You can make a man into a good soldier by showing him the necessity of it. Get him shot over a few times, show him a few dead bodies, and he'll become a good soldier. Not because he wanted to be a soldier in the first place. So he'll never become as good a soldier as he would if he was willing to become a soldier.

Thank you.

You can really do some remarkable things if you're coaching somebody and you want to get him over the hump, and you're really interested in your student - on good old confronting. Is just get him to - „What part of it's all right to confront?“ see, I mean, „What part of me is all right to confront? Is there anything that's all right to confront?“ you know, „Is there anything about what we're doing here that's okay?“ And you'll discover in a student that's having a hard time of it quite often, boy, he'll just sit there and say, „I'm glad you asked me because - whew! I - I - that's funny - I - never occurred to me before, but boy, I'm not even vaguely willing to be here,“ you see, „much less, confront somebody.“ Remember, ability hinges upon willingness. Ability is indestructible. Ability is always there. You can always do things. A painter can always paint as far as his ability is concerned, but when he becomes unwilling to paint, he then mocks up some specious inability to paint. See that? And he dams up his ability to paint with an inability to paint. Got the idea? Because he now considers that although he can paint, he'd better not.

How are you doing today?

Some people who are fixedly fixed - you know, like your catatonic schiz or somebody like this, you know - they are able to move. And it's a comment on the inability of - I forget the science - alienism, I think it is - that they disprove the condition by such a trick as walking in the room and say, „Well, we're evacuating the hospital now,“ and this fellow's lying there; he's totally rigid; hysterical paralysis. Guy walks in the room and says, „We've got to evacuate the hospital now, and there's no sense in carrying this fellow along. He'll never be good to anybody,“ and takes a gun out of his holster and cocks it. And of course, the patient leaps out of bed. So, he says, „You see, he wasn't paralyzed at all.“ Nuts! The only paralysis there'd be would be a mental paralysis.

Audience: Fine. Good.

Even if you busted every bone in the guy's body, it wouldn't keep him from moving. But when he knows better than to move, he then prevents himself from moving.

All right. Is there anybody here that wasn't doing at all?

He hasn't lost the ability to move; he's lost the willingness to move.

This is the second lecture, 20th ACC, July 15, 1958. We are going to cover in this lecture the auditing procedure - the auditing procedure of this ACC.

Therefore, the rehabilitation of willingness is quite senior to just the rehabilitation by drill, education and so forth, see.

Before we cover an auditing procedure, however, I should call to your attention that there are certain prerequisites to being able to audit. The first and foremost of these is the Auditor's Code. Bang! Auditor's Code is a very important document. It's becoming more so and more so and more so. It is one which is aging in wood. It definitely is. So it's time for you to take it out and look at it again because it answers an enormous number of questions.

Willingness. Now, that is why we sometimes take a psychologist and we herd them into class; they go through the HCA Course every now and then; they've heard about it; they've been teaching it; they've been teaching Dianetics or something in the psychology classroom. That's right. Oh, it's done an awful lot in the country today. Dianetics has almost totally been taken over by psychology and medicine. We're running into it more and more and more and more.

„How long should I run a process?“ It's answered in the Auditor's Code. „What should I do with the pc,“ and so forth. Actually, there's one more clause on the Auditor's Code than appears in the earlier versions. There are actually sixteen clauses in the Auditor's Code, and the last one is: Stay in two-way comm with the pc.

Some guy up in Chicago or near - or Michigan or some other such place - the other day a medical doctor told a patient that came in that, well, he'd better be careful about letting people practice Dianetics on him because it was now totally the property of the medical association; only medical doctors were permitted to practice it.

Now the Code of a Scientologist is apparently not as germane to auditing as you might believe. However, it is your best protection as an auditor, and your reputation has a great deal to do with the Code of a Scientologist. Therefore, it is very much to your interest to keep this code alive.

The patient wrote me at once in great hilarity.

The next thing that we run into is a series of training drills, the TRs. Now there are a great many TRs. There are more TRs than you take up in Comm Course and Upper Indoc. A full list of these TRs is available.

William and Mary - the professor of psychology - chair of psychology at William and Mary, has within the last couple of years written me for more information because he uses it in the classroom all the time and he found that he didn't know a couple of things. Boy, I said, this man's concept of his own ignorance is certainly wonderful. He didn't know a couple of things. Gorgeous.

The entirety of know-how on the backtrack of Dianetics and Scientology should be pretty well at your fingertips: such things as the composition of the reactive mind, what you can do with the reactive mind, the behavior of mental image pictures in general, engrams, secondaries, and so forth.

But we get these boys going through, and their willingness ends with a willingness to investigate something. And it doesn't include - this is awful hard for a guy to get sometimes, but once you've got it, you can understand a hell of a lot about these guys: they're willing to investigate but not to learn. See, they're willing to investigate but not to learn anything from which they're investigating.

If you don't know the definition of an engram, you sooner or later are going to run into one and have to have it escorted from the classroom so that you can get on with the lecture about engrams.

See where their willingness ends? And you get these huge research projects like those operated by Nelson Rockefeller and so forth. And he gets all kinds of people in there, and they're all willing to investigate, and they write papers, and they describe, and so forth, but it never reaches them.

These things are pretty-pretty wicked in the reactive bank of an aberree. They're pretty wicked. And they're what you hit as an auditor with these later, very heavy processes, and you hit engrams with a crash. You plow right into them with such things as Help, and if you don't know what's coming off this case, you might think he has medical association sciatica or something, you know? And he might have all sorts of horrible physical ills.

Their observations never materialize. See, their observations never amount to anything because they're not willing to learn anything from their observations.

I'll never forget a medical doctor becoming hysterical while I was running an engram. He became quite hysterical. He became quite a medical doctor. To watch one of these boys operate on the Effect Scale is quite fascinating. The surgeon particularly. He's in there with total effect, total effect, total effect. Got to get in there with a knife, got to get in there with a knife, gotta make a total effect, you know, arra ugh! And you never saw the like of this.

And you'll find some of the most remarkable things in these papers. It's quite obvious that they were willing to investigate, but that was the end of their willingness.

I've seen these guys absolutely froth at the idea that somebody was not going to have his stomach cut out. I have seen them in a hospital just - just become very upset because some diagnostician said that he didn't have stomach cancer after all. I saw a surgeon throw down a stethoscope and his gloves on a desk and spatter papers all over the place, and he says, „What'll you think of next?“ Now, you have to have surgeons in order to keep the insane happy and they're a necessary part of the community of course, naturally. But in auditing if you don't have a command of the scales, various behaviors will become extremely incomprehensible to you. You know, why is he doing that? You know? Well, there are only three vital scales and these scales are: the old ARC Tone Scale, the Chart of Human Evaluation. That thing is as valid today as it ever was.

Police officers are very often like this. They're perfectly willing to investigate a case. You know, they're willing to go out and find out this and find out that. They're willing to do that. But not willing to find out what they found out. And you'll get one of these boys describing the case later on to you. I've had this happen. And boy, he's not talking about anything that ever happened.

However, it has an extended bottom. It goes down into the Minus Tone Scale as given in Scientology 8-80. The scale that is most used by you is that scale. For instance, you'll watch people coming up through this emotional band.

See, he investigated it. But then he totally hallucinated about what went on, and you get this fairy tale. And most horribly enough, newspapers are more and more and more in this category.

Now, this emotional band has suddenly become more important than it has for the last few years, because when you hit the Rock on a case, when you manage to get in there and actually surround the point on the case that the person has identified with all other points everywhere, you will hit the case's greatest reality.

A good legman used to be a fellow who went out and found the facts and wrote them down for the rewrite man, see. And they made a story out of it. That isn't what they do these days.

These cases that are very unreal (we'll talk about this some more later) these cases that are very unreal - what wall, you know - actually do have a point of reality. And that point of reality is the Rock, this point on the case that they're obsessively mocking up, and that thing is real to them.

The legman goes out and investigates. And then he thinks up what would be a good news story. And boy, it's almost impossible to recognize the actual happenstance. You read about all these things that are happening to other people, you see, and you say, „Well, those must be true,“ and then one day you're involved in an apartment house burning down or something like this, and you read the news account of this thing.

It is more real than anything else, and you want to hit the reality on a case, you do a proper delineation of what this item is that the pc has associated with all other items everywhere and which we call slangily „the Rock“ because at the congress I hear people calling it the Rock, and so I'm following suit.

And you say, „Where was that apartment house? On Mars? It had nothing to do with the fire I was in.“ See? They're perfectly able to learn, but they've got the Effect Scale in operation, see. When they're very low on the Effect Scale, they can look at something but not receive what they saw. You got that? Now, this is the case of your pc who has a busted leg and doesn't know it. He tells you he has a broken leg. He can tell you that.

And when you hit that one, he goes up the emotional scale. He will go right on up to apathy, and he'll hit grief, fear, anger, antagonism, boredom, conservatism, enthusiasm.

And you say, „Therefore, he knows he has a broken leg.“

But a new manifestation comes in that has been observed before, but has never been particularly stressed, and that manifestation is that the Rock goes down scale through all of these points before the pc starts up scale. In other words, the Rock is in serenity and goes down to enthusiasm, goes down to conservatism. Got the idea? Well, the real Rock first runs this ARC Tone Scale in reverse and then runs it right side up for the pc. He is emotionless during the period when the Rock or the central pivot of the case is being emotional. See, it is alive; he is not.

No, he doesn't or it wouldn't be broken. That is psychosomatic illness, in a nutshell.

Now, if you don't know about engrams and secondaries, you wonder how the devil this Rock got into his hoof in the first place. A valence - a valence is no more and no less than an interiorization into an engram. It's a total interiorization into an engram where the pc has done the unheard of thing of flipping from the identity which he had actually in the engram into another identity in the engram. And this engram is totally solid, and then he now has the track and bank of the item he has gone into in the engram.

Fellow says, „I have sciatica. Well, I know I have sciatica.“

It's as simple a mechanism as this: You have a mental image picture containing pain and unconsciousness, and you have this fellow - there he is and here is the medieval torturer or something of this sort. (There is very seldom anything goes on in this lifetime the way the world is today that would really aberrate anybody.) But anyway, here is this medieval torturer and the medieval torturer wins. He's able to make this fellow be unwilling to communicate with anything, anywhere. And when this item we call „the man“ becomes unwilling to communicate with anything, anywhere, in any means or manner, he becomes the nearest thing which he thinks it's safe to use for a communication system. Well, it might be the torturer, it might be the boiler, it might be the whip. You see, it could be most anything that is in his vicinity.

No, he doesn't know he has sciatica. If he knew he had sciatica, he wouldn't have sciatica. See, it's as simple as this, because he'd be in total communication with it. So to the degree that he limits his communication is the degree that he doesn't learn.

But he's got a mental image picture of it, and the funny part of it is he actually does a flip into this mental image picture. And then he does a beautiful computation about what its track and bank should be like. There's some people who have totally black fields which are simply derived from the fact that a whip would naturally have a totally black field as everybody knows.

Female voice: He'd as-is it.

Now, more understandably, he goes into the valence of a furnace. Well, of course, a furnace always has a totally black field. Get in one sometime and you'll see. Or you won't see as the case may be.

Yeah. He'd as-is the whole works. This is one of the gorgeous commentaries. When you finally understand this about psychosomatic illness, you - you get in...

Now, the ARC Tone Scale is an index of life and livingness, and it is, you might say, a measure of how much alive a person is. When he is just so much alive he manifests some position on this scale. Well, when he is being something else, then it of course is alive and it manifests some livingness. You see that? And the index of that livingness is this old ARC Tone Scale.

By the way, I found out something the other day that I'll just mention in passing to you - you might find a little interest although this is your half hour, and that's epicenters.

All right. Let's go on to another one and that is the old Know to Mystery Scale. And if you don't know very much about the Know to Mystery Scale, why, you'd better review it because you'll understand why your preclear figure-figures when he cannot confront effort.

Do you remember epicenters?

Now, beingness and valences and other such like - is just the shift of livingness that he does - very often lead us into some fascinating computations on the Know to Mystery Scale. And the individual - the individual involved is usually parked somewhere on the Know to Mystery Scale as well as the ARC Tone Scale. In other words, livingness is also expressed in the chief class of significance which he assigns to the universe around him. And that is described by the Know to Mystery Scale. In other words, all things are symbols, you see? Now, you'd better know this scale because it gives you classes of viewpoints - classes of viewpoints. Now, a fellow can be a symbol. He can be nothing but a symbol, which is quite wonderful. You know, he's not a body, he's not anything but a symbol. And in view of the fact that a symbol, definition of, has mass, meaning and mobility - and that defines a symbol - we see that he always becomes to some degree a symbol when he becomes any thing.

Audience: Mm-hm. Yup.

Well, therefore, his attitude toward thinkingness becomes explained by the relationship or the position of symbol to think. So this person is telling you that he is a symbol. You're processing somebody. He says he's a priest. All right, very good, he's a priest. Or the Rock is a priest or something like this. He's a priest. Very good. All right.

I found out a process the other day that turned on an adjustment of epicenters which would undoubtedly be of great use in the treatment of stroke.

You say, „Think something.“ You know, you start running some kind of a think process or you sit there waiting for this man to think. Well, a man has to be able to think in order to cognite, a little bit. And he's a priest, you see? And he's a symbol. To you maybe a priest is somebody who walks around and does things. A priest is somebody who wears a uniform of some sort, a cassock, or something of the sort. He has a body. You've got your idea of what a priest is. Ha! That's not his idea of what a priest is. He is a priest, p-r-i-e-s-t. He doesn't do anything, wear anything, be anything. He is this symbol. See? And now he never gets a cognition. You process him hour after hour after hour and he never cognites on anything. Well, if you don't know how a person can grade down on this Know to Mystery Scale, and if you don't use this scale as an evaluative scale, you're liable to get in a little bit of trouble with some of these people that you process.

You see, thetans came after epicenters. See, we didn't quite know what was in communication with the epicenter. Well, evidently, a thetan who exteriorizes - he's kicked out of his head somehow or another, you know, in an operation or something like this or heavy shock - he's booted out of his head.

Now, of course, he could have been a priest and then gone down scale on the Know to Mystery Scale and gotten totally into mystery, so he is now a mystery. And you, you poor auditor, are looking for some explanation or rationale of the case, and there's no explanation or rationale of the case except one: He's a mystery.

When he comes back in, he doesn't hook up to the proper epicenters. Thus you get operational shock and all other things.

Well, mystery by definition has no explanation or rationale that is known, to you, you see? And he will just go on being a mystery. Well, now where is he going to graduate to when you get him out of being a mystery? Well, he starts studying Freud, won't he? The behavior of people - the behavior of people should not be a closed book to you, and once you have become used to observing them on these bases .. These scales, by the way, aren't something I just dreamed up. They were discovered more or less empirically, by observation and so on. Basically, originally, by the way, they were extrapolated as just - this is about the way they would fit. But there have been several hundred scales which were, you know, figured out and extrapolated, and they were all nice, and they were all neat, and they were theoretically perfect, only they didn't apply to the real universe, you know? Ah-hah.

Well, that part of the body he is not in communication with will hurt. That, by the way, is a technical definition. That part of the body he's not in communication with will hurt.

Of course, that would be the thing dearest to the heart of a psychologist. Totally no application anywhere, so that would be just the thing to have.

Now you can ask an individual about various parts of the body and on one of them, you may pick up a theta bop. Well, it's a compulsive exteriorization from that part of the body. Isn't this cute? You don't just exteriorize from the head, you see, you can exteriorize from your left big toe, too. And after that, there being no communication in the left big toe, his hookup is wrong, and he'll get pains in his left big toe. This is quite - quite amusing. But not to the patient.

The last of these three scales is the Effect Scale and this is peculiarly an ACC scale. The only place it is really taught very much or talked about very much or used very much is in an ACC and used by its students. The reason for this is, the scale is one of these simple esoterics. It should be, could be so much, you know? And most people look at it casually, and they say, „Well, that's that.“ They throw that aside and don't pay much more attention to it because it's not really complicated.

All right. The epicenter situation was that evidently an individual who is suffering from heavy shock will get what is medically diagnosed as a stroke. Now you could have a stroke in your arm or your finger, but it's normally half the body, or something of that sort, you know. That's a stroke.

Or somebody else gets ahold of one, this Effect Scale, and he says, „Well, we can make it very, very, very, very complicated and then they no longer have an Effect Scale.”

And what it is, is a failure to stay hooked up or to return to the hookup with the epicenter. And so you get a whole side of the body numb. One of the ways of checking this is to get a person to sense the feeling in his right hand, and then sense the feeling in his left hand, and ask him, „Are they equal?“ Sense the feeling in his right foot and his left foot and find out whether or not they're equal. An individual who's had a heavy shock very often will find a disparity between the feelings in one side of his body and the other side of his body.

Now, this one - this one is your preclear's behavior under auditing. And it's a very simple scale; I'll mention it in passing here, just describe it. If you had an enormous V, wide at the top and pointed at the bottom, this huge V, you would get a graph of satisfactory effect. And up here at the top, above the V, you get a person who didn't have to make an effect on anybody. It's the old Axiom 10 thing. He doesn't have to make an effect on anybody and he doesn't have to have an effect, you see? He's totally free about it, but by choice he could make an effect or receive an effect. That's way up scale.

Well, if that's the case, he isn't hooked up on the epicenters there.

Now, we get into it where a person operates to make effects and then we go down scale to a level where he makes effects so as not to receive effects. And then there are several flip inversions as you go down the scale whereby he doesn't make an effect on anything because he wants an effect. See, he's now on receiving an effect. And the point we're interested in is the gradient scale of effect on self in relationship to the effect necessary, for his peace of mind, on others.

And the process that does this is you pick out a prominent part of the portion he is not connected with - you know, this numb, dull, hurts. And you ask him for a condition, just, „Tell me a condition,“ not invent one. Just „Tell me a condition worse than that hip.“ See, not worse than that pain, not worse than that broken bone. And this came from this fact: that individuals when they are very, very soggy into a present time problem will only give you conditions. They won't give you problems.

So the gradient goes down to no effect on self, total effect on others, and that's the bottom of the scale. And he will have adopted some valence or some beingness which meets this desirable effect standard. And that beingness is somewhere on this Effect Scale.

So I decided to use this as an experiment and just have a person give me conditions. And what you're really doing is running „a problem worse than“ that hip. Well, that you're running a terminal then makes it quite valid. The actual case on which I first discovered this, by the way, was in agony and was lame and was nonfunctional. Pretty bad shape. And about an hour and 15 minutes or an hour and a half or something like that, of „Tell me a condition worse than that hip,“ straightened out the epicenters. The individual was now again in communication via neurons with all of that side of the body. But I picked out the most painful spot and then didn't shift just because other spots started to hurt.

And an individual who is being a piece of MEST realizes that a piece of MEST can have no effect on it, but it can have a total effect on others. A particle of lead, for instance, is very, very nice that way. You can take it out of dead bodies and melt it down and put it into another bullet, and so on, and none of the molecules are damaged or deranged, according to the physicists, and it's all set but it sure does have total effects on other people. You get the idea. It's total effect on somebody else, no effect on self.

And in the running of this thing, we got this amazing fact: The person realized she'd had a headache, a very severe headache, all the time the hip had been hurting, and that the headache was much worse than the hip. Now, it'd been a bad auditing blunder - as demonstrated in the actual fact that the blunder was not made - would have been to suddenly start running a condition worse than that head, you see. I just kept up with the hip even when the hip would go through periods of not having any pain in it.

Now, when you get this extreme case as a pc, he's lying there totally anaten; he's the insane asylum case. But you'll see versions of this case wherever you look.

All of a sudden, the person went flip. You know, he eased right in and then click. You know. And then all of a sudden were in communication with that side of the body. The lameness vanished, the soreness vanished, all the somatics vanished, several somatics, as I just mentioned, showed up and disappeared that the person had been aware of having but didn't know it. You know? And we got an adjustment of epicenters.

Now, you start processing somebody and he specializes in telling you how it isn't having any effect on him. He puts it numerous ways. At various parts of this Effect Scale, he will put it in different ways. One of the ways he will say is, „Well, I'm getting along fine. I'm improving all right.“ You know, that's a fairly high reaction. That means no effect on me.

It could be said that the world is a painful place simply because a person is out of communication with most of it.

A little bit higher he might tell you, „Well, I can cope with these effects okay.“ See, he's beginning - a little bit higher he admits that an effect occasionally occurs. A little higher on the scale, he cognites. „Oh, that's what that is,“ you know? This is what that is. It's quite a bit higher on the scale. See? But below that level he just sits there, you know? Being whatever he's being, you know, he just sits there. And the only thing he's telling you is no effect on him. There's no cognitions, there's no somatics, there's no reaction, there's nothing.

I woke up the other morning and felt very bad - I hadn't had very much sleep, had been working very hard the night before, and it was somewhat unusual to feel so bad, you know. I mean every time I'd communicate knowingly and directly with the body and so forth, there'd be somatics, and so on.

But boy, you give him a little chance, and man, can he try for a total effect on you, you see? He knows privately the kind of an effect that would be satisfactory and expected in this situation. And you'll find these people are in „Wait.“ They're below mystery; they're just sitting there in „Wait.“ Now, the Know to Mystery Scale, and this Effect Scale and actually the ARC Tone Scale can all be drawn on the same music bars. And they match up right across the line. Nobody has done this task. I'm lazy. I could give you a fancy explanation about being too busy and so forth, but that's not the explanation for this one. I am in a complacency. I know these so well and use them so frequently that they just seem to me to be. You know? And life in its various agreements seems to have come down to this type of a scale.

I sat there. I'd just awakened, and I myself had been asleep. I thought wow! What's this all about. You know? What am I - I'm more thoroughly coming apart today than I usually am, you know.

Now, you must realize that these scales are built out of a whole set of special agreements and that thetans, one after the other, have evidently agreed to these scales, and we are not describing something which I invented, you see? We are describing something which was discovered and observed and happens. And possibly - possibly someday we'll have a process which would just directly pull up these scales and tear them up as the expected behavior. By that time these scales become no good and we will really be cooking.

It suddenly struck me that I wasn't communicating with my body. I woke up to the fact that I very often make this mistake.

But until a person gets Clear, particularly, and gets well up the line, these scales are terribly in force. He believes this is the way he ought to operate, I guess. It, by the way, isn't necessarily the way a thetan operates. It's the way a thetan has agreed to operate and that describes these scales.

You know, I'll drop the mock-up and go out and prowl someplace or do something or other, and I don't continue to be in communication with the mock-up.

Now, don't let me catch you in the ACC being sweetness and light about this pc, totally, totally complacent. You're auditing this pc, and this pc is sitting there in some position of the Effect Scale that is not changing at all - don't let me catch you being complacent about that pc, you understand? Because when they get better, they go up scale. And when they get worse, they go down scale. And sometimes they are below scale, and they get better by getting apparently much worse.

I took a look at it and looked over the situation. I simply hadn't postulated communication with the body. That was all. And so I just said, „Well, I'm in communication with everything in the room at least,“ and that was the end of those somatics. Get the idea? I mean, I'd gone, and I'd thought that when you left a room, you should go out of communication with it, see. Slight little error. That's hangovers, totally.

We have an HGC preclear right now that every time anybody takes a couple of 90-ton building jacks and puts them under him and puts him up the Effect Scale a little bit, boy, does he try for a total effect on everybody. He goes running around telling everybody how it's all bad, it's all bad, it's all bad. And the funny part of it is the people he's telling this to are all in communication with one another, but he is telling each one of them that the other two have as their sole ambition killing him. I consider this quite - quite interesting because each time they have an effect on him, he knows this is all wrong. He's evidently just there to prove that nobody can have an effect on him, and the processes that are being used on him are chewing him up and tearing him up and throwing him away in his dearest areas.

You spend all night drinking to go out of communication with your environment, and then wonder why going back into it the next morning is so painful.

Now, where you hit the Rock you change scale position, and it can happen suddenly. Why? Because you take him off the ARC Scale, you take him off the Know to Mystery Scale, you take him off the Effect Scale - of a valise. He's been a valise now for the last fifteen, twenty generations, and you take him off the point of the scale where he is being a valise, you see. And you shift him over, perhaps not to himself, but at least to a more desirable identity, and of course, you'll get a sudden shift on this scale.

Yes.

So it doesn't always happen gradually, and these scales are not always approached on a gradient, except the ARC Scale. While this transfer of beingness takes place, he goes down scale on the ARC Chart of Human Evaluations, and goes up scale as his next personality. That's not himself probably unless you are very, very good and you hit the Rock right on the top with a sledgehammer the first time. You can do that. Don't think that you can't.

Male voice: Well, I found exteriorizing people a few years ago that a stable datum that most thetans seem to have is that if you exteriorize, you're out of communication with the body, naturally.

And then the shift will be quite violent. And he wouldn't just come up little by little by little. During the exact period of auditing, you will see these scales readjusting. He will follow the pattern of the scales and all that sort of thing. When I say it's rapid, I mean at the beginning of the session he was at this position on the Tone Scales. At the end of the session, he's at some other selected series of positions. You get the idea? Now, you audit him again and you move him further over into a beingness closer to himself, and he will again shift position.

Interesting, isn't it?

Unless you're shifting a person's position on these scales, you're not getting anywhere with auditing. So one of the little tiny goals, the little tiny goals that you have - this is a small goal in clearing - is to shift his position on these three scales. So, you better know what these scales are so as to know what to shift him on.

Male voice: Yeah.

Now, these prerequisites which I have just mentioned are of course accompanied by a fairly broad understanding of the subject at large. You should know something about time tracks, and you should still know something about other observable phenomena which we have made into noumena. There is very, very little phenomena left in Scientology. I hate to say that, but we have come to a point where so much phenomena has become noumena that now the preclear himself is a phenomenon.

Interesting. Not true, is it?

And that is, we don't quite know what the Rock is. Otherwise we know how he's going to behave. We don't know where he is sitting and we don't know quite the combination that's going to unlock this case and let him out.

Yeah. I had a cognition the other day - while I was speaking of cases, my own case - it was an interesting cognition. But it was a cognition, you know. I hadn't thought of a certain area of things for a long time and the cognition added up like this: No wonder things are going to hell over there, you know. Haven't taken any responsibility for it for ages. And then I says to myself now, who the hell do you think you are that you yourself think that you would be causative on all of the upset in that particular little sphere. And then I realized that the second thought was the betrayer, see. It was the inhibitor. It was the fact that I would think I was too much if I thought that going out of communication with an area would bring a disturbance into that area. Isn't that cute? Cutest little mechanism you ever saw.

Now, this makes Scientology a slightly different subject than you have studied before because it isn't just a subject of study of a number of very set procedures. It's a number of evaluative data and scales by which you can understand the behavior situation, position and escape route of your preclear and whether or not you're making it. But the preclear himself must be observed today. Years ago you might have gotten away with just auditing an engram, but now you've got to look at the preclear. You got that? I don't say that with any sarcasm. It is actually true that I have actively attempted for years to avoid, because I have failed each time, that I've tried, to avoid the task of slamming into an auditor's hands the problems of diagnosis, judgment, understanding a case, so forth. I have actively avoided this. I have tried to bypass it every way I could because every time I've tried to broadly teach this, the factor of judgment was very, very poor and it was not teachable. So therefore I was trying for processes which would not make it necessary to actually judge this case. Now Christian philosophy says thou shalt not judge, so get over that and get on with the game.

You probably all of you, possibly to some degree, believe that it would be awfully cheeky of you to think that things were so bad on earth because you weren't taking an active communication look at the thing. You know, you were letting them go to hell over in that quarter. And you'd think that was awfully cheeky of you, wouldn't you.

When we discover that there's 10 to the 29th power data as an absolute minimal figure - 10 to the 29th power number of things a pc might be being, and that the route into them is devious indeed, and that there's at least 10 to the 10th power (these are just gag figures to give you some idea of magnitude), 10 to the 10th power of locks, any one of which looks like the item you're going for, you begin to get some idea of the complication of the thing but that he will only get reality on that chain and total reality on the item itself, and that he is obsessively mocking up this chain and the item itself and obsessively repressing it at the same time, we see where all of his attention units are locked up, what his reality is, why all other things are unreal to him. We understand this case from beginning to end the moment we start hitting that thing.

You'd think, boy, am I swelled up on myself, that the Far Eastern situation is as bad as it is simply because I don't stay in communication with it. See, boy, tha-a-a-a-that's - that's - oh, boo. Boy, I'm going nuts now for sure, you'd say to yourself.

Had an HGC auditor tell me last night, „I kept wondering why I was thinking about a prisoner in a boat, and when I got all through with the session, I realized what this throwing up the head and putting the E-Meter cans back of the ears and all of this sort of thing was. The guy was being a horse!“ A Rock sticks out like mad if you know how to look. It sticks out for you, but it doesn't stick out for the pc.

It's that thought that lets the Far East go to hell. Got that?

Now listen. If you try to audit out of the pc your own Rock, it'll never work. So I'm afraid you'll just have to look at the pc. Now, based on what I have just told you - these prerequisites - we get to our better rundown here of an ACC procedure. We've had several ACC procedures. And each ACC, they're a little different, they're a little better, they're a little more advanced, and this time we have really taken off into the blue.

Audience: Yes.

Now, this looks very much like the ACC procedure of the 19th. It looks quite like it, but it isn't, so don't be fooled. Now, this is merely an ACC procedure. It's an ACC procedure. It is not an outside auditor procedure. It is not an HGC auditor procedure. It is not a procedure that you would be expected to use on preclears from here on out, necessarily. Just - just forget about the furthest complications and ramifications of this procedure and look at it as a procedure which is going to be used for this unit. And therefore we don't put any strain on you about thinking about how true it is, and how you've got to memorize it all, and how you've got to do this and that. And if it doesn't work for you in this ACC, of course, in the ACC, you are perfectly welcome to tear it up and use something else.

There is an awful lot to know about communication, and the greatest thing to know about it is it's so simple.

I am consulting with your reality. You got that? Your reality is what I am attempting to enlist in this ACC, so get it off your Rock and let's go with this procedure.

Well, come on. Let's have some questions.

The first thing that we run into is a Clear checkout. Now, that's part of ACC procedure. And we have a new TR which was originated just for this ACC and which will continue on, which will undoubtedly be used for a very long time to come.

Yes?

It is the TR - the training drill - by which an individual uses E-Meters.

Male voice: Ron, when somebody's always seeing white - pure white spots in their head and body, and they can't do anything about them, they're just around all the time. What is this? Field.

And I will rapidly go over this drill. Some of you got it yesterday; some of you got some personal coaching on it yesterday. And it is simply this: One, does the E-Meter respond to any action of the pc? This is the first thing you discover. So the cans are in his hands, the E-Meter is in the auditor's lap.

Male voice: Field.

Now, the first thing you want to discover to your own satisfaction is this fact: Does the E-Meter register anything about the pc? Now, I had auditors telling me yesterday, „Well, yes. If I ask him so and so I'd get a lie reaction.“ Oh, no, no, no, no. Let's come out of think and let's get into actual fact.

Mm-hm. This is a definite - this is a definite manifestation of the Rock.

Is there anything he's going to do? Yes. He could short the cans. That's about the crudest. If he shorted the cans, then some action of his is expressed on the E-Meter. You got that? And I don't mean squeeze the cans. I'm talking about a cruder reaction than that. He'd have to have some strength in his hands or something. But if you were to push his hands together so the cans would hit, you would get a flip on the needle, right? So there is something that could be done there by the pc that could influence that E-Meter, right? Well, that one will always happen. Theoretically, you could get somebody so stuck that you don't have enough sensitivity on the meter to crank up to permit the needle to move when he squeezed the cans. Remember that. So further south on this „What reaction can the pc make on this meter?“ is: short the cans.

I'll tell you something which was a dirty trick. As D of P, preclears sometimes look on you... You see, the D of P, the Director of Processing, is not the auditor. And the Director of Processing is merely trying to get the show on the road and keep the case straight and form a liaison there and keep things running, and so on.

Now, the next one is: Squeeze the cans. Now, unless you have a pc squeeze the cans to find out whether or not the meter is operating, then you from there on do not know whether the meter is connected to the pc and operating. I say that in all seriousness. You don't have him squeeze the cans to find out where to set the Sensitivity knob first. That's not your first action or your first concern at all. You have him squeeze the cans to find out whether or not the meter works.

As Director of Processing, she has an awful hard time keeping her hands off cases. After all, there's somebody sitting there with E-Meter cans in his hands, you know.

Now, remember, since the last session, somebody might have come along and dropped the thing. Somebody might have put it on a steam radiator and melted the solder out of it. The battery might have gone bad and it just gave up the ghost. And the auditor, for his own security, must establish that when the pc squeezes the cans, the needle on the E-Meter works. And if that doesn't happen, have him short the cans and see what happens because he might be that low.

The HGC sometimes gets a little upset, I imagine - I've never heard any of them getting upset; possibly they don't at all - to have worked on a case for four or five days, you know, with sweat and blood and tears and all this sort of thing, and then have somebody else come along and hit the Rock right on the head with a crash, you see, in five minutes. Terribly invalidative.

I suppose there'll be some cases around someday that somebody will find that are just stuck because you notice on some pcs you have to crank that sensitivity knob up there pretty high to get a quarter of a drop on that needle. So the stucker the pc is on the track, the more sensitivity you have to have in order to get the needle to swing. But you want to know if this meter is operating. That's what you want to know right now, and the way you do that, and the first action that you ask him to do is to squeeze those cans. Now you know that his action of squeezing the cans is what made the needle go phoof.

Although the most I've ever heard an HGC auditor say about anything like this was to laugh like the devil at himself. He'd just laugh. He'd - wow! Of course, the truth of the matter is he probably had the case all loosened up in the first place. They don't look directly at that. It just appears to be invalidating.

Huh, this sounds awfully elementary, but that's what things are. That's life. Life is awfully elementary, and what is wrong with life is that it seems awfully complicated. You could sit there for hours trying to get the pc to register on an E-Meter that was busted. Don't think you couldn't. Do it all the time with Mathisons.

Well, anyway, she was fooling around with this case, answering her question directly, and just wanted to find out how the case was getting along; and the case talked about spots and a field, and conversation went vaguely - this is not even probably a good paraphrase - something like this.

You know, I've seen auditors operating with a big, complicated Mathison that was registering house current. It wasn't registering the pc. Needle flying around, looked so active that everything was going along. Wondering why he couldn't get a reaction off this thing. Well, it was busted in some fashion. Any tube meter and any meter which is attached to house current are more liable to error than a good transistor meter which is battery contained because you are now independent of the surges of electricity. Somebody turns a light on and off someplace in the house and you get a flip on an E-Meter, see? An elevator goes up or down in the next apartment building to you and you get a flip on your E-Meter. So you're too connected in to the house mains.

„Uh-well, uh-wh-what is that?“ Asked the preclear, „What is that?“

The earlier meters that were battery operated were simply battery operated because they were cheap. But there is a good reason why. These batteries in these new meters last for a very long time, by the way. I don't think we've worn one out yet, have we? We've had them in operation; they've been sitting around left on overnight and all that sort of thing, and we have yet to wear one out. They don't - so I don't know how long - we have no estimate yet. It may be a battery will last a year or two.

„Well, I-I don't know. It's-I can't see anything. It's just these white spots, you know, and so on.“

Now, that's the first thing you've got to find out, and just asking him to do it once is no proof. It might have been at that moment that you sneezed too or something, you know? Now, you told the preclear to squeeze the cans. And he squeezed the cans and then the needle dropped. All right, we'll take that first one as coincidence. Let's do it again, therefore. We haven't even gotten to the „set sensitivity“ yet. We just cranked the thing up and told him to squeeze the cans. We don't care how many dials it drops just as long as it moves when we tell him.

„Well, what is it?“

We say to him again, „Squeeze the cans.“

„Well, it's just these white spots with these black lines over here.“

And to set one you'll probably have to adjust how he's squeezing the cans because sometimes they grab them real quick and let go of them real quick, and so forth, and the meter doesn't even get a chance to operate or... You don't get a set that way. You want a steady, hard squeeze and then have him let go. That's to set the needle.

„What is it? Yeah, but what is it?“

But all you want to do at first is just get him to squeeze the cans. You say, „Squeeze those cans.“ He squeezes the cans and the needle goes wham! Well, that could be double coincidence, see? So you say to him again, „Squeeze the cans.“ He squeezes the cans and the needle goes wham.

The fellow says, „Well, it's - uh - it's just these spots, and they keep flying back and forth.“ „Yeah, but what is it?“

Now, note carefully that the needle did not go wham when he wasn't squeezing the cans. So sit there for a short time just looking at the meter to see whether or not it goes wham when he's not squeezing the cans. You got that? Now, by that procedure, you yourself arrive at a certainty that this meter is registering the preclear, not something else. Now, you know it's registering the preclear, right? And you are ready to proceed with the E-Meter operation. Now, the TR for this is really a Clear checkout. If you're doing a Clear checkout, look at the position of the tone arm and the position of the sensitivity knob. The Sensitivity knob at 12 o'clock: your tone arm registers more or less 5,000 ohms resistance for a female and 12,500 ohms resistance for a male. And if it isn't somewhere near there, you can skip your Clear checkout right at that moment. If it's way down on the dial or way up on the dial, that invalidates a Clear check. You see this? Now, if you doubt your meter and if you're really using your meter for Clear checkouts, you should get a 5,000 ohms clip and a 12,500 ohms clip resistor. Get two resistors, put them between the cans and set your tone arm, and then hand the cans to the pc without further setting the tone arm. That would be a testing Clear checkout meter. That's what you would use it for.

The fellow looks resigned for a moment and says, „Some African shield.“

You'd put this little resistor between the two cans instead of the pc, you see. Then when you took it off, then you'd set it to exact zero, see, so your needle is up there where it should be and everything is fine. You take the resistor off and hand these cans to the pc; they ought to be right on. If he's Clear, they will be somewhere close to on.

And that was the Rock. The case is back in auditing this morning. That's the end of that case.

Now, position of the arm then gives you an indicator of where this pc is sitting.

Yeah, well, it's just - the answer to the question is just: you'd have to get the preclear to tell you what they are - what these white spots are.

Your drill now continues on this basis: There are five actions to a needle - five actions to a needle. Four of them are reactions, one is an action. And it's very interesting to hear a professional Scientologist boggle at this fifth action.

„Well, what are they?“ or „What is it?“ is probably a much better question. And he might on some gradient scale eventually drag up something and tell you.

They always have a hard time. I've had several now to date, and they can't think of this fifth action; they can think of these four reactions all right. But this fifth action evades them which is very funny. And the fifth action is the first one we take up which is: free needle. The needle is free. That's where you're supposed to be going with Clear Procedure, is a free needle.

After all, he's looking at what he is mocking up, that's for sure. But the white spots or the field, or something like that, is a mask over what it is. And that's the obfuscator. That has a technical term, by the way. That's called the „inhibitor.“ There is the mock-up, and then there's the inhibitor, which is a second mock-up. You see how you do this. A fellow mocks up a giraffe, and then he mocks up an inhibitor over the giraffe, so there's a mock-up, and the inhibitor is a special kind of a mock-up that prevents the preclear from seeing the mockup, which he is making.

But in the drill we are interested in the four reactions, and we're interested in them in this order - and purposely this order: We're going to have the auditor ask questions and say things to the preclear which then make the needle behave in a certain way. And after an auditor finds out that he can selectively ask questions of non-Clear preclears that make the needle behave as he wants it to behave as a result of the questions, he, one, gets a big reality on the pc's bank and behavior and gets a big reality on using this E-Meter in auditing.

And it's liable to be in motion, it's liable to have spots, it's liable to have almost anything. It's liable to be solid black; it's liable to be totally white and clear and invisible.

The first one of these is a drop. It's any kind of drop.

Fellow walk up the other day and tell me he was Clear, he said, perfectly seriously, because he couldn't see any mock-ups.

The next one of these is a theta bop.

And so I checked him out. I said, „Just where aren't there any?“ Of course, that picked up the inhibitors off of a half a dozen, and the next thing you know, he was surrounded by a menagerie.

The next one of these is a stuck needle.

By the way, it's not good auditing to pick up those inhibitors. It makes a pc very uncomfortable. Therefore, these „not-do“ processes are quite limited.

And the next one of these is a rising needle. Any kind of rising needle - fast rise, slow rise, so forth. Any kind of stuck needle - very stuck, not so stuck. Any kind of a theta bop, wide or narrow. And any kind of a drop going back in reverse on these things.

There's a terrific rationale back of running not-do. „Tell me something you're not doing.“ „Tell me something you don't have to do.“ „Tell me something you don't have to have.“ „Tell me something you don't have to be.“ These are all of the CDEI Scale not-do's, you might say. Not-be's. Not-have's. Terrific rationale back of this, but it's evidently too much for the preclear to cut all at one scan.

Now, how does he turn these manifestations on? The thing drops every time you get an emotional disagreement. An E-Meter registers disagreement. That's what it registers. It doesn't register lies or anything of the sort. It really, I don't... Basically, because thetans make by consent and belief all this energy and so forth, maybe it doesn't even register energy but it certainly registers disagreement. And when he disagrees totally with life, he's totally stuck because that's his agreement; that if he disagrees, why, then he penalizes himself.

You take the inhibitors off without taking the mock-ups out first, and he starts up for that hump, but he never makes it. Wonderful processes. Theoretically exact, but they kill the preclear before he gets Clear.

All right. Now, this first one is drop. So you tell the preclear not to say no to each one of the following: Improper statement. It's „I want you to lie to me about each one of the following questions and say no.“ Not that. Plant it in his skull that it's a lie as well as no, don't you see? So then he'll listen to it and he'll say, „Well, I'm supposed to lie to this. All right. I'll lie,“ you know? And he knows now he's disagreeing. This is what you tell him now.

Yes?

And you will find as an auditor that you can, by this mechanism, make the meter drop at will. But you have to find out what his lie reaction is. Therefore, you have to crank up the sensitivity until you get it. And the sensitivity may be all the way up and around the dial before you're getting a good lie drop. You may have to have it totally cranked up to the top on a relatively stuck case anyhow, but you will see the lie reaction.

Male voice: You said that a person had to do a certain amount of thinking before they could cognite. Is that what you said? Did I get that right?

Now, you've told him to lie to you and say no, so you ask him a question like this: „Are you sitting in that chair?“ And he says „No,“ and the machine drops. The needle drops. Eh-heh. But that might have been just a fluke. So you say to him, „Are we in a room?“ And he says, „No.“ And once more the same drop occurs. Now you're getting a little more to it. If it doesn't, you certainly better start looking, see, because the machine is out of order or something is wrong here or you haven't got the sensitivity knob cranked up high enough or something of the sort.

Yes, you got that right. Let me phrase it this way. A person had to be capable of a certain amount of thinking before he could think.

Now, you say something on the order of - of course, you wouldn't ask him if he was alive because he might say no, and it might be the truth. By the way, the question „Are you Clear?“ is not a good lie question because a person might honestly believe that he himself was Clear, and you might not get a lie reaction on it at all. It's already happened twice.

A person had to be capable of a certain amount of thinking before he could cognite.

The person stuck all over the track and they said with total belief that they were Clear. Get the idea? They just said that as part of a lie reaction test. Yeah, but they evidently believed it.

Male voice: I got it.

So you ask such questions that obviously require the answer yes and the preclear is under agreement to say no. And you'll get this reaction drop each time you ask the question, and therefore you eventually get a reality on the fact that it is your question that's making the needle drop, and it's dropping just that much because you're asking that question. You get the idea? All right. Now, we get into how we make a needle do a theta bop. All right. We've proven the thing is dropping; that we, the auditor, can make it drop at will. So let's get into a theta bop here. How do we do a theta bop? Well, we just talk about death in each and every one of its forms. „Have you died lately? Have you ever died? What do you think about dead bodies? Do you have any dead friends? Have you lost any pets through death? Have you ever had an operation that you exteriorized in?“ and so forth.

Yes?

Well, what is this theta bop? Theta bop is the yo-yo of a thetan going in and out. And it may be the yo-yo in a picture or it may be actually happening in present time.

Male voice: Ron, is there only one Rock on every case to clear it?

You could take a Clear and ask him to get back of his head to some distance, and you'll get a theta bop on a machine if he in any way, shape or form is holding on to his head with an energy beam. In other words, the guy - that is not really an invalidative test on Clear. But just talking casually about death and getting a theta bop, that for sure is.

Oh, this is a point of speculation. We hope. We hope there's only one Rock. I would say it was something like this: that one item is so much more serious than other items that all other items appear to be identifications with or locks on the Rock. And this would give us a view something like this: that you could pull off several apparent Rocks, and then get the Rock. But this would make it appear to you as though the case had a half a dozen Rocks, you know. And that the case would be much freer after the last Rock would only seem to be the result of having pulled off several Rocks. And I don't like to pound it home too hard for this reason: it is not susceptible at this time to exhaustive proof. This is to a marked degree - this is my opinion. This is what it looks like. Okay? Yes, Dan?

Of course, if a person gets a lie reaction on a machine, he's not Clear, following the Clear checkout. A Clear can lie without penalty. That's one of the reasons you should be Clear. Anyway...

Male voice: This note that you said about something you're not doing. Does that apply to a process like „don't look at the ceiling“?

The theta bop is unmistakable. It's a little hunt to the right, to the left, to the right, to the left. Sometimes it's wide, sometimes it's narrow. On some pcs it's very narrow; some pcs it's very wide. It depends on where you have the Sensitivity knob to a large degree.

Mm-hm. There are a whole bunch of these processes ever since I came out with this rationale some time ago. The earliest ancestor of this rationale is SOP 8C, of which we merely have the opening procedure these days, but that was „nots.“ The whole thing was negatives - terrific number of negatives. And that eventually was evolved into not-do's and so forth. But this appears so right except that it violates communication to some degree.

So on your talk of death, do you turn on a theta bop? Yes, it turns on a theta bop. When I'd stop talking about death, does a theta bop turn off? Well, if it doesn't, you better chalk him up for seven weeks of auditing or something because he's sticky on the track. But the second you stop talking about death, it stops theta bopping, why, there's some hope for him.

„Somebody you don't have to stop.“ Somebody was running this the other day, and for a dozen commands it changed the case forever for the better.

See, you can measure how long it'll take to clear a person by the length of time the reaction you elicit persists. The more persistent is the reaction on a needle, the longer it's going to take to clear him. All Clear estimates are based on this factor.

Fortunately, the auditor dropped it right there on the dozenth command. By the time the preclear had discussed it and done it a couple of more times, why, the case was pretty „cavey.“ You get the idea? Appears so good. There isn't any reason why a thetan has to do anything. But for sure, while he's mocking something up, he ought to stay in communication with it.

All right.

His main difficulty is that he mocks it up, says, „I'm not in communication with it,“ and - oh, boy, can that go wrong. Now that's what's wrong with a case, rather than that the case is doing something. That answer it?

You turned on a theta bop at will, so you the auditor must be having an effect on the meter with your questions. This reality should be coming fairly clear and clean now. You turned on the theta bop, see? You asked the question; you turned it on.

Male voice: Yes. Does that tie in with the note you said yesterday about running „not-know“?

And by the way, you can turn it on on any preclear; you can do this on any preclear if he isn't dead. And if he's dead, you get a Clear reaction. You get a free needle. That's right. It's uninterfered with, with bank.

Yeah. This is an interesting aspect of running not-know. This is another not-do process.

A female body evidently registers 5,000 ohms, a male body 12,500 on dead bodies as far as I can find at this time, providing they aren't too dead. You have to catch them just after the thetan leaves and before the GE collapses, so there's a period there of a few seconds when you would get a Clear reaction on a dead body.

Yes?

All right. Death is not the same as clearing but there is, remember, R2-45. It's a very valid technique. A lot of people have used it before now.

Male voice: Ron, have you tried that aspect of „not“ as applied to help?

All right. Now, let's get to this third reaction - the stuck needle. How do you stick a needle? Well, you just start looking for the Rock - I don't care how expertly or how crudely - and you'll get it. But there's another method of turning it on if you miss finding the Rock. That's really what you should do is just go looking for the Rock, you know? Make any notes while you're doing this on a preclear that you care to concerning what made it stick. For instance, we were asking a person about death yesterday, and all of a sudden we got into stabbed bodies, and stabbed bodies has something to do with the Rock: a knife or it's something there - something - because we started to get a sticky needle. It went from theta bop to sticky needle.

„Not-help?“ People you did not have to help? Yes. Yes. It has a limited value, but it's again this whole class of processes we know as „not-do's.“ We call them „not-do's“ because doingness is obviously obsessive change. An obsessive doingness is an obsessive change.

The reason why we do this in this order, by the way, is because you can only turn these on in this order with any degree of orderliness. You start turning them on in some other order, and you get the needle totally stuck and then try to theta bop it and so forth, and you - you can do it, but it's a little bit more difficult. All right.

Now, if you get an individual out of obsessive doingness, you would theoretically get him out of all obsessive creation. It's apparently a wide-open door, you know. But it's one of those doors that you go out of, and it was a wide-open door, and you're glad to be out of jail, but the only thing outside is thin air. Nothing to walk on or something. There's more to be known in this particular area, by the way.

Now, let's talk about hate. Things he distrusts. Things he betrayed. You know, you couldn't find much of the Rock and you couldn't get a stuck needle. You just start talking about things he distrusts, things he hates, things he'd rather not communicate with, in other words. But don't use that word „things he'd rather not communicate with“ for the excellent reason that it might, on a limited process, simply free the needle. See? It might work for a few commands. So, anytime you use that word „communicate,“ things happen, so you want to lay off of it if you're trying to mess up a preclear. So talk about hate, distrust, betrayal, you'll get a stuck needle - it'll get over there - and the longer you talk about it, the stucker it will get.

Yes, Adele.

Now, you've got a stuck needle. What is a stuck needle? Well, that's something you should look at an E-Meter and find out: what is a stuck needle? There's no sense in describing it. I can tell you how to get the manifestations that then will appear this way. But you have to be confident that you in asking questions as an auditor of the preclear stuck the needle. You stuck the needle. It wasn't that the battery went out of operation or something. You get that? It's you that stuck the needle. All this time we're developing big certainty on the auditor's part regarding the performance of an E-Meter with the cans in the hands of the preclear. Until he's got that certainty, the thing is no good to him as an auditing tool.

Female voice: The process „Mockup a barrier in front of your nose.“ Would that be called the same category? You've written about that.

And if you keep on sticking the needle, we get to the fourth reaction which is rising needle. All a rising needle is, is a needle that's stuck so good that the more resistance you add to the top of it, the more it rises because what is a rising needle but an increasing resistance on the preclear. And how do you best increase the resistance on the preclear? By just pulling the bank in on him. Pulling more and more bank in, more and more bank, more and more bank. Then you'll get a nice rising needle, I guarantee.

Yeah, yeah. That's not quite the same category.

Processes that give a rising needle, you know then are really sticking the preclear harder and harder and harder and harder. This is all right. He'll come free on the chain sooner or later. You'll hit something and it'll go back, but it's kind of slow auditing to let it rise and rise and rise and rise and get up to 6.0 on the tone arm and then have it go back to 5.0 and then have it go to 5.5 and then have it go to 4.0 and then have it go to 5.0, then have it go to 2.0 and then go on up the line again.

Female voice: Tends to send a preclear down scale though.

You should realize what you're doing. You're just playing around with the Rock and its chain. You're just playing around with this, and you're not really directly spearheading it. You can make a needle not do this. See? You can chop it up so the pc isn't just pulling in locks on the Rock. You can shoot the Rock out from underneath and practically free a needle almost at once if you're an expert. All right. I say „at once“ - within a few hours of auditing.

Yes, it does. It does. It's not quite the same category. That's definitely „limit communication,“ and yet a preclear's unhappy if his communication isn't limited. This is one of the weirder things. You know.

Now, those are the four reactions of a meter and that is the first of this procedure for the 20th ACC. Confidence in your meter. Reality on what it is reading.

If your communication wasn't somewhat limited, you could never see a wall, see, I mean... But therefore, communicating with a wall or being out of communication with a wall winds up - and you're so close to the top where it's merely a consideration, that it begins to look silly after you've done it for a while.

Now, I got a clue for you. Don't think because it worked on one preclear that it's going to work on every preclear. So you want to check every preclear out that you get your paws on in this course first and foremost when you first start to audit with the procedure I just gave you.

Now, theoretically, if a person had nothing to communicate with, he obviously would be in better shape if he mocked up a barrier in front of his nose. But obviously, it's cutting his potential communication with the rest of existence.

Now, we don't care what you mark down on the Clear checkout sheet. You can go right ahead and give a full Clear checkout sheet. You ought to, to see how they react, but this is the first thing you ought to do with the meter. Got that? Now, one of the ways to learn how to check out Clears is check out plenty of people that aren't. And that's the only way I know of to learn how to check out Clears. And when you finally get your paws on a Clear, you'll say WOW! You know? This is open and shut. Or it's such a relief we don't care if it flickers a couple of little times over on the corner, you know? You'll say, „He'll get over that.“ It is such a difference. I mean, the difference is so tremendous. But don't make the mistake of getting an inoperative meter that is going in tune to the local TV station, putting the cans in the pc's hands, seeing the needle is free, and then saying he's Clear. You start right in from scratch and you have him squeeze those cans so that you know that the pc is the one who is having the reaction on the cans, and then if you're giving a Clear checkout try to stop him with each one of these - try to stamp on him with each one of these. If you can't turn on any of the manifestations, he's Clear. The only one he can turn on is the can squeeze. A Clear squeezing the cans will produce a drop.

So what's right, but the person goes down scale. That's more of a communication than a not-do. Got it? All right.

All right. Now, that is your first and foremost action. And that is where we find ourselves at this stage of the course. And that one, learn well. There's no sense in sitting there with an E-Meter in your hands unless you know that it's operating and that you are causing it to operate with your auditing commands. And when you get that all settled, why, it becomes a tool. Up to that time, it's just something that makes your hand tired during auditing.

Yes?

All right. We will continue on with this procedure in a later lecture. I think you're doing very well in going along with these checkouts, these Clear checkouts. I'm sure those of you who are doing it are getting it down very well, but that only comprises at the moment about a quarter of the class, and the rest of you are going to be coming up to this. So just because it was done and stressed a few days ago is no reason why you shouldn't remember it and go through this exact procedure just as I have given you.

Female voice: Ron, in relation to what you said on those questions of „would you be willing“ today, in our coaching of the TRs, instead of saying, „Could you take that smile off your face,“ or „Take that smile off your face,“ couldn't you say with more effect: „Would you be willing to?“ Wouldn't it be better coaching?

You get this one pat and then we know where we're going and we know what we're doing and auditing becomes much more meaningful.

Yes. Remember something. The TRs - it would be longer and possibly more stable coaching. Let me answer it that way.

You also should develop an ability to aberrate a preclear because in 200 years we'll have cleared everybody and that will be our sole business and we'll have a sign out in front - „Thetans aberrated: 25-hour-25-hour dissection. Individuation our specialty. We have the most powerful electric shock machines known to man.“ That's what they're buying right now. We're not selling it. The APA is.

Remember that your TRs are artificial drills. They are artificial. They are not something a thetan does natively, see. They are a new consideration. In this particular case, he has an ability to do them, however, and the short instructing route is something on this order - although we're on very unsafe ground here when we're talking this way because it's a subject that is wide open to opinion.

But the point is, your procedure that we are following here is totally one of reality. And as I describe this to you and as this is given to you by your Instructors, it is given to you by the viewpoint of getting you to get the process real to you before it operates for you as well as it should.

When an individual finds he can do something that is quite new to him - he never thought he had to do it before - he then will become willing to do it. And we have the ice-cream cap on top of that pie, which is simply this; that the individual, with processing, finds out he's also willing to do them. So we're perfectly willing in instruction to make somebody do something. And then later on he finds out he's perfectly willing to do it, and his modus operandi increases.

For instance, there are many parts of Clear Procedure right now that are totally foggy to most people using it. They don't realize the help and so forth.

I have several times worked with this in coaching somebody that I found was having a terrible time. I would pull him right up in three, four minutes with a gradient scale of what part of it was he willing to do, and so on, and have used it. And it's a perfectly valid coaching mechanism, but has not to my thinking been sufficiently valid to throw away the benefit of just doing the drill.

In this communication process here, the ARC Straightwire process, you should realize one of the most powerful assists there is underlies this process - one of the most powerful assists there is.

See, this is a point here. This is a point where Scientology theory and the processes of teaching Scientology are themselves trying to reconcile one with another. A drill is a drill. An individual should be able to do a drill. He should be able to do a drill for no other reason than being able to do a drill.

You just ask a person what part of an aberrated body part he wouldn't mind communicating with and you're liable to blow it more solidly than anything else. This is a powerful process and there are people right here who don't realize the power of this process. We're going to get that reality through to you if we possibly can so that it is your reality. And those of you who have already operated on this TR for E-Meters, I think, like this method of teaching. Don't you?

And the funny part of it is we throw out even whether he's willing to do it or not.

Audience: Yes.

But you can, with coaching, bring a person up scale rather rapidly, with willingness, but I would not consider this the basics of it because somebody who is just about to blow or something like this can, by doing it, discover that he can do it. See, there's another method of going about this whole thing. Got it? That answer it?

All right. You know more about E-Meters than you did, don't you?

Female voice: Well, it seems like pretty heavy attack the way we're doing it.

Audience: Yes.

It's a heavy attack all right.

Yes. Well, that is what we are here to do. Thank you.

That's right. It's heavy.

Thank you.

Female voice: It does seem like a serious...

Do you know why it's a heavy attack? Because the preclears make a heavy attack. Every time you audit a preclear who is saying, „No effect on me, total effect on you,“ it's worthwhile to have a little steel in your back pocket that consisted of this fact: „Whether I want to or not, I can continue to do it.“ You know, and that's the lesson which is being driven in with the TRs. I'm sorry if it's sometimes onerous.

Yes, Connie?

Female voice: When we had a rising needle on the meter, and the preclear was pushing stuff in or avalanching it in or something...

Yeah.

Female voice: Isn't that what we used to call Repair of Havingness?

No, that's by avalanches. That's avalanches. You always take over the automaticity of an avalanche. An avalanche itself was never considered therapeutic.

Female voice: I think I used to think that you just if you didn't feel good and you pulled in a whole bunch of bank, why, then you'd have your havingness up again.

Oh, yeah. That's perfectly true. That's the thetan for you. Anything is better than nothing. The things that make a thetan feel good are not always therapeutic.

Female voice: No, that's ...

That's right, isn't it?

Female voice: Yes. I don't know. Havingness eludes me sometimes.

Well...

Female voice: Okay.

Get her straight some of these days. Look, we're already running over our time.

Yes, Dan.

Male voice: What happened to the process „Wasting help,“ below the order of help?

Oh, you'll run into it here. It hasn't been forgotten. It's just nobody can handle it very well. They have the awfulest time handling it.

I've seen a couple of auditors getting together and co-auditing, you know, and they get so involved over wasting help they forget to help each other.

Yes?

Male voice: This thing about willingness and ability.

Right.

Male voice: Isn't it an actuality that the guy is willing - it's only apparent that he's unwilling because of all this junk he's got against it?

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

After all, a thetan is trying to live his life according to a pattern that he, at one time, believed was desirable for some environment, somewhere. And he hasn't noticed that he has moved.

When you call to his attention, with just spotting spots in the room, in some such process, that he has moved, he is very often much more willing to change. He thinks he's still living in the tournament age, you know.

And here the highest adventure he is having is eating hot dogs or something. That's as close as he can get to a tournament.

He notices that he isn't in the same environment anymore, so he says, „Well, I'd better shift things around.“ So he tries. He's liable to get awfully confused in trying. His values are all upside down and different and backwards and so forth.

The world is constantly changing, and a thetan believes that if he can just achieve a complete static, then he's set for all conditions everywhere. And then, the next thing you know, they invent three-dimensional TV or something, and this is all that anybody looks at everyplace, but he was a vaudeville star.

And he was a vaudeville star, and the only thing - the only act that he could do was just one act and after they've shown this once over TV he's through. But in vaudeville you did the act twice or three times a day in different towns for years and years and years, you know. So now you ask him this new thing which he thinks is very bad.

He's supposed to invent a new act for every TV show. His stable datum is: you always do the same act. Now he can't reconcile the things and you get a non-computive situation. So he's up the spout.

Now he knows he must change, but he's forgotten how. You must teach him again the lesson that that which can best adapt the environment to it survives. You don't teach him the Darwinian lesson: that which best adapts to the environment dies. Of course, that is the Darwinian lesson, only Darwinian says „survives.“ That which is best adapted to the environment survives. Survival of the fittest.

If you have nine kittens and one has four fits a day, and the others don't have fits a day, you have the survival of the fittest.

Male voice: Ohhh.

Why, it's just as technical and accurate as Darwin.

Anytime something starts adapting itself totally to the environment and never adapting the environment to it, it's had it. And this society right now is suffering from that stable datum. It thinks it must adapt to an environment when there ain't none.

The government itself is murder on the subject of anybody who is trying to change the environment. They get very upset.

Any production mechanism is under attack. Isn't this fascinating? You may think I'm pulling a long one, but what's an internal revenue tax but an attack on somebody who's producing? Well, what does production and improvement and progress do but change the environment? Now, I'm afraid we all, as a nation, believe we should adapt to an environment without having decided upon one. That would lead to confusion, to say the least.

Okay.

We've had it here. So thank you very, very much.

Do a good job this afternoon, will you?