing.

You notice in the lower bands of the tone scale that when you snap your fingers at him and he repeats a phrase he is not hearing this phrase. He does not even have a sonic impression on it. It just occurs to him, he repeats it sort of weirdly and maybe it turns on a boil-off, maybe it does all sorts of strange things, but he doesn’t know where it came from. You can get a file- clerk response from him and he will say, “That’s Papa,” but that is not reality to him. So, in using Validation Processing, you maintain a level of reality no lower than that which is readily accepted as real by the preclear. You maintain this level of reality — ”Does it seem real to you?” “Lets go to a moment that really seems real to you now,” “Let’s contact something which seems very right, that you know happened” — and he will start giving you things that he knows happened. Sometimes he even comes up to the point of knowing he is sitting on the couch. Sometimes that is where you have to start! “Let’s find something real.”

Validation Processing can be used on any case. If you can attract that case’s attention and get him a little bit in present time, or even if the case is way up the line, you can do Validation Processing. Where it is evidently most efficacious and most effective is up to about 1.5, because that is an area where you can’t run much; you can’t produce spectacular results.

When processing present time for a very low-level, well spun-in case, you sometimes have to look around the environment and check various items in the environment until you find one item that seems real to that preclear. All of a sudden he is liable to say, “Why, yes, the light switch seems real to me. The wall doesn’t, but the light switch — that’s real.”

This whole subject lays to view an enormous experimental potential. There is a tremendous amount here which can be discovered. We know in Validation Processing that, used as I have outlined it, we have produced certain results. We know we can extrovert people, and we certainly can knock chronic somatics out of prominence so they will just dive out of sight; we can do these various things. I have a hunch that it leads a lot further. I think that as we go on and investigate it further we will find more and more angles; there will be more and more procedures, and certain ways of handling certain chains will turn up. We might smoke out a way of turning on grief quickly and easily or turning on the somatics you want so you can run them. There are various things that you could do with this procedure, and we are looking at a pretty wide scope when we look at this. The principal reason I am giving it to you is that it has potentialities.

You start from there. At that moment you have picked up a theta line, so you follow it through. “What else is real?”

Standard Procedure turned up last July, the theta-MEST theory turned up about October, and Validation Processing turned up about two months ago. Those are three major advances along the line. There was one more when Chain Scanning of engrams was developed. That was a definite advance. And the fact that people could be run and run on boil-off turned up out of another research project as being of some use. Evidently, you can keep a preclear boiling off, but let me caution you that after you keep that preclear boiling off for a short space of time — maybe three or four months — he will boil himself down to the bottom of the tone scale, unless you extrovert him.

“Well, your suspenders. You’re not, though.”

Boil-off is beautiful stuff. You are going to get all kinds of boil-off. Actually, as you advance on a case with this Validation Processing, you can get more boil-off than I have seen with anything else. You can really put him on the back of the stove and let him stew!

Now I’m talking about the extreme case; this is Present Time Processing. Don’t plunge this case into something which he can’t credit as real himself, because the case will stay static or get worse; doing that, you are just stirring up the entheta and making more and more entheta.

For example, in one two-hour session, a preclear was twice started at the beginning of a chain. The first time he got two incidents, two happy moments on this particular chain, and went out. When he came to, he was given the same chain to scan again and found three happy moments and went out — just conked out colder than ice — and that was the end of two hours. There was that much boil-off sitting around on this case!

Your ARC with the preclear and the theta body which you compose as a group have been forgiving you a large number of sins. ARC — the theta of the auditor and the theta which is attracted into that group — has been masking by its existence a number of sins on low-level cases. In other words, you had quite a bit that you could get away with without recognizing that it was a wide latitude and that you were getting away with something.

You are going to get some cases which you will start this type of processing on, with scanning and Straightwire, and you will be able to go along for quite a while before you suddenly begin to get entheta manifestations or anaten. Evidently, what you are doing is you are not tackling the right chain, but there is nothing wrong with this. You can take some cases and scan pleasure and continue to scan pleasure; I don’t know what the case is doing, but you are certainly not on the aberrative line. If you were on the aberrative line it wouldn’t work that way, so you shift the line that you are scanning. It is very important to do so.

If you really want this preclear up the tone scale, however, you just assume that this ARC is there and then operate as though it isn’t — which is to say, you want levels of reality, levels of affinity and levels of communication which he knows were affinity, which he knows were real and which he knows were communication.

In all these techniques there is something you should keep in mind: The validation of a technique is whether or not it steadily increases the efficiency of your preclear and his position on the tone scale. That is important. It might not seem important to some preclears but it is really important to keep them coming on up the line. Your preclear may have the idea that the only thing he could possibly do is run engrams and secondaries, secondaries and engrams, engrams and secondaries. That is all he is going to run for you, and that is the end of that — although you know very well he is not doing well on this. That is just tough.

Understand that seeing a light switch is a communication. If he is really seeing this light switch — it seems real to him, there is something between him and this light switch — it is probably representative of some pleasant environ in his past and therefore is duplicating itself to him. So you have picked up just that much of some former theta incident in the present time environment and you start building up a potential.

He has heard of running pleasure moments. Now, there are various ways of running these pleasure moments. Running a pleasure moment is another technique where you start in at the beginning of a pleasure moment and take the preclear through it perceptic by perceptic in an effort to try to do something with his perceptics — just through one pleasure moment — and then you take him back to the beginning and run him through it again just like it was an engram. That is running pleasure incidents and that is not what I am talking about when I say the analytical side of a chain.

One of the interesting things about this is your preclear is liable to break out in tears or something when you run it. You give him just a little tiny bit of theta and then with great ambition it goes right into the entheta, and he starts to cry.

The analytical side of the chain includes any time he was analytical about something, and you straightwire that or you scan it. You don’t run these as incidents. You could if you wanted to, but if you are going to do that with him he probably isn’t able to move that well on the time track anyhow.

Now, you have seen where you can’t get the secondary off a preclear and he just sits there and so on, until you take him back to the time when he was really happy with Papa as a little boy. He has Papa’s death sitting there on the track and you are not able to approach it. But we start running theta moments about Papa and we run more pleasant incidents about Papa and more about Papa, and all of a sudden, without any command or anything else, we go right straight into the entheta of Papa’s death. It is almost a lead-pipe cinch that that is going to happen.

There is no limiter on this that I know of beyond the fact that if you find your preclear diving too quickly into entheta while you are scanning a chain you leave Chain Scanning and Lock Scanning alone. You just leave Lock Scanning alone on that case and straightwire him through the incidents, and you will get the same effects. This is slower but you will get the same effects. In other words, don’t treat the case more heavily than you should be able to treat it.

There is an example of this which you have seen, but believe me, that is a very limited scope compared to what this processing will do. You actually will have the feeling, after you have processed somebody for a while, that you really are fighting with the case a little bit, because this guy starts wandering all around Robin Hood’s barn. He starts getting into entheta and you keep trying to pull him out of it.

All of the emphasis on processing now, as I told you earlier, is bringing them on up the tone scale. That is important to you as auditors — very important.

Actually, the final definition of processing is that you are trying to get all these attention units up to present time. You are trying to get everything up to present time — that is, in the way of good, clean attention units. You don’t want any entheta out of the bank up in present time, you want all this theta up in present time. How are you going to get it there? You have to pull it up, scrap by scrap, erg by erg, and you will finally achieve it. That, really, is processing. You can redefine processing with that definition: trying to get all of the theta attention units in present time.

If you could work only the manifestation of 4.0 you would really be living the life of Reilly. That would be gorgeous. You would never be diving into a lot of restimulative and aberrative material; you would just be bringing the preclear up along the line and so on. It was to this hope — that you could do this — that Validation Technique was originated. An auditor can sit there just so long running entheta out of people before he himself starts to get pretty enturbulated, unless he is getting plenty of processing himself.

If you are able to do that, by the way, you will notice some remarkable manifestations. Have you ever come into present time after blowing up a large amount of entheta and suddenly taken a look and had everything seem very bright to you? That is ARC up; your ARC is on much more heavily so your communication with the environ tunes way up. It gets very bright.

We could work it out on the basis of the auditor getting plenty of processing, but very few auditors do get plenty of processing. As a result, there has been a considerable amount of research on my part in order to see what we could do with types of techniques which were not auditor restimulative.

That is the way the world looks to a little kid. That is just simply the matter of having enough free theta in present time to make the proper connections. It is that simple.

That is one of the reasons for Lock Scanning. That is a very definite benefit from Lock Scanning. The auditor can sit there and he doesn’t get fed this entheta hour after hour; he is better off when he lock-scans than when he runs engrams.

If you tackle processing from this angle on low-tone-scale people, you will find yourself collecting some dividends. How far this will go, I don’t know. I can’t tell you that. I only know that it produces results. How many ways this principle can be used, I don’t know. I do not have large numbers of completed cases to show you on this, so I am offering you this — it is in advance of other methods — merely because it has proven very useful on low-tone-scale people.

It is the same way with Validation Processing. The auditor very much has to be on the ball; he has to be very alert when running Validation Processing on a low-toned person. He has to keep that person communicating with him, because the person may just start on up the analytical moments and then be off into the entheta, and the auditor wouldn’t know it. So vocalization is required from the preclear on a lot of this stuff. On Straightwire particularly the auditor has to be continually alert and informed as to what the preclear is doing. But if the auditor is running analytical moments he is handling theta, and an auditor who handles theta could handle it for eight or ten hours a day without showing much wear. As a matter of fact, the auditor himself would probably come up on the tone scale.

I am not giving it to you as a technique which stands head and shoulders above this and that. Our new line of technique development may go out along this theta-entheta principle line, and it may not. But handling low scale people has been a terrific problem.

I know pretty well what this type of processing will do this far. I hope in your hands that it will increase greatly in efficiency, because I would like to see all of my friends in Dianetics at no lower level on the tone scale than 4.0, chronically.

You can evidently damp out engrams in restimulation using Validation Processing without ever looking at the engrams. That is a nice trick. Of course, it requires from you an enormous amount of restraint. For instance, you are running a preclear on an analytical-incident chain about cars and he says, “Oh, I’ve got this terrible backache.”

Now, extroversion has something more that I should say about it. Evidently, from 2.0 down you could say is introversion, and from 2.0 up is extroversion to some degree. You can just compartment that like you can compartment theta and entheta.

And you say, “Let’s go back to the last time that you had a nice ride in the car, and so on; you’re enjoying the scenery.”

There has to be a certain amount of theta available before the individual will attack his own environment. It is sometimes much easier to attack the interior environment than the exterior environment. Have you ever heard of somebody saying “Wait till I get to be a good release, and then I’ll do it”? It is easier to attack the interior environment — after all, one lived through that already — than to attack the exterior environment. So, above 2.0 is where you get attacks on the exterior environment.

“Yeah, I see one.”

It is a funny thing, but theta will change, mingle with and conquer MEST. Theta will automatically do so. You get enough of a theta unit and MEST will move under it; you get enough of a theta unit and it will be attracted over the top of MEST. You can watch this happen. If there is not very much of a theta unit, it is liable to get attracted into enMEST. It will get enturbulated by the existing entheta and it will go into the enMEST. That is not very complicated.

“Remember the time you kissed the girl in the car?” “Yeah! Yeah, gee, I was happy that day!”

Entheta will turn into enMEST any MEST which it touches; it will, very definitely. You watch what happens to the possessions of somebody below 2.0. In the same way, theta will tend to maintain MEST as MEST and even make MEST out of enMEST.

“Now, remember the time you got the new car?” “Yeah.”

So there is a correlation between extroversion and handling and bringing order to one’s environment, and between introversion and bringing destruction and upset to one’s environment.

“Remember the time you gave a car to somebody, or gave them a ride.” “Oh yeah, I remember that time.”

I hope you don’t think I am throwing you a curve there, because that is really true. You get too much introversion and the environment will really break down around the person’s vicinity. His interpersonal relationships, his possessions and all of these other things will start to go to pot almost mechanically. You hardly see any line of reason here at all. All of a sudden this fellow finds himself with this upset and that upset and some other upset — he has become too introverted.

“Where’s your backache?” “Gee, I don’t know!”

If he is very extroverted, he will collect to himself MEST. He will throw nine tenths of it away, too, if he has any good sense, like the seasoned campaigner who always carries about a ten- pound pack while the rookie always has a ninety-pound one. Theta will attack too much MEST. It has to be checked in its activity.

You don’t either! But I will tell you this: You could really fix him in this backache. You are running him on theta moments when all of a sudden he starts to get this backache, and you say, “What’s the phrase connected with this backache? (snap!)’’

I am giving you this for a very good reason. Introversion, self-auditing, reactive mind, entheta — these are synonyms, and along with them go enMEST, confusion and the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.

So he says, “Ah, ‘I have to go back.”’ “Now, who’s talking?”

If you want to be nicely successful and so forth in your profession of auditing, keep up above 2.0 and keep well extroverted. Also, take your preclears and bring them up that tone scale and extrovert them just as fast as you possibly can. Then you will get your bills paid.

“Oh, I don’t know; it’s a phrase.” “Well, just go ahead and repeat it.”

Now, this should alert you to something else, too: All you have to do to boot a person up the tone scale is extrovert him. You have gained half the band of the scale right there. That is a pretty big jump. So you extrovert him; you bring him up into the theta bracket.

Then he repeats himself into a heavy boil-off that lasts till the end of the session. You are running him at zero reality level and he will probably have the backache from there on out! He might not have; it might go away and merely leave a great big lock on the time track.

But if you want to wreck your preclear real well and fix up his environment so that it will really deteriorate, and fix up your own perimeter so it will too, just let him stay introverted and let him keep on being introverted.

So check your cases sometimes and find out how many of these enforced boil-offs have left locks on the time track, which, when your preclear runs through them, will boil again.

If there is anything that drives an auditor mad it is the preclear who comes in with 995 words written at the beginning of every session of the things he has thought up since the auditor saw him last. He was just sure while he was sitting at dinner last night that he has a phrase that says . . . And he made a note of it, but when he got home he dreamed this and that and he wonders whether or not . . . And it goes on and on and on — notes.

You may think you are producing a tremendous amount with a tremendous amount of boil-off, but you may just be littering up his track, too. If the case is pretty entheta and you keep insisting on running entheta, there is no theta present to knock that stuff off the track and disenturbulate it, so you just deposit it in various portions of the track. You just keep placing it here and there on the track and spread it around and get the backaches on and the headaches on and the chronic stomach somatics on and so forth. You can keep that up for a long time.

I kept a series of notes from a preclear one time just out of sheer curiosity, wondering what the volume would grow to. It was tremendous! I just kept throwing them into a drawer and thanking him. That was before I found out that the reason a preclear writes you notes is you haven’t got the computation on the case! So I looked back into the drawer and said, “That was a heck of a comment on my auditing on that preclear!”

Now, two things could actually be happening on this Validation Processing; maybe both of them happen, maybe only one. You are searching for a tone level which is above the tone level of the somatic, and you manage to finally, one way or the other, establish the tone level. That is one explanation. That tone level is above the sympathetic vibration level of the engram. This engram could have a 1.1 tone, and your preclear is in its sympathetic band of 1.1 so he gets the backache. But if you can somehow or other bump him up the tone scale by running theta moments, he will just climb out of the resonance area of that backache and it will stop.

If a fellow does not have a computation, that means that he must not be very analytical. If he is really analytical he will have a computation on his case. If he extroverts enough he doesn’t care whether he has a computation on his case or not! He will go on being audited. You may get the cycle-and collapse sort of thing where he is feeling so fine for a week that you might not see him, but he will be back.

The other thing that may be happening is that the theta is tackling the entheta and actually knocking it flat — actually kicking it off. One or the other is happening. I am sure that one of these fine days somebody will be able to stand up and say with certainty which it is. These are two perfectly good postulates and two perfectly good explanations for the same manifestation.

You don’t have to sell anybody on a long-term basis. If you can just work this well and work it well enough, you will find out that you are turning out pretty satisfied-per-session preclears. You are also doing a job of work, and don’t think you are not. Now, a lot of you may back off from this Validation Processing even after you have worked with it for a short time for the good reason that it does not have enough blood and thunders in it. That was why I talked to you earlier about the difference between stage demonstrations and actual demonstrations .

It so happens, though, that the alertness level of the person comes up. But this could also be explained by the fact that you are turning on analyzer rather than turning on reactive mind.

This is merely an estimate and is not based on any data of any kind, but I think you could probably produce a good release faster by never touching any entheta. That would really be a stunt.

What you are doing with Validation Processing is invalidating the reactive mind. So the guy has got phrases, so he has got engrams, so he has got secondaries, so he is sad — so what? We want to know how well he can think. All we are interested in is his analyzer, his good health, his agility, his cheerfulness, his happiness, his effectiveness, and that is all we keep asking for and talking to him about, and the only things we will buy off him are these things. The analyzer waxes fat on this; analytical power turns up and he climbs up the tone scale.

I haven’t processed anybody through the whole run on this process, so I can just extrapolate. But if I started in to process somebody right now on this level I would simply boot him on through, all the way up to the top of the scale.

That is validation. Behind this is a very definite principle: That state of being comes into being which is demanded or commanded to be by the auditor. The auditor can call into being any state of being he wishes in the preclear; that would be another way of saying it. It may be too generalized — the auditor can’t make him into an angel — but it is pretty much true.

I would watch those engrams fold up by themselves. I would fill him full of protein hydrolysate and vitamin B1 and watch those engrams fold up.

In interpersonal relationships, if you validate the orneriness, crabbiness, meanness and ugliness of another person consistently and continually, he will be what he is validated to be. And you know that by experience, I know.

By the way, there is another little point here. Once upon a time there was this stuff called Guk, and a bunch of south ends of horses going north didn’t bother to study this stuff or find out what it could do; they listened to a certain well-known medico who said “Oh, it’s no good! I saw a bottle of it once.”

If you validate that he is happy, that he is cheerful, that he is sunny, that he is in wonderful shape and so on, those portions of his being which are those things will begin to manifest themselves. It doesn’t necessarily mean that you have knocked out the other portions, but you have called into being and made predominant those things.

Last fall, freewheeling suddenly died. You can put somebody through freewheeling and maybe it does him some good. But a Guk freewheel got the Guk in trouble because the freewheeling wasn’t as good as it should have been and because freewheeling introverts the devil out of the preclear. Of course, he is paying attention to stuff all over his body, so it isn’t doing him the good that it should. But this has got nothing to do with Guk.

This could be explained simply and plainly on the postulate of resonance. You have just lifted him up the tone scale to a point where the lower-tone-scale manifestations simply don’t resonate. The lower levels of the tone scale are very harsh and ugly and a lot of other things, but you don’t pay any attention to those; you just keep putting out a vibration level which is in the upper band of the tone scale and asking for things which are high on the tone scale. The first thing you know, you have the upper tone scale in resonance, the fellow’s analyzer goes on, he thinks and he is effective and happy.

Last fall I wrapped my paws around protein and vitamins again to find out what they could do, and I found out that they would collapse circuit walls that couldn’t be collapsed without them. I had to go all the way through this again because of the amount of enturbulence that was thrown at it.

That could be a full explanation for this, except for one thing — a manifestation of theta which you see in using Validation Processing. You try to keep the preclear on pleasure moments and you get just so many of them, and then the case dives.

Now we find out in Validation Processing, evidently, that the somatics will clip off, boil off or go out faster when the preclear is on heavy protein and vitamins than when he is not. So we may have found at last and at long length the slot for Guk. There is no long series of cases on this, but I have noticed consistently that you could bring a preclear up to a point without Guk and the somatic would hang up and would stay hung up and you couldn’t do anything more about it. But if you then fed him some Guk that somatic would feed and boil on through.

You start this Validation Processing, getting up theta, and the fellow starts up the tone scale. You work him for two or three sessions, he keeps coming up that tone scale, and all of a sudden you have a 3.5. The next session you bring him up to 4.0, and for a whole hour after the session he is 4.0. Then all of a sudden he dives to the bottom; he goes down to his normal 0.5. That is no exaggeration; you can watch this happening.

On Validation Processing sometimes you can hardly keep your mind off this doggone somatic. It is somebody who was chewing off your left ear when you were three and you are going through all the happy times little boys smiled at you. You don’t identify this thing, and the somatic is going through just as slow as molasses and you can’t do anything about it. Then throw about 30 grains of glutamic acids down your throat and about 100 milligrams of B1, go over this chain again and this somatic just blows out, and anaten comes off when it wouldn’t before.

The fortunate part of it is that if he starts out at 0.5 and gets boosted by Validation Processing, session after session, clear up to 4.0, when he does his dive he will come back to about 0.6.

I don’t mean to overestimate Guk to you. I am merely saying that it seems to develop and disperse somatics faster, and certainly it gives your preclear enough energy to run. But there is also a caution on it: Anybody who thinks that taking a little bit of B1 and a lot of glutamic acid is the thing to do is asking for a nice case of D.T.’s. The data at hand seems to indicate that lots of glutamic acid and not quite enough B1 will produce nightmares and upsets far in excess of merely taking no B1 and no glutamic acid, and theoretically you could throw a person into D.T.’s by feeding him nothing but glutamic acid. A ratio which is apparently safe on this — and I am not prescribing this, I am merely mentioning it — seems to be about 25 grains of glutamic acid and about 100 milligrams of B1 — a good heavy slug of B1. But 10 or 20 milligrams of Bs and 20 to 30 grains of glutamic acid will produce hallucination; it will cut down reality. With enough B. content you heighten reality.

Then you boost him all the way up to 4.0 again, and he spins again, but stops at 0.8. You finally get him up to a point where he will be covertly hostile toward you!

By the way, it seems to be indicated that people can do better Straightwire — it is clearer and the reality level is greater — with enough B1 and glutamic acid. We have it down along the level of about where it belongs. You can do without it quite well and you can do with it quite well, and it is better to have it than not to. But it is not going to, with one shot, produce a clear.

One could postulate that what is happening here is a very simple thing: The preclear is simply climbing up the tone scale and getting a big preponderance of free theta, and his present time environment is absorbing it all. Then suddenly in goes a valence wall, out goes a circuit. In other words, you get too much free theta on there and the fellow goes around feeling grand and everything; you have actually, by being very patient yourself, built up lightning in this person’s skull, and all of a sudden it goes crash! What happens is that a whole circuit or a whole series of circuits will collapse and he just goes down because he is suddenly flooded with entheta. All of his thought processes go unclear, his analyzer shuts down and the reactive volume goes way up.

Now, we can use protein hydrolysate in the same way as glutamic acid; glutamic acid is only one of the amino acids, and protein hydrolysate is several of the amino acids compounded.

With Validation Processing you don’t touch circuits and you don’t touch valences. You don’t ever tell him to get in valence because that would be to infer that he could get out of valence.

There is quite a bit of data on this subject of nutrition and so forth during processing. Of course, one of the sure and certain ways to spin a preclear is to reverse the nutrition factor. Just feed him on a little bit of coffee and a little bit of sandwiches kind of irregularly, and go on and process him hour in and hour out through lots of entheta — and then carry him off to the sanitarium. Or keep him up all night long. Or when the guy is so tired he can’t even move, and he has a terrific somatic in his elbow and keeps begging you to do something about this somatic because he is disturbed, go into the case and start to do something about it. They will cart him off to the spin bin.

The preclear keeps saying to you, “But I’m way out of valence.”

Auditing when a preclear is too tired, auditing when a preclear is too hungry, auditing when a preclear is suffering from any part of malnutrition, is dangerous.

You say, “Okay, that’s fine. Let’s go to the time you had an all-day sucker.” “Well, I can’t even taste the thing!”

As a matter of fact, your preclear will go around and start getting hungry for things like ascorbic acid and so forth. You should have him take a balanced vitamin ration. There ought to be in it not only B complex, but vitamins A and D in limited, non-toxic doses. There is a whole array of those things that are put together in tablets. These are not important in tremendous quantities, but they are still important. B1 has got to be there, though, by super-super quantity.

“All right, all right. Let’s go to a time when you could!”

There is the sequence of events. You can see this sort of thing happening, you can watch this sort of thing happening, and believe me, you can really get a preclear going over the roller coasters. Actually, with Validation Processing, you will see more changes in a preclear than you see in standard processing, and yet you apparently aren’t hitting any entheta. You are trying to keep away from that.

If you get too much theta up there and the already existing valence wall gets this tremendous amount of free theta up against it, all of a sudden that valence wall crashes. (It has been a lot of trouble to you as an auditor, because every time you sent the preclear back down the track he went into a dog’s valence and started to bark like a dog.) But all it is now is entheta; it isn’t a valence any more. It is simply the entheta and everything connected with it, and it just floods. The preclear gets terrifically depressed; a lot of this theta suddenly enturbulates. But there was enough potential to knock apart the valence. So what you have now is a person who is just kind of occluded instead of supervalenced. Now you start back up the tone scale until you get him up to somewhere around 3.0. You can’t tell when one of these things is going to explode either. They explode very remarkably.

Validation Processing requires an even lower level of authoritarianism in auditing than entheta processing. This is processing theta. It seems to set up a sort of an automatic cycle.

Frankly, I would like very much to have worked many more cases than I have worked on Validation Processing before giving it to you. I’m giving it to you here because it is valuable, not because it has been tested out to the degree it has. As a matter of fact, it has not been tested now on more than about fifteen cases that I know of, which is a very small series, particularly since those cases were not carried through a large number of hours.

But we know what it does to some degree, and we also know that you can really improve a case. For instance, take a preclear who is in terrible shape at ten o’clock; he gets Validation Processing for an hour, and at eleven o’clock he is sitting up and taking nourishment and ready to go. That is a heck of a thing to be able to do to a human being.

A person, to do good Validation Processing, has got to know and keep in mind more about Dianetic mental structure than otherwise. A person could do it blind; he could actually fumble through somehow and do it blind. But unless he knew thoroughly the behavior of locks, secondaries and engrams, unless he could be prepared at any moment to pick one of these things up and discharge it in some fashion, and unless he could do something for this case, he really should not play around too much with Validation Processing because it is chain lightning.

It is not a process that you would turn over to a book auditor for the simple reason that it would perplex him so. He wouldn’t know what he was fooling with! He starts auditing his mother on it, and he runs this and he runs that and he runs something else, and “Mama is so happy now after I’ve done all this, and isn’t this fine, and look how happy Mama is!” So he goes out to the other room and says, “Hey, George, come in here and see how happy I’ve made Mama,” and she is sitting there with tears streaming down. You wouldn’t be able to put this processing across to somebody who didn’t know his basics. It is very important to know them.

For instance, if you ever find a preclear who has suddenly dived into a secondary automatically and is busy running the thing, you had better run it out. If you can get tears off the case, real tears off the specific incident with the preclear going into it automatically, you run it out.

I’m talking now just about tears and terror and apathy as three types of secondaries that I would really dive for. If the preclear walked into one of those things automatically and he was there in the incident, believe me, I would run it! Because there is where you are going to get a lot of relief on the case quickly. That is really why you are fishing with Validation Processing.

But just because a guy goes into some yawns, just because he goes into boil-off, just because he goes into some other manifestation, or because he is merely angry is no reason to go after the entheta.

For instance, the preclear is sore as the devil, and the more of these theta moments you run, the madder he gets. And he can’t tell you what he is mad about; you are not even asking him what he is mad about. He is obviously not sitting in a specific incident because he is not talking about a specific incident or specific thing.

As you build up more and more theta, though, you might get him to say, “Well, Uncle Bill was a dog — that’s all there is to it — when he beat me with that club!”

So you would say, “And where did he hit you?” and you would run off this anger secondary. But the thing would be there and obviously ready to be run. You wouldn’t have even asked him to go to the incident. If he will go to the incident automatically, if he is there, if he will run it automatically, gorgeous! You sit there then as a good auditor and audit it. You don’t just let it sit.

Sometimes you will get line tears; don’t mistake line tears for incident tears. You are running pleasure moments and this person can’t tell you what he is crying about or anything and yet he is just crying. You are getting a grief line charge, and it will come off as a line charge; it will come off as tears.

I have tried to explain this several times and I have watched auditors work after it has been explained to them. They run pleasure moments, pleasure moments, pleasure moments, pleasure moments, and then all of a sudden the preclear gets an earache. Immediately the auditor says, “Where does it come from? How old are you? (snap!) Is there a phrase that goes with this? (snap!)”

That is wrong. You don’t even run pleasure moments. You are used to running pleasure moments. Now change your mind about that. What you should be running is analytical moments. This gives you a tremendous scope of incident. You are running analytical moments, and you are running them by Straightwire, as single incidents, and as chains of locks; those are the three ways to run them.

You will find, after your preclear gets up to the point where he can lock-scan, that you will get the most free theta up the quickest with Lock Scanning. But on a lot of preclears down at the bottom of the line, when they start up that chain they just crunch into the entheta.

It is very interesting how fast they will stop on that. For example, take somebody who was ordinarily and daily beaten unconscious by Papa, and just start scanning Papa. We don’t scan Papa doing something to him, because he is not sure that Papa ever did. Let’s just scan the times when he knows Papa was there or he has some sort of an idea it was Papa — anything analytical about Papa: any time he was thinking about Papa, any time he saw Papa, any time he went on a trip with Papa and so on. What you do is just take the theta tied up in Papa and put it back into this incident and it will try to run itself. Now, how do you get him out of that? If he is too low on the tone scale he will latch up right there with Papa beating the devil out of him unless you can find some more Papa. If you go on and find some more analytical moments about Papa, this may merely dissipate as an incident and seem to just blow of its own accord. Only you have never gotten him spanked. This depends on your finding some more about Papa.

But if you get this fellow too low on the tone scale, his free theta/entheta ratio is such that he will actually hang up in the incident. Then you have to go looking for somebody who looked like Papa or you have to go get something that is vaguely associated with anything: “Let’s take a look at your house when you were a boy.”

“Well, I . . . you know, I never can see the inside of this place.”

“Okay. I’m not asking you to see the inside. Let’s just take a look at the shrubbery.”

“Well, all right. Sure, I can see some of the shrubbery. There’s a tree. Yeah, an old tree over there I used to crawl up in.”

“What did the front door look like?” “Oh, so-and-so and so-and-so.”

“And where were the water taps located around it?” “Oh, such-and-such, so-and-so.”

“How many chimneys did it have?”

“Well, so-and-so” and so on. The first thing you know, the fellow is saying, “Yeah, and there was oatmeal paper in the living room, and Papa used to sit in that rocker. Say, its a funny thing, Grandma used to sit over in that rocker too.”

Of course, there is just the empty rocker sitting there, and he wouldn’t put Grandma in it — not now!

He goes on, “Yeah, and here’s all the times I had to haul wood for the fire. And my father used to say to me . . . Boy! He was mean to me. Gosh! he’s a . . .”

“Now, who else used to sit in the rocking chair?”

He is starting right into the entheta; you have just gotten up that much theta. Of course, he looked at that house many times when he was cheerful and pleased and so forth, and you get him to describe the confines.

If you find, for instance, that your preclear is unable to approach a telephone conversation which told him some bad news or something of the sort, just start running telephones. Get him to spot where the phone was in every house or office he ever had. You don’t run anybody talking on it; that is too dangerous. What you want is just where all the phones were.

Obviously these are analytical moments; you don’t consider these pleasure moments. They are analytical moments of where the phones were. We pick up these phones, we pick them up two or three times, then we try to pick up a phone bell. Even if he doesn’t have any sonic, we pick up “A phone bell rang there; and one rang there. Oh yes, I had a funny phone bell over at this other place,” and so on.

Then you say, “Do you remember a time when you were a little boy and talked on the phone?” — sneaking it in.

“Yeah.”

“Do you remember two or three other phone conversations?”

“Yeah. There was the time Aunt Mamie told me to come out to the farm, and — gee, my head feels awful bad!”

You would make a mistake at that point if you just started to grab for what you were after, because it has just come into view; the theta is too ambitious. You can make that as a rule; theta is going to jump before it is ready to jump.

So pick up some more phone bells, and pick up some more phone calls. If you do it well the incident will disappear and you won’t have to handle it anymore.

The avidity with which a little tiny bit of theta will spring is tremendous, and that is where you have to exercise great willpower and caution about what you pick up.

You work with the file clerk and, in the absence of a file clerk, your own good sense on this. You don’t start picking up stuff which is obviously on the aberrated line. You can be very selective with Validation Processing.

There is a patter which goes along with this. If you have a file clerk that you can work with, you ask, “Is there a chain ready to be run? (snap!)”

“Yes.”

“What is the name of this chain? (snap!)”

“The cat-whisker chain,” or something of the sort. This is just straight patter.

Now, ordinarily you would take off from there with Lock Scanning. You would simply take off from there and start to run all the entheta on that chain. Not with Validation Processing; you run everything on that chain which is analytical and which he knows has a good level of reality. You just scan, in other words, the analytical side of that chain.

You could postulate that, although this chain looks to you like a straight line of incidents, actually the chain probably is two broken chains of incidents. One line would be reactive areas, and the other one would be analytical areas.

If you keep paying attention to the reactive one, you are just going to bring him further and further into reactive-mind reaction. He is going to get more and more reactive about this unless he has enough theta available to run it, at which time he will run it right on out and desensitize it and feel much better for it. But that means he has to have enough theta to do it.

So, on a low-scale case, if you start chewing away and plowing away at this reactive side of the chain you will latch him up. Keep him over on the analytical side of the chain and start turning his analyzer up further and further, and some of the incomprehensible problems on the chain that were incomprehensible before to a tuned-down analyzer will try to resolve themselves and try to pull over into the analytical side of the chain.

Your stunt as an auditor is to keep him over on the analytical chain and not let him go into the reactive chain. Willy-nilly, sometimes he will boil off; very often he will boil off. You let him boil off. Very often he will shed a couple of tears; he doesn’t even tell you what the tears are all about, but he just sheds a couple of tears or he gets a little scared as he is running the thing. It is just line charge that you are getting; it is not from a specific incident.

You just start working with that, and he boils and he does all sorts of standard manifestations and he comes out of it. You don’t put him into what he was boiling from. You don’t ask him “What are you boiling off about? Where is this incident from?” You don’t do any of that.

All you do is keep him over in analytical moments: “Are there other analytical moments in this chain?”

Now, the reactive mind can get validated up to the point where the whole case starts to look enturbulated and it does not start to rise up the tone scale. But, actually, you can start working on the analytical side of the ledger and the case will come up the tone scale. Day by day by day you can watch the difference.

You are not doing the spectacular, you are only doing the important. That is a nice differentiation. It is terrifically spectacular to get a screamers screaming, but it is not good processing.

If anybody is going to scream, they really have got no business running engrams. You will do better, according to tentative conclusions so far, to keep them out of and beyond their aberrative areas, and just try to pick up theta. Now, when I say aberrated areas, I mean simply chains of aberration. For instance, if we take somebody and we know that he is pretty loopy on just one subject, we stay away from that subject if he is low on the tone scale; we won’t even pick up analytical moments about it. In other words, we get him out and away from the obvious entheta areas.