And this is December the 8th, morning lecture. And this fine, crisp morning, you have in your hands the SOP 8-C brief form for student use.

December the 8th, afternoon lecture. And we have, today, to take up the problem of auditing — just for a change.

Now, that's a brief form — indeed, that's a brief form. That's the one thing you can know about this form, that it's very brief. Because you can do anything to a preclear that you can do in Scientology.

You know, it isn't very difficult to audit somebody or exteriorize them or bring them up the line. It's just not very difficult. It could be that somebody could be standing by waiting for myself to do it. Could be somebody was saving those nice effects there to be sprung out in this fashion. And that would be gypping the rest of you as auditors, wouldn't it? So let's discourage the idea. Let's just discourage it real good.

Now, I occasionally throw in all kinds of odds and ends of techniques — partially on the basis of interest. Your biggest and highest levels are interest, attention, cause, effect, and their negatives.

You know, I don't want to take up SOP 8-C for the remainder of this course. It's almost beaten to pieces right now. If I thought I had to say anything more that was very specific about it, I would be very disappointed in you, believe me. I'm going to go over it until the end of this week. And Monday morning, I hope to be able to take up SOP 8-O. So you better be a Theta Clear by then. Because it'll just become incomprehensible. Now, that's — it gives you lots of time, gives you days.

And the most potent emotions which go along with this, of course, are — for the people, a lot of the people you'll be working on — insanity (insanity's an emotion, not a state), fear, sexual sensation, competition and superiority, and their negatives. And that's just about the prime list that I handle.

Now, the brutal truth of the matter is, if I'd put as much time in on a preclear as you've been putting in on preclears, and I hadn't gotten a Theta Clear on the thing, I would examine my own postulates about what I was trying to do and break the neck of the preclear — one or the other. (laughter) Ten hours of auditing today is a long time, that's lots of auditing. You'd expect to put this in on somebody who was 99 or 108, who couldn't see, couldn't feel, and didn't know where their right foot was; but not on fairly young people. Thirty hours would be a long time to put on the character that I just mentioned to you. Five hours of auditing would be a long time to put in on any case here.

Just as an aside on this emotion called insanity, people worry about insanity and they do lots of things about insanity, but it is an emotion which is brought about by the compulsion to reach and the inhibition not to reach, or the compulsion not to reach and the inhibition to reach. And those two things together, one way or the other, bring about this emotion. You can turn this on in almost any preclear, by the way.

Now, at the risk of making myself very unpopular with you, which risk is always taken when one tries to do something for somebody else, let me assure you that the amount of progress which has been made on an average by this unit could have been duplicated by a third grade class. Third grade, US public school system. I could have taken a third grade class and we'd have had this much progress.

People going around worrying about being insane or going insane, are very amusing. They are amusing, because you can turn that emotion off just as fast as anything. It may give you a bad fifteen minutes or a bad half an hour, but you can turn it off. And the other ways to handle it, is just have them match-terminal themselves going insane and repressing all their insane motions and so forth.

Now, let's search into the basic reasons and the deep significance as to why this is. One, partially my responsibility — I didn't put in your hands a piece of paper which put a technique sequence down. That was necessary. And two, that's not mine. Somebody just mentioned it over here before the lecture. And that something was the substance of education — he said this morning he'd had a lot of his education, since he was here, run out. You could call this a process of uneducation. That's the only excuse — I keep telling you this — the only excuse we have for (quote) "teaching" (unquote) this subject, is to uneducate.

Insanity is a postulate. It precedes death on the whole track. Death was an invention which came about as a self-protective mechanism.

It is not what you know in terms of data. It is what you can unburden in terms of knowingness. Now, if you're going to go on the basis that your knowingness is all there on the surface and all accessible to you and you're able to put it to use, and if you have enough data surrounding it, it can be of more use, and if you make that all automatic, that will be of more use, well, you're not going to — you just missed the point.

So long as one was a being and had gotten into something he couldn't get out of, the punishment could continue against all arguments, you see. So the first invention to keep punishment from continuing was insanity. That's on the whole track. That's very early.

Your knowingness is native. But it's something like a native that's been buried alive. We used to talk, in mining, in terms of "overburden." There was as much value in mining a mine as you didn't have to remove overburden to get to the ore. And a preclear is a problem of overburden. And you could envision yourself as an auditor up there about 150 feet above him with a shovel and throwing it off into infinity, you'd just about have the role right.

And it said, "I'm insane, which means I have no further responsibility, which — this and that, and to prove it, here's this emotion." And one merely did that by reaching and not reaching, and withdrawing and not withdrawing.

Now, in instructing so that you can get an uninstruction, I have another problem. And that's to show you what rocks in the overburden can be removed to disturb and get rid of the overburden — what rocks? Because all of the overburden on a case is held rather delicately in place. It's not very solid. And there's certain pins which, if disturbed, will cause the overburden to go on off, and we get to the gold.

It said, "I can't do you any further harm because I am in this horrible state which is non compos mentis. I can't think. I can't act. I can't harm you in any way. No further menace in me, so therefore, you should leave me alone."

But if you think you can train yourself into getting some of this gold, that's not true. SOP 8-O is the first technique into which you can go into some (quote) "training." That is simply to exercise the thetan into doing some of the things which he should be able to do as a thetan, and probably on the whole track never learned how.

And that made punishment stop sometimes, so having been successful at various places on the track (audience member coughing), a pc who is inclining towards insanity ... I notice this is starting some coughs, that's interesting. A pc inclining toward insanity or worried about insanity, has simply had this work too well, many times, you see. He says, "I'm nuts, you know, and therefore you've got to leave me alone" — and it's worked.

Now, that's the first education you'll run into. And that will not be on the basis of setting up an automaticity, it will be on the basis of examining the universe in which a thetan finds himself, and discovering how it is habitable, as well as constructing parts of it. That's what that concerns itself with. That's very constructive and destructive in this fashion.

Any mechanism which the pc has, whether it's a sore knee, a sore jaw or a crossed-up postulate — anything, you know, I mean just anything — he's got it because it's worked.

We're not at that level with SOP 8-C. We're trying to dig a thetan out of a skull and stabilize him and get him unburdened enough so that he knows he's there and he knows he's operating and he knows where he is. And where he knows how he can get rid of his own data.

It has been superior to the situation, and he's tried to make it work again and again and again. And he's always hoping it will work. But you take a sore tooth — this fellow goes around with a sore tooth — well, this sore tooth has made it work. Now, earlier we classified this as the service facsimile — call it the "service postulate" and it comes closer.

When we consider how many lies the preclear has been told, we can see that we needn't worry about the truths. Because these are outweighed a thousand to one by the chicaneries which have been put upon him.

So insanity is something that's demonstrated and worried about by people and so forth, and it's just escapement from punishment. A little bit later on, individuals invented this other one. They said, "Look, I am my own mock-up, and my own mock-up is now dead." And that didn't work too well, so they said, "I'm really my own mock-up and my own mock-up is dead and I am dead too, and look, I can't remember my former life as that mock-up." And that's the condition of the track which we have here in 1953 a.d. Earth; and it's just an argument against further punishment.

He was told that if he was a good boy and minded, he would succeed in life. Isn't that wonderful? Why, right there, we open that up and that carcass starts to stink — right away, quick. What is a good boy? Well, we get by parental definition that a good boy must be a dead boy — that must be the best boy you can be, by just extrapolation.

Punishment is the motto, the justice, the thisa, the thata. It's very worthwhile, by the way. There's no future like a future in which you can punish people, according to the very best authorities. That's the end-all. That's the end-all of everything, is to be able to punish somebody, according to — does — at least that's the way you think that this thing operated. Just because nearly every difficulty which you find in a preclear is — stems from punishment — either his punishing others and so on. Overt act mechanism, overt act-motivator mechanism, all of these things center around punishment.

Now, let's take what a good boy is: a good boy is quiet, doesn't make noises or disturbances, goes into no large motions, disturbs nobody's havingness, acquires nothing that he asks for, and asks for nothing but is sort of put on charity, and he gets what is coming to him, you see, and is happy about it afterwards. Now, this is a good boy.

And this centers around pain, and pain is not supposed to be desirable anymore. Pain was quite — just quite a desirable emotion earlier. It's just an emotion. It says, "You're alive, fellow. Look, you can hurt." And we get earlier on the track and we find, however, that many other emotions were used in this capacity and pain became undesirable and so on.

Parental proposition is stop motion, stop motion, stop motion, stop motion, stop motion, stop motion and then for variety, stop motion. And when he gets to be five, they put him in school so his motion will really stop. Oh, he will have all these stops on the track, and that's being a good boy.

Well now, anything which somebody didn't like was punishment, so you had to convince him there was something not to like before you could punish him. So you see how far down Tone Scale the whole thing of punishment is. You had to convince him there was something unlikable. In other words, you had to have him select out some randomity before he could be punished.

Well as stopped as you can get, of course, is dead. And it's a funny thing with some preclears, you run End of Cycle of parents killing him, and gee, people are satisfied with that. Not just because of prenatal AAs and other things, but just because of this stop, stop, stop, stop, stop. That isn't what they meant to do. That isn't what he interpreted them as meaning to do. But this is what the mechanics of this thing called life dictated as the end product — death.

And the goal — the goal of law, justice, police, so forth, here on Earth is to find something the criminal doesn't like sufficiently to in — stop crime. That thing which causes crime is, of course, fear of punishment. In case one "haves," you see. In case one "has" something, you know, why, he'll be punished. And in case this happens, he'll be punished. In case something else happens, he'll be punished.

Now, we're discovering, as we look over this, what inference life itself takes from the actions which occur in an environment. And we find out this is very strange, but the child comes to the conclusion after a while that they were trying to kill him. You see, it comes to this conclusion quite naturally, because being stopped is being dead, and if he's stopped often enough — this is all anybody ever tried to do to him on the track when they'd killed him; they were just trying to stop him — so if the parents stop him, they must have been trying to kill him. So this is his inference. So he finds himself living with a couple of murderers. And this is the inference he takes.

Now, the main thing that inhibits your pc in clearing is fear of punishment. He thinks if he gets that good, he'll be punished; so he tries to stay in a state of agreement which is lawfulness and law and order and et cetera, in some kind of an effort to keep from being punished.

Now, we're not going into the deep significance of this. Don't look at it as a deep significance or a hidden significance — it's the overt one which has been suppressed. Because almost any child who got into that situation and got that deeply mired down, eventually blew up in the parental face — crash!

Well, this is very, very funny if you look at it. This becomes very amusing, simply because you can't punish a thetan. That's impossible. And hence this goal of the impossible leads into many impossible complications. Leads into complications such as the WCTU, the — leads into complications such as the FBI. Leads into politics and war and all these various asininities.

And he said, "What's the idea? Are you trying to bump me off? What do — you don't want me to be. You don't want me to live. That's the trouble with you. You don't want me to amount to anything, you're always getting in my road," and so forth.

War is asinine. It isn't necessarily bad, it's just stupid. The reason it's stupid is because you can't have a good time in a war. That's what's wrong with a war. That's all that's wrong with a war.

And he was told, "If you talk like that any more, we will really fix you up."

A bunch of guys — they've got lots of stars all over them, you know and they get all around and they say, "Go here, go there, do this, do that, jump here, jump there," so on.

So there, you see, the overt conclusion is the buried one, and we get this sandwiched on and on and on all through the ages that an individual has lived. All through the ages.

And the fellow says, "Well, what am I supposed to do?"

It starts out with a trick. It says, "Now you — you're afflicted with spirits and God because your mock-ups are disappearing. Your space is collapsing and none of us had anything to do with it, you poor fellow, and we're going to help you out."

"You're supposed to wait."

There's an incident on the track known as the Dear Souls, which is a wonderful incident. They put up a thing called the "Bubble Gum" and they'd catch thetans, and then they'd explain to them how it was all for their own good. Of all the soupy, supersaccharine goo that comes off of this facsimile — it's just goo in all directions! And it's keyed in by some of the more debased religions here on Earth. Sympathy — oh, sweet and so forth — really urk.

There's nothing wrong with a war where it comes to action. I mean you get an initial moment of action on the thing, why, there's action — there's something to do.

Now, the kid runs into this in this lifetime and here's this thing sitting here and confronting him again. Well, he got out of that one time or another, and he got through that some time or another, and here he runs into it again, and he gets the inference that every kind action then must be designed to kill him off.

But wars are run by people who today are so low, so despicably low on the Tone Scale, that they never provide any action for anybody. And so therefore, they forfeit their right to leadership. And all they can provide is, in essence, a punishment for somebody — which is wait, or closed space.

There's another overburden. You try to be kind to a lot of people, they don't know what you're talking about. You must be a pitch. And it's real bad. It's real dangerous to try to help man. No kidding. You got to be God knows how tough. You have to be able to take almost anything in order to help him, merely because he knows so many things that aren't true.

What's wrong with war? Well, war is forcing somebody to operate in a role he doesn't care to have, under another determinism than his own, in some sort of an effort to make political issues more complicated.

And yet, let's look at this: The person who has no trust or confidence anymore has no knowingness anymore. Isn't that interesting? Now, that's a mechanic of existence. Somebody who cannot trust, who cannot just widely throw himself to the winds and embrace everything and trust everything in sight and so forth, he gets real bad off, he doesn't survive well. That's interesting, isn't it? He's real bad off when he can't do that.

The very, very best essays — paragraphs — on war were written by Bolitho in his introduction to Twelve Against the Gods. And he says very little about war, but what he says is really very good. You ought to look it up sometime. It's a fabulous piece of work, that Twelve Against the Gods, anyhow. I don't necessarily agree with what he says, it's just a marvelous piece of work.

Well, you say that's the most dangerous thing imaginable to suddenly open your doors to every robber and burglar and so forth. No, that's not dangerous. What's dangerous is to close those doors. That's getting real dangerous, because that's cutting a communication.

Anyway, you're handling somebody who is afraid of being punished, and he's going to exhibit various mechanisms to persuade you not to punish him. And although he ostensibly is saying, "Well, here I am all willing and waiting to be cleared and straightened up and squared around and so on," why, he isn't, normally. He's trying to find an acceptable state. He's not trying to get Clear. He does not know that being cleared is an acceptable state.

You ask most people — you say, "What would you think of complete wide-open communication lines in all direction? All right, now you as a preclear run this — complete wide-open communication lines — just get the concept of this."

He's been convinced all up and down the track that he needed mechanisms to avoid punishment, and these mechanisms are his service mechanisms, his service postulates, his service facsimiles. And you're just asking him to throw down his armor. You're asking him to get into a state where he professedly will be dangerous to his environment.

And most of the people you give that to, if you were in a session, they'd say, "Urrururr. No, not for me! Hm-mm. Somebody else, but not me. This is probably a very noble theory, but I know it's dangerous."

And he isn't going to get dangerous to his environment if he can help it. The environment's too dangerous to him. And there's about the highest order that you'll hit in a pc that can be processed before he starts to burst through and stop fooling himself, is dangerous to his environment, environment's dangerous to him.

You see? He knows again. What does he know? He knows that he better be small and powerless. That's what he knows when he says, "I know it's dangerous to have wide-open communication lines in all directions." The only way you could know is if you had total communication potential — wide-open communication lines in all directions.

Actually, this is a computation of a beast, not a rational being. Man reacts to this very, very well. It's very high for man. It's higher than — oh, I don't know, almost anything man has ever had in terms of a level of action — a feeling of complete dangerousness to his environment. He is dangerous to his environment.

So you see how life becomes a dwindling spiral. It's by making a basic mockery out of anything a person should be. A man should be noble and have self-respect, and yet it's fashionable to negate any skill a person has, and to say, "I don't amount to much."

And most men operate on this basis: "The environment is so dangerous to me that I couldn't possibly survive on one dynamic or another or maybe all dynamics."

In the most debased societies, this has gotten to a point where people are saying to each other all the time "(indrawn breaths) I withhold my foul breath from your face. (indrawn breaths) I withhold my foul breath from your face. Insignificant I, addresses honorable and glorious you, the question, how about some tea?" Routine conversation. And yet these people have to have self-respect in order to be at all.

When he can't survive on all dynamics and he's convinced that he can't, he dies. Although some will substitute the mechanism of (quote) "going insane" (unquote). These are just mechanisms all toward the same thing. Insanity is not very important, not very interesting, and not very smart. And it is just a computation of escapement. So with a service facsimile. It's not smart to use a service facsimile at all. It's very unclever. Extremely unclever. But when a fellow doesn't have any way to pick himself up, why, he uses the next tool to hand.

So you see how the spiral becomes inverted? See what happens? Well, it isn't clear at first glance, but a person has been taught by experience that he has gotten into trouble by — and he immediately defines it — he says, "By trusting, by hoping, by being, by being proud, by doing noble things." He's gotten into trouble every time he's done these things. What a foolish man would say that. And yet all man says that. Because you see, high on the scale, he — wide-open communication lines — trusted everything. That's way up and real young.

So you discover your preclear — with SOP 8-C, you discover your preclear in a state of a dangerous environment in which the preclear is trying to avoid or escape punishment. And that's any way that punishment could be defined.

And the funny part of it was, is you can exactly trace this point: It was his own failure of trust which brought about his first decline in trusting. See, not by a code, but he just failed on trust. Otherwise you never get an outflow-inflow condition with regard to trust. He must have failed in trust.

And your fastest route up out of this is to bring about a condition where he is dangerous to his environment, rather the environment being dangerous to him. And your responsibility at that point is to push him on over the top and not leave him in that state. Because that's a very low state. That's the state of a beast, no more than that.

You see this? He knows now that it's not safe to trust. Well, believe me, let me assure you of this — it is not safe not to trust. That's what's not safe. That's real dangerous. Because the bottom of it is winding up microscopically small, scurrying away in terror from every beingness there is. And you think that's desirable? No, that's not desirable. It's better to get your head knocked off three times a day and to finish that day noble and self-assured than to moderate and monitor your actions throughout the day so that you won't get your head knocked off.

You see fellows — they suddenly get an edge up in processing. They suddenly get this little leg up in life, and so on, and they get to the state to where all of a sudden they conceive that they can be dangerous to some small portion of their environment. And being dangerous to that very tiny portion of their environment, they now think they have achieved "nirvana" or "vendetta" or some other wonderful state.

Now, if you as auditors don't see that we're doing an uneducation of the preclear, then you've got your vectors reversed on what SOP 8-C is trying to do. See, it's not trying to teach anybody anything except as you would say it's trying to teach him that he knew a lot of things he didn't have to know.

And the auditor is very often dismayed at what he's done. This fellow is becoming very pugnacious — doesn't process well. He's come up to the level of a lame tiger — about the same sentience. The thing to do is to give him a kick in the teeth and throw him back on the couch and push him on through. Get him to a point where he doesn't have to be dangerous to his environment, if you please.

Now, it's quite a trick to take a being who is bogged into a tremendous quantity of codes, beliefs, (quote) "knowledge" (unquote), science, bric-a-brac of all kinds and descriptions — public education has given him, everybody's given it to him, experience has given it to him and so forth — and bring him up to a point where he can differentiate between experience for his own protection and experience to learn a modus operandi. Because these are two different educational channels. He ordinarily, as a preclear, has these two things completely confused. There's nothing wrong with knowing how something works. And there's every­thing wrong with saying it mustn't occur again.

That is idiocy. A man who has to be dangerous to his environment to live has, of course, just walked up to the point where he will have all the new resistances cave in on him, eventually, once more. See, he's just gotten up to a point where he and the environment are at war.

There's nothing wrong with being able to know enough about something so that you can create it. And everything wrong with knowing something about it so that it won't hurt you. What nonsense this is, "knowing that it won't hurt you." Yeah, it mustn't hurt us. It can't hurt you!

Well, that's like — you have to be careful with these techniques if you're going to stop a person at that state, at that level. But you'll find somebody or other will arrive at that state and he'll snarl, and he'll fuss and he'll damn Papa and Mama and he'll damn this and that, and he'll get mad about this and that. And to hell with him. It's not important.

Now, you can tell a preclear this, even as I am telling you right this minute it can't hurt you — and you can accept this, you might say, sort of intellectually — yes, you see the force of my argument and words. But believe me, you're trying to get ahead to where — a point that a person realizes it. He knows it and becomes certain of it. SOP 8-C run in that direction, all of a sudden the fellow gets certain of it. "What the dickens am I afraid of?" he'll say.

He'll do this mainly if you as an auditor make an error, and that is, if you process him internally — while he's still interiorized. You process him very far with SOP 8-C interior, he'll get into trouble; because all you're operating with there is a beast — the body.

Gee, the only thing to be afraid of — if there is anything to be afraid of — is to step back from one's own state of beingness as one has announced it; because one goes into an immediate smaller operating area. That's dangerous — -to take on less space because some space proves dangerous.

And you go get this thetan to restimulate all these pugnacious ideas in this body, and this body has about the same right to try to be dangerous to a mest environment as a match has in putting out a fire. It just won't work.

Now, stepping out from this, which would be more or less the state of Theta Clear, stepping out from this, a person can broaden — because of having looked into things, and knowing the state of things — he can actually broaden his activity. He can broaden his operation, you might say, in existence. He is only then able to. You take away the fear and you take away the smallness of a man.

The body — you take it down into the earth a mile and a half, and it's too hot. You take it up into the sky at twenty-five thousand feet or something like that, and it's pretty hard to breathe. And you take it down five miles, and you take it up eight miles, it's dead. Just can't tolerate it. It has to have one atmosphere of pressure — fifteen pounds per square inch. It's one of these more delicate machines.

Now, when an individual is exteriorized — it's done well, he's drilled well SOP 8-C, you're not asking him to learn a thing. You're really not asking him to unlearn anything, but just insidiously, it happens that he does. Several tons of overburden can go crashing down the mountainside without his noticing it. And he really won't call a halt until he's been put pretty well on his way. And then he'll start calling a halt on throwing all this stuff away because he hasn't been given the opportunity to make anything. Creativeness then has suffered to some degree. Well, that's the difference between SOP 8-O and SOP 8-C.

Probably any Swiss watch, in essence, is less delicately built than a body. One of these shockproof watches they're turning out over in Switzerland now — it'll stand more than a body will.

So, you're trying to unburden a preclear — man and his burdens. For the first time we're doing it without somebody taking on additional burdens himself. Man used to have ideas of doing this whereby he sort of handed the burdens around — that's faith healing, for instance, is an example of this. You take the pain from the person. You'll find preclears who have done this, and that's real dynamite because they've chosen pain for their randomity. And of course this makes every pain their enemy, and they wind up almost in terror of anything vaguely resembling a sensation. That's death. That's a thetan dead, if you please, if he — when he's in terror of the sensation. All right.

So we have to recall this fact that we mustn't as auditors get completely sold on this, because we're selling our preclear on a frailty when we're heading him in toward the body. We continue to sell him on this frailty called a body and this idiocy called the human mind and we will get up to this point where he's dangerous to his environment. He's dangerous to some people — a few people in his environment, then we think we've done a good job, see? Next time he sees a doctor, he'll snarl at him. You know, big gain. Next time he sees a traffic cop, he'll tear up the ticket and throw it in the traffic cop's face.

How could you err in processing a preclear? The first way would be not to give some attention to the immediate problems of the preclear and to override them. Now, I have done this as a test. I have had a preclear suddenly offer, quite emotionally, some tremendously pressing problem. And he just kept harping on it, he kept talking about it, and I have ignored it. And I have not seen the case improve.

He'll recognize somewhere up the line — not "well, this filthy thing called a body" or "what am I doing with this thing called a body" or something like that — he'll come past that point of recognition, but he'll come up to a higher point of recognition, way up from there. And that is, "Well, bodies, mock-ups — well, they exist."

He's trying to say, "Look, here's something bigger than I can handle and you're here too, and so maybe the two of us can handle it." And that's what all of his jabber and yap is about. "I've uncorked this thing, and it's a real beast," he's saying. "To me it's a big beast and the two of us might be able to rope and hogtie it, but I certainly can't by myself."

Now, recognition and acceptance of existence, then, is your main goal. If you can get somebody up there, he'll go on the rest of the way up. So above this level of dangerous to the environment, we get recognition of existence, acceptance of existence. Now, people can accept existence way down there at the bottom where the environment is terribly dangerous to them. They accept this existence. They sure do. Existence says, "You'd better!"

And if you don't handle it as an auditor, either by handling it as an automaticity, which is possible, you see, and handling it in other fashions — but if you don't handle it as an auditor, the boy has a tendency to go into a bit of a decline. Because you have failed the person as an auditor. Why? They said, "Now here's the two of us together and the two of us can rope this beast." But it didn't look like a beast to you — didn't even vaguely resemble a beast, it just looked like a whipping, looked like a whole lot of whippings, something of the sort. And you say, "That's nonsense, these techniques handle more broadly than that."

But way up, the fellow just whhoomm, complete relaxation about it. I mean, other people can live, other people have a right to live, he has a right to live. There are mock-ups, and you can do things with them. You can have fun with them. You can get things into motion. You can see things come about and develop and materialize and so forth. You can startle people sometimes and you can surprise thetans, and you can do all sorts of weird things. But actually the most fun is at a relatively non effort, unserious level.

Well, you can avoid it and ignore it the first time it — but if the preclear keeps it up any length of time, believe me you better get in there with a lariat and corral it. You've got too many ways of corralling it to ignore it. Match-terminal it if you can't do anything else.

Every once in a while somebody says to me, "Well, you've got all these Operating Thetans going now — now, why don't you do something about the political situation between Washington and Russia?"

You must always, in handling any process, even if it is a rote process which is down the line perfectly, do that process with intelligence and do it on the preclear, not into an empty space. Because the preclear is a live space-energy production unit and is in a rather delicate state of mind early in his processing. Because he is sure that everything is going to betray him, and he came to you with complete confidence and then he handed up this time when he lost his pup, and he mentioned it five times and you didn't do a thing about it — you've betrayed him. Now he knows, completely and utterly, that no auditor can be trusted.

And you say, "Well, you ever meet any of these boys?"

Another thing — couple of cases here could easily have been bettered with a very, very small amount of common sense. Very small amount. You say, "Look, this case isn't progressing. I've processed this case for half an hour — isn't progressing." You know you should regard that as cataclysmic. Let's just change our sights on this thing and process the case for a half an hour, and no communication change and no apparent betterment in the case and no better exteriorization and no better perception — cataclysmic. Not just "isn't that strange" — ah, that's cataclysmic. I mean, it's just terrific! I mean, it's awful! I mean, that's just something you just couldn't stand. That's a thousand pairs of fingernails on the blackboard all going down simultaneously. See, that's real bad. And for anybody to sit there, you know, and go on into the next half an hour without something happening is real strange. That's peculiar.

"Well no, I never had much of a chance to talk to them."

If you get yourself gauged up to be able to — you say, "Someday I will be able to make a Theta Clear in an hour — total, you know — good perception and so forth, in an hour," why, you've condensed your sights down just a little bit more than they will stand. I mean, that's just a little too short, see? But if you were to pull them down in that direction instead of up into hundreds of hours, where I'm sure one or two has them at the present moment, why, you have a big difference.

"Well, what is it you said you wanted straightened out?"

Now, here's our problem. All the technology which we've had to date has validity. These states of mind, and this phenomenon has not altered or varied simply because we have better processes to handle it. And what you're sitting there with is rich in processes; and just because you're rich in processes didn't make the mind poor in phenomena. There was no distribution of wealth took place. The mind is just as rich as it ever was in peculiar phenomena. And it's not very peculiar now. Book One tells you what symbols will do, it'll tell you what language will do and what engrams of pain and unconsciousness will do; that — they still do those same things.

"Well, I — Russia, you know, and the United States and the 'I Will Arise Society' and other randomity, other randomity, terribly serious, terribly serious. Why doesn't somebody remedy this if you people are so good?" and so forth.

Now, Science of Survival talks about cases that are "too heavy" to be run by heavy techniques, and that still exists. Well now, just because you can handle all these symbols easily, and just because you can handle a heavy case and so forth easily is no reason why you suddenly say, "Well, there are no such cases." They are. They exist. No reason for you to validate their difficulty just by making it more difficult for them, because you can handle it easily. But remember, you can handle it. The techniques of SOP 8-C will handle all of those problems.

You say, "Did you — have you ever talked to one of these boys? Well, I invite you to sometime." Because you get up toward full responsibility and you don't happen to be excepting out somebody's tribal randomities.

Now, there are other problems. There's the overt act- motivator sequence. I'll give you a fast way to handle the overt act-motivator sequence, very fast way to handle it — move it around as a postulate. What's the best postulate that fits it? Consequences. The consequences of an action is another action. That's the overt act — motivator sequence boiled down to its most significant estimate.

You know, they don't do it on this basis, but I point out that the very famous explorer by the name of Cook — the early Cook — got himself into a fabulous state. He interfered between a couple of tribes and they took him apart. You know, you can't tell what beasts are going to do.

So if you just put "consequences" around or "consequences if" around and handled it as a postulate all over the place, why, the fellow would — all of a sudden would completely shake free of the fact that, "Well, let's see, if I tip my hat, she might not understand . . ." You get what's falling apart there? He's going back to facsimiles whereby if he ate somebody, why, their relatives are liable to eat him. Gets real heavy, you see, back on the track, and it's called out in this — in these little, minor social ways.

If you're going to go out and run with tigers, why — if you're going to go out and run with dogs or something of the sort, why, they expect you to make up your mind about what side you're on, you know. Which pack do you belong to? And they're liable to bite at you.

Overt act-motivator mechanism. "Well, he deserved it" — how often you hear this in society: "He deserved it," and so on. It's consequences. Deserving something — consequences. "The consequences of his action are . . ." Now, you should recognize this sort of thing.

Now, if you're in a condition of beingness where you don't happen to have to be bitten just because somebody wants to bite you, you certainly don't have to go to all the trouble of accepting these tribal randomities.

Now, true, if everybody is in agreement with everybody else, then people must have mechanisms to be in agreement with other people. Now, some people you run into will have very peculiar cases. They'll look very peculiar to you, simply because the mechanisms they're using are not in agreement with the mechanisms which you're accustomed to see in the same tribe. Such as the tribe of New York.

You get some Operating Thetan — he's going to go over and straighten out Russia. He gets — wakes up in the morning, he's kind of down Tone Scale, and he hears something over the radio, and so he's going to do this, you see. And he — next thing you know, why, you meet him again, you say, "Hey, what did you do?"

Now, if this isn't done ... I mean, this person — he sees a woman is trampled on in a subway or something of the sort and he goes over and picks her up, and you look at him strangely, wondering why he's doing that. Nobody in New York would ever pick her up. See, it's not a tribal custom. And you might process madly on this, thinking there was something horribly wrong with this fellow, when all it was, is it happened to be a custom of where he came from — advertisedly, Texas. And so these differences of custom very often will appear to you as major aberration when they're not.

"Say," he says, "you know, there's the strangest thing over there in the Kremlin."

No, the only thing that's an aberration is what's oppressing him, and that he's helping oppress him. That's a major aberration. It's not that he's doing something peculiar, there's something oppressing him. Now, you better find out what's oppressing him if this case isn't making any progress. You know, just look over at him and say to him, "What exactly is oppressing you?" you know — you know, not even confidentially. You give him a chance to talk.

And you say, "What?"

And you know practically no auditor I ever ran into ever gave the preclear a chance to utter an opinion? Preclear never had an opinion. Early auditors in training way back, they ordinarily and routinely talked too much and let the preclear talk too little. Routine. See, and that was the routine criticism that was just auditor after auditor after auditor after auditor, the reason for failure, reason for failure, reason for failure, reason for failure — he talked too much, the preclear talked too little.

And, "You know, there's a place there where one of those czars must have hung an awful lot of women. I straightened some of them up. They were still hanging around this room."

But now we're not talking about uttering phrases, we're talking about letting the preclear express something. You're trying to increase somebody's self-expression — well, please don't be shocked when somebody starts to express; because he will as an immediate result of your auditing.

And, "What'd you do then?"

Now, there's such a thing as somebody expressing compulsively or continu­ously in such a way as to completely interfere with what you're trying to do. All he's doing is fighting a duel with you, but you can recognize this. There is that long-suffering preclear who will only offer the objection once, in the mildest and most covert possible manner, and who afterwards will never utter it again — he will simply sink into apathy. He said it rather pathetically once, "I have a slight feeling in my shoulder." That's all he's going to offer you on the subject. There's a burning pain in his shoulder and it's been continuing now without anything happening to it for fifteen minutes. And he — it finally prods him, practically as a hot iron, up to a point of saying something about it. And he does, and all he says about it is, "I have a slight pain in my shoulder."

"Well, there's this village and they were having this big — big festival of some kind or another and I sat up on the steeple and watched for a while. And there was this young fellow and he wanted to get married to this girl and so he did. Huh!"

And you as an auditor don't take your cue and you don't do anything about it, and after that he's lost all confidence in you. He sinks into apathy, you don't have his interests at heart — that's the end of it. And you're going to have to work like mad to get this man to do anything after that. But he's liable to sit there and say, yes he's doing it, yes he's doing it, yes he's doing it.

You say, "Now — now what — what about Stalin?" Now, this is what we wanted — this was what we used to get into: "What about Stalin?" — before somebody got ambitious and bumped him off. Somebody didn't exceed these — I mean, he didn't get high enough Tone Scale evidently. Stalin, if you recall — remember, died with a — he died from what they call a stroke. And the way you do a stroke is you just electronically short out a guy's head. That's a stroke. Anyway . . . They don't get serious about these things.

I had a very promising young auditor one time — oh, he was a very, very fine young fellow. He looked good, he sounded good and the only trouble was he just didn't have good sense. A rather routine 1.1 case was picked up by this boy, we were going to keep him around and so forth and not turn him out to grass because he — a lot of promise in that boy. And we gave him this case, and we told him to do something about this case; and you know what he did? He sat there for five days and let the case tell him he was running one thing while the case was running something else. And the case was using that period on the couch simply to run something else.

You — somebody's going to go down to straighten out Washington, you see. And he goes down to Washington and he sits around and he listens to some of this, and he looks it over and so forth, and next time you see him he's laughing like mad. You know, he's just terribly amused. You just can't get these fellows serious.

And if you're having very much trouble with a case which is apparently running all right but no communication changes are happening on it, you know what's happening? The preclear isn't running what you say so, or the preclear is running nothing, but is just sitting there with perfect contentment saying, "Yep. Mm-hm."

This that we're doing is no — has no military use. It really doesn't. If you had a pilot that you brought up to Operating Thetan — good jet pilot, and you brought him up to an Operating Thetan — he would do the practical thing, one or the other. He would do the practical thing. If his emotions were involved with other pilots, he would simply keep enemy planes on the ground, see? It just — it would be no point, you see, in going through all this. Or he might just like the motion of it. And he would be rather puzzled as to why somebody was trying to cut down air fights.

And you'd be surprised how often this happens. And this boy never detected it. This promising young auditor was immediately unpromising. We put him down as having the — not even a foggy insight into anything. Because this preclear was obviously doing something else. He was getting somatics on other things. He was running when he was not supposed to be running, he was not — all you had to do was look at him and watch him twitch in the wrong places at the wrong moments and realize he was doing something else — you didn't need an E-Meter to tell you this.

"Well, there's nothing wrong with an air fight. What's wrong with an air fight?"

But if a preclear isn't making any progress with me after a very short time, if I don't happen to be in a mood to take much looks that day, I go and get an E-Meter. Not as a criticism of him, I just go and get an E-Meter and say, "We will now proceed." And if that needle isn't moving somewhat, somehow, when I tell him to do things, I find something that'll make the needle move. I'm good at that. You better get good at it. I can always produce an effect upon a preclear. I can blow them out of the chair if nothing else happens.

"Well," you say, "men get killed."

One preclear was not convinced that anything would ever be done to him, would ever produce any effect upon him, and he kept along in this delusion for an hour and ten minutes. And at the end of that time, I gave him a command which is a rather sharp command anyway — I mean a rather result-producing command — and told him to run it. And he didn't know whether he was running it or not and he says, "Well, you didn't — quite sure how you ran that." And, "Ha-ha!" he ...

And he'd think this over for a while, and he'd say, "Yes, that's true. That's true. I guess that's right, yeah. But what's wrong with an air fight?"

I said, "Well get the thought of it. Now get the thought of it clearly," and then zapped him in the right temple.

See, this has no point. It's just as hard to convince somebody who's gone up Tone Scale that all of these "solutions" how to stop people from punishing you are valid. Because he knows they're not valid. There's no validity to such a solution.

He says, "It produced a somatic."

Fellow says, "I'm dead. I'm dead. I've been dead for years."

I said, "You're absolutely right. So now let's get going."

And some other down — body down in the insane asylum says, "I'm insane, I'm goofy. I don't know what's happening to me. Go ahead and shock me. Cut out my brains," and all this sort of thing going on. And those are just solutions. These people . . .

Isn't that mean? (audience laughter)

And a guy gets up Tone Scale, he looks at this and he says, "Isn't that silly?" He doesn't say, "These poor people, maybe I am one of them."

This was a very far-gone case, by the way. He didn't think anything could give him any kind of sensation, that was what was wrong with him, so he wasn't going to even try — really floppy. But you take a few bolts and shove them at some­body suddenly and out of the blue, and as an immediate result of something . .. Now, I shouldn't tell you something like that because you don't need anything to boost you along occasionally. But I sure got him interested. It focused his attention.

He runs out of his likening himself to everything and every being that he meets. He has achieved an individuality. And therefore, if he's run out of this supersympathy, why, he's probably gotten into some bracket that occasionally will be compassionate. But that's an entirely different thing than "sympathetic." Compassionate — "Well, it's too bad these people are in all this trouble. Have another cup of tea." That's compassion.

Now, he ran that experimentally a couple of more times and naturally it did the same thing. Why? It made a little engram. And he thought that was real peculiar, and he got real interested in his own phenomena from then on. And he went right on along, we cleared him, exteriorized him, got him so he was in good shape. That was all he needed.

Being very serious about cleaning up the affairs of the world and the affairs of the mest universe, I have learned, exceeds the powers of an Operating Thetan.

Well, I don't ask you to do that. Nor do I ask you to connect your E-Meter cans to the electric light plug. This is not effective — often cruel. But it will produce an effect! (audience laughter)

It doesn't exceed the powers of man, Homo sapiens — no, he's got to get in there and kill somebody. But — it certainly does. It's very remarkable.

Of course, that's pretty wild stuff. In all the preclears I've ever audited, that's the only one I ever zapped. I've sure felt like it a few times though. But mainly on the basis of somebody telling me that he was doing something when he wasn't doing it. Now you shouldn't form a harsh or critical opinion of your preclear merely because he isn't doing it, you should use it as diagnostic material.

Now, this is a difficult state, maybe, to wrap your mind around if you're all bogged down in the superseriousness of things. But you can get a whiff of it the first time that you exteriorize with some degree of certainty and say, "Huh? A body?" You know, a surprising thing — "I'm not a body." Well, it goes on from any surprise about being a body to "Gee, I hope I won't get bored." And it goes on up to "Well, I can always seek confidence in furnishing randomity. I can always furnish enough randomity for myself. I won't get bored."

Then we get the other kind of preclear. He doesn't do something else, he does something quite opposite. He's done all you're trying to get him to do. That's always a sticker — he's done it all. His trouble is he is running a "got to maintain." He has to maintain. He feels desperate about maintaining a level of knowingness and superiority. And he has to — he's having a rough time when he's doing that. So you handle that by getting him to push these postulates around.

And certainly one doesn't "mess in" — and just because one is actually capable of destroying something, does not mean that one destroys it.

But you should be able to look at somebody and think. Not just look. There's something else beside looking, there's such a thing as looking and knowing, rather looking and figuring. You see what would be different about looking and knowing, and looking and figuring. You can figure-figure-figure-figure-figure. You don't have to figure a preclear — look at his behavior and then know what he's doing.

But here's an odd thing: The manager of a business who is afraid to hurt his employees — very afraid of hurting his employees — will eventually do them the most harm. And one who is simply afraid of his employees succeeds a little bit better, but succeeds in doing them considerable harm. And one who really knows what he's doing doesn't worry too much about the employees — he isn't afraid of them or otherwise — because he knows he can right, one way or another, almost anything they do. So he doesn't set himself up as a police force over the employees. But the bulk of them, all they had to do is saw a little wood, and they don't get hurt. They don't get hurt. In the first place, they don't get hurt by sudden failure of the business. They don't get hurt by sudden injustices coming up.

If you just run yourself for a little while on looking at a preclear and then sitting back and knowing, it'd surprise you the next time you started to audit a preclear to all of a sudden know what he was doing. That's what we call insight.

There's somebody will listen to reason. Somebody will change his mind about what he decided. You know, it isn't "all got to be fixed at 1.5." That's a big difference. So you take — the person who scatters the most agony around him is the weakest person. It's the weak person who causes trouble.

Now, if any case is hung up, it's probably because of some perfectly easy thing. Just stuck on the track. Where? Well, of course, the closest thing to home would be stuck on the track by auditing, wouldn't it?

The — fictionized America is sold on the plot of "the girl is right." For instance, I saw a — Frederick Hazlitt Brennan wrote a play, Arizona. They — I don't know why they called it Devil's Canyon, it wasn't. It was the story of the first penitentiary and the first woman convict put in the penitentiary in Arizona. And she was a robber.

Well, I started a preclear going the other day — one of this group — because this case has been stuck on the track by some auditing. How do you remedy such a thing? Got lots of ways to remedy it. But this person had been audited by people in this class several times without any result. And the clue to the thing was, the preclear knew exactly what it was — she was stuck in an auditing session.

And they got this all involved one way or the other . . . (Easy to see lots of movies, you know — all you have to do is go down to Hollywood and fly through the cans.) And this one was remarkable, because this girl is the one who actually instigated the rebellion in the prison, was to a large degree the cause of the complete upset and decline of the villain, was a traitor for having anything to do with the hero — to anything that she represented — and was then pardoned by the state.

And so what did we do about the preclear? We just chased this preclear around the various rooms in which the preclear had been audited. She wasn't even well exteriorized, that just didn't matter two nickels' worth at all. Just chased her around these auditing rooms. "Just get the idea of being in room — now we'll number them, one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight — all the rooms in which you were audited." And first you only had about three or four auditing rooms, and then we only had — then we had some more, and then we started to spot up other things in the places where she was stuck. Well, we never talked about it, we just chased her around these auditing rooms until the auditing on the case was sprung. That was the case entrance. And that's possibly the case entrance on several people here.

And she did, evidently, everything wrong, you see — but in a very sweet way. If she'd never gotten messed up in this thing, they wouldn't have had any story at all because it all would have run off like clockwork, you see.

Now, you've got Change of Space Processing. You have Creative Processing. You have all kinds of processes. It doesn't mean that just because we're using hot, fast processes, we've all of a sudden just lost all the processes we have and nor does it mean that the mind is suddenly released and all the phenomena that can happen to it. These things haven't ceased. You're still auditing this person.

But in fictionized America, they have assigned this tremendous value to weak flabbiness in fiction. But they have, fortunately, carried on a tradition of "only the strong could afford to be just." And that's very true.

Now, we've got hot processes which, if followed out well, will wind up with a goal. It's definite; very good, too. Let's treat it that way, however — that you're auditing to produce a betterment in terms of freedom from knowing so well that one is going to be betrayed, done in, et up, chewed up. You're trying to get somebody over "it must never happen again," consequences of his own action, consequences of his own lookingness. These are the things you're trying to do. They're just the fundamental things which I've been covering with you here in these lectures. That's all. Those are your goals. All right.

Now, an auditor finds himself asking — if he suddenly recognizes the techniques he is using are going to produce an individual freer than himself, if he isn't up scale himself, he's liable to ask himself the sudden, fast question: "Do I want to?" Now, he doesn't ask it behind his hand, he doesn't ask it quietly, he asks it right out loud. And he'll ask himself that question: "Do I want to set another thetan free?" He'll — very often will come up against that one unless his own state of case is in good shape.

How many ways could you do it? Well, let's take "it must never happen again." The crudest and most horrible way to do it would be to match-terminal it. Anybody who would match-terminal this on a preclear would beat a dog — without cause. Because that's real brutality. Because that's the postulate which exists with heavy effort in every heavy facsimile the preclear has: "It must never happen again." He has every motion which was going to threaten him stuck on this postulate. But you could handle it as a postulate. You could shift it around as a postulate — "must never happen again."

It's an important point, if you're ever training auditors. You'll be able to spot what auditors are going to do a job and what auditors aren't. Just by that — are they willing to set people free?

Now, you'll find out that all kinds of things would start falling off the case that must never happen again. Even auditing would. But a problem, very often, at which a preclear cannot look, must be handled as an individual problem. As long as it doesn't take too much of your time.

Well, now, in SOP 8-C we have come about as close to the inevitable on this as possible. You just go ahead and use it and it will happen. It's very hard to wreck this technique — very, very hard to. Because it'll remedy faster than it'll wreck. And that was the balance that I was trying to achieve on it.

Now, if handling a problem for ten minutes doesn't produce a change in it, by any of the more modern techniques, you're using the wrong approach, and you should simply shift what you are doing to something else if you don't change this thing in ten minutes.

And I don't mean by that that all auditors are upset particularly about this. But I can tell you that an auditor can be upset about it. He can be. But if he is in — up there toward Operating Thetan you probably have some sort of a situation developing where he doesn't worry about it. And you get him too high, he doesn't audit, either.

The other thing is, is you very often beat a problem to death that should never have been fooled with. You take some foolish problem — you make up your mind that this person is this way because of a terrific affinity with Rover. So you just start beating Rover to death. Well, of course, the funny part of it is, if somebody put you on an E-Meter, why, "dog" would probably fall fifteen dials. Because this is the effort the auditor makes to duplicate, you see. He's got to duplicate. So some poor preclear sits there and beats Rover to death.

There's various things which you can do, and various things which you can't do. Somebody told me recently that three auditors over in England had been sitting around spotting each other's ridges and then cleaning them up. Well, that's very fine. What's wrong with this? Only that when you start cleaning up somebody's ridges for him, you're upsetting his self-determinism, you're putting your paws on his havingness and you're generally pushing him around like mad.

Now, this becomes very, very sad, but it's only sad in terms of lost time in auditing. If I don't see a communication change in a half an hour which is quite marked, I don't pursue the course of auditing which I am pursuing. I start digging. Well, I start digging by finding out "what does this preclear have to unlearn?" Generally, it's — this preclear has to unlearn that women are voracious, horrible, dangerous and terribly necessary. Now, that's what this person has to — that his whole life is completely oppressed on the subject of women.

Now, there is no trick at all to reaching into somebody's head and bapping him out of it. Very long ago I knocked a guy about three hundred yards — by accident. I mean, it wasn't completely accident, but I didn't think he'd go that far. (audience laughter) And he was in a terribly discombobulated state for some little time. Some little while, he was — upset him.

Or she's got to unlearn the fact that Papa is the worst beast of all. You know, we find out which — this person can't mock up Papa, can't do anything about Papa. Has complete, good mock-ups, you processed her for a half an hour, nothing happened and you didn't handle anything like that. You start looking around and all of a sudden here's Papa. She can't mock up Papa, she can't do anything about Papa, she puts up any idea about Papa and it flies off to the moon. Well, let's just start in with gradient scales or anything else we can start in on. Gradient mock-up building is awfully interesting in this line. Build them up shoe by shoe and various ways, but let's get her to handle this problem. Let's get her over this idea of Papa.

And anybody whose ridges have been straightened out by somebody else and anybody who's been exteriorized in this fashion — nah, doesn't last, and doesn't do them any good. Because it doesn't increase their self-determinism.

Well, there's various — thousands of ways you can do it. There are ways to handle Papa and so on. Well, I don't expect you to know all these ways, but you've got ways in SOP 8-C which will handle Papa. "Where isn't Papa?" And you've, right there, started handling him. You say, "He isn't — let's see, he's not — not on Mars." Well, this is a good clue. Must be in the room. Here we start, see? You've got dozens of ways to handle this, but it's a specific problem.

So we get the essence of SOP 8-C, which is restore the self-determinism of the individual by demonstrating to him that he can handle his own problems. This tells you, then, that there is some stage along this line where you do an "exit auditor," and we put that stage at Theta Clear. And we make sure it happens by SOP 8-0, which is Operating Thetan. And we just clean up anything like "auditors" on the fellow, because this is an oppressive point.

And please don't leave anybody hung up on lots of past auditing and so forth. They've been waiting for an effect from auditing and they've been doing this and that from auditing and they may be stuck one way or the other on the subject of auditing until one just can't have any peace about it.

Now, in the use of this, then, I've been trying to show you you're trying to overcome the fear of punishment on the part of the preclear and you will put him up through various stages such as "dangerous to his environment" and "superambitious to straighten out everything."

As far as exteriorization itself is concerned, if you start to experience a vast difficulty with exteriorization — we go over this again — this person knows he can't exteriorize safely. He just knows he can't be out of his body. Let's just get over this idea of "he is in his body because he is stuck there and can't get out." That is not true.

By the way, at the time he's superambitious to straighten out everything, it's quite amusing — he isn't able to. He doesn't have enough soup yet. And he will be the most confused person you ever saw. He'll go over and give a speech someplace or he'll try to monitor somebody into some kind of an action somewhere, and he just does not have enough certainty or positiveness to accomplish this action, and he will fail. And then he'll read avidly in the papers to see whether or not it happened, and he won't find any trace of it in the papers.

He is in this body because he has to be behind a barricade and inside a thing in order to control that thing — and that is true. You see that? He's got to be in there, protected on all sides. He has to have it. It's terribly necessary that he have a body. It's a barricade, its eyes are invisible barriers, it's — all kinds of things there he's got to have about a body. You don't have to pick up many of these things and solve them. But at least solve something like the invisible barrier and so on.

He probably set up some kind of a ridge or something and did something, and it's very upsetting to him. And he'll pitch flat on his face and you'll have to pick him up again. Because almost everybody does this — they feel big and powerful all of a sudden and real ambitious and they're going to do something terrific, and they go over and run a mock-up of a mock-up of a mock-up for a couple of minutes or something like that, and they feel they've done it and then there's no evidence that they did and this invalidates them like mad and here they go.

You can exteriorize almost anybody on effort, if you try. "Find four points of efforts in the body. Now find four where there are no points of effort. Now find four . . ." And next thing you know, just tell him to step out and put his hands on his shoulders. Effort is what's wrong with this case. But he won't do it very happily and he'll go back in in a hurry if you haven't handled some of the reasons why he can't get out of a body, believe me.

So the auditor must be prepared, as he pushes somebody up the line here, first to take on a great deal of responsibility for his case and then to expect the case to nose-dive and to pick it up, and the case to nose-dive and to pick it up. Because it will several times, probably, before it gets up to any degree of stability.

So exteriorization is a somewhat specialized problem. But you better work right straight along with it. SOP 8-C will do a pretty good job on exteri­orization, but it won't exteriorize if it doesn't hit the answer why the person isn't exteriorizing.

After you've audited somebody, and you see them staggering around or something, you ought to get hold of them and do something about it. You know, in spite of the fact that it's not a scheduled session or something of the sort, you just shouldn't leave a guy in agony because the next session is such and such a time. That's because it's very easy at this time to do something about it.

Now, here you have in those first three steps — just reason after reason after reason can be laid open there why a person isn't exteriorizing. And you have other techniques down in the last four steps. These four steps — last four steps shouldn't just be run as a gunshot, but you have all kinds of techniques down there to remedy the reason why. You've got all kinds of them. I mean, there's just technique after technique in — contained inherently in the last four steps, which can be run on somebody who is still inside, just enough to boost him out.

Now, let's take somebody — let's E-Meter somebody and find out why his case isn't progressing, and all of a sudden we go over these various factors which I gave you earlier in the lecture that we're hitting, such as insanity, and fear of punishment in various forms and so forth, and we hit one of these things and the E-Meter goes clong!

It's not much of a trick to get somebody out of his body, you just have to disabuse him of the fact that he has to have one. And that's uneducating him and it doesn't take long to do it.

Well, match-terminal it for a while. That's an easy way to handle it. And then move the postulate around — postulates related to it — and he'll come right out of it. Now, he'll come out of it with the moving the postulates around; you can match-terminal it just long enough so that it doesn't appear to him to be a complete live wire which is about to explode if he touches it. And you'll find people have been sitting around worrying about going mad and people worrying about what would happen to them if society suddenly found out that their practice of yogi-ism was such and such and — it's weird. I mean, what men will design for themselves as traps for their own dolorousness is wonderful.

Now, the anchor points of the body can be disarranged to a point to make him — make it difficult for him to get out and get in. That is a mechanical reason. But that's a mechanical reason, and the others are mechanical reasons too. If they weren't backed up by his own self-determinism, they wouldn't have any validity at all, those mechanical reasons. He is determined to stay in a body. This is what you can immediately judge from it. And his determinations must take a certain form. Some thought must occur to him every time he tries to exteriorize.

Now, you'll find that this — one of these things is responsible for it. There's this that you must remember about a preclear, is that he is a different combination than any other preclear, but you're no longer trying to crack a safe. This will just take him right on out of it. You don't have to particularly crack the combination.

Well, there's one way to do that, is just send — have him get a picture of himself exteriorized, way back of himself someplace, see, and have him do that several times. And he'll tell you what he doesn't like about it. Now, you can handle that by waving it around as a postulate, just move it around as a postulate. You can also handle it, if a certain frantic or fixed feeling comes over him or something every time — he's just stopped, see?

Now, although every preclear is intensely individual and is entirely different than every other preclear that you will ever encounter, that doesn't mean that you have to vary SOP 8-C all over the place. It does mean that you will have to stress some part of it more than another.

Every time he — you say, "Be three feet back of you head."

Now, when you find yourself unwilling to process a preclear up above a certain state, do something about it yourself, because you have struck the "no-freedom" button. Now, there's one technique here that can be just self-audited till the end of time, and that's moving postulates around.

And he says, "Every time you say that I just get stopped."

Now, you must have some postulate kicking around about freedom. If you just put up something that was a postulate about freedom, see, and move it from the table to the couch and up on the roof and down in the basement and across the street and so forth, all of a sudden something would turn up. You could dredge it up. But normally it's not that inarticulate. It'll be something like, "I'm damned if I'll give a woman a break."

Why, you say, "Well, all right, put that stopped feeling in the ceiling. Now let's put it in the wall. Now let's put it over in another wall. And let's put it in another wall. And let's put it in the floor. And let's put it in the ceiling. And let's put it in the back wall. All right."

Yeah, like that. And you've just come up against it and you know exactly what the postulate is. You're processing somebody along and all of a sudden you say, "All right. Now get back in your head," or you have an impulse to say this suddenly. Or you get an impulse to give them some terrific command that they just — you know will make them lose all over the place and so on.

Now let's run, as a postulate, "I must leave" and "I must not leave," see?

There isn't any reason to be introspective and say, "Now, why did I did that? I wonder why I did that?"

"I must leave." Now we'll wave that all around as a postulate while he's still inside the body. We'll move it in various places of the room. We won't go very far, you see, and we won't mix him up in directions if he's still in the body because he's liable to get pretty confused.

No, no. Don't kid yourself. You know why you did that.

When he's in a body, don't mix anybody up on directions, because he's mixed up enough. And you get him out — "I must leave" and then you get that handled so that's no longer difficult to handle. And then you get "I must not leave" or "I must stay" or something like that, and get that handled.

You'll suddenly face the fact that maybe for three or four days, you have been building up an antagonism on some line or another that's enough to fry the lid off a frying pan. Or you've got an antagonism building up of some sort or another here toward something or somebody. Handle it by shifting it around as a postulate. Don't dramatize it. Because it's not that you shouldn't dramatize such a postulate or not that you shouldn't dramatize postulates, it's not that you shouldn't have freedom of some sort or another, but there's two kinds of freedom. And maybe I should have talked very straight from that title in this lecture.

And then the funniest part of it — the funny one to handle is, of course, handling stop by making it move. Preclear can get into more difficulties with this than anything else I've tried to run on somebody. Just for a few seconds they will be in bad trouble with this, trying to get this postulate "that he must stop." And then he'll start handling it very well. It's quite amusing to run into something like this.

There's two kinds of freedom. There is freedom to act on compulsion, obsession and inhibition. Now, that kind of freedom is attainable only within barbwire enclosures. That's what man normally calls freedom. Freedom to act freely on compulsions, obsessions and inhibitions. You will find base and lower orders of society insisting on this kind of freedom: "I love to shoot cops, and they won't let me shoot cops and therefore my freedom is being interfered with. I'm going to join the Communist Party." See? That's it.

What's his problem? He feels like he's stopped. So let's find out what he says his problem is. Let's at least find out what he says his problem is.

"Now, the management — the management's agin me and I've got an impulse to bust every machine in the place and they say they'll fire me the next machine I bust. Well, I insist on freedom." See, it's become very compulsive and obsessive.

Let's — now you do that and you say, "Let's mock — mock yourself up twenty-five feet back of your head. Now what occurs to you? Now mock yourself up again twenty-five feet back of your head."

Actually, war is an expression of this kind of freedom. War is a covert rationale by which men can murder other men without any liability to them­selves. See, because the men doing the murdering are sitting in swivel chairs. They're not sitting behind machine guns. The guy sitting behind the machine gun didn't ask to be there. I know — I've gone around and asked them. I said, "By the way . . ." That's all that's wrong with war. He didn't ask to be there — 'tisn't his fight.

And he — "Nuh-uh. Not for me," he says, "no, sir."

And you can say, "Oh yes, it is his fight. There's such a thing as national this and national that and national something else." There's a fellow invented nationalism a relatively short time ago, and it flared up in the day of Garibaldi. Nationalism — it was a new mania. It's a new thing. You'd be surprised that before that, they supported individuals.

And you say, "What's not for you?"

And then somebody made this astonishing discovery: If you could make a peasant cross-identify a flag and a piece of land — his land — and tell him he was fighting for his land and that his land was in danger, he'd go out and fight like hell.

"Well, I just wouldn't want — like to be up there, that's all. I might fall."

And then, of course, as soon as he got there he'd find out it wasn't his land he was fighting for, but that was beside the point. And that was the basic impulse behind nationalism — this great unity and so forth.

Good. You got it. "I might fall."

Only in the United States of America has nationalism actually amounted to anything rather than just pure murder. And here, why, you have forty-eight quite different states, who — which actually, any one of them, as big as a country of Europe — which are living in peace with one another. And that is a gain not so much of unit nationalism, as a gain of a highly generalized freedom on which forty-eight states are agreed.

Well, how many ways can you handle that? Well, one of the ways of handling it is making him — falling is a very rough problem to handle sometimes. But if you make things fall in reverse, you'll find out that every effort he's got ready to fly with, is reverse falling. Things will go from the ground into the sky at a terrific rate.

The day that it loses the perspective of forty-eight states — and I'm not talking like a secesh — the day that it loses the idea that it is forty-eight sovereign powers operating in unison, when it loses that completely, it will become a slavery.

I was showing the First Unit that one day and, my gosh, they had stuff flying and into the sky like mad. I mean it's just terrific volumes of stuff going up into the sky. Biggest piece of automaticity they'd ever seen. You just lay the heavy block of iron down on the floor or something like that, and it'll fall up to the ceiling on a person who's got falling in restimulation. Why? Because they regret having dropped. So they're trying to turn time backwards so, of course, everything falls backwards on them.

The biggest danger in the world is one of these superstates. And the federal government at this time is demonstrating every impulse in that direction — "we're a superstate." Because it gets to a point where all you can attack is a paper chain. And anytime the populace can't get their pitchforks into anything more alive than a paper chain, the government goes rotten.

But that is not the only way to handle that. End of Cycle: "Now have you mocked up as a thetan lying on the floor, completely smashed to pieces and dead." Do that a few times. It finishes a few falls for him. You know these unfinished falling dreams you used to have when you were a kid? Finish some of them for him. "Oh, you say you always got to the edge of the cliff and you jumped off the edge of the cliff and all the wolves were following after you, but you never reached the bottom. You always woke up before you reached the bottom." Just work with him on a gradient scale to make him hit bottom. And what do you know, all of those — all of those dreams will vanish. Just finish the end of cycle. Of course, he's never reached bottom in the facsimile.

See, it's just a basis of size. How big a state can man govern with his present systems? And it's about the size of a state of the United States, with smoothness and ease. Nearly every social function carried on in the United States is carried on by the city, the county and the state. It's not carried on by the federal government. And yet we hear more and more and more — the prettier buildings, the nicer post office and so forth.

Reaching bottom is in itself a fascinating problem in auditing, in terms of making somebody land. But the best way to do it is to have them landed and dead and run that for a while, and then fly them into the sky for a while, and you've handled the problem of falling. But if you just go on hammering them, pounding them and telling them to fall and trying to make a mock-up fall and the mock-up move down another inch and so forth, there's just screech, scree — you could just — you could smell those brakes smoke. Every . . .

That doesn't mean that one is agin the federal government, it's just a fact that the federal government, in these days of fast communication and transportation, will go up into a higher and higher form of a generality and because of its power, it will crush further and further down the sovereign powers of units of people, such as a city.

It's wonderful to behold a preclear trying to fall. They just don't do it, that's all. It's very, very quick if you just mock him up as smashed, throw that away, "Mock yourself up smashed again. Mock yourself up as smashed. Now mock yourself up as having fallen from an airplane 8,682 million miles above Earth" — smash. "Now mock yourself up as frozen to death and smashed, having fallen through all that space. Now mock your — mock up the whole bottom of the Grand Canyon in Colorado full of your bodies as a thetan." (This is a real good one, see, bodies as a thetan). "Just full of all of them, all smashed."

You see, the optimum form of government is not even a state government, it's a city government. But there is no way, really — that's but short one point — there's no way to prevent cities from going to war with each other unless you have a slightly higher power than the cities to monitor. Otherwise you run into anarchy.

"Now get the walls — get the Colorado River turning into blood clear on down into the Gulf of Mexico," you know. Build it up any way you want to build it up. Requires a little bit of fast thinking on your part.

And always somewhere along the line in a family, in a state of cities, in a nation of states, or in a world of nations, you're going to find somewhere along the line an anarchy. And the next move beyond that will be to prevent the anarchy.

You can get too entirely extraordinary on imagination on what you're trying to do in Creative Processing, but only if you've missed the point of what you're trying to do. You can't get incredible enough — you just can't get incredible enough — if you're still on the point: We're trying to keep him from falling.

In other words, anarchy is independent — this isn't the political definition of it, but it's conceived to be relatively obsessive action, you see, on the part of a number of units which are not controlled by a higher unit. So man's impulse is always to find a higher unit. And then the higher unit then absorbs all the lower units and it forgets about their independence and their freedom and then goes on up.

Now let's don't have him have dances with thetans and don't get non sequitur on the process. I've seen that happen — the only reason I would mention it. I had somebody eating black thetans one time — I mean, I was having this — I saw this auditor auditing and he had somebody eating black thetans. And this person, this poor preclear, was gorging more black thetans and more black thetans and more black thetans and more black thetans and finally, I nudged the auditor and I said, "What are you doing?"

So that we have nations in a state of anarchy; that gives us worlds — world wars. So the idea of that is a "united nations," and that would be a government all over the Earth of all nations. And you'd have the same thing as the forty-eight states being absorbed by the federal government, now you'd have the umpteen nations of Earth being absorbed by the "united nations." And each time you get a higher echelon, it gets further and further from competent to govern a people. It starts to be a paper chain — it starts to be very detached.

He said, "I don't know." (audience laughter)

So if you had some method of preventing this anarchy of states, short of a superstate, why, you could arrest the dwindling spiral.

He didn't, either. He hadn't established a problem the preclear had in order to resolve it.

Well, it could only be arrested by a better definition of the word freedom. What is freedom? And if superstates then held within that definition, they would have prosperous states within their boundaries.

Now, another thing is, is the preclear is nothing if not a problem. And you'll get the preclear who does nothing but offer you new problems. His level of acceptance is to be a problem. He could only get attention from his mother and father when he had a finger smashed or something wrong with his body physically. So you audit him for a while and you'll find he's starting to droop. You know what's wrong with him — there's nothing wrong with him at all except he's got to be a problem. He thinks that your acceptance level of him is one preclear ruined with a smashed thetan, and this is very upsetting. Now, he'll finish off sessions and so forth with you on a flip, see. He's got to be a problem. That's his acceptance level.

Freedom. The other definition of freedom would be freedom to play a game. Nothing more and nothing less.

How many thousand ways can you handle "I have to be a problem"? You just got lots of them. By the way, this is a very interesting fact that little kids in school quite ordinarily fail in arithmetic because they think of themselves as problems. I had a little girl who was failing in arithmetic one time, tell me, "I just don't know what's wrong. I don't know what's wrong."

Once upon a time, when it was fun to play the game of being a hussar, or fun to play the game of being a peasant, just the game of being a peasant: Go out and raise things — matter of fact, it's a wonderful lot of fun. You go out in the garden and fix things up and you have things nailed down pretty well, you don't have to go far, and things are self-sustaining.

And I said, "Well, what about — you having trouble with . . ."

Well, when one doesn't have a right to play a game, why, his freedom has been injured. If somebody makes it so that it isn't fun anymore, that is an incursion against freedom. See that? It's a pretty hard concept to get sometimes, but it's just about all the concept there is.

"Yeah. I have trouble with this problem and that problem and so forth."

And probably the only high-level crime is the death of laughter — to kill laughter. I don't mean mockery laughter. I mean just the death of fun. That's a big crime. That's big.

And I said, "What kind of a problem are you?"

You can run that on a pre-c and shed tears off of it. Because when it's no longer fun to be a peasant and when it's no longer fun to be a good officer, when it's no longer fun to be a good janitor, when one can't have his own pride and self-respect in what he's doing and so forth, his freedom has been entered upon more deeply than anyone has a right to enter upon freedom.

She thought for a moment and all of a sudden the lock blew almost visibly and she said, "Oh, you mean that kind of problem? Oh, I'm not that kind of a problem at all," and turned around and did all of her arithmetic correctly.

So, where are you trying to put your preclear under this definition of freedom? You're trying to get him out of a compulsive and obsessive dramatization of what he conceives to be "freedom," into the freedom to enjoy it.

Fastest session on record — two minutes of conversation.

It's quite marked. And when you've attained the upper goal, freedom to enjoy a game — not potentially enjoy a game, but he's freely enjoying a game — you have achieved a very high point on a case. And it's because of that freedom to enjoy a game, that you find your Operating Thetan is no menace. He's not a menace. As a matter of fact anything less than he is, is a menace.

So I'm asking you to look at your preclear and find out why he's not making progress, and if you've audited him without a perception change or if you've audited him for a little while and he's not exteriorized yet. I would say offhand when you get real good, that it shouldn't take you more than three or four minutes to exteriorize almost any preclear. That's when you get good.

The greatest menace a state can have is its most abject slave, not its most dangerous criminal. That slave, he is the menace.

Now, you just make up your mind you're going to be that good because you can't be a discredit to me. So just get that good, you understand? Otherwise we'll have no — I won't give you any orders, you're just as determined — you can just be as completely self-determined as you please, so long as you exteriorize preclears as well as I say you've got to.

And so we find that the preclear will go up through various stages of being upset with you, upset with the world, sometimes upset with me, certain that this and that and so on, and he's — quite often will kick back at you and tell you, "Well, it was a disappointing and horrible session," and so on. He'll complain to other auditors about you and that sort of thing.

Okay.

Well, if you're at a point where your own effort to give him freedom is compulsive, this will hurt you. And if you're just trying to pull him on up the line, your level of understanding is quite adequate to the situation. It becomes very amusing.

We haven't covered here, as I've gone into this, very much in the line of highly technical information. This all might be filed under the heading of opinion. But I have talked to you about it perhaps as a — one tries to give a — an orienting point toward which you can go with a little less grief than otherwise.

There isn't any reason why you have to learn with pain. That's completely idiotic. Anybody who assumes that men have — can only learn with pain, of course, is assuming that man is a stimulus-response mechanism. And man is not a stimulus-response mechanism, that's the best of him.

So when you deliver freedom into the hands of the preclear by the use of SOP 8-C, you've attempted something rather adventurous. And it's liable to upset you now and then. And the way for you to do it is to get over a level of being upset. Because it's actually a lot of fun watching somebody struggle up and struggle out of it. It's a lot of fun. It's quite amusing.

Oddly enough, the most powerful technique in here was one which I confess I didn't much care to give you — makes it too easy. You find over here terminals. Change of Space. That's terminals, period. Change of Space. Have pc shift and fix ideas between various points in various universes.

And then we have Step VI: symbolization, remedy of. And at Step VI we actually are doing the same thing we did at Step V with this single difference, is we use those things which are real big symbols to the preclear. And at Step VI when we handle these things, we're going to have to do it by a gradient scale. You are going to have to work on some preclear — preclear after preclear probably — will have to have symbols shifted on a gradient scale. So that's a word of caution with that step.

You ask him to put his name up and then move his name around from place to place, and you're going to find preclear after preclear who have just one hell of a time doing it. It's because it's too big and heavy a symbol. So you give him a light symbol. You just say, "Well, all right. Put the name 'Joe' in these various places."

"Well, I never knew anybody named 'Joe.' "

And you say, "That's all right, just put that name 'Joe' around these various places. Now, put your last name and your first name and so forth, those around." In other words, just take it easy.

Now, if you find out that he can't run just bluntly, bang, "waiting for effect" as a postulate all over the universe, why, just get him to get the postulates "dogs have effects." Or you get the postulate, "effects exist," and have him move that around. That's less heavy. And symbolization and the reason for and so forth, works out that way.

Now, anytime you have made a postulate that you're having trouble with since — and you occasionally will run into those that you have, you can just handle it in this fashion.

Now, I want to give you a very fast note on that. How long does it take to work out a postulate? Well, that varies with the preclear. But you shouldn't expect it to have the effect of blowing locks and steam and all sorts of things. They just sort of go away. And you can easily sit there for a half an hour and process a postulate which evaporated twenty-five minutes ago. You can easily do this. You can easily overprocess a postulate.

And it's no error. It doesn't upset the preclear to have them underprocessed, like an engram. It isn't very upsetting to have them underprocessed. Because that can be remedied with great speed.

Now, how do you process a postulate? Let me go into that once more because you will find preclears are uniformly going to make mistakes on how you do it. And you're going to uniformly have people put them too far.

You put the postulate up. How does he put it up? Well, he puts up the idea. Now he can put that up with words, he can put it up any way he wants to, he can put it up with forms, with effort — you don't care how he puts it up; you just say, "Now you put up the idea," in back of him. You keep most of the action in back of him, not in front of him. And you find him letting the action happen in front of him, skip it.

Now, you'll find out that he'll make mistakes no matter how carefully you explain it to him. You'll run into preclears making this mistake. So just keep checking with him as to what he's doing.

You'll say, "All right. Now move that postulate to Camden."

And he'll say, "Okay."

"Now move the postulate to New York City."

And he'll say, "Okay."

And after a while — you've processed this now for about five minutes, you see, and nothing's happened very much, you know? You — so you just keep on doing it, and you can see the strain on his face and you say, "What are you doing?" He's bringing a picture of Camden back of him, and then bringing a picture of New York back of him.

That won't do him any good. He's supposed to move the postulate — not make it appear and then disappear and then appear and disappear someplace else — he's supposed to move it. Just as though he put it in a truck — and some of them will do this — and freighted it to the other place. He's supposed to move the postulate. Because the postulate's been moving him around, you just reverse it.

Now do you run a bracket on this? No. You just have him move the postulate. He got himself into all this trouble with these postulates — it wasn't put in in a bracket.

Anytime anybody was able to force one on him, it's because he had a prior postulate — his own. So we have it moved from one point to another point. Moved.

And if he's substituting pictures for cities — that is to say, bringing in pictures of cities and all that sort of thing — you don't care whether he exteriorized or not while he's doing this, that's not important; but the point is, you're asking him to move it further than he can move it. So just designate three places in the room — all behind him — and have him move it to this place and to that place and so forth. It'll evaporate just as quick on a short reach as a long reach.

He hasn't lived from New York to Camden and in that total area simul­taneously for years — well, he lives in a room at a time or a car at a time or something like that, so pushing it around in small areas is very beneficial. And then later on as you process him, get him to reach further and further areas.

But take it easy, because it's a very, very, very powerful technique and it isn't going to do him any harm. And where you're going to err is you're going to try to beat them to death with an hour on one postulate. And you'll be processing it fifty-eight minutes after it evaporated. It evaporated two minutes after you started processing him.

And the errors he will make is then in — he'll have it in front of him and he — God — anytime God will give him two seconds of time, he will spend it on putting something in front of him, see? No, no. You want it in back of him. And you want it to shift in that fashion.

Okay.