Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you very much. That’s a nice welcome.

Иногда он пугается или чувствует одиночество и вам приходится говорить ему «Угу», чтобы приободрить его, но это что-то вроде полуподтверждения. Если вы будете давать ему их слишком много, то он начнет говорить с вами навязчиво, потому как он чувствует, что ему нужно сказать что-то еще, а вы его уже подтвердили. Так что, сделайте ваши полуподтверждения действительно полу-, понимаете, – «У-гу», понимаете? «У-гу». Не говорите: «Хорошо!» ‑ понимаете? Так вот, если вы действительно хотите, чтобы он начал говорить, то просто сделайте это с ним раз или два. Тогда он почувствует, что вы останавливаете его рассказ, и поэтому он будет затем говорить все больше, больше и больше. Такие непрерывно говорящие ПК, когда у одитора даже нет шанса ввернуть вопрос, или он был обучен в сфере психоанализа, или одитор сверх-подтверждающий и ПК пытается говорить что-то после такого подтверждения.

Well now, today we’re getting down to business. We’re getting down to business, and this is the 21st of July 1966, Saint Hill Special Briefing Course, a lecture on Dianetic auditing.

I go away, and right away everybody forgets how to audit. No, the processes today are so fast, they’re so rapid, that an auditor cannot be trained. That’s it. I mean, it’s as simple as that. I recognized this some time ago, and back in April wrote a bulletin which covered this, which has actually not been put into action yet, and which is being put into action right now. And I think went into action at 2:00 P.M. That’s it. Ron’s back.

All right. The main thing about this is that if auditors can’t audit, why, then no auditing gets done. Now, that’s very, very horribly true. And then nobody will make it up the line at all. And it’s also factually true that our first Clears are uniformly good auditors. But today I turned a PC over to an auditor, and he didn’t know enough to flatten the process. PC went unconscious, so he changed the process. Huhoo! That’s awful! That’s awful. Don’t do things like that!

So the guy goes unconscious. All right. Get your question answered. So a PC says he can’t answer the question, just sit there till he does. If a PC has no more answers, and so forth, the process probably went free needle and you didn’t notice. It probably is already squared away. But don’t just change a process because a PC went unconscious. Do you see? These are the little truisms of auditing.

Man to man, and man to girl, I make a plea: Follow the fundamentals. Get your auditing question answered. It’s a plea. Don’t change processes because the PC goes out like a light. Don’t panic; don’t be a psychiatrist.

Now, if goofs like that can occur, it’s because one doesn’t have enough drill. But drill, just on the TRs, is not adequate to produce the whole of auditing phenomena for the auditor, and so he doesn’t get used to handling them, and it’s like a greased ball in his hands, you know? Like: “Let’s see, it said in the bulletin that the next thing I huh-hah . . . and . . . yeah, and I hope that’s right.” And the PC goes Release, and so he says he gets no more practice with that.

Well, I can assure you, Dianetic auditing carried on this way is not likely to release anybody very rapidly. And if it does, it only releases him on a chain. If you get any Releases in this, they’re subzero Releases — way down.

Now, I have made Releases with Dianetic auditing, and so on, and they were the first Clears. It’s not too hard to do. But of course, they were simply keyed-out Clears, which today we call Releases. Those people remained stable or didn’t remain stable or something of the sort, but it completely changed their lives. The trouble I had in those days was the person felt so good — and there was no training, of course, pre-’50 — they just walked away. I kept tabs on them for some years, from time to time, but somebody stole my book and I don’t have any idea what happened to them. But I can tell you that these people were in much better shape. They really weren’t up to a Grade 0 Release, but they were certainly in much better shape. Something had happened.So there’s value in this type of auditing. But I wish to make you another plea, is don’t go out and use it in practice. It’s practice auditing. Don’t practice with it on people. Because all sorts of disastrous things will occur. If you become an expert Dianetic auditor, then we’re all in trouble. Because we will start curing everything, you know, and knocking out psychosis and neurosis, and doing all those poor doctors out of their jobs. And you don’t want to do any doctors out of their jobs.

But I say this in all sincerity: This leads you in to the fact that you can heal; and that is not your profession. You’re trying to clear people. And these processes will heal people, even badly run. They’ll cure migraine headaches and arthritis and lumbosis and medicosis, and all kinds of wild illnesses. But it doesn’t necessarily follow that it’s uniform. In other words, you don’t get one for one for one, you see, for the excellent reason that the whole reactive mind is the reason for very severe illnesses. It’s the whole mind. And you can key out parts of it and make somebody quite well, you see. You can key out some very specific illness like that and have it go away, but don’t be too surprised if it comes back. So therefore, “cure” is not well used. It’s ill-advised as a word.

The way to make somebody well is to make a thetan Clear, and just never, never depart from that and you’ll be fine. But you do need practice. I don’t use “you” broadly. But you as an Instructor, you as a Scientologist, and the new student, all need some process which doesn’t produce an instantaneous result. And then you get so that you can handle ARC breaks and you can handle a comm cycle and you can do this and you can do that. And you get practice. You can sit there and grind away by the hour, don’t you see? You can use a meter; you can fool around with this and that and so on. You could go on a project like cleaning up all the engrams of the last three lives. Well, you’re not likely to release anybody doing this, but it’s awfully interesting — great interest to the auditor, great interest to the PC. You might change some things; you might improve somebody. We’re not interested in that particularly. But it’s quite rewarding, quite rewarding for the PC. But we’re only interested in the auditor in this particular case, you see?

Now, the auditor will get so that he knows that a PC who is being critical has got a withhold. And he knows enough to get his question answered. And he knows enough not to overrun. The PC completely runs out of answers: well, you should recognize that the PC has done so, and ii isn’t just a dodge; he’s not a very imaginative PC.

You say, “Where did you put the cat?” And the fellow says, “In the living room.”

Now, there’s no point in now saying, “Where did you put the cat?” because there aren’t any more answers to it. And sometimes you get into this squirrel cage and you must recognize these things.

But the way to learn how to audit is to get y our hands dirty, and the dirtiest you can get your hands is going down the reactive bank on the time track. Now, there aren’t any bugs in Dianetic auditing; there aren’t any bugs in it. They’ve all been ironed out. Even visio: There is a way to run on somebody’s visio so he can see the picture. There is a way to do this. All you do is get the duration of the incident, and if you get the exact duration of the incident, the boy will have visio in it. It’s the most remarkable thing you ever saw. So you’d have to know how to get the duration of an incident.

You know, if he was being hit on the head with a sledgehammer, you have to know if he was hit on the head for one minute or five minutes or one day, you see? All right, if you get the correct time on your meter, and so on . . . This fellow that’s 811 black — this case is a black V; he’s never seen pictures or anything like that — if you get the exact point where he’s parked on the track with your meter, and then you get the exact duration of the incident, bang! he has visio. Startles him most to pieces. That’s what used to chop us down in running engrams and so forth.

Well now, one has to go into this from the most basic and elementary possible ways; the most fundamental fundamentals have to be gone into to teach somebody something about Dianetic auditing. Now, there is a book on the subject, Dianetics: Modern Science of Mental Health. But to give you this practice material, I have condensed Dianetics: Modern Science of Mental Health into HCO Bulletin 3 April 1966, which is one, two, three, four, five pages long.

You get brighter as you get older, you know — and processing. And I wish to point out that HCOB 3 April 1966 is a far simpler and better method of running secondaries and engrams than Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health. So, if you’re reading this and read Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health, realize that this bulletin written sixteen years later takes precedence. You got it?

Now, there’s a lot of dope in Dianetics: Modern Science of Mental Health, but it runs engrams quite differently; it runs them by repeater technique, it runs them by phrases, it does all kinds of things, and so on — whereas this doesn’t run them by repeater technique and run phrases. Now the main danger that you run into, then, is not really reading what it says in this bulletin, and actually trying to run Dianetics secondaries and engrams the way it is described in Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health, you see? You let some of the old Dianetic technique get into this bulletin, and you will have, to that degree, just this much trouble.

Now, a Dianetic session today would look like a repetitive-auditing session with this single exception: that it takes longer for the PC to answer the question. If you tell him to go through it and tell you everything that has happened, and so on, that is an auditing command, but it may take him five minutes to answer it. And the only danger is, is I don’t want you to pick up the idea that your PC ought to gab, gab, gab on Grade 0 processes, and so forth, any more than it takes him to answer the question. We don’t want the PC continuously itsaing.

Well now, he isn’t continually itsaing. He’s told you — you tell him to go through it and say what happened. And when you tell him this, why, he then goes through it and says what happened. When that finishes off, why, you give him a final acknowledgment.

Sometimes he gets scared or lonesome, and you have to give him an “Shhuh” to encourage him, but this is a sort of a half-acknowledgment. If you give him too many of those, he’ll start talking to you obsessively because he feels that he’s got more to say and you’ve already acknowledged him. So get your half acknowledgments really half, you know — “Uh-huh,” you know? “Uh-huh.” Don’t say “Good!” You know? Now, if you really want to start him talking, just do that to him a time or two. Then he’ll feel that you’re stopping him from talking, and so he will then talk more and more and more. These continuously talking PCs, where the auditor never has a chance to get a question in edgewise, have either been trained in the field of psychoanalysis, or the auditor is over acknowledging and the PC is trying to get past that acknowledgment.

So anyway, you’ve got a lot to learn about auditing. And it’s about auditing that you are learning while you’re running Dianetic auditing. But to use Dianetic auditing at all, you have to know something about Dianetic auditing.

That brings us back to a subject called the human mind. Now, there was a fellow one time called Sigmund Freud. And Sigmund Freud started out on an adventure in hypnotism with a fellow by the name of Breuer, to explore the entirety of the human mind. And he explored it down to a light lock at three years of age and figured out he had done the whole works.

That’s something like looking at a mountain, telling everybody you have found the entire mountain because you now are holding a pebble; see, a little pebble came off the top of the mountain. Or the tip of a blade of grass growing on the top of the mountain — then you’d say that’s the whole mountain, you see?

But he had this occasional experience: That after he had let somebody chatter for a while, he would find some kind of a childhood experience of some kind or another — and maybe that was his own case he was running, who knows — and he would take some charge off of this, and all of a sudden the person would feel a little bit better, and then he would be told, “Now if you are very, very careful for the next thirty years, you will not be neurotic anymore.”

That was psychoanalysis. Eighteen ninety-four, he released a libido theory, saying that all life is based on sex. Now, that is maybe an unkind statement with regard to the libido theory — libido for love — but, nevertheless, that was it. Later year psychoanalysts had an awful lot of trouble trying to explain away this, and say that what Freud really meant was that life was based on social things as well as sex. But Freud didn’t say that. He said it was based on love.

Now, this guy Freud, in spite of all of that, was a sharpie. And he did discover that there was possibly some coordination between mental reaction or mental experience and psychosomatic illnesses, or physical illnesses stemming from the mind. He discovered that there was this relationship, only he didn’t have any proof for it. And how medicine has gone on believing it ever since has got me staggered, because he couldn’t do it one for one. So of course, therefore, it was not really proved.

But medicine today believes there is such a thing called psychosomatic illness. You understand? They think there are physical illnesses that stem from the mind. Well now, how they know this, I don’t know. Because, you see, they’ve never proven it, because they can’t take somebody’s lumbosis and get away with it by doing something with the mind. You follow? But we can. So it’s quite factual that physical illness can result from mental aberration.

Now, we’re not much interested in the vagaries of neurosis and psychosis, and all that sort of thing. Let somebody else worry about these, or use more basic processes. Or if you got a psychotic, put him someplace where it’s nice and quiet and where he gets something to eat, and nobody disturbs him for a long time, and where he feels safe. And let him look at a motionless object that has some mass as the common thing for him to do, and you will find out that he generally will come out of it.

As far as neurosis is concerned, neurosis is... The difference between neurosis and psychosis is that, psychosis the Guy is just generally the effect of everything, and in neurosis, why, he’s more or less singly the effect of things. He’s a deranged being on some subject.

Now, all of this is very easy to say today, and it’s very easy to cover. If you want to know more about it, read some things on psychoanalysis and so forth. Good practice for you to do so. Nobody is trying to make a psychoanalyst out of you but you might be curious about it. You won’t find very much there, and knowing Dianetics, you will read far more into what you are reading than what was ever there. They didn’t know what was there.

Now, let’s get into this subject called the mind. The mind is a record, a literal record of experience plotted against time from the earliest moment of aberration until now, plus additional ideas the fellow got about it, plus other things he may have mocked up or created on top of it in mental mass, plus some machines, plus some Valences. Joe Doakes is a monster; Joe Doakes beats him up; therefore, Joe Drakes is the winning valence. And after that he can keep a valence called Joe Doakes. Got the idea?

Now, it’s just those pluses. But all of those pluses — you can audit almost any of those things. The least profitable is to audit the machines. It’s very often a lot of fun to audit a machine. When I say a machine, I mean it has wheels and smokestacks and so forth. And every once in a while a thetan has got a machine parked out there. This isn’t very uniform, but you have to comment on it. You have to comment on it.

Now, valences are interesting because they make circuits. And these circuits will talk to the being; he can talk to them, and they talk to him. Oh, he has a ball. And very, very disturbing, this idea of circuit. This gave the Arab his psychotherapy. And the Arab psychotherapy was to chase out the demons, and what he was really talking about were these valences.

Now, the auditor can actually talk to the PC and get the PC to talk to the demon or the valence, and have the valence talk to the PC, talk to the auditor. It gets that complex. What it is, is an endowed-life object.

Now, when we say record or when we say mass, and so forth, we are speaking of mental mass. A thetan is quite capable of mocking up mass. He actually is quite capable of mocking up matter, energy, space and time. He’s quite capable of doing this, only he mocks it up — in his aberrated, wog condition — he mocks it up very thin, very thin indeed. Its proportionate weight would be terribly slight compared to the real objects which he is mocking up a picture of.

He mocks up a picture of a car; his picture of the car would probably be . . . one hundred - billionth of a gram would be the total weight connected with it, and the car weighs two tons, you see? But nevertheless, he can mock up a full picture of a car in his aberrated condition. When he gets better and when he’s no longer sick or human, and so forth, why, of course he can mock up a car. But that’s beside the point. We’re getting off into more advanced therapies now.

Now, here’s the score with regard to the mind, then. For auditing purposes, it has these valences. And that’s what you are working with when you do what’s called a Search and Discovery, or an S&D. You’re not working with mental image pictures, you’re working with valences; you’re trying to find the valence that is raising the devil with him. Every once in a while you miss because he is the valence that is raising the devil with him. Sometimes, if you wanted to really do a profound S&D that went the whole track, you’d say, “Who are you?” You’d possibly even get a suppressive. But that would be a very, very fundamental S&D.

The psychiatrist and the psychoanalyst more and more began to try to address what the person was creating, and they began to consider that everything there was there, was what the person was creating. I said there’s the things the guy mocks up in his mind, you see. Well, so they addressed the things that the person had, himself, created, and they are not very aberrative. They’re the lightest of aberrations.

So the fellow says, “I think the room is full of Martians,” and their immediate therapy is “You’re just imagining it.” You possibly, through accounts of hospitals and that sort of thing, know that that is the standard response. Well, that’s because they’re addressing the illusion or the inactual. They think the inactual or the illusion is what is wrong with the person.

Actually, what is wrong with the person is that he is producing illusion. And [if] you want to find out why he is producing illusion, then you have to get down to the cause of the production of illusion, not “Oh well, you’re just imagining it, Mr. Jones.” “Mr. Jones is crazy; he thinks he’s prime minister,” see? “He thinks he’s Napoleon,” and so forth. Illusion.

So the psychiatrist attacks illusion, and he’s trying to get rid of that. And that is something that you neglect entirely. You’re only interested in experience. He would have gotten much further had he actually attacked experience.

Now, sometimes a person gets delusory after they’ve had an experience. This is perfectly true. But you’ll find out that that is a minor problem. Because as the person confronts the experience, he will lose the illusion and get the actual experience. Illusion is a surface manifestation which disappears when experience is consulted. So what you are doing is auditing — with Dianetic auditing — you’re auditing experience. Now, don’t get all clouded up about “Is it illusory or isn’t it illusory?” or “Wah-wah,” you know, this or that or the other thing. No, just skip that.

Now, you’ve got processes, advanced processes that handle valences. Those are by assessment and they’re summed up today in Search and Discovery. If you want to change somebody’s personality graph like that, why, audit a few valences. Because the personality graph is actually a picture of a valence on any human being. He himself is not really enough there to have a personality. He’s very subdued.

So, we take that out of Dianetic auditing; we take machines out of Dianetic auditing. They’re fun, but they don’t do anything. You think I’m just joking, probably, about these machines, or you think it’d be some little object someplace like that but, actually, every now and then you will run into one that’s got great beg red flywheels, and brass, a body, you see, and little whistles and things. And it’s something that produces predictions for him or something like that. It shuffles them out to him, you know? You know what I mean? It’s crazy, man. These people aren’t insane. Their perception has to be much better than the average in order to perceive that they have these things.

So, we’re going to neglect that, and then we’re going to neglect illusion. Now, you must remember, you must neglect illusion in Dianetic auditing. That’s very, very important. Because illusion is simply the product of the actual. And if you attack illusion, you prevent him from reaching the actual. Now, the actual is so bizarre (from the viewpoint of a human being), it is so strange, so weird — the actual is — that, of course, people are all too prone to call the actual and the illusion both illusion, or hallucination, see?

There are people around who work on the basis of making somebody hallucinate. You know. There’s a whole play dedicated to it called Gaslight. You know, they work on this? A guy works on this girl, and works on this girl: By changing the actual physical universe, makes her think she’s crazy you see till — “Where did you put the staircase Paula?” And anything that happens, he does it and then he blames it on her. And she can’t remember doing it, so she thinks she’s gone mad. So therefore, she thinks she’s having illusions, you see, or hallucinations. So people work on this all the time.

For instance, the newspapers would like you to believe what they print. You only have to read stuff about yourself in the newspapers to know doggone well there isn’t a line of truth anywhere in the paper. But somewhere in the human world there was probably some event that had an actuality on which the news story is based, you see? There probably was something. You get down to more solid objects like “trains run off bridges,” it’s easy for them to write something like that because it’s at their tone level, you see? “Disaster.”‘ and “Everybody messed up!” and “We’ll sell lots of papers!”

But it’s remarkable how much illusion they’ll even write about a train wreck. There was a train wreck, but what appears in the paper is very often quite different. No, as I say, you only have to read about yourself in the press a few times to then wonder about the story to the right of that story and to the left of that story. You wondered if Senator Snodgrass was even in Washington at the time he made the speech, you see? It’s spooky; it’s spooky. What a river of lies. So that is the social illusion — what normally, laughingly is called news.

This is based on old women’s gossip. There used to be gossips occasionally who were put in stocks because they said nothing but vicious things about everybody and stirred up trouble for everybody and ran all around doing this sort of thing. And they just made nothing but trouble and told nothing but lies and so forth. Well, the modern gossip is the newspaper. And if those characteristics were in one human being, that human being would be driven from the community. Why everybody buys newspapers, I don’t know. I’m tired of them myself.

But I’m just giving you an example. The newspaper is the illusion of the event. Well, very often a person will get an illusion. You can expect a PC running things to get an illusion of the event. The event was too much for him to confront, so he dreams up what it was. Now, if you’re really running a real engram, illusion will often come off of it. The fellow will start changing his mind about it. Well, for heaven’s sakes, don’t fix him with the illusion till he reaches the actual! Don’t stand around saying, “Well, the last time we ran that . . . last time we ran that you went off the bridge. Now, apparently, you weren’t in the car at all!” And yourself, don’t be baffled. Because the fellow couldn’t confront the experience. So he partially confronted and partially dreamed it up, see? The part he couldn’t confront, he dreamed up. Now as he audits this, his confront gets better and he sees what it is.

Now, a PC quite often will get himself confused because he says, “The mental image picture is absolute, and that is what I see the first time I run it through. And therefore, I’m very upset because the second time through the woman has a red hat on, and she wasn’t wearing a hat the first time through. So what is this? This then isn’t a real experience.” Well, it’s not for you to evaluate for him. Just put him through it again and he will say, “Oh, I . . . I guess I never could confront her,” you know, or something like this. You get the idea?

So actual experience is at the root of all illusion. And you are not in the business of evaluating the content of secondaries and engrams! That is not the business you are in. The business you are in is the alleviation of the incident — mental image picture of the incident itself.

All right. So what happens in life? A thetan is a busy little bee, and he will make a picture of events as they occur. And then he clutches these pictures to his thetanish bosom and wonders why he’s so sick. This is not very bright, but he does it. Now he has a great loss. All secondaries depend upon loss. We say secondary, and the reason it’s a secondary is because it depends for its charge on an engram which contains pain and unconsciousness. It’s secondary. It does not contain pain and unconsciousness, it contains emotion. Any emotion or misemotion may be contained in a secondary, but, of course, pleasure and so forth does not make a secondary, and it also doesn’t make an incident. It doesn’t make an aberrative incident because he was so happy.

A person, however, can have a win which is so magnitudinous and 90 unexpected that it hangs him up forever. He’s always going back to this big win, you know? Very often, old men will sit around and go over their wins with one another. And it was always amazing to me as a little boy, listening to former road agents (which is to say, robbers who are now very respectable), cattle rustlers, ex-sheriffs (not much difference to choose between them because, actually, they swap their hats almost at random, you see?) talking about the horses they had stolen and the cattle rustlers they hadn’t shot, and all of this sort of thing. It was interesting to me that their stories never wore out. And while I would find their stories of interest, sitting around as a little tad, I would very soon become very familiar with all of them.

And they would still tell them. And one of them would be talking and the other one would simply not be listening at all, but be waiting to talk in his turn. And it was interesting to me that those incidents never wore out. They never desensitized at all; they just were good forever, like an unperishable phonograph record. And that is true about pleasure moments, and so forth, is the thetan just goes on with them forever.

All right. So we’re talking then, when we talk about a secondary, about misemotion: grief, fear. . . Well, actually it’s the old Tone Scale. We got the old Tone Scale from the fact that as you run a secondary, if you run a classic secondary, it will come up from below apathy, into apathy, and move right on up the Tone Scale in its tones. And it will finally wind up at boredom, and that’s the wrong place to stop, because there’s enthusiasm just above that. And at that point he doesn’t care about it again. But that is a secondary; it’s misemotion. The Tone Scale was plotted from the behavior of secondaries under auditing.

But to have a secondary (a moment of loss which is aberrative), an individual must have had an experience containing pain and unconsciousness, and that is an engram. An engram is an experience mental picture of an event of pain and unconsciousness. The person had to hurt, and he had to have gone unconscious to greater or lesser degree — and sometimes they just go unconscious during the center moment of the hurt, but there’s always a little unconsciousness connected with great pain — and the mental image picture of that event is the engram.

Now, the word engram itself comes from “trace on a cell,” is what it means. And at the time I was first working with this, I was thinking in terms of cellular memory. I didn’t know where these things came from (it was way back when), and so I chose a word which was preferably different than other terms being used, and that was the first consideration. The second consideration was that we could define it and say what it did mean. Any time an individual was hurt, like a faithful little idiot he made a complete record of the event. A complete record of the event was manufactured at that moment.

You’d be surprised how complete it is. Do you know that you could take somebody through a tonsillectomy with a stopwatch? You can even have a doctor there who knows the speed and action connected with a tonsillectomy, and have him criticize the quality of the surgeon doing the tonsillectomy. You can move the person right through the tonsillectomy by calling off the time in the tonsillectomy — one minute deep, two minutes, three minutes, four minutes, five minutes. You know, you can get the event, and so on, you can put the time in it.

A thetan is fantastically accurate in terms of time. Time is something which a thetan has a good, solid grip on. He has a very, very solid grip. A being does not make errors reactively about time. Analytically, he gets confused about time. But right down deep, right down deep, he never makes an error about time.

He knows reactively exactly when it happened and for how long, but he now is incapable of confronting the fact, so he makes (quote) “errors” while he’s wide awake. You ask some girl how old she is, you’ll understand what I mean. She sometimes looks very vague.

Very often a person can’t tell the date. Well, that’s because he doesn’t particularly want to confront dates. But if you went at it with a meter, you would pick up the exact date. It is recorded but is unconfrontable. So he records what he can’t confront, and that is where he gets engrams and secondaries. I find that very amusing. And would he record it if he can’t confront it? If he can’t confront it, why didn’t he just skip it? But the truth of the matter is he didn’t. See, we’re only dealing with what is, not what should be, you know?

So we have a time track, let us say — well, we have a consecutive series of events, beginning with the first aberration of the being, on through to the present. And the wonder of the E- Meter is, is that as a person is more capable of confronting, the E-Meter will reach just below, to what he slightly can’t confront, and will give you a read on it. The E-Meter sees deeper than he does. That’s very interesting. But the E-Meter doesn’t see all the way down.

You’ll run right straight across events that won’t register on the E-Meter. But then the PC is improved by auditing, he comes up, and then all of a sudden you’ll find the E-Meter is registering on those events that it didn’t register on before. That’s because they’re closer to being confronted. So the E-Meter will register on anything that is close to being confronted. And it reads deeper than the thetan can confront, which is quite amusing.

It’s like life is at this level you see — four feet off the floor — and then we have the E-Meter able to sound a foot deep. See, the being himself can only see this strata four feet off the floor, but the E-Meter can see three feet from the floor. See, it can see one foot deep. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t event between three feet and the floor. See, there’s tons of event in there.

But as the being becomes more familiar with his own mind and his own past, and as he becomes more able, then this depth increases. But of course, the four-foot level is now very, very easy for him to confront, the three-foot level where the E-Meter was seeing before is now confrontable by the being himself, and the meter is now confronting to two feet. And eventually, the being can confront as much as the meter can confront. But at that time, unfortunately for auditing, the individual is Clear.

Now, therefore, the function of the E-Meter is not a sees-all, end-all seer of some kind or another with a swami-type turban and a big glass diamond; it’s just something with a little bit better telescopic sights. It can see a bit deeper than the being himself. Don’t feel completely reassured, because there is no meter read, that everything on that subject is gone. No, everything that is in restimulation that will have any effect upon the thetan is gone. Do you see? So, therefore, you can easily unflatten things which you have flat.

In other words, you’ve gotten something down to a point where it no longer registers on the meter, and you say, “Good, that’s flat.” Now we go over it again just to make sure, and now we get things reading in it again. I want to caution you about this in auditing engrams, because you can flatten them and you can unflatten them just as easy as scat. So you want to get it down to where you aren’t getting tone-arm action, you more or less got it.

Now, the mind, then, that is being approached by Dianetic auditing is the mind of event. And the things which are aberrative in that mind are the engrams and the secondaries. They are very often visible through their locks or tiny surface manifestations.

A guy is hit on the head with a hammer. That makes an engram. There’s physical pain and unconsciousness in it. A few days later he walks into a hardware store. He doesn’t like to be there. He can’t tell you why, because he can’t confront the incident of being hit in the head with a hammer, but there are hammers in that hardware store. He doesn’t even see what is restimulating the engram. He just is uncomfortable and he will take a picture of the hardware store as an uncomfortable place.

So you chase a guy down the time track and he has a picture of a hardware store. Well now, you couldn’t possibly guess why he has a picture of a hardware store. He might have been hurt with a blowlamp; he might have gone bankrupt, making a secondary. We don’t know why he’s got this little picture of a hardware store, because there’s no pain and unconsciousness in connection with a hardware store. But with a meter, and getting him to look it over and think it over and look around on the incident, and so on, we could pick up what it was the lock on. Now, the lock is in view and the incident is out of sight.

Now, what a person knows about is not aberrative. I’ve had more people walk in and say, “Oh! I know exactly what it is. My second husband . . . and he beat me all the time with a club, and I’ve been in terrible shape ever since.” And they go on and on and on and on and on. Well, we point out this interesting fact: They know about that. You’re the thousand-and - first person they have told about that, and it hasn’t blown yet — which is to say, hasn’t disappeared, hasn’t erased. So obviously, that isn’t what’s wrong.

Now, it would be your job as the auditor to discover what was wrong. Now, maybe in actual practice that would be an exercise in finding valences like a — you know, listing and assessing lists for individuals or things they have known. But we’re talking about it from a Dianetic approach. This is the processing we want to work slowly; we don’t want any speed out of this process. We would go on down the line now to find out what was this all about. And this is her second husband, and according to her, her first husband was a knight in shining armor. That’s illusion.

You know that you could say to almost anybody, “Who” — you notice this fellow is terribly silent, see, always silent, never has anything to say. So you say to him, “Who is the most talkative person you ever knew?”

“Oh, my Uncle Bill. Oh, he just talked all the time.” “What did he look like?”

“Oh, he was a tall fellow, and he had green hair,” and so on. And so on. “He just talked continuously, and he’s the most talkative fellow you ever — ”

You say, “What’s the matter?”

“That’s funny. I can’t ever remember him saying a word.”

He’s in Uncle Bill’s valence, don’t you see, resenting everybody being talkative, but he’s actually transferred valences. So his valence at the time has now transferred to Uncle Bill’s valence. You get a swap.

You ought to try this sometime just for fun. You notice something about a person and ask him who was the reverse. And watch him get all confused and mixed up. You notice this girl is very sad; she’s a very sad, moping-type person. “Who’s the happiest, gayest, most enthusiastic person you ever knew?” You want to ask her this, see?

“Bessie Ann.”

“Well, tell me about Bessie Ann.”

About halfway through the dissertation: “You know, Bessie Ann was the most sour sourpuss I ever ran into in my life.”

They themselves had loses in being enthusiastic in trying to cheer up Bessie Ann. You get the idea?

That’s a valence problem, which you’re not interested in, but this comes into auditing because in engrams they sometimes swap valences. And if you want a real tough engram, you will find somebody has been the scaffold, the headsman, the ax, the block, his wife, a little boy in the crowd, an egg, a hen . . . You’ve got this incident, and the game in running this thing is to find out what was he? And if you run it long enough, why, you’ll generally find out that he was the guy being beheaded, or he was the executioner. And you’ll run into valences just to that degree.

Now, if an individual is looking at himself in the picture, he is out of valence. You can actually briskly tell him to get into valence, or just run it. He eventually will.

Now, there is a danger in running Dianetic engrams, in that you run too late on a chain. Now, incidents of similar nature strung out in time are called chains.

Now let’s take the automobile-accident chain, the auto-accident chain. Now, this is a fascinating thing, but the individual will tell you he’s been in one automobile accident. When you start checking it over, he’s been in three. You have to have the earliest incident on the chain before you really start grinding away.

But you can get too enthusiastic about this, and you can work too hard to find the earliest incident on the chain. Because unfortunately, even though the psychiatrist doesn’t like us to say this, and even though the Church is quite insulted occasionally when we mention that their converts have lived before this lifer this is one of the first phenomena you run into in Dianetic auditing. And you run into it in everybody.

Now, a this-lifetime address to the situation is recommended, because the number of automobile accidents the fellow has been in may be nearly infinite. He might have been in dozens, hundreds, thousands. Maybe he’s stuck in an incident in a space-opera society where a flying car hits him, you see, and that last truck accident, and so on, is simply hung up on it. But you can’t always insist that he stay in this lifetime. Because it’s very hard for him to do. So he’ll skid. But the danger that I’m telling you about is not a danger of him going into a former lifetime, but the danger is trying to erase something that is getting more solid. The reason for that: It is too late on the chain.

Now, there’s two mistakes can be made here: You can continue to grind, grind, grind, and it’s just getting tougher and tougher and harder to do; or you can hit it too lightly and go back too quickly, and then go back too quickly again, and then back too quickly again without taking enough charge off, and the guy will become just a ball. He’ll get all messed up.

Let’s say we have fifteen automobile accidents, and we can only find the fifteenth. So we take a light pass through it, but we get all the charge of it off, and then we go to the fourteenth. We think that is the earliest one now, see? That’s what it registers on the meter. And it’s a bad thing for you to always be using earliest one, and so forth, because you quite commonly have a lot of earliest ones earlier than the one you’re running, you see? So it’s better auditing terminology to say earlier — the earlier incident.

So you get the fourteenth. You don’t know it’s the fourteenth by this — see, you don’t know it’s the fourteenth yet; you think it’s number one — and you go through it, but it also behaves in a peculiar fashion, and if you started to grind it too hard, why, you’d be in a bad way. So you find the thirteenth. And here’s where you would enthusiastically make a mistake: You just note that there’s a thirteenth, note there’s a twelfth, note there’s an eleventh, a tenth, a ninth, and all of a sudden bluu-lualluuth!

What you did is you tried to shoot him down with the same perception as the E-Meter. There’s not enough charge off. You should have gone through those incidents. You should have gotten enough charge off of them so that he could go through them and go down earlier on them. Do you follow?

So an auditor can make this error, and it’s a very serious error. I give it to you very, very, very severely here as a great error: To try to follow down a chain without running what you’re finding on the chain — just out of your impatience or the PC’s curiosity or something like that. You got fourteen automobile accidents, you’d better run him through fourteen automobile accidents until you get the first one. Now, maybe in the last two or three at the bottom he’ll suddenly jump to the first one. You run that and the whole chain blows. But you can ball him up, man! Do you see?

The area has got too much unconfrontable stuff in it. But the more of these he goes through, why, the more he can confront and the deeper he can go and the more charge, see; the more material he has confronted, the more he’s able to confront it. And you’ll finally get him down to where he can confront basic on the chain.

Now sometimes a PC will fool you. And he himself will get so anxious that he skips five, six, seven incidents, just in an anxiety to get to that bottom one, you see? And the next thing you know he’s glug! — he’s gone into the glue. Now, a PC gets very confused if you do this.

The right way to do this is to erase the auditing. You don’t go back and do what you should have done; you just erase the auditing. Treat the session as an incident. And erase it as a lock. And everything goes back together again rather neatly. And that is something we’ve almost forgotten how to do in Scientology. Guy has a rough session, right away we want to get him over to Review and get his ARC breaks off and fool about with it and do this and that.

No, you don’t want to have to do that. Run the session as an incident. “You remember the beginning of this session? All right, go to the beginning of this session. All right. Rapidly pass through to the end of the session and tell me the incident and tell me what happened.” Do that two or three times: pssth! That’s it.

You can erase anything if you’re good. But, oddly enough, if you took him through the session two or three times it might gum him up. Because he’s had some earlier, rougher sessions now that you should have gone back to on a chain, and you’ve got another chain on your hands. So you might say you can always go through something once, but if it’s a chain, watch it.

So the whole of Dianetic auditing is the tracing of experience. There are thousands of things I could tell you about this. There are tons of phenomena. We probably know more phenomena about Dianetic auditing than any other single activity. And the funny part of it is, all you really need to know — well, lam giving you data in this lecture which is highly explicit and which is very useful to you, but it’s all contained (pretty well contained) in HCOB 3 April 1966. If you had this lecture too, of course.

Now, there’s power in this stuff, and you can become a drug addict on Dianetic auditing very easily. Because it is very, very, very interesting stuff. It’s the root material of life. I probably, from time to time, will remember little bits and pieces and give you some more. I just thought of one just now that’s a handy thing to know. If you get some life time in restimulation, run the engram of the death and it’ll disappear; the life will desensitize.

You get the guy stuck in a lifetime as a sewer cleaner in Paris, or something like that, and it’s such a degraded life — when he at first was telling you he was Joan of Arc during that period. He isn’t necessarily wrong about this, don’t you see, but he actually was jumping to an earlier life and getting it beautifully confused so that he wouldn’t have to face the degradation of that life.

It’s the lives that almost make it are the bad ones. You know, the lives that almost make it. Or the lives which are just so degraded, a guy can’t imagine himself as that kind of a being. And that’ll upset him. It isn’t really the successful lives. People will run Julius Caesar with the greatest of ease. But they wouldn’t like to run Cassius.

People who run Julius Caesar were probably something horrible during his lifetime. You see, they’re just like the guy flying around in the incident, and he is the headsman, he’s the headman’s ax, he’s the block, he’s the executioner, he’s himself, he’s the executed person.

Now, you have a lot of fun running stuff like this. You can find out a lot about track, PCs have an awful lot of cognition’s, and you may hit some lower levels of Release. But it’d be release by chain. You’re not going to get release from the whole experiential track. That’s not possible. But you might get a free needle on automobile accidents. And if you do, pull out, man. But then don’t stop running engrams. Find some other type of engram.

I can assure you that you’re not going to get a total bank release, because those total releases are up there at 0, I, II, III, IV, V, you see, and they’re all above this. You’re going to get negative releases. Releases on the negative lines: the minus scale which you have on your first Gradation Chart, and which should have been repeated on the next one — and will be repeated again — because they’re quite vital. Do you know that you can apparently assess the minus levels and sometimes produce a Release just by assessing them — where the guy is stuck at. But don’t keep on assessing after you see a free needle.

But here is practice auditing — practice auditing.

Now, somebody will tell you that it’s very, very bad to fool about with the mind — Very bad to fool about with the mind. But in actual fact, any Dianetic auditing is better than no Dianetic auditing. You see, that remark was true about Dianetics. We’ve moved up into such powerhouse auditing today in Scientology, and so forth, that you can perhaps knock a guy around with auditing. But not with Dianetic auditing. The guy will struggle out of a session and so forth.

Now, we used to tell people to come up to present time, and in view of the fact that’ll also put him at the beginning of track, there’s no particular reason to tell him that. So, the thing for you to do if your PC is very groggy after a Dianetic session, why, just get him to look around the room. Get him to name two or three objects in the room, and it actually will orient him in PT.

Now, try for light secondaries when you first go into this sort of thing. Well, far as that’s concerned, try for what will really be light locks. Try for a little bit more in the way of secondaries. Actually, if you just kept auditing secondaries, you’d eventually fall into engrams. Because it’s very funny: the engram lying there, and the secondary, is visual. I mean, he can run the secondary, but the engram is too much for him to confront; so he can’t run that. But the reason for the secondary is the engram.

You say, why is the fellow sad at the departure of his wife? The fellow is sad at the departure of his wife. If he is way over-exaggeratedly sad and she wasn’t a very good cook, you can’t see how this is going to ruin his next hundred years, don’t you see? But he’s all set to have this ruin his next hundred years. Why is that? Well, it’s setting on an engram. It may be sitting on an engram. And maybe he was a wife in the life before and got shot. See? Something like that. There’s pain and unconsciousness associated with a similar contextual incident. Now he gets this terrible grief — heavy grief-type incident — and he doesn’t know what to make out of this.

This has great value, by the way — auditing of secondaries. There’s a lot of tricks associated with this. It takes a long time to audit these things sometimes, but there’s a lot of gimmickry associated with Dianetic auditing that you don’t really have to particularly know. You sort of fall into it; you start developing it; you start recognizing it, and so forth, because it’s very obvious. But I could take ten or fifteen years off the appearance of any widow by simply running her husband’s death. It’s fantastic! You wouldn’t believe the change that would occur.

There are certain things that you can do that produce remarkable and fantastic changes in a being. There are certain things that you can alleviate. But I give you this warning: If you start using Dianetic auditing to cure up somebody’s lumbosis . . . He’s got lumbosis, so you’re going to run the engram that causes lumbosis. And that is now going to cure his lumbosis. Forget it! Every so often you will cure his lumbosis. Every so often you’ll have a win. That’s the wrong way to go about it, because you’re Validating a down statistic. You’re giving him this attention because he’s got lumbosis, and he tends to deteriorate as a being. you want to use this just as you use any other kind of auditing: You should use it just to improve the being. Just improve the being. You’re auditing a thetan, you are not auditing lumbosis. Now, you’re not medical doctors (thank God); not psychiatrists (heaven forbid!). You are people who can make beings totally recover. You have the technology of total recovery of a being — and that doesn’t mean a body. And that is so fundamental a truth, that as long as you use any auditing just to make the being better, there you are. All you’re trying to do is improve the guy’s confront, that’s all.

This guy wants to be audited because he’s got medicosis — deadly illness! And he wants you to cure his medicosis. I don’t think I’d take that PC on; I really don’t think I’d audit him. I’d much rather audit his sister, who wants to dance better. Because this guy is down the line in a sort of a cave-in, don’t you see? He’s going to be rough. He’s going to be this, that and the other thing. Entirely different emotional frame. Now, he’d be very anxious, and he’s already told you he had a hidden standard. He’s saying — when he says, “Cure my medicosis” — he’s saying in essence that “If you can have an effect upon my medicosis, why, then I will believe in Scientology.”

And you say, “Isn’t that sweet of you!”

There’s an ant over there and, you know, I just don’t care whether he believes about Scientology or not. In fact, I don’t think it’ll change any part of human history whether that ant believes in Scientology or not.

Slow, if you know somebody who thinks he can be better, I’ll happily audit him. But I’m afraid I would be that nasty I’ve had enough hidden standards, man! Because let me tell you, his medicosis probably won’t alleviate until he’s about a Grade V, and he’s asking me to do it with two seconds at Grade 0. glut he’s so stuck on a hidden standard that he wouldn’t even care that his communication was better. He’s just all wrapped up in problems like mad, and so on. Well, there’s ways to handle this person. There’s ways and means to handle this person — but not as a practice case in Dianetic auditing. This is fun. Why get serious about it?

Now, you yourself as an auditor should know how to run an engram; you should know how to run a secondary. Because you yourself in your early career very often burn your finger, cut your hand, and you can run it out. It’s very remarkable. You can make burns go down and you can do all sorts of magical things with yourself. I wouldn’t advise you to do it for some little kid, just because he’s burned. I’d give him a Touch Assist or something like that. But it’s very interesting. Anybody ought to have this experience, but don’t burn yourself just so that you can have the experience. To watch a blistered finger go down as you steadily, steadily, steadily on, run the incident out of having burned it: it’s quite interesting.

Every once in a while, in auditing somebody with these, you’ll get an awful win. And the last I want to question you about — one thing I want to warn you about very, very much — is please don’t get stuck in those wins!

There’s value to this auditing; there is greater value to this auditing than man ever before had. This solves the problems that Sigmund Freud was trying to solve. It solves them with spectacularity, man’ And compared to Scientology, it’s nothing.

Don’t go getting stuck in a win! Have wins by all means, but don’t get stuck in them and suddenly say, “You know, Ron’s really got something there: You can cure people with this. Hey! Woof! Look at that! The guy had a withered arm, I ran three engrams, his arm grew the normal size. My God! This is for me!” You go out and collect a whole bunch of withered arms and that’s it.

The danger of Dianetic auditing is it wins. The road out is the road you have, up through the Grades. And it took all this knowledge of Dianetic auditing, it took all the material, it took all the odd observations, it took all those years of work to carve that very thin and now rather ordinary-looking path that works too fast, up through the Grades.

Dianetic auditing was very useful with which to learn the fundamentals about the mind, and that’s what I want you to use it for. You will all of a sudden be rather interested to learn about these recorded incidents, and you will become very familiar with this thing called the human mind as you use this in auditing. And you yourself will get a very interesting insight into such things as history, customs and habits of bygone races. You have lots of fun. You get practice in handling PCs and you might make some minus-grade Releases. You won’t even make a Grade 0. Don’t expect it. But this is great training, great training. If you were to go out and hang up a shingle with this, you’d get enough wins. You’d get probably 50, 60 percent wins. So what? You’re rewarding a down statistic. The guy got sick, so we’re auditing him. That’s probably what’s wrong with him in the first place: he wants attention.

And if you go bog yourself down at this stage of development of Scientology with handling all the sick and the insane of this planet, you will never get anyplace. There are all kinds of people who aren’t.

Now, somewhere up the line, in a century or a millennia or something like that, somewhere up the line the registrars are going to run out of auditors and PCs. By that time, everybody will either be very adept or very disinterested. But wait for such a time as when an organization, to function, must have such PCs. Then get into it. Then get into it. You’re not strong enough, stable enough, or anything else, to suddenly take on all the woes of the world simultaneously. I can confront them, but that’s no reason I have to audit them. You could just bog yourself down right there.

I’ve seen more auditors ruin their careers by making a career out of one psychotic. Think of all the able people that could have been made more able while one psychotic was giving an auditor a total failure! Because the reason he was totally psychotic was probably his environment, and he wasn’t even removed from his environment to audit him. And he gets up two feet and gets knocked back three.

I remember one girl in New York City that . . . They kept auditing her and auditing her, auditing her. And they’d get her up to anger, and she’d blow the household, or something like this — she’d get out of there. And they’d promptly blame the auditor because the girl was now angry, and go back and put her into apathy and get the auditor to audit her again. And she would audit her up to a point where this girl was in anger, and then the family would blow up because the person now couldn’t be lived with, and so they’d knock the person back into apathy again. And this went on and on and on, and what an awful waste of time. Do you see?

So Dianetic auditing is not for the psychotic, the neurotic or the sick — in spite of the fact that it probably could handle the psychotic, the neurotic and the sick. It is done in this wise for your practice. You’ll be able to ARC break people and have other people come along and help the ARC break out; and you will learn all the things you aren’t supposed to do; and your comm cycle will get smooth; you’ll become very familiar with the mind. And that is why it is being given to you at this particular time.

I have never seen anything really more interesting in the realm of human endeavor and activities than Dianetic auditing. It is the champion of all time. A tremendous amount of fun. It does fantastic things. So there it is, and I hope you’ll have some fun with it.

Thank you.