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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

“Something for what?”

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

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

“Down at the Foundation in Wichita.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

“Well, it had piston slap.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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