Thank you.

And this is what? Eleventh of Jan. The mystic month. And we are finding ourselves in the middle of — no, it's at the beginning. . . What cycle are you in?

Время от времени у меня возникает желание рассказать вам о том, каких успехов мы достигаем по всему миру, в том числе в работе с кейсами.

Well, anyhow, it's on a planet, on a twelfth-rate sun, and it's the beginning of the — it's shortly after the winter solstice. Saint Hill Special Briefing Course.

Это можно выразить одним словом: «Замечательных!»

Well, if you lived right and if you knew what you were doing and many other unlikely activities, you have it made. But we have to assume — we have to assume that if none of you have grown wings in the last twenty-four hours and you actually have had a pc on an E-Meter as an auditor and the pc hasn't grown wings in the last twenty-four hours with all the tools which you've got, we must assume that there is some faint disconnection between what I am trying to teach you and what you are doing I would say there's some small gap. Maybe not a large gap. Maybe only a light year or two.

Недавно меня обвинили в том, что я преуменьшаю результаты, получаемые при проведении типовой процедуры 3D. Сейчас эту процедуру очень легко проводить. Было бы трудно переоценить происходящее.

I don't mean to open up with that sarcastic, professorial attitude, but like a student or two that we've had who never had any critical thoughts "because they were all true" — that we've run into two or three times, by the way; it's quite an interesting mental phenomenon — why, we have to assume that you have not confronted some of the facts of life. And this lecture is devoted to some of these facts of life.

Благодаря использованию такого инструмента процессинга, как проверка на безопасность, и появлению типовой процедуры 3D, мы получаем такие достижения, которых мы никогда раньше не получали.

And it's a scrambled lecture because it's on both Security Checking and 3D. And some of the people who are listening to the lecture, of course, haven't gotten up to Security Checking yet and will immediately have a tremendous impulse to go out and run a 3D promptly and immediately on anybody in sight.

Усовершенствование клирования (на самом деле это дорога к ОТ) позволяет нам получать достижения в кейсах на ранних этапах работы, чего раньше никогда не было.

And let them do so. Let them go ahead and fall on their heads. It's all right. It's okay. Let them get a half a dozen wrong terminals, and you know, and get these things all mixed up in some way and null the wrong things. Get a list null by getting the rudiments out. you know the system. And then — decide then that this best fits the pc and force it on him. That's what is known as a California assessment. Oh, I'm awfully hard on California.

С появлением процедуры «двадцать – десять» (сочетание проверки на безопасность с процессами по обладанию) и ассесмента, используемого при проведении процедуры «3D крест-накрест», опытный и хорошо обученный одитор способен взламывать кейсы с такой легкостью, как никогда прежде.

Actually, I haven't got any overts particularly on this California — this particular California. But I must have some awful overts on some California on some planet or another to get as many motivators as I get from that quarter. The only way I can figure it is that this must be somewhere else.

Теперь вся наша задача состоит в том, чтобы обеспечивать правильное проведение процессинга. Это единственная задержка на нашем пути, и сейчас мы ее успешно устраняем.

Well, anyway, getting down to the facts of life, there is some small difference between the way I would security check and the way you're security checking. Let us put it that way.

Мы хотим обеспечить выполнение следующих вещей:

And I was showing Mary Sue at lunch how I would go about this and she unburdened herself of about three very juicy withholds I'd never suspected before, so there must be something . . . And she'd never suspected she had them either. So there must be some effectiveness in this particular method of Security Checking. Because as far as I was concerned, she was clean as a wolf's tooth clear back to the beginning of track, you know.

1. Все одиторы должны стать одиторами класса II.

I said, "Well, this is the way I'd go about it," you see. And I was talking about this very thing with her and I said I would ask so-and-so and so I asked her so-and-so, you see and then I would ask so-and-so and so-and-so and so-and-so and, bang, you see, she was in-session giving me the withholds. I knew she had withholds because she was so embarrassed, but there it was. It was something fantastic. It was something on the order of not collecting a diploma or something like this. It was very — something or other, but seemed to produce considerable charge and I noticed her eyes turn color — different color.

And if you can't make a pc's eyes turn color, don't talk to me. You're not in my class. Do you know I actually watch a pc's eyes? If I can't make a pc's eyes change color, I don't think I've done anything That's one, maybe you've never — maybe you've heard me say that before. Maybe you haven't.

But if I can't make a pc's eyes that are sort of a slate brown, you know, a sort of a mixed up pea soup that's got some cement in it, you know and if I can't warm that up and — actually, you think I'm just talking now, something that should be qualified about change color. No, I mean that. Change color. I made a pc's eyes turn from a very arctic killer blue to a brown in one session.

You even know the pc, only he probably — I don't think anybody commented on it particularly. It was one of those things which they just couldn't confront, you know?

And there are things like this. There are things like this. I notice I have your attention very alertly.

It's all in whether or not you get to the pc. After all, you're auditing a thetan and a thetan has various characteristics. And if a thetan can communicate directly and straightly toward what he is communicating with, of course, he immediately begins to communicate more immediately and directly with his body as a — as a completely secondary effect.

Вот и вся текущая программа.Конечные результаты этого планирования, разумеется, легко представить. Наши усилия, направленные на продвижение вперед, больше не являются хаотичными. Мы продвигаемся вперед равномерно и в соответствии с хорошим планом, и конечный продукт столь же неизбежен, как и восход солнца.

Somebody gets well, so what? So somebody made a body well. Well, well, well. We've been doing that for ages. You've been making people well among the Aesculapians and amongst the Indians and amongst the thises and thats. You can always make somebody well.

Я полагаю, вы не замечали, чтобы я в последнее время поднимал шум, поскольку я сам совершенно спокоен в отношении нашего будущего и очень занят его планированием, так что у меня просто нет времени рассказывать вам об этом.

I had a sailor one time that insisted on going overboard to recover a line that he had carelessly gotten mixed up in the propeller. And it had really gotten chewed up down there and the water was about fifty degrees or forty-five degrees or thirty degrees or something like that. He didn't quite have to break through the ice.

К примеру, достижения, которые, как я в последнее время видел, получали преклиры, когда их как следует одитировали хорошо обученные одиторы, просто поразительны. Сейчас у меня нет совершенно никаких сомнений в том, что эти одиторы могут брать кейсы с любым уровнем аберрированности.

And he said, "Well," he said, "I'll go over and free it."

Единственная трудность, с которой мы сейчас сталкиваемся, заключается в следующем: как нам добиться, чтобы одиторы не пропускали у преклиров висхолдов, и чтобы они использовали Британский Е-метр «Марк IV» и выбросили те Е-метры, которые хоть и регистрируют все правильно в плане электроники, но не регистрируют соответствующие умственные реакции, что необходимо для выявления всех висхолдов. Преклиры расстраиваются лишь тогда, когда у них пропускают висхолды.

So I said, "That is an excellent idea. An excellent idea."

Только что прошедший в Вашингтоне январский конгресс, имел огромный успех и на нем была представлена сводка всех последних данных. Надеюсь, вам представится шанс использовать данные с этого конгресса. Это именно то, что люди хотят знать.

He went in and got chilled to the marrow. Most people get only chilled to the bone, you see, but he got chilled straight through to the marrow. And he came out of the water shaking so that the stern of this rather heavy boat was quivering.

I made him well. I handed him a bottle of issue brandy. That's it. Total action. Didn't even put him in-session. Handed him a bottle of issue brandy. And he promptly and instantly recovered and then I had nothing — I had from about 150 men nothing but volunteers to go over and free the nonexistent lines.

So I get back to the fact that making somebody well is not much of a trick. It really is not much of a trick. Even a medical doctor occasionally does it by accident. He tries not to, but he occasionally does it.

Actually, if you want immediate first aid surgery, why, go to some old grandma someplace. Stay away from the medical profession.

But you get — that's a plug. That's a — that's a commercial. I'll collect from the grandmas of the world for that.

Anyhow, it's true. My old grandma used to — I used to get a sore throat when I was a little boy running around in subzero weather and she'd take a wet cloth and hang it around my neck and I'd go to bed with a sopping wet, cold cloth around my neck and next morning, so help me Pete, the sore throat would be gone. It's fantastic.

So anyhow, if you're going in — if you're in the business of curing bodies and you can't cure bodies, why, God help you. Because anybody can cure a body.

Hand them a bottle of brandy. Pat them on the back. Whistle at her. you know? Raise her morale. Anything. Anything and you're liable to get into a situation where you've cured a body.

In a society where care of the body, care of the body, care of the body, care of the body, care of the body is read on all the best television programs and in all the best periodicals and is featured in all of the best stories, they get off no further than a game called "care of the body." "Brush thy teeth and thou will be salvaged," you know? They're all set.

Well, all right. Bodies are okay. The bodies are okay. There — nobody's running down a body with it, but to fixate totally on this as a game, sounds to me to be one of the more interesting idiocies.

It's true that a thetan can feel like the devil if the body's falling apart, but what's he in that kind of condition for?

Now, all you've got to do to cure a body is put a thetan in some kind of condition and you promptly and immediately have somebody who is happier, but you have a well body. And one of the first manifestations of somebody recovering is he recovers from some chronic somatic of some kind or another.

Now, if you're dealing with technology which is able to restore the communication lines of a preclear, you inevitably will cure up all manner of maladies. You also, with what you are running today with Security Checking, Twenty-Ten and 3D, you will run into the condition where you cure up all the maladies they had and they get a whole new set.

I remember Pon, the day she left here and BO forth. I asked her how some horrible somatics and difficulties — she came in here worrying about them, you know. And she said, "Oh, they're all gone. I have an entirely new set now."

But a body responds in direct ratio to the communication level of the pc who is engineering that thar vehicle. All the body is is a meat vehicle if you can imagine such a thing. And, of course, somebody imagined one one time or another. You wouldn't be sitting there in one now. But it's a meat vehicle.

And communication of the thetan is the monitoring factor. Now, it is true that a body will run on total automatic and sometimes you find thetans who aren't even there and a body in pretty good condition. Well, that's because he hasn't communicated with it. It's quite the reverse, you see? There's been no communication with the body of any kind.

It has been born and has growed and has come up to its present estate of elegance without being the least bit troubled by inhabitants. No habitation has occurred.

You see some girls like this in — get down around Hollywood, something like that, you see them walking around. And what they are is an operating body. And they're fine. There's nothing wrong with this — to be an operating body. But you start talking about the finer things of life or something like this and you find out you get no response whatsoever. It is just an irresponsibility.

But it's an irresponsibility of fantastic magnitude. I've looked at this many times and been quite amused by it. It's the low-scale mockery of it all, don't you see? This thetan hasn't even got enough horsepower to make a body sick. See? And they will very often be sitting — you read about this in E-Meter Essentials — they'll very often be sitting on Clear read. you know, they're eight hundred thousand fathoms deep and sitting on Clear read. you know, way below anything

Start to process them, your first reaction that you get is they fall off to about 1.5 or they fall off to 6.5 or something like that. And you have to work pretty hard to get them into a density. In other words, they come up to density. And then they go on and proceed on upward. And they start getting into some relaxed state of mind.

Well, somewhere in that middle ground, you start processing a pc without creating a physical change in this pc and you are doing something different than what I am trying to teach you to do right now with the technologies which you have at hand.

This is rather typical of me, by the way, that twenty-four hours after you've got the package that resolves all packages, I always bawl you out for not being able to do it and that keeps up the record and keeps everything straight.

Now, it's almost what this is.

Actually though, you should have been getting results with 3D and Security Checking consistently and continually for some little time. Rather horrendous results, so therefore you must be doing something different than what I'm trying to teach you to do. Now, that unsettles all of your stable data.

Let me go into this very — in very detailed fashion. All I expect you to be able to do is run a perfect Model Session. Read anything that the E-Meter tells you and read it right now, not an hour after the session. Do a very good detection of an out rudiment or a withhold — and what's the difference. Just do a instantaneous detection of it. Just be able to smell that thing right there through the meter. In other words, that's something you can do. you can look at that meter and if it goes whap, know that you have hit something and find out what you have hit. In other words, if you get a needle reaction, know that you have a reaction.

Now, I'm talking, however, about a British Mark IV. I am not talking about a Model T. 1922, Mathison. I'm very much inclined to the theory that most auditing falls to pieces exclusively on this one point of a busted thetan running an E-Meter, see. I mean, there's something wrong here that this thetan won't communicate with that needle. That is the biggest breakdown in auditing When somebody can't audit or the pc's getting mad at the auditor and so forth, you can trace it back pretty doggone routinely to just this one point, is the auditor was not handling that box in his hands. That's all. I mean, the main breakdown in auditing is not some little tiny ramification someplace. It's right there on that one button of they can't run an E-Meter.

So I expect you to be able to run an E-Meter and know what its manifestations are and handle it perfectly all right.

And know, when you have asked a question, if you have gotten a response and to be able to clear that response off of the meter. Now, that is a specific skill. And you'll find that there is no faintest, slightest, tiniest change of any character whatsoever, as we go along, in technology that changes this. This definitely is the same thing and it is what it is and you can read a meter or you can't. I mean, that's all there is to that.

I mean you either can read a meter and if it's a good meter and know what it is saying and so forth or you can't read a meter and that's the end of that. you follow this? I mean, this is an open and shut proposition. This is a specific skill and this skill is itself. And there isn't any arguing with this skill. I mean, a fellow can either read a meter or he can't read a meter. And if he can't read a meter, he can learn how to read a meter. We've proven that time after time. So that is something that you have to be able to do. In order to produce any kind of a — of an action of any kind whatsoever on a pc, you have to know what that meter is doing and what it is all about. Period.

Well, that's your chief skill right there for your lower activities or any auditing activity. And you'll find out if an HGC is running with the rudiments out and you'll find out if they're turning out unchanged profiles and if they're having an awful time of it and a terrible time of it and all of that sort of thing, as occasionally happens some place in the world. You'll find nothing very esoteric. You just find out they can't read E-Meters. I mean, it's just gross auditing error. Also, they could be equipped with — as they have been in the past — they could be equipped with E-Meters which don't read. See, squirrel meters, the various meters that were built in the United States. These meters don't read.

By the way, the old green and gold meter of the 5th London, alike with all of the early American meters, don't even vaguely come up to this Mark IV. This is not any plug I mean that they don't read things that the Mark IV does read.

In other words, all earlier meters than a Mark III could be counted upon to miss withholds. So you needn't curse yourself too much about that. I mean, that's the way it is.

All right. We've got a situation there where if you have an E-Meter and you can read it you can then obtain certain results.

In other words, you know what's going on in the pc. All right. If you have that as a skill, voilà, you have it as a skill. And if you don't, you don't. And no auditing is going to count. That's for sure. Going to have pcs upset with you, going to be in a tangle and so forth.

All right. Now, that's a specific skill — reading the meter. It's a specific skill being able to pull a withhold. That's a very specific skill. Being able to chomp down and yank the withhold up and let it be aerated.

Running a process routinely is something that auditors do well. It was looked on as a highly desirable skill many, many years ago. I call it to your attention that they do it with the greatest of ease now. There is hardly anything to it now. It's just a bang! I mean, every — anybody can run a repetitive process.

Now, let's look at a much more specific skill than all this, and that is listing and nulling a list. Now, let's not call it any other thing than just that.

Take what the pc says, write it down on the page and assess it by elimination and come up with a result at the end of that time. That is a skill. And that skill is not likely to change. It's one of the tools of the auditor. That's something you have to know how to do before you can start assessing anybody.

And you've got a condition here where if an auditor can read a meter and if an auditor can list and assess by elimination, then your chiefest and most direct actions of an auditor are performed. If an auditor can do these things, wonderful. If an auditor can't do these things, well, he can't audit, that's all, see?

You know, any of you are going to go home and you're going to be absolutely horrified, you know? You curse your Instructors for beating you over the head and so forth. But when you get home and when you get back to your operating area, you will appreciate it because you're going to see some — heh — auditing

Hasn't anybody left Saint Hill that didn't go home and say, "Oh, my God! How could I ever have considered this auditing." I mean, they've been horrified, just horrified.

In other words, their own expectancy of what an auditor should look like and sound like and do had been raised up the line. And they go home and they find auditors with their feet on the back of the pc's chair muttering into the electrodes, you know, and just — and all of a sudden break off the session, go out and get a Coke, talk around the front of the building for a while, you know and then remember they got a preclear in-session. I mean, that's how ragged it looks. Actually, it isn't that bad, at all. But that's how bad it looks to these people when they see it. And they get quite militant along this line.

Well, I'm not saying there's that much of a gap between what you're doing and what I think you ought to be doing, but almost. Almost.

You must learn the mechanical action and most of you have, of reading a meter accurately and well and making a list and nulling it to come up with one item. Now, those are specific skills and you should be able to do those skills. No matter what we dream up from here on, running a repetitive process, getting the rudiments in, being able to read the meter on Security Check questions, being able to list and assess by elimination, boy, that's going to be with you a long time. So you might as well learn how to do those things well. But please, please, please don't think that you have now learned how to audit. Because you can do those specific skills does not mean that you are a sentient, alert, quiveringly-fast-on-the-trigger auditor. It doesn't. There is more. There are more above that.

You learn — you learn how to keep the rudiments in, run the Model Session, read a meter, security check, make lists and null them and come up with items and run repetitive questions. By all means, these I expect of you perfectly. I expect you to be able to do those things without a flaw. And then I can teach you how to audit. And it's just about that bad. That's about what it amounts to.

The knowledge of the human mind — a knowledge of the human mind — a knowledge of a thetan that we have now are so basic, so fundamental, that you ought to be able to think, sitting there in the auditor chair, straight through any kind of an impasse and achieve any type of result, bang!

I'm not trying to give you a lose. A lot of you think you're doing fine. I don't think so yet, because I haven't seen you changing the color of anybody's eyes. Isn't that a hell of a thing to demand of you?

But I can. So why don't you? I don't even consider it a trick. A girl sits down in the pc's chair — a lot — a lot of people who have watched me audit never noticed this. I'll audit a pc until their eye color changes. Maybe it's just a very faint change and maybe it's from brown to blue, but it's a change because that's the most direct channel of communication from the thetan to you and to the outside world. And if you can improve that channel of communication from that thetan outward, he can't help but do something to his eyes.

So if you've altered a thetan's channel of communication, you have done something to the amount of sparkle or glisten or something of his eyes.

Now, I don't care if you turn them flaming red. Do something to the color of his eyes.

Now, you see, I'm talking straight from the shoulder now and I hadn't actually let you in on some of these little facts of life. you recognize this now. Now, I'm saying there're certain technical skills-that you can perform. And these technical skills are excellent skills. And there are very few auditors in the world at this present instant who can even approach any of you. But that doesn't mean that you know all there is to know about auditing I can sit down, look at a guy, put him in-session, ask him what he's worried about, which way he's going and so forth. I'll usually use the current and the most and the best, you know. But I'm not above using anything that fits his case. But I use it very positively and very directly and I ask him what the score is and, using usually the most and current and the best, will apply it directly to that particular case by definition, not by a rote action. Not by a rote action. I'd apply it by definition. Of course, I'd do the rote actions. I can do those as well as you can.

I mean, actually you can get as good as I am on that level very easily. Very, very easily. Because what is it? It's reading a meter and translating it into set forms which are all perfectly lined up and which are perfectly valid and which are the product of years and years and years of application, observation and research. Yeah. Well, you can get up to doing that.

Now, I'm asking you to do another thing. Now, I'm asking you to audit the pc who is sitting in front of you and not somebody else. And not some synthetic person that you dreamed up or some person that's sitting at the other end of a form or something of the sort. Audit the guy who is there, please. Audit the person.

Now, there are certain things you're going to do that are going to produce disaster. And one of those is miss a withhold. First and foremost across the boards, that one. That's the biggest — after you know all these other skills, then the biggest mistake you can make is to miss a withhold.

You just miss one withhold and you've had it. And for your information, the next time your pc is ARC broke, you follow it right back, puppy to the root, to that missed withhold and you will find the missed withhold. And the pc will just settle down and just act like a complete lamb as a pc the moment you've got it.

You can do that. you can do that. you can keep all of your rudiments in just with withholds. Withholds are that important. So you can hold a pc in-session. You can keep him in-session no matter how many present time problems or state of case or scratchy needle or anything else he's got. you can hold him in-session.

You got technical tricks that hold him in-session, one way or the other. But because you've got these tricks, don't fall so far short. Don't think you've got it wrapped up because you can do a few tricks. You've got to be able to audit the person who is sitting in front of you. Audit that person. Handle that person's peculiarly constituted mishmash, based securely on the fundamentals that we know.

Now, you see, he is no mystery as far as fundamentals are concerned. We know what makes him cook. We know from what spring his aberration proceeds. We could give you all the rules and theories by which he got aberrated, for sure. But nevertheless he is an individual package of cow's breakfast versus dog's breakfast.

You see, he's his own peculiar handmade mud pie. See? He is that. And that's peculiar and that's peculiar to that pc. Now, you got all the rules, you know all the basics, you know all the rules by which he got aberrated, you know the fundamentals and so forth. That's all fine. But on those he's built a peculiar edifice that he calls "me" or "my mind." And you have to be able to put your finger on any button in that, that is there to be pressed and produce a considerable reaction in the pc.

You have to be able to produce an advance of his communication. That is what you are trying to produce and that's all you're trying to produce. I don't care how many ways you phrase it, that is all you are trying to produce — an advance of his communication.

This person says, "Well, the good old days. And why aren't I still able to operate in a space opera. That was lots of fun. We used to take our electronic cannon, mount it on the flight deck and depress the rheostat and a space fleet one-and-a-half light-years away would blow up in smoke. And now I have trouble spilling a cup of tea. Ah, sad. Ah, woe. Ah, woe is me. What has happened to me? Is it because my mother was mean to me? Could that be it? Or is it because I once read a book by Freud? Perhaps — perhaps that caused it. Or perhaps it's because the world has changed."

It isn't any of these things. This is just one of your basic fundamentals. These are one of your basics of the theory of the mind. This is one of these things. His communication reach has shortened. He can't blow up any space fleets one-and-a-half light-years away, he can't now. He can't even reach into a spilled cup of tea eighteen inches from his schnozzola.

Did you ever see anybody spill a cup of tea? They always leap back. Funny thing to do, isn't it? In other words, they aren't reaching at all already and they want to decrease their reach further.

Now, what's the matter with this character? His communication no longer has the same reach. And that's all that's wrong with him. As his ability to reach — which is to say to communicate — decreases, he considers that he is aberrated. It's this stupidly fundamental, see.

And when you audit this person, all you've got to do is extend his communication reach. That's all you've got to do. Now, there were many things that did this and most of them were short reach things. 8-C. That's one of them. That's a short reach, but it nevertheless is pretty good. When it would work, it just was wonderful. But that was increasing the reach to MEST and that was showing your — showing him, "Now, look, it doesn't bite when you touch it. And it doesn't kill you to be orderly in your emotions."

Told him these things. "And it won't — you won't perish because I am here communicating to you. Therefore, you can receive a communication without dying. And it isn't killing you because you're touching MEST and look, you've got your reach."

Well, actually, that works best on a fellow who heretofore has not been able to reach quite to the end of his nose. And you get him to reach out to arm's length. That's all there is to it. you extend a pc's reach, that's all. Which means extend his ability to communicate. Anything else you want to call this, any other way you want to go about this, you will find that whatever you're trying to do with the pc is covered by this one point. And your technical skills are addressed to this one point.

Now, his inability to reach can come about from these two things: One, he is restraining himself from reaching in some fashion or another, just directly restraining himself from reaching or he doesn't know what to reach. And there's only those two things.

He's keeping himself from reaching and he never suspected that before you came along. And the other one is, he doesn't know what to reach into or at. And there you are, too.

Now, it's on that one second button that you get your biggest gains. That's why 3D works. You show him what this character's — you show him what he's been trying to reach into. It's Goals Problem Mass.

Every time he went floundering around in his mind, of course, he collided with all this impacted mess of valences of one kind or another, all of them filled with terrific enturbulances and he couldn't even identify them. He didn't know where he was and he didn't know what he was doing, so he just didn't know which way to go. He didn't know what to reach. He didn't know what was the future and what was the past and where he sat and so forth. He had a hell of a time.

All right. On the first one, the auditor has to be smart enough to be able to find out what the fellow's restraint of reach is and we call this withholds. How is he restraining himself from reaching?

Well, there are many mechanics to withholds. He has reached at sometime or another, overtly. He has reached. And then he has decided that, that was a bad thing to do, so now he withholds the reach next time. And of course, this gives you a confusion immediately followed by a rest point, the withhold and of course it locks it up very nicely on the track and makes it float rather timelessly. Not as bad as a problem, but it's a confusion and a stable datum, one after the other and it locks it up.

And now that he has decided he must never reach that way again, see, type of reach — he has never — he has decided he must never exercise that type of reach again — he has now forgotten utterly what type of reach he was exercising that he mustn't reach again. So he's in a total confusion as to what he is withholding

He doesn't know what he's withholding All he knows is he's restraining his reachingness. He's — he'd better. All sorts of horrible things might occur if he didn't. All of them imaginary. Oh, not all of them imaginary. I imagine if one or two of you went down and pounded on the door of the local gendarmerie and spilled a couple of your withholds, why, they would probably lock you up in a sanitarium or something They probably wouldn't send you to jail, or something. I think, in terms of criminal withholds, well, the burden — the burden of proof is on the other fellow that you did it. you just got it off as a withhold.

Some people go so far as withholds, is in order to know that they've gotten them off, they have to get hanged. And that seems to me to be a terrific exaggeration. That seems to me to be aberrated conduct.

All right. So there's the auditor. There's the auditor and he's faced in this one pc — who is not all the pcs there are — in this one pc, there is a randomly cockeyed mess of ill assorted pullbacks that forbid him from communicating See, a bunch of withholds.

Well, he has his own line and lot, as I've mentioned in other lectures. He's got his own brands. Here are all these withholds. Well, how are you going to get these withholds? You think I could write up enough forms to give you to cover the withholds of the whole universe? No, I'm going to take a shortcut on it. I'm just going to tell you, "Get off somebody's withholds."

Go ahead and use forms, by all means. They're very useful. I think you should also know how to get off a withhold. I think you should know how to find one. I think that would be interesting Just directly and overtly find the withhold and get it off. Crack, crash! Here is this pc. He is not any other pc. He definitely is himself. And although he runs on all the rules of the game and those rules of the game are invariable pc to pc and although you are auditing definitely on the rules of the game and no other rules; nevertheless, he's his own peculiar breed of aberration. He is festered in his own individual way.

The package which he is with — restraining is his own — has infinite variety. Now, an auditor can get so lost in the infinite variety of the pc's 3D package and the fantastic complexity and unexpected idiocy of the pc's withholds, that he thinks there wouldn't be any way possible to reach him. But that's the auditor's belief that he can't reach. Isn't that interesting?

You know why you don't — why the pc doesn't reach into valences? Because they're enturbulative. Every time he reaches into one of these black masses, it bites. He gets somatics and he gets cold and he gets this and that. But honest, it won't kill him. Oh, yes, they have killed him many times though in the life of livingness. Not in auditing sessions. But living a life — yeah, oh, man, they killed him many times.

In fact, he couldn't even die if he didn't have them. So from his point of view, he is handling the stuff which murders thetans particularly and especially him. And he's sitting there, you know, not going through this and if he lives very carefully and he doesn't look very much or if he only looks from eight feet out forward only for a foot, he'll be all right, maybe.

And then one day he accidentally — he gets out of a car and he accidentally, gong, he misses and he will look at this valence over here, you know. And he'll put his attention right square on the valence and it will activate and that is his sinusitis. And it goes splat. He knew he shouldn't do it. In fact, he knew he shouldn't do it so well that the second he does it, he instantly forgets he's done it and said it was because he got chilly today.

The rapidity with which he can forget his goofs in handling his own bank is marvelous. No, he daren't reach into these things. They bite. They bite. They killed him and killed him and knocked him off and killed him. He knows this.

He's out — he's out driving on the highway and one of these valances moves in. Mm-hmm-mm-humm-hmm-hmm-hm, that's the end of him. He reached in the wrong direction.

He's chewing on something, he's chewing on something and chewing on something, thinking about something and all of a sudden he feels kind of agitated, you know and he chews on something All of a sudden, why maybe he blanks out and drives straight into a tree. That would be the most elementary thing.

More complicatedly, he accidentally restimulates one of these things. He sees a pretty girl and he's thinking about something else and he thinks about how pleasant all that is and he thinks it all — how nice all that is. And then all of a sudden he realizes he shouldn't think all that was that nice. And he realizes he shouldn't be thinking like this. And then he sort of says that he wouldn't be able to tell his current girlfriend that he'd been admiring the girl in the roadster, don't you see. And so then he realizes he'll have a withhold from his present girlfriend and having a withhold from his present girlfriend, he brings in a valence. See, he brings in this valence and the valence activates and he gets very agitated and he can't coordinate suddenly and it's two highways and he drives on the wrong one. Yeah, he had been killed by his valences many times, so he knows better than to touch them — that's dangerous.

All right. And as far as his withholds are concerned, why, he knows he'd better withhold. There isn't anybody understands him anyplace. He knows that.

Of course I — from our point of view, if he came up and told us that, we would say, "Well, your difficulty is that we understand you too well."

You know, people complain about Scientologists not being sympathetic. Well, I didn't breed this no sympathy into Scientologists. But once you've learned to handle something to that degree, confound it, you just can't bring yourself to worship it anymore, you know.

And this fellow comes in and he says he's led an unhappy life and his mother was mean to him and his first wife was mean to him and his second wife was mean to him, his third wife was mean to him, his fourth wife was very mean to him and his fifth wife is being just as mean as the others. And a Scientologist doesn't follow through with the proper human cue, you see.

He's supposed to say, "Oh, you poor fellow," or something like this. Instead of that, he says something — something blatant, you know. "What do you do to these women?" Something elementary, you see, something down to earth, something effective and so on. Busts the guy's dramatization badly. That's all right. He'll recover faster.

Now, as far as withholds are concerned, what are the basic withholds that a person is confronted with? Well, they could be anything. They can be in the most assorted and unlikely packages. But he knows he can be punished for getting them off, because one of the things he's done is make people guilty every time they got off withholds. So he knows if he gets off a withhold out in the public, why, of course, he knows that he'll be made guilty and they'll hang him. And it's that type of mechanism. His overts are visited upon him.

So he's rather educated into submerging these overts. And of course, they have nothing — these withholds — they have nothing to do with his state of health. And he knows that better than anything else. That he really knows. His withholds have nothing to do with his state of health. No. Nothing to do with his brightness. Nothing to do with anything. He could just go on withholding forever. You'd think some of these thetans just think that, you know. They can just go on withholding forever. And somehow, while withholding, recover miraculously on some level or another. Can't be done.

You cannot teach somebody to communicate better while that person is restraining their own communication equally throughout the activity of trying to reach better. Do you see what an idiocy this would be? If the person is going to keep on restraining the communication throughout the exercises to reach better with that communication, of course, the communication is never going to arrive. So of course, he's never going to be any better. That's it.

So an auditor has these two zones of action. He's always had these two zones of action. In Dianetics he had pictures. And these pictures, by the way, are quite interesting. But pictures are a very shallow look. They are a hundred billion miles deeper than anybody ever looked before on these sort of things, but they're a shallow look compared to valences because valences are some of the wildest packages of pictures you ever saw. We're now auditing pictures by the quintillion. You throw out a whole package of pictures when you throw off a valence, see. And that — I don't know how many pictures a person would have in a lifetime. And every valence is at least one lifetime, so just count up the number of pictures that would be expressed in this valence.

Somebody was telling me the other day — it was very funny this package that floated in on him because he could look in on it and, just about the size of a 35-millimeter slides, he could see these pictures. Well, of course, what did he think they were? They're engrams and nothing else, don't you see?

There's types of engrams. You have condensed engrams, you know and crossfiled engrams and impacted engrams and sometimes you can take engrams and mush them up like a — like a bunch of black dough and then when you try to take them apart, you see, why, they explode. Something like this happens.

Pictures have nothing to do with it, now. Let's not worry about pictures. Let's talk about valences. And then you're into 3D. Now, let's not talk about drills and getting the pc to communicate better. Let's talk about knocking out the things which keep the pc from communicating There — what things are impeding the reach? And we know that he is impeding his own reach and that these are being impeded by having things he cannot — or he feels he cannot communicate.

All right. It's up to the auditor to get those off. Now, I don't care if we have policy letters. The auditor does it standing on his head, hanging by his toes, does it by handing carrots to the pc every time the pc gives up a withhold. I don't care what method is used here. The point is the auditor has to be good enough to get that pc's withholds. Not some other pc's withholds. But that pc that's sitting right in front of him. He has to be able to get that pc's withholds.

What are they? Well, the auditor doesn't know. On the basic fundamentals of the game, you could say, well, a generality of withhold is the pc is not communicating something because he doesn't want to, thinks he'll be hung, tried to make other people guilty, is restraining people from knowing about him. you could go on and make a long category about it, but just come down to the solid fact that the pc is not communicating because he's holding back the communication and you've got it.

The pc isn't reaching because he's not reaching. And why is he not reaching? Well, he has self-imposed restraints called withholds. And that's that. That's it. That's the entirety of Security Checking. All you're trying to do is release jammed communication lines that are pulled in by the pc so that he will not anymore communicate into certain areas. That's all.

And that's all you're trying to do. I don't care how many systems or rituals or anything else. You're just trying to find out what he is withholding from whom. And of course the converse of this is that if he is withholding from whom, why, he ain't communicating somewhat to that whom. So therefore, he isn't reaching that whom, so therefore, he doesn't feel he can be free in that direction, so therefore, that is just one more channel in this universe that he cannot put a communication on. That is just one more zone into which he cannot reach.

In other words, men build their prison cages out of these bars of "mustn't reach." And one by one they say, "I cannot reach into that zone and I cannot reach into that zone." In other words, "I have withholds from this zone and withholds from that zone," see?

And every time they do that, they put another bar on the cage and after a while somebody wheels them off and uses them in a circus as a freak. They get elected president or something

But withhold after withhold, you see, they just pile it up and the next thing you know they're in a cage. That's all there is to it. That is all there is to it.

Now, knowing that and understanding that completely, why, you should be able to get withholds off. You see, these other technical skills learned and truly done and well done, you should be able to get withholds off.

What would you have to do to get withholds off? Well, all you'd have to do is find out where the fellow ain't. Not isn't, that's too polite because that's where he ain't. Where ain't he?

Well, I could pull a withhold off any of you just on this one basis. You're here, so you're not home. I'll show you a formula if you want one. All right. You're here, so you're not home. Isn't that a self-evident fact? Hmm? That's self-evident.

Well, any pc who is sitting in the auditing chair opposite you isn't home. You may be auditing him in his living room at which this would alter. Then he would not be at his office.

In other words, he ain't somewhere. That's — isn't that the first fact that meets the eye?

Female voice: Yes.

You can't avoid this fact. Here he is in the auditing chair. In the pc's chair. And you're in the auditing chair. You sit in the auditing chair, look at the pc in the pc's chair and the first thing that you could observe, as far as location is concerned, is he ain't somewhere else. He's there. Isn't that the first thing you'd observe?

Well, how come he blew from this other place? Now, let's be real crude about the thing. All right.

Of course, we could say this is far, far too significant. This is far, far too fundamental. But why ain't he there, see?

All right. Reduotio ad absurdum, he is of course withholding himself from home as he sits in the pc's chair. Not being home, he's withholding himself from home, obviously. He isn't there, so he must be withholding himself from there. That's the most evident idiocy that you could possibly imagine. So there's a withhold. If you're looking for withholds, there is one. He ain't somewhere.

Now, consciously or unconsciously or factually — certainly factually — this pc — this pc is not where he was. It's just that crazy, you know. So he is withholding himself from where he was or he wouldn't be here.

Now, that would be the first tiniest little gradient and of course, it's not aberrative. Nobody's upset by it except people who want to be there. And there's nothing more complicated about it than just that. That's all there is to it. And yet it's a withhold. And if you're looking for withholds, there's the pc, so therefore the pc isn't somewhere else, so therefore the pc must be holding himself.

Now, if you took a pc and I'll show you really how to find a withhold, you say to the pc, you say — you say, "Where haven't you liked to be?"

"Well," the pc says, "I just never ain't liked to be down at the seashore."

All right. Now, you've really developed a nice, interesting situation right there. Pc does not want to be down at the seashore. He is sitting in the pc's chair and he is not at the seashore. This is obvious. And he does not want to be at the seashore.

Now, that he doesn't want to be at the seashore at all and he is sitting in your chair there, he's not at the seashore — given those conditions, I could develop you some of the nicest withholds you ever saw. Bang-bang-bang-bangbang! They'd feel — the pc would feel much better. He'd be in communication in all directions all of a sudden. How?

Well, you'd ask him, one, what they have done to him at the seashore. That's very carefully worded, see. "Well, what have they done to you at the seashore?"

Oh, he'll answer that. Oh-ho-ho. Who was it and you know, get the details of this. What they've done to him at the seashore.

Now, your next thing is who did it to him at the seashore.

And then the next one that comes up, of course, is has he thought any critical thoughts about that person.

And then immediately behind that, you ask him, "What have you done to that person?"

And that formula lands you in some of the hottest withholds on any case you ever heard of.

Just find out where the pc ain't and doesn't want to be. He doesn't want to be there and he isn't there, so obviously he must have some withholds on the place which are quite in addition to not being there physically. And then find out what they've done to him there that stirs up the motivators. And he's always happy to pass on the motivator. That's always safe communication — a motivator. It's nothing the pc can be hanged for, he always thinks. Only Scientologists hang them for having a motivator.

And there's your next action, of course, is who. who did it? Get a name, you know. Get one, two, three names. "Who did it? Who was this brute?" And then, "What critical thoughts have you thought about that?" You know.

Well, it's proving itself all the way. They didn't want to be there. They aren't there. They didn't want — don't want to be there. They have motivators there. Well, we're getting warmer here now. And there's some person there who did these motivators to them. Mm-hmmm! There we are. And now they have critical thoughts about that person. We're moving right in close. Now, at — up to that point you have not done anything to help the pc or cure his aberrations. Now, you understand you have not done anything. I don't care whether you were pleasant in session or sympathetic or I don't care what juicy motivator you pulled off of him. I don't care how many critical thoughts you managed to get and I don't care. you haven't done anything for this pc. Baa! It's — you do those things, you possibly could change his profile. You'd make him happier. Yip-yap, yip-yap, yip-yap. See, I mean now, pffft. These are little grains of sand. They're nothing, see? You haven't really done anything.

Now, that spring-trap question. Nyaa-ha-ha-ha. "What have you done to that person?"

"Oh," the pc says, "Ha-ha, well, ha-ho, that's something else. Hoooooooo. Ha-ha-ha." As goosey as a bear on hot skates, and you have to fish now. But go on and let him tell you a few more motivators and a few more critical thoughts and you'll loosen it up.

Now, the odd part of it is in Twenty-Ten, after you've gotten that far and you've gotten the withhold or two off, you know that running Havingness will cause them probably to volunteer a few more withholds on the same area. It's quite interesting Havingness will get them to give you some more withholds. Elementary.

And you say to the pc, "What did you do?"

And the pc will tell you. And when the pc has told you all, when you run some Havingness, he will tell you the rest of it.

Then run some Havingness and stabilize and the pc will feel wonderful. And you'll change the color of the pc's eyes. Why?

Because the pc really was being careful not to communicate in that direction, has been careful ever since not to communicate in that direction.

Well, it's not at any accident that you arrived at a proper set of withholds because you applied the first principle. He ain't somewhere else. He's here. Well, why ain't he someplace else? Well, the obvious common denominator, from someplace on the track he must have blown. Obvious he must have blown.

So if he blew he must have withholds. He must have committed overts before he got out of there. Obvious. I would say, "my dear Watson," but I'm afraid this is a little smarter than Sherlock. It's just on this prima facie evidence. And there's your basic Security Checking. That is the basics of Security Checking and that's all the basics there are to Security Checking And you can change a pc's eye colors and hair wave and anything else you can think of just by applying such a principle.

But that's because you're auditing the pc who is sitting in front of you and because you do want to find out what this pc is and you do want to get the withholds off of this pc and you do want this pc straightened out. So given the basic skill of being able to do Model Session, get the rudiments in and read a meter, that is important. Being able to do those things, why, of course, you can audit the pc in front of you and find out what that pc's withholds are. Now, if that pc doesn't consider any withholds withholds and so forth, you have other versions.

You'd run the whole thing all the way through and then find out what the — what, the who that you got out of this package doesn't know about the pc's deeds, actions, looks and so forth. And all of a sudden, the pc comes up enough in responsibility to know that that was an overt. You can play this any way you want to, you get off withholds.

I'm not necessarily stressing how you get off a withhold now. I'm telling you how to locate a withhold and how to take a pc who is right there. And, golly, you know, you've already accomplished the greatest miracle of all time. You've got this thetan into the pc's chair. From there on, it's easy as long as you know your business.

See, the biggest miracle was getting him there to be audited. The biggest miracle is that Scientology exists. Why, after that, there's nothing to it. There he sits, so why are you dodging, see? Audit the pc in front of you and get off the withholds that pc has. If he doesn't think he has any withholds, get off the things other people doesn't know about him and he'll all of a sudden find out he has withholds.

All kinds of ways to go about this, but what a pc considers is a withhold has nothing to do with what you consider a juicy withhold would be on a standpoint of quality. It's what the pc's withholding.

Honest to Pete! You can listen to some girl sometime or another who is just bursting into tears over this fantastic, horrible thing they've done to their family. Ooooo, how awful it is, you know? They didn't send Aunt Molly a Christmas card, you know. That's the withhold.

"All right. Now, is there any overt connected with it?"

"Well, it's a pretty bad overt. Didn't send one last year either."

Don't badger her. Clears the meter. The meter's clear on the thing. You can't find any more on it. Don't ever make the mistake of saying, "The quality of the withhold is not such as to have produced tears in the pc. Therefore, there must be much deeper and more significant overts in this particular area because nobody would cry over not sending a Christmas card."

How do you know? It's not your bank. What do you know what kind of a Goals Problem Mass package prompts all this, huh? Hm? Do you realize this person might have been the biggest Christmas card manufacturer in the whole of Germany three lifetimes ago? Do you realize this is absolutely contrary to every mores of a Christmas card manufacturer?

And it very well may trace back to fifteen hundred thousand years ago when they didn't send a Christmas card, they sent a bomb. It said "Merry Christmas, family dear," and they opened it up and that was the end of the tree and everything.

How do you know what it goes back to in the package? The thing about it is, is did it clear the meter and are there any more?

Now, I told you the other day I could throw rudiments out at any time. Well, you got to throw the pc out. The trick is — the trick is, you see — to audit with the rudiments in and to run the rudiments so they stay in, see?

You open the session. Keep the rudiments in. And then you throw the pc around, see? You handle the pc. You're the one who stirs up the pc's bank. You're the one who restimulates the pc's bank and gets the withhold. There's nobody else around. The pc isn't there. I'm talking truth now, you see. You're the one that stimulates the pc's bank.

Now, an auditor auditing this way is auditing improperly: "While running the withholds, stir up the pc's bank all one possibly can." Pardon me. "While running the rudiments, stir up the pc's bank all one possibly can," you see? "While running the rudiments, get them out as far as possible so as to get them in," you see? "Really run the case while running the rudiments." See, that's highly improper. But it's — has an equally improper sequel: "And when doing the main body of the session, be as careful as possible not to stir up the pc's bank." See? "While auditing rudiments, always get the pc in a turmoil and while running the body of the session, why, keep it as calm as possible and do as little muddying of the still waters as you can," you see? That's exactly in reverse.

You want to audit the pc with rudiments in. Every once in a while when you're doing Security Checking on a pc with the withhold question in the beginning rudiments and the session has started. See, the session has now started. The pc has a half a dozen he thought yesterday and last night and came in and decided to tell you and so forth. The session started.

Well, recognize the session started and just run it from there. That's a clever auditor. Clever auditor never lets auditing get in the road of auditing results. Auditing results are not something that would happen in spite of an auditing session.

What you've got to get is a smooth approach into the rudiments. Don't muddy up the still waters. With an air of great confidence and command of the situation, by taking over and controlling all environment in all directions clear on down to the horizon regardless of storm clouds, winds and leaking window panes. In spite of all this sort of thing, have that session so deeply under control in the rudiments that the pc never dreams that he is anyplace but in-session. Now, that's auditing.

The pc had a present time problem before he sat down in the chair. He doesn't have one now because you're auditing him. Not because you ask him, not because you ran one, not because you handled it, but just because you're auditing him. Obviously, he doesn't have a present time problem, you're auditing him. He realizes all will be resolved and it all keys out and there he goes and so forth.

Now, get that in smoothly and rapidly and then arrive at the rest. And then take a great big butter churn, about half-universe-size butter churn and put the pc in it and attach the motors to it. As far as his mind is concerned, rile it up all you possibly can. And the reason why you're not changing the color of the pc's eyes is because you're not muddying up his bank. You're letting still water be still.

It's you that do it to the pc. you think the pc's going to think of all these things? He's — look he spent lifetime, ages. Why, he's been careful not to think about this for the last millennia. And you think he's going to think about this all by himself? What do you expect him to do? Sit, be — there he is in the auditing chair and unless there isn't something else happening, he's just going to sit there in the auditing chair, just as he has in the whole last millennia.

Well, what else is going to happen? Nothing else is going to happen unless the auditor makes it happen. So it's the auditor who's got to stir it up. It's the auditor who's got to do something It's the auditor who's got to get something done. And if the auditor doesn't start anything . . . oh, this idea of sitting there very carefully, you know and sticking closely by the rituals so that we keep the still waters of the pc without a single ripple to be seen anywhere and so forth.

We get to the end of the session, I guarantee, absolutely, you will never change a pc's eye color.

Now, by cutting the pc to ribbons with sabers, by getting angry with the pc and busting the Auditors Code in all direction — well, you've stirred him up, but you didn't necessarily get your hands on anything in the case.

No, you want to stir him up. Just as I was telling you in the last lecture, that you say to this pc, "Well now, did you have a present time problem? You been concerned about anything in life the last day or two? Ha-ha."

And you can see you didn't get a read on the present time problem. Disappointing, isn't it?

And you say, "Well, in the last day or two have you worried about anything in life? Is there anything in life that is worrying you?"

And the pc says, "Well, I have been a little bit worried about the payments on my house and so forth."

"Well, could it be possible that that's worrying you now?"

"Well, now that you mention it, yes, it . . ."

See, you could always connect the pc up to present time problem. Well, you don't do that in rudiments, but you do it in the body of the session.

The pc says — you say, "How do you feel?"

And the pc says, "I feel fine."

And the auditor says, "Well, I can fix that, too," to himself and goes ahead and does something

Man, if you're going to run these quiet sessions with no somatics and nothing going on and everything very nice, the pc will wind up at the end; the pc will say, "I feel fine," and he'll think you did fine and everybody did fine and so on. Everything is fine.

But you're not going to change anybody's eye color. I don't know. you got about a ten thousand hour expectancy to Clear.

No, you got to look at this pc. This pc is sitting there. You're going to take this pc and you're going to put him over the jumps, man.

You say, "All right. Now, are you very happy?" during the rudiments, you see. "Are you very happy about everything Are you happy to be sitting there? Nothing is troubling you sitting there? Are you very happy?"

Now, you got the bulk of the session. The question you're asking now is, "How unhappy can I make you about a few of these things in order to get you to take a look at them and get the withholds off of them and clean them all up at the other end and come out the other end alive and in better communication. How unhappy can you get?"

Well, you sit there overtly and you say, "Aunt Grace, Uncle Bill, George," something, you see? You say these various things. All of a sudden, you get a fall on George, you know.

And you say, "What's that?"

Well, what are you doing except restimulating the pc so the pc can find something?

"George? George? Oh, I get this on George. George who?"

Well, the wrong way to attack the problem is "Oh, I get a fall here on George. Oh, good. Have you done anything to George? Very good. Thank you very much. All right. Now, we don't have a fall on George now. That's fine. Now, here's Aunt Bessie now. Have you ever done anything to Aunt Bessie? Well, thank you very much. Very happy that you've never done anything to Aunt Bessie. All right. Uncle Bill. If we can just keep this meter from reading and we can just keep this awfully null, we somehow or another will get through the Sec Check."

Well, that's not the way to do it.

We say, "George?" We get a needle twitch. And we say, "Well, have you done something to George?"

No, that would be the wrong way to approach the thing. At least get the pc talking to you. Stop omitting this Auditor's Code line about staying in two-way comm with the pc.

"George? Who's George? George who? When did you know him? What did he do to you? What critical thoughts have you had about him? Ooooo, is that so? Ooh. How interesting What did you do to him?"

"Agggg. And it's this and it's that and it's the other thing and it's the other thing and it's the other thing and it's the other thing And I don't want to tell you and besides hee-hee-hee, that wouldn't be very important," and so forth.

And I'm still getting a fall on the meter. You say. "What is it? What is it? What's some more about George? Well, what did George do to you about then?"

"Well, ha, it isn't what I did to George. It's what George did to me. That is obviously the whole thing, you see."

Well, what are you looking at the meter for to find out if the pc still have — a withhold? The pc's still got a motivator, so they must have a withhold. How could a pc get a motivator without having a withhold. See, that's auditing by the rules, but it's also auditing with good sense.

Instead of looking at the meter, you could say, "Well, have your families been mean to you?" You're trying to pull overts on the family. "Has your family been mean to you? What has your family done to you?"

And the pc still goes off on a long machine-gun parade of what the family has done to him.

Well, you say, "That's fine. Good. Thanks. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. Now. Have you ever had any critical thoughts about all that? Oh, yes, very good. Well, what did you do to your family?"

Anything. Any way you want to enter it.

A little bit later they told you this. They burned down the house and ran up grocery bills and had their father accused of treason and a few other minor things. And there you get all these things off, pc says, "Funny thing, I never told anybody about this before," and so forth.

And the auditor says, "Oh, fine." you finally null the needle down on the thing. Well, another way to null the needle down on the thing is say to the pc, "Well, all right. Now, what else did your family do to you?" See?

And they say, "Well, the family did this and the family did that and the family did something else, the family did something else."

And you'll say, "What did you do to them?"

See, I mean, you're sitting there looking at the needle. Any time the needle twitches, they still got withholds. Well, any time they still got motivators, they still got withholds.

And this is just the rules of the game. This is auditing by the good sense of what it takes to audit. That's all. It's you're there to take these still, running waters. That's the trouble with them, you know. Their still, running water is only about a quarter of an inch deep. From there on, they're a churning torrent of total introversion because it's all held in and nothing is flowing out, see.

And you say, "Where are these self-imposed prison bars?"

That's what you're doing and you have to stir him up like mad sometimes to find that. Oh, you can get a pc so absolutely sweating on the subject. Not at the thought of telling you their withholds. That's the wrong direction for them to sweat.

But just sweating on the subject of how terrible life has been. These still running waters are no longer running still.

"Well, did you have a bad time with your first husband?"

Girl has a second husband, must have left the first husband. Well, that's a fruitful field of withholds. They aren't there, are they? Not still married to the guy, are they? All right. They must have left, so therefore the rules apply that they still have overts on the person. I mean, it's as elementary as it is, you see.

Pc has left places all over the track. Every time they left anywhere, they left some withholds. Simple. But you have to stir these things up and bring them into view and you have to move the case around. And you can't sit there, "Have you ever looked at a pretty girl? Thank you. Have you ever looked at a pretty girl? Thank you. Have you ever looked at a pretty girl? Thank you. Have you ever looked at a pretty girl? Thank you. Have you ever looked at a pretty girl? Thank you. I don't get a reaction now. We'll go on to the next question. Have you ever stood on your head? Thank you. Have you ever stood on your head? Thank you. Have you ever stood on your head? Thank you. Have you ever stood on your head? We got all the withholds off that now. Thank you very much. Now, we'll go on to the next one."

I could cry. I watch this, I could cry, man. I could just cry. There's a pc sitting in front of you. This pc has got perfectly — well, a sort of a slate mauve colored set of eyes set in deepest bloodshot. Pc is not in communication with life. Pc every time they — you start to think they have developed a reputation of being a very conservative person because they always think first. Well, the reason they think first, because otherwise they'd stutter. What makes this pc this way? What's this pc all about? What withholds does this pc have? Same thing, isn't it?

Where isn't this pc communicating to? Well, let's look it over and let's find out what the score is here. Where is the zone of no communicate. Certainly, you're not going to learn it by talking much to the pc. You're going to get the — learn it by getting the pc's responses to what you're saying to the pc. You can't just sit down and say to a pc, "All right. Tell me the zones of communication that you're not communicating into in life. Good. Thank you. Now, what withholds do you have from those areas? Thank you very much. One, two, three, four, five. Thank you very much. Well, then the meter's clear now."

"I wonder why the color of his eyes hasn't changed. Ron said the color of his eyes would change." No, you audit the pc that's in front of you and, man, you can turn their hair green.

No, you improve somebody's ability to reach and you improve somebody's physical health. You also improve their — the calmness in their environment. You also improve their ability to live. you also improve all the people that associate with him indirectly — their ability to reach. Thetans are basically good. When they can reach, they do all right. And when they can't, they raise hell. And that's about all there is to it.

Now, as far as 3D packages are concerned, 3D's the same way. you do a dozen things with 3D. This is almost unlimited, numbers of things that a slippy auditor that can think on his feet can do with 3D.

Pc says, "Well, I've always had dyspepsia and I want to get rid of my dyspepsia."

"All right. Give me a list of people who would have — who would oppose dyspepsia."

And you list the people who had dyspepsia. It doesn't matter.

All right. Now, "Who or what would oppose that (finally assessed out item)?" End of session — no dyspepsia.

Fantastic. You say to this pc, "What have you always wanted to do?"

You see, you're not going to audit this; you're not going to run it, so it doesn't matter if it's the wrong terminal. You've only got to have a right terminal if you run it.

So you can say to this pc, "Well, what have you always wanted to do in life?"

Pc would say, "Oh, I always wanted to be an artist. Never understood why, but I always wanted to be an artist."

You say, "What kind of an artist?"

"A painter."

"All right." You say, "You wanted to do what now?"

"Well, I wanted to paint. Paint, specifically."

"Well, who would paint? What sort of a person would paint? What kind of a person would paint?"

"Well, a painter."

"All right. Good. Who else would paint?"

"A dilettante."

"Who else would paint?"

"Oh, uh . . . an artisan."

"Who else would paint?"

"A painter."

"All right. You see if there are any more of these?"

No. No more of these. Assess it. you get a painter. That was elementary enough, but it'd be a good thing to do.

Now, you roll your hands up and you say, now, "Who or what would oppose a painter?"

List, list, list, list, list, list, list and null, null, null, null, null, null, null and all of a sudden the individual will be looking at you rather oddly and strangely — particularly if you've run some Havingness somewhere in the vicinity of this.

"Let's see, I certainly feel strange. I certainly feel different about the whole thing. The thought of painting makes me want to vomit."

And you say, "Well, that's very, very interesting, what do you know about that."

"I didn't realize it before, but I just can't stand the idea of painting."

Well, that's very interesting. You've now made him reach into the zone and area of painting All right. And whatever item you've finally found, who or what would oppose that? Next thing you know, why, the guy will be sitting home diddling with the crayons and making good with the pictures. All of a sudden, he can paint.

The guy says, "Well, I know I'd get better..." (This is another use of hidden standards.) "I know I'd get better if I suddenly started speaking Arabic. I've never been in Arabia and I haven't run into any Arabic in this lifetime, but I know Scientology would work if I suddenly started speaking Arabic." That's a very good way to handle that hidden standard. Say, "Who or what would speak Arabic?" List, list, list, list, list, list, list, null, null, null, null, null, null, null.

"Good. Who or what would oppose that item? Who or what would oppose that item?"

And he says, "Allah, Allah, uk, Allah, ugala, ugala... splig-wug, dates" — other Arabic words.

Who knows? He's liable to start speaking Arabic. On the other hand, he certainly will stop worrying about speaking Arabic. You see, those things are minor results. They don't have too much to do with the case. Don't have too much to do with anything. It would simply be a subsidiary use to 3D. You can do anything with 3D. If you don't — if you don't — don't run those items, you understand. I mean, don't set those things up and run them on the 26 December command sheet or something stupid like that because they're not proper items.

But they certainly did shift the bank around and blew out terminals, particularly when you accompany them with lots of Havingness.

You see, Havingness blows terminals and withholds loosen up terminals and 3D finds them and throws them away and you're in the business of circuits whether you like it or not. So you better learn how to audit and learn what you're auditing and stop sitting there saying, "Well, have you ever raped a waterbuck? Thank you. Have you ever raped a waterbuck? Thank you. Have you ever raped a waterbuck?"

And you finally wake up after a while and find out that the pc has been saying for some time, "What is a waterbuck?"

That is not the way to audit. No, learn to do these skills by rote, learn to do them absolutely perfectly. And then learn to audit. And it's on the basis of auditing who is in front of you and so forth.

Now, whenever I make you a lecture like this or I tell you to do something like this, always here or there a student goes into some wild skyration in some direction and does everything backwards, upside down and somebody is chucking his cookies out of an upstairs window. Something like this is going on. And it's disastrous in all directions. And the Instructors and other people around that are responsible for these things actually hate to hear me say things like that.

But have it very clearly understood, there are some things that you should know perfectly before you start this kind of thing and then you can get off the springboard of knowing how to audit the pc who is sitting in front of you.

And speaking of waterbucks — speaking of waterbucks — Mike was nice enough to get us a picture of a waterbuck. And I thought you'd be very interested in this waterbuck. I understand that the waterbuck has kinder eyes than this, but there is a waterbuck. There is a waterbuck. And by courtesy of Quentin who got this for Christmas, here is a tiger.

Now, I didn't want you to not have any havingness on these two terminals and so forth. Because I realized that if I kept talking about them, sooner or later somebody would start running them as a package.

Well, I've now given you some havingness on the subject and I hope that remedies it enough so the circuit will blow.

Okay. Well, you've gotten along pretty well and you only have a thousand light-years yet to go before you get off to the starting point. I don't like to — I don't like to be sarcastic or upsetting along this particular line. I usually tell you you're doing fine. I usually flatter you. I try to keep up your confidence and that sort of thing. But frankly there isn't a rough case in the lot of you. There isn't a rough case in the lot of you. That's right. I'm saying that absolutely factually. There isn't a rough case in the lot of you.

And the weapons which you have right at this particular moment will take any case that is here and blow it to ribbons. If anybody is sitting around worrying about his case, why, I hope that his auditor has heard this and I hope the person who was worrying about his case stops worrying about it and starts auditing

But the main — main thing that we're interested in — the main thing we're interested in is your obtaining results and we're very interested in these results. And I can tell you frankly that it's all right to teach somebody out in some Academy someplace, "Da-da-da-da-da-da ra-ta-tat. Thank you. Da-da-da-da-da-da ra-ta-tat. Thank you. Da-da-da-da-da-da ra-ta-tat. Thank you." And expect them at the other end in some way or another to achieve some kind of result.

Well, it's magic that I can make them achieve a result, even that way. That is — that's pure magic. But I'm not asking you to totally exercise this particular magic. I'm asking you to exercise — to learn these skills well and then exercise your own magic. You know you have some. It's about time you brought it out of mothballs.

Thank you.