Well, thank you. Thank you. We thought we'd have some props up here. And this is a good prop. It's a very good prop for the excellent reason that it's liable to become a billiard ball any time now. I just wanted to give you a nostalgic view of this planet. It's a nice planet. I know we used to take care of it in the biological survey. It was a park. It was a nice park at that time. It was well cared for, then the Republicans came along.

Hi ya.

But we are not on a militant basis now of trying to prevent atomic warfare. We're not out on a "ban the bomb" proposition. We're not beating the drum in this particular line. I think they're too lazy to push the button. Give us another three years and we'll give them peace.

Well, I see you decided to develop some ARC overnight, so that is good. Thank you very much. Thank you very much.

And this very nice globe here is a nice piece of havingness and that's what this lecture is all about — havingness. Been a long time since you've heard about havingness and I thought it was opportune while we still had a planet to tell you about havingness.

You know, it isn't quite as bad as you think, you know. It really isn't quite as bad as you think. It's much worse.

Now those of you who are brand-new to Scientology and haven't been with us very long, make up your mind to one thing. You will either go away and we will pick you up next life or you will stay with us and be much happier this life.

The second day of this congress and I've got a lot of ground to cover this congress, but we fortunately have a three day congress and lots of time to cover it in. So I can sort of take it easy at two or three light-years per minute.

But one of the things you should know about is havingness. And this is so basic and elementary that all Scientologists forget it routinely and regularly.

Well, I'd like to talk to you today something about this and that and the other thing. None of it very important — merely affects your future and the future of the country and that sort of thing. I don't think anything could affect the future of the country just at the present moment, however. I'm pretty sure that's the case. Nothing could affect the future of the country. It's at no-effect.

Havingness has to go in fits and starts and fads so that every couple of years we have a big forward push to rehabilitate this subject — havingness. Every couple of years it has to be done all over again and then everybody forgets it. Why?

What I've seen since I've been back is quite interesting. I haven't been out of the hotel, but a lot of people go down to the Congo for 24 hours and they're authorities thereafter; and a lot of people go to Australia and they're authorities thereafter. And seems to be that they're an authority in direct ratio to the small amount of time spent in the area. So I'm an authority on the present American situation because I haven't been out of the hotel since my arrival. But it's nevertheless good to be back.

Well, I don't know. I think their havingness must run down and mine too, you see. And then we have to go through it all over again. Now, there were thirty-six Havingness commands — thirty-six Havingness commands released by the First Saint Hill ACC. And they exist in HCO Bulletins and they're the pc's Havingness commands. And by walking through that thirtysix — just the Havingness commands for themselves — forget the Confront commands, just wipe those out — you can rehabilitate a pc's havingness. And havingness is a very marvelous thing to have a clue to in a pc.

I've had a lot of complaints. We get a lot of complaints at Saint Hill — a tremendous number of complaints from American students there. They're put over the jumps, you see, very heavily and very hard and it's pretty grim, actually. Their day begins at about 3 A.M. and ends at 10 P.M. Oh, it's not quite that bad, actually 3:30.

What does he consider havingness? Well, these thirty-six different auditing commands should be gone through at least to the distance that you findout they loosen the needle and give you a little tone arm action on a meter.That is very important because if you are running a Havingness Process which tightens the needle, it is not improving the pc's havingness. Quite the contrary. If you are running a Havingness Process which loosens the needle, you are improving the pc's havingness; and what auditors often forget is that their processes change the pc, and therefore the Havingness Process, particularly if it's an offbeat Havingness Process out of the thirty-six, is very susceptible to changing.

And the American students all find it is too cold and the English student uniformly finds the rooms much too hot. You see, they're used to a cool climate there. And the other students from the Commonwealth, well, they don't quite know what to think.

And all during the first part of the week it works beautifully. And then they don't notice that during the last part of the week, it is simply tightening the needle. So you test the Havingness Process every time you use it. You test it at the beginning. You give a can squeeze. You tell the pc, "Squeeze the cans," and notice the looseness of the needle and then you say the Havingness command. We give him the Havingness command five, six times. And then once more, "Squeeze the cans," and notice whether or not the needle has in actual fact loosened.

But the truth of the matter is that you just can't cater to anybody, so — everybody, you see, so we just don't cater to anybody. And we've got the English climate turned on very well. English climate's turned on pretty well — up. And it has a nasty reputation, a very nasty reputation — the English climate does — totally undeserved. Much better climate than Washington, DC, infinitely better.

And if it has not loosened, find a new Havingness command out of the thirty-six. And those are tested exactly that way. You take command number one. They're stated in order of frequency that they occur in people so that your — the early commands of the list are more likely to be the command for your pc. And the ones late on the list are those that are only happening in freak instances.

And an auditor flew in last night from Florida. Couldn't come to the congress. Flew in, saw me, went down, climbed on a plane and went back to Florida. And they were getting on their fur coats as they left — not as they arrived. It's apparently warmer here than in Florida just now.

So you take the first command, and you give them the command a few times with this can squeeze test, and find out if it loosens the needle. If it doesn't loosen the needle, you don't even bridge out. You simply say, "All right. Thank you." And run the next command a few times between the can squeeze test. You just keep going down the list until you find one that loosens the needle. And that is the pc's Havingness command.

This climate situation is very confusing.

And this is a very, very simple, easy thing to do. It's not very difficult and personally I don't think I would run a pc without his Havingness Process because his Havingness Process has the marvelous quality of being able to run out all of his PTPs and ARC breaks and everything else except his with-holds. And therefore — pc has an ARC break which is — a little bit upset. He gets upset somehow or another.

The reason why I operate in England might possibly interest you. "What's he doing over in England? What's he doing over in England?" Well, England is in communication with the rest of the world. That's right. That's true. That's — I'm — it's not even a crack.

All right. You can pull the withhold or you can run his Havingness Process. But what about this particular circumstance? The pc gets so mired in to what he is in that he is going wog, wog, wog, wog and he doesn't seem to be able to come out the other side of it. And you're getting no change of tone arm and you're getting no change of needle. And the pc feels terrible and you probably are wrong.

You go down here to an accountant and you say to Price Waterhouse (American accounting firm), and you say, "Well now, we've got some money owing to us in Cape Town. Would you please collect it?" And the fellow says, "What state's that in?"

Well, this is not any condition with which to reassess or anything else, so the best thing to do is to run the pc's Havingness Process. That is all. If you've got his Havingness Process, of course, you can run it, and he will come out. And he'll start feeling much better. The world will stop going around in a circle.

You think I'm kidding. You try to execute some particular administrative activity on communication lines — it's all from nowhere. And you wouldn't realize this unless you were in my boots because we have to have fast, fantastically rapid communications throughout Scientology. They're not always in a screaming fury, but when they go into a screaming fury, they have to be fast. We're always there many, many hours, years and days before anybody else thinks we even got started. We make up with speed what we lack in numbers. We make up in ability what we lack in guns. Our war is fought very successfully along very fast communication lines. Very, very little can be done to Scientology that we can't head off long before it happens, so that fast communications are a substitute for enormous resources.

You can always make a pc feel better if you know his Havingness Process, so it's a good thing to have a pc's Havingness Process. We don't have any campaign in progress at the moment — get rid of the pc at all costs.

You should look at the telex network which now exists throughout Scientology. It's very interesting. There isn't a major office that isn't — or there isn't an office that isn't on the telex. You can go into any Scientology office and be in direct communication on teletypewriter with any other Scientology office throughout the world. You didn't know we'd moved up that high. Well, it's there.

Therefore, havingness is quite an important subject. A few years ago, I could have told you in just so many words that I could have listed — and I did tell you — that I could list at least forty-three reasons why Havingness worked, why Havingness influenced the mind to the degree that it influenced it. I could give you forty-three reasons. And today I can give you just one. There is only one reason Havingness works.

And England happens to make a better central for that particular type of activity. You can get to all parts of Scientology from England faster than from the United States. That always comes as a shock when you bring it up to America. But remember, America's a brand-new civilization. It's a brand-new country. It's only been here about a hundred and — two hundred, something like that, years.

This is quite historic because I've been telling you we didn't know what

And it hasn't had time to groove in ruts. That's what it amounts to. And one of the difficulties it's having on the international scene right now: it doesn't have any well-worn ruts. You can't drop anything accidentally and have it roll to the right position without any effort.

Havingness did and why Havingness worked for all the years since we've had it, which is seven years. Earliest Havingness activities were seven years ago. And all that time we've just been using it because it worked. We did not know why it worked.

And it's very amusing that old civilizations leave their communication networks in place. And the oldest communication network in existence now, which is still functioning, comes out of Greece. It's the oldest, civilized communication network. This is very fascinating to watch that communication network in action.

But today, knowing about withholds, we know why Havingness works. And the reason Havingness works is very elementary.

The Greek is totally convinced that he is still the center of the world. And it's so long ago that he was, that you at this moment don't even think that he ever really was the center of the world. Isn't that right?

Havingness can be defined as the ability to reach. Ability to reach equals the ability to have. If the pc feels he can reach something — I know this is so elementary. That very nice little boy that was sitting down in front here a moment ago, he could tell me. That's right. Everybody knows that. If you can reach an apple, you can have it. If you can reach a cookie, you can have it. That's elementary, isn't it? Everybody knows that. Well, why didn't you tell me?

You've thought of Rome. The might of Rome rolling out across the frontiers and smashing down the barbarians, but never Greece. And remember, it was Greece that exported all the civilization that Rome profited by. And the Greek sits down there in Athens totally convinced that he's the center of the world, that his communication lines still reach everywhere.

Now, the pc has to have the idea he can reach before he can have. Now, it's the idea that he can reach, not the possession. The idea that he can reach, not the action of reaching, which remedies havingness.

And we look for this in actuality and it gives us a rather amusing slant on things. He is. The lines are still there. Did you ever hear of Greek ship-ping interests? Yeah, you have heard of it then. Those communication lines still do exist. And over that pattern lies the Roman communications system. And you go down to Rome and you find out that Air Paris has bigger offices in Rome than in Paris. Isn't that fascinating? At least, it looks so standing out in the street.

Now, of course, you could make him practice reaching until he gets the idea that he can reach. Or you can get him to get the idea that he can reach, and then he can reach. But he doesn't have to reach in order to get the idea that he can have.

But the Italian has never found out that the Roman Empire folded. He just never found it out. And he has communication lines and means of getting to the rest of the world that would absolutely clobber you if you inspected them. It's fantastic. It didn't even go down in World War II. An Italian is absolutely convinced completely that he's the center of the world because he has been for so long.

All right. This planet here is a very, very good example — an excellent example of all kinds of wild misconcepts on the subject of havingness.

I'm sure they still have offices there that are sending despatches out and are — is really set up to totally handle the subprovisional government of England. I'm sure there's an office still there that is doing that. It really hasn't noticed that England is gone as far as the Empire is concerned and that the communication network has moved to England. Now that is the oldest, still, long functioning communication lines in the world.

How many times in the last couple of hundred years has somebody set out to have the world? Our last casualty in this line — a fellow by the name of Schicklgruber, a house painter. Very interesting. His idea of being able to have was in direct ratio to the number of people killed. And I think he got rid of some 30 million human beings trying to reach Earth. But he knew that he couldn't have Earth so he had to actively reach with an overt.

The British Empire — the sun never sets on it although it's now a commonwealth, although they're trying to give it away madly. Their businessmen and various other activities are all tied in neatly. It would interest you very much how easy it is to administer things from England because even the United States has better lines from England to the United States than from the United States to England. It's fascinating. Did you realize you were in a colony?

His only method of reaching was an overt: war. Many of his intelligence officers and political officers could have told him that Germany had rehabilitated herself by about 1936 and all she had to do was sit there and make cameras and putter with the chemicals, and she would have practically conquered Earth because nobody else was interested. But what did he do?

Audience: Yes.

He had to get armed men to plunge out against the German borders to wind up — I think it was a — five gallons of gasoline and a small square of earth that he finally had. Quite interesting, wasn't it? His idea of reach was an overt. Why?

Most English will make a joke out of it occasionally. They look — "Oh," I say, "well, I'm going over to America," and an Englishman will say to me, "Oh, you're going over to the colonies," you know, as a joke. And the other day the remark was made to me just like that, "Oh, you're going over to the other colony." I just looked at the fellow quickly. He wasn't joking. And someday you may make the revolution good. But you haven't yet.

Because when one has withholds, one can't reach, so therefore when one has withholds, one can't have. So one's only possible reach when one has withholds is by an overt.

Well now, why? Why, why these intermeshes? Why this tremendous amount of hang-up, tremendous longevity and endurance of old communication lines? What are these all about?

Why do people commit overts? Because they can't have. Why can't they have? Because they have the idea they can't reach. All you have to do is get some house painter named Schicklgruber and get him to get the total idea that he cannot have any part of Earth and that Germany cannot have any part of Earth. And then, of course, you get somebody who can only reach with an overt.

I'd like to talk to you about problems. Wouldn't seem to have too much to do with communication lines of old civilizations.

So he knew how to reach Earth: with guns and men and armies. Sort of stupid, but he did it. And you right here, all of you, even you little kids — weren't born yet — you had your share of that war, one way or the other, even though you were just pushing a jackhammer in some shipyard. All because one man couldn't reach and one nation thought it couldn't reach.

But a problem is timeless. And when you have long empire communication lines which have run into a heavy collision here and there, you of course have run communication lines into problems.

One Scientologist, knowing what I am telling you in this lecture — working for two hours with Schicklgruber, the house painter — could have prevented in its entirety World War II. That's why I say give us another three years and we'll give them peace. Interesting, huh?

And those problems hang up and become suspended in time and move forward on the track as though they were independent. The problems are never resolved. The loss of Spain to Greece . . . Oh, you didn't even know that Greece ever owned Spain, but it did, you know. They still bring in singers from their colony in Greece in — it — in Greece they still bring in singers from their colony in Spain. They still have guitars and that sort of thing. Well, they had an awful lot of problems connected with Spain.

All he would have had to have done was run his Havingness Process. And if they'd run enough Havingness on him and gotten off his withholds at the same time — if they had done those two things, his major withholds, and if they hadn't missed one ... It isn't that you could have gotten all SchickLgruber's withholds off in two hours. You merely could have eased his case. He wouldn't have been quite so certain he was doing the right thing.

They were the earliest civilizing influence in there. It was just at the other end of the Mediterranean. These problems stacked up and, of course, in the cultural mind these things have never unlocked because the problems were never resolved and nothing ever as-ised these problems. And there's Greece at one end of the Mediterranean totally stuck with Spain on the other end of the Mediterranean because they've had so many problems. So the communication line floats forward because you must stay in communication with that area because you have lots of problems in that area.

Psychosis is a very easy thing to unsettle because it is a very hard thing for a thetan to maintain it.

Although the civilization and the connection and the government and everything else is now dead and long gone, and most of the races that were there then have been moved around and upset in various ways, you still have these hard and fast communication lines. Why? Because a problem has existed. And wherever you have an unresolved problem, you continue to have communication lines.

A neurosis — I don't know why a neurosis gave Freud as much trouble as it gave him because I have difficulty getting a pc to hold on to a neurosis long enough to inspect it.

I can see it a thousand years from now. Oh, maybe not a thousand but five hundred years from now, somebody up in London suddenly finds out about America by as-ising some old problem concerning America. There's some part of the British Empire still trying to solve restraining colonists from selling guns and whiskey to the Indians.

But the entirety of neurosis and psychosis is insufficiently magnitudinous to constitute an individual study from the mind. It is a tremendously tiny fragment of the entirety of mental technology and knowledge. It is so minor and so fragmentary that it's hardly even worth studying because almost any process you have today will work on a madman. And it is so difficult for him to maintain his madness that you can unsettle it very easily. All you have to do is security check him.

See, it's a problem and they had to take responsibility for the problem, and therefore they kept a very solid communication line in there. A very heavy communication line. Well, it just drifts forward as a sort of a shadow or ghost line because the problem was never resolved.

Insanity, the feeling of insanity, is the feeling that one must reach but one can't reach. One must withdraw but one can't withdraw. If you want somebody to feel how it is to be insane, have him get the idea that he must reach but he can't reach.

So anyway, the difficulties of communication are only those difficulties of resolution of problems. Only those difficulties.

And if you tell him to get that idea very good and very well, he all of a sudden for a moment will feel the glee of insanity. That's how insane people feel. It is as elementary as that.

In other words, the communication line would as-is all the problems if it were good enough. That everybody is rather convinced of. The difficulties, then, are that the communication line did not resolve the problem and this becomes then part of the problem and the communication line stays in. Because the communication line did not do what it was supposed to do, which is to say, resolve the problem, so it's still stuck. So you've got the problem and now you've got the communication line. And of course, the communication line was a solution to the problem, so you still get this stuck communication line which is floating because the problem is floating. Well, now, how does a problem float and why?

Well, what makes this condition? If one must reach but one can't reach, what is it that makes them feel they can't reach? Well, they must then have withholds. Because nobody else is telling them they can't reach, so they must be telling themselves. Well, how are they telling themselves they can't reach? By having withholds, of course.

Let's take a look at problems. It's extremely interesting to look at a problem because the last time you were in difficulty, it was because there wasn't an agreement after there had been an agreement.

And the surest way in the world to run one's havingness out the bottom is to have a nice, handsome pack of withholds. Go out and commit a bit of a flub and then don't tell anybody about it and you have just a little less of this planet. And then go out and commit another flub and then carefully don't tell anybody about that. And you have just a little bit less of this planet.

The first stage of a problem is an agreement. It's just an agreement, but part of this breaks down into some kind of a disagreement. Now we're talking about problems in terms of mass.

And then commit another flub and don't tell anybody about that and then have a little bit less of this planet. And finally you live in Moscow. Where is it? It's a small town here someplace — Moskva, yeah. That's it. Gorki, Gorki is one of its suburbs.

Joe and Mary are married and they're doing perfectly fine. And until they start accumulating head-on disagreements, they go on doing fine. But part of the reason that they go on is because they have problems and disagreements.

And you get pulled down to the Kremlin. And then you commit another flub. You have ten thousand Georgians murdered or ten million or whatever it was that Stalin the Great did. He had a withered arm, by the way. Wonder how he got it.

In other words, some of the disagreement is used to improve the longevity of the relationship. So there's always a little bit of a feeling on the part of a thetan that he ought to have just a few small problems. Nothing very catastrophic, please, but — well, you'll see some family joking about it. He'll say, "Well, he likes Brussels sprouts and she doesn't." They sit down at the table, and you'll always hear a remark on something like this. "Well, Joe, he likes Brussels sprouts. I personally don't see how he stands them," you see.

And after you've knocked off ten million of your fellow countrymen, of course, you can't reach any further than the Mausoleum and the Kremlin in the Red Square. That's all the further you can reach — is the confines of a glass coffin.

Well, that's just trying to get a little longevity. That's trying to buy a little time, so there's little clashes one way or the other. This is very note-worthy between two men.

And then because you haven't had anything anyhow, your successor gets you removed. That is simply based on a cycle done of overts and withholds. Now, we see the overts so they appear to be very spectacular because they're quite visible. Actually, they're not as serious in deranging the mind as the withholds which follow them. So the fellow has the overt and every-body can see the overt, but then some part of it he withholds.

You'd walk — you see two men who have known each other for a long time. They meet after a while and you would think they were fighting. Did you ever notice this? They're trying to get a continuum or a longevity. Not to be particularly profane about it, but one says to the other one, "Well, you old son of a bitch, how are you?" You know? That's fight talk, you know.

Now it isn't that the overts are unaberrative because it's the overts and the shame of them and the overt act mechanism and all of that which then brings about the feeling that they just have to withhold themselves from doing that again. But it's the feeling they've got to withhold themselves from doing it again that drives them around the bend. Not that they knocked Uncle George over the head with a baseball bat, but it's the feeling they must never again touch a baseball bat because they might knock Uncle George over the head.

And the other one says, "Well, I'll be on top long after you're under the ground. How are you?" See? Something like that. Did you ever hear this kind of a conversation? It's rather astonishing. These fellows are friends. What would they be calling each other if they were enemies?

Well, of course, there were withholds that preceded knocking Uncle George over the head with a baseball bat because that, of course, was an overt action so it must have been preceded by withholds.

So they get a longevity of their friendship, and they cement their communication lines by making little bzzzzoots on them here and there, you see. So they turn this smooth line which would simply as-is into just a little bit of a collision here and there, you see, and then you have this thing very nicely going along and so forth. They can always count on a nice row. They make sure that they play golf together, you see, and that gives them a little contest. And it's a very acceptable contest in the — it makes the thing float on the time track.

So criminal actions always follow a sequence of withholds. A gradient scale of withholds becoming larger and larger and larger eventually result in a criminal action. And that has filled the prisons of Earth. The criminal can only have by committing an overt. And we have carefully educated them into that and followed it along the line.

And if you ever want to see hatred arise, it is after that relationship has disintegrated. There is nothing quite as furious as the warfare between a couple who have loved each other dearly for a long time.

Now let's look at Germany again and its 1939 effort to take over planet Earth.

When they fall apart, it's with exclamation points. There is but violence. I've often been interested in the degree of violence which can arise between a married couple. And I knew a fellow once that was foolish enough to intervene.

Do you know that Germany — Now this, I said, "Havingness is the ability to reach." Now let me tell you what no havingness is because that is where the trick comes in.

He adjudicated from the violence of the argument that they really did hate each other. And he was wrong, you see. They had just become sufficiently anxious about longevity and survival that they were banging it in good and hard, and the basis of their argument was actually love.

Let's take a third dynamic example here and we have Germany, country of forests. I know, I was there and some of you were, too.

If you have ever done any patch-ups of this sort of thing where it has all gone to pieces, and taken the wife and the husband, and taken them and gotten them to get off some of their overts one way or the other, you would be fascinated at the lack of actual viciousness contained in those overts. The actual viciousness . . . They were upset because they couldn't help the other one. They were upset because they thought they hadn't "done the other one right." They were upset because their plans to further the longevity had gone astray.

And these characters kept trying to come out of these forests. It was damp in there, you know, and all you had was mud huts and it was kind of blooey. And they kept trying to come out of the forests and go down into the Roman Empire. And it was a very interesting cycle, see?

And you get down to what they really were upset about. They started piling up overts right after they decided that it didn't matter because it couldn't go on, you see. But it was basically something that they were trying to help each other with. And that — you can trace nearly all those marital arguments back to that kind of thing.

They'd come out of these forests here and they had originally come in from Poland's — Polish and Russian plains. And they got into these forests and they tried to come across the Rhine and get some sunshine.

They now hate each other because they loved each other too well and failed to express it adequately to each other, you see.

And there was an outfit called Rome. And they had some armies and they were pretty good — we were pretty good. And we just made sure these characters could never cross the Rhine. We just made sure they never could cross the Rhine.

Now, this sort of thing is, of course, a problem. Now a problem by definition is a postulate-counter-postulate. And at the moment when this condition of agreement — kept together with a little bit of natter and communication with one another, you know, yappety-yap and so forth — when you really do get a head-on collision, when you really do get a head-on collision, it will become this postulate-counter-postulate. See? So we get a big one, and a big one, and it'll be something more fundamental.

Every time they started to cross the Rhine, we knocked them back across the Rhine. We used to have punitive expeditions go in and burn a bunch of villages just to teach them that they shouldn't cross the Rhine. And they mustn't cross the Danube, and they mustn't cross the Rhine and they mustn't cross the Danube.

"I refuse to live in Riverton anymore." See?

The whole reason Paris was built was just to rehabilitate troops that were keeping Germans from crossing the Rhine. And it doesn't perform any other function to this day but rehabilitate troops if they .. .

"You will live in Riverton because my family is here." See?

Now, down through the centuries, this action continued. They mustn't cross the Rhine. So when they finally did cross the Rhine, they actually did want Christianity. They did want the civilization of the Roman Empire. They did want culture and they were perfectly willing to join up with Rome, but they — when they finally were able to cross the Rhine, they had to cross it with an overt. See, they had to cross it by conquering and destroying Rome. That was the one thing that they never had in mind at the first time.

This is a decision to do and this is a decision not to do, or a decision to do something else and a decision to do something else, you see. And it comes on to a head-on collision. We get postulate-counter-postulate. "This is the way it's going to be." "This is not the way it is going to be." Crash! And if those are of equal magnitude, we move in here and that thing will hang in time and space. Because nothing disturbs its balance.

But the prevented reach carried on as an engram. The prevented reach of the German areas of Europe. The prevented reach. And the German gradually became totally convinced that he mustn't reach Earth. And so he goes to war, 1870, 1914, 1939. And right now England and the United States are in contest with each other as to which one will sell the most arms to Germany. And everybody seems bound and determined to rearm Germany. Why?

They now have a problem and that problem now moves on the time track. That is a real problem. Neither one of them thinks up the wonderful argument that will resolve the problem, such as, "My family is in Burbank." See? Well, the other one would think, "Well, there should be some give and take on this sort of thing, actually, and let's get a summer home in Burbank and work here for the winter," or something like that, and you'd have some reasonability about it. But neither one of them cares to give up. A Pershing tank has run head-on into a Pershing tank. Clank!

Well, obviously, "the engram must go forward." That isn't intended as any criticism of the United States and England. But I consider it fascinating. We have carefully prevented them from reaching over a long period of time and some of you were there, too.

And the — no matter how much forward tread motion you put on these two tanks, they don't move at all. And you get the illusion of time not going forward at all because this location, of course, is unaltered.

Those marks that itch on your shins were probably greaves. The difficulties one has had with the Germans was restraining the Germans from reaching. And you always have trouble with anybody that you have prevented too thoroughly from reaching. Why? Because that's no havingness.

No matter how much force is put into it, there is no alteration of location. There is no alteration of opinion and there's no alteration of the circumstances or conditions. And what do we have? We have a result that it looks like it's forever because there is no hope of change. See? And there being no hope of change, there, of course, is no change and time equals change. And if there is no change, you have no time. And if there is change, you have time. So a postulate — counter-postulate adds up to no change, no hope of change.

The way you create the condition of no havingness is the prevention of reach. All you have to do is prevent a reach and you have brought about the condition of no havingness. Therefore, you have brought about a condition where an enforced withhold has been put in and the person will then get other withholds on their own, which are much more aberrative to them, you see — the "must reach" — the "must be prevented from reaching," you see. And you have run the other side of the withhold. And the other side of the withhold is prevention of reaching. You could almost run this on a pc. Whom have you prevented from reaching? You ever prevent anybody from reaching? Have you?

"Well, Joe, he's just never going to change his mind about that. That's it. That's it." Bang! Crash! Thud! You know? And "Bessie, she's never going to change her mind about that. That's all." They're just convinced, and to some degree they make sure the other one doesn't change his mind because they tell each other often that they don't.

Audience: Yes.

And where you get a no change arising out of the situation, you get a no time. And that is why the difficulty which you had 200 trillion years ago with another thetan can still be found in your bank. You see why? There was no change so no time. And it wouldn't matter how much time had gone by, you still have this interlocked problem and you will find the problem.

Then you set yourself up to have withholds, that's all.

So therefore, the basis of the reactive mind is a problem. That is the basic fundamental of the reactive mind. A problem. There is nothing that will support anything in the reactive mind except a problem.

When I ask you that question, "Have you ever prevented anybody from reaching?" here and there through the audience, you got a brrrrrrrrrr automaticity of it. Oh, no, you know.

The thetan isn't sitting there saying, "Well, let's see. Let's make sure I keep this mocked up, keep this mocked up, keep this mocked up, keep this mocked up." He hasn't been thinking that for 200 trillion years. I assure you his mind has been on other things — girls and asparagus and all sorts of things.

Did you ever prevent a child from reaching? And you husbands, have you ever prevented another male from reaching? And you girls, have you ever prevented a man from reaching? Have you?

Well, why is it, then, if he hasn't kept his mind on it, that it can still be found there? Well, let's assault those people in the audience that I'm glad to see that their friends brought here because Ron always gives a simpler lecture than a PE. I apologize to you for giving — exceeding your reality on this subject of past lives. We actually don't believe in past lives. Past lives believe in us.

Audience: Yes.

But that stick of candy that you didn't get when you were five years old and the tremendous problem that resulted in trying to get it — see, you had a big problem trying to get it and then you didn't get it and so — your brother was saying to you that you wouldn't have it and you were saying that you would have it and so forth, and it's just never resolved one way or the other — can still be found in your mind.

Now don't come around and tell me it's a mystery to you why you have withholds, because that's the overt which brings about the withhold. There-fore, the withhold ties directly into havingness. Why does havingness deteriorate? Let me tell you this phenomenon about havingness. The thirty-six processes? You must have them. You must be able to do something about these thirty-six processes and get the pc's havingness and so forth.

You take a pc — will have stuck pictures in his mind to the direct ratio that he has problems. He has as many stuck pictures as he has problems. The stuck picture is just a sort of a tag showing that a problem has existed in that area. That's all a stuck picture is.

But there is this characteristic to havingness which you should be very interested in. You can run Havingness for a hundred hours on a pc and he will slump. All Havingness does is make somebody feel good and boost the case and make him easier to process.

And the more problems a fellow has had, why, the more stuck pictures he's got. Well, fortunately, it isn't arithmetical because it is monitored by the willingness to confront problems. So the willingness to confront problems is then expressed by whether or not he has ever confronted them, and that index to that is how many stuck pictures can you find in his bank. That's simple.

But Havingness itself run on the pc just as havingness — "Look around here and find something you can have." "Point out something." "Where is that room object?" — "Where is the room object?" rather. Any one of those commands can be run and run and run and run and run and they are not therapeutic or — on a lasting basis. They are a very temporary basis. Why? Because the no-have condition is the condition of withhold and therefore as you have these withholds and as you get more withholds — as fast as your havingness is run up, it, of course, is pulled right back down again onto the Goals Problem Mass by the existence of withholds.

I'm sure that you, or at least a pc of yours or you, have sometime or another shut your eyes and seen a stuck picture. I'm sure that this has happened to you once in a while. And it wasn't about to go away. And you could chew at it. I'm not talking about auditing it now because there'd be dozens of ways to handle it in auditing. But you chew at it and nibble around its edges and sort of shake it up and admire it and do most anything that you could do to it, you see, and this picture is still stuck.

So you could run the Havingness on somebody forever without removing a single withhold if you're very, very careful, you see, never to remove a with-hold. Use a squirrel meter and it doesn't register anything but can squeeze. Put a cricket in the potentiometer so that you get needle action.

It's interesting how long one of these pictures will stay stuck. One of the engineers that was helping me design the British Mark IV meter knew nothing about Scientology at all. He was aboard for electronics only and I wanted to show him what the instrument was for.

You know, any kind of idiocy like this. Don't find any withholds on the pc and then audit him like blue blazes. Just audit and audit but never find a with-hold. Be very careful never to find a withhold, see. Audit and audit and audit and find things and audit him and find things and run Havingness and run Havingness and run Havingness and audit him, but don't take a withhold off.

He sat down, he picked up the cans, I said, "Close your eyes." I said, "What are you looking at?" And he said, "Well, it's all black." And I said, "Well, what part of that blackness could you take responsibility for?"

And the case goes creak, creak, creak, creak, whooooom, boomp! Creak, creak, creak, booooom, boomp! The guy's pulling his havingness down faster than you can pull it up. You've got the frog, the traditional frog who is climbing up out of the well; and in the story he climbs up three inches all night and falls back two during the day, or vice versa. Only you are doing it now on the basis of three inches up and three inches down and three inches up and three inches down and three inches up and three inches down. And after you've audited him for ten thousand hours, you will conclude that you have gotten nowhere. And I'm giving you the sole reason for long auditing without lasting gain.

About a half an hour later, he had been in a space car and had had the sensation of traveling over the top of a hill with full kinetics, had watched a city blown up with atomic fission, and in general had had quite a lot of things happen.

If you don't pull the withholds, nothing is permanent. Everything slumps because the havingness runs down. And the Goals Problem Mass continues to be pulled in on the pc. See? Isn't that an interesting mechanism?

The date of it was totally unreal to him. There was something on the magnitude of 400 billion years ago. He knew nothing about it. He didn't ever imagine that he had ever had any connection with it in any way, shape or form and there it was. And it was able to produce all those kinetics with him. And he was very happy with it and very satisfied about it, and it changed his whole life — that half-hour of auditing. I don't think he's ever been audited since but he sure knows what a meter is for.

Well, more graphically, you stand back of the guy and you kick him and you say, "Go forward." And then you have a big, strong elastic belt around his waist and you kick him and he goes forward; and then, of course, the belt tightens up and he flies backwards.

Now, there is an example. There was some kind of a parked problem on the track. But, of course, you didn't see it in terms of a problem, you only saw it in terms of a picture. But isn't it interesting that the thing moved and changed when you ran Responsibility on it? Now let me show you that this person could resolve this problem by taking responsibility for the other point of view. And this person on this point of view could take responsibility for the person on this side. And if they mutually took responsibility for the thing it, of course, would go bzzzzzzt, and there would be no problem there.

And you say, "What are you doing back here?" And you feel very upset with this fellow for not having gone forward and you kick him again, this time harder. And he goes forward a few feet and then he springs back in your lap again, so you say something has got to be done about this.

So part of the anatomy of the problem is that vector A must take no responsibility whatsoever, ever, ever for the viewpoint of vector B. And if they carefully arrange it so that A never takes any responsibility for B and B never takes any responsibility for A, you will have a problem that will go on forever.

And you get somebody else to kick him harder. And then by the time you've brought in baseball bats and you've dreamed up large pneumatic motors that put out pneumatic hammers that push him forward and keep him out to the extreme end of the belt, you have now invented psychiatry. That's right.

You show me an organization — you show me an organization where everybody in it says that somebody else handles that and I'll show you an organization that has a lot of problems. Inevitably, they have lots of problems because just by the one factor of responsibility, they, of course — creating problems because the anatomy of the problem means that vector A must not take responsibility for vector B, and vector B must not take responsibility for vector A and thereupon and thereby, and only thereupon and thereby, will you get problems.

I'm not hard on psychiatry. I actually take it much easier than I should. But there — there's pure idiocy, of course. The fellow's withholds are going to bring him back. It doesn't matter how hard or violently you process him. He's going to go no further than those withholds remain unpulled. And that's it because his havingness goes down because the withhold tells him he can't have anything. And he can't have the gain he's making. He can't have the — a forward life. He can't have more in life. He can't have a better view of things. Don't you see?

One of the best ways to clean up problems in an organization or an activity is to go in and find out how willing people are to take responsibility for the things going on in the organization.

He can't even see better. How many people have you worried over — you auditors — how many people have you worried over trying to improve their eyesight? Well, you keep trying to improve their eyesight and trying to improve their eyesight and trying to improve their eyesight and trying to improve their eyesight, and so forth.

Somebody walks in the front door. Is anybody willing to take responsibility to ask him, "Well, is there any — are you being taken care of?" You find the person who is asking him, "Are you being taken care of?" is, in actuality, a file clerk in office 18 and has nothing to do with reception.

Well, the guy can't have a brighter physical universe. How can he have a better eyesight? He can have that exact, dim blur that is out in front of him. Why? Because he prevents himself from reaching. He knows better than to touch a baseball bat because he'll hit Uncle George over the head with it. So he knows better than to see well. No telling what he will do.

Now that would be an organization that had few problems and was functioning very well. But the organization where you stand in the outer hall for a half an hour, an hour, and clerks and executives and so forth, fly back and forth and by and by because the receptionist isn't at her desk — I would go back of this facade, and I could show you that the individuals in it were absolutely mired down with problems. They had problems beyond count. They had problems they didn't even know anything about. And every day they created another half a hundred.

If this could be done and it can't, fortunately — if you could take a criminal and improve his abilities a thousand percent, he could then be a very, very effective criminal. Couldn't he? Unfortunately, that can't be done. This is the booby trap in all efforts to go forward while remaining very evil. This is why the mystic begins to believe after a while that a person will never achieve more power than he can be trusted with. It's a built-in mechanism and it doesn't have anything to do with mysticism or anything else. That is an observation of the mystic.

And the longer they run on the basis organizationally that A must take no responsibility for B's hat and B must take no responsibility for A's hat, the more problems they will develop.

The truth of the matter is that the individual cannot have a greater ability as long as he is withholding. One of the most pathetic cases — although he didn't look pathetic — that I ever processed was on an experimental run of a fellow who made his living by grabbing fellows off the street, taking him up a dark alley and hitting them over the jaw and robbing them of their pocketbook — or getting them into a hotel room, hitting them in the jaw and taking their pocketbook and leaving.

Now, you, of course, can take so much responsibility for B's hat that you take no responsibility for A's hat, and you get another series of problems.

And he had a withered arm. And I tried to cure his withered arm just with straight processing. Oddly enough, I did it a little bit of good. His mother had awakened him suddenly when he was a little boy — and a newspaper boy he was — and they were quite poor; and he used to be beat up every day by the boys in the streets, and they'd take his paper money away from him — and he was lying in bed and his mother woke him up suddenly and he pulled back his fist and almost struck her. And from that moment forward in his life, for the next thirty-five years, that fellow was still holding his arm back. That was the overt. Interesting?

If vector A never does its job and vector B never does its job, but B does all of A's job and A does all of B's job, you now have new problems. Why? Because you've simply reversed these letters and you have B, A. It's elementary.

But he dramatized hitting people in the jaw and taking their money. That's also interesting, isn't it? I find it very interesting. His disability was his criminality.

A fair seasoning of good sense is very good with this, but it can be expressed practically mathematically.

I got a little bit of this off and he felt better and he felt he might not have to do it anymore. He told me. So maybe I've saved a lot of guys' broken jaws. But anyhow, I might not have lived in vain.

A must take responsibility for his vector and must be willing to take responsibility for B's vector, and B must take responsibility for his vector and be willing to take responsibility for A's vector. And that problem will evaporate.

But you see how that sequence went? An interesting sequence. He couldn't have except with an overt after that, of course, because he was so withheld that he couldn't reach. So if he couldn't reach, of course, he couldn't have. That's all there is to that. A fellow wears glasses; he'd like to get rid of his glasses. Well, he's got withholds, not necessarily this lifetime's withholds, but he's got enough withholds to last him. He's been busy on the whole track. He's been real busy.

But you've never been long at taking responsibility. Can you think of anybody right now that you wouldn't care to take responsibility for? Can you think of somebody? Yeah?

But basically, today, he's become afraid that he will get busy again.

Audience: Yeah.

It's very interesting. You see a pc and this pc says to you his goal for the session.

Can you think of somebody? Right now? Well, if you've thought of any-body, then I can tell you have a problem with that person. It's as elementary as that, you see.

"Well, I'd like to get more active in life."

Now let's not look at it in reverse. This is straight way to. You haven't got a problem. You're will — unwilling to take responsibility for the person because you have a problem with him. You have a problem with the person because you're unwilling to take responsibility for him. See, it's the reversed.

Well, that's fine. Of course, if you were running an average, routine session, you would not question this in any way, shape or form; but I'm talking about experimentally now. And we were to examine this: He wants to get more active in life.

You can almost force a police officer to arrest you by doing this: Go down and stand against the corner of a building where you've stood before — not that you would attract any attention of the police — and watch the officer on that particular beat and just stand there and postulate that you're taking absolutely no responsibility for the city government and no responsibility for that officer. And you could go on with this, just postulating this very force-fully, and he would practically turn around like an automaton and come over and arrest you for loitering.

If you were to ask him, "Are you active in life?"_ "No."

But to this degree, then, men make their own problems. That's for sure. They always make their own problems. But unable to handle these problems over a long period of time, we get a type of situation here where these simple problems, each being timeless, wind up too ... There was that first one at the top right here at the bottom of this graph here, too — because remember, they're timeless.

"Are you active in life?"

Now let's multiply this. Of course, this would also be — the A's and B's would be on top of each other too, you see. Now multiply this by 500, and I think you'd have a larger blob, wouldn't you. Remember, all these things are timeless. So they have no separate time to go anyplace else into except timelessness — a zone and area of timelessness.

He'd say, "No."

So now let's multiply it by 500 thousand. I think that would make a somewhat bigger blob here on the bottom of this chart. And now let's multi-ply it on this reasonable assumption that you have had at least a problem every day of one side [size] or another which you resolved or not resolved for the last 200 trillion years, thereby multiplied by 300 or 800 or a thousand or 20 or however many days there were in a year on this planet or that planet. And this gives you a figure which is getting difficult to write on a long wall. And that is the Goals Problem Mass. Do you see what its exact anatomy is?

"All right. Now, what would you be liable to do if you became more active in life than you are?"

Now, because the problem which the individual got today, stacks up on this other mass, he is unable to as-is it easily and worries and fusses about it and is confused. And even when you audit it, it sometimes takes a half an hour or an hour to do something with this thing.

You practically will have keyed him in across the boards. Ooh. He can't tell you offhand what he'd be more likely to do. He suddenly feels this thing that he had better not. And then if you said — because this would be experimental auditing, and certainly not auditing — then you were to say to him, "Well, now how do you feel about becoming more active in life?"

There are some pcs that are terrified of getting a present time problem because it'll eat up the whole session every time they get one, and the auditor will always handle it if he's a good auditor. So if he's a good auditor, he ARC breaks the pc, you see, by handling the present time problem, because he has to handle the present time problem — because if he does, he finds himself auditing the whole Goals Problem Mass with a process that he wasn't intending to handle the problems mass with. And, of course, the pc cannot be audited on the whole Goals Problem Mass on a present time problem problem, and it is all very confusing. But that's because all of the problems of all of the ages of one's longevity are stacked up in the same timeless zone. And that is the reactive mind.

And he would simply sigh and give you another goal such as, "I want to be able to live with myself," or something like that, you know. Just a very rapid one-two.

So the reactive mind is that zone of timelessness in which is impressed all the accumulative and varied problems of a person's entire existence.

Now you could do this trick. Now, this goes a little further than that. It goes a little further. We could do this trick. These, of course, are not auditing processes. These are simply experimental demonstration actions. We know all about that.

Now, one of the things that's quite interesting about the reactive mind is that it can be parted at all — that you can get any part of it different from any other part of it. This is quite fascinating. How can you possibly do this?

But if we were to take somebody and take an offbeat chord on a violin intermittently and not rhythmically played, and we were simply to play that sporadically and oddly and peculiarly, note after note after note, and we did it like this: we'd say, "All right. Look around here and find something you can have."

Well, just put it down to your skill and the fact that it hasn't totally condensed itself yet. And you'll find out that the reactive mind reacts instantly on everything, and that should be a sufficient proof. Reactive mind is an instant reaction. It reacts instantly. Why does it react instantly? Well, it reacts instantly because there is no time in it. So it will answer up as readily to a question about 200 trillion years ago as it will about a question yesterday. And it goes bang every time, providing you have a meter.

And the fellow looks around and says, "Well, I can have the far wall."

Now, that is the anatomy of a bank. And that's what you've been in contest with. I'm sure that those of you who just arrived and were brought here by a friend in all innocence, realize that this is something that other people have, but tonight, just as you're going to sleep, when you close your eyes, sort of open up one a little bit inside your head and see if there isn't a stuck picture of mass out there someplace. And speculate for a moment what it might be, but don't speculate much longer.

And then we took our violin and we played some horrible, screeching chords on it one way or the other and then we said to him, "Look around here and find something you can have." And he'd probably say, "Well, I could have uh — I could have that chair in the middle of the room." And then we played some horrible, screeching chords on the violin and we said, "Look around here and find something you can have."

I find this a very fascinating fact that the problem of the human mind could be as reasonably and as easily stated as you have heard in the last forty minutes. So is this a very complicated thing if it could be described in forty minutes? 'Tisn't, is it? It's a little rough to take apart, and you have to know quite a bit to take it apart, but to understand what it is and how it operates on its most basic fundamentals is pretty good. Because we got some bright young sprouts in here today — I'm always glad to see kids at a congress — and I am very sure that some of these bright little young sprouts will explain this very carefully to their parents who probably haven't gotten it too well. Because I'm sure their parents, here and there, will think, "Well, it must be much more complicated than that."

And he'd look at you rather grimly. And not — you could rationalize it all out. Actually, it's going out on a mechanical basis.

Well now, you understand that I have simply expressed what it is. It begins with a search for longevity and ends up with all longevity now, or all longevity is an absence of anything.

And he'd say, "Well, now I could uh — uh — uh — I could have the end of the violin there, the head of the violin."

It is inevitable longevity. They couldn't possibly keep from having longevity, and there's many a thetan would love to lay aside his thetan because life has become a wearisome burden. Every time he thinks "thunk," he gets "clunk." And he's so tired of it, you know?

All right. And you played some more horrible, screeching chords one way or the other.

He sees this pretty girl. He sees this pretty girl and he says to this pretty girl, "Uh . . ." And he can't say hello.

And you say, "Well, look around here and find something you can have." He'd say, "I could have the end of my nose."

So of course, he wants to commit suicide on the whole track, you see. Think of the plight of the man, see. Couldn't possibly think of anything else.

And the more horrible, screeching chords on the violin and you say, "Look around here and find something you can have."

I stopped a man from committing suicide one time in the London HASI. He walked into my office and he was very distraught. He was very upset. You see these people occasionally — less of them than you would think in Scientology but he was not a Scientologist. He was somebody who had been sent in. And he had been on the verge of blowing his brains out for a very long time. And he'd been processed for a while and he was flying all to pieces in various directions. And the auditor had him patched together with sticky plaster and then a piece of the plaster broke — and you know, this modern plaster doesn't stick well at all. And he had been obsessively trying to commit suicide for many years, so he went straight back into this dramatization. He was busy trying to commit suicide and he came into my office and he was in a screaming fit. And he was telling me and telling everybody in the organization that he was going to end it all.

And he says, "Well, I could have this black mass inside my head."

And I sat there calmly and looked at him and I said, "Well, what's troubling you?" And oh, my God, you see. This almost drove him up through the roof that anybody could put it that mildly, you see. And — of course, I'm always willing to listen to people's troubles. Perfectly all right. But I don't necessarily — I don't feel incumbent upon me to listen to them emotionally. Emotional listening is not necessary. You're listening. That's enough.

And then some more horrible, screeching chords on the violin. "Look around here and find something you can have."

And so I said, "Well, you don't quite understand what I meant. I mean what actually goes umm or clunk or mm-mm or askew, and bothers you, you know? What is it? What is it? What's it do there?"

No response. Because you are preventing his attention from reaching by giving him a sensory perception against him.

"Oh," he says, "it's this horrible pressure. This pressure come down .. . This pressure and rrrrowr, rrrrooowr." And he said, "And I'm just going to blow my brains out and end it all." And I said, "Well, that's just the point, son. It won't." And he said, "What do you mean?"

Those machines which make the loudest and most sporadic noise will bring about the greatest number of accidents in industry. Because, of course, they're preventing the fellow from having them. So therefore, the machine becomes randomity and also, under the care of management will be those which are broke down most often by the workmen. Interesting.

I said, "Well, who do you think is creating that pressure?" I said, "After you blow your brains out," I said, "you're going to pull out of that body and take the pressure right along. And the next body you pick up, you'll have the pressure back again. And after all, you are here at HASI."

You could actually draw up a coordination. You could walk through a plant with all the machines running. And you could look them over and pick up the one that has the intermittent, loudest, noisiest action. And you could say, "Well, that one and that one and that one. Those machines break down more often than others, don't they?" And the management would say, "Yes, how do you know?" "Elementary, my dear Watson," or "My dear Ron."

"Bbbbbbrooor," he says and walks out and goes back into the auditing room and went back into session.

They prevent people from having them — prevention of havingness, you see. Quite interesting. So therefore, in a noisy or an enturbulated environment, a person's havingness is reduced. This is, by the way — was known on the whole track empirically. It was known in this wise. It was simply known that if you set up enough drumming and screaming and howling around an individual, he might go mad. He didn't inevitably go mad but he could be driven mad; and just enough random motion and action, and everybody pressing the motion and action in on him, he would eventually snap, you might say. He would get into a condition where he couldn't reach at all. His havingness would be out the bottom.

There was no gag on my part. I had simply imparted the horrible fact to him. And he must have realized down deep someplace that the last thousand bodies he had, he had knocked off because of that terrible pressure. And every time he knocked one off, it cured no terrible pressure because the terrible pressure was him. So these things are not a solution. So, of course, every time he solved the problem with suicide, which he had undoubtedly been doing for a very long time — every time he solved the problem with suicide, he, of course, simply added another failed problem to the mass of the reactive bank.

Now a thetan is as well off as he can reach. He is no better off than he can reach. That is it. The character of his reach is monitored or the quality of his reach is monitored or established or becomes the belief, the limit of the belief of reach.

So instead of making his condition bearable, he was making it less and less bearable, but there was no way out. No road out. No road of any kind.

In other words, as we go down scale — as a person is unable to reach — the savageness of his reach increases. And then below that level, the covertness of the reach sets in and increases. And this ability to reach, oddly enough, suddenly becomes our old Tone Scale. And what do you know? The thing's right. Quite amazing. It is in its proper perspective, but it is the index of reach. There might be some things that could be adjusted slightly in it to make it absolutely on the button; but the thing was right from the start, which is quite a triumphant extrapolation way in advance of an actual datum. The ability to reach or the quality of the reach — these two things are monitored one way or the other.

Man hates to look at this fact. But this bank is not something he got from his mother. This bank is something that he personally has been accumulating for a very long time as a totally dedicated activity! And it's something he's going to keep right on carrying with him that is not going to drop off by accident. It's something that's going to have to be audited out. And what auditing in Scientology is, is the first time anything, anyplace, anywhere has been able to handle this thing called the bank.

As a person has an ability to reach, as the ability to reach improves, the quality or tone of the reach improves. And as the reach deteriorates and the ability of the reach deteriorates, the quality of the reach deteriorates.

And you could electric shock the fellow and it'd key it out. You could do this and you could do that and you could do other things, and make him feel better for a moment. But every time you solved it, of course, you just added another problem on top of it, and it didn't look like it was getting very far.

So there is no such thing of beating a worker until he works better. That cannot be done. You can beat a worker until he creates the low-scale action one way or the other, but he'll start building in booby traps into what he creates. And all of his work will be booby-trapped.

That perhaps would help you understand what Scientology is. It seems to me to have a better — instead of saying to somebody, "Well, if every day you touch your toe to the floor five times, you won't have ingrown hangnails." I don't think that's the order of magnitude with which you're operating. We're actually operating with the raw meat of human aberration, the raw meat of human beingness and the raw meat of human difficulty, and it's pretty raw.

I can see a car built by some factory where everybody feels they are driven with whips. Well, a Russian car, something of that sort. Man, I wouldn't want to go ac — much less go down the road — I wouldn't want to go across the running board and get into the thing because the quality of their reach is monitored by this fact: that a thetan never gives up. A thetan really never quits. He only can seem to so as to reach another way.

Now, what it takes to pull this apart and what it takes to handle this shouldn't be confused with what I have said about the simplicity of its expression because that's quite complicated. It requires a level of precision that no auditor has previously ever attained. And we're just attaining it now. And we do handle that with that level of precision. But this is the difficulty explained. There it is.

I tell you, a thetan is an awful insistent bunny. I congratulate you. I never saw such an insistence. It doesn't matter how much the reach has been blunted. He will still try, even by making an impression of apathy. He is still trying to reach.

Now, actually, taking it apart is not difficult if it is done with great precision. But because this is human aberration, because this is difficulty, because this is the basic trap in which man finds himself, because this is the reactive mind which Freud called the unconscious and all that other thing and this — because that is it, the taking apart of it has to be done neatly. You can't leave straws lying around and litter on the floor as you were doing this because it just won't come apart.

Did you ever see a very apathetic person putting up one awful show of being very apathetic? Well, they're simply trying to reach, for heaven's sakes, with apathy. They do, too. Look at the number of do-gooders in the United Nations. All they've got to find is some part of the world where everybody is sitting in apathy and they start saying, "Those poor people. Those poor people. Where can we borrow another six bombers?" That's not — not — not the way they've done it. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. We've got to be careful of them because they're on a war of conquest.

Remember, automobile accidents, train accidents, spaceship accidents, falling into suns, being born on Earth — the most cataclysmic activities have assaulted this being and haven't shaken this up but merely added to it. And every one of those cataclysms is contained in it in folded-up, crisscrossedover-which pictures or from pictures floating free and loose out here. And when you take it apart, you have to be neat. You have to be precise and deft and neat. Otherwise, the pc starts reacting much worse than he ordinarily would, naturally. Because it's overwhelmed him all this time, it is very easy to overwhelm him with it some more.

Now those people are the next people who will be trying it. Not the United States or Russia. Count them out. You've got a Frankenstein monster going. You've got a government without a people and they have no reason to reach. The people are sent there; they have no interest in it. You've got a low-quality reach. Well, Lord knows how it'll reach. Be the last way in the world I would ever try to get anybody to reach with a high tone. Just tell them they were not responsible for anything and that they could only bring peace and that they must never reach in anger and you — they'd lead you into a shooting war every time. And the UN has just led into a shooting war. I mean, another interesting war.

Now, what these things add up to and what these things are composed of and that sort of thing — the identities and so on — require a considerable precision of detection and neatness and so on.

They've had nothing but trouble ever since they've been around. America lost more in the Korean war — I think 365,000 casualties — wasn't it that way? More casualties than in World War I. Wasn't even our war.

My victory is not so much being able to express this thing — although that is a considerable victory, it's more on the technical side of affairs — the victory is that I've been able to get auditors to do it. They have been able to do this, and that has not been entirely true of all the techniques of yesteryear.

But this country now — the quality of this country's reach is lying propaganda at the present time. I don't mean to malign Russia. I don't think you could. But they're reaching. They're still trying to reach. They're still trying to reach.

I'll give you an idea of what I mean. Do you remember Step 6? Do you know that Step 6 would work this very day? But did any auditor really look at Step 6? It says, "With a meter find a null object." Thereby with a bad E-Meter, with bad E-Metering and with the rudiments out, it could have never gone anyplace because they never would have had a null object.

And the Chinese. They're trying to reach like mad and everybody is still trying to reach. Well, the quality of the reach is what we're interested in. And the quality and length of the reach is totally dependent upon the lack of withholds. It's a direct index. The less withholds, the more quality of the reach and the further the reach. Isn't that — isn't that elementary?

Auditors could not do that one. People got into trouble with that one. And it resulted in no Clears, no matter how well intentioned the auditors were about it.

Well, am I talking about the dissemination of Scientology? See?

Well, today these other technologies are far more complex than this — merely testing on a meter for a null object. They're far more complex; but auditors are able to do them with great success and great ease, providing they are considerably trained. They have to be very, very, very arduously and precisely trained in order to accomplish them easily. Don't disabuse yourself of that. I'm not trying to sell training with the organizations or trying to sell you a British Mark IV meter.

You want to sell Joe Blow on Scientology and he's been down the street. And he's been falling on his head every time he turns around and you think it might be a good thing to his family because their screams late at night are keeping you awake. You think it might be a good thing if somebody did some-thing for this boy.

The precision it requires in terms of training can be acquired. The instrument exists by which it can be done. Auditors are doing it successfully. There's no difficulties along in those lines. We're making good and ample progress. And we even have something a fellow can do before he gets up to what you call a 3D assessment or requires a Class III Auditor. That is very easy to do. People needn't start feeling so queasy about getting — "Don't get audited now because there aren't any Class III Auditors around," or some-thing like that. That's all nonsense. Go and get audited now because you have to get your primary and fundamental steps out of the road before any-body who could do Class III activities would even look at you. You see?

Well, I assure you that you're not going to do much for him as long as you've got withholds, because you're too individuated. You cannot get up to a pan-determinism. See, you're being you. You're so convinced yourself of being you while he is being him that you then have to talk to him persuasively and sometimes sort of, well, "Scientology doesn't amount to much. And it's probably not much of an idea but possibly, sometimes by accident — something — you know and . . ." You could get down to a low-tone sell of this particular type, you see. I don't say that you would. Somebody could run it out afterwards.

So there's the way that is.

But you're sitting here and he's sitting there. Well, that isn't the way you reach. You also don't reach over and pick him up by the scruff of the collar and hit him in the jaw and say, "Now there, go to the nearest auditor." That's not the way to do it. You don't call for the boys in white coats the way the psychiatrists — I didn't mean to mention a nasty word. After all, children are present. Those things are not quality reaches of any kind whatsoever, you see. Those are very low-toned reaches.

You — we have these tools. We have the anatomy of this thing. We know where it's going. We know what we can do with it. We know we could straighten these things out. We've got it there. It simply requires a consider-able sincerity. And it requires a considerable application. And it requires an absolute zero of missed withholds on people. It requires a reality and a realization Scientology works, and so therefore it is well worth making work well! That is the other part of the phrase. And basically, under those fundamentals, here is the anatomy of the bank. The precise tools exist to take it apart. The skills can be taught. Auditors can do these things.

You actually, if you had — well, look, look — just supposing you had — supposing you were over here at the Central Organization's HGC and you had 75 hours of nothing but a Joburg. And all he did was plow along and, "Did you ever cook a company's books?" You see. And "Did you ever take any change when you thought you shouldn't have?" And on and on.

There are many lighter things can be done which assist this operation and have to be done before you can start in with a knife and sledgehammer.

Of course, it might stick in you that somebody was getting evidence on you. No, that's what you used to do. We're just trying to get off your with-holds. And it's just get off your withholds and get off your withholds. And all of a sudden, why, you'll reach further and you'll reach further. And the quality of your reach, of course, is better and the quality of your reach is better. And your tone comes up and you can reach further. And there it is. And that's all the explanation there is to it.

And there it is. It's pretty well a fait accompli. It's incumbent upon us now — it's incumbent upon us broadly to put a shoulder to the wheel, demand that level of precision and preciseness, demand that level of skill and training, demand the precision necessary in an E-Meter, and get sincere and get very alert to these various factors and as a group mores — bring them into being and make them stick — and we will have won the whole way. There is no doubt about that in my mind. And I can tell you with great confidence, in the next few months you will have, certainly at the latest, no slightest doubt about it in yours.

I mean, it has no moral values or immoral values or anything else. But you find out a fellow with all the withholds off, of course, becomes a very dangerous person — extremely dangerous — because he has a high-toned reach and his intentions are good. And he does reach. And he's very dangerous to people who wish to mess everybody up. See how dangerous he is? Because he reaches them and they can't mess people up, he actually prevents their reach.

Thank you.

So in order to keep from committing the overt, you then — after you've improved your reach — have the responsibility of improving the other fellow's reach. Don't you? That's right. Otherwise, you'd always be guilty of an overt.

All right. I'll run that out in my next auditing session.

No. Actually, a high-toned reach doesn't aberrate or upset anybody. I'm just joking with you.

But all right. We have this fellow down the street and every night, why, we've been coming to pieces because of the screams of his family and so forth. And we got all our withholds off and we're in pretty good shape. And we go down and we say, "Hey, Mr. Smithers, so-and-so and so-and-so, and why don't you go over and see an auditor," or something like that. That wouldn't be a real good reason to have anybody audited, but you just tell him this, you know.

And he looks at you with high hostility and snarls and the next day asks you what the fellow's address is. And you give it to him and he goes over.

In other words, he recognizes your command value through your ability to reach. See, your command value is totally dependent upon your ability to reach. Factually, altitude is totally dependent upon the ability to reach. It's worked out that way. It's basically the ability to reach. It's quite curious but you could land on a planet, total stranger; and if your ability to reach was excellent, you would have both altitude and command value. Not through your reputation. A reputation and an identity is a substitute for command value.

I go out and talk to people out in the sticks someplace — never heard of me, nothing like this and — just turn around and ask me what to do. Why? I don't have any overts on them or withholds. And you'd do the same thing. It's not even any trick involved to it. You talk about dissemination. Wow!

You have failed to disseminate and pass on ideas and betterment to people to the exact degree that you had withholds. Isn't that horrible? That's accusative, isn't it? Makes everybody guilty, doesn't it? Well, there should have been somebody else around a long time ago making people guilty along the same line instead of saying, "Don't reach. Don't reach, ye, because the kingdom of heaven is at hand. Oh, you sinners. Oh, you'd better not do any reaching around here. Stop reaching. Repent. Repent. Stop reaching. You recognize you're a sinner. You're all evil, that's what."

I can hear it now rolling around the chautauqua circuits and rolling across the land — an educated, prevented reaching which would reduce havingness down to a criminality. And the end product of a great civilization is a criminal civilization because it has taught one another too well not to reach. It's very simple. Very simple. There's nothing much to it. Once you know about it. Once you know about it.

It's all very easy once you know about it but when you first look over the ocean, it is full of drops of water. And the only trick is to pick out the right drop of water. That's all. There's just an ocean full of drops of water and that happens to be the drop of water which describes havingness — it's reachingness.

Now, for instance, you could have me — not to the degree that I have roughed you up or yapped at you or screamed at you — but to the degree that you believe you can communicate to me. See? The degree you can communicate. And you'll be very interested that over the years it has been the amount of traffic and mail which I have — of course, it's utterly impossible to individually answer nearly everything that comes in. It would be a twenty-four hour a day job because the mail has never stopped rolling since the first and early days. It has never stopped rolling. Until a Scientologist has gotten eventually a built-in mechanism to the effect that you — "Ron is very busy, and he can't see you, and you mustn't communicate to him." Heard that before?

Audience: Yes.

That's a prevented reach, isn't it?

Audience: Yes.

And you know, every person on my staff knows that he ought to do it because he feels guilty as the devil. I mean any staff in the world. They feel guilty as the devil occupying any of — more of my time than is being occupied because they know very well that if you just add another thirteen and a half seconds to my day, my back will snap. And they go around saying, "Well, you can't talk to Ron," and "He's very busy," and "I'm awfully sorry." And they hate like the devil to do it.

So when I put out Standing Order No. 1, Standing Order No. 2, and Standing Order No. 3 and Standing Order No. 4 HCO Policy Letters as of last month, the people in the immediate vicinity of Saint Hill started throwing a horrible sigh of relief even though they felt it was a horrible overt. Because these orders simply consist of this one fact: That you must not stop a communication to Ron. It must go to Ron and be received by Ron and read by Ron and answered by Ron.

So let's forget the other old philosophy of "Ron is too busy to be communicated with" because, frankly, I never have been. If I need a couple of more hours in the day, I can always fit them in. It's just as easy to make thirty hours as twenty-eight.

Now, disabuse yourself of that idea because it's factually true that the bulk of your communications I do see. And now I can guarantee you that I will see all of them.

That is all into the subject of reach, prevent reach and havingness, but it isn't for that reason. It isn't for that reason only. It's, I'm over the bumps now. I'm over the jumps. I've got the administrative lines pretty well nailed. I've got things pretty well squared down. The research work is pretty well taped. We know exactly where we're going and I think you will see exactly where we are going. It's very easy. There is no bad pitch or curve on our future intentions. It's quite inevitable what will occur. It's all for the good. The bulk of my work is done along this particular line and there would actually be no reason to keep up such barriers. That would be all there was to that because I do have more time.

1950, I said Scientology, Dianetics, would go as far as it worked. Well, it's working — working very nicely, thank you.

Havingness — havingness could then be tackled by an auditor — just reverting to the subject for a moment — could be tackled by an auditor in several ways. If he knows the definitions of it, then he could handle it by definition. Instead of, "Look around here and find something you could have," to find out if something was wrong with the room — although that will remain the standard rudiment — you could also say, "Is there anything around here that would prevent you from reaching the room?" And the person will almost at once spot anything that is there that would give you a needle tick on the room rudiment. Be another way to say the same thing, right?

Male voice: Yes.

Now horribly enough, you — it doesn't run well to say to a person, "What prevents you from reaching? Thank you very much. What prevents you from reaching? Thank you very much," because that's the motivator side of it. You'd have to say, "Whom have you prevented from reaching? Thank you. Whom have you prevented from reaching? Thank you."

And that would just be another Security Check question, wouldn't it? So we come right back to Joburgs and withholds and any trick methods we've got but with the understanding of why a withhold is so deadly: because it cuts down the person's havingness and will never let the havingness restore.

When you were young, the world was bright. What has happened since? Same world. You've got the same eyeballs. Must have been that between then and now, you have accumulated some withholds and prevented a few people from reaching. And that is about all there is to it. It's as simple as that.

Havingness is an interesting subject. It's a subject that has been a very complex subject. It is not very complex now, but just because it drops into such an easy category, for heaven's sakes, don't forget it. Because if you security check and then run Havingness and security check and then run Havingness, the Havingness stirs up withholds and the Security Check takes them off. And you can play one against the other and you can increase the velocity, of course, of a Joburg madly. That makes it a very interesting, fast, much faster, action to run the two that way.

Perhaps you didn't suspect before this hour that the withhold was connected with the Havingness and I must confess to you that neither did I until a couple of days ago. I didn't know that they were intimately related. They are sufficiently intimately related, however, to be practically the same thing. A no-have equals a withhold. A withhold equals a no-have. A no-have equals aberration. A no-have or quality of no-have equals the quality of reach or the lack of it and gives you the tone of the person. It's as easy as that.

So it turns out to be a very simple subject just like all of Scientology is. Turns out to be very elementary. But the trick is to understand it well enough to know what is elementary and what isn't. I'll leave that up to you or maybe we'll settle it in the lectures tomorrow.

Thank you very much.