Hiya.

And this is lecture 20A of the 20th ACC, August 8th, 1958. Now going to take up the rudiments of session. The rudiments of a session.

Somebody wants some information here on adjusting anchor points in the body. You got a long way to go before you get smooth enough to do that.

Now, the rudiments are something you get rid of and then you never pay any more attention to. That’s the usual definition, just as a TR is something that you never use again because you just found out that it’s not valid.

Adjusting body anchor points is a very interesting exercise, but you have to be a pretty smooth auditor in order to do it. Reality of pc has to be very high; doesn't do much good unless you do - unless it is.

If you understand cases and understand what makes them well, you won’t make flubs. But you can go off into a whole bunch of tearing nowheres, and I do mean a bunch of tearing nowheres, on the wild theory that you can do it all at once or something of this sort with a case. Now I’ll lay it right on the line. I’ve processed more cases, added up more cases, seen more cases processed, directed more techniques to be run than will probably ever be assembled again under one roof in the next God knows when. Now I make that very clear. I lay it right on the line, see? Now, these are the bones on which the visible flesh of Scientology exists, this fantastic amount of research, fantastic. Now, I’m not saying that I have run everything that you will ever think of. That is a very - would be a very stupid thing for me to say. I will say that in eight years I’ve run practically everything that has ever been suggested to me.

This is the twentieth lecture of the 20th ACC, August 8, 1958, and today we are going to take up a summary which simply adds up to a description by me of a session.

I think there was one new suggestion or two in the last year and they came from old-timers that had been in there for a long time, you know? And they got an idea about something or other and they wrote in this idea and this idea did shed some light on an obscure corner. Got the idea? They’d run into something, they thought this was pretty good and they sent it in.

Summary of what you do, how you do it, what you can do. And this is so far above what you can do right now that you're going to get lost right away. So stand by to get lost.

Well, I always tell everybody that they’d better send in anything they happen to run into, for the very reason that it’d be totally in- stupid of me to say that I had run into everything and worked with everything that could ever be worked with in the human mind. You see, that’d be a Freudian statement or something.

Tell you right at the beginning, you're right now at a point of auditing where you can learn something. And don't kid yourself, you're no further along than that - any of you.

I have had some humility of one kind or another along this line in that I was perfectly willing to admit at any given instant that I knew nothing about the whole subject. I was not trying to uphold my own integrity because that was not important to me. That was quite important, too. And I was not trying to sell anybody a process or sell anybody a theory just for the sake of selling one.

Given the ability to do all of the TRs perfectly, given the ability to do it - do them hour after hour, day after day, with complete perfection - you can relax. That's interesting; you can relax.

And people have watched this occasionally with considerable horror, you know? They saw me come off of running engrams and go into exteriorizing people. And then later on, why, they heard me say that exteriorizing people was for the birds. If you didn’t exteriorize them into a willingness to be exteriorized, you were nowhere and that frankly we didn’t have it made on making them willing to exteriorize, see? I’ve even sat down and said, „I’ve made four mistakes, you know? Here it is, you know? I’ve made these mistakes,“ and so on.

And the TRs form, simply, the woof and the warp, the solid foundation from which you audit. You no longer confront with or audit with the TRs. But anybody who knew his business, anybody who was an excellent auditor could sit there and look at you and recognize that every TR was present and functioning. But somebody who merely knew the

And the common denominator of anything I’ve done has been, I hope, honesty. And people, over a period of time, who could cheerfully have shot me in 1951 have turned around and come back and said, „Well, he seems to be the only one who knows where he’s going or what he’s doing.“ You know? Just because it was an honest line of research. Just totally honest, sincere - there isn’t any pitch to it.

TRs, who had just read them, would be unable to discern the presence of any of them.

Now, we are dealing with firm fundamentals, and therefore I ask each and every one of you to understand the firmness of these fundamentals. And I’ve had to whip up some of these fundamentals into an understandingly translatable form, into words, just for this ACC right here. So don’t think we are not still learning.

Now, that is a shattering blow after you've gone ahead and learned all of this and you're doing just fine. No, it's not at all. You've simply got one small toe on the bottom rung of the ladder of being able to play this piano called auditing.

But what we know, boy, do we know. We know we know it. You got it? What I’m about to give you as the requisites and fundamentals of a session, we know. Not, you adventure off these at your peril. I’m not telling you that at all. You want to waste your time, it’s okay with me.

The reason why you were grilled and grooved and hammered and pounded so hard into the TRs is they get an auditor over the idea of omitting or flinching from some portion of auditing and substituting for it yak and ineffectiveness. You understand that? Just ...

You start running conditions of one kind or another on a preclear and patching up this lifetime and so forth, you’ll wake up somewhere up the line in six months or a year and say, „Why am I not clearing anybody?“ You’re not running procedures exactly and instantly and immediately made and tailor-made to clear people. That’s why.

Going on and on and on and on and on about this, about that, and following down this line and that line and floundering around and going over the hills and far away, and getting lost in the green woods, and getting the preclear out over someplace else and finally winding up by straightening up his jewel collection instead of his case, is the normal result of ducking out with a TR.

Clearing is something else than putting a person back together again. We know all kinds of ways to put a human being back into a state of being a better human being, you understand? We’re not even vaguely interested in them.

But if you watched me audit and if you watched a very small handful of very fine auditors audit, you would swear to Pete that was what was happening. You would swear to Pete that was what was happening, that we had just ducked out on the case and we were over the hills and gone. And it had nothing to do with anything that was going on.

You come up perhaps with a new technique that makes better human beings human beings, and a big bunch of new vias on the line of one kind or another, yeah, you’re just avoiding making Clears. Don’t kid yourself. And don’t try to kid me. When I see this, that and the other thing going on, you must be putting some new vias on the line for some reason or other because I can list the fundamentals of what it takes to make a Clear here, in such a very few minutes that they’re hardly worth recounting. And when these are dropped and avoided, why, you’ve had it.

A process, some Straightwire, Two-way Comm, a process, another process, Two-way Comm, Straightwire, a scout; additional process that you never heard of before and neither did the auditor until that minute, flatten it out, Two-way Comm, a scout, a little more Straightwire, then a process, and then a process and a process and a process to - ah, Straightwire. Ah! Starting a session. Now we start a session - start a session for two and a half hours with Two-way Comm, a scout, Straightwire, Help, two-way bracket, scout, Help, two-way bracket, Two-way Comm, Straightwire, Two-way Comm, a scout, pinning another Rock chain and here we go again.

Now you’re going to sit there right this minute and say - about the case that you’re auditing right now, or about the case you were auditing in the last auditing period - on some of these you’re going to say, „Hey, say, what do you know. I didn’t do that, you know?“ Yeah, you will, so just stand by right here. Here they go.

Now I see from the startled and fixed looks upon your faces that you don't think this is the way it is.

First, willingness on the part of the pc to have the auditor audit him; that’s your first requisite to a session. I could bite some of you for always saying to me, „What process do you use to do this?“ You know, you guys are the ones, you guys are the ones that made me put things into process form, you realize that? We didn’t have anything like a process way back when. And the heroic thing about it is, is that I have. That’s utterly incredible.

But I'll tell you something; I'll tell you something. Not one auditor, including me, can audit until he can do a totally technically perfect repetitive session without a single flinch anyplace along the line, without a single flub any way along the line, and only after that can he relax.

We’ve got a process for everything that a two-way comm could do. It’s fabulous. Dick was saying the other day, „Oh, God, if there were just four things we could teach an auditor.“ Two-way comm was one of them. Judgment was another one. These things - these things are paramount. There’s a screaming need for it and there’s only one way we can do it and that’s to clear you. The only way we can do that is clearing you.

If a fellow can do ten, twenty hours, let us say, of the CCHs on Tone 40 auditing, or if he can do technically perfect, repetitive, formal auditing, can he then afford to relax. Because he knows himself then, that he is not ducking out on anything. He's just going through that case like a sawmill.

But one of these days, maybe the 21st, 22nd ACC, why, with great aplomb, we’ll be teaching people who are spun-in and half flat on their faces two-way comm and so forth with some kind of a process, you know? This will be an interesting thing but it’ll undoubtedly happen. Even that can occur. But right now remember that we are processing short of some things. So therefore, we have to have it awfully exactly laid out. And that’s no invalidation of you. It’s a matter of a communication line.

And I told you a joke yesterday, and none of you got it. And I will tell you the joke again now.

And evidently a process is necessary to a communication line in this particular subject so that you can codify something. But to do that, for God’s sakes, you have to lay down the exact microscopic fundamentals that are totally accurate on every given impulse and leave nothing to understanding at all.

Given a session in progress, the Rock located and isolated, I could clear you in fifteen minutes. That's a joke - nobody's laughing. Oh, somebody - dawned on them - oh! Pc in-session; auditor cleared with the pc perfectly. How many hours do you think you ought to spend on that? I should say three-quarters of the intensive.

Boy, that’s an awful horseshoe to be dropped around somebody’s neck with a clank, let me tell you. All right, well, we’ve done it. Now, when I tell you that the preclear must be willing to have an auditor there, I’m going back through a series of processes designed to do this. One was „Look at me, who am I?“ That is the ancestor of these processes. „Look at me, who am I? Look at me, who am I?“ And after a while, he finds out you’re not his dentist. Now, when I say he finds out that you’re not his dentist, you think I’m inferring that this pc has to be pretty spinny to have such a misconcept. Oh, no, not at all. This fellow is sitting there, he’s well dressed, he’s bright, he’s alert, he’s a success in his profession, he’s brilliant and you’re auditing him. Boy, every time you come off the basis of, „He’s too sane for me to go into things like this,“ you’ve had it! And about two intensives later you say, „What is wrong here?“ What is wrong is your incurable, wonderful optimism regarding your fellow human being, his state.

The Rock scouted down, located, its lock chains peeled off of it and in plain view - boy, there goes another awful lot of hours.

And where this is very touching, and I respect you for this tremendous idea of the sanity of your fellow man, I must condemn it as unwise in auditing.

And of course, if it was totally in view, with total reality on the part of the preclear, he'd just go birumph, Clear! And it would take you those fifteen minutes to end the session.

Now, I don’t say you have to run, „Look at me, who am I?“ on every preclear in order to audit them. I didn’t say that. But you for heaven’s sakes must have a pc willing to have you for an auditor. Not you because I said so. Not you because your Instructors assigned you. He must be willing to have you as an auditor. And if you’re hot and you’re good, the next thing you know, he’s more willing to have you as an auditor than anybody else in the entire course. You understand that? I don’t expect you to be good along this line. I expect you to be perfect.

All right, now you've got it.

And do you know that he can be put along this groove? Because there’s not a one of you here now, not one of you, but what would stay in there and pitch and do the right thing as to the best of your ability. You understand that? But oddly enough, you as preclears don’t understand it. And you’re afraid this auditor’s going to make a flub, that you’ve got as a pc, and spin you in, and wind you up and not know whether you’re coming or going and so forth.

You see, when you know everything that is supposed to happen, when you know everything you are supposed to do and when you can do all of these things with ease, you are no longer in a state of super-embarrassed self-consciousness. You are actually confronting the case. Your interest is no longer on whether or not you did this or you did that, or something of the sort. Your interest is on the case. And you know well enough how to do this, that, that when you decide to do it, you do it effectively, and you get it done! Now, right now, looking at you auditing, you are being effective, you are being infinitely more effective than anybody less well trained. You are being much more effective, exactly the way you are auditing, than you've ever been it before. That, I can absolutely guarantee you and promise you, and I could prove this on profiles.

And we get to the next point. Nearly every pc here is so far out of session that I, if I were auditing him, would spend two or three hours simply putting him in-session. Two or three hours. When I got a pc in-session, the building next door could totally blow up and the wall fall in, and he wouldn’t notice. His confidence would be sufficiently great as to have no outside influence penetrating his lookingness and workingness with his own bank. That’s in-session. Got it? The pc is going into session during the first three-quarters of an auditing intensive. Any allocated period of auditing, about three-quarters of it is spent by the pc going a little bit better into session, providing he’s got a very smart and a very good auditor. And while you’re looking far afield for magic tricks that will clear cases much faster, the magic trick is sitting right in front of your face. Put him in-session. That’s the magic trick.

I could take any auditor here, and I could stack him up against any auditor less thoroughly trained, and even though the guy less thoroughly trained might look a little more relaxed or something, you know, he might look a little more natural or something, I could take any one of you and a preclear's profile, and any other such auditor and a preclear's profile - the end of twenty-five hours I would show you your pc's profile, way up. And the other guy's profile, „Well, he just - he gained a little bit. Pc's a lot happier,“ he'll tell you. „The profile, the profile doesn't reflect the actual gains of the case. Preclear told me that he was much happier.“ He's knocked the preclear down into some propitiation, you know, and the preclear says, „I'm better. I'm better.“ Got this? All right. With that proviso I will then unload on you with a barrel-load of grapeshot, which is this: you look to me, in auditing, like a bunch of little wound-up marionette dolls. You understand that?

And what is „in-session“? He is so relaxed and so confident, so hopeful, that no matter what he runs into he’ll run through it. And the more he’s in-session, the more he feels you’re in there pitching with him, the more he can run through and the faster he can go through it and the more he can confront and the more bank he can get rid of. You got it? And the further he is out of session, the less he gets done. It has nothing to do with what you run on him. Nothing to do with it at all. And when somebody comes to me and tells me some new trick, and I know damn well he doesn’t get his pcs in-session, I could almost cry in his face. But I’m a nice guy and I don’t. And I say, „Good. Fine. Thank you.“ It’s in-sessionness, it is getting an auditing session going that is important, and continuing that session that is important. And that clears people.

Female voice: Mm-hm.

And you could run „Abba-dabba-boo-boo“ and clear somebody if he had total confidence in you as an auditor and he was totally relaxed in session. Do you know he could look at the whole flam-damn bank and tell you what the technique was? Do you know that? He’d just look brrrrrrrrrrr! Whew! „Hey, I didn’t know I was mocking that up. Isn’t that interesting? Hm-hm, hm-hm.“ Do you get the idea? How do you suppose I found out things from pcs? Why do they tell me these things? It isn’t altitude. Fifty percent of the pcs that walk in are less willing to go in session because I’m auditing them because they are superstitious about what I can see. Whereby they’d go down and talk to an HGC auditor, they think they’ve got to put on a good show for me.

That's a very legitimate comment, isn't it?

And I rack them over the coals in an awful hurry and spend nearly all of my time getting them squared, curing the altitude factor in most of the cases, not by making nothing out of myself - that’s the standard social mechanism. The way you cure altitude is to make nothing out of yourself, you know? You can play a concerto in A-flat major upside down with rubber gloves on, you know, and play rings around Paderewski. So you sit down at a piano at a party and say, „Well, I’ve just taken a couple lessons, I don’t play very well, you know, don’t play very well.“ Standard social mechanism.

Male voice: Yes, it is.

Don’t use it in auditing. And don’t try to overwhump them with how good you are. At the same time, don’t let them be overwhumped by how good you are. Because then you’ve just got an overwhumped preclear, not a preclear in-session; and that’s hypnotism. His willingness has got to be up, way up. How do you raise that willingness? Please don’t say, „What process do you use?“ We have certain things that are the fundamentals of Scientology and they have to do with willingness and certainty.

You'll still do better and get further, auditing like that, because you know better now what to do. But unless you improve, your time to clear - after you get out of here (of a pc) - will be two or three times the number of hours that should be required.

You can make any of these things into a process so that you can ask them, but you’ve already got your processes laid out from the earliest times in this particular subject. It’s just as true today that a person has to be certain of something, anything, to get better, as it was years ago.

The difference is that other people who have not been through what you've been through won't be able to clear anybody.

We ask this individual, „What part of this session is acceptable to you?“ We’re simply asking for a certainty - old Certainty Process of one kind or another, a willingness process, Certainty Process. You want to know if he’s absolutely certain if it’s all right if you sit in that chair in front of him.

Now, I'm just telling you that from where you are at this moment up to a terrific auditor is just another step. You're on the road; you're on the road. But you've now got to learn to live again. You got to learn to be able to do all this and still be alive.

Well, it doesn’t take any magic process or any series of numbers written down to arrive at that one. Is it okay with him if you sit in that chair? Is it okay with him if he sits in that chair? Well, we’ve got it reduced down to its weirdest fundamentals. Is it okay if you talk? Is it okay if he answers? This is all we’re trying to establish. Is anything horrible going to happen because he’s sitting in that chair? Good. We can just go on and work and work and work with this.

Now, the whole lot of you can get Clear going right on auditing this way, particularly if I hang over your shoulders like I will be next week, breathing hotly down the back of your neck, saying such deep, abstruse things as, „Get him to define a people pleaser,“ you know. „Get him to define a people pleaser.“ Person saying, „Well, how could you help a people pleaser,“ and so on, so on, so on, so on, so on.

Now, we can take up the specific relationship of the auditor-pc, one with another, and we can get that thing balanced out. Now, that’s your third in-sessionness stage, you see? You’re still getting this fellow into session.

„Get him to define a people pleaser!“

Now, don’t take it that I’m angry with you because I am not even vaguely. I want to - very, very badly, I want to put it across to you. I want to level straight across the boards with you. I want you to get off of this kick of „What little wound-up doll process do I run to make these things come true?“ You’re trying to make me do it; and you’ve got to do it. And it isn’t some glorious new process that you’re going to tailor up in order to get it done.

„People pleaser. People pleaser? People pleaser. People pleaser? I don't know, what is one?“ Now, I'm not trying to give you the idea that you should go on auditing with me breathing down the back of your neck. Got that? You got that? I want you to get the idea you should go through the rest of an auditing career with the idea that an Instructor is about to leap every time you make a flub.

Every once in a while, I catch an auditor on staff - the case is getting worse, or something, and the case is not doing well and he’s trying to think in terms of, „What total effect can I dream up?“ And the other day, some little kid that’s just getting along just dandy on staff as a pc - a couple of auditors blew up on the subject. They just blew up. They got to discussing this. They got to discussing it and discussing it and discussing it and they got more and more convinced that it was some new technique or some new process. Some new technique, some new process was needed, I guess because they weren’t smashing him into the chair with a totality.

Instead of that I want you to get the idea that you can do all of these things perfectly and still look alive and natural. Only an expert, such as you're well on the way to becoming, could discern, in some of the better auditors, these TRs working, just working, working right straight through there.

I went over it with them and I said, „What’s the matter? You’ve given me a recommendation here first, that you run engrams, next that you run Help in brackets, next that you do this, next that you do that.“ I said, „Have you gone nuts? Is there anything you’re doing that works?“ „Oh, yes, well, it’s - yes, it’s, a little bit, you know?“

What's he running? He's comm bridging, he's comm bridging into a new scout. In the process of the scout he finds something interesting; he knocks it out with Straightwire and goes on.

„What’s a little bit?“ CCH 2, 8-C bites.

Well, where was the bridge into the Straightwire? The preclear isn't even aware of the fact that a new process has been entered upon or left. It's just scouting questions, obviously. See, he's getting everything done he can do. See? He's just sawing all the proper angles and chunks and polishing the wood in the proper place, and getting it all corded up over here, and getting it all out of the way here, and getting it all added up someplace else. He's making every question count. Even on a scout he can't neglect knocking out a couple of major aberrations.

„You know, well, he has long comm lags and sometimes he has to think it over and once in a while he holds his head.“ And I said, „Is this flat? Is this flat?“

Halfway through a scout he said, „Music boxes, music boxes, music boxes,“ and he gets pshewww, you know. Thing falling off, he thinks „I might as well punch up the cognition here.“ „Music boxes? You - people pleaser? That's a good music - music box a good people... Well, fine. Did you ever know anybody with a music box? Family ever have any music boxes? Anybody have any music boxes around the house? You ever see one?“ „Oh, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. As a matter of fact, I remember now, oh, yes, my mother beat me within an inch of my life for breaking up her music box when I was five. I remember that. Remember it vividly, vividly, you know - swish, swish, swish, swish, swish, swish, swish! Ah, fine.“ „Now you do recall - you do recall that instance?“

„Well, no.“

„Yeah. Oh, yeah. Yeah. Oh, yeah.“

Well, I said, „Well, why not flatten it, and then come back and ask me all about these fancy processes that are going to do so much for this guy.“ Good, old-time 8-C and he’s back running it now and now doing handsomely, thank you, after four days of being monkeyed with, with a bunch of goofball nuttiness that had nothing to do with it. The guy could be put into session with 8-C and with good 8-C and good formal auditing, and patching that up, he was getting closer into session. He was getting more and more confidence in his auditor and they were using 8-C to get him in-session and looking at 8-C all by itself to do the entire job. I don’t care what they were doing with the guy. They were getting him into session. Don’t you see this? It didn’t have anything to do with the process. They did have a process that he was improving on and that he was in good ARC with the auditor with.

„You used to be very fond of your mother, hm?“

And instead of concentrating on making that ARC better, instead of concentrating on this, they wanted to go off into a whole series of gimmicks that sounded just like space opera to me. „We can’t rule the planet with a- with a thought control emanator. Let’s get in there now with a super-hypnotic powder and kill everybody and then we’ll show them.“ They’re saying, „We can’t audit so what do we use to audit with?“ Vicious statement at best, isn’t it? It’s got to be all right with the pc for you to audit him. It’s got to be all right for that pc to be in-session. And then it’ll be all right for the pc to look at his bank. And then you better know the things that he’s supposed to look for in the bank, because he’ll just look at bank, bank, bank, bank, bank, bank, bank, bank, bank.

„Oh, yes, yes, very fond of her. It was an awful break with her.“

So you keep putting him better into session, making yourself better off with him as an auditor and guiding him more strongly and securely over onto what you want him to look at in the bank. And when he looks at it well enough, he will confront it absolutely direct.

„You were very fond of her, though?“

Now, if it took you 150 hours to accomplish this, you would have done no more than to have made it all right for you to audit him, all right for him to be in-session, and directed his attention over onto what he should look for on the track, which is the basic Rock on the case. When he’s got that, it’ll tear up - if you’ve got these other ingredients, it’ll tear up lock chains. Why, atom bombs don’t even vaguely have this much power and force.

„Yeah, oh, yeah, yeah, yeah.“

So you have to know your TRs perfectly so you don’t flub and keep distracting him. And then you have to know how to be relaxed and expert and facile in handling him. And then you have to be interested in him, otherwise he never adds your attention units to his lookingness in the bank. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Ever think of that? And then he has to be sufficiently relaxed so his attention units aren’t out on the society, or on you on the basis of ARC breaks. And he has to be sufficiently relaxed about what is going on and what is coming off in the session for him actually to look with all of his attention, not just some of it. And do you realize that he would exteriorize at that point? He would exteriorize if you asked him to. Why? Because his attention isn’t on anything else. And what is a total exteriorization but a total selectivity of attention.

„Well, that's fine. Now, let's look up something else here. Let's look up something else that could be a good people pleaser.“ Pc isn't aware of anything peculiar happening. Auditor said music boxes, and the pc accommodatingly told him about it, and the auditor was nice - nice enough to get interested in it.

So he’d, of course, exteriorize from nine-tenths of his bank just by going into session. Most of his bank has to do with safeguarding himself automatically in the environment.

And he ran two processes in the process of simply asking a couple of questions. First question was a Straightwire question, followed up by a couple of more Straightwire questions, making him remember just that exact instant. You know? So, let's make it go bang! All right, now let's plow the rest of it out by doing what? Recalling, if possible, an earlier moment of affection for Mother, which is another process entirely and which applies to psychosomatics. So here was a scout with Straightwire, and the standard - what you will hear about shortly - a standard psychosomatic process. You get the idea? Followed up by a scout. But done with sufficient ease that nobody got parked on the comm lines, nobody got parked on the time track, nobody got stabbed to the heart, nothing got broken in any way.

It is so simple that man has looked at it for billions and trillions of years and never seen any part of it. He said, „What god can I bow down to in order to make my wife fertile? What chieftain can I pay off in order to raise my harvest? What can I propitiate amongst the aerial demons and devils? How many witches can I hire? How many bank statements can I write down as magic incantations to somehow or other get me by and through? How much prestige is necessary in the Mayo Clinic in order - if I say I’ve gone to the Mayo Clinic - in order for me to be impressed with the fact that I am now well? How many hundred thousand dollars do I have to spend on my crippled child before my guilty conscience is assuaged?“ He just drifted and drifted and drifted and drifted and he’s never looked at anything; he always looked at something else. And the motto of all of his days is, „He looked at something else.“ It was raining, so he looked at something else. A war was coming, so he looked at something else. And all it took was one good look by one man, anyplace, anywhere, at any given moment, for any miracle that has ever occurred to occur again.

He just thought, „Well, to hell with auditing people pleasers if we can just get this lock out of the road. See? To hell with auditing music boxes as people pleasers, let's just take the thing off the case. We don't need it, let's just blow it while it's right here to hand. See?” There it is, blow it. He'd blow it.

But if one man all by himself and alone did this in this particular society at this time, everybody else would go into a total overwhump and say, „All right, one man, you do all the looking for us, and we’re all slaves.“ That’s the way it goes.

Lock chain he's looking for probably had nothing to do with music boxes, but he keeps this in mind, and he says, „Music boxes, he-he-he-he-he! Musical theta traps.“ Something bad starts happening to the case, you know, a case looks boggy and sagging and freezing up, and so forth. He remembers he did have one gorgeous lead-in there, that was music boxes and he blew a lock off of the thing. He also has a dozen more, but we're thinking about music boxes, and he says, „You ever see a theater that played its music out in the marquee so that you'd go in and buy your ticket?“ „Oh, yeah.“

How do you get a fellow in-session, huh? Well, I can even give you processes that will do it. How do you like that? „Greater love hath no man.“ You will get with the preclear you’re auditing right this minute some of the most startling responses if you use a question that Jan codified yesterday looking over this fact and what we’re trying to do, „Who should I be to audit you?“ Startle half of your preclears out of their wits. „Who should I be in order to audit you?“ Hm? „Who would I have to be in order to get some auditing done? Who would I have to be to have you confident of my ability?“ And some of them will say, „My grandfather.“ And some of them will say, „God.“ And some of them will say, „This.“ And some of them will say, „Well, you’d have to be a little boy.“ How the devil we ever get into that, we don’t know. And „You’d have to be a magic snuffbox.“ And „You’d have to be Ron.“ „You’d have to be Dick,“ or some other better-known auditor.

Take him on down, hit the Rock chain. Get the idea? He knows his business. He knows his business, he knows the processes that are effective and he knows his business. And there's a very definite aliveness in his auditing.

Now, that’s an interesting thing, but you know, the guy never goes into session if he never has an auditor? And if you should be somebody else, it’s absolutely necessary that you’re somebody else in order to audit him, then you never audit him, do you? And then you Q-and-A with him and try to be somebody else in order to audit him. Ha! That’s a nice trap for you to fall into, isn’t it? Hm? That’s right.

Now, in the TRs you'll find a great difficulty in trying to acknowledge the origins of a pc. Do you realize that more pcs go out of session because of mishandled origins than anything else? Someday you'll maybe learn how to handle an origin perfectly, but perhaps there is no „perfect“ way of handling an origin. I can only tell you the way I know origins can be handled; I can only tell you how origins can be handled well.

The session only begins, or begins only, when you, as you, can audit him. Now we can’t say „as him“ because he’s not in-session yet. Even though you’ve said, „Start of session,“ don’t kid yourself. „Start of session” is a bunch of syllables. They’re vibrations in the air. They merely give him warning through his remote warning system of how to clam up and brace up so that you don’t get anywhere.

To be able to do it requires that you first recognize that there can be an origin, and that it doesn't necessarily get in your road as an auditor. Most auditors believe that origins are something that gets in your road.

Oh, you start a session, you certainly better clear the auditor. And only when you’ve got an auditor good and clear, then you can go on and get some auditing done. Half the pcs here are halfway inclined to believe that their auditor leaves something to be desired and that they would - they can hear the commands of the fellow two chairs down and they sound very confident, and they say, „Wouldn’t it be much better if I had him as an auditor,“ you know? „He sounds so overwhelming and I’m so overwhelmable.“ Well, I’ll clue you, if anybody, while being a pc, has heard any other command in the whole room than his auditor’s, he’s out of session but royally. Pcs of mine don’t hear what’s going on in the next room, let me tell you. They just don’t hear it, that’s all. But they do up to the point where they’re in-session.

No, origins are that from which the auditor tailor-makes with scissors, needle, and thread, the cognitions of the preclear. They are wonderful things to handle. So instead of origins holding up the case, you should learn how to weave them into a case recovery. They have use.

I was Q-and-Aing around with a pc last night. I was, by the way, auditing till 3:30 this morning. Auditor’s Code should always be obeyed; I always learn it when I audit after midnight. I can get away with it up to midnight sometimes, but when I get somebody that’s tired or sick, as I had last night, boy, they get more fancy code breaks. I got about twenty minutes of auditing done in about two hours. The rest of it was patching up exterior noises, code breaks, this, that, the other thing and getting the person into session. I got in five minutes of auditing at the beginning of session, and then the pc’s - wasn’t really nicely in-session because it was kind of an assist, you know? I fell for it and didn’t put him well into session. And then I spent the next couple of hours, you know, just trying to - trying to keep this thing patched up so I could settle it. Finally, about 3:10, I had the pc totally, nicely, beautifully, wonderfully in-session. All ARC breaks with me on any time or place or anything else all patched up, everything arranged, adjusted and squared around. Audited him for fifteen minutes and took away his strep throat. See? Five minutes at the beginning, fifteen minutes at the end, that was the actual auditing that got done. The rest of it was getting up to getting some auditing done. Got that? Boy, is auditing effective if they’re really in-session. And boy, is it ineffective if they’re not. Now, what’s a PT problem but that activity going on in the physical universe at this moment which permits a preclear’s attention to be exterior to the session and exterior to the auditor and therefore not upon the problem of auditing.

In addition to that you should know how to turn off origins while giving the preclear at the same time complete confidence that you have received it. Oh, that's a fantastic thing.

If you don’t think this is serious, watch profiles before and after twenty-five hours of expert, excellent, professional auditing on a pc who, all that time, had a PT problem that wasn’t touched, and that he never told the auditor about and that remained masked and buried. You get no change of profile, no change of IQ, no vanishment of psychosomatics or anything else.

As a matter of fact, he'll go on originating along a certain line, until he is certain that the auditor has understood it and received it. Understanding is the instrument that handles the origin. Understanding it.

Now that tells you how important that in-sessionness is: pretty important, if it can keep every process run from working. So therefore it must be senior to every process run. Just by flat, factual testing, getting them in-session must be senior to any process run because it can keep any process from working. Digest it, please! Don’t monkey with a pc out-of-sessionness; solve it, not the case and then solve the case, because the case is not available to you until he’s in-session. When he’s in-session, he doesn’t hear the automobiles going by. He isn’t worried about his present lifetime. He’s just as willing to be totally revivified 800,000 years ago and lost in a jungle with dinosaurs eating him up. He knows the auditor’s there. Get the idea? A case runs like hot butter if they’re in-session. There’s just nothing to it. And there are auditors here, right this minute, that have never seen a case in-session. Never have seen a case in-session, and just going bzzzz. And they say, „Well, preclears are tough, they’re hard to audit; they’re tough.“ No. No. No. No. No. It is tough to audit a pc who isn’t in-session. You got that? And there are auditors here, because there are some old-timers here, who have seen pcs really in-session and have seen a case run like a rocket shot by anybody else than the US Army, US Air Force and US Navy. Get the idea? And do you know that the ease of running of a case is not the relative difficulties among cases. The ease of running of the case is relative to the degree of in-sessionness on the part of the pc. So a tough case looks like a tough case to the degree it is not in-session. And the trickery and the smoothness on the part of the auditor that is demanded, is demanded to put the pc into session. So, it’s difficulty to get into session that measures the toughness of case. And that is all there is to it.

Well, how do you understand it? One of the ways is to find out more about it. Well, the best way to find out more about it is, want to know something more about it, which tells us that we have a point here which is not synthetically manufactured. It can't be manufactured synthetically. You have to be interested in what cases are all about to handle origins.

Given total in-sessionness - that’s not a hypnotic trance or anything like that; the person’s more awake than he’s ever been before in his life. And he’s actually up with more trust than he’s ever had before in his life. Given total in-sessionness, all cases are totally simple. They’re just complicated to the degree that they’re out of session.

Now, you can get into trouble handling origins and handling responses by being too interested, but it usually comes out all right in the wash. The only error I've been conscious of for some time is getting too interested in people's origins. Not that it extended the case, or I led them off of it or something; they got upset because I was that interested, but only when the pc had not offered it as an origin.

Now when we’re saying, „out of session“ we mean to the degree that they are bothered by the environment, bothered by the auditor, bothered by this and bothered by that and bothered by something else. Actually, constant harping on ARC breaks is only a symptom of being out of session. But constant harping on ARC breaks ought to be enough. It’s not dependent upon the in-sessionness on the part of the preclear but acceptance of the auditor.

Now, let me follow this through. See, he didn't really intend to originate, and I received what he didn't intend to originate because I'm so interested in his case. Get the idea? And then I go in on that real quick, and it sometimes startles the pc into practically an auditor Code break which I then have to patch up.

ARC breaks come about when the auditor is not acceptable totally to the preclear. And when you have a not totally acceptable person doing the auditing, you get ARC breaks. Well, you needn’t feel bad about this because you have to say, „What person is acceptable?“ And you find out the only person under the sun, moon or stars that could possibly have audited him would be Mother and you happen to be a man. Or it could be Father and you happen to be a woman.

He says, „Well, the best people pleaser there is, is a wrecked truck.“

No, don’t think it’s a criticism of your skill that he has ARC breaks, so much so that I am less and less concerned with getting pcs’ ARC breaks. I audit on a straight, overt, aggressive line, and eventually saws right on through and then we get what’s wrong and square it around. In other words, I just tsh-tsh-tsh-tsh-tsh-tsh boom, you know? And the pc is fend off, fend off, fend off, fend off, fend off. „After all, you are not Krishnamurti swami, someone, and therefore you can’t audit me,“ you know? „And after all, you audit much too well, you’re too smooth and you’re going to get all of my secrets. And you’re going to find out all about that sort of thing that I did there back... - and so forth,“ and therefore it’s as much a liability to be known as an expert.

Well, now that's comprehensible. But he says, „The best people pleaser there is, is a totally smashed planet scattered all over earth.“ And you say, „What?“

There’s guys around that will only let putty-fingered stumblebums that have never been near school audit them, do you know that? And if they find some girl that can learn a couple of terms or some young boy that doesn’t have a very hard voice and they say, „Well, you’re my auditor, go ahead.“ Oh, ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho! Boy, that’s out-of-sessionness but gloriously, isn’t it? Now, these two facts, combined with the fact that there is something wrong with the case - there is something definite and specifically wrong with the ease. And some of you right now have a very far cry from a good understanding of this. I hear you go sailing in like this: „Well, we’re going to clear this now,“ and so on. We just clear the command word by word, the English definition for this, the English definition for that, and even throw in, „What is your opinion of help?“ and „What is your opinion of a people pleaser?“ or something like that. And „Here’s the first command,’How could a people pleaser help itself?’” Oh, no! What are you doing? Where the hell did you get the idea that you could run with an unspecified terminal? You’ve got to prepare a case with constant scouting of two, three, four, five hours’ duration to find exactly what people pleaser, where, is wrong with him. And then you can run what is a people pleaser, by, „How could you help a people pleaser?“ and „How could it help itself?“ and so forth. He’s got to have one! Now where did you get the idea that you could do anything else? What do you do - going to run this case on such a high generality that not even you want to understand it? That takes a scout. And I’ve been weeks now teaching you how to scout. Did you think it all went out the window because I gave you a magic button? Not for one minute. Look for that stuck needle. Take it right on down the track. Find out exactly where it winds up and then find the people pleaser connected with it. Or, by defining people pleaser, and finding out what pleases people, just by a straightwire, two-way comm, blow stuff, blow stuff, blow stuff until you get that damned Rock undug. And you’ll find out it was the first magnificent thing that on a via pleased everybody and then gloriously flopped.

Pc is liable to say, „Well, you've invalidated my answer and ...“ See? And you probably have.

And when you’ve got that item and it is identified and he knows where it is and he knows what it is and he knows how it is, now run Help on it. Otherwise, go ahead and waste your time because you’ll be 8,000 hours to Clear.

You say, „What?“ You know, „Where'd that come from?“

You’re auditing something. You’re not auditing an idea. Where did you get the idea that you could audit this vague idea? That Rock is an isness. It has mass. It has a position in time which then became all time everywhere. It has an anatomy, it has engram and lock chains connected with it. It has a specific identity and the best name for it is a people pleaser, whenever and wherever it is found. But you sure as hell better get that thing spotted and identified before you start wasting and ruining a perfectly fine process like the Rock bracket.

Sometimes they give you answers that sound like forecasts of something or other, you know, and you want to know what the weather is and you ask them.

Oh, I know, your HCO Bulletin wasn’t specific. It said, however, „What is a people pleaser?“ It did say that, didn’t it?

And any time you take apart their answers and try to get anything out of their answers, you're liable to get into trouble. I don't think there's an auditor so skilled at auditing anywhere, that he wouldn't get into trouble if he started taking apart very many of the preclear's responses to the Help questions. See? So, there's the auditor considering that an origin has been made, and answering up to it when it hasn't been made, and this busts things up sky wide and handsome, because the preclear quite normally says, „All right, so I can't have that answer. So, you won't acknowledge it.“ And you get off the other way.

Audience: Yes.

Safest thing to do, of course, is to wait until the pc originates something non sequitur to the answer, and says, „Say, you know, the last four or five theta traps I was in, they always used music.“ Now you got a little backlog of wonder about all this, why, you can pull the whole thing up by the roots, because a preclear has volunteered it. Get the idea? But I never let a preclear's bad reactions to an auditor's rather natural reaction prevent me from communicating with the preclear.

And then it gave you brackets, and it said you could just run brackets; it’d still find it. It said, „Find it.“ It didn’t say, „Avoid it.“ And the best way I know to find it is just get right in there and chug-chug-chug-chug-chug-chug, bang! Rock! You get the idea? I don’t care if you have to go in there with blow torches! Find it. Isolate it. Circumscribe it. He knows absolutely and exactly that that is the Rock and there’s no further question in his mind but what this is everything everywhere and everything that would ever be wrong with him or ever has been wrong with him. He’s got that totally nailed. He’s fifteen minutes to Clear. And if you don’t get him to that point, he’s fifteen thousand years to Clear.

And I don't think any auditor ever ought to sit there in an attitude of withdrawal, simply because he might upset the preclear.

Hear me. It’s the last time I will mention it to you in public.

I don't care how many preclears I upset. I don't give a darn. I can put them back into session almost faster than they can get out and not with any brutality, either.

The definition of a process is: a way of avoiding looking. But that doesn’t mean that everything you run isn’t a process, and that the best way to reach things is by a process. But as long as you don’t realize that a process is simply a tool that opens up tin cans for you, you’re never going to see any tin cans, and you’re going to say, „What are we doing? Isn’t it nice we have this process because we never have to look at anything.“ It’s just another via.

But an error that you would make would be not communicating with the preclear's state of affairs, in not investigating and asking about things that you're interested in, in the case.

The process is a tool, not a via for lookingness. Oh, I shouldn’t run down its value to that extent because I’ll make you come off repetitive questions and I’m not asking you to do that. Anything you run on somebody, you ought to run as a repetitive question of one kind or another. I don’t care if you rephrase it eight different ways and call it straight-way comm - you know, two-way comm, or Straightwire, or something of this sort. You’re still running, to some degree, a repetitive question.

You think it's real peculiar, something about this, see, you think it's real peculiar that the preclear should be so fascinated or upset with, or something, on the subject of juvenile delinquency since it doesn't seem to have anything to do with anything we're running! Error! This is an auditor error now, just sitting there listening to this while you're interested and would like to know more about it. Error.

When you go in there and start asking about the Rock itself, you had better - and when you are starting to run it out and - you had certainly better use it as a repetitive question, and it had better be perfectly worded. But you use a process when you’ve got something to go after, or you use a diagnostic process when you’re trying to find something. You don’t use a process to clear people. You get the horrible difference here? You could sit and drift in limbo for the rest of time and you’ll never get anything done with cases. Now, it doesn’t say you haven’t gotten things done with cases, but you’ve got enough done with cases so you now might get something done with cases. You got it? You’ve gotten enough done with cases so you might get something done with cases. Now that’s what’s important.

Preclear is going on, „Juvenile delinquency this and juvenile delinquency that and so forth.“ He's not originating; every one of his questions had to do with juvenile delinquency. Every answer he gives you: „Juvenile delinquency this, juvenile delinquency that; a teenage boy could blow up a bank, you know.“ This guy is a thirty-five, forty-year-old man. What's he talking about „Juvenile delinquency do this, juvenile delinquency do that.“ You never heard any of this on the case before, and he goes on for a while talking about this.

And you’re going to have yourselves a ball. Boy, when you can tell me exactly the size, shape and general description of your pc’s Rock and what it pleased and how it pleased and so forth, and what the lock chains are that branch off from the thing, and where it’s going, boy, he’s so close to Clear, don’t let him sneeze because he’ll sneeze himself Clear. You get the idea? When he’s got this thing real well taped - well, the odd part of it is, a process has very often taped it for him, but then the auditor never asked for it. He never asked the dope on it. Why couldn’t he ask the dope on it? Well, he was running a process and of course you can’t stop a process and ask anybody anything. Processes are just sort of a machine that winds up and just runs forever, you know. No, you have to ask.

That's an error. It's not an error as far as the preclear is concerned, it's an error as far as you're concerned. You're withholding interest. And that is the only crime you can commit in the final analysis. Man, you can invalidate preclears, and get out of it - scat. You can stamp all over their favorite things, you could say, „Well, I don't believe - I don't believe in integration myself. I know you're going all out for it, but I don't.“ You can go this haywire - you could even go as haywire as to say, „Well, from everything you've said I think your mother's a pretty nice girl - why don't we come off of this?“ That's pretty haywire. That's pretty bad; it'll make a pc break every time. But that one you can patch up; that one, you can put the whole thing back together again. You understand? You're within the limits of reparableness.

You have to find out what he’s doing and how he’s doing it, and what it is and where it is and what it’s doing. And you have to ask him expertly enough so that you’re not slowing up the whole case and avoiding the case simply by asking. You see, there’s a nice adjustment point. You can yak, yak, yak, yak, yak as you go down along the line and as-is his havingness and chew it all up and not find out anything either. You see, you can do too much of that sort of thing, but you also can do just exactly the right amount.

But an auditor's withheld interest from the case is not within the limits of repairability because you are not being audited as the auditor.

And that right amount, by the way, is very well dictated by your interest. If you only do what interests you to find out what this thing is, if you only do what interests you to put him into session, and so forth, and do the other proper thing, you generally do the right thing, within the framework of the TRs, because they’re just ways of - the TRs reversed are methods of nonconfrontingness used by humans.

After a while you stack it up to a wooden mannequin just going through the motions of auditing - withhold that interest, withhold that interest.

When you start disobeying the TRs, you are using methods of nonconfrontingness, see? So the TRs teach you, if anything, teach you you can confront anything. You get the idea? But they too are tools and for use, but there’s the way to go about it.

Go ahead and get interested in cases. It's everything - the whole woof and warp of auditing depends on your interest in a case.

And, you know, when I see somebody slumped in an auditing chair, auditing and all caved in and twisted up and so forth, I know what he’s having trouble doing. He’s having trouble confronting. He’s not having trouble with TR 0, even though you point to him and say, „TR 0.“ What you mean is he is not confronting. There’s something he is avoiding. So let’s chew it in there and let’s get him braced up, not to make him sit better but to make him confront the thing he’s not confronting. You got the idea? Well, let’s come off of the little rote patterns of training and get on to some good sense, without taking it as a liberty of doing no auditing. See, that is the horrible, the horrible thing that you face, you get the idea, that at any moment, why, you’re tired so you do no auditing by going off into the limbo and not following something down. I catch myself doing it every once in a while to some dim degree, and I say, „Oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh-oh. Tsk, tsk, tsk, tsk, tsk, tsk. Back in the groove, Ronnie. Now, where did this pc start boring me to death? Oh.“ And once in a while, I’ll go for two, three minutes - this sometimes drives a preclear nuts - two or three minutes without asking him a single question. I just look at the meter and look at the pc and size the thing up, try to get the orientation of the situation, get it squared around so that I understand it. The pc’s saying, „What’s the matter, what’s the matter, what’s the matter, what’s the matter?“ „Shut up.“

And we go back to what I was discussing first which is origins. And the whole ability to handle origins is contained in interest, and the moment that you have lost your interest in the case, and you haven't patched it back up again, and you haven't squared it away, you'll stop handling origins.

The pc is sitting back there - he’s sulking now. And you say, „Now, now, what’s the matter with you?“ „Well, you told me to shut up.“

Pc will originate something and you give him a cheery „Yes, yes. Fine. Thank you.“ And give him the next auditing question - they go out of session, swish, and no auditing gets done thereafter.

„I know I did. Now, let’s see, the next auditing command...“ That blows the ARC break usually. „I know I did. I was trying to figure your case out and see where we were going.“ „Oh!“ Big understanding blows this thing. New light dawns. „You have to look over my case, too,“ you know? „What do you know?“ Now, a process that leads in toward getting him to accept you as the auditor, something on the basis of: find the biggest ARC he has had with somebody on the backtrack as an auditor and just blow it to glory. It’ll blow all the locks off the top of it. We use this pattern today to such a degree, and it is so good, that it’ll blow an ARC break, it’ll blow a psychosomatic right out the window. Find the pleasedness that precedes the illness.

And you say, „Why isn't this fellow progressing and getting well?“ Well, you're not interested in him, that's why. He won't come up with any people pleasers unless he's got a people there. Something to remember.

He’s having trouble with his wife; find all the times he was happy with her, and poom! Got it? He’s having trouble with his throat; find all the times and things and good throats. Just find some good throats, and zing, all of a sudden the bad throats go. We know the mechanism now, we know it exactly, we can use it.

Well, how do you handle an origin then? Well, just if you're interested in cases in general. You know, I've heard it said that a person really is never interested in a hobby until he knows something about it. It's fairly true.

He doesn’t like you as an auditor; he doesn’t like you as a practitioner, then some minister or god or priest or devil or somebody was so much a practitioner that ever since, why, everybody who did anything to him had to be this god or devil or priest, don’t you see? So find out what was so wonderful about this god or devil or priest, not sarcastically, but just run it out. Just get it, get more of it and all of a sudden he blows through and he says, „Well, you’re okay as an auditor.“ Now, you can do something else with this whole thing. You can find out what it’s all right - what part of you it’s all right for him to confront, and what part of you it’s all right for him to have, and find out what it’s all right for him to be doing, and what it’s all right for you to ask. And just take up the various points that you’ll have to be going through, you know, and look these things up. Not a bunch of stupid vias on the line, you know, I mean just right direct.

Now, you can make this work reverse way to. You can take a fellow down and show him some rocks in a rock collection, and you can show him the names of a few of these rocks and tell him a few interesting facts about rocks. And if you don't push the information off on him, if he's kind of volunteering it, you're liable to see him out in the field someplace collecting a few rocks. You know? „I wonder if I could find any more of this malachite schist that this fellow was talking about. He said it was all over this country. Ah, there's a nice piece.“ Well, he'll throw a couple - few pieces of rocks in the car, you know. And next thing you know a little time go by, well, he'll say, „Boy, was I stupid. I used to only collect things that had something like hornblende in them, you know, just green discoloration and so forth - uh, looking for, really - I was looking for much more ...“

You’re asking him, „What the hell is wrong with me auditing you?“ You know? I don’t care how you phrase it, this is what you ask him. You don’t say, „Well, I think I’m perfectly all right as your auditor, and therefore I am now auditing you and the hell with what you think about it.“ See, that probably wouldn’t win. But it’s better than neglecting the point entirely. You got it? All right, now the next thing that you want to have happen is this pc to get into session. How do you get him into session? Well, it is more you, but it’s mostly help. A general Help bracket will assist him markedly. But I’ll tell you a much better one, and this patches up ARC breaks and so forth, and it’s a process. You say, „How could you help me? How could I help you?“ And you ask him an odd number of times. That is to say, you don’t ask him one question, then one question. You ask him two „How could I help you’s“ you know, because he seems to be glib on that right now. And then he slows down on it, so you don’t ask him but a few of those, then you flip it.

In other words, he's gotten technical enough to be critical of what he was doing. Got the idea? But he's well advanced on the line to being a connoisseur in ice-cream cones if he simply knows which store sells the best ones. See? He's well advanced.

Every time he slows down, develops a comm lag, you shift the bracket. You just shift the bracket. But it’s a bracket of two. „How could I help you? How could you help me?“ „How could I help you? How could you help me?“ And you just run it enough times until you’ve smoothed that out between you and that. Boy, he’ll have some of the weirdest ideas of - concerning you, but that will flatten them. Now, that also gets sessioning done and that gets him into session. Get the idea? That gets him grooved down the line.

He is advanced along the line if he's merely wondering which stores sell the best ones. Get the idea? But, he's becoming a connoisseur; he's getting interested. You see? Now, let's carry this out a little further. You could say that regardless of whether you are human or not - and fortunately there are very few human beings present in this class - very few. Nothing I detest more than a professional human being. And these pros really get me.

Now, if you want to put him further in-session, prove to him absolutely and conclusively that you can do something decent for him fast. But in order to do that, he’s got to have a proper definition or an understanding of five key buttons and one additional button which is Pleased. Change, Help, Problems, Create, Responsibility and Pleased. Boy, has he got to have a good idea of those. And you know, people can have the wildest idea of what „pleased“ means, or what a „pleased person“ is that you ever heard of. Boy, really wild! You wouldn’t - you won’t believe it till you look at it.

You can't be human and be right. And a few of you people can be right, so that automatically makes you unhuman; unhuman, not inhuman.

You’re trying to run a process on this individual, contains the word „pleased.“ And „pleased“ to him means a broken leg, „pleased“ means a broken leg, „pleased“ means a broken leg.

Now, if we bat this guy in the head or he bats himself in the head about collecting rocks, you know, he goes out in the field and farmer says he can't go into that field and he finds out there are no fields he can go to to collect rocks, and there are no beaches where there are any rocks, and people around him are discouraging him from locating rocks, and having anything to do with geology. And the local museum changes its curator and they don't have any collection down there anymore; they sent it all to the „not Rockefeller“ Institute or something. What the hell happens to his interest in rock collecting, huh? Well, it was manufactured just by the fact that there were some, and somebody told him something interesting about them. And then he went on and developed into a good rockhound, see, connoisseur: a real one. A geologist just would, in a university, would sneer at him. He would say, „An amateur.“ Get into other fields they call you an „amateur“ but when you get mixed up with universities you become an „amateur.“ A professional always sneers at the amateur, just as you would sneer at some amateur auditing. You go around and you see some and you say, „Oh, my god! Zzzzt! How did that ever get loose?“ And then hypocritically you say, „I think you're doing just fine.“ Eighteen origins, all of them dropped flat. Auditing question flubbed every question, not just once. Process changed fifteen, sixteen times; auditor Q-and-Aed with the preclear. They started out to do something about his laryngitis and they wound up running bald heads and they never started the session and it kind of dwindled out to nothing and they both went out for some Cokes, you know.

„How could that person be pleased with you?“

You can see this guy up the track someplace or another; he's still in-session eight or nine years from now. Sessions never begin, you know. Everything you know is right is being totally violated and you say, „Nothing could possibly happen here.“ And you would just be absolutely flabbergasted to find out once in a while he gets something done. You know, it's sort of like you - hit or miss - get something done. If you do enough of it, you're liable to hit something. But here's case interest, actual interest in cases.

„Well, he could fall off a grating and break his leg.“ I mean, it’s totally non sequitur. „Well, he could be pleased with me by being very sad with me. People believe that people are pleased by being sad.”

Now, nearly every one of us knows something about a case intellectually, that we've actually never seen in a case. We know something could be theoretically true about a case, or a certain combination of circumstances would be true about a case, but we've never just sat down and seen it right there - bang! You know? So there's lots of those things and you kind of keep wondering if these will ever turn up, and you're looking now on a via. After a while you begin to look fairly directly. You know, you say, „Well, that's what that case is all about - phewww! See? And it's this way and it's that way.“ Now, we don't collect cases, we don't collect cases, we spoil them; we're case spoilers, we ruin them. We alter the cases around.

When they have a disarrangement on any one of these six buttons including Pleased, you can realize their case is up the spout just by misdefinition. You can straighten out cases just by straightening out these definitions. Well, there’s a process you could use on that, „Invent a person; tell me his ideas of being pleased.“ You know? „Invent a person; tell me his ideas of change.“ Get this straightened out.

But the reason psychiatry has utterly flopped, and it's one of the biggest flops in the world today, is because they carefully preserve them. They're scared stiff of spoiling one of those gorgeous manic-depressive schizes, you know. They have this wonderful maniac back in a cell and he just keeps gibbering and gibbering and gibbering, just exactly the way Kurtz Schnutweiler says in his book on Mania, My Mania.

Straighten him out. Straighten out your semantics. Don’t worry too much about whether or not this command is the right incantation; does it mean anything? And don’t be so optimistic as to believe that „help“ to him is - means help.

Fellow came into the psycho ward up here, one of the hospitals north here, that had a twitch which was apparently an exact textbook case of Norbert Wiener's. And I promised Norbert I would never mention the name of cybernetics, so of course I can't, you know. And I never do anyway.

Now, some of you are running Help on people that don’t know what help is. And some of you are running Pleased on people that don’t know what pleased is. And you say, „a people pleaser,“ well, supposing the person didn’t know what „people“ were and didn’t know what „pleased“ was. Boy, you’d be up the spout. Some of them have eight or nine vias on „pleased,“ if you please - just don’t have a clue what „pleased“ is. Not a clue. But they know what „pleased“ is; it’s somebody with a broken leg. They just can’t conceive of anybody ever being pleased with anything, everyplace, at any time. And yet you run a Pleased process on them.

And so anyway, he writes in there about a feedback or reflex moronic type reaction - a „moronic reaction“ or something of the sort, whereby you stick a needle in him someplace and you can actually trace the current pattern as it goes through the neurons and get it back somewhere else.

Well, you’ve got to put your words and processes together. But this again is getting them further into session. And you keep grooving them further into session. And the expertness of your auditing gets them into better and better session.

I'll be a son of a gun if a standard case that matched this textbook didn't come into one of these mental hospitals. You know, they didn't do anything with the guy for two or three months, but every doctor in the area went up and saw this.

And then you start for that Rock. Well, you’ve got to find out what pleases people, and you’ll have to lift bales of locks off, and I don’t care what process you use to lift those locks off with. „And what have you used in this lifetime to please people mightily?“ (Ha-ha-ha-ha.) „What?“ And „Recall times of doing that. Recall times of doing that.“ Boom! Off with this present lifetime.

When you hit a certain nerve area in the fellow's upper back shoulder, you got a leg twitch. And so doctor would come up, and they'd hit him in that area and then they'd watch that leg twitch, you know? And it's wonderful - wonderful case. There must be - there must be something to cybernetics because look at that, guy obviously couldn't do that unless there was an electronic circuit, and there it is. And there must be something about the body that has to do with electronics.

„Is there any other thing that you believe this?“ And we get some generalized illusory thing, and we start running that thing down, „Yes, that’d please people.“ „Tell me how it would please people. What sort - what sort of an ashcan would please people?“ You found ashcans, you know? Bang! You found ashcans sitting right there. Fixed! Just like I taught you in the first week, see? And „What kind of an ashcan would please people? Think of a person that would be pleased with that ashcan.“ You got it? And you get that thing straightened out. You can run right on down to the Rock with no more valid a process than that. You can knock out psychosomatics. You want to do something to him to increase his confidence? Just use „Pleased“; people – “What kind of a throat would people be pleased with?“ Ten, fifteen minutes later you got a psychosomatic out of the way that he’s had for years, and he says, „What! My asthma’s gone? Hm, you are pretty good, aren’t you?“ „Yeah, I - I always like preclears to think that.“ Get the idea?

And I heard one of them say, „This proves conclusively that we should continue to shock people.“ I don't know how it proved that, but it did. They have a tendency to preserve cases.

Get them in-session. To get them in-session, you have to make them willing to have you as an auditor. Improve their certainty that auditing can do something for them. Square them around. Get them oriented on their words and definitions. Find the Rock by spotting sticks.

Now, as long as you have a vast number of available people, as long as there are lots of people available, you never preserve cases. But more importantly you'll never collect any people unless you preserve your interest in how cases are made up.

And you go checking your interest simply because you've been told that you should go through an exact patter, and it's you that'll wind up in trouble.

The idea of being withstrained and withheld from the preclear all the time when you say he said, „What? What?“ The „don't get it!“ „How did that add up with which?“ I had a lovely girl here the other day whose pc was busy running space opera. She said to me, „But I don't know a thing about space opera.“ Well, I'll clue you, I don't know anything about outer space, space opera either except what I've learned from pcs and my own track. There she had all the raw materials of space opera sitting in a pc's chair.

Now, it could upset the pc if she says, „Now, how could you help a spaceship?“ or whatever was being run, you know, „How could you help a spaceship?“ And the pc said, „Oh, I could use a zongo ray.“

She says, „What?“ She says, right out of context, you know, right out of session, she says, „What did you say?“ „I said I could use a zongo ray.“

„Well, what is a zongo ray?“

Now, the pc is liable, actually, I will confess to you, liable to go right back on that question - possibility - and say, „Now, wait a minute. You mean you won't accept this answer?“ You know? Uhhuhh. And you have to put them all back in-session again and patch it all up. But it's worth it if you can find out what a zongo ray is! Therefore, actually, you cannot afford to get interested in cases unless you're a very expert auditor! You can do it all by the book and not by the book, and sitting there and handing it out any way, shape or form. You know what you're doing and know what results you are going to get. Now you can really be interested in cases.

I have a trick in handling origins that isn't really a trick. I always grab the fundamental from which the guy is leaping.

You know, he says, „Well we had this train, and it kept - lots of tunnels and on this particular planet there were nothing but spongy-like rocks, you know, very spongy, and so on, and we could bore tunnels through. But the trains actually never ran on track, and so forth. And they're - they're doing this and that - that - that and - and I got into a lot of trouble because I was just a conductor, you understand? Later on I was in for that planet. But anyway, conduct and, boy ...“

I'm saying man, this guy has gone so far off the Rock, and this data is fascinating - but - but he's totally omitted this because his takeoff point is apparently missing. And I'm more interested in how the hell we ever got on this planet with all these trains, from a perfectly innocent processing of a powder puff. You know? And I'm left with a jump from a powder puff to a planet.

And I always ask for the gap in the origin; I always ask for the gap that interests me, you see? When you ask him for the missing link, you stop and say, „Whoa! Whoa! Whoa! Whoa! Whoa! Okay! Yeah! Good! Fine! WHOA! STOP! Shut up! Now, listen! Listen now. (Finally got that down.) All right, now, listen.“ You know, actually say that to a pc. You have to patch it up, so what! You can. He'd get used to it after a while and realize that you can patch it up, so why protest.

So you say to him, „Now, now we ye got this slowed down, would you please tell me how we got from a powder puff to a planet? I'm not criticizing you, I just want to know.“ You know? Well, that's about the crudest version of handling an origin I know, but is more effective by far than, „Thank you. Good.“ This guy is pouring his heart out to you, and you say, „Thank you. Good. Good. Fine. Thank you. That's fine. You ready for the next question?“ „Mm-hm.“

Now, there's a wide gap between the one overt handling of the origin and this other one. But I'll tell you that the overt handling of the origin is more effective. It's not very correct but it's more effective. And it's easier on the auditor because it does display his interest in the matter.

Now remember it's your auditing time, not the pc's. And you always get sold on this because if you sell auditing by the hour, he's paying it forth by the hour. I think this is just a foolish economic trick from my viewpoint.

Why anybody should pay for it by the hour to interest me is more than I can fathom, but they do. You get the idea? But that's the way I look at it. And the time isn't precious because he bought it - so what! He didn't buy my time in the first place. If I'm running the auditing session it's still my time track. Thoroughly! So this guy's going on and he says, „These big spongy mountains and these spongy rocks and these trains and, you know, they just had borers right on the nose of them, and they kept going through these trains. And after a while they had all these holes, this - this, and I was just a conductor, and later on I became emperor.“ And I say - if I'm really interested in all this - I say, „Wait a minute, what planet is this?“ Now, this is getting a little easier, see, to handle. „What planet is this?“ „Well,“ he says, „planet Zed. Yeah, planet Zed.“

„Was this a long time ago?“

„Oh, I guess it was. Don't rightly remember exactly, but quite a while ago,“ so forth.

I say, „How about these - these mountains? Keep talking about the sponginess and so forth. Does that have anything to do with powder puffs?“ See? „Any association between these two? What's the gap?“ „Oh, I don't know. I don't know. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah - yeah, I - I - I get it. I get it. I get it. I - I get it. Had a girl on planet Zed and her name was Powder Puff.“ Well, anyhow...

If he could interest me with his origin, fine. If I can get the case advanced with it at the same time, wonderful. If he's just burning auditing time and isn't interesting me, I pull the basics out from underneath him.

I'd say, „What started you thinking about that?“ „Do you remember the old gang?“ „What started you thinking about that?“ He has to reach down at the bottom of the chain that he's now dispersing from. He pulls that, tells you about it and you've got the origin and you keep on going.

But remember, it's your preclear; it's your preclear. And he has resigned himself to the Fates. He stands naked in the winds of the universe, far as you're concerned. You want to find out something about the whole track? You've got a preclear right in front of you. Get the idea? You want to find something about the sex life of the Moranga Bongie Indians that he has just mentioned? You've got a preclear right in front of you; it's your preclear.

You think he has the most peculiar computation you ever heard of. Even at the expense of practically cracking the whole session up, find out about it; it's your preclear. About time you took ownership of these things you're collecting.

And if you think that your interest invades his privacy, you've got no business auditing, because you're a professional privacy invader. And when that dawns on you at long last, that you can invade privacy, that it's your job to invade privacy and unless you do invade a bit of privacy, you haven't got anything to be interested in except a body sitting in a chair. And I know a planet where they sell these things rather cheaply. Twenty-five cents you can always go out and buy a body; they have a body factory up there. Of course it costs you about ten, fifteen thousand dollars to get a body that moves and talks, and that sort of thing, but you can still raise ten or fifteen thousand dollars.

No, you just got a body in the chair - who cares about a body in the chair? If you want bodies, why, take up a little internship in medicine or something of the sort. They give you bodies: they smell, but, you can - you can cut them up or do almost anything you want to with them, you know? No, you're looking at the whole history of this universe. You're looking at the cross-computations of a thetan who is in and out of trouble in this way and that and it's interesting material. And as you know more about it, and as you find out more and more about it, the more of a connoisseur you are, the more there is to know about it.

Do you realize none of you - one of you asked me the other day, „Are there any of the old track maps around?“ Yeah, I suppose there are some of the old track maps around. Ah, now, but don't ask me about a track map. You're sitting with the finest E-Meter ever made in your hands and you're sitting with a person as a pc who has been at it and with it since the very, very earliest beginnings. And you can read old Electropsychometric Auditing and find out how to plot dates.

„Was it greater than a trillion years? Was it less than a trillion years? Ahh. Was it greater than a billion years or less than a billion years? Ahh. Was it greater than a million years, or less than a million years? Ahh. Was it greater than five hundred million years or less than five hundred million years? Ahh! Less than. Well, was it greater than two million years or less than two million years? Now where is it there?“ And then get it with over and under, over and under, over and under, all of a sudden, „It was 1,750,922 years ago.“ And that was the time the first Fac One implantation was made here on Earth, see, something on that order. Not necessarily true, but you can spot them, you can nail them. And man, when you nail one of those things down on the time track, your pc will turn into a canary; he'll tell you all about it.

„This spaceship landed, and it was - we were all standing around there and we were minding our own business, and the spaceship landed and a bunch of guys in funny looking white jumpers jumped out. And we didn't know anything about that sort of thing and one of them took the headman by the arm, took him up on a hill and there was a little flash up there (we didn't see what it was) and the headman came back and we said, 'What happened?'” „And he said, 'Well, I went up on top of the hill and there was suddenly nothing.'” „And we said, 'Oh, yes. Well, then these guys are not particularly dangerous.' And 'So, well, that's all I remember.'”

Now where do you err then in auditing? Come on, where do you err in auditing, hm? What's the difference now between being able to do all this perfectly and doing it naturally?

Audience: Interest.

You said it!

And that will come and your diffidence will disappear at the moment when you discover completely, absolutely and without argument that you can patch up anything that happens in a session! And then you'll stop being afraid of making something bad happen.

Now, it would be absolutely fatal to tell somebody who wasn't as well trained as you, this same fact! You see why it would be fatal? While they're trying to patch up a Code break, they're really struggling with the fact that they can't ask a question! Huhhh! How can you patch up a Code break when you can't ask a question of the pc? Being able to handle, guide, and square around a case with speed, eventually gives you enough confidence to be awfully interested.

When you find out that you actually do not any longer injure a case no matter what you do to it - because you can patch it up as fast as you knock it apart - then you can afford to be as interested and as prying, and as peeping Tom, and as investigatorish and as honest and as real as you actually are in an auditing session as an auditor. You get me? Now, that's what gives you confidence. That permits you then, interest.

Yes, you ask a pc about this peculiar answer and how that added up. And the pc says, „That answer is peculiar? Oh, you mean you won't accept this answer?“ „Nope. And I didn't really mean that but what the hell were you saying?“ „Oh, now you've done it! Now you've done it. And I was going along so nicely. And I had this somatic all set.“ Oh, it happens; that's the commonest one there is. And you say after that, „Well, that must never happen again and I must never question or challenge the pc's answer simply because I'm interested.“ All you got to do evidently, sometimes, is raise your eyebrows. The person says, „Well, how could I help you?“ „Well, I could go out and I could get a police officer and have him shoot you.“ And he says this with a smile, you know. No viciousness behind it, you know.

And you say, „What!“ Or maybe you just say ...

Pc says, „Code break! Code break! Code break! Code break! Code break!“

Now, if you're afraid of the pc doing that, you'll get afraid to be interested. So your answer is to now acquire from this moment on, enough confidence in your ability to patch up a case and square it around, that it doesn't matter what Code breaks you lay in on the line. Do you understand that your ability to patch it up is the splendid exactness with which you can handle those TRs. After that, you can do anything.

Now, a comm bridge is there because you don't want to startle or shock a case by changing a process. That merely demands of you then a very sliding, smooth shift from one process to another. That's what a comm bridge is.

A comm bridge is not necessarily, „Well, in three commands we're going to do another process. Is that all right with you? Thank you.“ Yes, that's the school textbook answer. But that's - that's perfect, except for this one thing: interest in the preclear, interest in his reaction.

You say, „How are you getting along? Getting along all right? You doing all right now? Think this thing is tamped down and in place?“ You know? „Think in the next question it's going to rise up and do anything with you? No. You think you got it licked? All right. All right. Now, here's just the last question now. And don't run into anything hot on it now. Let's - last question. Last question. Okay. How could you help a bugaboo? Good! Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! All right, that's all! That's all of that! We're off of that now!” „Now listen, I've run into something here and this needle is sticking all over the place on the subject of mothers-in-law. And I think we're getting in the session - have you got a present time problem you haven't told me about? Oh, you haven't? You don't even know of a mother-in-law? You haven't even got one? Well, has your wife got one? Oh, yeah, oh, well, what's your mother been up to? I - it's the first I've heard that she lives with you. Now did you come into this session with a PT problem that you didn't tell me about at the beginning of session? Oh, you did. All right.”

„Now, we're going to run a little process to handle this sort of thing, because I think we got to get it out of the road. And I want you to describe the problem here. Describe this problem - mother-in-law - problem. All right, now let's get this,“ you know? And we go through Problems just as a process, bring it up on the other side, and all of a sudden we got a different acting case. You understand? And you say, „Thanks. Now how do you feel about that? Do you think - you're okay on this subject now? All right. Now, that was the last question; that was the last question - we're on the subject.”

„Now, let's get back and do something more pertinent to the existing situation. All right? Now, the auditing command is 'How could you help a bugaboo?' See? Let's get in there now and let's clean up some more bugaboos”. Get the idea? Hm? You take up what needs to be taken up. You don't Q-and-A with the case and take up everything it presents. You know better than to go on auditing the case with evidently a PT problem every time you say, „mother-in-law“ or something like this, or „A mother-in-law could kill a bugaboo.“ „Well, now, how could you help me?“

„A mother-in-law could fry me in oil.“

„How could I help you?“

„A mother-in-law ...“

Well, it's all right if it just changes and shifts and disappears. What if it keeps hanging up? Hangs up for ten or fifteen minutes, I begin to believe that there is something here that we ought to look into, and I am not averse to looking into it at all - pang! And I go right ahead and look into it, because I'm not afraid to be interested.

All this adds up, maybe, to a bunch of protests from the preclear every now and then.

„Well, you've run too many processes on me. I'm all tangled up and confused. We've got about five started now and we haven't finished any one of them.“ „We will before the session is over. Let's go.“ See, totally factual reassurance. Pc eventually responds to this sort of thing. And you do, you flatten all of them. And you just - end of session - quite standardly on the end of one of my sessions I go back and check everything we have done and see if it's all right, everything's okay, and the pc finally says, „Yeah, what do you know? I can walk on solid ground here,“ you know? He feels better about the whole thing.

One of the things he's afraid of is of you getting too interested in him. It's one of the things he's afraid of and one of the things he tries to break down.

But his confidence in you, at long last, will build to a point where you can practically get rid of - get away with anything.

You say, „Was that a Code break?“ (which is very good). „Is that an Auditor's Code break?“ or „ARC break?“ Anything you want to say. Needle just as loose, nothing to it. You've just said, „If you please, if you please, let's calm it down now on the subject of your grandmother. Let's just calm it down.“ And then you say, „Code break?“ No, no Code break. You just told him not to talk about somebody, that's a shut communication break if you ever heard of one. You could go that far and you could still get away with it. You got it? So, my message to you is: Be a good auditor, but never at the expense of being disinterested in the case.

Always be interested in that case, and you'll be a far better auditor than you ever dreamed you could be.

Thank you.