[Start of Lecture]

[Start of Lecture]

Thank you.

Thank you.

Well, tonight particularly I have nothing to talk to you about. Tonight particularly.

Want to talk to you now about the coordination of processes or classes of processes. There are several classes of processes which do not ordinarily cross very much. However, one is additive to the next, and you could put them in a sequential chain. They could be placed in a chain, a gradient scale, or any way you wanted to arrange them, but that would to some degree be false, because these classes of processes, each one, take up, really, another aspect of existence.

And that's because the weather doesn't really permit dry humor.

Now, I'm not going to give you a list of these classes; I'm going to talk to you about the most important ones. The first we know as mechanical, and the second we know as postulate processes. Those are two very broad classifications, and you mustn't get these two confused. They are two different classes of processes. We won't do an A=A=A on them and say postulates go into the mechanics and the mechanics go into the postulates because the mechanical processes that have to do with space, energy, masses, and so forth, are all dependent in the first place on postulates, so therefore they're the same processes. They are not. You got the idea?

Very good. I knew one man would applaud that. I knew that.

Now, as I say, you can put one of these on a gradient scale to the other: You say mechanical processes are always junior, then, to postulate processes. But the funny part of it is that you have to process mechanical processes as mechanical processes, and you have to process postulate processes as postulate processes. You see this clearly?

I would like to give you a little talk on the Tone Scale and rather bring it up-to-date and talk a little bit about its uses.

The two broad classifications, then, stem immediately from the first few Axioms, and they break down into those two enormous classes.

This material you all know. You've heard all this. There's nothing new about it at all, I assure you. Except, of course, some few small items.

Now, the moment that we take up these, we are taking up the actual anatomy of substance of the universe and life within it. The substance of the universe is just first and foremost idea and thing. There are ideas; there are things. See? Now, you call space a thing. You might as well; it's a manufactured item. It's mechanical. It's a mechanic, you might say.

Now, the first of these few small items was the addition, some time ago, of the Know to Mystery Scale.

There's the whole category of particles which could be considered one different from the next, as on the periodic chart. But in view of the fact that the periodic chart doesn't even begin to cover the number of actual atoms, molecules, types of gas, invisible particles and so on, it just doesn't even begin to stretch. In the first place, it is only on this planet that it ends below a hundred. It's only on this planet. You realize there's a star, which is a companion star to Sirius, one teaspoonful of the substance of which would weigh one ton on Earth? Well, what element is that, if you please? You see, we're immediately outside the periodic chart.

Now, the Know to Mystery Scale was an interesting introduction, but all it was in essence was an expansion of Science of Survival up and down. We expanded Science of Survival up and down. Well, it's very interesting since in Science of Survival we have told you how bad it can get and is, you see, at the bottom of the scale, that with our Know to Mystery Scale we then go south. And this is very hard to do, but I managed it. I just said everything from that point on down south was indescribable, incomprehensible, un-understandable, and that was the trouble with it. Everybody was trying to understand it and there's no understanding in it.

Now, therefore, it is not true that we can carefully and neatly say, „This is all the atoms there are. This is all the molecules there are,“ and just let it go at that. There is no sense in trying to completely classify particles. Why? Because each set of particles is simply another set of postulated particles, and there could be a complete infinity of these, don't you see?

Now, it's very fascinating that the Tone Scale itself occupies that band which is covered in the Know to Mystery Scale as Emotion. And that's a rather high band.

So therefore, you take the particles where you find them and that's it. Don't ever be surprised to find a different kind of mass or a different kind of particle, because they are on a postulate basis — originally. Look at our gradient scale here. They can be postulated but they are in existence. They are. They do exist.

The Know to Mystery Scale goes in this fashion: It goes Know, which is totality of knowing; and then it goes Not-Know, which means that we have to not-know some things in order to know some things; and then it goes down into Look, which means the totality of perception; and then goes down into the emotional band, which goes, of course, from enthusiasm down to (covering it very roughly) conservatism, antagonism, anger, fear, grief and apathy. That's the emotional band, and then we move into Effort or Solids; Solids are part of the Effort band.

You just might as well say, „Well, all right. They all come from postulate, therefore it's very easy to handle them because they're just all idea“; and we're off onto a Mary Baker Eddy. You see? And she couldn't have done worse. I mean, as fine a woman as this was, she actually couldn't have done worse with her conclusion. Her conclusion was that if it's all so actual and painful, it better not exist — so all is infinite mind, don't you see — and never took that into category, so it never went south with anything.

Well, right about that point – right about that point – a fantastically terrible cognition occurred. It almost blew me out of my chair at the time I was sitting there. I was minding my own business. I wasn't thinking about much of anything. And I was sort of adding up processes, you know, in a lackadaisical sort of way, and I said, "Now, let's see. These processes over here obviously upset preclears." And I wrote down a small list of these things, and "Then these processes over here obviously benefit preclears. But in this list of processes that benefit preclears we find a great many that don't, and in the list of processes that don't benefit preclears we find some that do. Oh, no."

Now, this is all very well. I'm not criticizing Mary Baker Eddy, because she was simply falling into a track which had, oddly enough, a tremendous amount of truth in it. You see, it's perfectly true: All is infinite mind. I mean, it's the truest thing you ever heard of. See? I mean, there's no falsehood there. But it unfortunately doesn't allow for the fact that infinite mind gives us at once infinite matter; and if you try to not-is everything, you've had it. In other words, you go through. You don't say, „It ain't“; you say, „It is.“

Well, of course I had entered right into the strata of incomprehensibility and unfortunately made it comprehensible. I got to looking at this and all of a sudden realized what we've been doing for a long, long time. Ha! It's pathetic to think of it, but every now and then when we audited a preclear and he became apathetic, we were making him well. Just look that over.

You have to admit the actuality in order to obtain a communication. We get to this as a very tremendously sweeping law in processing. The preclear has to admit an actuality in order to get into communication. And if he cannot admit it as an actuality, then he cannot get into communication with it, and so he will remain communication-shy of this particular item, and it will continue to communicate at him on a cause-distance-effect, don't you see?

Every now and then when we were auditing somebody and he apparently slumped to the bottom of the emotional scale, we actually were winning. We had brought him up to apathy.

So when we say „All is infinite mind, you can just skip the rest of it,“ we are pulling a tremendous blunder in processing, because we are saying it is not then necessary to communicate with all these things which you put into existence to communicate with. And if you abandon this amount of communication the end product is insanity.

When you really look this over you have the answers to a tremendous number of phenomena which we have encountered, and amongst them is "don't care." Amongst them is "forget," "can't remember anything," "can't remember childhood." Amongst them is irresponsibility: "can't do anything about it anyway." Many of these characteristics lie below apathy and they're all above apathy. And what a happy man it is that can be apathetic. He's high toned.

All right. We're not raising the devil with Mary Baker Eddy. She had a fine, hard time of it. She made a very gallant fight, and we are actually indebted to her for the tremendous push-back she gave the world of medicine. But we mustn't, in our gratitude, fall into the same snare.

Now, one of the first random data that was recovered in this wise was the observation that very often seamen, very often chaps working on ships, rather beat-up characters... I'm talking now about the common seaman of yesteryear before the unions promoted him above the officers. This fellow would occasionally get hurt and would then insist on going about his duties, and could not be made to sit still long enough to have a broken hand or something like this heal up. And very many men have observed this and they have assigned a certain deity to it, you see. The man is practically godlike in his ability to withstand pain.

It's very easy for somebody you're teaching to fall into that snare, and I tell you this as future Instructors. You're going to have people in your midst that are endowed with this philosophy that in view of the fact that it's all postulated, it isn't. Now look! If it's postulated, it is! Who are we invalidating? See? If it's postulated, it is.

The horrible discovery is he's not withstanding pain; he can't feel it! He cannot feel it. He is incapable of that much sensitivity. He is below apathy.

Now, if it is true that you must get rid of all of it, whole- track-psychiatry style, then you better postulate all of it. The way you undo mass is to undo the postulate of mass. The way you undo a particle is to undo the postulate of the particle. The way you undo space is to undo the postulate of space. Do you see that? But this will be found, in essence, to be pretty doggoned stratospheric for most of your preclears.

Now, I know what I'm talking about now, because I've had several cases that were in that range and they hadn't known that they had been hurt and had no recall of it whatsoever. And I worked with them and brought them upscale, and they finally became apathetic about having been hurt. And I brought them up a little bit higher and, oh boy, did it hurt. And brought them up a little bit higher and they could handle it. But at that low stage they had been completely overwhelmed to a point of not even knowing they had been overwhelmed.

So therefore, we have to have this class of processes which simply admit the existence of MEST and accustom them to its actuality. Do you see that? They can't see that they postulated it; they have to accept it just as it is. And you get them to accept it as it is — that is a wall; that is a floor; that is a ceiling — and we get quite a gain, quite a gain. It's quite interesting what 8-C will do for numerous cases — what straight locational processing will do for numerous cases.

Now you say, "How bad can it get?" Well, you can go lower than that. You can go lower than that. You can go to a point of no comprehension of any successive moment. No comprehension of any moment preceding or succeeding any other moment.

Now, these are processes which admit fully the mechanics of existence and so we must consider that as a full class of processes. It is a full class. You don't have to say anything to him at all about how he postulated the stuff and how he agreed with it and how he helped out with the whole thing. You don't have to say a thing. He'll find this out eventually as you process him.

Now, you can get worse than that. You can get no comprehension of any moment, including now. Well, we get a politician or something like that, you know. We get somebody that's really in there pitching, you know. He doesn't know he's there; he doesn't know he has been there; he doesn't know he will be there; he doesn't know you are there or anything of the sort, and that's about it.

Now, it is quite a strain on a case to run postulate processes. It is such a strain that running postulate processes — Change the Idea, and so on — on a lowscale case is routinely unsuccessful. It reduces the havingness.

Now, we have already descended below Mystery because he's not puzzled. Nothing worries him. Oh-ho-ho, no. Nothing worries that man at all. He can be counted on to not react, and therefore he is a firm, sound, solid individual. Obviously nothing ever affects him. But it would if he found it out! Get the difference. Something would affect him if he found it out.

What is this mechanism of reduction of havingness? It is the simple mechanism which I spoke to you about just a couple of minutes ago. You say it isn't when it is. In other words, you get a second-postulate situation in the thetan. He postulated it into existence, it is still in existence, he hasn't undone the postulate which put it into existence, and now he says it isn't in existence. And he's made a liar out of himself, meaning he has denied himself, which is the only thing he can do that is terribly aberrative. Do you see that? So that if we bypass all of these mechanical processes, sweepingly, we wind up with a reduction of havingness. It is, but it isn't.

Now, this is actually a matter of tone. Of course, we're approaching, in the ranges of the Tone Scale, close down to now-perpetual unconsciousness. And unconsciousness is, of course, just plain waiting. That is all.

Now, in the field of postulates this just makes a liar out of him, that's all. I mean, it's just as simple as that. It invalidates him.

Now, there are some other few little things about the Tone Scale that are interesting besides that below-apathy matter. And one of them at first is not too useful, but a person is a victim of any tone level above him. No use to this, of course. Now, we've talked long ago about the fact that it took about one point zero band – that is to say, one solid number on the Tone Scale – to affect the lower number. In other words, it was one-half a number or a whole number, but you could have an effect on a person in fear, for instance by being angry or antagonistic. See, that's one whole point above it. Fear at about 1.0 then is affected by 1.5 and by 2.0, but isn't particularly affected at all above that line.

Now, you will find preclears who just ache to be invalidated. They invalidate themselves all the time, and so on. They've got this obsessively. They said, „There is a lighter. Now, I don't see any lighter.“ They said, „My postulates don't work,“ didn't they? They said, „There's a wall. I don't see a wall. There is no wall there at all.“ This is the same statement as „My postulates don't work. When I build a wall by postulate, I thereafter have no evidence that a wall has been built. So therefore, I cannot build a wall, and I am not capable of building walls, and there I am, weak.“ What made him weak? The fact that he said he was by the statement, „There is a wall. Now, I see no wall.“ Do you see that?

Now, this is quite interesting. He doesn't know anything exists above that line. Cognition, low on the Tone Scale band, is in terms of about one tone or one-half a tone. In other words, one can cognite upwards easily one tone. So that a man who is afraid perpetually, always in fear, would then have great reality on the fact that people became angry and antagonistic. Also that people became sad; that is below that tone. And also that people became apathetic and weren't afraid when they ought to be. See, there's something wrong with the fellow, because he isn't afraid when he ought to be.

Now, if he wanted to get rid of the wall, it would really be necessary for him to say, „There is a wall.“ He could run out his having said „There is a wall,“ and this, then, would make the wall disappear. And this would only tell him, then, „I can put a wall there, and I can take a wall away.“ But the course that leads to complete disaster is this other course: He says, „There is a wall. I don't see any wall.“

But that's sort of dim. That isn't too well understood by this person.

Now, he has to be able to see a wall, and you've moved him up just that height. Reduction of havingness is this process: „There's a wall. I don't see any wall,“ „Here's an engram bank. I don't see any bank,“ and we get this odd manifestation of a jumbled-up havingness denied.

So we get a new principle on it: That a person is affected most by that part of the Know to Mystery Scale immediately above or below his position upon it. That becomes a fantastic weapon for analysis of various things. It tells us at once that the German people were somewhere between grief to fear when they were being led by Hitler at 1.5. Here we had a perfect 1.5. They must've been in grief or in fear, and that must have been the national tone at the time this was going forward.

Now, the person feels that he should have and then he says, „I don't have to have anything. I don't want it.“ You see, it's a clutter of postulates. But you start running nothing but ideas on somebody, you get in trouble. Nothing but ideas. No masses, no particles, no spaces. And the only reason for this is that he has put the masses, particles and spaces into existence as an actuality, and by your complete ignoring of them — you ignore his ignoring of them — you get a bunch of things which are there but aren't.

Therefore, we could predict the Tone Scale of a people by examining their choice of leaders. And when we do this, I'm afraid we would often error because we would get down below a no- emotional band and there those points are hard to recognize. But there the rest of the Tone Scale serves us well, because those lower bands are significance, significance, significance and from significance on down through to greater significance and greater significance.

Now, I talked to you about the dwindling spiral of reality, where it went down from postulate to agreement to terminals to communication lines to no lines. Well, the funny part of it is as you start to run reality upstairs again, you have to exert an idea in the direction of, first, there are lines.

You see, there's... From the end of the Tone Scale at apathy and down through Solids we're on solid ground, if you will excuse me. But from there on it is merely the type of significance which gives us the judgment of the situation. That's all. There is nothing else.

Well now, you'll also run into the phenomenon of his saying, „There are no lines.“ What a clumsy tangle. Now, don't be amazed, as you start to process somebody, to have him totally packed in solid all of a sudden, because that's what he's been doing. Stuff has been appearing around him and he says, „Oh, it doesn't exist.“ He postulated it into existence, then he says, „It doesn't exist.“ See? „I'll think about that tomorrow,“ you know, „That's nothing. Doesn't exist.“ In other words, each one of these statements is „I won't go into communication with it.“ See? It doesn't exist; I won't go into communication with it — same thing. Well now, if he made it and now he's unwilling to go into communication with it, he's really in the soup.

Now, I am particularly interested in the fact that people keep following this Tone Scale. I don't know, they've heard a rumor or something of the sort, and it's fashionable or something, but they do follow it. And a process is a good process which raises people on this scale, and it is a bad process when it doesn't. I don't know any process which depresses them. It's quite interesting. I really don't. I know processes by which their total memory could be wiped out in twenty seconds.

So communication undoes the whole level of postulate processes, but postulates do not necessarily do so. Do you follow this? You got communication here as the tool which works best on postulate processes. Nevertheless, I'm going to give you some of the beefiest postulate processes there are.

The second I started studying brainwashing, this one fell out of the hamper. I mean it became one of those easy things. There's nothing to that. Brainwashing – the whole subject is insufficiently complicated for the Pavlovian school to have grasped, don't you see. It's not complicated enough. So there's really nothing to brainwashing somebody. All you have to do is take away all his mental image pictures at once, quickly, suddenly, and so forth, and if he depends on these utterly, of course you wipe him out. That's all you have to do and you've brainwashed him thoroughly.

Project: to turn on somebody's mock-ups so clearly and so brilliantly that he won't possibly be able to even flinch. He himself will be flabbergasted. It's rather easy to do. The worst of the cases have to be given a Subjective Remedy of Havingness. You have to have him mock up black spaces and black masses or something and push them in. Remedy his havingness with these blacknesses in order to clear the field up a little bit. But maybe that isn't even necessary, because the process I am going to give you is a quickie, it's impermanent, and he will be upset by it, but it's a process you have to know.

You can do a limited job of this by giving him some additional pictures he doesn't want. But that, of course, is very limited and very arduous. The Pavlovian school didn't even do that. The people brainwashed in Korea were... Well, I guess they were brainwashed, I don't know. It's a technical name, but it's just the technical name of it.

You have the preclear get the idea of putting up a mock-up or a facsimile the size of the wall before him, and then have him get the idea... This is just get the idea, you see; just postulates; nothing but. Now, you don't ask him to do it; he just gets the idea of doing it, see? And then he says, „Well, tsk! that'd spoil the game,“ and not do it.

A tremendous amount of duress was used and the mechanisms to produce hallucination were interesting, but they didn't work.

Have you got this sequence? Let's get this sequence well. You have him get the idea of putting up a mock-up the size of that wall, have him hurriedly get the idea that it would spoil the game, and have him quickly stop and not do it. It's devastating! Run on a case that is quite high it is a very powerful process. Run on a case that should have been run on mechanics, it still works but it's one of the most deadly things you can do to him. All of a sudden he has staring him in the face something he has so often postulated mustn't exist — a facsimile, a picture, a mock-up — that he is flabbergasted. And you are doing something which appears to him to be just witchcraft, that's all. Because the facsimile he will begin to put up there, the mock-up he will begin to put up there, whichever he does, will be so deep, so massive, so brilliant and so big, it'll be quite upsetting. You simply run the cycle of postulates which ran him into not putting up things. Got that? That's just the one-two-three. Got those now?

By the way, the Korean is still working somewhere in the range of the 22 percent. You've heard me talk about 22 percent. I mean, any therapy will do good work with 22 percent of the people. And it's interesting that brainwashing is apparently right in that band, too. In other words, there are 22 percent of the people with which you can do anything. All right.

I don't tell you not to do this. Do it all you please. Isn't going to kill him any. It's certainly going to stun a few preclears, because even on a black case it has some chance of happening. But the kind thing to do to a black case is to give him a Subjective Remedy of Havingness first to get rid of the blackness and then do it.

Now, it's an interesting thing that a person does not escape affect from the upper band above him even when he doesn't know about it. He will consciously react to one-half to one tone above him – referring to your Tone Scale in Science of Survival. But just because he doesn't cognite on them, he doesn't fail to react to the upper bands.

It's just those three steps. I'll go over them again. You tell him this; this is just your palaver:

So a person in Eat has got the rest of the stack sitting right there.

„All right now. I want you to get the idea of putting up a mock- up the size of that wall. Now get the idea that would spoil the game and not do it.“

So we go down into complications from Solids. Now, I said the Know to Mystery Scale, this very useful scale: Know; Not-Know (the ability to not-know or forget or wipe out things consciously); Look, which includes all perception; and then down into the emotional scale, the various emotional bands; then into Solids; and then, what do you know, into Think. All right.

And that's all there is to it. Then you tell him again, „Now get the idea of putting up a mock-up the size of the wall. Now get the idea that would spoil the game and don't do it.“ One-two- three, one-two-three, one-two-three. Just like that. Over and over and over again.

It's a very fine thing to run into Think finally, because at this band one only thinks of things he invents to think about. It's quite an amazing band. It is a band occupied normally by people who cannot face anything solid. They cannot work, they cannot exert effort in any way, and they occupy this band with great thoroughness.

Now, at the end of an hour or two, he will be getting these fantastically huge, overwhelming mock-ups. That's for sure. You never saw such brilliance and clarity in your life. If you, in Dianetics, wanted to turn on somebody's facsimiles so he could see them and run them, then this would have done it.

Well, they go south from there. Now, you know, that was about as far south as anybody has ever gone. But actually, they go south from there; they go way down from there. You go into Symbols. And, of course, the definition of a symbol is something that has mass, meaning and mobility. But at Symbols we never really have the thing. We have a substitute for the thing. And that is the proper definition of the Symbol band. If a Symbol has mass, meaning and mobility, that would make anything a symbol.

That's why I say these days I couldn't be interested less in research; can do things like this.

But let's look at it a little more carefully, and we find out that the symbol band actually is a band of substitution. One substitutes for the thing, something else.

Now, this has a companion postulate process:

In other words, we have a barrel and a person at the symbol band never looks or feels or weighs or inspects the barrel. He says, "That, uh... that is a... a Krokokinov barrel. Yes, yes. That's true, that's true," and goes and looks it up in a dictionary, chases down the derivations of the word, follows those through carefully on its history, writes an enormous paper on the subject, releases it, has it printed in some huge technical journal, is acclaimed far and wide until, of course, the janitor comes along, who's in better shape (because he can work), and he looks at the barrel. And he finds out it's a barrel of crackers, and he proceeds to pass them out to his family and friends and they eat it all up. And nobody ever finds out about this. It's this tremendous amount of significance which is built up on that. In other words, it's a representative stand-in.

„Now get the idea of putting a mock-up in the center of the room that everybody could see. Now get the idea that would spoil the game and stop it.“ The one-two-three again.

The characteristic of that is "Never look at the thing; always look at a substitute for the thing." Well, you can use this directly in processing by making people look at substitutes for the thing until they will finally find themselves, willy-nilly, in communication with the thing, and they find it doesn't bite. And that's the end of that particular manifestation as far as they're concerned.

„Get the idea of putting up a mock-up in the center of the room that everybody could see. Now get the idea that would spoil the game and stop it.“

Now, we go south from there and we find people who cannot substitute meanings for things, but still have to get rid of them. And they do that by eating them. This is the activity to which they are mainly dedicated and devoted.

Now, those are run, first one, then the other. In other words, you have to flatten the one where he puts up the facsimile or the mock-up the size of the wall before you enter in upon this other one. It has been found to be more successful if it is done in that sequence.

Now, there are two sides – because there's cause-distance-effect as a formula for communication – there are always two sides to being eaten. There is eating and there's being eaten. And actually, it's probably a very interesting game. I know a number of animals that play this game. I've actually had a number of recipes given to me as an affectionate gesture by a chief of a tribe down in the Solomon Islands. He thought that was a good thing for me to have there.

Now, I have never run a preclear to a point where the mock-up did appear with total solidity in the middle of the room — on this same process. Never have. But I have run one to the point where a shimmer appeared, which some other people, coming into the room a short time afterwards and sitting down, noticed and wondered what it was. There was a shimmer in the middle of the room.

It's how you cooked "long pig." And you have to do various interesting things to overcome the rather sweet flavor of human flesh. Evidently it's very difficult to get rid of that pungency. He explained to me that very often when you were raiding the poorer tribes, they had not been dieting well. If they ate too much seafood, for instance, you could sometimes taste fish in the thing.

Now, we're straight on the highway of putting a universe together when we can do that with a postulate process. But don't think for a moment that it doesn't upset your preclear, because he becomes convinced that it'll spoil the game, and sure enough it would. Sure enough it would. That's absolute truth.

And he had a certain kind of berry that you cooked with the food, you know, which did away with fish and so on. It was very scientific but awfully complicated.

„All right. Let's get the idea of putting up a stack of a million dollars worth of one-dollar bills in the middle of the room. Now let's get the idea that would spoil the game and not do it.“ („Stop it“ or „not do it“ interchangeable; „stop“ sometimes upsets him.) And he'll pull out of that in a very short space of time with wild protests. „What you're trying to do is just ruin the economics of the country,“ he's liable to tell you, because he shortly becomes aware of the fact that it is within his capability to put that stack of bills there that would be perfectly passable bills! He sees himself ruining the construction trade, ruining the whole of the contracts and business of the planet builders, completely wrecking the genetic line. What would be the use of having the genetic line if every time you wanted a body you simply mocked one up? And then everybody did this, and we would have a game without limitations which would not then, of course, be a game because there wouldn't be any barriers in it.

Of course, you'd take a French chef, he could go the Solomon Island cannibaler several better. The pinch of thyme which matches the touch of ginger, and it's all flipped with exactly a certain angle of the little pinkie, you see. You have to hold the little pinkie up like this just as you flip it in a certain way, and otherwise it doesn't taste right.

That's a rather fabulous pair of processes.

Well, we get down to that band, and then we get into another band below that band and that is the band of Sex. And people have had an awful lot of fun with this band. They get awfully significant about it. It's much more complicated than eating – much, much more complicated.

Now, you can figure-figure on these processes if you want to and undercut them in some fashion or another and do other things with them. Yes, they advance a case, but they don't put a person in a frame of mind where he can live in this universe. That is the singular limitation we are confronting. In fact, it puts him in quite a different frame of mind: that it's impossible to do so, particularly with a fellow on the loose like you, an auditor. Because sooner or later you're liable to start in on this and start mocking up Ford cars from one end of the street to the other, and that would ruin the economics of the automobile business and that would ruin this and that would wreck that, and he begins to find out he has a stake in this universe — which is the important postulate recovery. Nothing else is important about the process, really, except that one. He does have a stake in this universe.

Well, I don't know, there's no reason to go into some of the aboriginal customs on the second dynamic, but there are several that are very, very amusing. They're very interesting and so forth.

You never saw a man get down and scream until you've run this process for several hours on a preclear. It's just over his dead body!

Let's take courting of one kind or another, and so on – the various accepted measures. Here, sixty, seventy years ago, the whole act of courting was done according to some ritual which was notable mainly for its complexity. You talk about its inhibition, however. You sat on the girl's porch in the hammock, you know, and you talked in exactly certain tones about certain distant, disrelated subjects. You went and saw her. You didn't just jump in the car and get across the state line and get married. You didn't do that. You asked her father, and he looked into your bankbook. He tried to find out how secure you were in life and all kinds of odd, ritualistic functions that went along with this.

„All right. I'll do it again.“

But anyway, that is even more complicated than eating, I assure you. Much more complicated.

I've seen them sweat, so on. People who a few minutes before would have said, „Well, now...“ Oh, I mean pardon me, a day or so before would have said easily, very easily, „Oh, well. The destruction of this universe would be a very good thing. Very, very good thing. Yeah, nothing wrong with that because — get it out of the road — because it's the thing that's victimizing all of us.“

Now, you go south from there and you get, of course, into what we have normally called the Mystery band. You get into, oh, basic religions and so on. And boy, are these things complicated.

And then you run him on this other process, and he finds out he doesn't want to get rid of it, and as a matter of fact is liable — and not in all cases — but is very liable to accuse you of being a destroyer par excellence.

It's very interesting that the moment firearms came out... You would think that a manual of arms was something that evolved across the centuries, but this is not true at all. The high priests of the military at once invented rituals of Lord-knows- what complexity in order to load and fire one of these early firearms. They even had priests running up and down the line blessing the touchholes. It was quite interesting. And nobody understood firearms, so they just made a terrific complexity out of it. And I don't know whether it was blessing the touchhole or not that made them go off, but the soldiers were fairly convinced that it was.

Now, those are the two most powerful postulate processes of which I have any acquaintance, because they do not necessarily change a case but they certainly upset one!

You start to fade out about that point into anything that is easily understood, because that's its definition – "not easily understood" – from there on south. So that we get below there the next definite location is "waiting to understand." "Not easily understood," you see, goes south to "waiting to understand because it is too complex to figure out, so therefore we have to have some other thing someplace or another to undo this complexity, but it probably will not come along, but we'd better wait anyhow."

Now, we've fooled around with this quite a bit. Years ago we had Concept Therapy. Somebody down in Texas (a traitor to the state by the way), turned this out just as Concept Therapy, and he's been fooling around with it ever since. And they've had their various vicissitudes. But Concept Therapy is one of the limited therapies. The only thing wrong with it is havingness; it throws havingness down. You directly make somebody change his mind. You run the positive and the negative in order to get out the maybes. A maybe is composed of the positive and the negative. We remember all this. This is years ago — Scientology 8-80. It's true and there's nothing wrong with it except one thing: It doesn't work well on people who are still getting acquainted with the mechanics of existence. You get that? So it's one of these real high-toned processes. A fellow would have to have a Remedy of Havingness from A to Izzard. He'd just have to have a Remedy of Havingness the like of which you never heard of, on any subject under the moon, stars and sun. He'd have to be able to accept and reject anything and everything on the whole planet Earth and the surrounding galaxy, too. And then Concept Therapy would work without liability.

See, at that band they don't wait for anybody or they don't wait for any purpose, you see, particularly. They just kind of wait. But understanding is not part of it. No understanding enters into that at all.

But why do we have a therapy, since a thetan can do this anyhow, and if you get him up to that state, he can always simply change his mind? Remember there are certain things he doesn't want to change his mind about, and the first two processes I gave you are those things. He doesn't want to actually get into a frame of mind whereby the whole universe is invalidated and he has no game left of any kind whatsoever.

Now, you see, we've gone a lot further south than the original Tone Scale in Science of Survival. This is because we've become, ourselves, hypercritical and cynical – as time went on, you see. But the truth of the matter is that we were driven to it. We have been driven to it because we have found preclears located at all these way stations south from simply being apathetic.

Now, we could work this out in various ways so that it became more workable and we got around these odds and ends, but it's too high for the usual case that you run into. That case has to be run on mechanics.

Now, this produces something fantastic in processing. If an auditor doesn't understand this when he's processing these days with modern processes, he gets himself into an interesting batch of trouble. He thinks he's making the preclear worse.

So, the two major classes. You get somebody exteriorized in present time, he'll run on all the postulate processes you ever wanted to do. And you can do the first two on him with great success; he'd love them. But he'll tell you after a while, „You know, you're trying to ruin the universe if we keep this up much longer!“ He gets quite convinced of that.

He starts processing the preclear on Connectedness. The best process I know on the subject of Connectedness would simply be "What could you make connect with you on how many vias?" Nice complicated process.

So mechanics do fit into the realm of existence. It is no good to be a physicist, and reject all masses.

Now, originally the process was even simpler than that, but it proved a little too simple: "What could you make connect with you?" You had him look around and spot things that he could make connect with him. Now, that's an interesting thing to do, an interesting exercise. The only trouble is, it is a bit forthright and occasionally misses the preclear. So what you do is add "via how many other things." "What could you make connect with you via how many other things?" See? Not only "What could you make connect with you?" but "How zig-zagily, crookedly and round- aboutly could you make this occur?" And we'd find this is much to the appetite of the people on the south end of the scale. They think this is a delightful process. It begins to work very easily and nicely. And they work it, and they work it with innocence. And they sit there, and they run as good preclears should, and then they get apathetic, and they get more and more apathetic.

Now, I want to call to your attention an omission in the first ten Axioms. There is an omission in those Axioms. One of those Axioms says that the particles, grouped, become masses. Do you know that? Well, masses also become masses simply by being mocked up as masses. Got that? So there's a little added clause in that, and you'll see the proper correction on it one of these days. It's already been done.

But unfortunately, some of them simply get caved in with effort before they hit apathy. Then they hit this apathy and they get very apathetic, and they get more and more apathetic. And then after a while they get sad. And after a while they get afraid, and so they come on up the Tone Scale.

Now, when we started to keep walls from going away, it became apparent at once that our people had been misguided by the field of physics; and the whole subject, in paying some attention to physics, had itself been misguided. So we just took physics out of Scientology. The one thing that seems to run out when you keep walls and masses from going away is simply this: molecules, atoms. They're a swindle. A wall is a wall! It's solid! How come it's solid? Well, because it was postulated as being solid. Ground is ground. Mass is mass. And in view of the fact that nobody has ever seen one of those molecules or atoms, it of course gets into the realm of invisible particles, which the physicist is terrified of.

But this process, particularly, is one which does turn on the subzero scale. "What could you make connect with you on how many vias?" They come upscale on this process, and you do actually move them up into this.

You would never get into such terror in your life as you would get into running a physicist on making the air of the room solid without seeing that it had to become so. There's real terror on that for these boys. The invisible particle; they're haunted!

Running Stop-C-S and some other modern processes you see the similar manifestations. A person is apt to feel awfully, awfully apathetic for a little while. Take "Keep it from going away." You ask somebody to keep something from going away. You hand it to him. You're liable to turn on an awful lot of soggy, degraded sort of feeling and so on.

Actually the whole field of disease depends on these invisible particles. Radiation for its reaction on the body depends upon its invisibility. Invisible, invisible, invisible, invisible.

And if you didn't know about the subzero scale, you'd say "I'm making the preclear worse," just like I thought for five years. I thought, "Well, you run these processes, it makes the preclear worse." No! We had our hands right on processes that were making them better, except it isn't normal and natural to expect that a person would be healthier in a state of apathy than in a state of ugh. But it's true; he would be. His health would be better going around apathetically.

Well, you see, it's closest cousin to being a thetan. It can produce an effect but it can't be seen. Well, that's disease germs and so on. Somebody invented a microscope and found out there were little wigglety-wiggles and animalcules and things like that and this convinced him. But he never asked this: Did they exist as live forms or did the body make them? That's a hell of a thing to throw at a... Do the diseases exist as a separate protoplasm line, chasing endlessly through time (the way they teach you in biology) or does one body scent the postulate from another body that it is making glumwums, and it starts making glumwums, too?

A chap one day had been run on a process which did this, and he said all of a sudden, "You know, I... uh..." – this is after the session – he says, "You know, I... I – I think I've been calling boredom wrong all of my life. I... There's something wrong with this. You know I think what I've been calling boredom is really apathy. And this means that I would occasionally come up tone to feeling bored. But I wasn't feeling bored, I was really feeling apathetic. I wonder how boredom feels?" He found out a few days later and he came back and told me. He says, "You know," he says, "boredom is entirely different than apathy." He says, "You don't, when you're bored, have a sick, degraded feeling in your stomach." A big cognition, see.

Now, the question is, is do glumwums make glumwums? This is an interesting question. I'm just asking it as a question. I'm not giving you any data here. I don't have any real evidence — in spite of the fact that they say glumwums can be cultured, I don't have any real evidence that they're real glumwums. I think they're just glumwums that stimulate the body into making glumwums. I don't know that a body can be affected by some other body's glumwums beyond seeing the other body has glumwums and wanting to be duplicative and nice about it, of course, mocks up glumwums.

Therefore, we in many instances have, as auditors and people practicing in Scientology, actually believed that we were not achieving any effect upon people when we were, and we were actually bettering people when we thought we were running them into the ground. Well, that's because we weren't cynical enough much earlier in the development of the subject. If we'd been more cynical, we would have simply looked at it plainly and flatly and said, "The human race, heh, is not flat on its back, but sooner or later we will get it there."

See, this whole subject is very interesting. In other words, is the entirety of disease autogenic by the disease or is it simply a generative function of the body, restimulated by the existence of such a pattern in another body? This is one of these fascinating questions. You could go round and round about it. But if you did go round and round about it, you might suddenly come up with the answer to disease!

Now, an individual, then, would better into unconsciousness. Now, look at that one. Could a person better into unconsciousness? Yes, he frequently does become better by becoming unconscious.

You see, glumwums are supposed to be very, very chewish. They chew, you know, on everything, you know? They do! They just gnaw everything up and swallow it up and spit it out. But how come they don't chew up some bodies? Do they have some kind of a guild law — hm? — that bacteria must not eat bodies that have 862 more cells per cubic centimeter than other bodies? Or... It gets too complicated if you go that way.

Now, this is no reason why the medical profession should go on knocking everybody out with squirt guns, or whatever they do. Those syringes they go around with all the time. Just knocking a person out doesn't make him better, but a person who is getting better very often presents the aspect of being knocked out. They get groggy. They go "wog-wog," you know.

So you find some bodies will always escape in an epidemic, and yet all of these bodies are made out of meat, and the most fastidious cuisinarian in the Solomon Isles would not be able to detect the difference of taste between one of these bodies and another, but one of these bodies is susceptible to glumwums and the other body isn't.

Well, the first time I found this taking place was when I was processing somebody and they went clean unconscious.

I don't care how new the disease is. It suddenly springs forth from the Middle East and chews up everybody in England — the Plague! Well, how come everybody in England didn't die of the plague? Well, they should have! Or were there some bodies around that didn't think they ought to generate them?

Obviously they were totally out. They were not in communication with me at all, obviously, but I just kept on giving them the auditing command anyway, which was a subjective command. And what do you know! They followed it all the way through much better than they had a few minutes before when evidently totally awake.

It normally requires a fear of the illness before the bacteria will bite. Now, we know that in Dianetics and Scientology.

Now, this was quite fascinating, because they were totally awake as somebody else. So the whole of valence shifting is simply ceasing to be awake as Joe and waking up as Bill. See, that'd be the whole of valence shifting. One passes out of Father's valence into unconsciousness, which is "It's better off for you to be unconscious than to be conscious as Papa, because you aren't Papa." It's very complicated.

Um! So if somebody is very afraid, he is liable to be very agreeable. This is the principle that's used in international relations by France, England and other countries.

I don't know how many echelons a person would have to move through in terms of unconsciousness to get out of maybe forty or fifty valences, one after the other, because each one of those would go through unconsciousnesses to get better before he totally passed out of that valence.

I wonder if this just isn't one of these things where some bodies make glumwums and some don't. You put some glumwums into body A and body A says, „Ah! Eeek!“ and immediately makes some. You put some glumwums into body B and it says, „Ho-hum,“ and doesn't bother to make any and therefore it gets a sign hung on it saying „Immune.“

In other words, how many unconsciousnesses north does the preclear have to go to himself become unconscious.

You see, if you came way downscale about disease, you would consider at once that it was a thing, wouldn't you? It would become a thing.

Now, I hate to tell you these things really, because it's liable to give you a snide attitude toward the people walking up and down the street. You're liable to get the idea that these people are not quite there, and I don't want you to get that idea at all, because they obviously aren't.

Actually barbaric races always develop into a visible god any poorly understood phenomenon. They always give it a visibility. They build it a house and put it on a pedestal. They give it mass, in other words. If they don't understand something well, then they'll symbolize it in mass. Just like medicos and other barbaric peoples: They don't understand anything about the brain so they give it — they give thought mass, and yet there is no evidence that any part of the brain performs any real function in the process of thought. There really is no evidence to this effect.

But here's the great oddity. They get along one way or another or somehow. They bungle through in some way. And the only thing we can object to is occasionally we're what they bungle across. And when they do that, we have, of course, a great license to object.

I know we've heard about people with bullets in their brains and they then couldn't perform certain functions. Well, we had one not too long ago in the HGC; and when we got through with him, in spite of the fact that he hadn't gotten any brain back, he'd gotten all the functions back, and they hadn't transferred over to something else, either.

But actually, until man can develop a criteria of his own, not something borrowed from his great-great-great-great-great grandmother, only then can he move up into a level of culture that you would call in any way, shape or form, a desirable level of culture.

So it doesn't look to me — it doesn't look to me any more than somebody has manufactured a terminal to match up the postulate when the body starts making glumwums. Do you see that? And it fits in with more of our way of thinking, if we really conceive this, this way. It's by agreement. „I get sick; you get sick. Okay? Fine.“ Tu-huh! And yet there is such an agreement.

Now, if an individual is unconscious himself while being conscious as Grandpa, then we get the interesting aspect that these individuals that can be affected by nothing – you know they take everything in their stride; they do not react to things; they tell you "You shouldn't be so emotional. You should take it all calmly and philosophically like I do." Of course, this individual doesn't ever do anything, but that's beside the point. "You should be calm, you see, and you should not react. You shouldn't go into motion of one kind or another. You should be real calm."

Now, this goes down into a terminal and the terminal is a glumwum. This is an agreement gone solid. But what is an agreement? An agreement is a postulate gotten lonely.

The funny part of it is, this individual that evidently will not react to anything is in a total hypnotic trance. And anything you say to him goes in, thud! and he will react to it just like a puppy dog if you know this. And that's a horrible thing to find out about somebody.

Now when the glumwum disappears, we have the phenomenon of the solid communication line. In other words, the glumwum is a thing now, and so we say it's a solid communication line of some sort or another, but the terminal is invisible. See that? An invisibility of terminal then occurs. You've got just the Reality Scale falling south here. And then pretty soon even the communication line disappears.

Here's this individual who is in an obsessive game condition. He's in a game condition whereby he's been fighting unknowingly some sort of a fight or game or other and – I don't know, the penguins will get him or something. And he's been fighting this game. And here he is and he's evidently alert, you know, and he's on his toes and so on. And you say something to him, and he says, "Ah, that's not true, rrr-rarr-rar-rar-rar-rarr," see. And you say, "MY goodness, what a formidable person. He's really getting through life, isn't he? He just brushes everything off."

Now, let's look at that. Let's look at that, because this particular civilization has not yet attained that depth of depravity. The terminal is no longer visible. Just how you get glumwums is not clearly discerned because it's very hard to isolate all carriers. But they still isolate some carriers, don't they? They can still do that, in spite of the fact that the terminal is invisible. So we have come to a point of a substitute terminal. We call it a carrier or a host. In other words, we can find the host but we can't find the thing easily.

Well, the funny part of it is he's in a total hypnotic trace. That's something you'll miss unless you look. Actually, all you'd have to do, in spite of how he is snarling at you, is fix your finger in front of his face like this and say, "Bark!" He would say to you, "Well, it doesn't affect me. Nothing you can do would really affect me. Woof! I'm pretty tough or..."

Now, the more electronic microscopes they invent, why, the greater difficulty they have trying to find glumwums. This is for sure.

One way or another your suggestion will go in, it will penetrate and it will act, because it is usually more alive than he is.

I made one of these microscopes, by the way, in 1932, which was a very successful microscope. The first one used the principle of ultraviolet light, which I recognized was registerable on a sensitized plate — photomicrography, in other words. And therefore, you could see smaller. We had already gotten to the microscope's limit on light, and you had to get a tinier wave of light in order to see smaller things, you see? So I went — got smart here, one way or the other; got lazy or curious or something of the sort — and went south into ultraviolet light against photographic plates. Very interesting. Interesting phenomena. Using a very, very, very fine-grain emulsion, and I couldn't see any difference myself. Although I'd gone south, it didn't seem that we had really wound up anywhere. I got some cultured slides — some slides of various cultures of this and that and so on — and looked at them. And they were definable; they were discernible and so on.

In handling preclears, it's one of the more fabulous things, that the preclear who acts the roughest and snidest toward the auditor is usually closest to a total hypnotic trance. And the funny part of it is, that although you apparently are making no impression on him whatsoever, if you became rough or lost your temper a little bit and said some things which were slightly engramic, they would be.

And the next year got even more curious, and we had something that would bombard a screen with very, very tiny particles that they have now assigned very interesting names to — alpha, gamma, Eisenhower, all kinds of names to these menaces — and anyhow, I found out the same thing that Yale spent, I think, two and a half million dollars finding out about eight or ten years later.

Such a person is in an obsessive resistance which inverts and pulls in on him everything that is said to him. So, he can't select anything that's said to him. He can't analyze it or look at it. It's below his level of inspection. Everything that's said to him goes below the level of inspection. How does he know?

They've had these big electronic microscopes — they fill a room! I don't know why they had to build them so they fill a room, because all they are, in essence, is some sort of a screen on which a particle, directed in straight line, will register. The particle, of course, sees something by detouring around it. So you just have magnetic plates that keep the particles going in straight lines, and where they encounter something, why, they leave a pattern on the screen. That's about the whole of it.

Now remember, I gave you that first characteristic; I said when they go below apathy, they get down to a point of where they're not conscious of the moment just passed, not conscious of the moment which will come and not conscious of the moment they are in. But they can be a valence sitting there raising hell with you and usually are.

And two or three times they've had measles all beautifully categorized. They've had beautiful pictures of measles. Only they keep coming up with different pictures. And you can't take a slide and throw it into one of these machines and say, „Ah! Measles.“ You say, „Now we'll inject it into something and see if it gets measles, and that was measles, and we've collected another picture of measles.“ It's not a certainty.

Now, this person, oddly enough, fulfills all the condition of an hypnotic subject. And just because they don't react, and instantly the body goes into some sort of a rapport the second that you command it to, is no reason why you haven't got them in an hypnotic trance, don't you see. The valence doesn't hypnotize. You can't hypnotize Grandfather because he's not there; he's been dead for years. But you can hypnotize his grandson Johnny who is sitting just in back of the valence. This is quite fabulous.

It's like electrocardiographs. Have you ever seen one of these things? Well, somebody spends four or five years studying the patterns of these in order to detect whether or not somebody has heart trouble. Look! Anytime you've got to spend three, four, five years studying a meter to find out how to read it, you'd better invent a new meter. Either that or the meter isn't registering anything.

So that these people have a tendency to go around and pick up life as just a running fire of engram, you might say. It's just total moment-to-moment. They see a mantelpiece and they know all about the mantelpiece. They know it falls in on people and hurts people, so they know that's dangerous. And that grows in as something against which they should violently react. Only, of course, they're too low to react, so they simply look at the mantelpiece. But the odd part of it is, is some part of them violently reacts to the mantelpiece. There they sit, below apathy, evidently not reacting, but they look at something and they do react.

It's like Rorschach. You spend four years to get so you can interpret a Rorschach. Well, any time anybody can take kid inkblots that were invented back about 1860 — you drop a blot of ink on a piece of paper and then you smash another piece of paper down over the top of it. That's the first game. And you get an inkblot. And now the kiddies look at it and they say, „What is it?“ and they guess what it is; because it makes a strange pattern. Now you take a white card and you drop some ink, then, in the middle of this, and fold it good and tight. Squish, you know? And then you bring it out like that, and you look at the resulting pattern.

So you have this odd fact of their unlearning characteristics. They can't unlearn. It's not possible for them to unlearn something. So be careful of what you teach them. Don't act like the society does. Don't take these people and put them in jail, because they won't unlearn it. Don't tell them they're criminals; they won't unlearn it. Don't tell them they're bad children; they won't unlearn that. Don't tell them they're bad husbands; they go, "I am now a bad husband."

Now, that is a Rorschach inkblot! Was originally a child's game, and still is! Somebody goes to the university or some other pathological area and he studies for four years to learn how to interpret these things. And if anybody, however, has ever gotten a hold of the textbook, he can interpret in any way, shape or form that he cares to. And that's what makes it such a handy test, is it doesn't depend in the least upon the person being tested.

Now, they only go crazy when somebody tells them they're a bad husband and a good wife or something. Somebody tells them they're a bad husband and a good husband because they're a bad husband because... so on. And eventually they get mixed up, and their selectivity is now they can't select out which hypnotic trance to follow, so they have to cease to be along that particular line or be a confusion along that particular line. Maybe after that they're just a confusion. They go down and join the traffic department and plan traffic.

You always want several tests like this around. They lend to the authoritative atmosphere, you see? Requires super experts in that case.

Wherever we see somebody who is having a hard time in life and whose tone is obviously somewhere along "beautiful serenity," you know, don't get the idea that there isn't chaos going on, because there is.

Actually, the responses on Rorschach are supposed to be very standard from one type of insanity to another type, or one insane person to the next, or something like this and so on. Actually, there's the wildest response you ever heard of. And it doesn't coordinate against other types of tests, which makes it, of course, at once suspect. You take all the people in several insane asylums and you give them the test, and you take several people in a university and you give them the test, and you get what the difference is. And if the difference is undetectable you give it to several people out in the public and see if there's any difference again. Empirical findings.

Somebody comes along and says of the fireplug, "That's green." This person goes walking up the street wondering how the person knew they had a green complexion, because their complexion obviously at this time is now green. Yet when you confront them and ask them why they are looking sad, they can't tell you. "Well, did you hear somebody say something?"

All these tests do from our standpoint, by the way, is measure change.

"No. What do you think I am, crazy? Do you think I take in everything that is said to me?"

That's a little bit off the subject. The subject is that we simply are dealing with the field of detection. Now, what is this detection? What are we detecting? We are detecting a terminal which has become invisible.

Well, don't say, "Yes, I think so," because they'll have to think so that way, too.

Now, if you'll notice, people wear glasses when they can no longer see small objects. Then they'll wear glasses to see the small object. Don't you see? Well, there is nothing wrong with wearing glasses. You're just boosting up the sight ratio. After a while people wear microscopes. Got the idea?

What we look at in this wise is an ambulant dramatization dragging around an hypnotized preclear. And I'm afraid this comes close to being average man. It does begin to look this way.

What is a pair of glasses? You notice eyes are supposed to deteriorate; the glasses have to be thicker and thicker and more and more powerful in order to see these objects more clearly, you see? Well, this is just the symptom of something going out of terminal. It's going out of the class of terminal into the class of visible comm line. You take anybody with glasses and have him mock up beams to the object, and he'll find out he can do that. If his glasses fit him at all he can always get beams between himself and objects rather easily, of course, given a clear field. You want to worry for him a little bit if he has to do it forty or fifty times before he gets a beam, because he's running upscale from no beam. Got the idea?

Now, the odd part of it is that he wakes up on simple, basic, fundamental communications, truths and actions. That's why processing works. He wakes up. He says, "That's my language." All of a sudden he says, "Ha! Somebody said something to me." See, that's the first time that's happened. They've been talking to his dramatizations or his valence before this, and somebody has said something to him, you see. Something happens; he starts to wake up.

All right. Now, the invisible terminal is a vast study and an important one, because it is the lowest rung of the field of mechanics. And we apparently have come back to postulates, only we haven't.

So don't be amazed if he goes completely anaten as a dramatization as he wakes up as himself. He'll get this odd manifestation of himself feeling totally awake and giving the aspect to the auditor or the person talking to him of being totally asleep. We have merely reversed the situation, you see. The valence went to sleep and he started to come awake, so that he looks like he's asleep. Deceptive, huh?

I want to call your attention to this rather strongly. We apparently have come back to postulates because we can't see it. It does exist but we cannot perceive it, therefore it's invisible. It can render an effect upon us, that is obvious, and yet we cannot perceive it beyond its effect. We can still perceive the effect area but not the cause area at all. Terminal gone.

But the funny part of it is that you can go right on and audit him very well. I mean, all that's asleep is the dramatized valence.

Now, doesn't that look like a postulate? It certainly does. It certainly looks like a postulate; and you will find more people, then, classifying postulates in that band rather than in their proper band.

Now, he is not yet strong enough to wiggle the arms and do those other things, you see. He's not strong enough to prop open the eyelids yet. But if you go on processing him and don't quit at that point, why, he'll get strong enough so he can open the eyelids. Interesting phenomena.

„Thetans are fearsome things. They fly around in the air and throw postulates at you.“ See? „Anytime we get sick it's because of the ghosts and devils.“ See? Actually, it's just an invisible terminal that was set up there God knows when. Just held in place endlessly.

This series of processes which have recently been developed are devoted exclusively to picking up a being where he is and boosting him up the line with the least barriers encountered in terms of bank and other valences. You encounter the least number of barriers possible, and you just try to boost him up the line. So don't be alarmed if you find yourself auditing somebody who's gone completely dong. He'll tell you afterwards, "I don't know why you didn't keep on talking because I could hear you all right." Now, what he's really confessing is that he himself can't wobble the chin without the help of the bank and other mechanisms and automaticities. He can't wobble the chin and wiggle the vocal chords, so he has a hard time acknowledging.

How many of these things are there? Duhhh! How many terminals have become invisible, per any given preclear? A few.

He gets very, rather rapidly, able to kind of bob his head a little bit, you know. You'll sometimes see some guy who is evidently totally anaten, and you'll give him an auditing command. If you watch him very carefully, why, he'll manage a little bob of the head. And it gets into a better and better headbob, and after a while he would himself begin to talk.

Well, let me tell you something very interesting: A thetan originally didn't think it was a good house unless all the light in it came out of the objects. We're using an entirely different system here. The light shines on the wall and then shines back. The wall reflects, or reflexes, you see? Well, this is different than the object emanating, and once upon a time a nice object was one which emanated. But how does an object emanate? Well, it has to glow, of course, and we get the whole phenomena of gamma and so on.

Well, don't be amazed if he starts to talk sadly or angrily or something to you, as though you have just knifed him to the heart, because that's where he moved on the Tone Scale – up, not down.

Well, now. These terminals have disappeared. One doesn't see these around very often, but one knew they were around and one knew they were scarce and one knew therefore that they were dangerous, and so one reacts to gamma.

Interesting phenomena, the subzero manifestations. And of course, we're all Scientologists here so I can tell you it is the exact phenomenon of lost past life. It is not necessarily true that a thetan forgets everything simply because he loses a body. That is not necessarily true at all. He depends on the havingness of a body to remedy his havingness. When he loses it, he drops so far in tone that he drops into the no-memory band – no record, no memory, don't care. And if you bring him upscale he begins to be mad as hell at having lost that body. Oh, he begins to really, really gripe about it.

Now, we can explain this very easily. It's a matter of lost terminal, invisible influence, hidden influence — anything you want to call it there; hidden influence is what we normally call it in Scientology — but it simply means the terminal is invisible.

And one of the interesting things I did one day with a Connectedness process was – right out of thin air, I was running Connectedness, and the fellow all of a sudden went gog-wog-glub. And I kept on giving him the auditing command and so forth. And all of a sudden the preclear sat up in the chair and said, "Damn them!"

Now, you run a fellow upscale and he will find more terminals than he thought were there, and several of these will be radiative terminals, radioactive terminals. We process mechanics on somebody who is sure it is all postulates and we're never wrong. Got that? We're sure. This person is absolutely certain, you get it, that it's... We've seen a lot of those cases.

I said, "What's the matter?"

I begin to suspect my own sanity every once in a while. I got a fairly wide comm line going on Earth here. And you guys got some comm lines going, and we put out some ideas, see? And these ideas wind up places. You know, all of a sudden they wind up in someplace, and somebody is glibly coming on the air and giving forth one of our ideas. Now, our comm lines are better than you think. They're much better than you think.

"They had a nerve!"

Well, I forget this every once in a while — I forget how good these are — and I get a shock like I got in Great Britain one time. And I really tried to follow this comm line back, and had a hard time following it back. And it wasn't for about two or three weeks after my first effort to track the comm line that I found the actual communication channel; and the actual communication channel existed. Put out an idea out of the PABs about educating peoples before we armed them. I mean, just as simple as this. The Labour Party grabbed this whole-hog (of England), and came out with a policy which is now their policy with regard to other countries than England proper. It's very fascinating. And I thought, at first, you know, I says, „Well, what do you know! You shoot an arrow into the air and it falls to earth you know not where.“

"Who had a nerve?"

One night the TV was turned on (British TV) and here were a couple of chaps, a Labourite and a Socialite or — Conservative and a Labourite, that was what it is — and they were discussing this idea. You educate them, and you make sure that you have democratic principles beaten into their skulls before you start shoving freedom and machine guns in their paws. You know, that was all the idea there was, and they were discussing this, and I said, „The — the — the — the — the... What the hell here? The — just a minute. Am I skidding? Maybe I shoot an arrow into the air...“ I said, you know?

"Where am I?"

Well actually, people in insane asylums are sure they do this all the time. That's the thing they're sure of. See?

Come to find out he'd just been knocked out at the Battle of Hastings. He thought it was kind of mean for full-armored knights to be attacking a couple of unarmored peasants, of which he was one.

So I said I'd better go over and take my Rorschach or my Wassermann, or whatever you take, and make sure I'm still moting on all eight cylinders — well, at least one or two of them. And it had me in a bit — a bit confused there. So I tried to run it down along one channel, and I wrote one auditor who had such connections and I said, „Hey! Did you put this through there?“ and he wrote back after some time and he said no.

Now, just how he'd been coasting up the track since, he didn't bother to explain, nor did he have any memory of it. But his last intimate consciousness, as a thetan and a being not dependent on a body in any way, was getting knocked off at the Battle of Hastings. So, of course, we get lots of argument from people about past lives.

And just about the time he wrote back and said no, I got a long letter asking me for more material, from a person who had simply sort of hung around on the outskirts of the London organization but who is intimately connected with the government. And this person was writing me to get more data on the same plan. So it wasn't an invisible communication. You get the idea? But for a while there I had my doubts! What's going on here? What have I got here, an invisible communication line? From no terminals? Worried me.

Of course, it isn't any such thing as a "past life." How can we speak of the person standing before us in past tense? There are past identities, but there were certainly never past lives. He loves, though, to categorize things on a past-life basis, which frees him from any further responsibility for having stolen the warden's chickens. And he very glibly says, "Oh, that was life before last." See, he glibly says this. That's very easy, because this absolves him of any responsibility for it.

But downscale they don't worry about it when they see something like this. They just „know“ that is the thing. They just „know“ that is the thing.

Well, have him look it up in the statute books. Nowhere in the statute books does it say a thetan is guilty of anything. It says bodies are guilty, and that settles it. A body is buried. If you'll notice, it's always The People v. John Jones. See, "John Jones." Well, he's a thetan. His name is something he'd tailor up. Somebody else named this body "John Jones." He gets out from it sideways with the greatest of ease, you see.

Now, you add it up to the fact that the person can't work, can't spit, can't think and can't run on any process that you run him on, and yet they're absolutely sure that all they've got to do is just accidentally think a thought that somebody is going to run into a lamppost, and somebody will run into a lamppost. Got it? They get sold on this invisible terminal, invisible comm line, way down south — way down south below nowhere. Now, a thetan way up top can do these things. And they sort of remember this capability. Now, these people at the same time tell you that there is no such thing as a mechanic. They tell you there are no walls; they can take care of that sort of thing, you know, and they tell you that's easy to handle. Their emotional tone is quite often beautiful serenity.

But there are no past lives. One has been living continuously for a long time and he never ceased to live. But he did drop down tone.

Now, this is interesting. This person not-ises mass and puts himself into some kind of an ecstatic state. He's got the whole universe on the back of his neck. He daren't look or the whole thing will fall in on him, don't you see? He has this all suppressed with such pressure that it is fabulous. He has the universe itself completely suppressed. Do you see that? All right. We see this commonly amongst holy men in India, Tibet, so on. They're quite good, many of them, and many of them are quite nuts.

You suddenly take away from somebody who is carrying it, two hundred pounds of potatoes that were his, and he'll complain. You can watch him drop down tone. Now, if somebody is carrying two hundred pounds of gold, and he had amassed this at great care and labor, cross-postulates and not-knowingness; and he'd gradually accumulated this tremendous amount of gold, and somebody came along and took this gold away from him at once, he would probably be so apathetic about it that he would not complain, you see.

There's a nice piece of differentiation here. You have to differentiate between the person who can do it and the person who says he is doing it. See, there's a difference. And that difference is the acceptance of the mechanical universe. The fellow who can do it can also accept or build or construct or reject the whole cockeyed universe — the whole thing! — and the other fellow daren't accept any part of it.

Now, he could beef about the potatoes; he could argue, see. Somebody came along – he has this two hundred pounds of potatoes, and he knows there are a few thousand pounds more in the world – and they took these two hundred pounds of potatoes away from him, and he said, "Ah, those dirty dogs! They robbed me of two hundred pounds of potatoes!" See, he could still rah-wraw. Or he can say, "You know, I am afraid to walk down that road anymore with potatoes." Or he can say, "You know, that makes me pretty sad." Or he could say, "I sure feel apathetic about that," and go back and dig some more potatoes the next day, you know; knock off for three or four days on digging potatoes.

So don't fall into an error here in processing. The fellow who does it all by telepathic thought and has Western Union wiring up his brain so the government can read his mind, or something of the sort... It doesn't even have to be that crude. He tells you that he doesn't have to be processed on any of these things like walls or things like that; he's rather insulted about the whole thing. He's much better than that. This is your boy. You run him on mechanics. You just run him on mechanics.

It's quite a different thing with a higher value. Two hundred pounds in gold – they take it away from him, he goes below apathy. He simply sits down, and you say to him, "Hey! Hey!" And you say, "Hey!"

Now, we don't care what processes you use. You certainly, however, use walls. You use walls and spaces and floors. You can put ideas into them, you can do anything with them you want to do with them. You make invisible particles solid if you want to. You do anything you want to. We don't care what you do as long as it is a mechanical process. The process must then process the mechanics of existence, with very good procedure, with tremendous stress on the communication formula. The funny part of it is, you'll have a hard time.

"Nah."

The other boy who can really do it is quite interesting in that he can be processed perfectly and easily on mechanics. He's just as willing to be processed on mechanics as he is on eating soup. Doesn't matter to him. He can stay in good communication with you or not. He might change his mind and not be in communication with you, too, you know.

"Hey! What's the matter?"

Furthermore, the game (and here's the other one) does not have to be complicated for the fellow who can make the postulates stick at a distance. The game can be so simple it's idiotic. It can be awfully simple, and he can still enjoy it as a game. And brother, the other fellow has to have nothing short of Brahms. See? It's got to be nice. And, of course, if he's really interested, it'd be Prokofiev. That's life. That'd be really interesting!

"Umm." And that's about all the explanation you'd get for his tone.

That's fascinating to see there that we have newly inherited a brand-new method of detecting differences of tone, and that is complexity: What is interesting?

Well, we do this with thetans, as auditors, all the time. We say, "Hey! Hey! Hey! Hey you, wake up!"

This, by the way, gives you the whole substance of interest. It tells you that interest has to be enforced by complexity as you go downscale, whereas interest and disinterest upscale is by postulate.

And he says, finally, "Hm?"

Now, you see those first two sweeping classes of processes? You have to call them classes because when somebody gets out of mechanics, he can handle mechanics, he can mock them up, he can do things with energy and spaces and masses, motion and no- motion, and so on, he can do things with all these things; he then has only one class of processes on which he can run with benefit and that consists of postulate processes. But we didn't understand it three years ago that these were as widely separated as they are. They're plenty widely separated. And so we have to treat them as two entirely different classes.

And we say, "What's the matter with you? What's the matter with you?"

Now, these two occasionally coincide so that you can do both at the same time, and where you have that you have an optimum process because it processes both. But just because you're processing both, for heaven sakes don't think you're processing one thing, because you're not.

He says, "Damn them!" Because what'd he lose? He lost two hundred pounds of body, just like that.

Some cases react very, very well to mechanics alone and some cases react to ideas and mechanics at the same time. But you're doing two things at once; remember that you're doing two things at once. Substitution and Confronting as processes are doing both postulate and mechanics at the same time, and there you have the coincidence of the two fields. But they are two fields, and if you get somebody who cannot even vaguely embrace both of them at the same time, you have then to run on him mechanical things, mechanics. Get him to feel walls, put walls there. Do anything you want to do but run him only on mechanics without straining the brain. Got it?

He nursed it carefully. He was very careful to steal it from the very best people! Raised it up. Educated it. Protected it. Somehow or another got it through school. Somehow or another got enough things stolen to keep it going in the lean periods, you know. Kept it out of jail. Found it a good dame. You know, he really cared for this thing. Groomed it every morning, polished it every night; careful never to run it into lampposts or anything like that. Somebody comes along and they take it away from him.

Okay. Thank you.

And, of course, he gets more apathetic than he would get at losing two hundred pounds of gold just like that. And he doesn't come out of that easily, even though he gets another body, because the body that made him apathetic isn't there again ever. He gets very, very significant at this band.

[End of Lecture]

Well, we take the Greek. The Greek knew pretty well that people lived before. The Egyptian was certain of it, earlier than that. Later than that we find the primary mission of a church, whose name we will not mention, substituting good spirits for all the bad ones that were running around in Europe.

The main appeal that the Roman Catholic church had in its early inception – the main appeal that it had – was simply that it would protect you from bad spirits by exerting a certain amount of power over them. And the peasant bought this. Everybody bought this because they knew all about bad spirits. They knew that lately when they were exteriorized they didn't intend anybody any good, so they could understand perfectly how nobody else would.

That is the only way Catholicism got its grip on Europe. You can go back and examine the histories very carefully, but this is what it amounts to.

Now that nobody is worried about spirits at all we find the whole Catholic movement much paler in the world than it was once. They have to mock up a new enemy in order to really get along well.

But here we have loss of havingness resulting suddenly and catastrophically in subzero scale position which contains no memory, no recall, no present, no past, no future, no existence: "It didn't happen. It couldn't happen. I'm not here. It never was." And we get a good look for the first time at the subzero scale, which is not, by the way, a new scale. But to understand this scale was quite something else because the scale itself just gets more and more complicated from Effort on down. It gets so complicated it goes beyond comprehension. But one can describe it in negatives. He can isolate those things which are not present on the subzero scale and describe them, and the things that are not present are memory, reaction, sensation and all of the upper scale. And that's what's in the subzero scale.

Now, do not confuse insanity with subzero scale. Insanity is a peculiar mechanism which happens. You can turn on the sensation of insanity any time you wish in a preclear by getting him to get the idea that he must have something but can't have it, that he must reach something but can't reach it, that he must withdraw but can't withdraw. Any of those sets, rigidly enough held by the preclear, gives him the feeling of nahhhhhhhh! whoa! It is a very delicate condition. It's delicate in that it's almost impossible to continue.

Just why they don't get more cures – those people that handle the insane – is a great mystery. Barrett and I were going to write them a letter the other day and ask them "Why don't you people get your 22 percent quota of cures?"

That is an odd circumstance. It is simply a conflict existing right on the point of conflict, and we get a "no decide" on an emergency measure, and we get the feeling of insanity. And when that persists, then the insanity persists.

Well, everybody has felt for a moment this terrific emergency situation in which there could be no decision. He had to make a decision! He can't make a decision! You see? Anybody has felt that for a moment.

Now, if we synthesize that and extend it in continuance on the track without disturbing it in any way, we get then this thing called the glee of insanity or the feeling of insanity, and so on. It's just a no-responsibility in any way.

But I call something to your attention: that the insane do gyrate, they do move, they do chatter and they can still dramatize, and that is something. It is when they can't dramatize at all, when they're in a catatonic state, that people consider them completely incurable. Actually, a catatonic is not incurable; they are merely difficult. You could do lots of things with a catatonic. No need to go into that since this is no talk on the subject. But one of the things you could do is simply lie down alongside of them – assume the same positions. They get mad after a while; that's more duplication than they could understand. They'd [be] liable to turn around and say, "What are you doing?"

But, looking at the Tone Scale at large, we do see that we have a firmer set of values. We can work more positively and understand more certainly a betterment when it occurs. That's one of the tricks of any therapy, is to find out when the patient is getting well. That's one of the great difficulties, since it was formerly impossible to rely upon the patient's statement. He either said he was, rather obsessively – "Oh, I feel so much better! I am very grateful to you" – and falls over dead, you know. And the other one... And the other one has never been able to raise his hands above his belt before and he says, "I'm damned if you're going to treat me like that anymore!" See, and so on.

But the only thing that you notice is the variability of reaction following this rather pat pattern as it moves upscale.

Now, we have many training processes which are the processes which have formerly moved people upscale rather rapidly. They are not just training processes. An auditor has to know how to do them. He has to get along with them well. Each one of these, however, moves people on the Tone Scale, and so he gets a good chance to look this over – particularly old Opening Procedure by Duplication, an early Scientology process which has just come back into view. It'll be in view, too. Because you can watch a person walk right up the Know to Mystery Scale. They go tock- tock-tock-tock-tock-tock-tock. It's very fascinating. One moment they're talking about – oh, I don't know, they walk over to a book and they pick it up and they say, "I hope it's something about sex," and they put it down, and so on. And they walk over to the bottle, and say, "I wanted something to eat, not to drink," and so on. And they'll make remarks, if you ask them, which tell you just where they have gone to on this Know to Mystery Scale. We have a very handy tool, then, of analysis.

And the unfortunate part of it is, the only real diagnosis in terms of analysis – the only real diagnosis there is on the subzero scale – is in terms of being able to experience the present, imagine the future and recall the past. Reality of these three things are the important things in diagnosis on that scale. And it means the ability to experience (and this is also monitored by the ability to learn), the ability to forget and the ability to handle or reject a datum are all establishing points on this subzero scale.

And when you increase and better those abilities, you better them up till even they can feel apathetic.

Thank you.