Today we’re going to continue to talk about spacation. We’re going to go into energy, particles, and then go into time. We’re going to cover this all very rapidly and if anybody gets left behind, that’s too bad.

First hour of try night, December the 4th, we’re going to cover here the logics. The last evening lectures I covered these Qs.

We have a couple of questions here which have been asked; they’ll probably be answered in this lecture just in general.

All right, the logics are something which evidently apply quite broadly and uh… are not necessarily fixed for all universes but are quite general to universes and are certainly very specific for this universe. Logics would consist of methods of thinking. There could be many, many methods of thinking.

Now the subject of spacation is the subject of the creation, handling of, or concept of space. What’s space? Very difficult problem at this time. It is sufficient to answer the problem in this wise. Actually the physicist has no definition for space – now isn’t that a heck of a thing? He operates in space all the time and he doesn’t have a definition for it. He says, „space,“ and everybody knows what he means, only he doesn’t know what he means.

You take the decimal system. Uh… the decimal system is a method of thinking about object;, and particles, and so on. And it says if you take ten of them and then multiply them by ten all you have to do is add another zero. Uh… that’s a very fascinating system and this has a great deal of argument, however, from something I think is called the sept-signal system, which I think is by twelves or something like that. Sixes, twelves, and so forth; they claim this is a much, much better numerical system.

Now, uh… a mathematician has a viewpoint for space. He says „point, a point is something with location but without dimension. It has no length, breadth, or thickness.“ That is a point, mathematician’s definition of a point. Now that’s all very well, but uh… what about this space?

It goes along so and so and does such and such. And the odd part of it is, is it forms a different structure of logic. So you could change logic by changing the basic postulates on which the logic is based.

Well, I’ll tell you what a space is, and a space is something, uh… well, you see it’s like this. Time… time, you see, you have time and you have, uh… well uh… the two interlocked and uh… and you, have time. That’s… that’s motion, and uh… what motion is… is uh… well, that’s time, uh… uh… well, operating in space. You see how that is?

You could simply say, you could simply say, now it is logical to state the plus and the minus of a thing, and that is all you should state, the plus and minus of the thing. Plus you should never state the plus without stating the minus. And that is going to be logic.

Now that’s all very clear and I’m very glad that you have that, because that is the limits of uh… our understanding the subject. Now, I want you to get into something very practical like building a steam locomotive, uh… weights, balances, and all into other complicated things here in this subject of physics because we haven’t got the time to spend on these basic fundamentals like what is space.

Now we would say something like that, you get something interesting about – the logical statement will be: I think I would like to eat dinner, perhaps I will not. And that would be a reasonable statement, and that would be a universe called maybe. A universe… a universe in which homo sapiens is quite at home.

All right, let’s… let’s take a look at space. Now when you… when… when your physicist starts talking, remember the other day I was telling you, you can do an awful lot if you have three frames of reference. And you compare each frame of reference to the other frame of reference, then you’re all right.

All social intercourse is apparently a long series of maybes. You know, you say, „How do you do? I don’t care how you do.“ „Would you have something to eat? I hope you won’t eat too much.“ Except the second maybe in social intercourse is never stated.

If you have three frames of reference just as you have if you have three summer lines of position, you’ve got a position. You can orient yourself, but don’t just take three, think you have something very thorough, if you merely have three things, each one defined in terms of the other two and without any further definition.

So it’s a long series of maybes and if you want to find somebody who’s been very very social for a long time you will find out his ARC relationships lie all in a ball. All wound up in one small tight ball, because everyone of them has got a plus on it and a minus on it, and the minus is never stated.

Don’t think you have something defined. That is definition, as you find in the HANDBOOK FOR PRECLEARS, that’s definition by association. Uh… what is a cow? Well uh… a cow is like uh… yeah, well, you know what a bull is. Well, uh… well, a cow is not a bull but it is like a bull, and uh… they’re in a barn so that’s like a barn. low you understand of course what a cow is. That’s silly, isn’t it?

Now in view of the fact that Scientology is the science of knowing how to know, we have to have some definition of knowledge. Now these logics as they are written here have to be rewritten slightly for the echelon of Scientology in which we are operating, which is to say the make-break of universes.

And yet, the physicist has been doing this. He says, „What’s space? Well, space is something in which uh… operates, uh… well, it’s motion, motion, and that’s time and… and motion… motion is change of position in space, and you see that changes position by time and time is a change of a… of a… a action or something in space.“

This is very very true of homo sapiens, these logics, but they have to be refined just a little bit in order to fit them into a wider category.

„You know, what is a cow? A cow is a… it’s like a bull, but it’s not a bull, but cows and bulls have something about this thing, otherwise you wouldn’t have barns. And uh… the barn, that’s a… we don’t know anything else about a barn. Actually it’s a far clearer explanation than…

Logic one is knowledge as a whole group. There are lists of these around, in these various books. Knowledge as a whole group or subdivision of a group of data or speculations or conclusions on data or methods of gaining data. That pins knowledge down as data. And that’s true for homo sapiens. And that is true for the type of logic homo sapiens uses.

„Well, I’ll tell you. Space is something that is determined by time and energy, and energy is something determined by space and time, and time is something determined by energy and space.“ Now I tell you, get up… get an airplane up in this rat race and you get going around this field. And you go round and round and round. And you’ve got to get out of this rat race before you ever land or go anyplace with the airplane. Now that’s the solid truth of the matter.

That does not happen to be the highest level of knowledge. The highest level of knowledge is the potential of – it’s an action definition – the potential of knowing how to know. And that consists of simply the potential of knowing how to know. I’m sorry, but that’s all there is to it. And how do you know? Well, in order to know how to know you have to be free to postulate knowledge. And the freedom to postulate knowledge creates the data which then arranges itself as bodies of knowledge. So, you want to know what your highest echelon of knowledge possibly could be, it would probably be complete freedom to make the postulate to form any… any datum or group of data without even making the postulate to do so.

Physics, nuclear physics, atomic and molecular phenomena, is going round and round in that rat race right now. What’s space? Space is a dimension in which a motion can operate and that’s time.

And that, that would be knowing how to know, so logic… logic one should be rewritten: Knowing how to know is the definition of the highest level of knowingness. And that the level of knowingness is the freedom to state a postulate which then can become knowledge. Now that’s very simple.

What is time? Time uh… well, time is a measurement of change of a motion in space. Well, now, what is a motion? Well, that’s something operating in time and space, of course. Now I want you to get clearly there that if you have uh… some sort of a rat race like this, it adds up to space, energy and time, and that stands for S E T and that is SET.

Logic two, a body of knowledge is a body of data aligned or unaligned or methods of gaining data. Well, that’s… that’s interesting too. That just simply says it’s a… a body of knowledge could consist of one postulate or two postulates. And that’s all. And that would be a body of knowledge and if they were stated from… for this universe, they have to be two. And they were stated… they have to be two to be a unit. I’ll explain that a little later. Uh… but, then… then a body of data could be any two data to make a com… a very complete workable body of knowledge.

And SET was the most incredible, to read, of all Egyptian cats. And that was night itself. Now, actually, when… when you said… when you said this, you… you actually have a slightly wider range of comparison. We’ve said, what is space, energy and time. Well, space, energy and time adds up to SET and SET is a cat and that is an Egyptian cat, and it was a black cat. Now that’s all there is to it. But actually you’ve said more than energy, space and time. Space is time and energy, and time is space and energy. You’re not out of any rat race, I mean, we’re just there.

Now, let… let’s have a whole body of knowledge. Now let’s think one up, let’s think real hard for earth here. Let’s postulate good and evil. Now let’s postulate from good and evil enough other data to make a full body of knowledge which would be very satisfying. Let’s think in a nice wide curve here. We say good and evil. That can lead in two directions.

And we’ve got to get out of this association of ideas and get over into another association of ideas before we can determine this and before we can use these concepts actually and handily in human experience – not just build uh… atom bombs and child’s toys and so forth with them.

That can lead to God and the devil, complete bodies of knowledge. But those are sub-bodies of knowledge to the body good and evil. Now on the other side of it – justice and injustice – and what do we get? We get the church and the state – that’s immediately descending from the postulate that two things can exist called good and evil. Now we say what is good? We could be Aristotelian and say: Good is something which isn’t evil, and what is evil? Evil is something which is not good.

Before we can do anything with these things we have to have them in a framework where man can experience. Now you are motion in space and time. You’re quite aware of that. But unless you compare that immediately and exactly to understandable experience, these three things aren’t worth much to you.

Now we can have a universe in which all things good were purple and all things bad were magenta. So that people would get snarled up between the two when they were a little color-blind and that would cause randomity.

You build an atom bomb, so what? That’s nothing. So what are they? Space is a viewpoint of dimension. That’s a good definition. Thought it up myself and recommend it to you very thoroughly. Space is a viewpoint of dimension.

In this universe we have more or less conceived that good is white and black is evil. So we get the black and white and good and evil and we really get the opening of aesthetics. Now we’ve got church, state and the arts, proceeding from one set of postulates.

Now we have such a thing as height, length and breadth. And you would get here uh… from an origin, you would get X Y Z. Now actually that’s a sort of a floor there and this back area here is a… a wall. You see how that would be there, you got a quadrant. You’ve got a chunk of space; it’s a viewpoint of dimension, that’s all, just a viewpoint of dimension.

See, that becomes a body of knowledge. Now we’ll just… we’ll just put bric-a-brac on these things. And hang all sorts of bric-a-brac in various directions. We’ll put all the speculations of Martin Luther and uh… confront these with the speculations of Sigmund Freud. And uh… we’ll mess that up with Bismarck’s attitudes and throw in the writings of Machiavelli, sort them very nicely into one big bin of scrambled facts and you have the humanities.

Now that doesn’t mean that you necessarily have to be at the point of view of your space. You can make some space that has a viewpoint of dimension way over there. Or you can be at the viewpoint of dimension yourself. You can mock up one, put one out here. You can be at it yourself, or you can be operating in a hidden viewpoint of dimension. That is to say, here’s a viewpoint of dimension over here someplace and you can actually operate without Knowing exactly where it is. You just know you’ve got some space.

Uh… first we have then this… that’s a body of knowledge. But don’t, in Scientology now at this time, confuse the potentiality to make a postulate with data. Because the two are not related. The two can be connected, but just because one has the potentiality of making a postulate which then can become a body of knowledge does not mean that one has to make a postulate.

And if you do that you have to put in a false viewpoint of dimension. You have to add then a viewpoint of dimension of your own. Now supposing you didn’t know where 0 was and you were out here. And you were operating in 0’s space, X Y Z 0 space, and you’re at… you’re at this little point here which is point one. And you want to use X, Y, Z coordinate space and you don’t know where 0 is.

He might never make the postulate but this doesn’t. take away from him the right to make a postulate. So a body of knowledge, we might have… this fellow might have a… a whole great big pile of whuf – a huge pile of whuf and there it is. And never do a single thing about it. He’s got it. Other people could come along and say, „Well, why don’t you whuficate that stuff.“ But it wouldn’t matter a darn whether he did or not. He’s… he’s got the whuf.

You’ve got to postulate something to use that adequately. You’ve got to say you know where 0 is. You’ve got to sort of assume you know where 0 is. That is the physical universe. You’re assuming you know where 0 is. 0 exists in the physical universe.

Now that is a much lower echelon than not having anything. Not having anything is about as high as you can get. You know the old Chinese legend that the uh… the uh… head of a Chinese state or the emperor or his chamberlain or somebody had a daughter and the daughter is very, very ill and the doctors all got around – they were members of the American medical Association. They all got around and they said, „Well, you’ll have to cover them with the shirt of a happy man, and wh… that is our equivalent of penicillin. We’ve made a postulate that that exists and uh… have to find the shirt of a perfectly happy man and put that upon her and your daughter will then be well.“

What is the point of origin of the coordinates of the physical universe three-dimensional space? Actually this type of space is the idiot’s delight. This type of space goes into minus coordinates and down here you have a quadrant. Here you have a quadrant, back there a quadrant, here a quadrant. You’ve got eight quadrants.

And so the chamberlain and the king called in all these couriers and messengers, sent them north, east, south and west, and they all rode and rode and rode and batches of them started coming back all footsore and weary and… and with their horses caved in and they hadn’t been able to find a happy man and she was just about to expire and… and the last… the last doctor was being hanged and in came the last messenger and he looked at the king or the chamberlain or whoever it was and he says, „I did find a happy man,“ and very eagerly because the last breaths were just coming out of the girl by that time.

If you take three intersecting planes there it gives you all these beautiful quadrants. Three intersecting planes – it’s very lovely, beautiful, and uh… the planes don’t exist, all they are is a viewpoint of dimension. Now to each one of you postulating a viewpoint of dimension: as long as you postulate that you do not know where origin is, you cannot then yourself say you are origin. As long as… as you think, „Well, there’s an origin someplace, and that’s really what the origin is, why, I’ll just kind of tap in and say, „Well, I… I’ll be origin too, I mean I’ll just view this thing from this.““

The King says, „Well, give me…“ and the fellow said, „He didn’t have a shirt.“ So you see, there is… there’s a large difference though between… you see the reason man’s, by the way, never been able to resolve that little lesson, the reason he’s never been able to resolve it, is because he considered himself potentially what he was, was something that didn’t have to have, didn’t have to want, and so he knew very well that the way to be perfectly happy was to have nothing – no objects, which didn’t give you any time. And you could sit down on a pink cloud and there you were. And you could just be serene. You could be serene for just ages and ages and ages. So what do we have? We have a fellow down tone scale who is in the situation of having to want. He is running a body. He has responsibilities added up in his society which consist of families, and employers, and pieces of MEST in general, other pieces of MEST and he’s got to work, in other words, in order to keep a supply line going because he’s in a time track because he’s got objects already running.

But it’s a sort of diffident thing; it’s something – you don’t say I’m origin for the MEST universe. Just… just think of this. Just think of this as the thought to yourself right now: I am the origin point of the whole MEST universe.

And now we tell that fellow, now we try to tell him this philosophy: well, the happy man is the fellow who has nothing. Boy, he sure knows you’re wrong. He knows he’d only really be happy if he had this twenty-eight room house and nineteen hot and cold running servants and he… he’d only be really happy if he had these things.

Sometimes people get pale when they think of that. „That’s just, oh no, I am the point of creation of the MEST universe. No, no, uh-uh.“ Now, what he does instead, he says, „Origin, I don’t know anything about that – wherever the origin is, but I sort of look at what is there in terms of origin. I sort of look at this from a viewpoint here that, well, uh… it’s a secondary viewpoint and somebody must have given it to me.“

And yet, yet, uh… if he gets those things he just reduces himself that much further to MEST. So he’s on a cycle which is very difficult to interrupt for him without knowing how to know. If he doesn’t know how to know, he cannot interrupt the cycle of having to want. Because having to want procures and procurement has to be selective between procuring what is desirable and not procuring what is not desirable.

And here we get the whole theory of God made the physical universe and God made me but uh… I am – by His good offices, good graces and by a charter which I don’t quite have a copy of – am able to view all this space by His leave. And that’s where you get that.

And one begins to make this selection back and forth this way and that, and he gets to have more that he doesn’t want and want more that he doesn’t have and his confusion on this line gets to be such finally that he is MEST and that’s the bottom of the actual cycle, to be an object.

Now, what kind of self-determinism is this? This is pretty horrible self-determinism. Now what… what’s the viewpoint of space of the MEST universe? Well, the truth of the matter is, you are at the viewpoint of the space of the MEST universe with an extensional line from the viewpoint of space of… of dimension of the MEST universe. You’re actually at that point. You want to know where you are? Well, you’re actually at that point. And you want to know what you’re doing? You’re kidding yourself you’re someplace else. Now, that’s the trick of the MEST universe.

So the object of that sort of thing is to be an object. Well, you try to tell him about… about this thing – the way to have is to be happy is to not to Have and that sort of thing; he knows you’re nutty. Now a Hindu has a terrifically workable lot of data lurking in the midst of a terrific lot of very treacherous data.

If you can tell a fellow, „All right, now look, we’re going to coincide our viewpoints of dimension. Now you agree that uh… it’s that-a-way and that-a-way and that-a-way. Now you agree that, don’t you? All right, now that you’ve agreed that, you have that, now you know you couldn’t possibly have made that, now we’ll move you someplace else and you pretend you’re at this new place.

And so you get a rustic, a fakir, or a yogi low level sitting on a bed of spikes to discipline the body and telling himself, „I am training myself not to have and by this I shall ascend to and rise to the highest of controls and nirvanas.“ And there he sits with a body.

It’s very simple to take a thetan and knock him into a state of somnolence and make him believe he is someplace else and then actually operate with him at that new place. You could, for instance, take a… go down the street here and find a lady of easy virtue and uh… put her into a super trance and then tell her very convincingly while she’s in this super trance that you’re going to take care of her body, but you simply want her to go down and uh… uh… uh… be Mrs. Eisenhower. The darndest things would happen to Mrs. Eisenhower. This is one of the oldest political gimmicks in this universe. This is so old and so worn out as a political gimmick that nearly everybody has done it and he is now guilty of an overt act every time he thinks of it.

Now you can talk about playing tricks on a fellow – he’s playing tricks on himself; he… he’s got something that has to want continually and here he sits with something that does and he says at the same time, „I will be only… I will only be happy if I do not have and therefore I must deny everything.“ And so he gets where? He gets on a maybe. And it’s from that datum it can be said that the very confusing quality of Indian practices arise.

You take somebody’s body here and you just change this false viewpoint of dimension. Because it is a false viewpoint of dimension from which he is operating, an extended viewpoint of dimension of the same point in space, he can then be shifted anywhere because he’s already lost. He’ll already believe he’s anywhere if he doesn’t know where he is. All you’ve got to do is get somebody thoroughly lost and then tell him that he’s at Broadway and 42nd Street while he’s standing out in the middle of Albuquerque, and if he’s so thoroughly lost he couldn’t even recognize Broadway and 42nd Street he would shake you by the hand and pant with gratitude. You’ve at least given him a name for the place he is and the point he is.

He knows by instinct that he’d be happiest if he didn’t have, and he’s still holding on to something because he doesn’t know how to get rid of it completely. He’s holding on to something that has to want. And so he’s on a maybe. And he gets: „Is God there? Isn’t God there? Am I in communication with Him? Am I not in communication? What things are around me? Is it true or is it false or what is or what isn’t?“ and on this big maybe he rides himself right on in. It’s no joke; I’ve known a lot of those boys.

Now you recognize that, he’s… he’s so anxious to be found that he’s willing to believe he’s lost. All right, we take this fellow and bring him into the MEST universe, and you say, „All right, now, uh… you’re coming in here at the point of origin viewpoint. And uh… here you are and you see all these beautiful dimensions. Now you’re here. Now just out of a favor we’re going to let you into this place and you can go someplace else and take a look at it.“ Of course, the viewpoint of dimension is right there.

Logic three: any knowledge that can be sensed, measured, experienced by any entity is capable of influencing that entity. Too true. Just too true. This is, by the way, an interesting logic in that… in that it is aimed right straight at a fellow by the name of uh… I think it’s Kant. Uh… I guess it’s an impossible name like that… and with a name like that you’d sure expect that he wouldn’t be able to. And he sure couldn’t.

He’s never been anyplace else from the moment he first heard about the MEST universe until right this instant. You want to play around with this with a preclear, you can feel the walls start creaking. Now we’ll say something about it takes two to disagree. If two disagree with the MEST universe, it’ll go by the boards or something like that. It’s almost… it’s almost that delicately in balance. It’s something you have to be very, very careful about, not something which you have to fight and hit over the head with a sledgehammer.

Now that’s our friend Kant and that’s… all knowledge that is worth having will be found to be beyond the bounds of human experience. So you better quit right here at this barricade, fellow, because us scholastics have got it all nailed down. We got a machine gun and barbed wire across here and anything that’s worth having is over here and this is the last outpost toward it, and if you try and pass it we’re going to fix your crock.

The only reason people are hard to process is they’re scared that they’ll find just that and go zip and here won’t be anything. And so they… they won’t move over here and touch this viewpoint of dimension but they’re at the viewpoint of dimension; they’ve never been anyplace else because they can’t be anyplace else in the MEST universe but at the viewpoint of dimension. But that’s a point of no space.

For a hundred and sixty-two years that philosophy pervaded Western philosophy and monitored it to such a degree that today you go out in Podunk and down on Ray Street and ask people offhand; you say, „Now what, what would you think of somebody who would dare to investigate the actual beingness and soul of man?“

And origin is a point of no dimension. A point has neither length, breadth nor depth, but it is something from which you could view length, breadth, and depth. Now if you very adventurously suddenly start out and postulate that you are a viewpoint of dimension, you have broken agreement with, as far as you are concerned, with being where you are.

„Oh, you mustn’t do that. No, that’d be very, very bad, because if you found out there’d be no more universes or something.“ Now, that’s the… that is the… I think that’s called transcendental logic or realism or something; it’s wonderful stuff.

You are saying I am at my own point of origin; naturally, how could you ever be anywhere else. If you’ve agreed that you were at the MEST universe’s point of origin and then the MEST universe has given you a point of origin which you can now use, you have abandoned your own ability to be a viewpoint of dimension. And if you’ve abandoned being a viewpoint of dimension yourself then you don’t think you can create space.

Any datum worth having, then, is beyond man’s power to know. And that is sure enough sheer by the bucketful class A quality hogwash. It’s not true, it never has been true because it states that in this universe a one-way flow can exist. It says you can never backlash up a communication line and that’s sure wrong. There isn’t a piece of wire in any electronics laboratory nor a piece of MEST anywhere in any planet, not a piece of space manufactured anywhere in this universe which will not conduct both ways.

What’s space? Space is a viewpoint of dimension. That’s why in mock-up processing you get this odd phenomena: An individual goes ahead and he looks at these mock-ups and they fade out and they get thin and they do this and they wobble around. He thinks he’s viewing them in somebody else’s space.

Now that engineers can figure them and figure them, and rig them and rig them and rig them but they still won’t get one that will put up one hundred percent butterfly valves along the whole length of it. If you pour juice in that way, there can juice go back that way again. That’s the wrong way to think about it, that there can be a one-way flow.

He doesn’t know he’s really viewing them in his own space, that he’s never had anything but his own space, there isn’t anything but his own space, he… he doesn’t know this so he thinks they wobble around. Get him to postulate first a viewpoint of dimension. Get him to postulate and look and make the area in which he’s going to place the mock-up. Now the way you make this area, is simply to give it dimension from the viewpoint of the individual. You just give it dimension, you say, it’s uh… uh… long that-a-way and that-a-way and it’s… it’s… it’s tall that-a-way and that-a-way to a certain distance. And it’s… it’s wide this-a-way and that-a-way, and it just goes out there.

They’d have you think that this… and we are the puppets of some sort of a monitoring agency which could command us and affect us and influence us and yet we would never be able to contact nor experience the puppet master. Well, to hell with the puppet master.

And uh… it’s uh… it’s a very finite dimension. I got… I’ve extended a shell out there and got this shell all around this particular area and, all right, now we’ve got a space here. Now we’re going to put a particle in this and we’re going to make the particle go into motion and we are going to have a mock-up.

That is the philosophy. I hope no man ever falls into that trap because it blocked human thought and human progress. Philosophy became completely abandoned as a subject. Would you believe it that even at this moment, this subject has been in existence for… more or less for two and a half years, and even at this moment they still give a Doctor of Philosophy degree in universities which demands only this of the student: that he know what philosophers have said. Now that’s incredible; if you had a Doctor of Philosophy you would expect a Doctor of Philosophy to be able to philosophize.

And actually, if he goes at it a long… this isn’t a ritual line, this is really the only way you can do it. He’s been doing that other automatic and let’s get out of the automaticity bracket. He’s been doing the other automatically so you just say to dickens with this automatic. It’s getting postulated space, and you’ll find something very peculiar – that the things are more durable.

And a person… the professors of those courses would just be shocked beyond shock if you dared come in and infer that the end and goal of their students should be the production of philosophy. No sir, that’s how you keep a society static.

His… his mock-up won’t… are… he looks at them and he’s much more interested in them and they’re much more durable and he’s more careful of his space. So, whenever you have a preclear doing a mock-up, he will think he’s using MEST universe space and as such he… he really won’t have too much brrrr doing this because he knows he’s just working on borrowed space, and… but that’s the biggest gag that could happen to anybody, isn’t it?

This society… this society actually was penalized to an enormous degree by that block on the philosophic line. It’s much more intimate to thee and me than you would suppose, because in the field of science they long since learned that in the natural study of use of natural law and the exactness of the agreements which had been made, that an enormous number of effects could be produced.

Fellow comes along and he says, „Now look,“ he says, „here you are at this point of dimension? Now you’re going to look at our dimension. Ha-ha. Now you’re going to look at our dimension. Now look out that-a-way and this-a-way and tall-a-way and wide-a-way and… and just… just look at this all. And that’s our viewpoint of dimension. How do you like it?“ Rrrrr.

And since Immanuel Kant, assembly line rifles, automobiles, assembly line machine guns, rapid-firing naval cannon, steel ships, aeroplanes, atom bombs and H-bombs have been invented without what happening in philosophy? Just… just a dead blank. Now if somebody had been actually with some… some sensitivity that we shouldn’t really override the humanities just because we have a clear road here…

You see, all he’s done is make this fellow make some space. I mean, „Now you’ve seen our viewpoint of dimension, isn’t that nice? That’s a nice viewpoint of dimension. Now we’re going to let you go into one of the coordinate points from this viewpoint of dimension and uh… you after that will be able to view our space. And that’s very nice and we’re not going to charge you anything for it. That’s very nice of us.“

There ought to be some other road in the field of humanities there. There ought to be some parallel track. We haven’t got a society that knows anything about these things.

So, he is told he is at the viewpoint of a dimension and after he’s told he’s at the viewpoint of dimension, so help me, he is permitted then to go to a coordinate point in these dimensions and thereafter operate.

Well, what are we doing? We got atom bombs around here and there’s no danger with the control of an atom bomb. All you’ve got to do is push a button and there’s no danger about it. If you don’t push the button it won’t explode, and if you do push the button it will explode; the control of the atom bomb is an assured fact. It’s utterly certain that if you push a button of an atom bomb it’s going to blow. So you… there’s no danger or trouble with control of nuclear fission.

Position one, the only space there is as far as he’s concerned is, the space which he is manufacturing every instant from viewpoint one. But he’s manufacturing from viewpoint one a backtrack back to origin point and he’s keeping this space manufactured all the time very arduously in order to have viewpoint one.

The boys have done a very good job, but how do you control the human being who pushes the button? And so we get Uncle Joe, uh… Uncle Joe and other characters around that may rush around, and they think the hottest way to do this to to make a… a secret society out of atomic science, as their first answer.

Now, there isn’t any reason why he just can’t start manufacturing space from viewpoint one. He just manufactures space out here and here and here. No reason why he can’t. It’s idiotic that he doesn’t, except for one thing: If he did that too thoroughly the MEST universe would vanish.

Now we’ve got to have a sort of an atomic police and none of this data can get out in any way, shape or form; and we’ve got to throw the barricades down, not just on trade but on the free knowledge of science which should circulate amongst all lands and which itself is the best guarantee of peace.

Now he does this very diffidently because he’s afraid that if he does this the MEST universe will vanish and then he won’t know how to get back to that point of origin. That’s cute, because the only way he can get back to the point of origin is to say, „Well, let’s see, I’m… I’m viewing this thing now from the point of origin of the MEST universe. Okay, now that I’m there I shall now extend myself to the coordinate point one. Okay, I’m at the coordinate point one, I shall now view the MEST universe.“

So not only do we produce the ultimate weapon but we produce at the same time a new barricade. Science is out of circulation with science today. And it’s going further and further out. Now that’s very interesting. An imbalance like that has been happening almost by the square. It is happening with a rush. We’re seeing the fruition of all of that misconcept at this time.

And he will again. He doesn’t get lost. That’s elementary, an elementary dissertation on the thing.

Actually, the only real danger an atom bomb is as far as thee and me are concerned is simply that somebody might bust loose with one of the doggone things and cost us some time, that’s all. We’ve got a spielplatz here called Earth and… and uh… uh… it’s… it’s… we need it for a short time and they keep trying to mess up the playing field.

What do we mean by space then? We mean a viewpoint of dimension. That’s just an elementary definition, but it’s a very workable definition. That definition will work in physics, by the way.

I’m trying to do something about it, but not… not a bad sad hope either.

What is the space of… what is the space of an electric motor? The space of an electric motor would be two things: the viewer’s – the viewer could consider himself at point of origin and space would be his dimensional set-up, see – I mean he’d be at point of origin looking at electric motor, that would put the electric motor at coordinate point one in the viewer’s space. Now he could look at it just exactly in reverse. We could say the electric motor is a point of origin and the viewer is at coordinate point one. And the viewer is using the electric motor’s space in which to view the electric motor. Yeah, we could do that.

All right, that knowledge which cannot be sensed, measured or experienced by any entity or type of entity cannot influence that entity or type of entity.

Now, we could go further than that. We could say: The viewer is at origin point and the electric motor as a coordinate point one. But the electric motor and the viewer are both viewable because of the existence of an unknown, get that, unknown coordinate point.

If nobody to date has been able to actually spot with a meter the existence of commands from a Supreme Being… you see, he’s got no reason or right to keep insisting that people receive commands from a Supreme Being. He has no reality on it. He… he couldn’t… he couldn’t get a good agreement on this except on a stampede basis. It cannot be scientifically established the geographical location of a fellow by the no… name of the Supreme Being, MEST universe. That can’t be established.

Of course, neither the viewer nor the electric motor would be viewing with own space and therefore would not be viewing with any great clarity. Get that unknown. All you have to tell somebody and convince them of, is that it’s unknown. There’s a fellow by the name of Herbert Spencer, old favorite of mine. He talks about the knowable and the unknowable. Well, that’s just great. Any time you say that this thing is unknowable, you postulate that somebody has postulated it already, and then you don’t know what he postulated.

A lot of fellows been trying that. This does not say that there aren’t such things as gods and makers of gods. But it does say that this cardboard thing-a-ma-bob that they sell by painting signs on the rocks probably isn’t sending out anything for us to experience at all.

That would be all there would be to the unknowable. I’ll go over that again. The unknowable, the unknowable would mean that somebody knows that somebody has postulated something, but this person doesn’t know what that somebody else postulated. And then that the individual himself is willing to make a postulate, that he will now never know what the other individual has postulated.

Why? We can’t measure it. That’s a heck of an arbitrary scale, isn’t it? Well, the dickens it is. We’ve been able to measure everything else. In absence of that we’ve been driven to this incredible length. In absence of trying to find a Supreme being for this universe, why we’ve been driven to the incredible length of having to discover that uh… uh… probably the mostest god you’ll ever know is you in this universe and uh… for lack of a… lack of a nice big fellow who anthromorphically sits on a throne and uh… has a greed for adulation which would be found disgusting in any mortal (I’m quoting the Greeks now. The sources of Christianity, Plato, the great pagan, he’s their sole reason for authority). Anyway, didn’t you know that, that Christianity is based upon the writings of Plato, and the Catholic Church at all times when challenged about its doctrines has uniformly referred to the authority called Plato? You understand I’m not… not in any way, sense or form against the Church. I think the Church is a good organization. But we got a better one now.

All knowledge is, is a series of postulates. Now, anything can work out from these postulates, so when you say something is unknowable you have to go through that… that complete complexity of conditions. You’ve got… you’ve got to postulate that something exists to be known and that then nothing can be known about it. Big trick.

Now there’s something else that goes with that which I ought to say to an auditor. He’s going to discover more half-known thing-a-ma-bobs and what-nots in preclears with this stuff than he cares to count up.

All right, let’s look how that applies here to point of origin. We have to postulate that this universe, uh… work as it does, we have to postulate that there is a point of origin and that is unknown. And, furthermore, when you start a preclear working, one of the first things your preclear does is run into the postulate that he can’t know because somebody else has made a postulate, now he can’t know what that postulate was. That he’s running across an unknowable. You’re running across the fact that the preclear is certain that if he knows something it will blow up.

If he had one of these Chinese things that does addition in incredible numbers – I think it’s above an ENIAC in the number of figures it will carry or something – he would not be able to count off in a career of one year of auditing and Dianetics all the screwball things that he will run into and it’s a very, very good thing, a very good thing, to go along the line of what you actually know as a certainty and to lay off in receiving communication from your preclear and in trying to establish this, that and the other thing about the preclear, what you cannot discover as a certainty.

Or if a mystery is exposed the power will be gone in it. Ah, ah, true, true, if a mystery is exposed, the power will be gone in it. The uh… whole principle of the unknowable though and the unknown and the „We’ve got to know but it doesn’t exist,“ and that sort of thing depends mostly upon the confidence that somebody else can make a more powerful postulate than yourself.

The E-Meter is a fair certainty of establishment. When your preclear starts to tell you that he is immediately in connection with the upper, higher key of the left-hand side of Betelgeuse, when he tells you this and says that he has positive information that you are about to be wiped out at thirteen-thirty o’clock, you say, „Okay, now let’s get a mock-up of…“

All right, if you believe that other people can make much more powerful postulates and they’re in full control of their minds and situation at all times, why, you of course have set yourself up a continuing and continual unknown.

I told you when the class began about that thing about the Prince of Darkness. That’s routine. Sure, sure, there’s all types of odds and ends of communications that are coming through and being taped onto your preclear. But, you’re underestimating the power of thee, you’re just completely underestimating it. Nothing can tamper with you unless you agree to permit it to. And there is no stronger law in this universe really than that, as far as protection is concerned.

You see, that doesn’t happen to be true at all. You get up into the telepathy bands some time and find the postulates other people are making around you. „Let’s see, will I have chocolate or vanilla? Well, let’s see, the waitress looked at me rather hard when I said „chocolate,“ so I guess I think I’d better take vanilla, but I don’t like vanilla. But then you can’t ever have what you like anyway, so the best thing to do is – probably they haven’t got vanilla anyway – well, I won’t order it.“

If you start saying this is destructive it can only then become so. Now, people can be hit with force because they have agreed that force is destructive and only then can force hit them. That person who has not agreed upon the destructivity of force would theoretically be untouchable by it.

Yes, indeed, there are much more powerful postulates around than both you and me.

We tell this story. I ran this out of a preclear one time. Didn’t run it out of a preclear, preclear told me about running it.

All right, don’t get confused about this viewpoint of dimension. We could go much further into this, but that’s about all we got there. We got a viewpoint of dimension. That’s a very simple way to view this.

Way back on the first area of track… there are three areas to these tracks, you know, for each person. There is thetan plus thetan, there is thetan versus bodies. And then there’s bodies versus bodies. And you can divide the track roughly into those sections. The earliest portion of it is thetan versus thetan, the middle portion of it is thetan versus bodies and the latter portion of it is, of course, bodies versus bodies.

You say it’s down there that-a-way, there’s a point and there’s a distance between myself and that point. There’s a dimension between myself and that point. It’s a very interesting thing that the meter is a metal rod of certain length which resides in Paris. That’s a meter. It isn’t even the number of something or others, uh… it isn’t even the number of something or others as a hemisphere, uh… yards, or something of that sort. It’s some equidistant point on the equator. The French tried to make it this and they sent a big expedition down to Equador to measure all this and then they flubbed it up, and so the meter doesn’t mean that.

Now that means that if you’re looking for basic-basic on DEDs and DEDEXs and so on, you’re going to find them rather uniformly on thetan versus thetan, not thetan versus bodies.

It could have been circumference, something to do with the circumference of Earth, but they missed it by enough to make it unworkable, unusable. So, uh… it… it is really a length of a piece of metal at a certain temperature which is in Paris.

Although, blanketing is a very easy place to go to. You have to know that on mock-ups by the way. It’s a lot more beneficial to take a couple of lighted electric light bulbs and turn them on and off and have the preclear smashing them together and breaking them and doing that sort of thing than it is to have the preclear doing the things with spots of lights on the body.

What is a yard? Well, a yard is the length of a… of a… of a… something in England, uh… that’s a yard. There’s this down… there’s a couple of these things have been duplicated down here at the Bureau of Standards, US Bureau of Standards, and they are kept down there in cages, so that they won’t get out and measure people. And… and they’re… that’s… that’s… that’s feet and yards and meters and so forth. All right, that’s what they are.

Well anyway, way back on the track… he is sitting there doing nothing and life was interesting to him and very pleasant and a bunch of thetans came around, about a hundred thetans, and said, „Do you know that you can’t fight a hundred thetans?“

Now it’s a funny thing, you just take it for granted that those things exist and if you went down there what would you have to do? You’d say, „Let’s… let’s look… look, let’s see now, this… this goes from this distance over here, from this viewpoint of dimension over here to this viewpoint of dimension with relationship to me. That’s what your view of it says.

„Aw go on, I’m not interested in fighting a hundred thetans, go on your way.“ And they tried to flip energy at him and of course he wouldn’t tune up to the energy; he didn’t think it was dangerous – it was just going right on by him and he wasn’t paying any attention to it. And they said, „Well, how do you know you can’t fight a hundred thetans? Why don’t you try to… you haven’t convinced us that you can’t fight a hundred thetans.“ Well, this got him kind of sore, which is the trick.

You say it looks from this viewpoint of dimension to this viewpoint of dimension and it exists in space which has been postulated from a point of origin by a fellow by the name God or Johnson or somebody. I mean, they’re just that foggy on it. They… they wou… you would say, „Space, well, they…“

And uh… they got him to turn on so he would start blocking energy and then about a hundred thetans started dive bombing him with force beams and so forth, and started running around and around and he’s very successful at the first part of the battle; he’s knocking them left and right and then all of a sudden why of course he’s not. So he goes running around after that telling all the thetans he’d run into and so forth, „Do you know that you can’t fight a hundred thetans?“

First thing they tell you, „God is everywhere.“ Rrrrr. You mean we can’t have any of our own space in this universe because that’s all God’s space. That’s the neatest trick of the universe. That’s been perpetuated for 76 trillion years. You think that’s new?

Well, it’s an incredible thing now there that… that gives you an example. Let’s say you’re sitting there and your preclear says, „You know ah anama and I da da and I was da da and these Venusian psychiatrists and so on and it’s just going to happen to you any minute and uh… so on,“ or „We should get into contact with this,“ so on. Why, give me then the modern equivalent of „Go over it again“: „Let’s get another mock-up on this now,“ because uh… if you say, „They are? What? By golly, you know, maybe you can’t fight a hundred thetans; I’ll have to find out“ – because these characters don’t have a MEST entrance point immediately handy.

It’s all somebody else’s space so you be careful what you put into it. And you be careful what you take out of it, but the only thing you ever see which is the most mysterious thing to you, the most mysterious thing is all you ever see; if you were going to look at the standard meter, you would see that it existed from this far maybe to your left to that far to your right. Or you could go around to the end of it and look down along the length of it and say, „It exists from this point here out there. There it is.“ Or if you, your… your visio was pretty good, instead of seeing with MEST eyes, why, you just turn around to the thing and you’d say, „Well, it goes from a certain distance from here out that-a-way to there.“

Just remember that, they don’t have a MEST entrance point. So deal in certainties. Deal in certainties. Know only that you know and go on from there. And when you know that you know, why operate. Work on that data. That also tells you that you should separate data out into various bins.

Well, if you were to lie down on a bench and take a look at this meter, you’d say, „Well, it goes from a certain distance below my feet.“ And now if you turn around on the bench you’d say that you went from a certain distance from my head, that’s all the same meter. You’ll notice it keeps occupying different points in space.

You take these bins and… and you… you can have, say you have several bins, and it’d be a gradient scale. You say, „All right, and we partially know about this and we know a little more about that and we don’t know anything about this over here on an evaluation of data; we haven’t got anything to measure this up to, but this we can correlate and coordinate and work with pretty well, now what part of it as we’re working is the most valuable to us?“

Well, it’s an awfully neat trick of you to be able to do this because you see you’re viewing it all the time from a point of origin which you don’t know about and you don’t own. You want to keep that firmly in mind all the time you’re looking at that meter. That it exists, it exists from a viewpoint that is being viewed all the time.

It is always that portion of it of which you were the most certain. Now that is a conservative way of looking at things in one way, at one… in one direction it’s a conservative method of looking at something but actually it isn’t. I consistently have done this trick in investigation. I’ve taken all the maybes and thrown them out the window and hung onto a few certainties.

That’s why, somebody’s got his eye on you. Viewpoint of origin, that’s what we’ve got here. And all these things I’ve been saying, you got an X Y Z coordinate there. Now there’s no reason at all why we can’t have space that looks this way. That’s the Z coordinate and that is the uh… Y coordinate and that is the X coordinate and this is the G coordinate. And back this-a-way – we get more complicated space now. Back this-a-way from the point of origin we always have a spiral. And that’s twisted space when viewed backwards from the point of origin. This would merely be a fixed point of origin, a more fixed viewpoint – you would say the forward look in this space gives you this picture and objects which are in that conform to that pattern and are distorted to that degree and back of this there is a negative viewpoint and everything just all sort of twists away.

And then with those few certainties looked for some more certainties and then evaluated again and thrown out any less certain thing that was there and I’ve gone straight on through in that wise. That meant that you couldn’t work with MEST universe what is laughingly called data – and so this work is not a product of MEST universe data, but it’s an investigation of the track of the MEST universe. All right, an investigation of its track alone would be the same in the investigations as it would be with the auditor.

Once upon a time you probably made a lot of experiments with this sort of thing. The space is terribly interesting in that it is, uh… well, this, by the way, this is, by the way, uh… torsional G space. And that is… it would be the general viewpoint, I’m sure, taken by the torsional people.

The investigation is a parallel to an investigation that’s being carried on with an auditor, and every preclear is an adventure. They all have their differences, some of them are wilder than others, some of them more interesting than others. But in every one of them you are examining, first, a member of a universe in which you are also an inhabitant and, primarily, you are looking at a universe.

You’ve seen contortionists, well, they’re… they’re operating in that kind of space. Now… now, here, this is… this is very solid mathematics. Somebody cores along to you, and he says, „Oh, that fourth dimension, that’s very mysterious stuff.“ It sure is.

And that universe itself might be very strangely constructed. You’re not even vaguely interested in how that universe is really constructed, only insofar as how that structure has been knocked to pieces and its functions disrupted by an agreement level of which you have a very adequate track.

You know, you could have fourth dimension that was a twist, a spiral, just like this, existing in an X Y Z coordinate. You could say, „Well, that’s time.“ Oh boy, how far fouled up can we get? I mean, time is really the fourth dimension, after all. Now let’s make it a little more unknown and say that although all the space of the MEST universe is from the viewpoint of origin, let’s… let’s be very careful now to say at the same time that this space is from the viewpoint of origin.

So deal with certainties, not with uncertainties. Be sure that you’re sure and operate. That doesn’t mean that you have to have 100% absolute certainty in order to operate, just take the one that comes closest to it in your estimation and work with it. If you knew eight techniques, let’s say, and you were darn certain of technique two, you would do much better to take this technique two and operate with it than you would be to try to operate with all eight.

Time happens to come from another viewpoint of origin. And if time comes from this other viewpoint of origin, you get motion created elsewise and uh… time actually comes from S… from uh… Saturn, everybody knows that, and time is space. When they say time is the fourth dimension they’re saying time is space. Oh, oh no, time can’t be space because time is one of the dependencies for motion, and space, and matter, and energy.

You know, I ran into a fellow one time who was learning how to play the piccolo. And he was playing piccolo for the band. And he was just learning how to play this piccolo and I kept hearing this excruciating noise. It would go on all evening. So I found this fellow who was making this noise, and he was making this noise with his piccolo and what was he doing? All evening long he would hold one note until he was absolutely sure of that note. And he was sooner or later then going to be absolutely sure of every note on that piccolo. And he got to be a pretty good piccolo player. That’s kind of cautious!

So time can’t be space, not fourth-dimensional space nor eighty-eight dimensional space, nor contortional space, nor G space nor anything else. You see, it couldn’t be space, because space can be postulated in any way, shape or form.

A lot of the difference between speeds in people is that some people have more certainties than others. Two people can get to the same goal really at different times – one simply holds onto his certainties and examines them longer than another.

Now there… here’s an interesting space over here. Uh… this, by the way, is figure two, this torsional G space. Uh… here we have over here, we have three-dimensional time. Now, I want you to watch this on three-dimensional time.

Now a person who’s trying to succumb will take the most uncertain data he has and use that. He’ll use that for all of his thinking processes and everything else. When he gets so far down the tone scale anything that has got an uncertainty principle to it, he’ll use. He won’t use any certainties.

Uh… three-dimensional time works this-a-way. Now this is linear time out this way, and it’s going where this arrow is pointing. Now, linear time from viewpoint AB moves forward and goes to second A prime S prime. Follow this very carefully. Uh… this goes forward to viewpoint A prime prime and BB prime prime. That’s really what time is. I… I hope you’re paying attention to this; that’s really what time is, because there’s always from each one of these coordinates a sideways time.

You as an auditor just reverse the process and you’ll bring him up tone scale. That’s why these people float around with maybes all the time. They’d actually rather have a maybe than a certainty. And you start him going up the tone scale and you’re just finding more and more certainties.

Now it’s obvious that there is such a thing as sidewise time for this good reason: There’s sidewise time because something happens simultaneously to somebody else someplace else right this minute that you didn’t know about. Isn’t that true?

This… this raving psychotic may be confronting you if you’re unfortunate enough to process psychotics and uh… uh… these techniques work on them. But uh… here… here he… he is… he’s raving around about this and raving around about that, and he appears to be quite certain.

There was somebody had something else that you didn’t know about, something happened to him simultaneously that you were here. Isn’t that right? All right, now, if that’s the case, that’s the case, there’s such a thing as sidewise time, obviously. It might be called simultaneous time, you see how simple that is? So there’s such a thing as simultaneous time, that’s sidewise time.

Lord knows he may be apathetic about it or wild enough about it, but if you question him even vaguely about this thing, you… you shake up what little certainty he’s been able to accomplish on this terrific uncertainty in which he’s sitting. He’s not even certain of anything, truth is.

And now… now when you get sidewise time, that would be known as G-Q and G-Q, uh… G prime, Q prime. I hope you’re following this very closely because this is very important here. Uh… you see, that goes forward and that shows you immediately that this linear time which is to point K, that’s linear time that’s going out here from origin point, this is for figure three uh… out here from origin point out to K is linear time, so you’ve got that.

Well, the wrong way to treat him is to challenge what he’s got because he’s really got what’s to him a pretty good level of certainty. But he will go away from any big certainty because he’s headed down scale toward MEST and the mostest you can say about MEST is maybe.

Well now, you’ve got to be able to stand up in time, haven’t you? Time isn’t just hitting you in the stomach or something like that. It’s hitting you in the head, in the feet at the same time. They’re aging simultaneously, aren’t they? Well, sure they are, they… they’re absolutely aging simultaneously and you look at almost anybody and you can tell that’s so, so obviously there is vertical time which is measured by this coordinate.

MEST is plus-negative and in confusion and chaos. And so it’s the big… biggest maybe there is, is MEST. So let’s go up scale with this psycho and let’s find out the least thing of which he can be certain, with confidence and complete certainty, and it will break a maybe.

Now, in other words, there’s a sheet of time moving forward through space, and that makes it obvious that there’s a sheet which is merely following this sheet so that all three of these sheets are coming forward at the same time, A’ to B, A, prime, B prime, air. Those coordinate shields and so forth in time are sweeping forward simultaneously.

And you can just… if you follow that principle, not running engrams or anything else, but just follow that principle as a general operating principle with psychotics, you’ll watch cases breaking with psychotics – bong, bong, bong.

And after we get through living this moment, it being rather secondhand, somebody comes along right afterwards and lives through this moment. Well, that demonstrates conclusively, actually, I’m making more sense up here than a physics professor does.

I haven’t any uh… qualms much about treating them. I hate to advise auditors to treat them for the good reason that psychotics are very hard to re… they’re quite restimulative when you approach them in a body. You can approach them without a body, just take your perceptic band off and just let it go through, don’t put up screens. That just builds up a stop and you get glee of insanity all over it. Horrible stuff.

Now this is grand 0. And this is grand Z, and this is grand… grand Y and this is grand X. Now those things can exist then from any point of origin inside the coordinates of origin, can’t they? Now there are eight coordinates of origin so that demonstrates conclusively that there must be linear lines of K at any time there and at all points of origin so that demonstrates that there’s an infinity of time which is running linearly in all directions.

Well, anyway, you take him up scale in certainties. If you have a raving psychotic you can at last say, you can at last say to him, he can recognize a MEST object, or he can recognize you, or he can recognize a window catch. You can just say to him sometime, „Is there anything in this room that is real to you?“

Therefore you have… you have three-dimensional time and three-dimensional space, which obviously give you in its various coordinates the fact that there are… there are coordinates of this space which have partially negative time and partially positive time and which are going in opposite directions at the same time. That demonstrates there’s an infinity of universes and coordinates and that somewhere in this universe there is a viewpoint of origin and if you went beyond that you would find one of the factors of time negatively; you’d wind the clocks backwards or something of the sort.

„No.“ Yeah, no.

Now that we’ve made it very clear to you we will go on. You see how silly you can get when it comes to saying time is space. When you… every time you say time is space, you’re saying space is static and time moves, so you could say space is a static sort of viewpoint that just stays there all the time and then time moves through this in some fashion or another. Boy, that’d be wonderful, wouldn’t it?

What you’ve done is make him hold on to two new anchor points, and then post something in the room. And he’ll all of a sudden look around and he’ll say, „The light switch… the light switch, yeah, that’s really a light switch.“ Now he can go from there to „That’s a window. That’s a washstand. This is a bed. That’s a floor.“ Don’t think he’s just chattering. This guy is in momentary ecstasy of certainties.

Well, let’s look at something a little more actual with regards to space. Now, I’m… I’m glad you got all those points. And I hope you get a good note on there because the actuality is that the mind runs in torsional G space. Oh, in all psychology departments it runs in torsional G space and that’s why they get so twisted.

You’ve managed to direct his attention just enough up level to let him find and locate – what? An object by anchor point coordinates. And you just let him locate himself. And he’ll locate himself; he’ll find his hands, and his legs, and stuff like that. He’ll locate himself. He’ll get himself right back into present time, if you don’t suddenly think you have to get fancy and if you don’t think you have to get more learned that that. Really there’s nothing more learned to know about psychotics.

Now, here’s where we have… here’s where we have a very nice pleasant thought for you. I mean, this is a quiet thought, and… and I’m… you agreed to be in this universe that there was an origin. There’s an origin for space, but you didn’t agree to be that origin, because if you agreed to be that origin, the only space… it would be you alone who would be there uh… manufacturing that space, and therefore responsible for everything in it. And you would not find that very desirable because it would be impossible for you to engage in any football games, or randomity.

Because you have to give them reality. What’s reality? You have to get them back into some sort of an agreement with something because they’re out of agreement with everything. You can even get a psychotic over, by the way, into his own universe, or you can get him into an agreement with you.

Well, let’s… let’s say… let’s say, then, that you say here is an origin point of space. That means there’s a viewpoint of dimension. You get this kind of a thing all the time. You say, that corner of that room goes up that way and it goes across this way and goes out that way and there’s a floor downstairs and it’s an extended line out there and that other line can extend theoretically from that corner.

One of the oddest ways to get a psychotic over something is to get him into an agreement that something is what it isn’t. Don’t just keep agreeing with his… his… he says… he says, „That’s a hobbyhorse,“ and it’s obviously the windmill and so forth. Direct his attention someplace else; he’s got an identification on that windmill and he’s giving you the wrong name for it.

You say, „That’s a… an origin point“. So, let’s look at you. We’ll put down here „I“ the observer and let’s put „I“ the observer here, and he… he’s at this point and let’s put him uh… there at that point. Now he’s got this kind of an idea on things. He says, „All right, now here we go. We… we’ve got a room here“, and he says, „This is origin point one or prime origin prime prime, origin point prime prime prime and origin point four.“ Now there’s… there he’s got those.

Get him over, mock him up an illusion, say „Do you see this little man, no, no, do you see this little man here?“ The guy will mock up a little man there for you, see? Maybe he’ll look at the one you’re mocking up and uh… he’s liable to say, „Yeah, yeah, I see that little man.“ Now you’d think you were leading him right straight off into hallucination and delusion; that wouldn’t be the case at all.

Now he pins down and postulates four origin points. He can pin down and postulate eight origin points. He knows that if he was in that point and viewed that area what he would see from that point. So he can – he also knows how these things are modified one way or the other.

You say, „All right, do you see the little man jump?“

So he says, „Look at this room, there are four origin points, there are eight origin points, it doesn’t matter. There can be an origin point for every dot on that acoustic shielding up there“, but he… he knows what these origin points are; he’s accustomed to that as viewpoint because he’s been around himself and looked, so he can postulate these as origin points and then he leaves himself free to be an observer.

„Sure.“ Yeah, he’ll agree with you, yeah. You’ve got a point of agreement. Takes two to make some universe like this one.

And he can then swing himself back and forth on origin points which are all around him and he can postulate that he isn’t the origin point and in that wise he goes into action. You see, if he were the origin point only of dimension, he would never be in motion himself. He would be pinned in one place and that would be the end of that; but by letting other things take the responsibility for being origin points he can shift himself around in any confined area which he himself has uniformly postulated.

Now, what is a datum? Logic four, a datum is a facsimile of states of being, states of not being, actions or inactions, conclusions or suppositions in the physical or any other universe. Too wide, a little bit too wide a definition. Let’s modify that definition by this: It’s a datum resulting from a postulate.

Now he has been in agreement in one lifetime, he’s in agreement since childhood, with origin points. Origin points? He knows what origin points the family made; he knows what origin points he himself has made. Well, there was a time in his life when he was so careless about this and he knew so little about it – he’d never taken the anatomy of it apart – origin points would shift all over the place on him.

We’ve got a postulate, you know, up in the Q’s. Now let’s just say a datum is something that results from a postulate; can be an idea, a thought, or anything else. We don’t have to put that in terms of energy, because postulates are things that govern a large order of activity and any part of that order of thought or activity could be a datum, couldn’t it? And it does not have to be stated that it is engraved upon energy and that is the definition of a facsimile.

All you got to do is feed somebody some hashish, by the way, and, boy, do his origin points go by the boards. He becomes sufficiently non compos mentis to be unable to control the origin points of any area or postulate origin points of view.

It’s not engraved upon energy. This is true for this universe but it is not true for all universes. What’s a datum? A datum is anything which proceeds from a postulate. You say this room is yellow throughout. You made a postulate. You’ve said a postulate – you’ve already said there is a room, space, coordinates, location and so forth – is yellow throughout and uh… now we get a datum, that wall is yellow. That’s a datum. Uh… those walls are so far apart, and so on. You see you’re… you’re making comments and classifications and gradient scale data proceeding out of basic data. Very… it’s a good way of looking at it. None of these terms are absolute.

I just talked as though they existed, they exist for him. He’s… he becomes unable to control and postulate the origin points of any area. And if he does that, he gets distortional shapes of things. He… he lies down on the bed and the bed is 18 miles high. It is 87 miles to the door, the corridor is one inch long. He gets this kind of upset because it throws him out of „orientation“ – so what is orig… orientation?

All right, five, a definition of terms is necessary to the alignment, statement, resolution, of suppositions, observations, problems, and solutions and their communications. Here’s a whole matter of definition. Definition is taken up so beautifully and expertly by Count Alfred Korzybski that it is very difficult to improve in any way upon his classifications of definitions or his understanding of definitions.

Orientation is the principle here of being able to have an „0“ moving – that’s origin point in motion. „I“ is the origin point in motion. „I can be here, then… or second point uh… origin point motion two or it can be over here – origin point motion three, this is origin point motion one. Now that… he could be at this… this here two, three, you see, he apparently is in motion.

Somebody said it a little shorter than Korzybski, uh… Voltaire – if you would argue with me, define your terms, and uh… Korzybski is speaking in the main about this universe, he’s using that reference point, and he is in the main working in an effort to gain a therapy which he never gains. The therapy intended in General Semantics, it would be the therapy resulting from any education, but an enforced discipline of forcing people to stop and think for a moment about this and that just to communicate better, puts a stop on the line. So it isn’t a therapy; it’s educational in its therapy level. It is not a process or a therapy which they tried to make of it and which it failed on.

All he’s got to do is keep shifting these origin points and other people have agreed these origin points and coincided with their agreement with him so he can keep shifting these things in accordance and in viewpoint of everybody else.

But it was too bad that they did that because it is what it is… it’s uh… a dissertation and a very wonderful piece of work on the subject of definition. But we put down here… this is not particularly an agreement or disagreement with that. I don’t think Korzybski himself would disagree with these. He might even have a little fun with them.

Here on Earth he knows how to shift his origin points according to this society. This is one of the things he had to learn in order to know how to walk, fall, talk, anything else. That’s the first thing he had to know and that’s the first principle of education, is you have to learn origin points.

Definition, a descriptive definition is one which classifies by characteristics by describing existing states of being. That would mean this is a table. Uh… this is a table. Uh… it has a flat top. And uh… it has uh… legs. And uh… it sits on things. Of course, that also… that also describes numerous things. That’s a descriptive definition, but that’s true of any descriptive definition that after you’ve described and described and described why, you still don’t have any great clarity on the thing. Even if you take a drawing of a rhinoceros you’re liable to get a unicorn.

If you learn the principle of points of origin and that’s an origin of dimension, that’s a… an origin point is just a viewpoint of dimension, you understand, so when we say „origin“, we merely mean viewpoint of dimension.

Uh… the descriptive definition is very limited. A differentiative definition is one which compares unlikeness to existing states of being or not being. We say this is a table. Why is it a table? It is not a chair. Why is it a table? It is not a box. Why is it not a box? A box has no legs.

He’s got to be able to postulate their existence instantaneously in order to perceive, and if he’s learned how to do that properly then he as X has four, six, ten thousand points of reference which he handily has nailed down, pinned down, and he knows they’re not going to move around and it gives him a feeling of security.

And we could say this has legs and a box doesn’t have legs, therefore it’s not a box. And we keep saying what this is not. The most wonderful fellow in the world on this is the German. The German can go on with this and on and on and on with this, of describing something by saying what it is not.

If you want to give your preclear a fantastic feeling of security, start picking up his origin points and moving them around. Now I’ll give you an example of that.

And actually there’s a system of Germanic logic which runs like this: it is not, it is not, it is not, and it can t, it can t, it can’t. They’ve proven those points and then they simply assume this about it. That’s a gorgeous piece of… piece of logic. They say it… it… it isn’t and it isn’t and it isn’t and it can’t and it can’t and it can’t and they’ve described what it isn’t like and what its disabilities are, and then they they say that’s all that’s left. And you say woooo.

Shut your eyes, shut your eyes and take the upper corner… oh, pardon me, open your eyes again, look at that upper corner of that room over there. Okay, now shut your eyes again. Now move that corner, postulate that corner out into the middle of the room, now put it back where it was in the first place, now let’s move it out into the middle of the room again. Now let’s put it back there and let’s look over to the other side here of the stage and let’s look at that origin point over there. That’s a postulated origin point.

They… they’ve just got through assuming with typical Teutonic conceit that they have just exhausted all possibilities here. They… they’ve insisted that they’ve exhausted all possibilities of unlikeness and inability and therefore conclude an ability. And Germanic philosophy is full of this sort of thing. My God, if you do that you can prove one equals zero and two equals ten and that one over the square root is the acceleration of gravity. You can prove anything if you do that.

Now close your eyes. Now take both of these origin points and bring ‘em slowly together just up above my head. Interesting feeling, isn’t it? Put them back where they belong. The second you do that it leaves some people sitting outside. It leaves some people no place.

So an associative definition is one which declares a likeness to existing states of being or not being. So you say that’s a table, it’s pretty well like a… it’s like a… well, it’s like a big table and uh… it’s like a chair except it’s not so high as a chair and a chair has a back, and so on, just go on like that. Now an action definition would be one which delineates cause and potential change of state of being by cause of existence, inexistence, action, inaction, purpose or lack of purpose. And that’s very interesting. Although it sounds sort of garbled as you read it there.

All right, now shut your eyes again and take that origin point and move it over uh… to your right about four feet and then back again. Move it over about four feet and back again. Now take these two forward origin points on the roof and move them both over four feet simultaneously to the right and then back over about to four feet to the left and then just move them back and forth, back and forth, till you get a sensation of motion.

Boil it down to this, boil it down to this. What that thing’s trying to say is simply this: here, here we have the classifications of insanity of Kraepelin. It’s actually Crap-lin but I… audiences snicker when I say that, for some reason or other. He worked an awful lot, long ago, and he made this terrific classification of psychotic states.

Isn’t that interesting? Well, that’s what motion is. It is, isn’t it? You… you can experience that. And uh… one of the first things you want to… want to show your preclear… want to show your preclear is something like that. He… he’ll have an idea then what motion is, better than anything else you can tell him.

The Germans are morbidly interested in this sort of thing. And he goes on and on and on and on and on; he says there’s this state and that state and there’s this state and that state and this state and that state and woah rah, page after page after page. And then finally, having exhausted all states and having said so, he gets to the last classification and he says all other classifications are unclassified and so fall here.

Motion, all he’s… all you’ve got to do for motion is just keep shifting OM-1 up here back and forth, up and down, back and forth. Well, how do you do that? It’s just by repostulating origin 1, origin 2, origin 3, origin 4. You just keep postulating those and you know how the society thinks and you’re in agreement with the society and you know how this universe is and you’re in agreement with that. And you’ve learned all these things very arduously, there’s some universe race out there, the darn fools, which have postulated that it’s only four inches across one galaxy. And, of course, if they postulated they only have to shift that particle across one galaxy and they’d never get a chance to look at it because the galaxy is too small. And yet if you want to go from one corner – assuming it has a corner – of this universe to another corner of this universe, all you have to do is take a very, very clear view of some origin point, postulate it, take a clear view of another origin point, postulate it and shift. Just move those origin points and you’re there. That’s space.

This is the most gorgeous, by the way, piece of classification that has ever been done. And it hasn’t any use. Its level of use is demonstrated by the fact that there’s a place by the name of Walnut Lodge. I… I… They don’t see anything humorous in that, by the way; it’s Walnut Lodge. And that’s a spinbin down the line here. And uh… Walnut Lodge has… has… treats only… only uh… psychiat… oh uh… pardon me I… I said that accidentally, not as a gag, uh… uh… not as a gag.

That’s the most fundamental thing about teleportation. You’ve agreed on the origin points for everything else because you’ve agreed so hard. Well, you’re never going to get a solid object to move as long as you continue in complete agreement that you will never change the origin points of an environment.

They… they… they sent three people to see, to… to see me and every one of them was under treatment. And this was their staff. But anyway, very good people there, I’m sure, didn’t happen to meet any. Have some fine patients though. Anyway, they… they treat only schizophrenia. And so they take only schizophrenics. Now how do they get only schizophrenics? Well, anybody sent to Walnut Lodge is a classified schizophrenic. And they take somebody who is a dementia praecox unclassified or a more modern definition, a mania-depressive and they take him from Saint Elizabeth’s and they take him over to Walnut Lodge and he goes onto the books as a schizophrenic.

It’s just as though you went down and swore your boy scout oath. And, and, and uh… gave your pledged word as a knight, that you would never at any time disagree with the rest of the society on what the origin points were. We have a… corners of a room. Look how standard they are for every… corners of a room, floors, ceilings, roofs of buildings, ground levels of buildings, and that would be anything from a Nipa hut straight on through to skyscrapers. Uh… that there is a center to every cube – you’ve agreed that. And that these things can be movable in or not movable in. You can move in ‘em or not move in ‘em. It’s very upsetting to a preclear to find himself sailing through walls for the first time. Well, he’s just… he’s just postulated that you can’t move in that area.

Why? Because Walnut Lodge takes only schizophrenics. Now you can look at them and you say, „Now wait a minute, let’s go over this awfully slow,“ you say, „What’s a schizophrenic?“

Now in order to perceive motion, all you have to do… well, we’re in the subject of motion right away. All you have to do is perceive motion – and we will have uh… point uh… N here as uh… as uh… uh… an origin to point N as an origin, point NO-1 as an origin… All right, observe from… from ON-1 here, now let’s… uh… let’s… let’s look at this chair. Take a good look at this chair. Now this is point uh… NO, it’s point NO right this minute. Now we’ll move it over here to point NO-1. Now it’s at point NO, NO-1.

„A schizophrenic? We take schizophrenics here.“

Look at that chair now. Okay, shut your eyes and move that chair. Shift it from point NO, now to point NO-1. Just from NO-1 back to NO. Now shift it from NO to NO-1. Now get to shifting it so fast that it’s a blur. Did you make that chair move back and forth for yourself? That’s motion.

You say, „No, no, no, what is a schizophrenic?“

„It becomes a solid block“.

„You know what a schizophrenic is,“ they say, „a schizophrenic is a general type of insanity and so when we take schizophrenics here that ends the whole thing.“

„Ummm?“

Actually, the modern definition of schizophrenia… actually the American psychiatrist does not define schizophrenia from its root word of shizoid or schizoid, meaning scissors-like, and it means a split personality. And you think that a schizophrenic today is a split personality person? That’s not true. It hasn’t anything to do with… it’s… I don’t know, I don’t know what it is. I go around and I get these guys and I hold them against the wall and I say, „Now look, what… what is this?“

„It becomes a solid block“.

And they say, „Well, uh… we had to go to school for twelve…“

„Yes, it’s true, it becomes a solid block. Thank you.“

„Well, wai… wai… wait a minute now. All I want is a common English definition or a Latin definition or even put it in Sanskrit. I can find a translator, but I want you to tell me what so and so is or why.“ And you get the most… it’s… it’s just A=A=A=A explanations.

You’ve said that this point of you is shifting and in view of the fact the point of view is shifting, it’s unoccupiable. You get anything that’s shifting that fast, becomes unoccupiable and you finally say, „That is solid“.

Well, he rowed a horse because he rode a horse and that’s on down the line – no sense. You get that way by treating psychotics. Don’t ever treat psychotics.

Now each one of these points has a viewpoint of dimension. Each point in this chair has a viewpoint of dimension.

Anyway, this action definition merely tries to state, then, that the definition of something should lead to putting it into action or remedying it. You say schizophrenia. Here’s an action definition of schizophrenia which you might apply. This isn’t the definition of schizophrenia, nobody can find that. It’s buried in the archives of the Library of Congress or something.

„Well, then if you shift as fast as that chair you can get inside that chair“.

It’s… schizophrenia is an idea that one is two persons, which is remediable by the discovery of the life continuums being dramatized by the individual. And that would be an action definition and when you’re defining things, particularly in Scientology, I wish you’d remember that. Define it by what it does or its cure. Don’t define it by what it is like or what it’s unlike or anything. Somebody says to you, „What’s an engram?“ Well, we have a technical definition which is a moment of pain and unconsciousness. That’s all right but that is not an action definition. That is a descriptive definition and so far is limited in use.

„Sure.“

So it’s the best… a clumsy way to define it but nevertheless a better way to define it, even if you say it this way, „An action definition of an engram is a moment of pain and unconsciousness which has content, perceptic content, which has command value on the individual and which when reduced brings a greater state of self-determinism to that individual.“

All right, viewpoint of dimension then can be existing from any origin point, and if you have a multiple series of origin points you can at any time get what is laughingly called matter.

Or you could define it this way, „An engram is a moment of pain or unconsciousness which can be erased by continuous repetition of its phrases and perceptions as though at the moment it occurred.“

You can get uh… energy. Anything you want to say you get you can get, but the mechanics that you use are this.

You see the reason I’m telling you this is a very interesting reason, that is the way you keep knowledge from being lost. The way to lose knowledge is to use descriptive definitions, associative definitions. It’s all very wonderful to say, that chair is like a hooblagobla. And it comes into a society which doesn’t have a hooblagobla. And then the information is then lost.

Now, if you want to operate in five-dimensional space, it becomes very simple to simply postulate different points of origin and different complexities to these points of origin and it’s wonderful mental exercise for a preclear to start operating in five-dimensional space and do this.

A chair is a four-legged object on which one sits and which is constructed by four legs, a seat, and a back, normally of wood. That tells them how to build it. Gives them some idea of how you build a chair.

He’s taken this uh… here; now he’s got 0-1, 0-2, 0-3, 0-4, 0-5, and he is at X-l. And he has postulated that in any five-dimensional pentagon of that character – of course in any pentagon, you understand, there are many, many areas where nothing is there at all. You understand that. And no matter how… how much looks like it’s there, there’s just a lot of nothing there. You look at any pentagon and it’s true. So… that was a labored joke.

And when you’re defining Scientology or you’re writing it down, please remember what I say on that. Give them as much of what you do to cause or cause an effect on this thing you’re defining in the definition as you can and still be brief… get an action definition. I do not know but what the concept of action definition is new – I don’t know this. It might not be, uh… but it… it certainly… it’s certainly something I’ve never before seen stressed in the field of philosophy.

All right, there’s… this bears no similarity to any buildings. Uh… we’ll just say there’s nothing in the center here. So therefore the center at all times is avoided as a point of origin. It’s all times avoided.

Uh… what is an action definition? Action definition is something which gives the remedy or which gives the method of use or construction. All right, you have to learn how to think in those terms by the way. You ought to have this stuff so that you can deliver it, so that you can can remember it without any textbook or anything else, so you can put it all back together again.

Now what are you going to get if you have X-1 and… and uh… X-1 moving to X-2? That’s all right. X-1 to X-2 in that pentagon. That will be okay, but uh… what about moving X-1 to uh… T-I? What about moving that? T is not for time; we’re just being very snide about time by using time’s sacred symbol for something else.

This is essentially learning how to think with it. And it’s much more important to know how to think with it than it is to quote it. Very much more important, that’s why I seem to labor some points, and so forth. It’s… it’s just I want them punched up good and hard so that the evaluation line on the thing, if you… if you, all of a sudden one day, if you don’t know this… this subject well, all of a sudden one day you’ll be walking down the street and you, orienting, and all of a sudden whirr click, and the knowledge is yours and you’ve got it in mind and you can suddenly think with it and there’s no strain on it at all. And that’s… that’s just, after that, it’s very easy, very easy.

Uh… X to T, well, it’s gotta follow a route like this. That right? It’s gotta go from here back through there. It’s gotta avoid that because nothing then goes through that point. All right, now what happens here when we move X-2 down here to T-2? If we moved it directly and those two things were moving you would get a flow action, whereby the X-l, T-1 flow would push out of line the X-2, T-2 flow. It would get sort of crowded in there.

One of the best auditors over in England said, „Well, I finally uh… finally got it fixed in my mind one day that anything which didn’t consist of an optimum motion was an aberration and after that I understood the whole thing and it’s very easy.“ I don’t know if – that doesn’t get home to me, does it get home to you?

It couldn’t help but get crowded because you… when you had… can’t have the shortest line, uh… a line is the shortest distance between two points, why, you’re naturally going to get a lot of lines coinciding in there someplace or another. So you get it going and get a different type of wave in that type of space; it’s going to look different, it’s going to feel different and so forth.

But he… he just told me this in his level of communication. Since that he’s been a wonderful auditor, everything going along fine. I don’t know what he got… what he got into the light, but something went click and after that the preclears are just coming off of an assembly line, click, click, click, click, click, click, click.

Sound can’t go, then, straight from X-1 to T-1; sound has to detour over here by the dotted line. So therefore sound with sound here’s bunched up so there would be a higher intensity of sound at point S. So everybody knows, who lived in that universe, everybody would know that uh… this was just an S point, and everybody would know sound got more intense at an S point. So therefore it would be a very, very good thing uh… to get a seat closer to the S point.

Now, all of the early logics then really boil down to the fact that you have a non-wavelength thing called theta which is capable of creating space, time, and locating matter and energy in it, and that uh… there are various things you can do, and at this time the mostest we know you can do with great ease is to make postulates and postulates are a statement of states of being which then go into effect, or don’t go into effect, as the case may be. And proceeding from postulates are bodies of knowledge and data.

What do you know, over here in this figure, your previous draft uh… over here everybody knows that sound in three-dimensional space goes back here to the back wall and hits and comes forward this way and the greatest intensity of sound is here, right in the center. So this is intensity. And uh… the sound is blurred though.

And knowing how to know is being free enough to be able to make postulates which will stick or not stick as the case may be, as you desire it.

There’s more sound action there at point „IN“ but it’s blurred, and your greatest sound clarity would probably be then at back „B“. Well, that’s just a freak of three-dimensional space. It is distorted because of three-dimensional space and the insistence on putting walls up in three – dimensional space and so on. And so you’d get a different type of behavior of waves only if you had pentagonal space of some sort and supposing you made a real postulated space that every pentagonal space would go over to the right as a warp here. And this warp is where you put in the furniture you don’t want. Therefore you could… you could actually train somebody who would see no motion at those points.

Let’s take a break.

At that point of warp he would not make any points of origin; he would collapse a point of origin, and the furniture which was „in there“ would never be there for anybody. You could train anybody you wanted to, in other words. Just start out from scratch and train people to view things differently than they are viewing them and they would get a different universe.

They would not only get a different universe, they would not necessarily get this one at all. If you would just want to make an experiment sometime, get somebody trained to take every point, every uh… this ought to have a name on this… on this figure 1 here, 0-1 uh… 0-1 ought to be uh… called an anchor point. And just train him to have an anchor… here’s… here’s his anchor points. Anything which he ordinarily orients his scenery by would be his anchor points; without those anchor points he wouldn’t have any dimension.

He’d have to have that, uh… pardon me, he wouldn’t have any motion; he would have dimension, but if he had to use OM-1 here all the time for his origin point only and his dimensional point only, you see, he couldn’t get any… any… any motion himself. He couldn’t get into motion. He would eventually get to a point where everything… everything else moved but he didn’t. And he would see motion and freeze and, what do you know, that’s one of the commonest things you find out wrong with a preclear. He’s gotten to a point where everything else is in uncontrolled motion and so then he conceives that he can’t move. In order to control it he says, „I am these dimensions and they are running in me. And therefore I’ll stop them by not moving.“ You get that as one of the first reactions in a preclear. He sees something going fast, he stops.

The best way to anchor anything, one of the first and fundamental ways to anchor anything down is to be the viewpoint of dimension of that thing, because it is then owned. God owns the universe because he is a viewpoint of dimension.

We’ve all said that he exists, but we’ve never said where the viewpoint of dimension is and then all of us handily operate in groups and postulate viewpoints of dimension for that particular area of the universe and we’re off.

We’re all set, then we can see everything everybody else sees. We can get the same motions everybody else gets; we’ve trained ourselves to do that. It was training, agreement that does that.

Now, what about somebody who is unable to control a motion? Let’s say he is unable to control a motion. Let’s say that at OM-1 up there is out of control. There’s too much motion in there. How do you solve OM-1’s concept. of being in too frantic a motion? That’s a dispersal case, mind you.

He’s in too frantic a motion. You’ll find out… the first thing you will find out is that these corner points, these anchor points here, O-l, 0-2, 0-3, 0-4, are in vibration. He won’t pin himself down as… as something to move in relationship to these viewpoints of dimension, these anchor points, because he doesn’t dare, things always get him out of there.

They chase him out of there. So he… he’s just gotten… gotten unconfident about the whole thing and he no longer desires to have, in figure l, 0-l, 0-2, 0-3 and 0-4 to be very static. He… he doesn’t want those things to be motionless.

He wants to… he’s trying to shift the room out from underneath him on the theory that he might not be able to shift himself out of the room fast enough. Now you take a little test to that. You’ll find most of your occluded cases when you have them shut their eyes and try to hold an anchor point still. Go ahead and shut your eyes and do that. Take that anchor point over there and hold that thing still.

Don’t let it move, hold it still. Now take that in relationship to the other anchor point in this room, 0-2, and hold those things the same distance apart. And hold each one of them dead still. Don’t let ‘em shift. Any difficulty with that? All right.

What you’re doing, you see, is you’ve… you’ve already agreed that, those were static and stable and there and then you thereafter didn’t uh… uh… like that agreement and your agreement left to disaster for yourself so you had decided then that the best thing that you can do is to he kind of cautious about that agreement, and you are actually kicking sideways from that agreement and you don’t want those points to stay still and that’s why you can’t step easily out of the body and anchor up the atmosphere. You know what space is then? Viewpoint of dimension.

So you can have three kinds of space; you can have point of origin, you can have the viewpoint of dimension such as OM-1. You have… this is the big, the big point of origin down here, 0. This is mythical. Then you’ve got OM-1, and then you’ve got anchor points 0-1, 0-2, 0-3, and 0-4, so that you can get motion into OM-1. Nothing will move unless you do that. Okay, let’s take a break.