Which is the most effective, running a direct concept or wasting and so forth? Come on, which is?

Audience: [various responses]

..the body out on the sidewalk. Be the motion of the body out on the sidewalk. Now be the body. Now be the room. Now be the motion of the body, now be the motion of the body out on the sidewalk. Now be the corner. Now be the motion of the body walking down to the corner.

Male voice: Concept.

OK, be a thousand feet up. Give me some places where you're not. Some places where somebody else isn't. Be yourself. Give me some more places where you're not. OK.

Concept was more effective than wasting it on up the line, huh?

Now give me several things that you can lose. Several things that you can afford to lose. Now check over some things you have not lost. Now some things which you own. Now some things which you know absolutely, with certainty, that you do not own. Be them. Be them, one right after the other. OK.

Audience: [various responses]

Find the two back points of the room. Now sit there for a moment and look and don't think. Now look through whatever you're looking at. OK. What you got? OK. Feel better? You're hungry? Put some people in your stomach. Go for British.

Male voice: They do different things.

Now look, cannibalism for the duration of this class at least, doesn't hold. How's that, feel a little better? Who exteriorized on that one? Good. Anybody exteriorize on that for the first time? A little patty-cake way of exteriorization. Did you? He doesn't know. We have to solve on some of these cases degradation because of exteriorization, before they'll exteriorize, because probably most of the people here who aren't exteriorized right now had, at one time or the other, and then they felt very degraded for having done so. And that's what you have to solve in this case.

They both do different things.

Well that's beside the point. SOP-8C is still very much in order, just as it rolls. Carol, be your lungs. Be your body. Be your lungs. Be your body. Be somebody else's lungs. Well, was that what you did? Did you do that?

What did it do to you?

(Tried moving that off.)

Female voice: It made me feel mean and ornery.

Oh you did. Still obey? Yes, well you be your lungs again. Alright, both you and Carol and you be somebody else's lungs now. Be somebody else's lungs. Now be somebody else's lungs, and be those lungs with TB. Now add lung fever. Now wheeze and pant and can't get air, as the lungs. Now get a gleeful feeling of actually lousing him up. Just get what you're doing to this person with your TB and so forth. Just fix them up but good.

Male voices Concept is very effective until I ran out of something.

Now be the person. Now be the lungs. Now be your lungs. Now be the effort of your lungs. OK? You still holding back a cough? You still afraid you're going to cough? Alright.

Ran out of something - ah! Well, all right

OK. That better? Well, I hope you feel better, but the practical truth of the matter is, you characters, I didn't process you this morning to make you feel better. I tried to give you the opening gun on randomity and automaticity, beingness and resistance.

Come on, which do you find the most effective now? Let’s just make up your mind.

Do you know you've been resistive thetans now and then? And did...

Female voice: Well the first part made me go down lower\ it just practically knocked me out.

Anyway, we're on the air, I'd better not make remarks like that. Poeple will get the idea that I sometimes inject spicey remarks in my lectures, and of course I never do. I've never said anything risque in front of a microphone, never since noon. Haven't been on a microphone.

It did, huh?

Anyway, we are now going to cover, we are now going to cover; you know it's very fortunate by the way, you do have symbols. Don't go fighting symbols just because I said that a thetan fought them. It's very fortunate you have them, because the truth of the matter is, it's a wonderful code system until somebody begins to louse it up. A symbol is as good as it represents exactly what it is, and it's as bad as it starts to represent something else. A symbol never gets dangerous 'til it gets into an abstract state. You don't have any trouble with this word space. You might have trouble with space, but you won't have much trouble with the word space. See, and you won't have much trouble with a lot of things.

Female voice: Yeah, ifthat’s being more effective, I guess that’s more. . .

But carrying on here this afternoon, we have a very, very important; by they way, this is quite important to you, is I don't happen to be covering this stuff at length. You better alert to that fact. I'm not covering anything at length. Now a lot of times when I find people very, very pleasant and agreeable, and life is running along very smoothly, and I don't intend to get an exact certain job done with the unit, I'll talk and so on, just to be a good talker, and amuse the audience and so forth. I don't happen to be doing that now. Of course you can't resist throwing a few punches around, but the stuff I'm giving you is rather terribly condensed.

Well now, that’s a nice, refined, narrow use of it. Did you feel better when you wasted them?

If you knew how terribly condensed it was you'd probably be upset. And we covered this same material in three weeks with the first unit. Three weeks of approximately three hours a day. The first unit, by the way, occasionally thinks of these SOP-8C as a new technique or something of the sort, and so on. As a matter of fact, they were trained in it, but they were trained in its basic theories, and they've come out with extrapolations of this course, because that's what they were trained to do. And it's very amusing that their orientation on this is slightly apologetic, because they're departing from a rote procedure slightly. But they're departing from it on exact, solid theory, and they're departing from it along the line of a theory, which of course leads them anywhere. They can go all over the hills and far away and still get results from a preclear. They're just applying these basics.

Audience: No. [various responses]

Alright, what we're going to talk to you about today, and probably never mention again, is randomity and automaticity. And I'm going to tell you all about it in about fifty minutes, and I'm never going to talk about it again. Now that isn't let's hurry up and grab on to all these symbols and so forth, but let's get a clear cut picture of these two things. Recognize that they are definitions, that the definitions are not necessarily true in the field of music, they are not necessarily true in the field of making bread, but they are very definitely true in the field of Scientology, because when we use these we get people out of their heads and in good shape. Now we're getting people out of their heads, you know, and in good shape, speaking of symbols.

Well, that you will find to be the case. And that’s why I ran you on a concept first. But I evidently didn’t make my point too well. Do you feel better now?

Alright, let's, let's then go into these two things on their purest definition, which is to say randomity is the ratio of predicted to unpredicted motion. Minus randomity is where that fraction is greater than one, and plus randomity is where that fraction is greater, is less than one. Reversly, if it were the ratio of unpredicted to predicted motion, minus randomity would be where the factor was minus less than one, and plus randomity would be where the factor would be greater than one. So I don't care which way you state it, it all adds up to the same word, the same thing. But because we've already said minus, the latter definition is the one you will be asked to put down on a quiz paper. The only reason you get a quiz is if it's a precise definition.

Audience: Yes.

You know, it's one thing to teach someobdy the airy theory of something or other, and another thing to ask him, "Point to an ashtray." When he points to a chandelier you know he doesn't know what an ashtray is. The kind of data we're handling here happens to be of that order. Ashtray, space. Space is something, it is a vewipoint of dimension. Communication is something, it is a message or a particle going through distance in a certain direction between two exact points, that's a communication. And, randomity is, in spite of the fact that's it embraces randomness, is a precise definition. And it is the ratio of unpredicted to predicted motion. And that is exactly what it is, and that's all it is, and it isn't anything else, and it's what thetans make games out of. And if you don't know that, why, then you can't produce a game.

Did you feel better when you finished running those concepts?

See, you'd be fumbling around wondering what people have fun playing. Truth of the matter is they'll play anything that has a randomity, that has an agreement with what they think is fun. And they'll have a randomity, if you have a minus randomity, that is to say the less randomity than what they think is fun, then they won't enjoy the game. And if you have more randomity than what they think is fun, they'll say the game's too fast and too hectic. Just like you're going to say this crowded in patch of data here, right at the beginning of the course which you are then going to forget all about and I keep jumping on you about all the time, is much too much randomity. But, it can't be helped.

Audience: Yes.

Here's, here's this, this definition. Random what? Random motion of particles. Well, what's random about it? That which is random about it is that which is unpredicted about it. And that which is not random about it is that which is predicted about it. So we take this magazine, and we say the magazine is here, we are going to put it over here at the other corner of the table. We do so. It's predicted motion. That's cause. We say, "Alright, here's a magazine, and lord knows where it's going to go." My foot, it stopped, but still terrifically random. I expected it to skid. That's unpredicted. But it's still caused to the degree that I threw down the magazine.

You still felt better. Well, the stuff is pretty hard to make it unworkable. But the living proof of the matter is, is most of your preclears that come up won’t be able to get even a concept of something except in a symbolical form until they’ve wasted it. Wasting betters a case and running the concepts has a tendency to bog it, you’ll find by experience.

Alright, we're all sitting in here feeling happy as can be, and all of a sudden a kid jumps through the ceiling and throws a base ball at Ross. Now he is a particle who is coming through an unexpected place, and he does an unexpected thing with another particle; in other words two unpredicted motions. See, they're only unpredicted because; well, Mr. Sidler, I'm awfully glad to see you. The unpredicted part of the action is only this: Ross didn't predict it. See, that's, you don't have to go into patterns where they follow smooth flows, or they're parallels on the hexagons, or anything like that. See, it's nothing but, all we've got to do is realize that we are dealing with knowingness, not dealing with patterns of particles. And then we'll get what randomity is. It's a very simple thing, and it's been digging around for a long time but it needs a terrific amount of explanation. A few sentences anyway, because you're going to be living with it. You've been living with it for seventy-six some trillion years, and you haven't got it solved yet, so it's about time we nailed it.

Don’t evaluate a technique by how deeply it slugs your preclear out, since he’ll just eventually just run out of havingness, you know. He’ll just run out of havingness and then we won’t know quite what we’re doing, one way or the other. But wasting, saving and so forth is better on the thing.

Now when a preclear is bad off he has a fixed rantomity. That we were calling, because I didn't want to start into randomity yesterday, I called it survival pace. Supposing front lines were just climated on a survival pace, well that's his randomity, bullets flying all over the place and so forth, he can predict this. He finally figured out a way to predict this. "You never get hit until the one comes along that's got your name on it." You see, he predicts it. He handles it in this fashion. He says, "Well, up here guys get killed." Then he develops a sixth sense so he isn't where the bullet is, and then he becomes unkillable. He actually does this, but that's his level of knowingness pitched against the flow of particles.

All right. What did you get on symbols? You find out anything about yourself? Yes?

Now in order to have a flow of particles you have to have space. So it follows with an individual who has any randomity at all, must have space. So an individual who is fighting randomity runs himself fresh out of space. You want him in space, too much randomity, so he says immediately, "Well, the way to cut down randomity so I don't have to predict is just have no space. Ha. No particle flow. Ha. Sit still. Simple. Nothing unpredicted about that, oh!" and he gets a somatic in his stomach. So that becomes no solution, because he can't exist and live without space. And so he always has some space, and in the effort to cut it down to a minimum he merely brings in and tries to hold still the particles so he can predict them. Well he has become effect at this time, and he is quite convinced that is effect and that he'll go on being an effect. But we have to move him over to cause. How do we move him over to cause? Simply by making his level of knowingness sufficient to predict the course of particles.

Female voice: I did. I found I’d been doing it all my life.

How far do you think you could drive an automobile if you couldn't predict the course of that particle on a highway, and the course of other particles on the highway? What interval of time is it necessary for you to have in order to predict these particles? Not a very long interval of time, true. But you should have several seconds. And a driver, yes, because when a driver is driving along the road in a fairly relaxed condition as he often does, the oncoming cars, he sees these oncoming cars actually several seconds before they will actaully impact, he sees them start to do something funny. That's your normal course of driving, and so he puts on his brakes or he speeds up.

Doing what?

Now you had it gaged there for a moment against an accident. Well of course in an accident his level of knowingness has been exceeded, or the mechanical ability of the car to be controlled has been exceeded. And so we get on either side the particle failure, or the knowingness failure. That's what we call a mechanical failure in an airplace. Airplane's flying along, all of a sudden he goes boom and explodes all over the sky. Nobody could predict that one. Why? Well, it's the mechical failure. The fellow who predicted it or could predict it is a long way from there, and he is the fellow who designed or the fellow who built the airplane. But that still was at one time a predicted motion. It was predictable at one time, and wasn't predicted. And that we call a failure.

Female voice: The brackets you were running - I suddenly discovered that that. ..

Therefore, what is a failure? A failure is a predictable motion which wasn't predicted. What is being wrong in terms of motion? Being wrong in terms of motion is realizing that one had the capability of predicting a motion, and he didn't predict it. So now he knows he is wrong. Why is he wrong? His level of randomity has been exceeded. See? He all of a sudden got a high level of unpredicted motion to the level of predicted motion he was operating on.

Saving symbols, desiring ...Female voice:. .. had been the masses - that I’d been doing - resisting this and resisting that. And I found that people had been doing it to me all my life and I hadn’t known it.

What's the tolerance of a thetan? What are the exact mathematical terms would be the tolerance of a thetan in terms of unpredicted motion to predicted motion? The tolerance of the thetan to unpredict, in this ratio of unpredicted motion to predicted motion would be one hundred over one percent. A theta can tolerate one hundred percent unpredicted motion. That's why people go to amusement parks. They try to attain this hundred percent of unpredicted motion, and they try to still read around, and leave as much as possible, some predicted motion, I mean, they try to leave that aside. But it's always with them. They for instance can predict gravity, so on. Where they actually get to is far, far short of their hundred percent. But because they can't get unpredicted motion they settle into a rut of a survival pace, you see? They wanted unpredicted motion and they couldn't get it, and they were too smart for it, so they cut down their knowingness, and fixed their survival pace at a lower pitch so they could get some randomity. Why do people come down hill? They want some unpredicted motion, that's what they want.

That’s right, that’s right. Well, I tell you, it’s a remarkable thing, but people talk a lot about "Well i£ just other people didn’t mess me up and so forth, why, I’d get along all right.” And the truth of the matter is, they’re really not very dangerous to each other. They’re really not. As people, they’re dangerous to each other, but you’re not people. You get what I mean? It’s a little abstruse, maybe, but you get what I mean?

Well they've fought predicting motion because a thetan can predict motion at I don't know what distance into the future. I daresay that a thetan in good shape could predict the course of an air particle now floating in this room for the next thousand years. He'd probably draw it down to the finest pin point. And yet that air particle will probably flow all over Earth, and be in every town and hamlet you can see so, and he'd know exactly what moment and what year it would be in what towm and what hamlet. I mean well, here's prediction of motion, he probably would just know this.

Female voice: No.

Well imagine the poor plight of this beast, this thetan. Let's just imagine the poor plight of a poor fellow. He has this terrible situation on his hands. He knows everything. Well, he could predict everything, poor fellow. No game. He knows he's going to win.

It’s a little abstruse. I’m not insulting your intelligence. I mean it’s just - there is a point there. If our purpose is to preserve a bunch of bodies and if we’re sort of here on a mission of putting them all on ice, well, yeah - yeah, people can be very harmful to people. See that? But if we’re here for the business of livingness - which is not necessarily the business of preserving a body at all - let me assure you that there’s something very dramatic in throwing one away with great elan. Why, we find out that people are very far from dangerous to people but are necessary to complete livingness.

Well actually he doesn't get trapped in this, and it doesn't cease to be a game to him until he becomes unwilling to duplicate. He has to have original motions. Now it's enough of an unpredicted motion for a thetan to put something in a little black box, close the box down, and then forget what he put in it. And then open the box up again, and be surprised. That's your first level really that these processes, your first level of randomity is just doing something so it'll surprise you. Now you'll find preclears playing this with somatics, you will see they do things that will surprise them.

And so we get pulled between these two things: life’s insistence upon survive and preserve and repair and patch up and the static, a thetan’s desire to live. And an individual is caught between these two points. Of course, he’s caught in lots of points, but the main thing it is, is gee, he’d sure like to live and, golly, he sure has to preserve this body!

Well, here we have a pretty easy problem. Why, why has life become serious? It becomes serious because one has too much unpredicted motion. His considerations alone governs whether he likes it or dislikes it, so he's decided to dislike a certain breed of unpredicted motion. So he fights it. So he becomes to himself unpredictable, because by fighting it he becomes a symbol or a mass, and he becomes himself a part of it. Most people think of themselves as a communication particle, and if you were to, if you put a stamp on the forehead of most psychos in an institution and dropped them in a letter box, they'd be real happy. They're a message enroute someplace, they're a particle. They can at least predict being a letter.

Well now, when they start resisting, they get worried about preserving and that is about the only big major trap there is, is resistance, resistance. You can get somebody to resist something, why, you’ll just fix him all up. There’s no truer truism than "that which you resist you become.”

Alright, what, what problems are we faced with here in processing? The individual who's trying to balance the desirable level of excitement against the desirable level of security, all excitement depends upon unpredicted motion. And all security depends upon predicted motion. So the day he believes he can be destroyed he gets interested in predicted motion. Up to that time he isn't even vaguely interested in it. He can't get enough unpredicted motion. A fellow comes back to you and says, "Whee, isn't it fun to be a lightening bolt, striking all over the sky?"

All right. Now, what’s a symbol?

Well, where does this take you in processing? You've got a preclear, he's got a terrific security goal. He's trying to cut down his unpredicted motion. That means he's fighting unpredicted motion. By resisting it he becomes it. So he's unpredictable, but sold on the fact that he has to have security. So he does the strangest things. He has to have security, so twenty-nine years of the service which will retire him at thirty years, will find him resigning. And he says, "And I don't know why I did it."

Female voice: A form of an idea?

Now the thetan is doing nearly everything he's doing to himself. He has set up some automaticity in the past in order to accomplish some randomity, and this kicks back at him. And after a while he says, "I'm in terrible condition, process me."

Oh, that’s very close.

Alright, what's automaticity? What's this got to do with randomity? Well one of the ways you set up randomity is to set up a chess player. Sit down on one side of a chess board, you make a move, go around to the other side of the chess board and you make a move against yourself, and then you go around to the first side of the chess board, you make a move, and go around to the other side of the chess board and you make a move, and you try to fool yourself by saying, "Now look-a here. Here I am, I'm moving on both sides of this chess board, one side after the other, and I know exactly really what moves I made against myself, and it's no fun." Did you ever play checkers or chess with yourself? Did you ever try to play bridge with yourself or something like that? You know what's going to happen, there's no opponent.

Female voice: Somethingyou can present something else?

So you decide the best thing to do is to make an opponent. So he duplicates himself and then you say, "I've forgotten I have duplicated myself. So myself is sitting over there, but I don't know myself, and this is some other person." And his name is Wagwalla or something. And here's this other guy. And now we're playing chess, but that isn't fair, as you've only made him a part of the person. So he's not a worthy opponent. So again there's no randomity.

That’s very close.

So you introduce a chess player that knows as much about chess as you do. And you'll have immediately cut yourself to 20 on the tone scale. And any thetan, given the slightest chance, will cut himself from 40 to 20, just bang, just like that, by producing the other chess player.

Female voice: Somethingyou live by.

Well the production of chess players of course is a limited project. I can sort of hear somebody saying, "I wonder who's chess player I am?" Your own. You notice the cells have never given up this method of procreation. A cell is his own identity, in his own son. And is his own identity in the second, third, forth, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, tenth, eleventh, twelfth generation.

Yeah, that’s an ideal, that’s not a symbol. That’s all right, that’s one of its variable meanings. I mean . . .Well look, we have a lot of divergent ideas on what a symbol is. It happens that, for our purposes in Scientology, this thing called a symbol can be given a finite definition which will clarify a great deal of the work we are doing. And it’s a very precise definition - very, very, very precise. That is, a symbol is an idea which is fixed in energy which is mobile. Which is mobile.

I refer you to the first book, cellular division. The identity is the same. You know that is, because I've conducted a series of experiments on this subject. You don't know it is, but I know it is, on this basis. I trained a generation of cells to resist cigarette smoke blown at the culture. They'd all bunch over to one side of the culture. Well, I started out by blowing steam at them, they didn't avoid steam because it was just wholly steam, didn't matter. And then substituted for the steam cigarette smoke, and then blew steam in, and then blew cigarette smoke, and then blew steam in. They finally would avoid the steam, but mind you now, cells will not avoid steam in a culture. And there's the nicotine poison and so forth, kicks it back, so they get trained.

Male voice: How tr that differentfrom a postulate?

Now we can go two generations down the line. No part of this culture was part of the experience, but the children were, are, here now. And these were the children of the same culture as those. You blow steam at them, they duck. Two experiments.

From a what?

I don't know why people didn't do it before, but that's because the field of psychology was not something you looked at, it was something you thought about and did something else with. But that experiment could have been the most basic experiment of psychology. It actually had to be done. You had to say, "Now what's this being man composed of?" Well he's composed of cells, and all the cells are part of a whole, so the behavior of the cells could be a pattern of the behavior of the whole. And it could have been worked out that way very easily.

Male voice: A postulate.

Anyway, you did work it out that way very easily. And I very much looked at having conducted it, because it covered an enormous section of knowledge, a way of not having the material your own...

Oh, the difference between a symbol and a postulate. Ah, yes. Well, we’ll get to that in a minute. A symbol is a postulate which has already been fixed. A postulate is something which an individual makes. When he has made a postulate, he thereafter may fix it in a mass and give it mobility.

Female voice: Could the symbol be a way of ascribing automaticity to our postulates?

Yes. Yes. That’s where we’re going. You’re a very, very bright girl this morning. Did the processing do it or a night’s sleep?

The person who won't look at the back of a book to see how a story ends doesn't want interference with his unpredictability.

Female voice: Could be, since I’ve been so deep in apathy all night and I’m coming up again now.

Delusion is only a machine that will give the preclear unpredictable mock-ups. He put the machine out of his control. There are machines that set up sharp and unpredictable pains, too.

Why were you in apathy?

You can't get the preclear out of his head until he can be cause, and he can't be cause because of automaticities.

Female voice: I don’t know, [laughing] There you are! There’s your answer.

Every one of the machines was set up with more particle motion thatn the preclear thinks he has.

All right. Now, let’s take a look at. ..

Automaticity is a machine which has been set up by the thetan to serve the thetan. The thetan gives power to the machine surreptitiously. Soon the power breaks down. The occluded persons have machinery that predicts blackness.

Female voice: No fault of the auditor, Ron, she’s a very good auditor.

When you run out these machines, he'll have to have more to enjoy the game. Have him set up new machines, but give them a finite time to quit operating, not to run forever.

I would never have thought of it unless you’d mentioned it there. Who is the auditor? Let’s “chastise” her. [laughter]

ANYTHING THE PRECLEAR IS DOING AUTOMATICALLY, MAKE HIM DO IT HIMSELF, CONSCIOUSLY! It'll quit misbehaving. Have him do it in mock-ups, and you've run an engram. If in his mock-ups a racing car keeps flopping on its back and you have him mock up a racing car and make it flop on its back, you may find - with an E-meter - that it's something else flopping on its back - such as an airplane. Make the preclear think of something, and get pictures - and you'll key it out.

Female voice: She did a good job.

To undo a loss, tell him to close his eyes and lose the room, then postulate he'll find it again and open his eyes.

All right. Now, let’s take a look at this thing called a symbol. And let’s look at that definition and now let’s take another definition, let’s take the definition of work in physics.

A person can't accidentally set up an automaticity - that's basic on the chain. Have the preclear make enough pictures and you'll key out the machine. That's why Self Analysis and Creative processing work - but it takes a long time. But they'll always get a preclear out of his head.

We all know what work is, don’t we? But in physics, work is a very finite definition. And when you say “work” in the science of physics, you mean foot-pounds of energy, you mean distance-mass-gravity factor. You’re talking about something terrifically finite, you understand that? So let’s understand, right here, the difference between а - you might say - a type of definition which amounts to a law and a definition out of a dictionary on a word. You see, they can vary slightly.

Those who say they can't get mock-ups have a machine that wipes out the mock-ups before they're mocked up. Have them get a "no mock-up", over and over. By doing it over and over, you're duplicating, and keeping it from becoming automatic.

Now, if we take this thing called symbol and we give it the definition we have just given it and if we use that definition, we are thereafter able to understand and codify a great deal of livingness and see what is taking place in this livingness. It broadens, somewhat, the definition of symbol.

At its best, it takes one to two minutes to run out an automaticity.

A postulate is something that you can give or take or pull or hand out or do almost anything with. But when you make a postulate into a symbol, you have surrounded the symbol with mass-energy of one kind or another - and you have granted it mobility. You have fixed it in energy and granted it a mobility. It’s a neat trick, isn’t it?

The only way anyone can control you is by taking over your automatic machinery.

Now, let’s take a symbol - the letter “a”, the article "zz”in the English language and you see that the moment we put it into the airwaves, we have given it some mass and handed it some mobility. Well, this makes it very difficult to locate. Theta, according to the Prelogics, creates space and time and energy in which to locate things. It is very happy when it is fixing things accurately in space and your preclear will get as well as he can fix things accurately in time and in space and he’s very happy about that, you see?

OCCLUSION: Something at which the preclear will not look.

Now, let’s take this thing he does with this thing we call a symbol - ha-ha, boy, ha! Isn’t that a wonderful thing. We wrap it up in energy and then we give it mobility and, after that, it’s lost but it’s still there. So it compounds into invisible barriers and into the most confounding and incomprehensible of puzzles. Take the letter “a” in the English language, let’s garb it in printer’s ink, put it in a book and then the book moves out of the library onto laps and back onto shelves and back onto laps and here it goes! And it’s got this letter “a”, this article "z/”in it. It is a symbol and it just keeps on moving and you never get track of it afterwards. The only thing which can pierce sixteen-inch armor plate is a symbol.

AFFINITY: Wavelength of flow.

A bullet is not, accurately speaking, a symbol. All a bullet is, is some mass. Now, it can be mass with meaning. It could be a silver bullet, but just a bullet - it’s just a mass. You could set it up and say, “Now this is a symbol of war” and discuss it and give meaning to it. As long as you use it actively and expend it - create it and expend it and locate it and fix it—it’s not a symbol, it’s just mass. See, that’s just a piece of energy. But now, let’s take the letter “a” and put it in printer’s ink.

All right. Now let’s take another symbol. We’ll call it “police.” It’s a word, isn’t it? That’s all it is, a word. All right, we take this word and we garb it in energy, we give it an ideal and we make it mobile and we get it lost and then we don’t know where it is and the next thing you know, it’s after us. You see that about police? Now, let’s take somebody who is present here. This person has been trained in judo, he is really an expert in judo. He is very good with a Colt pistol - extremely good with a Colt pistol. His alertness is good and his reaction time is much better than normal. All right. Will you please tell me why this person should be afraid of a police officer?

A police officer is seldom a good shot, is poorly if at all trained in judo and has reaction time which is mostly fat. And yet, if a police officer were to walk in the door and say, “Come down with me to the jail and lose two days,” this fellow would probably go along with him. Why? Why? It’s nonsensical. Well, it’s because the individual here has a symbol called “police.”

Now, let’s suppose this individual didn’t have this word called “police” and didn’t know the meaning of police and had no further significance to police and some character in a uniform walked in the door and flourished a gun on him, why, he’d just bury the guy that walked in at the door, that’s all. You see that?

Life would be awfully simple, wouldn’t it, if we didn’t have a symbol? It would be simple, 5 direct and without a long time lag. Because the only real trouble with the police is if he killed this fellow, then some more police would come tomorrow - he thinks - according to the symbol. Actually, they might not, they might say, “Well, we’d better not arrest that fellow.”

You see whither we are going with this thing called symbol? It’s an embracive idea and it gets fixed in mass. And because it’s mass and because a thetan is often hungry for energy, he will pick up one of these things. And because he objects to their confounded mobility, he will try to hold one still and after that, having resisted it, he will become it.

A body could be said to be a symbol. It’s mobile, it’s an idea, it’s fixed in mass and we find, strangely enough, that a thetan who believes he’s a body has already adopted a great number of ethics, ideals and otherwise and fixations and arbitraries. And when we start to process him, we exteriorize hirn and he says, “I’m not a body! Huh!”

And what do you know, you shed, at that moment, an enormous number of the arbitraries which have been holding him into a persistence in life and denying him livingness. He hasn’t any action or anything else, as long as this takes place—his fluidity. So the effort of the individual to fix and unfix ideas in matter, in energy, shows up immediately and intimately on the business of the symbol. Right?

So these damn things float around and people try to nail them down. A bibliophile is actually trying to nail down a bunch of symbols. He thinks they’re valuable and desirable. He didn’t start that way. That which a person resists, he will eventually find very valuable and very necessary. He wants it, he knows he wants it.

Symbols. It’s a fantastic thing. If an entity shows up or something like that - you’re exteriorized someplace and you all of a sudden see this character - and by the way, I don’t know that a thetan is the only livingness. I just happen to know that you’re thetans, you see? But I also don’t know if there’s such a thing as an evil demon that exceeds the value and power of a thetan and, as a matter of fact, Г know quite the contrary. Those things which show up in that form succumb with such speed that they appear to be more symbols than anything else. All right.

Yes?

Female voice: Could you say a symbol was an enforced idea of a selected mass?

No. No. You have already limited it. It might be an invited idea. It might be a very pleasant idea. It might be a hidden idea. Don’t add intention to the symbol. Intention is entirely separate from this definition. There’s symbols and men can add all sorts of intentions to all kinds of symbols.

Let’s take the symbol called “freedom.” Let’s print it up on a poster, that puts it in mass. And then the poster can appear almost anyplace and then somebody comes along - some politician - and starts screaming “Freedom.” Well, what’s this politician want to do? He wants to do some slavery. So, what’s his intention with regard to the symbol? The symbol is a weak and will - less thing which is a tool in the hands of anyone and depends for its existence - as do all things, except the static itself - on agreement. And when you have grasped this principle entirely and completely, you will understand not only what an engram is, what an aberration is and what your preclear is frantic about.

A thetan fixes and unfixes ideas in energy. When he builds something, he fixes it in energy. Rather simple, isn’t it? When he takes something down, he unfixes an idea out of energy. Now he’s got all these floating ideas in energy - they’re mobile, they go all around. He can’t locate them - they’re here today and gone tomorrow. Will-o’-the-wisp. It’s a Fabian warfare he fights. So he gets a passion for having everything nailed down.And this passion sticks him on the time track, fixes him in energy masses such as engrams, gives him automaticities, makes him do all the damnedest foolest things that you can think of

A symbol has a greater liability than it has a value. But it has a great value. If we continued to talk or converse directly as a fluid flow of ideas, our beingness would at once be very perceivable. But by avoiding, by hiding, we can put our ideas into symbols and then transmit them. And the symbols so transmitted, then do not disclose what we may wish to hold back as our basic intention. And so we get everybody looking through the symbol to find the meaning behind it. And this is a constant dramatization on the part of a thetan. He looks through the symbol to find what’s behind it.

In such, words to him are invisible barriers. They’re barriers because they’re made out of mass. They actually have mass. You can cut some out of a book sometime and weigh them if you want to. Spoken words actually have mass. You can put up a Koenig photometer and talk at its gas flame and you will see immediately that something is vibrating that gas flame - something which is not just wind but a vibration is activating the particles of air. And so we have a fluid flow of ideas which are yet floating along in an energy mass.

Now, we start to process an engram out of somebody and we find out that we’re running one of the most complex symbols you ever looked at. It’s got Lord knows how many perceptics in it and it’s got all kinds of things - a wonderful gimmick, an engram. Now, you start to process this engram today and you think you’ll finish it off tomorrow but it’s gone and then it recurs six months from now. In other words, it has mobility.

When you are pursuing, exclusively, the course of searching for and eradicating the symbol, you are just dramatizing whole track. Because a thetan has really never done anything else in terms of worry or anxiety or upset and so forth. As long as he can get in there and shoot, he’s all right. As long as he can get in there and build a house and tear it down, he’s all right. And as long as he can put up a great big beautiful mock-up that’s just pretty or blow one up, he’s all right. As long as he can engage in a game which has an actual finite football and chase that football up and down the field and knock people flat and do all sorts of things, he’s all right.

But the second he begins this endless task, this endless chase of the symbol - the findingness of the hidden meaningness behind thee - he’s a lost dog. Because the symbol is lost. And so the thetan who tries to locate them, himself, gets lost. And the lost feeling which an individual has is the pursuit of the symbol. Not the pursuit of a great big oak tree, not the pursuit of this and not the pursuit of finite things, solid things, and not even the pursuit of thought. Thought itself is not necessarily a flock of symbols. Now you understand that? Thought is postulates.

Now, a thetan, in his ideal state, can make a postulate and make it stick and make it act and take it up and throw it out. Now, he can, in his ideal state, make a symbol and tear one up. He can explode one that comes into him, he can blow it, he can release it, he can change his mind.

But once he has become so engrossed in this search for the meaning behind symbols that he has accumulated, Lord knows how many in packed masses, when he is no longer able to face up to them, when he believes that symbols are more powerful than he - he the creator of symbols, you see, is now being bludgeoned by the symbols - that’s an engram in restimulation. The creator of engrams, you might say, suddenly finds himself being hit by engrams. He believes that he himself must be of a lower order of symbol. So therefore, he must have mass. So therefore, he can’t make postulates. So therefore, he can’t undo postulates. So therefore, when he makes up his mind wrongly, it stays made up wrongly. Why? Well, because he can’t undo this.

And so out of fixing and unfixing ideas and the floating and mobile character of symbols, we actually get the mechanical-rhe. mechanical side of sanity and aberration. We also get the mechanical side of exteriorization. The deeper an individual gets into symbols,

Now, when you have a good command of what a symbol is and the chasing of symbols this way and when you get an understanding of what a thetan is and that he is a static - he is a static which can place itself or perceive from himself at any point over any set of particles at will and instantaneously - why, We see that we are trying to remove a preclear up the scale from the point of being a mass or a symbol or an answer, up toward a point where he is creative and where he can make postulates and so on. The second that he can do this, he can impose space on terminals and he can exteriorize very easily. He has no difficulty in retaining his identity, but he has his identity all mixed up with symbols.

Now, let’s take this thing called a name. An awful lot of preclears are in terrible shape simply because of their name. You take the fellow’s name and you move it around as a symbol, in moving postulates, and all of a sudden the case begins to free up.

Silly name. There’s a case, a notable case, that had been audited by practically every auditor in Greater New York and was audited by a member of the First Unit. And this case’s name added Up to “water.” And all this case ever did for an auditor was blow grief charge and got no better. This case was being the symbol - being water and would just dramatize this and continued to dramatize this and continued to dramatize it until all of a sudden, why, the auditor would say, “Well, we blew that big beautiful grief charge and so the case will be better.” But the case was no better. So this became an enormous mystery.

So a thetan becomes something and sells himself on the idea he is it merely because he’s so exhausted in this combat with symbols, freedoms, ethics, ideals, evils - these things become symbols - and he avoids them one way or the other and then he doesn’t know what to avoid because they’re mobile. And he never knows where they’ll turn up or anything else. His identity is something that is quite treacherous. Identity is a very treacherous thing, it turns up in police stations.

Most of the boys you are having trouble exteriorizing, by the way, have a record a light-year long. That’s right, they have a record a light-year long. That doesn’t mean they’re criminal on Earth or in this lifetime - but they’ve had their days. Put them on an E-Meter and you keep knocking it off the pin. They’re wanted in this galaxy and that galaxy - that sounds like just space opera, but it happens to be very true.

Now, they are dodging. They’re dodging the symbol called “law and order.” Well, can’t they create law and order? Well, they sure can. Well, what are they dodging law and order for? Well, that’s because they know they have an identity. But do they? An identity is forced upon one until he believes he will desire it. He begins to resist an identity until he is an identity. The one thing that I can tell you every thetan has in common is a terrible background of resistance to bodies. Oh, but thoroughly, the last thing in the world a thetan would be, would be a body! So here you are. That’s a resistance to a symbol, in essence, because that symbol is an identity. And as an identity, it fixes the individual instead of him fixing it.

Now, we have a problem with any symbol: is the individual fixing the symbol or is the symbol fixing him? And the way you keep symbols from fixing the individual that are pinning him down is very easy. You just mock it up and move it around until he realizes he’s moving it, it’s not moving him. You let him find it, in other words. It’s an End of Cycle Processing to mock-up symbols. Sure, because he’s been looking for a symbol.

All right. Have him mock-up the symbol called “freedom.” Whole populaces have gone to their death, whole civilizations have been destroyed, simply by people looking for freedom. The greatest slaveries ever established on Earth were established in the name of freedom. Why? Because everybody was trying to close terminals and locate it and find it and so forth and they were trying to find freedom by avoiding slavery. So they closed terminals with slavery and there they were. Freedom was the opposite to slavery, so they had to fight slavery in order to have freedom and that made slaves out of them. This is the most elementary of problems. It is not even difficult. But it lies in this exact field: a thetan conceives that he has mass if he conceives that he is a symbol. If he is an identity, why, then he feels he has mass, so he becomes, to that degree, hard to exteriorize.

There are several ways to solve this. He believes his entire beingness depends on his having a name. If that’s what his entire beingness depends upon, why, good heavens, of course then he’s going to be nailed down. How else could he be nailed down but by resisting a symbol - а name? He didn’t want a name at first, that’s why he thinks he has to have one. And we get this “what you resist you become.” An individual resists having an identity and eventually becomes an identity.

Well, then this is the problem in exteriorization and it’s that intimate. Anybody who’s difficult to exteriorize, who simply - “Be three feet back of your head” and you’re not three feet back of your head, is a symbol. He’s not a being without mass. And there are many symbols which are greater than he.

One of the ways of doing it is simply just take a look over the numbers of symbols which are greater than himself, in terms of an E-Meter - just ask him that, “On the eight dynamics, what symbols, what words are bigger than you are?” And you’ll get the most interesting responses on a needle. Then you simply have him mock these up and move them through space from point to point, back and forth, up, down and around until he’s moving them, they’re not moving him.

And he says, “Well, I’m not - I’m bigger than that!”

And the next thing you know, you say, “Be three feet back of your head” and he is.

Your problem of exteriorization, then, departs from an understanding of this: that a thetan in a creative state does not himself have mass and an understanding of how he gets mass. He gets mass by becoming himself a symbol. Of course, the last thing in the world he is, is a symbol. It’s like a fellow who makes drums all his life and eventually sits down in the corner curled up like a drum and expects somebody to beat on him. This fellow hates drums - so he becomes a drummer. See that?

Now, why is this? Why does a fellow become what he resists? Well, he just sweeps down on it in this fashion: he starts fighting it with energy and he gets more loses than he gets wins and so he gets to be it. Now, let’s get that much more simply. Let’s get the problem of the stuck flow: the fellow talks in one direction too long, he’ll get a stuck flow. Now, the way you unstick this flow is to reverse it or get some mock-ups and get it budged out of line, get it squared around and knock it off.

Well now, when he starts resisting something, very arduously starts resisting something - you know, crush, crush, crunch, crunch - he gets a stuck flow. Similarly, when he starts giving postulates toward something (in other words, commands or orders in one direction) and it never gives any back, he gets on a stuck flow. He eventually gets to the point where he can’t force anything along that line and the line itself will collapse. And that is the end product of a stuck flow: it collapses into a mass.

All communication lines eventually wind up to be one terminal - both ends. Anytime they stick too hard on a flow, why, they’ll eventually do that.

So your thetan stood outside the body for a long time giving it orders, telling it to destroy itself or something and, eventually, why, the very mass of material which he put out in one direction became a stuck flow and we got a collapsed terminal proposition.

Now what’s a collapsed terminal? That’s something that should have two ends which now has both ends in coincidence - both ends in the same place. Now that’s a collapsed terminal.

You’re going to hear this phrase an awful lot - collapsed terminal. Better get used to it. You’ll notice many preclears have collapsed terminals. Well, right next door to a collapsed terminal is becoming the thing you’re collapsed with. You’re right there, so you must be it. That’s the immediate assumption.

Now, thought is very agile. But when it gets fixed in terms of a symbol, it becomes much less agile. It loses its creativeness. Let’s take the plight of the writer who writes, writes, writes, writes, writes Western stories. He will eventually start wearing Western clothes, even though he lives in the middle of Brooklyn. It’s inevitable. He becomes the mass of symbols which he puts out. A method of whipping this, for a writer, a method of whipping this is a very simple one: just write in that many lines that you can embrace - never bother about names, identities, things like that. Sign yourself Henry Pillibomb and ...

I used to write Western stories many, many, many years ago and my name was W R. Colt. and you will still find me in the library. And the funny part of it was, is all the time I was writing Western stories, I was really interested in yachting. Never had anything much to do with the West and as a matter of fact tried not to close terminals with it because of my early boyhood misadventures with mustangs, which I do not consider very romantic. They are very bad transportation, but they work if you hit them hard enough in the head with a leaded quirt, [laughter] I mean, the SPCA and I have never seen eye to eye on the subject of horses which will buck you off and tromp on you.

When I was six, by the way (I remembered this the other day when I was talking about this down at the Congress but I didn’t tell it) I went, “Oh God, I had an argument with the SPCA when I was six.” I had managed to bring to curb, by running him into a brick wall, a twelve hundred pound Kentucky saddler that somebody had foisted off as a riding horse. And I couldn’t stop him. And he was going places and he wasn’t bright enough to climb the wall or do anything imaginative like that, so he merely ran into it. And of course, he fell down, so I sat down on him and - waiting for him to more or less come to and shake himself out of it. And this lady came up and, lo and behold, it was the SPCA, because this happened within a half a block of the capital of Helena, Montana and they had quarters right in that vicinity in those days. And she started to sound off about cruelty to horses. And I don’t know where she got off bawling out a six-year-old boy who had just almost lost to a twelve hundred pound horse! But we had quite an argument which almost put me in police court, which was to the effect - I said, rather profanely, that she ought to engage herself in forming a society for the prevention of cruelty to children by horses [laughter] and that she belonged to the wrong gang.

She didn’t appreciate this. She went and told some of my relatives. And they, of course, told me off. She was a very influential person. I think her husband was the Treasurer of the State of Montana or something, you know? I mean - influential - had money. (Had the State’s money anyway.)

Now, where it comes to any of your stuck flows, what happens? What happens on the management of a horse? You just manage enough horses and you lose a few times and you’ve got a continuous flow of commands going to this horse and going to this horse and you just go down to Virginia sometime and find out what happened to some of those fine old families. You go in and knock on the door and they say, “Ne-ee-ei-ghh!”

So here you have a problem - you have a problem in symbols. The horse has a fixed idea. He doesn’t want to do what you want to do. That’s his one fixed idea, so you fix a lot of ideas into him that he does want to do it and you fix them in in various ways: with sugar, with leaded quirts, with spurs, with petting. It’s all done and nearly every rider does it with all those, unless of course he’s smart enough to simply be the horse. Because that’s where he’ll wind up anyhow.

So the problem is, however, if you’re unwilling to be a horse and insist on using a horse, then you of course will become the horse against your wishes, on an inversion, which makes you a compulsive symbol. You know, you’re compelled to be a symbol. .That individual who can fluidly be something and then be something else is a very dangerous fellow indeed - he’s not fighting - that’s not fair! He’s happy though.

So anyway, as a writer, I used to solve this rather uniformly. I wrote stories in rotation. I would write a Western story and then a sea story and then I’d write a detective story and then I’d write a flying story and then I would write an article for somebody or other and then I would write something for one of the superslicks which, by the way, paid me much less than the cheapest pulp.

Yes, I wrote in one time to the American Mercury and asked them why didn’t they bring their rates up to what they were - а pulp paper - because they were published on pulp. And shortly afterwards, after I’d gotten busy on this and made jokes out of it and talked in front of the American Fiction Guild on the subject of the pulps and kept describing articles in the Mercury and so on, why, they began to frown on this sort of thing and my name became non persona grata with them. So I had to sell them under two other names, [laughter] Now, as long as one was willing to do that, that was fine. That was just beautiful.

But then one day, why, you up and you write yourself something and you’re silly enough to use your own name on it and you get fixed with an identity of having done something. So there you are. And actually, anybody’s career, whether as a writer or as a Homo sapiens or a streetcar conductor or any other darn thing, winds up the same way: he starts out playing a game of streetcar conductor, then he knows he doesn’t want to be the streetcar conductor, he resists being the streetcar conductor and then he becomes the streetcar conductor - a symbol. So you only become a symbol by resisting something.

Being something is quite something else than being a symbol. You understand that? You can be a man, you can fejohn Jones. Well, if you can be John Jones, then you want to be free to un-be John Jones. And the freedom of beingness should be equaled, in every case, by the freedom of un-beingness. And if you can parallel your freedoms so that you have the freedom to be and the freedom to un-be, as well as the freedom not to be, why, of course you exteriorize beautifully and you’re very happy and all things work out wonderfully. And also, all the problems of auditing are solved for the auditor before he gets there.

But when the auditor gets there, if he takes what we’ve been talking about this morning and uses this, why, he’ll find out that he finds processing very simple. Because, obviously, the fellow who is sitting there in front of him - preclear - is being Jones, a body, Earth, Galaxy 61,1954. And there he is.

Well, the fellow isn’t happy or he wouldn’t be there. Well, what’s he unhappy about? Well, he must be unhappy about being a symbol. Well, let’s take the biggest symbol that he is and just have him be it. And then un-be it. And then be it and then un-be it, on some sort of a gradient scale, which will eventually rescue to the individual his freedom “to be or not to be, no longer a question.”

And that, in essence, is your highest echelon of processing. You can develop any God’s quantity of techniques out of that. The only thing else you’d need to know about that would be a little bit more about the theory of communication. Because communication, cause and effect and duplication all are tied in very tightly. But we’ve covered enough for one morning. It’s not a very big subject. I mean, the subject of communication is idiotically simple. That’s the trouble with it. It’s so simple that everybody misses it.

Well, it’s like this business of symbols. Now you use that definition for a symbol and you’ll win. It isn’t whether or not that definition is good in the field of English or in the field of medicine or in the field of writing - we’re not interested in whether or not this these fixed ideas in it. Because this mass of energy with its fixed ideas in it was bigger than the preclear and so could victimize him and make him sick. Well, we had the means of eradicating it, one way Or the other, with greater or lesser success. And so, as we could knock out that mass called a symbol, we could make our individual relatively well as

Now, do your techniques sort of fit on this gradient scale of what we’ve been going into? Well, all right. We have then, in all the processing we’re doing, the problem of identification and differentiation, as we always have had, but we can sum that up now in terms of communication. We can sum it up in numerous ways. But the simplest statement that we can make of any of this is the right to be and the right to un-be. And if a person has fought being something for a long time, then he is it compulsively. He has no more determinism about it. But if he simply merely became it - you know, he just decided he’d become that and then he decided he’d un-become it - nothing is simpler.

No thetan ever snapped into a body unless he laid his hand on it in anger. You just don’t walk up to a body and put a beam on him and snap in. You don’t even walk up to a body and put a beam on it and have it be hurt badly and snap in. You have to walk up to the body with the intention of anger in order to snap into one suddenly and inexplicably.

You have to have conceived that bodies are evil and, therefore, something to be resisted, in order to be trapped in one.

You have to conceive that theta traps are very bad in order to get trapped in the theta trap. It’s almost impossible for a thetan to get trapped. But there is the one modus operandi of his getting trapped: being afraid of getting trapped, of course. And he postulates that he’s afraid of getting trapped in order to set an example so other thetans will be afraid of getting trapped - and they will get trapped. So he does too.

Fellows go down to the Gold Coast and the Ivory Coast and the Slave Coast of Africa and spread Christianity in order to buy slaves. Boy, they got to be the most psalm-singing, praying people you ever heard of. And Christianity, at the time they were using it, was no more than a tool - an effort to get some slaves trapped - you know, make the tribes docile enough so they wouldn’t fight against being bought. And they wound up as devout Christians - the people who were doing this. Fascinating, isn’t it?

So that, to be caught in a trap, you must have set the trap yourself. So in any case - as you go along and run any case, you want to know what’s wrong with the case, you could be very self-righteously accusative of the case and say, “When did you do it?”

Fellow says, “Everybody is mean to me.”

“When were you mean to everybody?” Unfortunately, this individual’s recall is not adequate to tell you this because it goes over too many millennia, that’s all.

Problem of processing get a little simpler to you, right there?

All right. Now, let’s just look at what else we were doing there this morning. This condensed scale of energy, of Lookingness - and when you go into energy, you go down from Knowingness into the rest of the band. And that band is Knowingness, Lookingness, Emotingness, Effortingness, Thinkingness.

You know where it goes there?

Female voice: Symbols.

That’s right. Thinkingness. Thinking condenses and becomes a symbol. A. symbol is condensed thinking. You know where it goes then?

It goes into Eating, it enters the Applause Scale at that point and that drops down to Eating. And you know what condensed eating is?

Female voice: Sex?

Sex. So you see what a terrific band of understanding we’re looking at here in terms of human experience, it’s a big band. Actually, condensed eating is sex. But you go on up there, you go to the Applause Scale and then you get up into Symbolisms and then you get up into Thinkingness and then you get up into Effort-Effort is pretty high.

But you get this thing repeating, over and over and over, and when it’s repeated and repeated and repeated, why - as it goes downscale - why, it evidently becomes MEST. We cannot justify that in just one-two-three, you know? I mean we can’t say absolutely this is the case. It just happens to be the existing theory. The rest of this is not existing theory. The rest of this just happens to be a lot closer to fact than “the acceleration of gravity is 32.2 feet per second.”

When we get down to Sex - you know, Eatingness and then Sex and, above that, Symbols and, above that. Thinking and Effort and so on - when we’re dealing with these things, well, we’re dealing with a fact that is better and more useful than 32.2 feet per second.

The definition of a symbol is actually a little more valuable to you than any of the definitions of physics. Because it was in desperation of chasing symbols that Man located physics.

Well, do you feel better Or worse through that little run this morning?

Audience: Better.

Feel a little bit better. Well, fine.

Now let’s just take two seconds here and do the rest of it.

Okay. Be a body.

Be a girl’s body.

Be a boy’s body.

Be an old man’s body.

An old woman’s body.

A young girl’s body.

A young boy’s body.

Be an Eskimo’s body.

Be a cat’s body.

Be a horse’s body.

Be a dog’s body.

Be a cat’s body.

Be a stone.

Be a body.

Be a stone.

Be a body.

Be a book.

Be a body.

Be a book.

Be a body.

Be a book.

Be a body.

Be the letter “alpha.”

Be a body.

Be freedom from want.

Be a body.

Be a murderer.

Bea victim.

Be a murderer.

Be a victim.

Be a murderer.

Bea victim.

Be a murderer.

Be a policeman.

Be a victim.

Be a doctor.

Be a murderer.

Be a policeman.

Be a hospital.

Be a stone.

Be a hospital.

Be a stone.

Be a hospital.

Be a stone.

Be a hospital.

Be a stone.

Be a hospital.

Be a stone.

Bea victim.

Be a murderer.

Be an electric chair.

Have the emotions of an electric chair.

Be a victim.

Be a murderer.

Be a burglar.

Be a sidewalk.

Be the sky.

Be a wood.

Be a sky.

Be a wood.

Be a sky.

Have the emotion of a sky.

Be a wood.

Have the emotion of a wood.

Be a murderer.

Have the emotion of a murderer.

Be a victim.

Have the somatic of a victim.

Have the emotion of a victim.

Have the viewpoint of a victim.

Have the knowingness of a victim.

Be the symbols of a victim.

Be the applause of a victim

Be a police officer.

Be the police force.

Have the viewpoint of the victim.

Have the viewpoint of the murderer.

Be a duck.

Have the emotion of a duck.

Have the motion of a duck.

Be a duck hunter.

Have the emotion of the duck hunter.

Have the viewpoint of a duck hunter.

Have the lookingness of a duck hunter.

Have the knowingness of the duck hunter.

Be a duck.

Have the emotion of the duck.

Have the knowingness of the duck.

Have the lookingness of the duck.

Have the effort of the duck.

Be the duck hunter.

Be the gun.

Be the pellets.

Be the pellets in the duck.

Be the duck.

Have the emotion of the duck.

Be the duck hunter.

Have the eatingness of the duck hunter.

Be the eatingness of the duck.

The eatingness of the duck hunter.

The eatingness of the duck.

Be the duck eating.

Be a fish being eaten by the duck.

Be the fish.

Swim. Be the motion of the fish.

Be the emotion of the fish.

Be the motion of the body out on the sidewalk.

Be the motion of the body out on the sidewalk.

Now be the body.

Now be the room.

Now be the motion of the body.

Now be the motion of the body out on the sidewalk.

Now be the corner.

Now be the motion of the body walking down to the corner.

Okay. Be a thousand feet up.

Give me some places where you’re not.

A place where somebody else isn’t.

Be yourself.

Give me some more places where you’re not.

Okay. Now give me several things that you can lose.

Several things that you can afford to lose.

Now check over some things you have not lost.

Now some things which you own.

Now some things which you know absolutely with certainty that you do not own.

Bethem.

Be them one right after the other.

Okay. Find the two back points of the room.

Now sit there for a moment and look and don’t think.

Now look through whatever you’re looking at.

Okay. What you got?

Okay. Feel better?

Female voice: Yeah. Hungry . . .

You’re hungry?

Female voice: Starving.

Put some people in your stomach.

Female voice: Something I might just do.

Well, go ahead! [laughing]

Now look, cannibalism, for the duration of this class at least, doesn’t go! [laughter]

How do you feel? Feel a little better?

Female voice: Yeah.

Who exteriorized on that one?

Anybody exteriorize on that for the first time? A little patty-cake way of exteriorization. Did you?

Male voice: I don’t know.

He doesn’t know. We have to solve, on some of these cases, degradation because of exteriorization before they’ll exteriorize. Because most of the people here who aren’t exteriorized right now have, at one time or the other, and then they felt very degraded for having done so and that’s what you have to solve with the case.

Well, that’s beside the point. SOP 8-C is still very much in order just as it rolls.

[woman coughing]

[to woman] Pearl, be your lungs.

Be your body.

Be your lungs.

Be your body.

Be somebody else’s lungs, [man coughing] [laughter]

Pearl, is that what you did? Did you do that?

Male voice: No, I’d been holding that off.

Oh, you had.

[to woman] Feel a little bit better?

Female voice: Tm all right.

Ah, yes. Well, you be your lungs again.

[various students coughing]

All right, both you and Pearl and you, be somebody else’s lungs now.

Be somebody else’s lungs.

Now be somebody else’s lungs.

And be those lungs with ТВ.

Now add lung fever.

Now wheeze and pant and can’t get air, as the lungs.

Now get a gleeful feeling of actually lousing them up. Just get what you’re doing to this person with your ТВ and so forth. Just fix them up but good.

Now be the person.

Now be the lungs.

Now be your lungs.

Now be the effort of your lungs. Okay? You still holding back a cough? You still afraid you’re going to cough?

Female voice: Well, not just now.

All right. Okay.

That better?

Well, I hope you’re feeling better, but the practical truth of the matter is, you characters, I didn’t process you this morning to make you feel better. I’ve tried to give you the opening gun on randomity and automaticity, beingness and resistance.

All right.