Thank you.

Saint Hill Special Briefing Course.

Thank you.

Now I want to tell you some very important facts of life. Now and then – now and then, when you’re growing up… It reminds me of a Marine sergeant. Marine sergeant came home, and his little brother had been having a bad time. So his mother – Marine sergeant’s mother – said, „Why don’t you take your little brother out back and talk about the birds and the bees?“

Are you making it?

The Marine sergeant says, „Okay.“ So he takes him out and he says, „Now look, Joey,“ he says, „you know,“ he says, „you get out your scooter, go along the street, you pick up a goil, you run her along back of a hedge, you know, you know, that kind of thing?“

Audience: Yes.

And Joey says, „Yep.“

Listen to those. That's what you get for getting yourself in such lousy shape. That's all I've got to say. What a dirty look. Well, who got you in that shape? Yeah, that's it. That's just the whole thing That's the whole thing. Somebody else is to blame. All right.

He says, „Well, birds and bees, same way.“

All right. Good enough. Now, my auditor at the moment is probably sitting back there. Where is he? Where is he? Yeah, there he is there. He's probably sitting there nervously because he said to me last night, he says, "Well, that's something that you can tell the students." Actually, he's very nervous that I'll make a comment on his auditing

And I want to tell you why auditing works. Reference: any publication or bulletin which discusses the two-pole nature of the universe.

I haven't gotten any hammer-and-tongs auditing for quite a while, straight on through and I'm going for broke now. And let me tell you, it's a terrific sensation to be audited by an auditor that knows his business. You know, will follow through and does do his business. You know, it's terrific. And absolutely nothing compares to it at all.

There’s a whole mathematics based on this, by the way, by a man that I was very happy to meet one time, Buckminster Fuller – Bucky Fuller. He invented Dymaxion geometry. He’s a stress analysis-type man, pure mathematics and that sort of thing Dymaxion geometry proves that the universe couldn’t exist without two poles. Everything has two poles. There is not one of anything in this universe. You’ve heard me mention this before from time to time.

The standard of auditing — just from — just from a subjective viewpoint — the standard of auditing of a couple of years ago and the standard of auditing now, they're absolutely no comparison of any kind whatsoever. The auditor's predictable, the rudiments we have, when they're in, the person is in-session, so forth. The auditors are getting careful of the pc. They're auditing the pc, not the chair or something And it's — just makes — it makes a heck of a difference. Terrific difference.

Now, in a recent lecture, I described to you the lowest level of observation. Or it get – it’s so low that it’s nonobservation. And that is „being something.“ Remember?

And this has been quite an experience last week and this far this week. And from a standpoint of subjective reality on just exactly what you are doing Nothing very fancy. Phil was auditing me a couple of hours a day and it's pretty good. And I was impressed with this fact. I was impressed with this fact, that all an auditor has to do today is do exactly the processes, the Model Session, the exact routine that you're doing — and if he doesn't vary from these things, if he's careful on each point and so forth, that it's absolutely marvelous. Absolutely marvelous. We really got this thing grooved in and a pc could not help but be impressed with just good standard auditing. He just couldn't help but be impressed right down to the ground.

The fellow couldn’t see it because he was it. That’s your lowest level of observation.

I was thinking it would be a wonderful experience if all auditing in Scientology were of that caliber. If it were all predictable. See, if it never got any funny business going on and if the auditors more or less stayed in twoway comm with the pc and carried on exactly what he was doing and never let the pc take the session out of his hands and so forth.

Now, you see this in human behavior all the time. The fellow can’t observe what he’s doing. If he knew he was doing it, he wouldn’t do it. But he actually can’t observe what he is doing. And that’s to a limited extent because he cannot observe himself.

This — particularly a new experience for me because the auditing I've had has been pretty varied one way or the other. And auditors suffer from the fact that every time I sit down as a pc, why, they think I'm going to instruct them and they want me to instruct them. So halfway through a process or something like that, they ask for some directions or something. That's pretty grim, believe me, you know.

Now, „know thyself“ is an old philosophic saw. And I think it was basically and originally introduced as a trap for thetans. The only way you could know yourself, of course, would be to view yourself.

And I got so I couldn't — I didn't dare make a remark to an auditor, you see. They'd do something about it, you know. I mean, I say, "Well, I had a somatic there," you know and the auditor would do something about that. We wouldn't go on with what we were doing, don't you see?

Now, the Goals Problem Mass contains in it anything you know about problems. Why does a problem hang up? Because it’s postulate–counter-postulate, intention–counter-intention, goal–counter-goal. And these two things being of equal strength hang up. When they’re not of more or less equal strength, they don’t hang up. An overwhump occurs one way or the other and you don’t get a hang-up.

And this — this in itself, just a non-Q-and-A in the auditing department is a fantastic thing to experience. An auditor never Qs-and-As. Pc can say what he damn well pleases. Gives you a terrific area of freedom.

It’s never any problem to be shot. You’re just dead, and that’s that. You see? I mean, if you’re going to be seriously shot. See, it’s not a problem to be shot. It is a problem to be shot at while shooting at somebody. Now, that is probably a primary problem, and that is why war is protested against and why it stays with us – because it’s a bunch of guys shooting at a bunch of guys.

You can say, "Well, you goofed," you know. you don't have the auditor all of a sudden blowing, you know. Auditor goes on with his business. In other words, you don't have to sit there carefully as a pc to keep the auditor in-session or something. And it's really been a terrific experience. I really appreciate it very much. We're going right on with this at a couple of hours a day.

Wars which happen suddenly on a total overwhump basis, one really never hears much about them. Probably they’d never be objected to either, and they certainly wouldn’t hang up on the time track.

It's been about seven sessions, two items listed and found, the terminal and oppterm of a package on a discovery list and tone arm action through the two items has been 1.75 to 5.0, as a breadth of range, constant motion. And we're having a ball. That's no — that's no kidding. I really appreciate the auditing I'm getting.

But these wars, particularly static warfare, hang up because you’ve got balanced forces. And it hangs up in time. And the more balanced the force, the more hung up in time. That’s all.

And I'm here to tell you something. I'm here to tell you something You probably have fantastic ideas of — particularly if you're just coming in new on it or if you've only been at it two or three weeks here or something like this — of, "Exactly what frame of mind do I get into in order to audit?" and so forth. And, "How do I best overwhelm this pc?" or some such questions, see?

You want to know how long a war is going to last? Just estimate the force of Nation A and the force of Nation B and of course, in view of the fact that we’re dealing with general staffs when we’re dealing with war, we have to equate the stupidity of one as compared to the stupidity of another. And this is a balancing factor. Now, if that stupidity were equal, and the forces of both nations were equal, and the destruction’s accomplished were equal, that war would go on forever. There must have been something like this occurring during the Hundred Years’ War. And that must have been the way it was, you see, and so it went on and on.

And I can tell you that the most impressive attitude for an auditor is simply calm competence and go on and do his job. Come hell or high water, just go on and do his job. And the greatest certainty the pc can have is that the auditor will keep on auditing and not take up something else every time he starts in auditing something

Now, a Goals Problem Mass means that the intentions of a type of beingness oppose the intentions of a type of beingness more or less equally. To hang up and become part of the Goals Problem Mass, it must be exactly equally. That of course is nearly impossible which is why you have so few items in the Goals Problem Mass.

And when a pc gets that idea, why an auditor then has terrific altitude. An auditor, actually, in an auditing session, has altitude for no other reason at all.

You have to have equal opposition, just as we’ve really only had one Hundred Years’ War in the last many, many, many centuries, you see.

All right. Well, let's see. What's the date?

Why, it’d be very rare that you would get a type of valence exactly against and balanced against a type of valence. Don’t look at this as a going-on-forever, don’t you see? Because a person has been many more beings than are contained in the Goals Problem Mass – many, many more beings. And why aren’t they hung up?

Audience: 17th.

Well, they just weren’t at that delicate opposition of one versus the other which gave us the fist against the fist which balanced it so as to make it drift in time.

By George, it is the 17th. 17th April AD 12, Saint Hill Special Briefing Course, lecture on the subject of auditing.

And we get equal forces exerted one against another, and we get an illusion of no time. And so it just goes on forever in time. And that is why a Goals Problem Mass stays with the person, and of course all there is, all you’ve ever learned about a reactive bank, all that we know about mental energy phenomena and all the rest of it, it just is contained in this thing, Goals Problem Mass.

We're only hitting two processes today — two packages of processes — on which we're going to count for steady, continued case gain. We're going to count on these processes. And that's the CCHs and 3D Criss Cross. And we're going to count on those processes. And the reason we're going to count on those processes is because those processes have been working and because they take a case all the way south. And because there are a certain number of skills which are packaged up into the CCHs and 3D Criss Cross which auditors have been able to learn, auditors have been able to apply. Auditors do well with these. There are very precise drills and they are carried out in a very precision manner. And auditors can do these things.

Now, there’s free track where a person has not had an opposed lifetime and, running engrams, you run this free track. Of course, it’s available, it’s free and it erases.

Now, that's the first test of a process, is can an auditor do it, not can I do it. 'Cause, Honey chil', I could audit things on you that would stand you upside down and hang the pc's thetan on the moon, see. But that hasn't anything to do with it at all. It has to do with my enthusiasms for certain processes in the past and it has to do for my misguidedness occasionally on certain processes because I could do them and somebody else couldn't. Something like that, you see. It'd be a limited number of auditors that would have success with it.

But what he’s up against is this nonfree track. That’s what’s really rough – where the valences versus the valence. You see? The type of identities versus the type of identity. He has lived many lives as a waterbuck and has opposed in those lives the tiger and has lived a few lives as a tiger and has opposed waterbucks. And you get this kind of a grep-rrrr-rrrr-rrrr, and there’s going to be nothing happens then except this stays there in the bank totally opposed to total opposition, you see? And it’s just balanced in time.

You look at these two and you will find out that they are broad success processes. The CCH and 3D Criss Cross. You'll find out that nobody's going to have very much trouble with these processes.

Now, frankly, it is so difficult to make two of these valances bash up against the other, it’s almost unheard of. You see, the chances against it happening are just fantastically remote that you get a hang-up over trillennia – trillions of years, you see, of two types of identity. Oh, it’d go away sooner or later, don’t you see. It’d slip, it’d wear out, it’d get erased.

You have to be a terrifically well-trained auditor to run these processes. Don't kid yourself about that. The standard of training is way up. But there is no compromise. There is no lesser grade of processing that will get a pc all the way through and don't believe that there is. There isn't. Not that auditors will consistently do around the world.

But those things in the Goals Problem Mass have not worn out, have not slipped, have not gotten erased, have never become overbalanced and are there in that delicate balance which maintains them in present time. And they’re maintained in present time and they are the reactive mind.

Now, what changes my viewpoint on this is that I have had a great deal of success with some rather fantastically, razzle-dazzle processes at one time or another. I remember a girl stumbled into the office one time, didn't even know her right name, audited her, think a couple of hours or something like that and she turned clean and sane and went and got herself a job. And as far as we know never had any trouble afterwards.

Now, in view of the fact there are tremendous numbers of minds available for these – you see, each type of personality, of course, becomes a mind – you have tremendous numbers of minds in the reactive mind with tremendous numbers of retrained responses.

Trick processes. Yeah, yeah, yeah, but these are spotty. Next psycho came along You couldn't audit the same process on that psycho. You see, you had to dream up something else.

Then for each one of these that is hung up, you have an accumulation of locks. And these can number into the hundreds for every one of these items. Now, let’s say – well, this is not an accurate figure, but let’s just get some idea of it – let’s say they’re average two hundred items as lock items for each valence that was hung up. That would make four hundred for two valences, wouldn’t it.

Well, this enters in judgment. It enters in imagination and judgment. It enters in a great many factors. And I will give you a resume now of what can broadly be done. And this is no insult to auditors broadly, but I'm just telling you factually what's the truth about the situation.

And let’s say there were twenty of these packages. Do your own mathematics: any one of those is a mind. See, the locks are as effective as the keystones of the GPM. See, it’s just the locks derive their power… Just because they’ve got – you’ve got two of these things hanging up one against the other, now the locks can become just as effective on the individual as any one of these hung-up things.

An auditor can do any process — that is, any auditor can be trained to do this — which does not require of him more adjudication than can be given to him by an E-Meter. If you ask him for any further adjudication or judgment than he can read off the E-Meter, you're going to find a broad swath of disaster following that process. See, some are going to be able to do it, but the majority are not.

And before you get it straightened out, every one of those, see, in their thousands, are a separate mind capable of thought, capable of action and reaction, with set solutions and now-I’m-supposed-to’s to all existing problems connected with them. And they can be pretty dopey. They got everything in them, in other words. And that composite lot is the reactive bank. If you add to it the few areas of free track that hang on both sides, you’ve just about got the lot.

Now, these precision drills of the CCHs require that an auditor observe constancy or change. Now, there we're going to run into a little bit of trouble occasionally. Some auditors are going to look at a pc and say this pc isn't changing when the pc's changing wildly and so forth. We'll run into a little trouble like that occasionally, but that nevertheless can be borne with and steered into adjudication of it.

See, this lifetime has certain areas of free track and other lifetimes didn’t happen to get mixed up in this, and you get free track, and the individual can run this free track.

In other words, as long as we've got Instructors that'll kick an auditor's head in while he's being trained for a change in processes while the pc is still getting change on the process, we can ride out that one. Auditors can be taught to do the CCHs. There is no mystery about why the CCHs work.

Free track, oddly enough, explain a lot of things to him but never quite unravels it all. There is always that reservation. It didn’t quite unravel everything. Do you see what this is all about now?

An auditor can be taught to list and read a meter against a list. In other words, he can do any of these CCH drills and he can do any of these listing, meter-reading drills. And those, auditors are having no difficulty doing And fortunately for us all, it is the main route and the fastest route to Clear or OT or anything else you want to reach. That's very fortunate for us, you see. Now, what it requires is instruction of a precision nature. When you're training somebody to do this, don't yourself get into the idea that there's two ways to do it, because I can tell you right now there aren't. There aren't two ways to do any of these things. There aren't two ways to do the CCHs. There's only one right way to do the CCHs.

In other words, the fellow galumphed along, and he was very fine and he was doing wonderfully and he was a polar bear. And he went for a long time as a polar bear and he went swimming in the ice and everything was marvelous and he ate fish, and so forth. And you’re not going to find that. He didn’t have any trouble as a polar bear. He’s never posed anything as a polar bear. He went on being a polar bear. Of course, he got engrams as a polar bear, but that’s fine, and then one day, one day he decided – one day he decided all on his own, you see – to start being a seal. Up to that time as a polar bear, he had never eaten any seal because this is early on the track, you see.

And in 3D Criss Cross, there's only one right way to list. There's only one right way to null. you could differentiate a couple of ways, but you'll lay eggs. It isn't a two-way proposition that you're dealing with. So we're dealing with something which is a studied, precise drill and a studied, precise drill which has been successfully, consistently taught to auditors now for quite a while — especially the CCHs. Right CCHs are easy to teach to auditors. Wrong CCHs are hard to teach.

And he accidentally knocked a polar bear, you see, off of an ice pack and this started getting very complicated one way or the other. So he decided, „Well, the devil with that. I don’t want to be a seal. I don’t want to be a polar bear. I’m going down into the warm latitudes and here’s an interesting looking animal: a waterbuck.“

3D Criss Cross — we've been very successful in teaching people to do 3D Criss Cross. Extremely successful. And this is marvelous. And the other thing is, we can train an auditor to do a repetitive process and that's your Class IV. It's just repetitive processes.

Up to this time he doesn’t have any reactive bank to amount to anything, see. Oh, there are incidents and oppositions and so forth. But here he goes.

So as long as we get a high level of competence in exactly those spheres, you're going to see dissemination go by leaps and bounds. It's terrific. I mean, there isn't anything that you could say that would be an exaggeration, factually. From days of exaggeration when I shouldn't have been exaggerating, perhaps, on enthusiasm, we've gone to a level where we can't exaggerate it. You yourself should learn that and you will learn that in your line of experience, that you cannot exaggerate what you are doing There's never been anything like it. Auditors can be taught to do this competently. And competently done, it makes a fantastic impression on the pc. He gets a level of security and interest and so forth. Terrific.

Now, he’s a waterbuck and he runs away from tigers, and he antagonizes tigers, and he has a hell of a time with tigers. And one day he becomes a tiger, and he eats waterbuck and antagonizes waterbuck and has a hell of a time with waterbuck. And one day he becomes a waterbuck and has a hell of a time with tigers and just messes up tigers. And pretty soon this is getting pretty gloomy to him.

Now, you can do these drills without sometimes understanding everything there is to do in them. you actually can do them a bit in the absence of understanding. But it would be much nicer if you knew precisely all of the reasons which underlay these drills. That would make a much more intelligent auditor. And he would not be teaching somebody on the basis of that old, old saw that I have mentioned of the wise man who taught the neophyte all about it. And to keep the cat from running around, before he began the lesson each day, he tied the cat to the bed. So when the neophyte got to be the wise man, why, he got a student in and said, "Now, the first thing we do is tie the cat to the bed" you know. A lot of that bunk can get into what we're doing, you see. A lot of — a lot of magical monkey business, you know.

And as a waterbuck, he’s blang-bang concentrated on nothing but tigers. And as a tiger, he’s blang-blang concentrated on nothing but waterbucks.

And fortunately for you, we know why. you see, that's even more important. We know why these things are working. See, and also you could find out why these things are working. There isn't any reason to go around Robin Hood's barn to wonder why these things work, because it's only recently that I've gotten the facile explanation of why the CCHs work, after all these years.

He’s been a waterbuck more often than tigers, but nevertheless he’s mocked up the counter-emotion of tigers and the counter-force of tigers often enough so that this is perfectly balanced. And from that time there on, „waterbuck“ can collect minds; „tiger“ can collect minds.

Now, you're going to ask the question along about now well, what the hell happened to prepchecking? Oh, yeah, you've got to be able to prepcheck. You learn how to Prepcheck and you learn how to prepcheck just as best as you possibly can. Because if you can't prepcheck, sooner or later you're going to run a cropper on some person. They're withholding like crazy. They're — you're missing withholds like mad on them. They're mad at you all the time and so forth. You only got one answer. That's Prepcheck. And that's what Prepchecking is for. And that's all Prepchecking is for.

This probably went on for a long time, and nothing much happened and he got into another sphere, and one day he became a priest.

Now, Prepchecking has gone the whole evolution. It is quite amusing that with Prepchecking we wind up, 100 percent, the work of Sigmund Freud. That's it.

And then he was mean to the vestal virgins, and the vestal virgins were mean to the priest. And he was a priest, and then he’s a vestal virgin. And he got to be a priest some more, and he ate more vestal virgins, and then he was a vestal virgin and ate up more priests. And we’ve got another one. But there could have been – could have been millions and millions, hundreds of millions, billions of years between the time the waterbuck and the tiger got together up to the time he became the vestal virgin-priest package. You see?

We've left the animal psychologist lying where he belongs in 1879, from which he never advanced. His idea was man is a brain. I, by the way, these days am never referring to psychologists. I only talk about animal psychologists because I want the beast to be known by his right name. That's all he is and all he ever pretended to be. Any psychologist is an animal psychologist because the basic theory on which he operates is man is an animal. So we call him animal psychologist. And I think that will effectively take care of that as the years roll along

But because these packages exist, they tend to lock up the rest of the track. Other pieces of track run into them, collide with them, and so on. So the whole track begins to look like a snarly mass of something or other, but right internally in the middle of it, why, you’ve got these two poles: the waterbuck and the tiger. And just up adjacent to those, you’ve got the vestal virgin and the priest. And then you have got the god and the devil and you’ve got all kinds of wild oppositions.

Now, don't ever use that word psychologist after this. See, just use animal psychologist, always. And you'll get it around. You'll find the Times, sooner or later, will be talking about the animal psychologist. And people will be phoning them up to take care of their horses. I wouldn't let them though. And I don't even like horses. I wouldn't let them take care of my horse.

But these oppositions, each time they are perfectly balanced, make a new Goals Problem Mass package.

Anyhow, the thing that — the thing that is newsworthy and noteworthy on this subject is that all of the work of Freud and any work by the faculty psychologist has been wrapped up in Prepchecking, which I consider quite wonderful. It's quite an achievement. Really, we ought to get very proud, you see and say this is really marvelous.

And then these perfectly balanced opposing forces or opposing identities accumulate to themselves any other identity that’s hanging around and you’ll get collapsed track.

Do you realize you can find any of the childhood traumas that Freud thought were there. You can find them all. you can eradicate them. And worse than that, we've wrapped up the work of Freud's squirrels: Jung, Adler. Well, I think it was Jung that traces everybody back to his stuck engram — druids. And we can trace people back to druids. Blow the trauma too. Blow the whole tree up.

Now, these are represented in the bank by spherical masses. Inside this spherical mass are compartments of thought. There is an internal compartment of thought because the fellow usually had a head, and he did his thinking in the middle of the head. So the Goals Problem Mass tends to approximate a head. And it’s got a think-think-think in the middle of the head and it’s usually empty. And there’s a lot of little compartments all through the Goals Problem Mass which have ideas in them. And you have the idea of force encl – you have force enclosing ideas or force enclosing thought – the trapped thought, in other words.

No, any of the work that has been assayed in this, any of the work at all. Furthermore, we can probably turn it all around into black Pavlovianism and probably give people enough psychic traumas to make them "slaver." I think you could hit a guy long enough and often enough to make him slaver when he saw food.

And these can be dramatized. They are not stretches of track. They are crumpled up pieces of – they’re crumpled up track in spherical shapes and that sort of thing.

Maybe I've got Pavlovianism a little bit wrong, but it seems to me that that has something to do with it. People are supposed to slaver. Actually, all the work that has been done by Pavlov was swallowed up by communism. Pavlov's basic work is not available to the Western world and never has been.

Now, where these things are exactly counter-opposed against other spherical shapes – you see, you got the waterbuck, the tiger proposition – these things are hung up one against the other, clank, to such a degree that neither one can go away.

And he treats of animal conditioning The last days of his life he was whistled up to the Kremlin by Stalin and told to sit down and write himself a manuscript of everything he had learned about animals and how they could be applied to men. And he sat up there in the Kremlin for quite a while and he wrote a four-hundred-page manuscript which has never seen the light of day. But we see communism everywhere.

Now, all this comes down to attention, of course, doesn’t it. It comes down to all of the other factors, you know, but this is the final material form which it takes, that we call the Goals Problem Mass. Of course, what’s a waterbuck do all day long but look out for tigers? And what’s a tiger do all day long but prowl around looking for a waterbuck? And it’s just concentration, concentration, concentration, concentration. And eventually, these two identities just get smashed together by this fact. And you’ve got the dramatization of a problem. It floats in time all sorts of other dramatic – or dramatizing factors here.

There was a film that was captured in Russia by somebody or another. And it's one of the basic training films on the use of Pavlovian work. And they show a young man going through all of the actions. They show a dog going through all the actions and a young man going through all of the actions, you know — slavering over the bell ringing and coughing because of the food or whatever it is, you know.

The individual is – years, years later, he’s busy selling – he’s busy selling boats, you see, and – oh, oh, trillennia later he becomes a boat salesman – and he shows somebody that it is very, very easy to paddle this little ski contrivance, you see.

In other words, they have a human being who was being conditioned the same way that the dog was conditioned in Pavlovian work and so forth. And this was a training film for embryonic Pavlovianists in the communist bloc. It isn't anything peculiar that people all lay aside the first dynamic in communism and assume only the third, you see.

And he says, „You just slide over the back of the thing, you know and kick your hoofs, you know.“

Those techniques are used politically by the state. And if you were to take any communist and put him over the jumps with any processes you've got, his communism would blow because it's a lot of psychic traumas. He has himself terribly associated with the state. You see, socialism lets you own . . . Well, actually, capitalism tries to let you have what you've got if they can't get it away from you. A socialism lets you have about half of what you've got. You see. It lets you have about half of what you already own. That's a socialism. But a communism doesn't let you have anything that you own. Well, let's just get off the definition of state ownership, see. Let's just define it for what it really is. It is the total games condition between the state and the individual. See, the total games condition. And nothing for the individual to the point where he doesn't even exist anymore.

And he goes on, and after a while he – the customer says, „You kick your hoofs. What’s that?“

All right, so that particular field of psychology, not particularly important to us — could be, politically, perhaps — but that field is sufficiently vicious that it'd probably have to be undone with the CCHs or something like that. You probably wouldn't be able to get down to the ground with Prepchecking. And in animal psychology itself, the way they have been developing it since 1879, I don't know that you would be able to get down to the ground of it in Prepchecking. These are traumatic actions which are undertaken in these particular fields, you see. They contain injury, which they call conditioning and all that sort of thing.

And he says, „I didn’t say anything like that.“

It's efforts to do things to people. So that effort to do things to people doesn't classify with the Freudian and the faculty — early faculty psychologytype work. you see, that was designed to alleviate things in people, which is a different goal. you have to recognize that the Pavlovian and the animal psychologist in general, are trying to do things to people. So Prepchecking wouldn't cover that.

But he did. See, it’d be a hangover. Just a momentary restimulation. They revert to this type of pattern. You will find some person’s been a dog, and a dog and a cat. And they’ve got the dog-cat Goals Problem Mass package of some kind or another. Very equal balancing there. If you’ve ever seen a cat lick a dog, why, you know it can be quite equally balanced. That’s why they’ve always stayed foes.

But all of the work of Freud is wrapped up in Prepchecking. And the outline of how you do Prepchecking in a recent bulletin, wraps all that up. That's it. That's what Freud was looking for.

And this dog has been a dog a long time ago. And he hasn’t been a dog for ages; for trillennia he hasn’t been a dog And he’s living a life as a human being and everything is going along fine, and he goes to bed.

Now, having gotten that, we put it over on the side of the desk and we say, well, whenever your pc gets upset with you, you know how to do Prepchecking and you address the Zero question of "Who has missed a withhold on you?" see, "Who should have found out?" "Who failed to find out what?" That's this kind of a Zero. And you'll cheer the fellow up markedly and enormously. And as far as clearing is concerned, that's the sole use of Prepchecking.

And his wife thinks it’s fine. He’s fine. His wife thinks he’s fine, but of course, he turns round and round and round and round and round before he goes to sleep. He has various explanations for this. But these explanations are all just based on the fact he’s been a dog.

You have to know how to do Prepchecking. But the end results of Prepchecking would only be the end results of — well, I don't know twenty-five, thirty hours of Prepchecking would be fifty or sixty years of Freudian analysis.

Now, all of this is very obscure to the person and to the auditor and you actually would be amazed the intricacies you’d have to go through to figure out what the fellow had been by observing his behavior.

But the very funny thing — if you knew how to Prepcheck perfectly, you could actually hang out your shingle as a psychoanalyst to psychoanalysts and do nothing but prepcheck them.

But after you find a few of these items in 3D Criss Cross, all of a sudden you say, „Oh, you know. Oh, I see. Yes. Ooooh, yes. It all now becomes clear.“ and it wouldn’t be clear because, frankly, there were thousands of possible choices from which this sudden habit of [LRH noises with his lips – lughing] came from, you see; been most anything.

Here's the way you'd do. You'd clear the withhold question and just take Form 3 and any other applicable Sec Check and use those as your Zero As. You see, your Zero would be "Are you withholding anything?" and then your Zero A, would be "Have you ever raped anybody?" You see. Any one of the Form 3s or any other applicable Sec Check. That becomes your Zero A. And you use that as a test Zero A. And then, of course, your What becomes the first withhold you get from the pc, if you get a reaction on that Zero A. Do you follow that? That would be the cleanest way to prepcheck.

Now, the two-pole character of the universe is something you should keep in mind. Electronically, no power can be generated in this universe in the absence of two poles. You have to have two fixed positions in space before you can have any electrical current of any kind.

But it has been demonstrated to me, several things. The first is condemnatory to auditors, so we'll leave that to later. The first thing that has been borne home to me is that it is a shallow approach. Later on, it might become adaptable in Class IV skills to the handling of actual items found in 3D Criss Cross. And be fully prepared to see it respond in that particular zone of action. But as far as clearing somebody is concerned, there is a probability that you could key everything out with Prepchecking But this is the derogatory point to auditors; is auditors do not uniformly find good skill in Prepchecking. And that's what licks Prepchecking. You understand?

That is something that you would learn the hard way in physics. You can take two poles and put them smash against each other or one inside the other, and you could grind away with little wheels and all sorts of things for, well, trillennia without generating any power. There would be no electrical current of any kind whatsoever. There’d be no electrical masses of any kind whatsoever, if there weren’t two poles. There have to be at least two poles.

Auditors go in too shallow and they miss withholds. I tried for a long time to convince everybody that this was what they were doing. I worked on it hard. I worked on auditors personally with this and they still went on doing it. And if I can't teach somebody this particular skill a few feet away from me, how can I teach anybody in Perth? You see? They'll go too far.

Now, maybe you could have a three-pole, five-pole, six-pole, twelve-pole type of arrangement, but remember the basic is two poles. You could add new poles. You could do all sorts of things, but you’ve got to have two poles and that’s fundamental and basic.

Honest, I got so I was practically weeping, looking at the Prepcheck folders. Somebody gets off this terrific withhold that they tripped over the linoleum and hadn't told anybody. And your heart would bleed for the absolute blood and viciousness in these — in these Prepcheck folders. Well, that's too bad. I mean, you sit there and weep over the terrible agonies this person had gone through because he had borrowed Joe's necktie.

Now, the mind is composed of energy which exists in space and which condenses down into masses. In the reactive mind, there is no time. All time is now. That’s because of the poised character of these valences.

Pardon me if I seem to sneer sarcastically. It's just too much. I mean, my nerves couldn't take it anymore. It's just too bloody. I use that in an American sense. I could just see the sanguine results of these sessions, you know. Gore all over the floor. And it's terrible. Auditor battles through and finally gets this terrific withhold off, you see, that once upon a time he had seen one of his mother's shoes mislaid. You see, I mean, gets right in there and pitches.

We must assume that if we have current, standing waves, electrical masses, flows and other phenomena which are very easy to demonstrate in the human being, there must be two poles involved. You’re about to learn the facts of life here. There must be two poles involved. Otherwise, you’d never have any flows, would you?

There's a terrific amount of skill between the Zero Question, the Zero A and the What question. And there's a terrific amount of skill between, particularly, the Zero A and the What. Finding that exact specific withhold. It requires skill. And it requires more skill than auditors broadly exhibit. And that's my opinion of Prepchecking.

A person would never have any ringing in his ears and, frankly, would never have a somatic. It requires two poles even to hurt. It’s the two-pole nature of things that – from which all else proceeds.

We've wrapped up Sigmund Freud. If you want to get to be an expert in Prepchecking, please do. You've got to know how to prepcheck to get missed withholds. You won't have any trouble getting missed withholds. You can't help but get the missed withholds that are making the pc unhappy. So you can get those, follow them through and clean them up because you're after a specific target: missed withholds. Fine. Cheer everybody up.

Now, this sounds very intricate and I can see somebody now saying, „Oh, no! Not about electricity.“ Well, I’ll tell you all you need to know about electricity: Take your two fingers, shove them into the mains. You will learn all there is to know about electricity at that moment because you can actually put one finger in one prong. And you can sit there and hold it all night, and you’ll never get a shock.

But withholds, no. Oh, it's very little skill in withholds. Plowing up new virgin territory in withholds, they exhibit too little skill. They settle for too much pale, skim milk. I mean, the quality of the porridge . . . See, here you are sitting there ready to see the river of fire go tearing across the cliffs and destroy the cities, you see. And there's this little, little trickle of milk runs out underneath the door and this emaciated kitten walks for it. you know that isn't what's wrong with the pc. you know it goes so much deeper than that. And auditors will settle for a null needle. And prepchecking for broke, if it's going to do anything with the case, has got to be a stirred-up case. You've got to stir up the case all the time. Stir up the case all the time.

You don’t notice any reaction there until you put two fingers in there, one on the other prong. And then you’d know all there is to know about electricity. You would have a subjective reality on the fact that it required two poles to have any electricity go anyplace or anything happen. And that’s a fact.

Auditors will always quiet a case down. you see why the skimmed-milk effect? They will always quiet the case down. They will always get that needle null, only to get that needle null right now, see. That's fine. Shows considerable skill in getting the needle null. And that's just what you need to do in doing the rudiments. But Prepchecking is a reverse action. You've got to get in with a spade and pickax. You unfortunately got the question null. That's your attitude. "I must have slipped someplace. I got it null.'?

All right. Now, what’s this got to do with the CCHs? Well, it has everything to do with the CCHs.

See, we got a nice, greasy fall, you see, on the subject of "Have you ever robbed anybody?" You know.

Auditing is effective only in the presence of two poles. Effective auditing is two poles. Now, there can be more poles scattered around, but it requires at least two poles for auditing to occur. This doesn’t say that it’s impossible to self-audit. This doesn’t say that it is absolutely necessary always everywhere to have an auditor. That is not the case because you yourself at one time or another have run a burn out of your finger and have done a Touch Assist on your left ear or something and had it work.

And the fellow says, "Well, I — I took a — ha, I got a knife one time and I got a penny out of my brother's piggy bank. Ha-ah-ha." You know and it goes null.

But in that particular instance when it worked, you were operating with two poles. You were observing something. You might have been being a mass while you were observing the other mass, but you had two poles going. Do you see that?

And the auditor says, "Well, that's good. We certainly got that one null." See and they go off to the next one. Well, he got a null. He didn't miss a withhold. But what it requires in Prepchecking is an excursion about this point, you see.

And one of the things that’s been a bugaboo to auditors from time immemorial is the pc who never cognites. He just stirs on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on, and he’ll run processes and processes and processes and if he was processing himself, he would go on and chew and chew and chew and chew and on and on and on. And he’d get ideas occasionally, and they would come and they would go and they would erase and they would go on and on. What an arduous activity.

"Have you ever robbed anybody?" You see?

The individual is running on one pole. Now, the pole that he’s running on happens to have thought in the middle of it and energy – standing energy waves – outside of it. Well, he’s in the thought area, and he keeps running through the energy as a thetan and he’s just chewing on this energy, you see.

And he says, "Well, I took a penny out of my brother's bank." And now it's gone null, you see. The auditor doesn't experience horror that the thing has now gone null. He experiences quite the reverse. He experiences relief.

And he gets into the thought zone and he only gets the ideas that are packaged inside that thought zone. You see, he’s being that mass. He is that mass. He is not viewing the mass. He is it. So, of course, he can’t view it because he is it.

No, no. About that time, "Well, what else have you robbed?" You see? Yeah. Well, all right. And it doesn't do anything.

And being that mass he is not viewing another mass, so he’s being himself and nothing else and not looking at anything else. And there he could chew and chew and chew and chew forever. You see how that would be?

"Have you robbed anything else? Have you robbed anybody else?" And so forth? "Ever robbed anybody else? How about school?" you see, "Well, how about school? How about the rest of your family? How about your father? Your mother? How about the church? How about God? You know. Your friends, companions. You were in the service once — you ever rob anything in the service?" — clang! "What was that? Heh-heh-ha-ho-hor-ho." It frankly requires a highly punitive and accusative frame of mind. And because you've got to use an accusative frame of mind this whole while, keeping the pc in-session while you ream him out for it, requires an enormous amount of skill. I would say that it can be taught straight up and with great ardure. But that does not guarantee that it will ever get as far as it may. Do you see that?

Can you imagine this glass, now – now we’re going to show you something graphically – now, just imagine this glass here as a mass of energy or a mass of mass or anything else, well, just as a glass.

Now, there's no doubt about it. You've got to learn how to prepcheck by rote, to get up missed withholds and be able to sit down with somebody who is boiling over. you know, how bad it all is and how bad you've treated them and how bad everybody's treated them, how bad their families treat them. That's all you hear about in this pc, you know. How bad. How bad, you know. How bad. you know.

And now we get the idea – get the idea of a thetan being this glass to such an extent that he would never say „I am a thetan,“ he would only say „I am a glass.“ You see, he couldn’t conceive of being anything else but a glass.

Well, we've got the absolute positive cure for it. "What did they fail to find out about you?" See, that's all you have to find out. Yeah, "What they — what should they have known and didn't?" That's all we've got to clear. And you clear that with a Prepcheck approach. And that's easy because you're trying to get the needle to null. And you're really not trying to stir up anything

And now let’s say he’s a very introverted glass and can never see you. This glass isn’t looking at anything. Never see the table. Never see me. And let’s say he went on chewing on this glass. Would he ever make any gain in processing? Well, the probabilities are he wouldn’t. And there is the picture of the no-cognition case. That’s your minimum tone arm, no-cognition case. The person is being something; observing nothing.

We've got the whole mechanism of the missed withhold and that's the most important mechanism. So just relegate for the moment, Prepchecking to that, well realizing that we're just abandoning the fact that it's totally wrapped up Freud.

Now, it would be perfectly all right for this fellow to be this glass, providing he could also view, as a glass, something else. He doesn’t have to view anything as a thetan. He could view something as a glass. He all of a sudden gets the idea, „Well, I – I can – rrr – glass – I’m a glass, you see. And I’m a glass and I can look at this cigarette lighter.“

I mean, my God, the old man would be standing on his head. He's in school someplace. Let me see, what grade's he in now? Anyhow, if you — he'd actually, practically stand on his head. He'd say, "Wow! You know, how that man worked. You know, how he worked to get out psychic trauma and find out how to handle them and that sort of thing."

And here he is, see. Here’s a glass and here’s a cigarette lighter. Oh, well, we’ve got two poles now. And as a glass, he can look at the cigarette lighter.

And of course our technology is so extensive in this particular field that it makes Freudian analysis look almost in reverse. But the final analysis is, you've got all these basic psychic trauma keyed out by the time you prepcheck somebody.

He can as-is this cigarette lighter. Things can happen with regard to this cigarette lighter. He can do some control of it. He can do some other things. And you’re sure going to get tone arm action. And there’s also something going to happen to the cigarette lighter, that’s for sure.

You go for broke on Prepchecking, you could change their lives. There's no doubt about it whatsoever. But you have to be continuously punitive. And you have to keep stirring up the case and you have to work at it and you work real hard at it. And it doesn't happen to be in the direction of clearing because it's just key-outs. Key-outs, key-outs, key-outs, key-outs, key-outs. You got the idea? The hell with key-outs.

But, you see, as one pole, the glass and being only the glass, you’re never going to get any tone arm reaction because you’re never going to get any energy movement. How can there be energy movement?

Don't forget we've wrapped up Freud and don't forget you should know how to do it. It'd be terribly impressive, you know. And any time you really wanted to put on a full parade in this particular direction it'd be shocking to anybody that knew Freudian analysis or something like this, to see you handling with ease, something in a — in an hour or two, that an analyst might very well require — oh, God — and maybe never get handled at all, you see. It's a superior skill, but it no longer belongs in your lineup as a process. See, it's a patch-up process.

For energy movement to occur or diminish or increase or anything else, you’ve got to have two poles. And if the individual only is one pole and he’s being that pole – see, he isn’t a thetan being a glass – he’s a glass! Why, of course, he could chew forever. And if he was getting no tone arm motion while you were auditing him – of course, he would get no tone arm motion while you were auditing him because there’s no flow. But as a glass, he is made to audit up against the cigarette lighter – ah, you get tone arm action. Ah, you get change. Because the cigarette lighter is also going to react against the glass, let me assure you. You see that? You’re going to get case change.

If you don't know how to do it, then you're going to have pcs get mad at you and you're never going to be able to straighten them out. See, that's the — that's the penalty for not knowing how to prepcheck on missed withholds. See.

You’re going to get a change of these masses. Therefore, you’re going to get a change of ideas. Do you see this?

Sooner or later, somebody's going to get mad at you or mad at your family or mad at your organization or mad at something and you yourself are going to be powerless to do anything about it. Because the only thing that you can do about it is a Prepcheck against missed withholds. And that is the only thing that works out of all the sun, moon, stars and firmaments. That's the only thing that works.

You must never have in an auditing situation a one-pole situation. That’s all. The individual is being a man, see. He’s not ever – he has no masses. He has no ideas. This is your poor psychologist. The poor guy. He is a brain. Never looks at anything. Never does anything. He never does a thing, you see. He’s – he’s being a man, and that’s all he is being. He couldn’t be anything else but a man.

We have pushed it right up to the point where it's terrifically workable, too. Guys get mad over the darnedest, smallest, tiniest, little things you ever heard of.

And if he’s a relatively introverted man, why, he’s had it because he never sees anything else. Never gets any changes of potential; never gets any anything. And that’s why the psychologist concluded that man could not be changed.

But you're far more likely to find out what is basically wrong with the case — far, far, far more likely to find out what is basically wrong with a case — with the CCHs followed by 3D Criss Cross.

He concluded this as a scientific conclusion. And several years ago, we were always being held up to scorn as Dianeticists or Scientologists because we said man could change. And now he teaches in his universities nothing else but that man changes. He’s tried to disprove testing to get rid of us. He’s tried to do all kinds of things to himself to get rid of us. He keeps doing things to himself hoping we’ll go away.

Now, you're assaulting the basics of the case. Now, you're assaulting whole packages called circuits, valences. You realize that it might only take you six or eight hours to find one of these items, see. Find the whole package. Another six, eight, ten hours maybe to find the other side of it. I'm talking about long lists and extreme jobs and all that sort of thing, you see. Now, what's this make? This makes twenty, twenty-five hours. Oh man, by the time you have found one hot item on a case and opptermed it you have gotten two personalities, two valences, two chains of lifetimes. You see, one of those 3D Criss Cross items is not just one life. That is not John Jones, the evangelist. See, we found the evangelist, you see. That is not John Jones, the evangelist. That is John Jones, Henry Smith, James George Wesley, you see. And that's in America. Now let's take up the number of times he was an evangelist in Holland, you see. Now let's take up the number of times that he was an evangelist in the Marcab Confederacy. Now let's take up the number of times he was an evangelist earlier on the track, before he got out of the habit and then later on keyed it in and became an evangelist again, you see. And do you know that any one of those lifetimes require about 150 hours to be prepchecked and cleaned up. Interesting computation, isn't it?

And now, today he more and more realizes what he is. Well, he’s a Scientologist. He hasn’t found it out yet, but that’s what he’s being. You get the idea? We’re probably terribly good for him. He’s probably the first – we’re probably the first thing he ever looked at since 1879.

Let's just be casual about it. Let's thoroughly clean up one of those lives as John Jones the evangelist. One hundred and fifty hours, but then there's Henry Smith and then there's George Aloysius Wesley or something. And then there's the times in Holland. And we're getting 150 hours and 150 hours and 150 hours and 150 hours and a hun . Hey, what the hell are we doing here, see.

Now, get the idea here of a glass. No action; one pole. The glass and the cigarette lighter. Two poles – action.

Well, now we're up to a thousand, twelve hundred, sixteen hundred hours' worth of Prepchecking and we've — we've only gotten one item, an evangelist. Oh, well, there's the other side of it. There was the devil. Oh, well, of course, he was a devil on the early track. He was a devil in the Marcab Confederacy and he's been numerously a devil in Holland. And, of course, he was quite schizophrenic as George Wellington Aloysius Wesley, you see. And was an evangelist all day and a devil all night.

Now, we see this easily in the auditing situation. Here is the auditor; here is the pc – something on that order – or here’s the auditor; here’s the pc. See?

Now you got two packages, so you just have to double the amount of time in Prepchecking. We're up to maybe thirty-two hundred hours. Well, if you could do it in twenty or twenty-five, I'd say you'd better do it. you better not bother with the thirty-two hundred unless you've taken to looking at the long track and gotten into the frame of mind that you have an infinity of time. Perfectly all right if you have an infinity of time and look at the long track. But it seems to me that something that could be done in twenty or twenty-five hours shouldn't have thirty-two hundred hours devoted to it. Because the funny part of it is, is you wouldn't clean it up in the thirty-two hundred hours. Isn't that terrible?

All right. Ah! If we can get the pc to look at the auditor, we’ve got a two-pole situation. Two-pole situation; that’s all. So you’re going to get change. But the pc who never finds the auditor never has any change. There’s the CCHs at work. And they’re only as good as that occurs and no better.

It's purely the mechanics of postulate-counter-postulate, mass-counter-mass, see, goal-counter-goal that you find in the Goals Problem Mass that keeps it hung up in the first place. And if you've got it going zzzzt this way, why, of course, it starts spreading out along the track anyway.

When you don’t have a two-pole situation in the CCHs, if you don’t have the pc observing the auditor, ah-ha, you get no change from the CCHs.

I speak with good reality on that. I've mentioned this, but I didn't realize it till I walked away from the session, something very peculiar. Items three and two that went out on the list, were another package. And they were a package that was some collision out here. And they came apart and blew before we found the final item of the second list, which collided with the first item we had found which, of course, blew. I think this is rather fantastic, you see. I mean, there's — there's a bonus package. See, there was thirty-two hundred hours blew off while we were trying to find the first thirty-two hundred hours' worth, see. Took a couple of minutes. Anyway, hardly anybody noticed it passing.

Has to be a two-pole situation.

But here's what you're into. You've got a bank that can't hang up. The mathematical probabilities of a Goals Problem Mass item hanging up against its opposition terminal and staying suspended in time and space are just a million to one, that's all. It's almost impossible for this accident to happen. By the time you found both sides of them, you get this kind of an effect. How can I do that again, you see. He hasn't got a prayer of doing it again, that's all.

All right. We’ll go into that a little bit further. But let’s go on, now, to 3D Criss Cross.

And you've done it. you haven't pulled apart somebody's miserable sequences of lives and all the times he did kiss the landlady and all the times he didn't kiss the landlady, you see, and got that all disentangled one way or the other. Just his bank wouldn't hang together is what the horrible overt which you have performed at that particular thing, you see. So the reactive mind is blowing up. This other way, you're still going to have the reactive mind around. Interesting, isn't it.

What condition must exist for 3D Criss Cross or some think process to exist or any think process to exist? Ah, the fellow is being one mass in his mind able to look at another mass in his mind.

So that's why you prefer 3D Criss Cross. And you will come to as you operate with it, why you will prefer 3D Criss Cross over Prepchecking. Of course, that doesn't forgive you for not knowing Prepchecking.

The fellow – it’s perfectly all right for the fellow to be a mass in his mind, but he also has to not only be that mass but be capable of looking at another mass in his mind. And then you get tone arm action.

I would like to see anybody be able to do a good job of Prepchecking if he could. Somebody wants to get rid of his lumbosis or something of the sort, well, prepcheck it out of existence. You can try anyway. Somebody will get a 3D Criss Cross item on him, it will come right back, but that's all right.

Listing, nulling – you’re going to get tone arm action.

You understand that in Prepchecking you must do an expert job of Prepchecking to handle the temper and temperament of the pc on the subject of missed withholds. Because you're going to run into missed withholds and I guarantee that a case that is really plowed in on this is going to get missed withholds tomorrow if you don't prepcheck them today.

But if he’s only being one mass in his mind and can’t view any other mass in his mind but this one mass, you’re not going to get any tone arm action. It’s as simple as that. Don’t you see.

In other words, you could just spot a missed withhold and spot another missed withhold and say, "Well, that's fine. He's happy." Oh, yeah, he'll be happy for hours. You get what I mean, because you didn't go in — you didn't go in down the chain of these. See, you just clipped off the last two locks. Well, tomorrow those are going to key in again. Ha.

So at the stage of the CCHs, the auditor and the pc furnish the two poles.

See, you, the auditor, are going to once more wiggle your right ear more than you wiggle your left ear and that is the key-in, you see. So that's an — then he thinks this thing again and then it becomes another missed withhold and you have to pull it all over again.

Actually, the auditor does not have to constitute solely the other pole. There is the whole present time environment to constitute the other pole, or any other pole or many other poles. Once in a blue moon, we have taken a person who was having an awfully hard time and said, „Look around here and find something that’s really, really, really, really real to you.“ And they looked around the room, and they eventually – one person found a silver teapot. And, my God, she went over and she grabbed a hold of the silver teapot, and heaven and earth couldn’t get that silver teapot away from her.

Well, by the time you get tired of doing this you will come to realize that Ronnie is telling you sooth. Pull the whole ruddy chain when you pull a missed withhold, see.

That was a one-shot command. She turned sane on a silver teapot. She found out there was something in the environment beside herself – a silver teapot; so she got a big change. See? One-shot change. Do you see how – why that would be?

Well, you're gonna — you're going to handle missed withholds, handle them in two frames of mind. One, in rudiments, just to get them out of the road. When you're doing 3D Criss Cross, you're doing 3D Criss Cross. But the temper of a pc sooner or later is going to become recognizable to you as very badly needing some Prepchecking, by which you mean you want to get off the missed withholds and stop this nonsense so the rudiments will stay in.

So it isn’t just the auditor in the CCHs that can constitute the second pole.

You see, we found the common denominator back of all rudiments is withholds, see. And then the common denominator back of all withholds is missed. So prepcheck missed withholds. You sit down for a session or two with some pc and say, "Well, this guy's acting up. It's just hell to keep rudiments in one way or the other," and just go for broke on the Zero Question, "Who's missed a withhold on you?" you see? And then just carry on from there and develop these withholds — what people should have found out about, what they shouldn't have found out about and all that sort of thing.

Now, is there anything in the pc that can constitute the second pole? Well, there’s two ways that the CCHs could be run: dumb-ox style, which is – well, a great deal of study of the steam engine would be about the best way to achieve this style, and all you do is observe this steam engine, and you observe the fact that it does nothing but have certain wheels go around and certain shafts move and a certain hiss come out the exhaust pipe.

You can cash in on a lot of processing this way. Case can't seem to get it going, it's having difficulty moving and even though you've done CCHs it isn't getting the sufficient tone arm action and his CCHs are apparently flat but really not and 3D Criss Cross and nothing much is moving and so forth. And all of a sudden — all of a sudden, like a bolt from the blue, this terrific thought will occur to you. "This case has missed withholds." "See, every time I put this case through the rudiments — 'What withhold have I missed on you?' — he's always had one, hasn't he? I'll bet there's a chain now."

And the auditor gets so that he can make his arms go around and his piston go and hiss at a proper Tone 40 and he thinks he’s doing the CCHs. All right; that’s fine. Odd part of it is, there’s enough mechanics built into it that even then it’ll work. The CCHs go from bright white to gray. They do not go from bright white to black.

Just take time out on whatever else you're doing and sit down and do a whole missed withhold session. And then maybe you have to do another session because you didn't get all the chain clean. You'll get all that type of missed withhold and you'll find out what he was missing withholds and who should have found out and God help us. And all of a sudden the case presents an entirely new aspect. And you get tone arm action where you didn't get it before. That is the one way I know of whereby you can promote a case into tone arm action with a strong arm.

So this flaw in the CCHs might not be observed. Some auditor might think the CCHs were absolutely wonderful and he was doing it at the lowest shade of gray that you could obtain. CCHs will always produce a change on a case one way or the other. So you never observe the fact that they can be done completely wrong. You see how that is? I mean there’s a gradient scale of wrongness, and it doesn’t ever get to black. You can’t be absolutely wrong in the CCHs.

Now, most auditors have been able to pick up missed withholds. And very few auditors have done a skilled job of Prepchecking on virgin, stir-it-up withhold type of mechanisms. That fact, that it's difficult to teach, is — already makes it a questionable subject. And then the other fact, that it only keys out and a 3D Criss Cross does so much more — the conclusion is that it becomes a junior process. One that an auditor must know how to do.

But the degree that you drift from white is measured by the length of time the pc spends under CCH processing. And the more gray it is, the longer the pc is under processing. Do you see that?

Oddly enough, this junior process is senior to all other processes. Show you where we've gone. See, we're now calling a junior process "Prepchecking," which is senior to any other process we ever had, you see. Well, where does that put the CCHs, run right and 3D Criss Cross done properly? Well, it puts them in the stars. That's really where they belong.

In other words, the less properly these are done – they can be done totally mechanically and in five hundred hours everything is wonderful with the pc, you see.

Now, you see how auditing stacks up? You see how it lines up.

They can even be done totally mechanically and half-wrong most of the time, and you’ll get some sort of a result. You see, CCH is, actually – it’s almost – if the guy was as bad as shook the pc every now and then and said, „I like you,“ you know, occasionally, or something like this. Something’s going to happen after five hundred hours – something. Because you got a two-pole situation. You’re working with a two-pole situation regardless of what point of the Tone Scale.

A little advice. Once more I repeat this advice. If your CCHs don't seem to be just what they ought to be and the pc just sort of sits down and he's doing them all mechanically and they all appear flat and... Yeah, CC... Yeah, he hasn't grown any wings that you can see. you know, you haven't had a good change on the case. you know. No cognite. No cognite, you know. He's not said anything about it. Let's get smart. We're dealing with a missed withhold case. And sit down for a session, check him. And after that do end rudiments on him. You'd be surprised. At least half of the pcs you're running right at this moment have their — on CCHs, have their end rudiments out on half-truth and untruth.

Now, let’s now do it right. This is how to really speed up the CCHs. CCHs are a matter of bringing the pc to present time. Now, why do you want to bring the pc to present time if what you really want to do is get him back down the track into the GPM?

"Are you satisfied that you did that?"

Ah, that’s because the GPM is upside down, backwards, locked in, crossed up and there’s so much keyed in in present time that it takes you quite a while to get to these masses unless present time is more or less (quote) (unquote) „achieved“ by the pc.

"Yes. Yes. Oh, yes, yes, yes. I duplicate it. Woo-woo-blyaa." Damn liar. You stack up enough of those and the CCHs become nonfunctional. You get your end rudiments . . .

In other words, you can do a lot of keying out of masses before you do 3D Criss Cross and make 3D Criss Cross much more workable.

Beginning rudiments aren't as important as end rudiments, frankly. And you get your — you get your missed withholds and half-truths and untruths stacked up in CCHs and your case will cease to gain because we're using the CCHs now on the sane people. Now, in the old days, yes, you could bull it through and go for two hundred hours and you would have gradually overridden it, you understand, Upper Indoc style. We're not doing that same type of CCH.

So do the CCHs for a while and key out several of those inverted loops. See, he’s got stuff keyed in from the year zero, you know. Well, let’s get that, you know, lined up a little bit. And he’s got the vestal virgin where the waterbuck ought to be, and so forth, and it’s all messed up.

And I would say, on a person that could articulate and talk to you, that if they gave you any trouble or you really ever had to put your hand on them to guide them around or force them into a session, I would say their rudiments were wildly out.

In other words, locks are all curled over into present time and he’s dramatizing some lock on the early track so hard, you see, that you can’t even get to a real piece of the Goals Problem Mass, you see? The locks are so active. He’s got a lock terminal, you know. A murderous husband. Got a lock terminal, see.

I wouldn't spend much time wrastling. I don't mind wrastling As a matter of fact I'm fond of wrastling. But it doesn't seem to me to be the thing to do in an auditing session. It seems out of place. The simpler way to go about it is flatten whatever you're doing or finish that session and come to the next session lugging a bulletproof E-Meter, you see. Let's find these missed withholds. And you're just going to do a Prepcheck-type activity. Get the idea? You find out a lot about it that way.

It’s just a lock! It hasn’t anything whatsoever to do with the real terminal. But it’s locked up on it. The real terminal isn’t even a murderer, you see; it isn’t even that close.

Don't keep probing when you're doing this. Don't keep probing for missed withholds because you don't have to probe for a missed withhold. The only thing you have to do is maybe guess who's been missing. See, who's been missing the withhold. Well, we know this fellow has a dog and a wife and has a Central Organization that has been near him and he doesn't like that very well. He's got a couple of friends and he has a mother still living, see. And he has a job someplace.

The real terminal is probably a bad wife. And he’s got this keyed in and somewhere or another – a murderous husband. It’s all keyed in.

All right. Well, you've got these few items, see. Just very smart and do one of these — do a very careful resume of the Preclear Assessment Form on him, you know. Go over that very carefully and so forth. And notice what makes the tone arm shift as you're doing it, you know.

Well, it’s nothing that you would even want to come near in a GPM because it isn’t even part of the GPM. You see, it’s just locked up on it.

List all these things and people up and so on. And then find out who — who amongst these people, you see, has missed withholds on him. What should they have found out? And you'll all of a sudden have a resurgence of case, don't you see? It's an easy one to do. There's hardly any difficulty with it. But that will very often give you tone arm action which you're not getting any other way.

You do the CCHs, that’ll fall into line. Otherwise, he’s got a problem with his wife every couple of days, see. He’s restraining himself from killing his wife every couple of days. So he gets a big GPM every day – every couple of days – he gets a big PTP. Every couple of days, he just has trouble. He’s just having trouble all the time. Well, you do the CCHs, you kind of lay this stuff back on the track, you see. Get him up to present time. Get him out of some of these things.

And the individual is sitting there. Boy, he's really braced. He's really braced. He eats with his knife, you know. And he never dares go into a nice restaurant because he eats with his knife, and so forth. And he actually never dares go to a restaurant because he eats with his knife. And he never dares take you out or be — let you invite him out to dinner because he eats with his knife, you see.

Well, how do you do that? How – what’s the expert, smooth way of doing that?

And this is pretty bad socially. And this is something that's pretty grim. And as you're doing the CCHs on him, you know, this really starts stacking up. He eats with his knife. And you mustn't find out about it. And on such shallow delicacies, you see, his whole case starts hanging up.

First thing you do is bring his attention over onto – you do the CCHs two ways at the same time – you get his attention over onto the auditor, and of course by utilizing communication, control and havingness of the environment, you, of course, attract the pc’s attention to the environment because these are the mechanics of communication and duplication, and that sort of thing. The things that you’re using, you see.

So in doing the CCHs on sane people, why, you ought to occasionally sit down and clear up them thar missed withholds. Clear them up on as much track as you can clear them off of. And you'll put the guy in a much happier frame of mind.

All right. And at the same time you’re doing this, you handle the doublemass factor in his mind. See, you not only handle the double-mass factor in the environment – here’s the pc being a pc looking at the auditor and looking at the environment – you also handle this in his mind. How do you handle this in his mind at the same time? By maintaining two-way comm with the pc, of course.

And a fellow who is showing no good increase on the CCHs should always . . . You just start getting the habit of finishing up the session with the. . . Sooner or later we'll have to do it for everybody. Otherwise, you see, to those people that are not getting increase, it's an evaluation. So everybody will have to be able to do . . . But I'll tell you, the truth of the matter is, is you only really need to do it on those people who are showing no increase of response.

How do you do that? Well, you treat the pc’s every twitch as an origin. Every time the pc does something – you’ll notice that the pc doesn’t notice most of these things that he does – you call the pc’s attention to it, by querying. Say, „What was that?“ you know. Any way you want to say – you could say „How does that feel now?“

And then you ought to do your end rudiments. And the most important end rudiments are simply the missed withhold question and the half-truth, untruth. And occasionally, when you've had a wrastling match, the damage question. He's been trying to damage you, the auditor. And this'll hang him up like mad.

„What?“ the pc, is the common response. See?

Well, now, the extent of auditing as you see it there... Prepchecking and rudiments are something which are relegated to letting auditing occur. See, these are the tools with which auditing can occur. You permit auditing to occur with these things.

Why did he say what? Why hasn’t he noticed it? Oh, well, that’s because he’s being the single mass. He’s being a somatic, for God’s sakes. He’s being a habit. He’s not even being a being. See? And because he’s being it, he does it!

Keep your rudiments in, auditing can occur. Pick up your large gobs of missed withholds off the pc and smooth him out in his relationships with his family and of course your rudiments will smooth out. The only difficulties he's going to have is with his environment and if you cleaned up all the missed withholds with his environment — just sat down for a couple of sessions, you know — you're not going to have any trouble with out-rudiments.

And you say, „What was that?“

It's very well worth doing. Instead of spending half of the 3D Criss Cross session everyday, you see, putting his rudiments in, just take two sessions and run missed withholds on him on any part of his environment you think might be out, you see. Get the idea?

And the pc has to go back up here and look at what he’s doing. And he says, „What?“

It's much happier to do it that way because then you've got it done and it'll stay pretty well done, too. And then you can keep it in with ordinary rudiments. Do you follow the use of that?

And you say, „That.“

Well, to get something done with the case — the CCHs, they will get something done with the case if they're done right. And 3D Criss Cross, well, my God, that just doesn't get something done with the case, that takes the reactive mind and pours it down the sewer. That's it. 3D Criss Cross well and accurately done — marvelous.

„Oh, oh, that. Ouch.“ In other words, you exteriorize him from this manifestation. Do you see? It’s actually very easy.

You recognize that the CCHs are a precision activity. You recognize that meter reading is a precision activity, that Prepchecking, even for just missed withholds, is a precision activity. And CCHs, more than ever, is a precision activity. That preciseness in it is simply your ability to give the auditing commands, to stay in communication with the pc, to ask the right questions for the Prepchecking. And as far as 3D Criss Cross, just reliably make sure that your rudiments are in and reliably make sure that your list is complete and that you differentiate it fine and that you null it perfectly and that you wind up at the other end with the item, that you check it out right. It's all very precise. It's all very precise. It's almost got the words and music all written down. I mean complete. And any auditor can learn those.

Every time he does something, you exteriorize him from it. If you fail to do so, oh, pass it on. Catch it next time.

It's a marvelous thing that you could today, with such ease that it would hardly be worth mentioning, identify the well-trained auditor and the poorly trained auditor. The ease with which you could identify the well-trained auditor just by looking at his pc's progress you wouldn't have to look at his auditing at all.

Now, what are you doing in the CCHs? You’re setting up a two-pole situation between the pc and the environment, which includes the auditor. And you’re setting up a two-pole situation in the mind by insisting that there is something there – except you’d insist very gently by asking, „What is that?“ – that there is something else there besides the pc all the time.

You say, "Well, there he is. And actually a well-trained auditor really never gets in trouble with a pc. It's nothing extraordinary that's being requested of the auditor today except just an atmosphere of competence and accurate rendition of a certain finite number of things. He just has to do those things, make sure that he always does them and does them thoroughly.

And the pc has no choice but to slip out of the somatic so he can look at it. And then you get a two-pole situation going in the bank. And so you get change, change, change, change, change, change, change, change.

You're not reaching for an unattainable, in other words. Nobody is asking an auditor today to do something that is impossible. That might have been true yesterday, but it is not true today. And it can be done and it can be done well.

Now, what happens in 3D Criss Cross? This again is an elementary situation. You’re finding what the pc has been. And when he sees it, he ceases to be it.

And the results which you get for doing the exact textbook solution, see, are just fabulous. The results don't match the sudden divergences and brilliances and new ideas, you see, that you get in the session and so on. The results don't match that. The results match the textbook solution today. Probably the first time in the history of this planet, that that has ever been the case.

You recognize that when the pc is listing – oh, let’s take a five hundred item list. You know he’s been every one of those items – every single blasted one of those items. Just the business of listing.

If you ever fought a war, according to West Point textbooks, you'd lose it. If you built bridges according to the engineering school manuals they would all fall down. If you repaired machinery by the maintenance and operation manuals, that you're issued for engines and things like that, Lord knows what would happen. They have one grease cup going three years, but you have to change the oil in the crankcase every fifteen minutes or something, you know.

You know, two hundred trillion years is a lot of years. If you don’t believe it, why, just think back sometime. Anyway, he’s been every one of those items that he’s listed.

Well, I'll give you an idea. The car you drive — if you're driving a car — the oil people tell you, you should change the oil in that car about every thousand miles. That's what they tell you if you read their advertisements. Factually speaking, nothing possibly goes wrong with the oil for the first five thousand miles.

Well, let me say this: He’s either been them or raised hell with them. He’s had an intimate acquaintance with each one – that’s for sure.

And you see motorists all over the place busy following these rules and regulations, you see, and changing the oil every thousand miles and they grease it every twenty thousand. And their cars just fall apart and they never can understand why.

Well, look, how many – you’ve made him differentiate five hundred times. You made him exteriorize five hundred times. Oh, this begins to look like Route 1, doesn’t it? You made him exteriorize to some degree from five hundred identities less the one, two or three he’s being so obsessively, he can’t see them. And the last one the pc thinks is it, is always it. Why? Because if he weren’t being it, it wouldn’t hang up and keep reading. If he knew which one it was, accurately, he wouldn’t be in it.

Probably a car needs to be greased every thousand miles, but it doesn't get its crankcase changed every. . . It all depends on the climate you're running in, of course. How dirty and gritty the country is or something like that, has a lot to do with it. These things are practically done in reverse, you see. See, you're so used to the textbook solution not working, see, that you tend to believe that something new and extraordinary and beyond this will be demanded of you.

That’s where we get the idea of if the pc knows what’s wrong with him – that isn’t what’s wrong. That’s for sure because if he can look at it, he isn’t in it. See? What’s wrong with him is what he’s being so obsessively that he cannot observe it.

Well, I can tell you straight from the shoulder right now, that that is not true of Scientology today. The textbook solution gets you the whole distance. And the only reason you won't get there is because you don't follow it. I know. I know. I just had about. . . I guess it's been about fifteen, sixteen hours of nothing but textbook solution. Working like a dream. Working like a dream.

So you’ve exteriorized him from five hundred items to some degree except the last – the last one. And when that finally exteriorizes – ooh. That was the one that had all the charge on it. Oooooh. That’s a bum one. He gets cold. He gets this and he gets that.

Well, that's auditing today. That's what's expected of an auditor today. An auditor can do these things, fine. If he can do them with understanding, wonderful. But he won't get any results at all unless he does it with complete precision. And that's what it depends on. Okay?

Of course, you’ve walked him back to what he’s being. Now, you find the oppterm and that’s what he’s concentrated on. While he’s being this, he’s concentrated on that.

Thank you.

And you start getting this whole package start blowing up right in his face because you’ve got a two-pole situation sitting right there in the bank and it starts discharging.

Now, the thing that makes the GPM hard to tie down and 3D Criss Cross a little bit difficult to do is sometimes he is so obsessively being the internal items that are close in and so slightly being the first items that you find – you see, he’s still being them – but not to that obsessive degree which you might expect later – but he doesn’t come close sometimes – this is not always true – but he sometimes doesn’t come close between the terminal and the oppterm.

You think you’ve got a package like this, but you very often don’t get your terminal package like this. You get a terminal package – this is the commonest, early package – is you get a terminal and then a plausible opposition terminal, only there are twelve in between before they meet each other. See?

If you’re lucky, you’ll hit them dead on the nose and they just go poof. But when they don’t go poof and they hang up, you’ve just got many more packages intervening.

I’ll give you an idea. A pc finally finds the item „child,“ and then we oppterm this item, and it’s „badness.“ Oooooh, see. That was right at the end of a long, long intensive on a pc, by the way. That’s not quite what I said, but to protect the case…

Well, you see, we just fell short of getting the phfft. We had all the items all combed down here to where there’s only about two items left holding the whole bank together, and we got the item next to the item that opposed the child. That was a sad day because it meant we didn’t have time to give the pc any more auditing, and it meant that we had to do more lists to get in close, you see.

What we had was this kind of a situation, see. See? That isn’t going to blow, because that is the package. See, just the – see, that’s the package there, see.

And we found this. Leave it there. What’s there? Well, that’s exactly what the pc’s being, is what’s there. You see this? You got to have a two-pole situation.

Now, anybody that knows anything about exteriorization should really roll up his sleeves.

When we were telling people to bop out of their heads and go sail about…

By the way, you’re going to be about six minutes more, you’re going to be about ten minutes late for this evening. Is that all right with you if I finish the lecture? Or should I stop right now?

Audience: No!

All right.

The pc has got a „no knowingness,“ really, of his beingness. We look at this fellow; he’s being a man. No, he isn’t being a man. Actually, in the – way down deep in the reactive bank, the most reactive thing about him and so forth and it makes him do this, that and the other thing is a waterbuck or something, see.

And the reason a waterbuck is hung up is because it’s a tiger. And sometimes he dramatizes the tiger, you see. And he – the last thing he’d recognize this… You say to little Johnny, „Why don’t you stop biting your fingernails?“

And little Johnny says – his first reaction is – “Do I bite my fingernails?“ see, „Wait a minute,“ you know. He’s gotta – starts worrying about himself because he never noticed he was biting his fingernails before, you see.

He never asked himself who or what would bite fingernails, you know. He goes around thinking there’s something wrong with him because he shouldn’t bite his fingernails.

Well, we don’t know why he bites his fingernails. Somebody says it’s an absence of calcium. I’d say it was a prevention from scratching out waterbuck’s eyes. Splendid way to keep from scratching waterbuck’s eyes out. Keep them all bit off, see. Real good. „Now, if I don’t develop claws, I won’t get that nasty – into any of these nasty situations whereby I suddenly get pulled into the water, you know, and drowned like last time I was a tiger or something.“ You know?

You got something wild going on, and Lord knows what the explanation will be, but a person starts worrying about himself… That is such loose language.

What’s he worrying about? Well, you have to step back to take a look. And all of the CCHs, straight through to the end of 3D Criss Cross, should simply be a succession of stepping back to look.

And early in the game, one steps back as a beingness or an object or something to look at another object. And later in the game, one simply steps back as a thetan to look at a mass. You still got a two-pole situation. You’ve got a thetan and you got a mass. In all of the processes you’re doing, from CCHs right on up through to the end of 3D Criss Cross are exteriorization processes.

Now, when we originally told somebody to be three feet back of his head, do you realize how often he came out as a mass? He went back in, too, didn’t he? The only thing we were doing was we were just overshooting his ability by about a hundred thousand light-years. We were exteriorizing a somatic. We were doing all kinds of wild things.

In actual fact, your 3D Criss Cross from the word go is an exteriorization process. You’re exteriorizing out of his past – his past identities, if you please; his past energy masses, if you please; his past problems, if you please – all of these things you’re exteriorizing him out of – one after the other. He’s not ready to come out of his head! Why man, he hasn’t been in a head for – well, incalculable.

So in CCHs, if you run the CCHs very smoothly, you’ll have present time sufficiently quiet and inviting and orderly and positive, that the individual will start exteriorizing out of bits and pieces of the past. We don’t care what bits and pieces of the past he exteriorizes out of or if – if he does no more than say, „Oh, that somatic. Well, I wonder what that was.“

You see, he was being it an instant before it turned on. It’s been there all the time, but he couldn’t feel it because he was it. He can only feel it when he wasn’t it.

Now, as your individual is processed on the CCHs, he goes through a sequence of exteriorizations. A little past this and a little past that and a little past something else and something else, and he keeps exteriorizing and exteriorizing. We don’t care anything about what from. We’re just trying to make him look at present time and it’s going to shift the bank, that’s for sure.

And of course, we don’t get him really, basically, all of him, anywhere near present time. But it feels like it to him; it feels better to him. And when we’ve got him up as much to present time as we can make it with the CCHs, why, then we ought to kind of clean him up so his rudiments will stay in and get him over on to 3D Criss Cross.

And then, of course, we start exteriorizing him out of all the beingnesses he has been and all the whatnesses and so forth. Sometimes you get lots of whats and conditions that the person exteriorizes out of before you ever get a beingness.

And you get these things, and you exteriorize him out of them – wholesale lots. And of course, if you’re hitting these things on the button, and you’re doing a good job, why, he’s just coming out of mass after mass. Of course, he’s coming out of a mass as a mass. And as a mass, he is inspecting other masses.

You will only get tone arm action to the degree that the individual is looking at something and you won’t get tone arm action unless the individual is looking at something. We don’t care what he is being while he is looking, but he has to be looking at something.

Now, of course, a substitute for looking, a lower-scale lookingness, is a feelingness. And you can sometimes do a bunch of feelies and get someplace with the CCHs where you might not.

Now, knowing that, knowing what I told you there and so forth, you actually, you’ve got all this; you could dream up a whole bunch of CCHs. You dream up a whole bunch of them, you know.

You could take your various drills of communication and to the room, to you, to this, to that – you know, and treat them all repetitively, you know. Good duplication. You could dream up CCHs like mad. But of course, they wouldn’t be any good if you didn’t keep calling the pc’s attention, not just to present time, but to his bank because he wouldn’t come out of his bank, would he. He’d just lock up. He’d slide out of his bank accidentally.

No, you can actually kick him out of his bank, you know. You say, „Gimme your paw, mate.“ And „Thank you.“

And he gives you his paw, and as he does this, he says, „Oomp.“

And you say, „Well, good.“ You thank him, you see. You finish your cycle. That’s a moot question whether you finish your cycle and ask or just ask. But you say, „What happened there?“

„Well, what? Oh – shoulder. Oh, yeah, a shoulder. Ooooh. It – it – it raised hell just a minute ago. Yeah, it kicked. Yeah, it did, didn’t it?“ Big win, see. Exteriorize him out of a somatic.

Of course, these somatics will turn on and off kind of automatically without ever calling his attention to it, and to the degree that you never call his attention to it and keep him in two-way comm on the subject, and keep him calm about the whole thing, to that degree he won’t progress. See, so you’ve got a five hundred-hour CCH staring him – in front of you.

You could extend the CCHs to the degree that you didn’t make your drills precise and repetitive. And follow the rules of the CCHs in general – just the basic rules. And to the degree that you didn’t keep present time attractive for the pc – all very important, see – he wants to do it for you.

And, keep his attention on what’s happening to his somatics or twitches or something of this sort, see? If he did those two things, hell, those – the pc will just sail on the CCHs. They are not a slow process. They are a very fast process.

3D Criss Cross is a fantastically fast process if you get the idea of how many exteriorizations per unit of time the pc is doing, man. It must look like the telegraph poles going by, to him.

You can exteriorize him one after the other, one after the other, and exteriorize him, exteriorize him, exteriorize him. You do a list. Differentiate the list. Null the list. Well, you’ve exteriorized him very well out of 497 and indifferently out of two, and found out he was stuck in one. And he keeps forgetting the one. It’s hard to remember the one. How does he re…? Yeah, yeah. Can’t look at it. He’s just remembering it. You told him, so he remembers it. Get the idea?

And then you find the other side of it, and maybe everything goes clank! you know or smash. Ooooh. Or maybe it’s been going smash the whole time, you see. And he eventually is the one, he can look at the other, and so on, and he’s – and you’ll find him, for days he’s likely to go around trying to be the waterbuck looking at the tiger and the tiger being the waterbuck, trying to say, „Well, I wonder how it really feels to be a waterbuck. Well, I wonder how it feels to be a tiger. I wonder how it feels. I wonder how a waterbuck would think of a tiger. How would a waterbuck think of a tiger – I can’t conceive of being a waterbuck; can’t conceive of it. And frankly, I can’t make up my mind about a tiger.“

He won’t even know he’s dramatizing them, because he’s obsessively being them. Well, when you’d get into that combination, why, you’d need a little higher boost, but again it’s just exteriorization.

But to summate very rapidly, it’s a two-pole universe. Unless you have two poles, you don’t have TA action. If you don’t have TA action, you don’t have two poles, so you must be doing something wrong. That’s simple!

If you got TA action and you’re getting items, and you’re calling the pc’s attention to it, and ARC exists – no matter what you’re doing, you’re exteriorizing him from things, and you’re straightening him on up and bringing him on up the line as a case. That’s for sure. And that’s basically all there is to the theory and practice of auditing.

Now, if you did that very neatly, you could actually figure out ways by which this could be done. See, you could take almost any pc and exteriorize him out of something even if you had to kick him in the head.

Say, „Look at my boot,“ you know. Kick him in the head, say, „Look at my boot.“ And I tell you, sooner or later he’d see your boot, man. I’m not advising that sort of thing. It’s much better – sometimes a pretty girl sits there and audits this fellow for five or six hours and all of a sudden he gets a kind of a dazed look on his face, and he looks across from him and he realizes a pretty girl is sitting in the other chair. First gain. Ten hours later he knows it’s an auditor. Maybe that evening he finds out it’s an auditor.

Okay. Well, that’s – that’s what I wanted to tell you about this. That actually is the first time I’ve been able to phrase accurately and precisely as a communication unit, exactly what auditing does and exactly what you’re doing as an auditor.

And it’s a fairly brief, comprehensible summary I think you’ll find out and it possibly will make your auditing a lot easier to do.

Thank you very much.

Good night.