This next subject you could call the goal of processing — in other words, what you are trying to do. This has something to do with the ideal state of man. A codification of an ideal state of man — highly ideal, with all of the meaning of ideal thrown in there — would be simply the top band of the Chart of Attitudes. That is an ideal state. Of course, it is very, very mpractlcal. Now, we are taking ideal as opposed to practical, but as an individual approaches this ideal state, he also goes into a practical state. There is a sort of automatic shift into an extroversion as he goes up to-ward this ideal state, and he will stay in a state of action. Life has sort of taken care of that.

Now I want to tell you a bit about Handbook for Preclears. A lot of work went into this handbook, not on the basis of how many hours it took to write it, but on the basis of a couple of years of trying to communicate these techniques. That is what is important.

You try to get him up the tone scale to this ideal state. If he has lots of circuits and he is pretty bogged and a lot of other things, you can try to beat it into his skull: “Survival is your right and infinite survival is your goal. Now, you understand that.”

Self Analysis was a pilot project, but Self Analysis does not come to an end because this handbook comes out. If you take a case that is pretty neurotic and try to stuff this handbook at them it can be pretty bad. But if you can coax this case to use Self Analysis for a little while before you give him this handbook, you will find he will come far enough up the tone scale to work.

“Yes.”

Self Analysis is an effort to connect the person with the material universe. You can read through Self Analysis and you won’t find anything but an effort to get the person reconnected with the material universe.

“Now, full responsibility is an ideal state. You understand that. You are fully responsible now, aren’t you?”

So, Handbook for Preclears would be too heavy for the neurotic or the psychotic but it will serve you above that level.

“Yes.”

Now, when I am talking about a low-toned preclear I really mean low tones — maybe a 0.8 that isn’t spun in, where there is no volume on the 0.8 but he behaves pretty much along a 0.8 pattern. You take that individual and you find out he can’t quite click with some of the things in Hand book for Preclears: it means that either you stand there and audit him — monkey around, fool around, do the first four steps of the fifteen acts — or you shove Self Analysis at him. Let him work Self Analysis for a while. You don’t care how thoroughly he works it, one way or the other. It will do some interesting things for a case. It sort of gives him an orientation. As a matter of fact it will actually take the major apprehension off a case. It just sort of takes charge off the whole line. You are not asking the person to tackle any of his postulates; you are not asking him to tackle anything.

“All right. I guess we got you there. Now, you are in a state of beingness, aren’t you? A complete state of beingness — you understand that?”

Something else interesting about Self Analysis is the fact that you as the auditor can use it, and you have almost an endless chain of Postulate Processing. Just recouch each of its phrases into a postulate: “Can you recall a time when . . . ?” and then make the next line into a postulate — ”Can you recall a time when you decided . . . ?” “. . . when you concluded . . . ?” “. . . when you evaluated . . . ?” — and ask him that. It turns in your hands — you can freely translate it — into Postulate Processing. But it is not headed at Postulate Processing. It is just a reorientation with the MEST universe. That is quite different from Hand book for Preclears.

“Yes.”

This book in its present state is made to be handled by an auditor supervised preclear. It is your knowledge which backs up this book. The uncertainty which your preclear will feel at being turned adrift suddenly with something like this in his hands is overcome by the fact that you are interested.

“All right. You are in that state, aren’t you?”

Now, let’s say that you have a preclear who is well up the tone scale — say 1.6, and the fellow has arthritis and so forth — and you give him the handbook and say, “Well, you process it on out from here. Just follow this book out.” This fellow’s aberration is stopping motion, and you are going to have a little trouble with the case one way or the other. If you have too much trouble with the case, take this book away from him and give him Self Analysis. Tell him, “You work that for two weeks. Then everything will get a little bit better for you and then we’ll give you the handbook.”

“Yes.” “You cause everything, don’t you?”

You can do that or you can just take this book and give him a little indoctrination. Don’t bother to argue with him. “Well, if you don’t accept that, that’s all right. That’s okay. Possibly you prefer something else, but this happens to work fairly well.” Talk to him kind of quietly and follow the first four steps of the fifteen acts. This will bring him up to a little higher point; it will get him squared around and up to where Dianetics has a little reality to him.

“Yes. Yes.”

By the way, there is nothing like turning on a good strong somatic to give people an idea of reality. The best method I know of turning on a strong somatic with a 1.5 or a 1.6 or a 1.7 — an arthritic — is to get them to get the feel of the atmosphere. Draw their attention to a knee or something and get them to get the feel of the atmosphere on that knee and various atmospheres — various counter-emotions are what you are asking them to feel — until you find some sympathy or some anger or something of the sort on that area, and the somatic will turn on.

“All right, you’re willing to accept the fact that you cause everything; you don’t desire not to be a cause on anything, do you?”

This counter-emotion is very interesting stuff, because it sort of seizes up somebody else’s facsimile. The counter-emotion comes in and seizes up this particular engram. It is held there by the individual but it is apparently seized up by somebody else’s emotion. So that is a very nice tnethod.

“Well, this business about murdering little kids, I don’t . . .”

Now, when you get a low-toned case you don’t give them the handbook. You could give them Self Analysis. If they don’t carry through with Self Analysis, you give them the first four acts of Hand book for Preclears yourself and build them up just a little bit, show them there is some reality to it, and then give them the handbook.

“Well, now, wait a minute. You realize that you cause everything and you . . .”

In other words, you can give them this book at any stage that they are ready for it. And you will have some preclears who will be ready to handle the book immediately, so you just give them the book.

“Yes.”

Then you call them and talk to them every once in a while. You keep expressing interest in their case. You keep pushing them along. You can even take this book and give assignments in it if you want to. Take a blue pencil and go over it with them and sit there and say, “Well, you go from this page to this and I’ll see you Wednesday,” and so on. You can use any trick you want to pull in order to get a person rolling on it.

“Now, you understand that?”

You will find occasionally that somebody will pick up this book and what he runs into will be too hot to handle. He will start running “people who enforced agreement upon you” — something that light — and all of a sudden he will say, “Yipe! I don’t want to go any further.”

“Yes.”

You call him up on Wednesday and say, “How far have you gotten with this book?”

“Okay! You’re in good shape. Get thee hence.”

“Well, I didn’t get very far. I was busy. I had to go to the store. Reginald got sick. Something happened.” You go over and you take a look at the book. Go over and call on him and start in again. Find what he wrote in it. He is hung up someplace.

That would be an educational level of doingness. It has certain drawbacks. You are going to find a lot of preclears that are suddenly going to charge off at about 1.5 or something like that and say, “Well, I’m self-determined now!”

Now, getting people started is the most interesting manifestation of the book. Once you get them started they will roll, because it will get interesting to them. This book is much more interesting to follow than Self Analysis as far as its processes are concerned, as you may already have discovered.

Actually, the attributes of self-determinism are identical with the attributes of theta all the way up the line. But if you really boost somebody up this tone scale they are going to suddenly fly out of your hands someplace along the line. This is not out of orneriness or blame or something of the sort; they are just going to get very active. It doesn’t matter what they get active in; they get very active. They have hit somewhere around their tolerance of randomity and so forth; they are not introverted anymore. They extrovert. In other words, available energy is being applied to the world and people around them, rather than being applied to the past or even to any great degree the present. They do a lot of future planning, a lot of action; every effort is into the future.

You can make a rule, then, that the book should be presented to the preclear at the time the preclear is ready to pursue his case in the light of the book. Your role as an auditor is to judge when he is ready and to bring him up to a point where he will be. You might be able to do that in ten minutes and you might be able to do that in five hours. Remember, the length of time that it takes to bring an individual out of an inaccessible state into an accessible state is not included in any time estimates on this book. Any time estimates so far used on this book include only accessible cases. So sometimes you may have to spend two or three weeks fooling around with somebody to bring him out of a psychotic state, the way things are now. You might have to do that. It would be regrettable if you did, but you should be prepared to do so.

Let’s take this business of survival. It may be that an individual can say to himself “Well, I’m going to survive forever” and lay in a postulate of that character and go on and do so. For some reason or other, every once in a while somebody in the past has walked into a monastery or gotten interested in engineering design or begun to raise flowers and just sort of automatically done it.

Now, this book can be used, actually, with you just sitting there reading it, asking the questions directly out of it, getting them answered and filling it in. If you are auditing a blind man, that is what you will be doing up to the moment when you are satisfied that he is going to roll all right. Then you give it to his wife or somebody else and you get them to read the questions to him, making sure there is no emotional conflict in that auditor-preclear group and making very sure that the person who is reading this book to the preclear and getting the questions and letting him go through these things won’t take any liberties with it and will call you if anything goes wrong. This is an effort to take the load off your shoulders, not an effort to put a load on the preclear.

By the way, pick up a Florist’s Guide sometime. These fellows are always in the future. They always want to see what is growing; they always want to see what is going to happen to these plants tomorrow. They have a couple of new breeds coming along and they are working out there in the slush and rain and going into the hot hothouse and out into the cold atmosphere all winter long. You would say, “Why, these guys would be in horrible condition.” No, they are not. You pick up a Florist’s Guide and the obituary in it says, “Smith, J: automobile wreck, age 96,” and so on. That is about the way those ages run — from 90 to about 110. This is really wonderful, and it is because their environment says “future” and of course their environment is actually full of life. They are growing things; their activity is very constructive.

It says right in the front of the book that there are several ways of handling it — four ways. One way is as a workbook to be used wholly by the auditor on the preclear. You actually would just sit there and all you would have to do is go through these steps: ask the questions when they are asked, explain things when the preclear doesn’t understand them, list these people all the way through, ask him to scan where he is supposed to be scanning and so forth. It is just a complete book of auditing.

Now, you would expect a maternity ward to be a little bit grim here and there. But you take a really big maternity ward like the one in Bethesda Naval Hospitall (just why the navy has to have a maternity ward is beside the point, but it does have one; it is an enormous ward and all the senators’ wives and congressmen’s wives and admirals’ wives and second-class seamen’s wives go there and have their babies), you go by it in the elevator and if you see somebody from that floor, you really know it’s the maternity ward. The nurses are way up the tone scale, they are just beaming and full of smiles, energy, enthusiasm. It isn’t that it is well-managed; it is just that there is new life. They are dealing exclusively in futures — utterly and completely in physical, living futures.

You as an auditor, from your experience and so forth, might suddenly see that this case is ready to run something in advance of what he is running, because this is for an average case. Make sure that your judgment is good. You don’t want to dive a 0.5 into a grief charge and expect him to run it, because a 0.5, being in grief, will not erase a grief charge. It requires a different point on the tone scale to get an erasure or a relief or a release.

You see a little baby suddenly appear in the children’s ward behind the glass, and three or four days go by and the child’s head shape is getting a lot better. The fathers are nervous and that is something to be joked about. The mothers come out of it and they are glad to see their babies most of the time. The doctors, the interns and the nurses that work in this ward are just up in the clouds all the time. It is a very cheerful thing to walk through the corridors on that floor.

You might all of a sudden find this individual way up ahead of you. All of a sudden you have gotten the computation on his case and he is just running like wildfire. You start to ask him to scan the various buttons, and you just grab hold of the chart real quick and get him scanning buttons on various dynamics. Suddenly he hits the central computation on the case of who he is being the life continuum for, so you run the sympathy off that and the preclear is off to the races. You can expect a case to do that, so you should use judgment in connection with this book.

That is action in the physical universe having to do with futures, and that is an ideal state of mind; it reflects itself in being very healthy and so forth.

It might even be of benefit occasionally to run an engram. The fellow is sitting in one, he seems to want to run one and there it is — run it! But you wouldn’t charge him into something heavy. This book will lead him into all the heavy charges you want.

Now, we are talking about an ideal state of being. A person to some degree, if he is in a happy state of mind, is right along that band. He is plotting into futures, he is working with futures, he is in action, he is traveling at a high level of motion. There isn’t very much in his environ that will block him, oddly enough; nothing much happens to him because he computes very easily on what is going to happen. He isn’t nervous about it. His computations are quite correct.

There is a section in this book that tells the preclear how to run his own grief charges. That is an interesting one. You are liable to find your preclear fouled up like fire drilll on it. All you have to do, though, is just probe around with enough regret and blame and life continuum until all of a sudden the charge blows anyhow. He is liable to bog on these grief charges. People run away from grief and they run away from fear charges — particularly from fear charges — so you have to watch the person. But you as an auditor using this book should also be perfectly competent to use your own judgment with regard to its processes, because this book is designed to keep the preclear from getting into trouble, and it is designed in such a way that it fits, more or less, the average case.

We are a little bit out of luck in Dianetics to this degree: at least at this time, in order to make people progress into the future we have to handle a lot of past. We sometimes fail some individual. We try to do something for him and every once in a while we don’t do it and we blame ourselves for that and we go down the tone scale. This is a very bad business and it is something that an auditor should safeguard against.

The next method of using the book would be as a homework book to be given the preclear for use between sessions. You just go into Advanced Procedure. You are giving this preclear a thirty-six-hour intensive, and maybe you aren’t giving it as an intensive in a week; maybe this preclear is getting audited at the rate of four or five hours a week or something like that. You can space it out a little bit. Give him the workbook between sessions. Just tell him it is a workbook and say, “Well, when you come back for your next session, have this thing finished up to such and such a point.”

The funny part of it is that all the auditor has to do is keep himself up at a rather high level of motion and he can fail all over the place for quite a period of time before he has to be put back up there again. Remember, though, he has to be put back up there again.

Regardless of where the preclear is in this book, you can just go right on along with Advanced Procedure as it is in Advanced Procedure and Axioms. It would really produce some fast processing if you were doing this double on him. But this person isn’t getting just a thirty-sixhour intensive. If you are giving him thirty-six hours of auditing and he is doing this book too, I don’t know where he would land. (And if you audit him wrong, the book will also unbog him ! )

Theoretically, he can reach that level and not be driven down from it again. No doubt this is the case, particularly if you review his whole lifetime and get it squared around.

The third method to use is the one that I really started out to describe. You get the fellow to a point where you think it is safe to turn him loose; that might be in ten minutes or it might be in ten hours. At the end of this time you give him this workbook and you keep checking with him then by phone or even by house call to make sure he is going on along the line with this workbook and where he is getting to.

But how do we go about both securing ourselves as auditors and securing our preclears into some action state of being? By motion, the handling of motion, action. Even if you are sitting around plotting and thinking and wondering and scratching your head about this and that, you can still indulge in some action. It is actually action to straighten out a preclear.

Now, when he gets over to Act Ten it says “service facsimile,” but for your benefit, what that really means is this is where you take a hand as an auditor and make sure his case is fairly straight and that he has missed nothing, and you do some of the auditing otherwise. Because you may find he has already blown his service facsimile and you also may find he has accumulated twelve more.

Now, there is one little question in Dianetics that someday will get answered. Why do we have to handle any of a person’s yesterday to make him look into tomorrow? That is an interesting question. We can see as we look down a person’s life track that it is an awful lot of yesterday, and any time we take in trying to straighten out that yesterday is that much tomorrow that we haven’t been plotting into. So it is interesting: Why should we have to handle yesterday?

And the last method is as a processing manual used wholly by the preclear without an auditor. This would take a pretty intelligent person. It would take somebody who was fairly savvy on the subject of Dianetics. You give him the book, he rolls on the book and he can push himself through.

When an individual is incapable of handling himself to his fullest extent and is being handled to a marked degree by his environment, the only way we know at this time to straighten him out is to straighten out the reasons why he cannot handle his own memory. We keep the environment from handling him by making it difficult for the environment to handle his memory.

This has the particular benefit of taking care of an isolated auditor. And it also breaks down the old problem of altitude as far as the auditor is concerned, because when an auditor gets back in an area and there are only two auditors in the area, will they audit each other? No, they won’t. They will go audit themselves a flock of preclears apiece, or if they do audit each other they will knock off auditing the preclears. Something will go wrong with the process.

This is an indirect approach. It should not be lost sight of that it is an indirect approach, since that would occlude a future worker in these lines from suddenly blasting through with a technique which would have to do solely with now and tomorrow and which would just do a “yesterdayectomy” on the preclear.

One of the first goals of this book, in its creation, was breaking up the cases of the auditors themselves and resolving those cases. There isn’t any reason in the world why you as an auditor can’t tear through this book and get yourself really up on top of the thing, particularly if you use this new section on life continuum. I am going to turn that out on mimeograph and we will send it out to you so that you will have a set of questions on life continuum. But I will show you that set of questions in just a couple of moments so that you won’t lose out on it, because you will be wanting to use it on preclears.

There is a mechanical means of doing “yesterday-ectomies.” You see it all the time: The individual fails markedly and decides to be somebody else. He comes up on the other side as a valence shift. This was life’s rather poor answer to how to go about this. He goes through these failure cycles and comes up as somebody else.

Now, this book can also be handed over to somebody to read to another person, as I just mentioned. You could really do a nice trick with this book. You could get a lot of people into class as auditors’ aides; you could actually advertise for auditors’ aides to help polio victims amongst children and get them to come in and give them two or three little evening classes and say, “This is how you do it. And you call for Papa if you strike a bad snag.” You would have located already quite a few polio cases — children, in other words — and you want these people to go to a hospital or go to a home and see that the child understands and performs the various functions of this book. They could just sit there and read the book and keep track of the case and be there all the time and so on. If they got in trouble they would call you. And s you would tell them not to try to get adventurous about the situation. They would have the security of knowing there is somebody behind them who knows.

Every once in a while an in dividual chan ge s his environ ment and changes his identity to some degree and succeeds wonderfully and is very healthful as somebody else — every once in a while. One doesn’t succeed anytime, though, to the degree that he should, because his yesterday will eventually catch up with him.

There are probably many more uses than that. Somebody was talking about an armed-services project. We will have to make another call on that, because what happened was, again, a shortage of auditor talent. Terrific indoctrination evidently had to be done, so I said, “No, when the book comes out, we’ll get the book supervised through and nobody will be arguing about it.” That was one of the reasons the book had to be done this way.

Now, the manic-depressive, historically — as well as hysterically — falls off from a manic, saying, “Oh, boy! Oh, gee! Oh, boy! Oh, great, fine! Euphoria! Great! Great!”

Another thing about this book: If you are going into a specialized type of case and you are going to have lots of these cases, we can print up this book so it says it resolves that case, give it a new cover and give it a new introduction. We can stress “bingoitis” or whatever you have decided to treat as a specialized line. Or for the armed forces, I could give out a copy of this book that would say its name is Survival Under Fire. Each and every time it is still Dianetics, but you as an auditor can say, “Well, it’s especially adapted to your case.” This solves the panacea problem: people don’t want to believe that they are that simple, that they can be cured up by one thing; they want to be known as difficult individuals.

And you say, “What are you thinking about?”

Those are the various usages and you can think up a lot more. This gives you a considerable fund of data concerning the use of this book. And where you find people are skidding or they get upset by it or it needs further resolution, and in particular when you have to answer the same question over and over and over, for heaven’s sake write me a letter about it. I will keep a summation of these things so that this book can do a natural evolution.

“Oh, I don’t know. Well, we’re thinking these big thoughts and . . . big thoughts and . . .”

Now, you want these books to throw away. You want these books to be used, written in, damaged, chewed up, and you want to pick them up when you have finished a case. You want to pick them up and look them over; you might learn something from them one way or the other. And if the individual says “Well, an awful lot of information is in there that I wouldn’t want you to know about,” you say, “Oh boy, how many pages did he miss?” You say, “Well, there happens to be an Act Sixteen and that means go back through it again. Here — there is a button you need to run that’s called hide.”

“What thoughts?”

This book is a destructible item. It is built to be that way. And it is also built to stay in your hands on a channel and come back to you and be destroyed.

“Well, we’re just thinking them. What are you questioning them for? You want to put me in a depressive cycle?”

You keep handing this out. When you hand this book out, you make sure you know to whom it is handed and what was wrong with the person when you handed it to him and what his name and address was. And when you hand it out, hand it out as a professional action. Don’t say “Well, here now, Bill, I think there is something here that could do you a little bit of good. You might look into it.”

That is the tune of it. He is not thinking. He is in an engram, actually — a simple, mechanical engram, just as mechanical as you read about in the first book. This engram has two points on its curve. Point one is way up at the top of the scale and the other point is way down at the bottom. That is an emotional curve.

No, you tell him firmly, “You want to be audited? Here. Name, address, telephone number. Yes, we’ll fix up a card for you and so forth. Here you are.”

So any time you run into this character, you are running into a very interesting setup which we get when we examine a facsimile.

This book is to be handed out as a professional action. Do you get the idea? Because this book is auditing. This is auditing. It is not something that tells him about Dianetics. If he wants something that tells him about Dianetics, there is Self Analysis, and also the Foundation can produce tons of small descriptive leaflets.

We take an individual who is at about 2.5 and we start operating on him; we put some gas to his nose or something of the sort and we start him down the line. And what do you know? He goes through a complete tone scale. He goes from 2.5 down to practically zero. There is the emotional curve. It is the middle of every engram.

I begin to wonder sometimes if anybody gets very busy in this business on some kind of an idea line. I got a cockeyed idea not too long ago, and I walked two blocks in each of two towns, just telling everybody I met who was obviously in horrible condition (it didn’t matter whether it was an old lady in a wheelchair, a young girl on crutches, a blind man carrying a cup — didn’t matter what), “Say, have you been down to the Foundation?” They would say, “What are you talking about?”

Every tone level below the level the preclear is chronically at is in every incident of unconsciousness. He may be starting into this thing at 1.1. This operation actually starts at the moment when he hears he is going to be operated on. He starts coming down the tone scale with the idea and then when he is actually starting to go unconscious he is probably down around fear. He will do a fluctuation into anger and then he will slide on down off anger into fear and down into grief and then into apathy. Then he will gradually climb up out of this on the same levels.

“Well, I just wanted to know. You know, they can probably do something for you.”

You do a cross section on any engram and you will find the emotional tone of that cross section. An engram is not a monotone: it is in a curve. You want to do a complete emotional curve on an engram; you get the emotion before, the depth emotion and the last emotion of recovery.

“Something for what?”

By the way, that is a very interesting one and you mustn’t overlook it because it is relief. The fellow hears that it is all over now, so he is in a state of relief. You ask your preclear what he wants and he will very often tell you he wants relief. Where do you find relief? If you scan all the relief in the bank you will find him at the end of every accident and every operation just after it is over. And what kind of shape is he in? He is all bandaged up, he is sick at his stomach and so on; that is relief!

“Well, for your condition — you don’t look like you are in too good shape.”

You run an emotional curve, then, which goes down and up. You start running this emotional curve down and up, down and up, and you will actually start disconnecting engrams from this individual without running them. I will go into that in a moment.

“Well, I’m not. Where? Where did you say?”

What is a manic-depressive? A manic-depressive is an individual who, because of a phrase or an effort or a restimulation — no more and no less — climbs way up the tone scale; there is just a small peak, and he hits this peak and then dives off it again and goes on with the engram. That peak is very fragile. It has been observed many times that a person stays on the manic less and less and in the depressive more and more. That is because the emotional curve of failure does what? We are really talking about key-in, aren’t we? Now we have the answer to key-in.

“Down at the Foundation in Wichita.”

A key-in is just a continual failure. The drop of emotion, which is natural to existence, can all of a sudden tie up with one of these engrams. And if a person gets enough of these emotional curves just in the analytical business of living, he will pick up more and more of these engrams until his whole bank looks like that curve.

But the point is, I was trying to find if these people were alert and interested. And a lot of them practically climbed over the top of me. That is very interesting, be cause you c ou ld open an office and you could go down the street and just hand out a little card that says “Dianetics” with a description on the back of it and your name and address. You could just say to the person, “How do you feel today?”

We are not ki cking out the window the first book or engra ms or sec ondaries. They are still there, but we have to know how to handle them a lot faster than we have ever known how to before. So let’s know their upper strata of anatomy. We find out in the first place that emotion is the thing which latches them on so that “I” can hold on to them. The “I” can hold on to them by emotion. We find out that when we get the emotion off we really start straightening things out.

The fellow, rolling along in his wheelchair or something of the sort, would be startled: “I don’t feel too good.”

We find quite often that one of these engrams has got effort surrounding its emotion and that you really can’t get to its emotion at all because there is too much effort on it. All of a sudden effort seems to be indicated in running the thing. You run the effort for a moment and suddenly emotion and thoughts come out of it. That is when you use Effort Processing.

“Well, maybe we can do something about it. A lot of cases like yours get handled all right, and so on. If you want to take a crack at it, okay; come down and see me at this address.” Don’t make any point of it. Just give him the address.

But as soon as e motion starts to show up after using Effort Pro cess ing , why go on using effort? What you do at that point is start running emotional curves, and the darned incident will disconnect. Because what holds it to the case? Effort doesn’t hold it to the case. Effort is just effort: You get in your car, you slam the door, you put on the brakes — effort, effort, effort, miscalculation. You start to open a drawer and you have to yank and bang at it. You mean to tell me this is aberrative? No, it is not. This is just incident to living in a rather patched-up society which doesn’t make drawers and doors so they handle easily.

There may be health sitting in that. He doesn’t know it. On the surface he thinks he wants to be healthy, and when you tackle his case, you will find it is a life continuum and he doesn’t want to give it up. But that is something you resolve afterwards.

But that effort can remind an individual who is already well down the tone scale that he has been balked before. And the emotion which he starts to exhibit can all of a sudden start to tie on to some old engram, and there he goes. What is happening to him?

Now, you don’t have to spend seven and a half hours doing something or other for him: You give him a book. You say, “Well, go on home and read it. What’s your name, phone number and so on? I’ll just keep a check on your case.” And you do. You keep a check on that case as he goes on through.

Doing an analysis of this, we find something very, very simple is happening to him: He is failing to handle his own facsimiles, and that is all that is happening to him. He is not handling his own facsimiles.

And he says, “Well, what’s it going to cost me?”

That is all that can happen to an individual, evidently: his own facsimiles go out of his control. So our study is how to put these facsimiles back into his control or how to disconnect them so he can’t handle them — so they just fly off someplace and that is the end of them. And in a lowtonescale case that is what you do: you just throw these facsimiles out. He would try to reach out and he would be reaching for thin air — that’s a big joke on him.

You can always tell him, “Nothing, but if it helps you, if you think it helps you, you can make a contribution.”

Then you pick him up along the line and you get him up to a point where he can do anything he wants with them. That is the state you are trying to get him into. That is self-determinism. Selfdeterminism includes the handling of one’s own memories. If one cannot handle one’s own memories, then the environment can handle them for him and that is restimulation.

It is a very funny thing, but an individual will usually contribute very heavily if he thinks he is going to help somebody else. He won’t contribute because he has been helped, so much. So you can come around after you know darn well that he is better, and you can simply ask him if he would like to pay for the processing of Mary Agnes Snide who lives down the block from him. It happens to cost $150 to process Mary Agnes, and if he thinks he was helped by it or something of the sort, let him pay for Mary Agnes’s work. You can actually go into action like this.

It is pretty low on the tone scale, this restimulation of the engram. It only happens to individuals who are being very thoroughly handled by their environment. Think about that for a minute.

One of the tough jobs out in the field is finding preclears. A lot of people sit around and no preclears show up. They even sweep off the front porch, but they don’t put out any sign; that is not “ethical.” (“Ethics” is whether you advertise for doing nothing, or not advertise for doing nothing! That is American Medical Association ethics.) The only fault that has ever been found concerning Dianetic ethics was the fact that somebody occasionally advertises in Dianetics. And you can’t have that sort of thing going on, because those doctors’ shops would just be wide open with the wind and dust blowing through them if you started advertising! Now, I want to give you the life-continuum setup for this book.

You start working on self-determinism and you will get your preclear going on up the tone scale at a heck of a rush. He will get up to a point where he can really handle these things and do anything he wants with them. This means you will have him up to a point where a silly tune won’t get into his head and start going round and round and round. That is just a facsimile he is not handling. He wanted to be affected by the tune, so he is being affected by it. He doesn’t know how to keep himself from being affected by it, so he can’t lay it aside when he wants to.

The first part of it is you ask the individual, “Who is dead?” And we have ten blank spaces, numbered, for him to write down who is dead. There are blank spaces sitting in front of him so he has to fill in something. After he gets through filling in all these things and he says, “Well, there aren’t any more,” your next column is “What is dead?” There are ten blank spaces, and you tell him this is animals or pets, younger children, babies — anything like this. And you get him to fill out “What is dead?”

Most minds would be some file clerk sitting in an enormous central filing system, and this file clerk has been told that he is in charge of all these files: There he sits and the file drawers slide open and packages start flying out of them. The whole file on the subject of automobiles moves over one day and somebody drops a steel curtain in between him and it. It is over there someplace, but he can’t tell you much about automobiles. He finally gets so he is just in a state of apathy.

Now you have got him set up with two columns, at which time you want him to describe the goals and the fears and the conditions of the first one of “Who is dead?” And you have ten blank spaces each for goals, conditions and fears for number one of “Who is dead?” In other words, make him completely delineate number one of “Who is dead?” on the goals of number one and the conditions of number one and the fears of number one. That gives you three columns for number one with ten entries for each column.

The file clerk stops working when a fellow goes way down the tone scale. It just sits there in apathy; the packages fly this way and they go that way, lines get connected this way and that way and the files get scrambled; a wind blows in through the window and it mixes them all up. He says, “Well, I guess that’s just the way things are. The environment is handling me.” That is the state an individual gets into.

You make up the same thing for number two, the same thing for number three, the same thing for number four and so on up to ten.

How do you put him back into a better state? Do you have to pick up every file, dust it off, find the proper filing place and put it back in place? God help us if we had to do that. That was actually, to some degree, what we were trying to do not too long ago. It is much too long a job and I hate filing anyway. Let’s just fix up the file clerk so he can go to work and do it anyhow. Let’s put personnel on the job. Let’s get the preclear into a situation where he can handle all of these things and then cut him loose.

He is sure going to get tired of bodies before he is through.

You will find that when you get him into a place where he can handle all of these things, he starts a rather progressive advance right on up the tone scale. He will walk along through life and he will see something and it will remind him of something else and that will remind him of something else. He will say, “What the — why was I ever worried about palm trees? Oh, yes! Yes,” and that’s that — boom! — it is gone, and he isn’t even thinking about it.

Now you take “What is dead?” — goals of, conditions of, fears of: ten entries each for goals, for conditions and for fears of every item under “What is dead?” — everything that has died in his life.

One day he will get so doggone extroverted and so intense on this new project that when you say, “Well, did you get it all straightened out?” he says, “Did I get all what straightened out?” “Don’t you remember? Auditing.”

I will give you a fast review on this: You have a column that says “Who is dead?” He lists as many people as he can think of in his life who are dead, whether related to him or not. Then you make up a column for “What is dead?” — you might say neuter-gendered. And then you make up three columns for number one of “Who’s dead?” three columns for number two of “Who is dead?” three columns for number three and so on. Then you go into “What is dead?” — three columns for number one, three columns for number two, three columns for number three and so on.

“Oh, yes, yes. Yes sir, that was a good session. That was a good session. Best thing that ever happened to me. Thanks ever so much. Say, by the way, would you like to buy a block of stock in . . . ?” He comes up above the level, eventually, where he thinks he has to buy any license to survive.

When you have all that done, you have your next one: “Who failed?” “What failed?” And you have him fill in the ten blank spaces for each. He has to give you a list of at least ten people that failed. On “What failed?” these are neuter objects, including machines.

Now, you might think offhand the society would probably fly completely to pieces and everybody would stop cooperating with everybody else and it would be entirely chaotic if everybody became completely, fully responsible and off on their own concerns. Maybe it would! But apparently, from what small indications we have, it doesn’t. It just starts to work a lot smoother and individuals in it become a lot healthier.

Now, you break these down the same way — goals of, conditions of and fears of. You give him a whole sheaf on that: for number one he has to make out all three columns, and so on. He has to write all this stuff down.

The main goal, then, has to do with the facsimile, and we could classify this as “facsimile, handling of.” Your knowledge which is under that heading should be classified as very important. Anything that comes under that classification is more important than “facsimile, erasing of” or “facsimile, reduction of.” Much more important is “handling of” — by the preclear himself.

It doesn’t matter whether the people he lists are alive or dead — anybody who failed, alive or dead. He will interpret it this way: He will find somebody who is dead and he will get one life continuum on this individual at the time that this individual dies. But then after he has got that one a little bit he will all of a sudden remember a time when this individual failed, too. And he gets another life continuum from that failure. He can get really loused up. Maybe this happened ten years before the individual died, and the individual was entirely different before he failed than he was after he failed. So for ten years after the failure this preclear is keeping on for the failed person, then all of a sudden he has to keep on for the dead person.

You have to know how to handle people’s facsimiles before they can handle them. The preclear isn’t handling his and you as an auditor are the environment, so you have to know how to handle his facsimiles.

Next, you go through the same routine on “Who departed?” and “What departed?” By the way, you will get all his repossessed cars, wives, incometax payments — all kinds of things.

By the way, you could probably process a person by processing him on all the people he was trying to process while he was busy growing up. “What would you like to have reformed in so-and-so?”

Now we go into this on the other side of the ledger. The first one on this is “Who won?” — ten people who won. By golly, it will sometimes really try a fellow’s imagination. But this winning category should be the second group. You should have the dead group first and then this theta group second.

Now, in the handling of a facsimile, first you have to realize what a facsimile is. It is a recording through all perceptions of the environment plus a recording of the thought, evaluation and conclusion — considering that a person himself is part of his own environment. That is a facsimile. It is a motion picture, a smellie, everything, across the boards — a wonderful motion picture in technicolor and so forth. This would be a full facsimile. This is data.

It should be “Who won?” and “What won?” A lot of preclears will answer this stuff very interestingly, because they will start listing what won over them — not as a life continuum or anything of the sort. They will start listing things like “Well, his name was, I think, Billy, and he beat my skull in.”

Once upon a time we were overstressing the need of sonic and visio and all the rest of this stuff. I don’t know that a person at 20.0 has any sonic and visio. I can tell you this: A person at 1.1 who has a tremendous amount of regret has a complete sonic dub-in track. I can tell you that, certainly, and I can tell you that if you take somebody at around 4.0 who is carrying forward a life continuum for somebody else, you will find he can shut off his sonic and visio and you can turn them back on again. But I don’t know that you could persuade anybody at 20.0 — though the facsimiles might be there, complete — to look at them. So this would be the same thing as saying they aren’t there, because you are never going to look at them. It comes out to that old cockeyed argument: Would there be a sound if a tree fell in a forest and a man wasn’t there? I have already brought an individual up above the level where he stops doing anything with sonic and visio; he is getting instantaneous computational data.

The next set is “Who arrived?” because every time an individual fails, he starts up in tone again when somebody else arrives, and that person will be an ally. You can really build up a fellow’s memory — his memory will really start functioning — if you ask him this question: “Who arrived?”

So handling a facsimile also includes what you select out of the facsimile and how you read facsimiles. I would like to see somebody do a paper on that; I don’t know yet. But I do know this: You can select any part of a facsimile you want if you are really self-determined. You can select out its effort, you can select out its emotion, you can select out its thought patterns, you can select out its perceptics. Any of these things could be selected out of it.

So, you take up those two categories: “Who departed?” and “What departed?” is the old one; its comparative level is “Who arrived?” and “What arrived?” With these, just as with the others, you have him write down goals of, conditions of and fears of — three columns for each entry on those.

But I don’t know that a person at 20.0 has any truck whatsoever with recalls as such. I am giving that to you bluntly; maybe I am up above the point where I rationalize. But there is a point for you: If you are trying to rehabilitate somebody’s sonic and visio as your goal in auditing, you evidently are going to keep him down along the line someplace where he does this. It is no goal. It isn’t worth it. This fellow is going to know everything there is to know, when he really gets up there, without recalling it laboriously, because recalls are not done in time. There is no time in a facsimile. There is a time tab and it says “August 3, 1942, 2:01 A.M.,” but he doesn’t even read that at this high level. He just happens to know that that is the datum.

You can make these out on sheets for a preclear or you can simply ask and straightwire the preclear. This is the way you would make it up with a mimeo sheet or something.

If you ask him “What time did this happen?” he would probably tell you if he weren’t too interested in something else. Don’t think that a person who has been rehabilitated is even going to be necessarily polite.

You do it just a little differently if you are straightwiring him. You have these categories, you ask them in routine order and you carry a tally sheet. You say, “Who’s dead?”

Now, a unit facsimile would be any consecutive related experience, in motion and so forth. Actually, it would contain as many recordings or as many separate pictures as sight needs in order to produce motion — 75 to 125 pictures a second. But maybe this experience lasted for a week. Maybe somebody got married and at the end of the week got divorced. Maybe somebody had an automobile accident; maybe somebody gave him a piece of cake. Each one of these things would be a unit facsimile. It would be a related experience. So you can see how variable its definition could be, but nevertheless it is only variable in terms of subject and time.

He tells you, “Grandpa.” So you get the goals, conditions and fears of Grandpa. You go ahead and work it out right there. Run its emotional curve, run some regret, run some blame — run anything — in order to discover if there is any continuum on Grandfather’s death. That is what you do if you are auditing him personally.

Related subject: “When I was in college . . .” Theoretically, lying there is a four-year or sixyear unit facsimile; this is the first one he presents. “. . . I was living in the south dorm.” That cuts it down to a much smaller facsimile. “And I had a roommate, and one night” (this is getting much shorter) “we went to see this girl.” This is a little tiny facsimile we are talking about now. That is the way things get introduced: big block, then smaller, smaller, smaller, smaller, and then the facsimile he wants to talk about.

Then you take number two on that category, then number three and so on. You exhaust “Who is dead?” as a life continuum. You just work each one of those as a life continuum till you get emotional curve enough, you get the blame, you get the regret — all this stuff — off the line on this life continuum. Just work it out right there. You find out “Who is dead?” and go straight across the boards with it, asking these questions. And you just get the deaths off the case.

Now, the person who is being handled by the environment says, “When I was in college — I forget which year it was — I had a roommate whose name was . . . Well, anyway, one night . . . What was I talking about?” This person is not handling his facsimiles. You want to get him up to where he handles them easily, swiftly and well. The only point that you will be able to get him to is the point where he becomes self-determined about handling them, and he is then going to fly out of your hands. Then you say, “Well, that’s the end of that preclear.” That is what will happen. You are not going to put anybody up at 20.0. You might put somebody at

This comes up in the area of sympathy in this book, in Act Eleven. You still have all the sympathy to run, but right in that same section will be this life-continuum proposition. That will be added into this book at that level. It will be the first part of the Eleventh Act.

3.5 or 4.0, but he will go on up if he is going to go. And if he isn’t going to go and you can’t put him any further anyhow, so what? There are lots of preclears!

Next, you go into “What is dead?” “Who failed?” and so on, right straight across the boards, getting the goals, fears and conditions. A person will do a life continuum of somebody who failed. He will go on and “succeed for him” by failing like him. Is there anything illogical about that?

You get him up above this band of 2.0 and he is not going to murder anybody, he is not going to kill himself, he is not going to work active harm in the society, he is not going to buy the crime of omission — which we very often forget is a crime.

Then you get “What failed?” and then “Who departed?” You just get one name at a time, and you want to know approximately when it happened, the goals of this person, the conditions of that person, the fears of that person. (When we say “condition,” you understand, we mean physiological condition or mental condition or both.)

Have you ever run into anybody who says “But I didn’t say anything, I didn’t have any part in the argument; it wasn’t any fault of mine”? Oh, yeah? That is the crime of omission. It is the failure to talk when they should have talked; it is the failure to do when they should have done.

Now, when you have finished “What departed?” you go on to “Who won?” “What won?” “Who arrived?” and “What arrived?” — the goals, conditions and fears.

Commission — action — looks so much bigger. That is pretty bad. Omission is worse, by the way, than the other level.

You will find a time that an individual’s automobile departed from him in some peculiar fashion or other, and you say, “All right, now, what was the condition of the automobile?” Right away he has to think about the automobile.

These people, when you bring them up the tone scale, won’t drive others around them berserk by their inactivity, irresponsibility, letting things slide by the boards and being completely limp about this and that and so forth. And they aren’t going to smash things and upset things and change everything haywire so people are upset all the time. In other words, they aren’t going to destroy things.

“Well, it had piston slap.”

But when you get them up above this 2.0 level, people start acting in a self-determined fashion. When they get up around 4.0 you can usually still reach them; maybe you can reach somebody at 5.0 and maybe you could push somebody up to 6.0, but by that time they are out of your hands. This is very different from somebody going out of your hands because of inaccessibility below 2.0. Don’t ever make the mistake of confusing these two.

“Is that so?” This individual often goes “Click-click-click-click.” (That is how ridiculous we can get!) “What were the goals of the automobile?”

There is one nice test: Is he thinking? Can he think about things? And does he remember things well? The only reason a person forgets is that he doesn’t want to remember. The only reason he doesn’t want to remember is that it hurts him to remember. If it hurts him to remember, then he can’t handle his facsimiles. So you just want to get him up to a point where he can handle all of his facsimiles, and that is all you are trying to do with the preclear. Of course, he won’t have any chronic somatics at that point. He could move in and out of a heart attack for an armyinduction physical in a split instant. He would go in and see the doctor, and he would have his heart going “B-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r! Murmur, murmur, murmur.”

“Well, to run smoothly and go places, I guess. And sit in the garage when it’s cold.” The individual will go on and tell you all about this automobile. But this is an innocuous question. He really isn’t doing a continuum on this automobile. However, what he is doing is finding out that you can be a little bit off groove. He has an idea of what you are looking for: you are looking for something else.

The doctor would say, “Oh, for God’s sake! I mean. . . It’s all right. Sorry, son,” and write down, “Poor fellow, he hasn’t got long to live. Rejected .”

It is not too bad a thing to be wrong once in a while. Don’t be wrong on purpose but don’t worry about being always right, because if you get your preclear to agreeing with you all the time, he gets into a state of trance or something as far as you are concerned, and you will have to snap him out of that before he will get up the tone scale.

Then the fellow would go outside and his heart would go pocketapocketa-pocketa-pocketapocketa- pocketa — regular as a clock.

So, you now have all these conditions of life continuum. This is a complete process all by itself.

Now, don’t get off into the feeling that because a person “wasn’t there when it happened” he didn’t know about it. Because you and I know he did. He can pick up both ends of an engram; they are both known. They are a space in time, aren’t they? And if he has that space in time spaced, he knows the content in between those points must have been space too; he can even handle an engram, and don’t think he can’t.

Now, somebody asked me how can “What failed” have a fear? Automobiles, for instance, are afraid of running into things, of course! I am being serious. I ran a little fellow who had lost a coaster wagon. What were the goals of his coaster wagon? “To carry me.” And this somehow or other was all balled up in his head in a complete bewilderment about him being carried. The coaster wagon was somehow his mother, was something else and so on.

You can go back along a preclear’s track and ask him, “All right, now, you’ve got this ear somatic. When did you first decide to have it?”

“Well, what’s the coaster wagon afraid of?”

“Never! I never decided to have it.”

“Hitting bumps.” He would get a jolt out of that.

“Oh, well, think for a moment. What is the value of having this ear somatic?”

So you say, “Well, all right, hitting bumps.” He had been trying to reacquire his coaster wagon ever since, only nothing he acquired which was on four wheels was satisfactory because it wasn’t a -coaster wagon. This was an individual in middle age.

“Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah. There’s something there....”

If you get somebody who is dissatisfied with every possession he gets, he is trying to possess again his tricycle that departed or something. It is fascinating. You ask him these questions, and it is jolting to him that there could be something about that or about this; because at the time he lost it, if he was a little child, the thing was alive to him — it had a personality and all this sort of thing. And it sort of jars it up in his mind.

“Well, do you remember what it is?” “No, but I just got a vague idea . . .”

Someone also asked whether this would include who lived and what is alive. I suppose you could include it. (Most everybody is dead, though, on the cases we get!) You would get a great deal of regret. But you can add that to the lineup.

“Well, run some sympathy for a minute.”

So, here we have something that is very close to a complete process all by itself, merely this life-continuum process. It will make an individual much better off. Do you see what happens with each one of these cases? Something very insidious happens with these cases. You can only do so much for a case and then it does the rest of it itself.

So he scans some sympathy — “Oh, yes, it’s my aunt. Ha-ha! She sure used to get upset when I got an earache.”

What you are looking for is the bumper, the booster that will send the preclear up the tone scale. Any one of these processes may act as a booster.

“Well, do you remember turning it on?”

Let’s take life continuum, for instance, and just work nothing on this case but life continuum. There are a lot of people dead on the case and so forth, and we just work nothing but that. All of a sudden this case starts going up the tone scale like a sky rocket and his somatics resolve. We have given enough oomph to this case so that not only did the inherent somatics he was holding as life continuums for people that you ran resolve, but people that you have never touched resolve too. You have just gotten his governor up to speed, so it keeps on going on up the line.

“No. I didn’t turn it on automatically at first.”

Now, you can take cause and effect, desire for approval and all the rest of this sort of thing, and process that. You can process that and not touch the life-continuum process, and very often you will find the preclear taking off and going up the line before you have a chance to work life continuum on him.

“Well, what did happen?”

Or you can take just the button chart and do nothing but scan him into the possession of some of these buttons, and he will take off up the line from there. You are dealing with some very powerful techniques. They all head toward the same goal.

“Oh, I remember I put a bean in my ear and it swelled up and she was very sympathetic. We went down to the doctor’s and he got it out. By golly, do you know after that every once in a while I’d get this earache when I was around her. Yeah. She’d blow cigarette smoke in it. Yeah. She’s dead now. I wonder if that’s why I smoke cigarettes?” The other thing just sort of drops out.

But these are just ways of unmooring a fellow from the bottom instead of mooring him there, as hypnotism tries to do, as some other techniques try to do. And you can, by the way, moor a preclear there. You can really fix him. You can authoritarianly process a preclear out of his arthritis by driving him from 1.5 down to 1.1. Then when some other auditor comes along and starts to pick him up the tone scale again, he will go through a stage of having arthritis. I have seen it happen. He goes down the tone scale from arthritis and the arthritis clears up; he goes up the tone scale and all of a sudden he gets into the strata where this life continuum that gives him arthritis is, and the arthritis turns back on — he gets some deposits back and so forth. It is not as serious as it was the first time, because he has found out that it could go away and he has made a postulate already that it went away.

Now, obviously some unconsciousness or something could be around such an incident, and the computation is on it.

You can just take straight Postulate Processing — nothing but Postulate Processing — and process all an individual’s conclusions and the postulates which he later on disobeyed because the environment insisted on changing. No postulate can be laid down that will be good for the rest of time. These postulates, then, can be picked up. You can pick up enough postulates off a case so he will start up the line, too. Sometimes you find it very difficult to pick up postulates because the case is so wound up in effort or something of the sort.

When a person goes unconscious down along the lower band he is in bad shape, because he is not conscious to begin with to amount to anything. But this isn’t any reason why he can’t say “Well, the years from five to ten I wasn’t very conscious.” That handles that facsimile.

Or you can take Effort Processing, all by itself, and run nothing but one complete experience. Run it out to its last possible dregs. Run it out till you get the effort of the cells to stay next to the cells, the effort of the liver to keep on “livering,” the effort of the teeth to communicate with the liver — in other words, all the effort and all the postulates and all the emotion off one major experience in a case. If you take the whole thing and that thing was even vaguely tied in with a service facsimile, the case is going to come on up the tone scale at a heck of a run. That is why we say “a few hours of processing.”

A person can handle his facsimiles with thought, he can handle them with emotion and he can handle them in lots of ways. But he knows what he is doing. And although you may act as though you are fully responsible, if you go on caring what he does with a facsimile after you have got him up to a point where he can really handle this facsimile, you are not being fully responsible at all. You are way down scale on the thing; you are being very concerned.

But I do not believe there is an auditor around at this moment who has 100 percent exhausted every single speck of effort, emotion and postulate out of one engram, because that is really a job.

The fellow you should be concerned with is the fellow who cannot handle his facsimiles: he has a bad memory, he doesn’t remember, he has slow reactions, it takes him a long time to think, he hasn’t got any time to do anything (although he is playing solitaire). This is a rough case! Serious! He says, “Well, I’ve put all that way back; I don’t think about that anymore.” It is way back, all right.

You run a preclear back down the time track and you get to earlier incidents, earlier incidents, earlier incidents — just clipping them as you go down, trying to find a good early incident — and you find one that can really be processed. You will find it generally on a conclusion line. You are maybe looking for the conclusions of why this preclear doesn’t consider that he is important anymore or the conclusion that he has to obey; there are numerous conclusions you can reach this on. You start running back down the line and down the line, getting the effort within the effort to obey, within the effort to obey, within the effort to obey, and there he is, getting run through the stomach in the Peloponnesian War or something. He can’t help himself; he will be right there.

All this depends on is a point of self-confidence. Perhaps this individual, by taking up the piano or by indulging in group therapy or some other thing, comes up fast enough so all of a sudden he starts to handle a few of his facsimiles. There you go — something has been done therapeutically. It doesn’t matter how you get this individual to handle his facsimiles; that is what we want him to do. At first he doesn’t want to handle them, in almost every case you lay your hands on, and you just sort of have to hornswoggle him into it. And all of a sudden he says to you very cockily one day, “Oh, well, I can remember that. I got myself started in. I always remembered that,” and he is going to town, because he is now going to be selfdetermined about the whole thing. That is what you are doing to people.

If you were then to take that engram — any one of these engrams (it doesn’t have to be a past death or anything like that) — and you were to exhaust it 100 percent, just sit down and knock it to pieces every way that you could possibly knock an engram to pieces, the individual’s recovery up the tone scale would be something fabulous.

This point of view is possible at this time because of the knowledge of Postulate Processing, the knowledge of Effort Processing and the knowledge of emotional curves. It is a faster and more advanced viewpoint than any of the past viewpoints we have had in Dianetics.

Auditors have been getting results even though they were not exhausting all the efforts out of these things. You don’t ask for all the efforts out of them — I know you don’t — because there are very strange efforts that you can ask for in any one engram. There is the effort, for instance, of the tail of the spine to communicate with the brain in that incident. You ask for this and all of a sudden brand-new flashes of pain and everything turn on in the thing. You think, “Well, that’s all gone now,” and then you get over on to some other efforts.

It is very distrustful of an individual to think that you have to knock out every bad memory he has. This is really saying to him “Well, we have to fix you up, you poor guy; you can’t handle your facsimiles anyhow; we just have to fix you up so no matter how you handle them you can’t get into trouble.” We didn’t have other ways to go about it. But now we have these other techniques; now we can start handling it on a faster basis. That is why processing has gotten swifter. It is just that there has been this shift of emphasis from fixing it up so that no matter what he did with his facsimiles he couldn’t get into trouble, to the point of fixing him up so he can handle his facsimiles no matter what happens. It takes the seriousness off the situation and the level of concern which you will feel. Therefore your technique is shorter and that is why it is shorter.

All efforts are nonsurvival. Every effort is nonsurvival in its ultimate, because at the very beginning is a state of beingness, theoretically, and then a counter-effort. Then that countereffort becomes the effort, and then another counter-effort becomes the effort and then another counter-effort becomes the effort. So each effort in turn was first nonsurvival and then survival.

Now, the unit facsimile is something that can afford a great deal of study to a lot of people for an awful long time. You suddenly run head-on into the genetic blueprint of the body or its structural blueprint or any other blueprint that you want to call it, and when you start looking over this genetic blueprint you find out what its patterns of memory were that caused it to be constructed that way.

So all the way up the line you have the nonsurvival effort and the survival effort. You have both of these efforts. You have the effort to see and the effort not to see, the effort to hear and the effort not to hear. You can hit either side of these. You can hit the effort, meaning the individual’s effort against a counter-effort, or you can hit the counter-effort.

This would be, by the way, a major discovery in biology. If you want to play with this, you will be “biologizing” above any biologist alive today. Also, it tells you about evolution. There is a lot of data in there. But this is the data of what is in the facsimile, rather than “can he handle it?”

Now, when you start running Effort Processing, you just start to ask for the effort this way and the effort that way. Effort Processing does not need much delineation from me here; there is quite a bit lying around on it already. It is fascinating stuff. When I fired the gun on that thing it really exploded, and we have seen some weird things happen in Effort Processing.

A person’s self-determinism can be advanced up to a point, evidently, where he can handle any facsimile back along the time track. He doesn’t have to even remember and recognize the thing; he can handle it. So when it starts to move in on him he knows exactly why it started to move on him, he does an automatic process and it moves out — bang! — if he doesn’t want it.

So, the individual’s efforts and counter-efforts exhausted 100 percent from one end to the other of a good, long, solid, hard, painful engram brings about a recovery in tone which is fabulous. You can look it over.

But if you started “biologizing” you would want to know, wouldn’t you? You would want to know what was in this one, what was in that one, what was in another one, what was in another one; you would want to monkey around and fool around with them and examine them one way or the other. That is a very fascinating study.

You have to get the thoughts, which are the postulates on that engram line. They come up about halfway through. Then sometimes you have to turn around and get the efforts to have those thoughts because the thoughts themselves won’t release. The thought is based on some earlier effort, which is action, and the effort was so strong on this postulate that you have to i process out the effort to have this effort in the engram. So you go back from the engram and process out that effort, then you come back up and go on processing the engram you started.

You can examine some history with this track too. It doesn’t always agree with the history books. A “Mississippi of lies” is how one philosopher referred to history. I have gotten enough checks off the line to realize that it is not all squirrel-cage stuff.

You ought to do it sometime just for practice — process one engram from one end to the other, completely, 100 percent. There is the effort for one side of the back to communicate with the other side of the back; there is the effort for the eye lenses not to touch the eyeballs; there is the effort of the hair not to stand up and the effort of the hair to stand up; there is the fellow’s effort to breathe and his effort not to breathe, and the effort to keep the heart beating but the desire not to keep the heart beating and the effort not to keep the heart beating. In a death, it is the effort to die and the effort not to die, the effort to hold the motion and the effort not to hold the motion, the effort of the cells not to collapse and the effort of the cells not to blow up — there are lots of efforts. But you will know what efforts to ask for, because all you have to do is ask the file clerk and he will tell you.

There is good reason you run into past bad incidents of that character: there is so much regret on them. For some reason or other, people do not like to have a bottom-static failure. There is something about dying. (That poor clam ! )

If you want to do this job of Effort Processing, just as a technique, it has remarkable results. But you should understand also that you can go on Effort Processing an individual forever until he disappears! Fortunately it would take forever to make him disappear.

Anyway, in all of this processing, if you have the return of self determined ability to handle facsimiles as an end goal, you will be able to do a lot faster work with your preclear.

Now, you say, “It takes several hours to run one grief charge off a case.” But are you saying “It takes me as the auditor several hours to run grief off of this preclear”?

It could be in three ways: We have this preclear up to a point where the running of the grief is incidental; we have this preclear up to the point where he will run his own grief; or he is still slogging down along the bottom of the tone scale someplace where you have to sit there and say, “Yes, yes. Yes, yes. And then what did she say? And then what did he say? What did she say then? Who else was there? Yes; yes, indeed....” You could take hours at that; I guarantee that you can spend over an hour running a grief charge off a case that way.

But if you start sneaking up on a grief charge by running regret and blame and an emotional curve and so forth, all of a sudden it is like an artillery shell exploding. If you run this stuff long enough, the preclear will blow up, or he will simply come into a recognition of the whole thing, snap out of it and pass right on over it, and he will no longer be stuck there on the track and he will be able to handle this facsimile.

It doesn’t much matter, because a facsimile is not interior; it is not inside you. It isn’t stored in any file-card system in the back of your head. It is not energy enclosed in your cells. It doesn’t have to be bled out of the cells in order to make the cells happier. I had done insufficient work on this; it apparently was in the cells, but that was before we isolated the identity of the life static and found out a facsimile didn’t have any wavelength. I would like to know how the devil you can store anything which doesn’t have any wavelength.

Furthermore, how rough can a facsimile get? I have a hole in my jaw that says it can get rough enough to kick a tooth out through the side — just a facsimile that you borrow and turn on full. Some of the people around the Foundation remember the night I came down looking rather hangdog and announced this experiment. It actually had broken a tooth out sideways. I would like you to show me a tooth which has residual energy in it sufficient to break it out from the center that way.

Completely aside from this point, all the cells of the body seem to change about every seven years. Completely aside from this point, remember the clam? You can’t tell me that the pain from that clam cell is still stored with physical-universe energy. It is not.

So you are handling facsimiles which are capable of regenerating on the physical universe and taking out of the physical universe the power they use. It is a regeneration process by which the facsimile uses the force residual in the universe in order to produce the forces which it has. But it can come in from the doggonedest vector sources.

Did you ever stand in a vaccination line? Sometimes the medical corpsmen or the hospital boys are not too easy on that; they stab the fellow and he goes spang! It is quite a jolt.

You can run a fellow through that; you can sit there and watch his arm if he is running well and you will see it dent where the needle hit. You will see it dent all the way in. Does anybody want to show me the muscles of the arm which can make it cave in to a point? That is nothing but fatty tissue that is caving in. Evidently the unit facsimile influences the atoms and molecules of physical structure. It is on that low a level of influence — at least that low a level of influence. It is a direct contact on atoms and molecules and it can form them into any shape it wants.

It is no mystery how your preclear can go way back down the bank and get into an incident in childhood and more or less get stuck there and keep on looking like that when you bring him up to present time. It is no mystery how you can have somebody with a big swelling on his neck and when you run the incident you can watch the swelling go down. It is no mystery; there is nothing much to it. That is a facsimile. What you are trying to do is handle these darn things.

The reason why the facsimile cannot be handled is not because the individual did not handle it at the time. That is much too brief. It is because he later on used it and failed with it. That is the key-in situation. It doesn’t matter how many Mack trucks you get run over by. Don’t, however, take a Mack truck and run over somebody and fail.

It is the use of the facsimile. You could actually ask a preclear this question and you would get an interesting result: “What is the first time you decided to use a bad facsimile or a destructive facsimile? What is the first time you decided to use it?” Try it. You may get some very interesting results out of your preclear, because that is basic-basicl on key-ins. I know what it is, but why don’t you find out? It is very easy to locate — the first time you decided to use a bad one.

Now, you decided to use a bad one in this life — the time your brother came up to you and said some nasty words and you hauled off and pasted him one. How come you pasted your brother one? What did you use for data to paste your brother one? You used an entheta facsimile. You pasted him one and Mama came out and said, “You mustn’t hit your brother anymore!” Bang! Bang! Bang! That hangs you up with this facsimile of pasting somebody in the jaw, and you can’t do anything about it, and so you have it. You went down an emotional curve; you went down to slow speed because you were interrupted in your action. And you get that facsimile from there on, because what did you use in the first place? You used the facsimile of being, yourself, struck in the jaw. You said, “This is data.” It was parked back there and you could handle that all right. So you were hit in the jaw — so what? But one day you said, “Hmm. I’m not fully responsible. Here’s a nice facsimile of a good sock in the jaw” — bang! You were being the countereffort; you were the winning valence at this point. You used that facsimile in the winning valence. You were being the counter-effort, you hit your brother in the jaw and then somebody came along and said, “No!” Down the tone scale you went. Then you had to swivel and be the effort — not the countereffort — so you got the sock in the jaw.

Why did somebody stop you? Because they wanted you socked in the jaw. People do this instinctively.

So when you drop an individual down the tone scale, you get him down below speed. It is even more exact than that: you throw him over to where he becomes the recipient of the counter-effort.

This individual has worked and worked and worked in order to get his preclear up from an engram. A little bit later somebody comes along and tells him he failed at it, or the preclear tells him he failed at it.

What has he been using for data? While he was working on the preclear, he may have been fool enough to pick up a facsimile out of his own bank that was almost identical to what had happened to his preclear. He had this and he was examining it: “It goes this way — goes round and round, and it comes out there. Oh, yes. What’s the next step? Yes. And then what happens? (That’s what happened to me.) Well, will that do?” He was all set. But what was he being? He was being the counter-effort. He was forcing the preclear to run an incident, but that was the incident that he was using and he was the counter-effort in that incident.

So, he has been using this and all of a sudden the preclear says, “Well, I know you processed me for eight hours but I still have pogostickitis.” (That’s a disease that makes an individual bounce around a lot.) The second the auditor fails he goes down tone, because what it restimulates is an emotional drop of tone. And that emotional drop of tone is attendant to switching him from the counter-effort into the effort. So he gets it — bang!

The auditor has a tendency to pick up and use a facsimile to compare it to whatever is happening to the preclear, and he is being a counter-effort in the preclear’s facsimile in order to force the preclear through it. Failure causes him to reverse and become — in his own facsimile, not in the preclear’s — the recipient of the effort. So he picks up the somatic.

In a life continuum, a person dreams up things for Grandpa and he dreams up things for this and that, and he is fully responsible for life in general, but all of a sudden he hits this emotional curve — he hears about a death or he witnesses one — and he dives down the tone scale.

His first impulse is to be the counter-effort and hold it back. Did you ever see some little child about to have an accident? This child is going up toward the table and you can’t reach him in time, and you pull back as the table or something of the sort.

You often get the same thing when you start to feed a little baby. One day I was in a restaurant and Mama was feeding her little baby, and everybody in the restaurant was looking over at that table. Of course, the baby was too busy playing with spoons and things to eat, but Mama would extend the spoon and the baby would clamp its mouth shut and Mama would open her mouth wide. Then the baby would open up and take it. I watched this going on — Mama opening her mouth, and so on, each bite. I looked around the restaurant and everybody in the whole restaurant was doing it. They were all cause; they wanted that baby to eat.

It is this mechanism with which you are dealing. There is how the life continuum happens and there is how you resolve it, and there is also your goal in processing — just to render the individual capable of welshing on some of his bets back in the past and to get in control of all of his facsimiles again.