This is February 1, 1954. This morning we have a couple of things you’ll be very interested in, I know. One of them is-and the most important-is exteriorization-interiorization when used in connection with Opening Procedure. And you take a fellow’s hat and have him exteriorize and interiorize his hand out of it. Get a basket. Put a small basket over the top of a beer bottle cap or something like that and have him grant the beer bottle cap beingness and exteriorize and interiorize the beer bottle cap. This is a fantastic process in that it very often knocks your preclear completely out-just boom. And he goes anaten like mad and tells you right there why he isn’t exteriorizing easily;

Of course, the main difficulty with any preclear is his inability to take orders. Dianetics, where it failed, failed exactly over that stumbling block: the inability of the auditor to give orders and the inability of the preclear to receive orders of the simplest nature.

You would be amazed at the difficulty the public has with minor machinery. You possibly would be very edified to talk to somebody who writes instruction books. People who write books on how to use the gimmigahoogit. People who try to write books on an army mess kit, use of. This is a very, very difficult thing. It is not difficult to write it at all, but it’s a very difficult thing to relay the method of use of something from one to another.

Now, these poor boys that are around beating their heads to pieces, trying to figure out how to use an army mess kit, Mark IV, in such a way that somebody reading that little manual will then be able to use an army mess kit, are up against something that’s too terrible for them to face, too horrible for them to face. And, that is to say, the people who will have that mess kit can’t take an instruction off of a piece of paper. That’s about all there is to it. There isn’t any sense in anybody being upset about-unable to give directions to somebody via a piece of paper, because actually it’s a job of auditing that’s necessary.

Now, I very often will pick up something in the society, some mechanical gimmick, which is very, very simple to use and try to show somebody its use, particularly when I have a piece of equipment of my own that somebody else is going to employ for a short time, such as a piece of office equipment. And two or three minutes later, why, almost have an utterly wrecked machine on my hands. Whereas it’s almost impossible to wreck this piece of machinery, it’ll be wrecked. Well, the reason it gets wrecked is, of course, level of acceptance and ability or inability to take orders or directions.

The simplest directions can go awry. You as an Instructor will be faced with this continually. And you as an auditor and the auditors that you train will be faced with this. The preclear is essentially incapable of observing his surroundings, which of course is an incapability of reducing the surroundings to a symbol. You see that? That observation and direction are-verbal direction-are apart just that much on the Tone Scale. You have what the person should observe, anyhow, having to be condensed down to words. Well, this is all very well. It is a problem in “can’t look,” you see?

Now, you will find in every large company there will be-companies don’t know this ordinarily except by experience, but if they knew it a little bit better, they would look for it very hard-but they will have people in their midst who will be able to look over a piece of machinery, something of the sort, and say, “Well that’s so-and-so and so-and-so and that does this and that does that and that does something else and that does something else.” And say, “Well that’s the way it works.” Fine.

And then somebody comes along with the instruction manual and says, “You have to study this.”

And the fellow says, “Well, okay, okay, okay.” He looks over the instruction manual and so forth and goes on using the piece of machinery.

Other people they give the machinery to, look for the instruction manual, read it, then think they have to have a lot of experience on the machine and so forth.

And you know the difference between those two people? The difference is very, very wicked: the fellow who says, “Yup, that’s what that’s for” and so forth, “sure I’ll read the manual, yeah,” and the other fellow, is the machine won’t run for the second fellow and it will be a mass of junk in a relatively short space of time. Because the index of fear, you might say, is that index of “can’t look.”

See that? The fellow who has to have it explained in terms of the machine and he has to read the instruction book several times and then he has to take coaching and then he has to have somebody being very alert in maintenance and so forth, to keep giving him this and that, that fellow is going to wreck that machine. And very funny, he’s not just going to wreck it in terms of bad handling in, you know, misdirection, but he’s going to leave a monkey wrench or something lying up there on the spinner wheel at the time he turns it on. Or he’s going to have a steel plate sitting underneath the needle when he pushes the button accidentally, you see, and that crushes the entire needle-button arrangement. He’s going to let the filings accumulate underneath this-various parts of the machine so they grind out all the bearings. And you know, you know, no machine.

Well now, where you have an automatic society, a society that is running, running, running, automatically on all sides, it gets to be the ambition of the engineer to build things that will have no maintenance problem of any kind. None. He is just obsessed with this as a problem.

His ideal machine is one that is unbreakable and untamperable, which is enclosed in a housing and you throw on a switch and it does something automatically without a human being even coming near it; And he begins to be afraid of human beings in terms of machinery. He’s always trying to design the human being out of the machine. That is, at length, his obsession. It’s an obsession.

Well, what’s he doing? He’s dealing with human beings who have to work to eat. He’s dealing with people that if they don’t put out effort, won’t have any effort and in addition to that, won’t be sane. So his effort, of course, is putting people out of work and this is the fight against the machine. But people get put out of work when they hit that part of the band when they can’t look something over and understand what its use is.

You would be fascinated at the complexity of some of the early machinery-some of the very early machinery which was put out. How much servomechanism a man had to be to that machine. If you take an early steamboat-the amount of valves and things that had to be adjusted manually in order to make it run right-you’d be fascinated. You’d say, “How could a man have that many hands and work that fast?”

Well actually, those early steamboats worked. They crossed the Atlantic and they did all sorts of interesting things. And they blew up once in a while and burned down and so on, because in any age, at any time, there are aberrated people. Anything as touchy as one of those steamboats-I’m talking now about oceangoing steamboats-required an awful lot of experience in design work before it came up to the point where it could combat the sea successfully, just that.

But a fascinating thing that you found those ships, so equipped, doing rather marvelous things in terms of horsepower and length of time run and all that So much so that one time in a very isolated part of the world, I ran across a steam vessel which had been in operation since 1865 and the engines were still running. Why, this is incredible! The engines were still running on that thing.

Compare this to World War II, where the very best diesel equipment that could be manufactured in the United States, on the very best design, was put into corvettes and escort vessels and put into the hands of people that-all they really had to do was push the fuel injection lever and pull the air andpam, they were off and running. And actually, this one type of machine simply required this and nothing else: required that it be run at flank speed, never reduced. Don’t ever run it slow, run it fast, run it all the speed it would take because it was designed to run at that speed.

Well, do you know that one-third of the engines thus produced were relegated to port duty, United States only, and were not permitted to adventure out upon the high seas in vessels far larger than the early packets that were crossing the Atlantic, with horsepower far greater. And with all of these many, many decades of technology in between, one-third of the engines installed in such vessels were so distrusted that they could not be permitted out of the sight of the US mainland. Fascinating isn’t it?

Well, let’s take just one of those vessels and get the human difference. Here-the name of the engine, by the way, was the HOR, the Hearns, Owens, Rentschler. It’s a stationary engine normally used in light plants and it was installed in vessels after being stripped down.

But that engine was in a ship and this engine room was under the commands of a chief motor machinist mate, US Navy-regular navy-about fifteen years service. And this set of engines did nothing but break down, nothing but break down! You couldn’t come alongside of a dock and safely land, because one of the engines wouldn’t be running all of a sudden. So I began to make eggshell landings and so forth. I had quite an experience with this problem. And got rid of that chief motor mach and got another one-also regular navy-this one with about twelve years’ service. And the engines continued to break down. And it was to a point where I used to have to go down into the engine room to check over the lubrication of the engines, just to look them over to make sure that they were still getting lubricated in the right places and so forth, just so they wouldn’t quit on the next landing or something of the sort.

And then finally asked who in the engine room is usually obeyed by the kids on duty? Who do they look to? And fellow says, “Fellow by the name of Reisling.” Well, he’s a second-class motor mach. So I looked up this fellow Reisling, found out he’d been in the navy for a very, very short space of time, hadn’t even gone through boot camp, had just missed it in all directions and had suddenly landed on the deck of my ship as a second-class motor machinist mate for the excellent reason that he owned a garage which serviced truck diesels in Chicago. Total experience with the sea, nonexistent. And all of a sudden, these huge HORs began to run and they never broke down and there wasn’t a single part went bad on them. And they never did anything after that but run at the speed they were supposed to run at and they continued right straight on up to the time the vessel was sunk.

Now, here we have a case in point. What’s the difference between this fellow Reisling and these chief motor machs USN? It’s something about taking directions, isn’t it? There would be something there. And sure enough, here you have men who are beaten into taking directions. They are argued and court-martialed into taking directions. They are taking directions under duress consistently and continually until at last everything they touch falls apart. Because when they try to give anything directions, it restimulates what’s happened to them, which is to say, “Make a sailor out of him or make an engineer out of him by ruining him.” So they follow the philosophy of “Make an engine out of it by ruining it.”

And there is where control by force, rather than leadership by reason, foul up. There is where control by force brings an entire society, at length, to its knees. Because an individual will pass on-in directions he is giving anything and anyone, after he gets to be a stimulus-response mechanism-pretty well the type of direction which indoctrinated him.

Therefore, we get interested in this stimulus-response mechanism and we know that to patch somebody together we had better clean him up so that the stimulus-response mechanism itself will not be relayed on down the line through everything in his existence.

And when you have to beat a man to give him directions, you’re installing an automatic machine which has “wreckage” as its primary goal. If you say, “If you don’t do this, we’re going to wreck you.” Therefore, he has to turn around to everything he runs and his machinery and actually (and what we’re really getting toward here) the automatic machinery in his bank, his own automaticities. “We cannot handle without wrecking” is the motto. “We cannot handle without wrecking.”

You are, to some degree, handing off to those things you are trying to direct, the same goal that was handed off to you when people were trying to direct you.

Now, if people tried to be reasonable and decent to you in trying to train you, why, you-if you were working totally stimulus-response-would have a tendency to handle machinery rather decently, to handle people rather decently. See?

But supposing you were trained on the basis of “Well, you can’t go to the movies unless you do so-and-so and furthermore, not only the movies, but if you don’t do so-and-so, we’re going to halfway murder you, we’re going to beat you, we’re going to throw you out the window, we’re going to stamp on you and so forth. You’ve got to learn to put your clothes away, you’ve got to da-da-da-da-da-da-da-yap-yap-yap-yap.” Goal: wreckage. Because what’s the threat? Unless you obey and comprehend, you will be wrecked. So then the individual turns around and those things which he’s trying to run-his own body, the machinery he’s surrounded with, his clothes, his effects, all of these things-rhen he turns around and gives them the goal. “If you don’t obey me, you’re going to be wrecked.”

Do I make my point about direction?

Now, the fellow who designed the Hearns, Owens and Rentschler engines did a good job, there’s no doubt about that because I’ve driven those engines at flank through attack after attack. No trouble with them at all. The only thing he did wrong was leave too many gadgets hanging out that could be adjusted. And he did that wrong. But he never designed the engine for that kind of use and that the engine would run at all for that kind of use was remarkable anyhow.

Well, here we have this problem. What emotion, what motive, are individuals relaying on to their environment? It will be that emotion and motive which their early environment laid into them, unless they themselves are capable of stepping above this thing called a stimulus-response mechanism and operating with reason. They can do that so long as they do not feel that if they operate with reason, they will fall immediately foul of pain.

If an individual has been trained to believe that he will be punished, if he employs reasonable measures, he is penalized in the handling of all the people, equipment, environment and very, very particularly, what I’m aiming straight at, are these automatic machines in the bank. And very often, he has been penalized for being reasonable. People around him, bigger than he, have punished him one way or the other for being reasonable.

He said, “Well, the right thing to do is so-and-so and so-and-so” and he’s actually been punished because he dared reason for himself.

So we have a penalty about being reasonable, about looking, and so it’s difficult to hand on such a thing as direction to somebody else.

Well, all this would be very sad if we didn’t have a fairly decent remedy for it. One of the ways to get at this is just old Opening Procedure. The only trouble is, in running Opening Procedure, the atmosphere of the processing is normally that of play, you might say, or it’s something-it is not serious. It lacks the pressure and the duress and so itself doesn’t restimulate the stimulus-response mechanisms. But we don’t actually want anything to do with these stimulus-response mechanisms. Hell with them.

So we have two choices: we can string that line from C to E directly or we can try to put the fellow’s bank back together again-one or the other. Well, it usually winds up with a case that we do both-generally we do both.

My belief is that any preclear who is hanging fire, to any great degree, has had an enormous amount of trouble in this lifetime with this thing of direction. Two things have happened: He has been given direction under pain, he’s been given directions consistently and continually with pain, duress. Or, on the other side of it, he has given orders for which he has become sorry. He has given orders which caused pain.

If you ever want to see a man in terrible condition, get a wartime bomber dispatcher. The fellow who signed them up to go out. And that fellow’s orders, of course, inevitably resulted in some sort of chaos and death, danger, upset.

So, when we have a problem with a preclear, it’s a problem with his postulates. And a preclear is as well-off as his postulates can be effective upon him.

Lots of remedies for this sort of thing. I’m giving you this little talk this morning on this subject, just so you can reclarify, through all of the technical information you have, what your actual goal is with an individual. It’s make his postulates positive with him, under his own self-determinism, so he does not necessarily either have to obey himself or not obey.

Many people are afraid to make postulates, by the way, because they are immediately taken up. He immediately obeys them. He says, “I don’t know, but I’m probably going to be sick about two o’clock” and he is. These people are frightened of the tremendous effectiveness of their own postulates, they’re very afraid of these things.

Therefore, in Opening Procedure and other processes, you should put very heavy weight on this particular facet, very heavy weight on making the man make a postulate.

Now, there’s a little trick in Opening Procedure we have not used yet, and which I recommend to you, is the making of security postulates. This individual that we’re processing probably has the feeling that if he makes a postulate that’s quite actual, then it will come about for the worst. So we can use all sorts of mechanisms here to disabuse him of this.

We can say, “All right. Now, let’s get some sort of a postulate that you could make now that would apply to this immediate environment that would be a safe postulate to make or a safe statement to make, a safe prediction to make about this room in the next thirty seconds” and go on from there.

For instance, “If I stand over in that corner, the ceiling will not fall on my head.” “All right. I can say, ‘The ceiling will now fall on my head the moment I touch this table.’” And he finds out that doesn’t happen.

Such mechanisms give a person considerable freedom. But remember your goal is to make his postulates more effective, not less effective. So don’t just keep breaking a person’s postulates, that is to say, make him make postulates that don’t come true. Have him make postulates that do come true. And this of all others is the most effective of the processes, the postulates which do come true.

He says, “That ashtray is going to be at the other side of that table about thirty seconds from now.” Then he reaches over and moves it over to the end of the table.

“This beer bottle cap is going to be exteriorized from underneath that hat-and this is the most important of them, exteriorization-interiorization postulates-it will be out from underneath that hat in another ten seconds.” Bang. And he moves it out. See, make it come true rather than the other way.

There are lots of mechanisms that we could get him over the hump of this horrible feeling that something horrible is going to happen if he makes a postulate-exteriorization-interiorization postulates.

Now, there’s another one which doesn’t particularly conduce a quiet atmosphere, merely because it moves people around, but there’s this one: people are going to go in and out of rooms and houses-“Exteriorize yourself out of this house.”

Fellow does, he takes himself out on the street, see.

“Now interiorize yourself into this room or house” and he does.

“Exteriorize yourself,” “interiorize yourself,” “exteriorize yourself.”

It’s very interesting. Your preclear’s liable to pass-if he’s having difficulty with his case, he’s liable to practically pass out on his feet doing this.

It’s not a light process for a heavy case. It’s a light process for any case that’s in good shape, just as any process is light for such a case. The very heavy case that’s having difficulty, this is one of the damnedest processes that ever came up.

Exteriorization-interiorization, prediction and when. “Now tell yourself to move yourself out into the street and tell yourself when to.”

Out he goes, in he goes. So you’d start out at first just using, oh, a hat and the beer bottle cap and you’d finish up by moving him physically. He’d move his body in and out of the house.

You’d be quite amazed, I’ve had a preclear just stand in front of the door, still inside the house-all he has to do is reach forward and open the door and move outside-and just have him stand there paralyzed, you know, unwilling to touch that doorknob. He’s dramatizing 100 percent, exteriorization prohibitions.

People have prevented him from being exteriorized for so doggone long and the motto “You will be interiorized” has been carried forward so thoroughly by armed services, the family, Mama, school and so forth that he daren’t move himself out anymore. You’ll every once in a while run into a preclear who can’t go out of the house or can’t get more than a few blocks from a house. This is very common. This is merely an exteriorization-interiorization problem which is one of the key problems which we have.

Well now, an individual who is wrecking or damaging things by postulates when he exteriorizes himself or interiorizes himself is liable to ruin some of his machinery-mess things up, run into postulates he shouldn’t, go around and do things which he feels would be very destructive.

See this now? The postulate exteriorization-interiorization-when I’m going to do it, how I’m going to do it and then do it.

Well, if everything he tells himself to do results in ruin, he, of course, is going to get into a wonderful situation with regard to exteriorization and operation of the thetan because he’s going to make himself do things wrong in such a way as to inhibit further free exteriorization-interiorization.

And an auditor who is having trouble with exteriorization-interiorization is liable to get somebody who is exteriorized and make him do things which will pin him again. Not for any other motive than that the stimulus-response cycle must end up in wreckage. “We’re going to wreck you unless you obey,” you see? That’s the goal: wreckage. How do you solve this?

Sounds very silly, by the way, but there is a process which is quite simple-you have the process: End of Cycle. End of Cycle with wreckage. End of Cycle with somebody beaten to dust. End of Cycle with somebody cracked up and crushed and crashed and so forth. This is End of Cycle Processing. Wreckage. You can run a lot of that on a preclear.

Okay. Now your next point here, some more of these particles. You know there are an awful lot of these little teams of particles of one kind and another. We’ve been hitting with courage a very high spot because it graduates very abruptly and quickly immediately into serenity.

But there are lots of these particles. I’ve mentioned nobility and so forth. It’s very interesting but more an academic exercise than anything else to team these up and show the bridge of consequence. That is to say, the consequence to courage is cowardice across the bridge of pain and so on.

Now, there’s another one of these that peculiarly enough will very often take precedent over courage. It is not a more important particle than courage, but it very often will. Now, I mentioned to you last Friday that there were a lot of preclears around who wouldn’t give you satisfaction as an auditor, by doing what you were supposed to do.

Well now, let’s again-let’s take this into postulates and what do we find? We find in postulates that if the individual had obeyed every time he was ordered, Mama would have been right and Mama mustn’t be right, Mama has to be wrong. So we get into this horrible situation that the individual cannot obey an order without giving satisfaction to somebody else who would wreck him. See that? He just can’t obey an order, no matter how simple it is, without giving somebody satisfaction and his entire defense and existence is not to give satisfaction about anything. This goes immediately into eating. Not giving satisfaction is refusing to be eaten-matter of fact, not giving enjoyment, refusal to give enjoyment, refusal to give satisfaction, all the same thing. Now, people know this particle by enjoyment. It’s slight past tense, you know, a little more past tense than enjoyment is satisfaction.

An Operating Thetan should be able to mock this particle up in tremendous quantity. And a preclear who still hangs fire when you are working Courage Processing-he can’t get it easily—should be shifted over to enjoyment, mocking-up enjoyment. He refuses to give enjoyment or satisfaction to himself or anybody else and so he’s not happy. Now, right along with that, have him waste pain and then run some more enjoyment and then run some courage and then have him waste some pain, in brackets, you know, and then have him run enjoyment in brackets.

He’s going to find out something. He’s going to find out something he doesn’t know: that there’s no part of life and no action in life that is not in itself personally enjoyable. Not enjoyable to somebody somewhere but personally enjoyable. There is no experience which is not personally enjoyable. Getting killed, raped, ruined, operated on, anything has in it enjoyment.

Now, this is another one of these solvent particles: it starts blowing down ridges. The solvent, of course, really is life. There is nothing that resolves livingness better than livingness itself. It’s just a little bit difficult to look at a preclear and tell him to put all this into one package, this thing called “life.”

But I’ll tell you what happens to a preclear who cannot experience enjoyment. A very vicious thing goes on in his bank-very, very, very, very bad for him. And that is, he gets to the feeling that life being a dog-eat-dog proposition and all being for the body and the body is edible and all that sort of thing, he gets to the situation where he doesn’t believe that he will be able to enjoy life unless the entire planet of Earth has been depopulated of all kinds of life. At that moment, he will be able to enjoy life. That is dramatized by the nuclear physicist and is the mechanism behind the atom bomb and why me and my fellow classmates never got along.

Now, this isn’t just an observation on existence. If it didn’t fit in here with technique, I would never be mentioning it to you. But our problem with a preclear is that the truth that he enjoys living always overrides this other computation that life is detestable and he must destroy it.

And your individual may be operating on a basis of he wants to help people, he wants to help himself, he wants to do things. He’s operating on a very reasonable rationale and lying underneath of that is this bear trap, this stimulus-response bear trap: the actual computation that he cannot enjoy life unless all life is dead. He could enjoy Earth if only fewere the resident thereof. And that is the “only one” computation which you make more and more acquaintance with. An individual withdraws and withdraws and withdraws and withdraws until, at length, he is the “only one.” He’s been forced to take on more responsibility than he should have taken on, on a fault-blame proposition and then draws back to a point where he’s the only one who can take care of things and then he’s the only one who can take care of himself and he’s just divorced himself from the human race.

Well, this individual has. And under this underlying computation-it’s routine, I mean, it’s just nothing strange or rare, it belongs right on the curve of he gets to the point where all life must be destroyed before he can live. And that stems out of an absence of the particle called “enjoyment.”

When an individual depends on eating for enjoyment, for instance, when he depends on other things to furnish him with this particle called enjoyment, he gets to a point of dependency where he expects the world to present him with enjoyment of living on a silver platter. And the only one that can mock it up is himself. So he’s turned over to his automaticities-and has then wrecked them, as he has other types of machines-this business of enjoyment. And so he loses the particle. And he does not realize that there is no experience anywhere in the firmament which is not in itself enjoyable.

That sounds-would sound to almost anybody to be a very wild, embracive statement: that there is nothing that is not enjoyable.

The difference between an individual with stage fright and an individual who is an accomplished actor is whether or not the person enjoys acting. The difference between imagination and fact or symbols is enjoyment. You’d look for a lot of things before you’d realize that particle, apparently non sequitur, is the bridge particle from laughter to seriousness, but more importantly, from poise to stage fright. It is the basic particle of competence and it’s a bridge particle. It belongs in there with courage.

Now, I gave you courage and let you knock courage around and you found out it worked. Well, actually, courage is more efficacious in terms of plowing through effort, ridges and so forth and is a senior particle. But if you don’t pay some attention now to this other particle, enjoyment, why, your cases that are hanging up, will hang up. They won’t give satisfaction. Well, that goes into recovery. They wouldn’t give you the enjoyment of letting them recover. And they very often don’t suspect they’re doing this.

Well now, let’s find out what happens to somebody’s imagination-we commented on this some time before-but imagination invests itself into symbols. An individual is constantly investing imagination into symbols. You might say imagination is sort of a raw material which he’s then pushing into significances and compressing and he gets symbols.

Somebody creating a body and animating it or granting life to something is still investing imagination. Well, the funny part of imagination is-an investment in symbols-is there isn’t, at this time, any technique that bridges it, just as such. You just can’t suddenly up and run “imagination going into symbols” and expect your preclear to do anything. And he won’t.

There’s another one like this, by the way, there’s one that’s perfect. It’s “When I reach they won’t withdraw” and “When they reach I can’t withdraw” or “When they reach I must withdraw.” This type of a computation can turn on some of the heaviest effort you ever saw on a case, but isn’t efficacious. It doesn’t work. It’s a technique which directly robs an individual of what masses of havingness he has. See, I mean, it’s just a direct robbery. It would tear ridges to pieces faster than anything else you ever saw. “I withdraw while they reach.” “They won’t withdraw while I’m reaching.” Any such combination will just rip ridges to pieces, reduces a person’s havingness too much.

Well, you see, there is no finite quantity of imagination. When an individual begins to believe that he doesn’t enjoy doing this anymore and so he stops imagining things, so he runs out of his own imagination, you see, just by stopping imagining. And after that he holds on to the symbols he has because he can’t create more and there is the entrance into that creation cycle, that labyrinth of computation known as creativeness. Creative writing, creative living, all that sort of thing and that labyrinth is entered by this: the individual is dependent upon the environment to give him enjoyment. He has demanded of the sunset that he enjoy it, because it says to. The particle of enjoyment, he believes, is in the sunset. It is not, it is in himself. And when he ceases to put it there, he runs fresh out.

Now, he’s probably run into people who are on a manic on enjoyment. Somebody has got an automatic machine of enjoyment running like mad and they have done things that were very harmful to him which they enjoyed a great deal. And therefore, he’s begun to believe that the particle enjoyment is disgusting or something. He has a lot of computations on it and he’s, of course, checked himself out of the land of the living the moment he did this.

And there is your make-break point. Just as an individual slides inexorably into pain when he ceases to mock-up courage, so does an individual slide immediately into a detestation of the entire universe and the computation that he must be the “only one,” by deleting all other life through refusing anymore to mock-up the particle called “enjoyment.” It’s mocked-up and handled like any other particle.

Admiration, by the way, is junior to these particles. It’s junior to enjoyment and courage is senior. Enjoyment, probably, if you were drawing a gradient scale, would belong way above admiration and just below courage and it would belong above nobility. All right?

What’s boil-off? Now we’ve brought you far enough along here now on a lot of things-what’s this thing called boil-off? Why does your preclear dope-off, why does he go anaten and so on? This is a problem of havingness, is only a problem of havingness and is a problem of reality itself Havingness is reality, to a large degree, and it is remedied by what he can accept and what he can reject. You’re making him reject things which he feels he can’t reject by running techniques which bypass his understanding and so rob him. And then you get his havingness down and he responds by going anaten. Very mechanical. Preclear starts to dope-off or his reality starts to cut down, why, you can be pretty sure that you have tapped a reservoir of havingness which you’d better replace.

Now, the odd part of it is that as an individual is coming up from the very low ranges, this is routine. He starts to boil-off, get dopey, things get unreal, you patch up his havingness. Then you give him some other of the same kind of process that you were giving before and then he starts to dope-off and get unreal and you patch up his havingness. And then you give him some more of the same kind of a process you gave him before and that works for a little while and so on.

You’re starting to change his ridge pattern. What are you doing? You’re exchanging masses of energy which have no significance for those he had which were masses of energy with significance. He wanted the mass of energy in spite of the significance. If it was energy, he would have it and its significance too. But he would much rather have masses of energy without any significance in them. And what you’re doing with processes is stripping the bank of its significances and giving him back-if you process to restore his havingness and so forth-you’re giving him back masses of energy which are minimally significant. You’ll find your preclear, sooner or later, gets up to the point where he can simply mock-up masses of energy which don’t have any significance in them. And they will become acceptable to him if they have no significance in them.

You can have him mock-up big globs of energy and on the basis that there’s no significance in them at all, have them snap in on him rapidly, fast, make him feel very good. See that? Well now, our routine of Courage Processing is essentially the same routine that you would use on enjoyment. You would use enjoyment as a particle in there in connection with courage. Nothing much to that. And you would keep very alert for this boil-off, anaten proposition, because you’d realize that you were running into less havingness and you were stripping away some kinds o£ havingness of the preclear which he needed.

This is nothing to fight away from, by the way. It’s inevitable that he will go in and out of these as he comes on up the line. Just don’t let him go out so far that he will suddenly start snapping in large masses of energy which have lots of significance in them, because you’ll have an individual on your hands who has electronics in restimulation, who has somatics, who will get colds and so forth. You see that?

You say, “Well, we don’t want him to boil-off.”

Well no, we don’t want him to go into a long sleep and that sort of thing. But when a fellow is starting to dope-off while you’re running any process, restore his havingness a bit.

Now, here’s another funny one with regard to havingness. Do you know that most people fight against having Earth. And they will give you one of the most remarkable dissertations on the subject of having MEST itself and so on, they don’t want it-they say. It’s tremendously valuable. You go through that band, you’ll find out that’s what they do want. They want Earth, but they feel they can’t have it, that other life forms are denying them Earth. And therefore, the remedy of havingness of Earth, the Sun and the Moon is quite important to your preclear. The havingness of Earth, the Sun and the Moon.

You have to get these into an acceptable condition where they can be accepted and then get them into a condition where they can be rejected. And you’ll find out that he has a starvation for Earth, which is in itself the manifestation he’s experiencing called “gravity.” That’s a starvation for mass. You want somebody to levitate and you don’t have anybody resolved on his havingness of Earth, why, he doesn’t levitate of course. And if you solve this, why, Lord knows what’ll happen to your preclear, but ... See that?

Now, there’s a funny one that shows up occasionally in this. You’ll find many people are stuck on the time track in the earlier centuries on the subject of Earth. You see they have no visual proof that Earth is spherical or solid and the early yap-yap on this subject is that Earth was flat. And you’ll find out that many a preclear thoroughly believes Earth to be thoroughly flat. It’s cute, isn’t it? I mean he believes Earth as a mass is flat. He believes that if he dived under the ground and so on, deeper than six feet or eight feet or something like that, he’d just exteriorize out the back side and he would be elsewhere and that there’s another world and so forth.

Edgar Rice Burroughs went into this considerably. There is supposed to be an entire life-type and society and so forth that lived inside Earth, Earth being a shell. Well, the funny part of it is that your individual gets this and if he has this solidly enough and this is his installed manufactury of Earth itself, Earth for him is flat, he’s never put in the other particles. It’s flat. He could exteriorize straight down quicker than he could exteriorize up.

This is one of the first times when you find reality suddenly creaking a litde bit. This is real cute, He’s never put these particles in. His automatic machinery doesn’t put Earth together that way. It puts Earth together as a slab.

Well now, being buried six feet into the ground has confirmed this quite often. People don’t mind being buried by the way, they say they do, but they don’t. It gives them a lot of Earth, an awful lot of mass there.

Well now, a very routine endeavor for your Operating Thetan is exteriorizing him into and out of-back and forth, back and forth, back and forth-masses. You take a mountain, interiorize him into the mountain and exteriorize him again and you let him do this, constantly and consistently and continually, in and out, in and out, in and out, in and out. Interiorize him and exteriorize him from Earth and the Sun and so on. Out and in, out and in, out and in, out and in, and you’ll find out that he is rather slow at it at first and draggy, but he will pick this up rather rapidly and speed comes up on it.

But remember that you’re stripping away his havingness when you’re doing this, so after you’ve got through doing it, have him mock-up lots of anchor points and snap them in on himself. You’ve taken away energy from him which had significance and given him back energy which doesn’t have any significance and he wants the energy with no significance.

All right. Now there’s an exteriorization process which if followed on a very rough case or on a very easy case is a very fast process. That is, you get him to get a dot of light-you run him, Opening Procedure exteriorization-interiorization into a hat and so forth-and then you have him put a dot of light into a mountain or put a body into a mountain or whatever else he picks up and exteriorize it and interiorize it and exteriorize it and interiorize it and exteriorize it and interiorize it and exteriorize it and interiorize it and he will finally get over the jumps about exteriorization. But every time you do this, you’re going to take havingness away from him. So you just have him take this mock-up or spot of light or a black body or anything he can get-but remember he can almost always get a black body and move it around-you take this and move him in and out and then you restore his havingness.

See, you don’t move your preclear in and out of his head and move your preclear in and out of the mountain. You have him mock-up something and move it in and out of the mountain.

Now, there’s-much closer to home than the mountain. If the mountain seems very unreal to him, give him a hat and have him move himself in and out of the hat as a concept of beingness. You know, grant his? own beingness to inside the hat and then move that outside of the hat and move it inside of the hat and outside of the hat.

But I again repeat, this takes more havingness away from an individual in less time than anything you’d care to front up. So he’ll start into a boil-off, at which time you give him things which are acceptable to him.

Now, if you’re exteriorizing and interiorizing him out of a mountain, haying him do that, of course, what begins to be acceptable to him is Earth, so you have him mock-up

Earth in acceptable forms. If he finds it is a six-foot-through slab, okay. Let’s mock it up that way as long as it’ll snap in on him, but you satisfy his havingness. What’s boil-off? That’s reduced havingness and you have to remedy that. You got it?

Now, the fact of the matter is, of course, these havingnesses aren’t necessary to the individual. They aren’t needful to the individual, but he believes they are and he responds as though they do and they are needful to the GE if the GE is going to operate. So we’d better restore his havingnesses, we better not argue with it. He’s always got less mass than he thinks he ought to have.

Now, I’ll tell you a very funny little instance. A fellow I knew went into an area and practically lost his memory. And this was very perplexing to him and everybody else, but he had practically lost his memory. He moved away from the place and didn’t get much better. We traced back to find out that he had gone into an area where he had lost a great many things. He’d lost a wife and he’d lost a car and he’d lost a house in this area. When he moved back into the area, his memory went. Do you see that? Very goofball little manifestation.

How was this remedied? We just gave him back acceptable forms of those things he had lost and his memory returned. So I repeat, your memory of your preclear on the whole track depends upon the restoration of the havingness which he has lost upon the whole track. The loss of a body, a piece of havingness as intimate as a body, to which he has granted his own beingness is very serious to an individual and therefore he loses his memory of the whole track.

Now, do not for a moment suppose that we can just compartment all that off and forget about it. Don’t suppose that this preclear is some kind of a peculiar beast that just because he went through an experience, he thereafter won’t mind the experience and is better off to have forgotten it.

You had better take your sights off of this lifetime as being the ideal thing and put it on this: the blankout of the whole track is a tremendously serious blow to the ability of the preclear. You could say very easily that 99 and 44/100ths percent of his capabilities are swallowed up in the lost havingnesses of the whole track. And if you want to restore his reality up to the stars, you just get in there and slug on the subject of the particle called “courage” and the particle called “enjoyment” and exteriorization and interiorization and the remedy of havingness of every damn body, wife, dog, cat, husband that he has lost.

You just better restore them and you’ll find out the most important things are the largest masses. If he lost a battleship one time, boy, that’ll really stick. And if he lost Earth time after time, that really sticks much worse than the battleship. See?

Remedy of havingness, restoration of reality and memory, these things are all interconnected.

Okay.