Okay. Here we are and this is the 24th of October 1961, and a very interesting day it is. The reason I'm late is I've been building a fireplace, and if I start making little errors here and talking about, "Well, the flue goes over here" or something, you'll understand this.

Now, you are embarked upon an interesting activity just now. Not all of you, but the bulk of you are running your terminals on a new series of commands. And this new series of commands is a very well thought out hydrogen bomb. And I can't tell you at this moment that there will be exactly no change in this particular series of commands, but I have been working on nothing but this command package for about two weeks. I'm just trying to smooth these things out.

Now, this very well may shorten clearing. Do you think it will?

Audience: Yes.

Because I have told you many times that auditing was a third dynamic activity, and so it is. Even more importantly, apparently, most aberration, as we learn in a Problems Intensive, stems from group mores.

Now, how would this be? It'd be basically that there was an agreement. And if you look at the Reality Scale, you will see that an agreement ranks high on the Reality Scale.

Well, a group is a multiple agreement. And as an individual agrees to and then disagrees to, he runs a one-two contradiction on his own postulates.

In other words, he says, "I agree," and then suddenly he says, "I don't agree." When a person becomes a member of the group, he agrees to certain things and then finds that he cannot uphold these certain things, and then of course disagrees to these certain things. Now, this is one of the highest levels of the Reality Scale. This is very high on the scale. But having agreed to and then having disagreed to, he of course does not then as-is, ordinarily, his original agreement. All he does is disagree to.

So he finds himself in disagreement with himself. Well, it was his agreement, wasn't it? And now he disagrees to this. So now he is in disagreement with his own agreement, which of course is the — apparently the first and foremost invalidation of a thetan. He invalidates himself by agreeing and then disagreeing to his own agreements.

In between the agreement and disagreement, we get a further set of agreements and activities, all of which are less in value but nevertheless bring about a complexity. He agrees to be a member of the I Will Arise Burial Society of Birmingham. And he agrees to get hisself buried. And he agrees to pay twenty-five cents a week from here on out until he's buried. And he doesn't get buried, and he hasn't got the twenty-five cents. But he also finds out that the treasurer of the organization doesn't spend this on tombstones as he's agreed to do. He hears some kind of a rumor or something of the sort, that he spends it on new Buicks.

And then he finds out dat the last few brethren was buried — dey was buried face down. And dey wudn't wearin' no coffin. So he now disagrees to pay his twenty-five cents a week, and he disagrees that it's a good thing to be a part of the I Will Arise Burial Society. And now he runs up a whole series of overts. He goes around and tells all of his friends that they must stay out of the I Will Arise Burial Society.

All right. So we're busy running this fellow, and he tells us motivator, motivator, motivator, motivator. "Dey took dis twenty-five cents, and dey put it in dey pockets. And dey didn't put anybody in de ground proper." And he tells you all of this. "They did this to me. They did this to me. Actually, it was seventy-five dollars, nine hundred dollars," or something of the sort. It doesn't matter what.

And he tells you motivator, motivator, motivator, motivator, see? Well, to free up this whole situation, you have to somehow or another uncover the — something on the order of the original agreements or activities.

Now, it so happens that the I Will Arise Burial Society had a great many social activities. And after they joined, they had a right to go to all of the funerals. And the I Will Arise Burial Society always provided all of the beer. And they provided a band and it was supposed to be quite an affair, you know?

And actually, as we begin to sound this particular activity with this group, we find out that for something on the order of twenty-five cents a week over a period of five or six years, this fellow averaged a funeral party a week, and at every funeral party drank fifty cents worth of beer, you see. And frankly, the I Will Arise Burial Society ceased to exist for economic reasons. They were burying people too proper. That was the trouble, you see? And they exceeded their exchequer.

Well, what have we got in there? We've got a whole area of motion — enjoyed motion. The individual enjoyed himself during that period of time, mutually, with other members of the I Will Arise Burial Society. In fact, he was, at one time, completely unable to differentiate what was his decision and what was anybody else's decision in the I Will Arise Burial Society. Dey was dancin' and dere was lot of beer.

And during some of those beer times, it was totally impossible to differentiate who was decidin' what. So we get an unknown area. We get a mutual action area. And all of these things have to do with a little group that came and went and disappeared because of financial insolvency. And we find our pc absolutely certain that he will never be buried. And we've got half the pictures he's got on the track of being — of dying on a point of land, you see, that is out in the open and just lying there with his bones being picked upon by the vultures. And he's got it with full somatics, you see?

And we've got pictures of him floating as jetsam, flotsam on the high seas with the seagulls scratching his eyes, you see. There he is, stone dead. No, women float face up, that's right. Anyhow, scratching the back of his neck and so forth, and there he is decaying into a cadaver with the fishes nibbling upon his face.

And all of these are very interesting pictures. And I'm sure that we could be very elucidative on the whole subject of how these pictures came to view. And we all agree that this is a horrible circumstance: not to be buried. But we begin to look at the chain of "not being buried" on the track, and we find out that he practically never got buried.

Well, we've cracked through a barrier here which has been in existence for — let's see, 1948 to 1961. Why, if the thetan was making his own pictures, why was he making that particular type of picture? Yeah, why was he making this? What was his proclivities for morbidity? And we find the answer in the fact that he can no longer differentiate between his actions and other people's actions. That's one of the first things we find out. He cannot differentiate. He can't tell what happened. He doesn't know what he did, and he can only condemn what they did. And he is not sure who was cause. That's what it all amounts to. who was cause of any of these communication lines or actions. Who caused these lines?

Well, you find somebody dancing in the I Will Arise Burial Society Hall, and there's a tremendous crowd of them, and they're all dancing and they are dancing faster and faster. And all of a sudden there's a tremendous crash, and all of the beer barrels which are stacked up roll on the floor because the combined efforts of the crowd move too surgingly in that direction.

Who caused it? Well, he gets a we caused it. Oh, isn't that interesting? We caused it, did we? Now, that's fine. There's actually only a very few of his motions were contributive to the beer barrels going out on the floor, but which motions? Well, he doesn't know.

And he gets confused with his causes. Then he doesn't know who caused what. And one day at a particularly violent funeral, there was a fight. And he was in a tremendous fog because of too much beer, and when all of the smoke cleared away of de fight, dere was de brother lyin' on de floor, and he wasn't breathing'. Who killed him? Well, he doesn't know who killed him. In fact, nobody ever finds out who killed him. The I Will Arise Burial Society sort of killed him, but there is no motion caused by any mass called the I Will Arise Burial Society. That is a bunch of motions individually caused. And the fellow after that begins to wonder if he maybe didn't kill that brother dat was lyin' on de flo'.

Some commotion occurred. And he doesn't remember what he did. And it could be that he killed somebody. But certainly he was a member of a group who killed somebody — that he knows — but where he was at the exact instant of the death of this brother is not something he can tell you. In other words, he's getting interiorized into the motion of the society till he can no longer differentiate between his motions and the motions of other individuals in that society but begins to call them "our motions." There is no "our motion."

All motions are, of course, caused individually, fundamentally and basically. All motion is individually caused. There is no collectively caused motion. That's where the governments of Earth are going astray left and right. They say the people, the people, the people, the masses, the masses. And you'll find people right up here in the Council House not ten miles away, five miles away, I'm sure will tell you that we must protect the people. And every people, as an individual that comes up to the door, gets a kick in the teeth, because they're not the people, you see.

Every individual is himself, and the government doesn't want anything to do with the individual. The government can only be concerned with people in the mass. And each person as an individual moving in to ask for assistance in some category is immediately told that he's not the people and that he shouldn't think selfishly for himself this way; that it's for the greater good of the greater people.

And you'll find there are people in government like this. you would be amused someday as you begin to look it over. The people, the people, the people, the masses, the masses, the masses, see? And they shoot individuals. And they have never realized that this thing they're calling the people is made up of nothing but individuals. And if you shot every individual that you found in the people — now, I'm not talking of the Russian cultism of individualism; I'm just talking about this identity, a single identity, not a people identity — if we shot every single identity we found amongst the people, we of course would have no people. Isn't that correct? All right. The government goes on the basis that you must only take care of the people, and you mustn't pay any attention to the single identity. Well, of course, then they're governing nobody, are they?

See, there we get a condition where all motions are confused with all motions to a point where nobody can differentiate what his motions are. And the third dynamic, attainable for the preclear, is the most fruitful source of this confusion of mutual motion, you can call it. The confusion of mutual motion. The individual doesn't know what he did, who he did it with or which was his effort that contributed to the motion. And he's no longer able to tell about this and he defends himself from this confusion by backing out of it. And he says, "Well, it was all bad, and here I am outside of it. At least I am still an identity."

And a thetan has gone through this on and on and on. Actually, the dynamics give us an excellent picture of this. The sixth is exclusively a co-motion undifferentiated. All the collective, undifferentiated co-motions of the past become what we call matter, energy, space and time of the sixth dynamic. That is what the sixth dynamic apparently is. It is the cumulative effect of undifferentiative, mutual motions. Nobody can say what he did.

After a builder gets through building the building, he stands back and he's in a bit of a fog about it. And there were five thousand windows put in this building, and he knows he put some windows in. Which windows did he put in? Well, he might be able to count them up, and he might not be able to, so he — but he takes a defense from the effort of not as-ising it. He takes a defense from not as-ising it. He doesn't as-is it. He simply says, "Well, that was our activity." Well, now, that was a very innocent action and it doesn't have very much to do with anything And, of course, life was made up of "our" activities. But it's only when these things come a cropper. We built this bridge. And then the first locomotive that goes across it caves it in. Everybody says, "The company built this bridge, and they built this bridge." They instantly deny their own co-motion.

Well, they've forgotten their individual contribution. And then they have denied their part of the co-motion. And then they say they had no part of it, and that is about the cycle that these group things go.

Now, if we were processing this fellow from Birmingham, and he was trying to get squared around on the I Will Arise Society, and he has this terror of being buried — of not being buried. And every time we get anything like it, we find these pictures of burials, and we find all sorts . . . Well, we don't know any background picture of the I Will Arise Burial Society. We don't even know he's ever been a part of it. It happened in an earlier lifetime. It doesn't even exist now. It is just a lost piece of co-motion on the track. That's not commotion, you know, I mean it's just co hyphen motion. Cooperative action.

And we've got a pc who is terrified of not being buried. And if we trace this down very carefully, we'll eventually run into the I Will Arise Burial Society.

He has so many overts against the I Will Arise Burial Society and such a tremendous dependency on being buried by it, that, of course, he can't be buried if he's not a member of it.

Well, he was a member of it three lifetimes ago. And he has a terror of not being buried.

Well, now, if we were trying to chase down every phobia that a person had on the basis of find the phobia, find the group, run out the co-action, get a redifferentiation of the individual's responsibility toward and for the group, all of these things, we could probably do it, but we would also have this fascinating thing: that at any given time on the track — at any given time on the track — an individual is a member of two or three groups at the same time. Member of the family, he's a member of the society, he's a member of the business he's connected with. I mean anything like that, you know? Even if he's a bum, he's a member of a group called bums. He's at least two or three groups, you see?

All right. Now, how long has he been on the track? About two hundred trillion. And I'd say that it was about three groups every twenty-five years would be the most conservative underestimate of the situation. So that is something on the order of twelve groups a century times two hundred trillion less one hundred, you see? Less two cycles.

So, it's two trillion times twelve, or twenty-four trillion, and you would have to do this twenty-four trillion times. Now, how long are you going to live? Could you afford the number of E-Meters that you were going to wear out during this period?

Now, if you are going to able — to be able to differentiate or get the individual to differentiate every single area and point and action of the track where he had come a cropper because of co-action, it would be that kind of an operation. If you were going to take each one of them individually apart, it would add up to something like twenty-four trillion.

You see, every time he died, he deserted the society. Just take that. Every time he died. He left a group. He had overts on the group, too. Dying was also an overt on the group. All kinds of wild computations will come up on this line, but it becomes an unauditable situation is all the point I'm trying to make.

And it's a good thing that we're assisted by a thing called automaticity. All overts and withholds are preceded by co-action — which is an interesting thing in itself There must have been co-action for a later overt and withhold to occur.

All right. Let's be much more down to earth here. There's a husband and a wife, and they have a fight. And she decides to leave, and he decides to leave. Perfectly routine, daily situation all through the societies. Some kind of a small vestige of this takes place, you see. Well, how come? How come? Well, they are a group. They're a group of two. They have mutual actions which are also flanked by nonmutual actions.

Well, just get the idea. she takes care of the home and he takes care of the business. She cooks food; he eats it. He earns it; she buys it. They're almost duplicative but not quite. Now, if we look this over, we find out that there's an ample opportunity here to have mutual action and a great deal of different actions all going on at the same time, which makes it rather confusing

An individual has — is evidently duplicating somebody else while not duplicating anyone. Wife's wearing powder and paint; he isn't. He's shaving; she doesn't. You get these differences? All the time we have an apparency of mutual action, we have tremendously different individual actions going on.

Well, this thing could very well add up, just as itself, to a bunch of overts and withholds because the mutual action is always being interrupted by differences. The differences exist. So they speak of these differences, but of course it's just overts and withholds and that sort of thing. But there were mutual actions.

Now, you can straighten out these people by running the O/W or you can free the effect of the O/W by differentiating the co-action. And that is the basic discovery which I am telling you about now.

You can knock out the co-action which preceded the difference of action.

Now, we take this fellow with the I Will Arise Burial Society and we start processing all the parties and good times he had, and we'll find out that it'll rather automatically discharge all of his overts against the I Will Arise Burial Society. And we think it's because, well, he looks at the good times he had and to where he understands the situation, you see?

Well, there's truth in that, but the co-action precedes the other and you're running a more basic action than the O/W. But the co-action is something he cannot face. If he is withholding himself from the group, he of course can't even remember the co-action of the group. There's many a fellow saying, "Oh, well, I belonged to this terrible space opera society, and everybody dressed like spiders, and we all went around strangling people. They were terrible, and I finally got down on the whole thing, and I left them all. I didn't want anything to do with them, and so forth." And we run this down a little bit further, and we find the withhold is, is he is no longer a member of the group. He is withholding a group member from the group, namely himself. That's your most fundamental withhold.

All right. So, as long as he is withholding himself from the group, he also withholds his memory from the group, so he really can't tell you what the group was all about.

All right. But we can get him up now to confront the idea that he's done something to the group and he's withholding something from the group, and he's done something else to the group, and he's withholding something else from the group. And something sort of goes bzzuh. Well, he gets, you know, a little freedom occurs. Well, he's in close enough to the thing now to be able to observe.

So now if we ask him about the co-activity of the group, he would be able to tell us. And the next thing you know he would look it all over and say, "Well, I don't know. Us spiders, we just tramped all over the universe and we kept doing this and that and we'd jump on a planet and we'd eat it all up and it was marvelous and we actually had a lot of fun, if truth be told," and get rather nostalgic about the whole thing, and tell you all about what they did. And you go, "Well, what about these overts and withholds against the group?"

"Well, it's nothing in particular."

"Well, how about your not being a member of the group right now. You're withholding a body from the group."

"Well, that's not very important. Groups break up, and groups come and groups go. I'm just not a member of the group now." And there's no reaction on the needle.

You see the approach? The fellow is so far outside of it that he couldn't touch the co-action to begin with it. So, an initial approach to the situation is not "find the co-action." It's sneaking up on it.

You ask — you can ask about the co-action, and he'll tell you something about it. And then you have to get a withhold off or an overt off or something, and then he can tell you more about the co-action, and then you get another overt or a withhold off, and he can tell you more about the co-action. And you get another overt, withhold off, he tells you more about the co-action. And all of a sudden, he realizes everything they did do, and that group blows. Do you see the progress made?

Well, these mechanics are inherent in the processes which were issued to you that have to do with groups. A body of agreement has been violated and thereafter will remain aberrative. And there's where you get the packaged I'm-supposed-to's. There's where you get the packaged postulates. There's where you get the whole-cloth personalities. We call them valence, and so forth. They were enforced by group mores.

You'll find some young girl who is a member of a family, who didn't have any great avidity for family life perhaps, but she was a member of the family and she was going along. And now we find her years later in terrible condition.

And she says, "The family chopped us up." Chopped her up. And the family chopped her up, and the family did this, and the family did that, and the family did something else of the sort.

And we'll find that even the memory of that family causes her pain. What's going on? Well, she can't as-is it because she can't get near it. Because she's got overts and withholds on it and is withholding herself from it, of course, she cannot approach the actual situation at all. So she really can't tell you what went on in her family.

And it's quite common for somebody to say, "Well, my mother beat me everyday and twice on Sundays and my father used to take an ax to me every Tuesday." And then to find out as you run the situation out that nothing like this occurred at all.

His father once threatened him with an ax, and his mother quite customarily used to duck when the preclear threw schoolbooks at her. I mean, this was about as close as we had to the situation. Well, why are we so far from the situation? Actually, the individual is withholding himself from the area of the situation in the physical universe and in his mind at the same time. So the mind, you see, is approximating what he is doing.

Now, let's take another activity. Let's take a speedboat driver. He drives speedboat races. And we find this pc wouldn't go near a speedboat. If you put him in a speedboat, why, it'd go off both sides of the harbor. There's no telling what would happen if we put him in a speedboat because he doesn't want to go anywhere near speedboats. And we say this is a peculiar thing. This man sees speedboats and he gets sick at his stomach. "Well," you say, "that's natural. You get seasick in those."

No, it's not natural. No, these things have causes. What activity was he engaged in. What is that group all about? I'm afraid it's something on the order of "We are a group who are at total odds with one another and who, when we tangle, tangle with violence."

Speedboat 27 running into speedboat 34 seldom do it quietly. The co-action of the group is crash. Otherwise, they're in total contest with one another so they're not an actual group. But the collision of the group is the co-action of the group. So you ask this pc, "What is the mutual action of speedboat racers?"

"Wrecking speedboats, of course."

Well, he doesn't want to be any part of that group because the whole mission of the group is to wreck speedboats. That's the way it looks to him at first, you see? There couldn't possibly be any other differentiation other than speedboats. What is a speedboat racer? A speedboat racer is a member of a group who wrecks speedboats.

Then we get him a little closer into it, and we get him over and he sees the individuality of the whole thing, and we see how it's running, and it all of a sudden begins to run. He can look at the situation.

But his first look at the thing will probably be "I don't want to have anything to do with the process you are trying to run on me." That's probably the first entrance point.

Because he'd say, "Well, I've been sitting here for generations perfectly happily withholding myself from anything to do with speedboat racers, and then you, you son of a aarr! you come along and you say, 'Associate with them that speedboat racers.' And I thought processing was to make people feel better. And look at me now. you done it."

Well, what are you actually asking a pc to do? You're asking a pc to stop withholding himself mentally merely because he's withholding himself physically from a zone of co-action and motion. You see, he's withholding himself mentally as he withholds himself physically.

You're processing a grown man. He's no longer a member of his family. Well, he's no longer a member of his family or he has some difficulty with his family. All right. And there he is. He's withholding himself mentally from his family, so you ask him to think about his family. It's almost the same as asking him to go back and join his family as a full participating member of the family. He doesn't know that he wants to do this. In fact, he wouldn't consider it wise. So you'll find all sorts of weird dodges being used by pcs not to run this process. Computational dodges of one character or another.

Now, why do the rudiments have to be in order to find a goal or terminal. Why?

Well, it's because you're asking the individual to walk very closely to the fact of an identity from which he is actually withholding himself. He's withholding himself from the identity and being the identity. He is not executing the goal while executing the goal.

You're asking him to look at something he is in the middle of. Now, as you start to run groups, you normally ask, "What group co-motion are you still in the middle of that you are now having nothing to do with?" And this appears very confusing to him.

Nevertheless, it works out and it works out very well. There is nothing very esoteric about the way the process works. You should know, however, this one sequence of there's an agreement to join or to be a part of or to agree to the mores of or the activities of or — and all groups have mores of one kind or another — followed by co-action, followed by overts, followed by withholds and more overts and culminating in a total withhold, physically and mentally, from participation with the group of any kind whatsoever.

All right. I'll repeat then the steps that you go backwards on it. you could security check the individual on this group, and he would walk a little bit closer to the group. And then you've got these overts and his withholds off, don't you see?

Now he could be asked about the co-action of the group. And pretty soon he would get a recall of a co-action and be able to differentiate his own actions from the actions of the group.

Now, the next step above that, of course, is not something you necessarily, I don't think, would have to process. It certainly could not be processed originally, because look at the barriers that intervene. And that is his agreement to join the group.

That should fall out of the hamper sooner or later in processing You've walked this group backwards, in other words. But there's the way you approach it. The pc is being a tank driver. That's his terminal — tank driver. Well, you can't even find his terminal at first, but he's right in the middle of it.

Well, the rudiments have to be in so he can look because he's going to need all the attention he's got in order to look. And the rudiments have to be in to run these things because you're going to ask him to run O/Ws and you're asking him to get the co-motion of tank drivers, really, by getting the O/W off. We get the co-motion of tank drivers.

At each point of this, you're asking him to confront just a hair more than he would be comfortably accustomed to confronting, see? There he is, perfectly safe. He's just got a busted neck, arthritis and three 88 millimeter shells through his brisket. There's nothing wrong with the man. He's a perfectly normal human being. Sits there and gibbers.

And there he is, comfortably, and they'll even tell you this: "Well, I have left that a long time ago. And I no longer have anything to do with it. And I don't know why you should ask me to look at these things which I considered so unpleasant at the time."

You'll hear this out of more pcs when you start running into this sort of thing. "I am not sure I want to go on with this" is the total expression. And the common denominator as you start to clear somebody of all his ARC breaks, all of his computations, all of his figure-figures, all the reasons he should blow, all of everything is "I am not quite sure I want to get any closer to that group of spiders." That's what it adds up to, you see? But it expresses itself in various ways. He says, "Well, I don't want to get Clear. I don't know if I should go along with this. I feel fine the way I am."

He'll show up for the next session, but he's kind of telling you this all the time. He expresses it to you as a member of your group of an auditor-pc, you see. He expresses it to you as "I see no reason to go on with this because it's all been unproductive of great unhappiness in the past, and I am trying to escape all that, and the main reason I am being audited is so that I can escape all that. And here you, you traitor, are turning me around and pointing a long, bony finger on the backtrack and I'm not sure I want to look down over the fingernail because it's just been just a little bit grim."

"Now, this cough is perfectly easy to understand. It's caused by bacteria. These holes in my stomach — they've been perfectly diagnosed as ulcers. My eyesight — well, everyone knows that when you get along in life, when you get up to twenty-one or twenty-two your eyesight starts to fail. And of course, with the world in the state that it is in, you can't expect anybody to be — to be happy, so naturally I'm unhappy. But I've been getting along somehow, and I don't see any reason why I shouldn't be permitted to go my own unhappy if somewhat aberrated way because I have everything explained. There's no mystery here."

And you say, "Well, what are your goals of life?"

Ah, well, this is great, see. You've just come up there with a roan horse, all sleeked up, ready saddled, and it's pointed on the out trail, see. It's up that-a-way, see. And he's come from down this-a-way. And he is not about to go down this-a-way again. But goals, "Oh, future. Ah, now, future. Oh, well, let's get out of here. Good. Future. Well, my goals are . . ." Brrdrrdrrdrrdrr!

And you sight it out and you find out which goal sticks. He says, "That's sort of funny. I didn't really realize that was my goal. But it is, you know? Hadn't thought about it for a long time. That's it."

"Well, now, who would . . ." you ask him. "Now, give me a list of people."

And he gives you a list of people. Very interested in this list of people somehow or another. There's a sort of a compelling horror. There's the bird looking at the — the bird-staring-at-the-snake sort of a fascination about this terminals list. And it finally narrows down right straight on the head of a very unlikely thing, which seems to explain it all. And he's there all right. That's perfectly correct, you understand, but he really didn't expect that he would land there. "But, of course, it is perfectly obvious why he is there, but no, it — on the other hand . . ." so on.

They never seem to tell you that the assessment is wrong They will sometimes tell you they don't like it. They sometimes are quite pleased with it, and it very often explains many things to them. But they hope, more or less at this point, that you will go off and let them sleep quietly. Because now you've got this roan horse, and you've turned the roan horse around and you say, "Now, just go back down the trail there and go around that pile of rock."

The guy says, "Well, I just came from there. And you know what's on the other side of that pile of rock. We all know there's a bunch of vultures. And if I go around there again, why — be the end of me."

And you're liable at that moment to get the most remarkable series — the absolute, most remarkable series of reasons why they don't want to become Clear.

And now begins the most critical period in processing. Oh, they go along with the goal, like a shot. They go along with the terminal like a shot. They themselves want to get Clear, that's for sure.

But the fact of facing back to the group and that group and that group and those people and those locations of the track and that activity and what they did then and what happened to them someplace else — oh, well, now, that's another thought. That is another thought. That is something else.

Yesterday was something that should remain buried. It was okay as long as we could skim along the edges and skate along the corners of the pond and never fall in. That was all right because that was fancy figure skating, but it was very safe. But we go out there, and we're liable to have anything happen to us. And the most critical period of processing is immediately after you begin to run the goal and terminal, particularly with a powerful process. And that can be wicked. That can be very wicked.

In the first place, if you have the wrong goal, and if you have the wrong terminal, you'll throw the pc in over his head and it'll take some real experts to bail him out. So it is not a light thing to attempt.

There is only one goal. There is only one terminal available. And now we have given you, if this works out all right, a surcease from your nervousness about the assessment of the Prehav Scale. That was a little bit tough to do. Of course, the goal and terminal is the critical things to do. That is really something You have to find the right goal. The right goal can only be found with the rudiments totally in.

You have to find the right terminal. The right terminal can only be found with the rudiments totally in.

All right. Now, our period of departure from that point begins what could be some very trying times. In the first place, the pc does not want to have anything to do with what he has left. And he does not know that — if he has to cross over that again — he wants to get Clear at all. So you can look for all manner, apparently, of ARC breaks, rudiments out, this and that, figure-figures, ducks and dodges. You can look for all kinds of ducks and dodges. He doesn't want to go back there. So there's all kinds of this and thats. He doesn't know the price he will have to pay isn't too great for the prize of being Clear.

After all, he's still alive as aberrated. He doesn't know that he'll be still alive after he gets through with all that.

Why doesn't he know this? Because it's well proven. He died last time, didn't he? He got hurt last time, didn't he? Well, he's certainly going to be hurt again. And you get the "mustn't duplicate" situation and you get other things coming up.

A pc can also begin to slide out from underneath a terminal up into degradation. And this is one of the more alarming facts of running terminals, and one of the things which is very discouraging to an auditor. An auditor really has to understand this in order to survive much of it because the pc looks so pathetic. The pc comes up to degradation. The pc is noplace. The terminal is everything. The pc isn't there. And the pc's first awareness is in gooey, ulnyah and degradation. It very often happens this way. It isn't necessarily usual, but it does happen this way.

The worse off a pc has been in life, the more interiorized the pc has been inside the terminal, the more liability you have in trying to pull him out of it because he comes up through a degradation band and he doesn't know that he wants to go on at all because it is too doggone grim.

Somebody can get degradation practically dripping off of him. But all of his escapements are reactive. All of his mechanisms to escape are reactive. And you mustn't lose track of that fact. Those are all reactive. By keeping the rudiments in and keeping the pc being audited and pointed straight ahead on his line, you will succeed. Why? Because actually the pc, what there is of him, at the time you begin to process him, is with you all the way. And the objections are reactive objections, and if you Q-and-A with these reactive objections too much, you stop the pc's forward progress. And that is basically what is the most critical period of auditing.

Given the right goal, given the right terminal, right now with the process you are running, the first six to eighteen hours after that point will be the most critical period of auditing. Once you've got them over that jump, all right.

Maybe they won't have any trouble at all. Maybe they'll just come through it like a dream. That they come through it easily doesn't mean nothing is happening It just means you're lucky or your auditing is very smooth or your altitude as an auditor is very high or the ARC which you've generated is carrying the person through rather easily.

And this looks fine. It goes through very smoothly. And there is no dynamite happening. There's just lots of motion, there's lots of cognition, and lots of this and lots of that. And everything's going along very swimmingly. And the pc doesn't necessarily go into any degradation at all. Doesn't necessarily do so, but don't be so alarmed if the pc does because degradation is the lower harmonic of apathy. You know what I'm talking about when I say degradation? It's really gucky. It's the lower harmonic of apathy.

How can a person be more apathetic than apathetic? By being totally degraded. And it is the first emotion that pc encounters on his road up. The first emotion encountered on his road up — if he is below the point — is degradation. And then he comes up through some other unnamed oddball emotions up to apathy.

When he's up in apathy, man, he's way up. Of course, the pc goes through a band between degradation and apathy of dying. The band of death lies straight across the line. A thetan is easily below death. Easily. In fact, most aberrated people walking around are a bit below death.

And when you bring them up, they get odd ideas about dying and things of this character. Well, what is this? This is just en route from degradation to apathy, they pass through periods of dying Obvious. It's just a band on the Tone Scale. That's all it is. It's just the individual goes through this before he comes out of it.

Now, it'd be very fine if you could take him from totally dead, totally insensate, totally unfeeling, to total enthusiasm with no gradient. Be wonderful if you could do that, but I think the only way you could do it is get an electronic cap and put it on his head and implant him and have him be totally enthusiastic, and of course you haven't cleared him. you haven't freed him. He's even more down there than he was before, but you've given him some kind of an implant of "You now feel enthusiastic about everything"

Well, if he's going to go up through degradation and up through death and up through apathy, remember, he'll also go through grief. Well, he doesn't have to cry to go through grief, but he'll go through grief, and he'll go through fear, and he'll go through anger, and he'll go through the lot. He'll go right on up the Tone Scale. And there's a sort of a hurdy-gurdy goes on which you must understand.

Did you ever see one of these little counterbalances whereby you put some pennies or some sand in one bucket that is up in the air, and the bucket goes down and the other bucket goes up. you know, there's two buckets over a pulley, you see, and as one bucket goes down, the other bucket goes up.

Now, the up bucket, as you start to process the pc, is the valence. And he is as overwhelmed as, of course, the valence is high-toned. That's a rule. The pc is as overwhelmed as the valence is high-toned. It's a direct rule. Although valences can have chronic tones of their own. You'll find this on the Prehav Scale.

The rule is the higher the valence is on the Prehav Scale, the more the pc has been overwhelmed by it. Works reversely. The more — or the higher the valence is on the Prehav Scale, on the Tone Scale actually, the worse off the pc is underneath.

So if the one bucket valence is way up, inevitably the pc is way down. And they swap positions. And in the process of processing them, you find out that the position interchanges, that there is a period when the buckets are even. Just as you lower one bucket, the other bucket comes up. There will be a period when they are both level. And that's a very schizy situation.

The pc is not in his valence and he is not out of his valence. And the valence is not there — it's not effective but it's not ineffective. The I'm-supposed-to's are not working very well, and the pc has not begun to function yet very well. And these two buckets pass each other on the counterbalance, and the valence sinks out of sight and vanishes, and the pc goes on up to the top. That is essentially what happens with a valence.

That demonstration, by the way, of the Tone Scale is not inept. It is very factual. You draw two buckets connected with a piece of string, one bucket at each end of the piece of string, and hang the center of that string over a pulley, and then plot a Tone Scale back of each piece of string as it drips down — you'll get the exact operation that occurs. The Tone Scale — the valence goes down tone, down tone, down tone, down tone, down tone, down tone. What valence?

And the pc goes — what pc, see? Then, "Oh, I'm so degraded. Oh, terrible. I feel awful — very degraded. I don't know whether I'm ready to go on with this sort of. . . Is it always this bad?"

And then they up a little bit and they say, "Well, I want to die now. I've seen everything, I've done everything. I've done everybody. There's nothing left," and so on. And then they go up to a point of "Oh, God, what's the use?" That's better than dying, you see, but it's just, "Oh, God, what's the use."

A little bit later, why, you see, the bucket has gone up to a point of "It's so sad. It is all so sad. Everything is so sad. Is there anything in the world that isn't sad?"

And then it goes up to a point — "You know, this is pretty scary stuff to be going through. Are you sure you know what you're doing?"

And then "God damn it! What do you think you're doing?" You know? And then "Well, we can leave this now. I haven't — ha-ha. Actually, this doesn't bother me any now. I'm not worried about it. We can leave the whole thing" And that's a wonderful invitation to an auditor. These are all wonderful invitations to an auditor to do something else, but particularly this one — "It's flat now."

The pc tells you, so it must be true. And they strike that boredom band. And more processes and engrams have been deserted by auditors at the boredom band than any other point. And they go up to the boredom band, and then the person says, "It isn't bothering me now." So the auditor says, "Well, that's wonderful. That's a good time to leave it." They've just struck boredom.

You go a little bit further, and they will become conservative about it. "Well, it probably is all right if I am careful." And then they will get enthusiastic about something else. And they've come out of it.

The valence goes down the same course. Now, this fellow is a gambler. The valence is a gambler. And you have at first a serene gambler. Nothing bothers him. All pervasive. Nothing worries him. Not a successful gambler — just nothing worries him, you see. He's very serene about it as he trumps his partner's ace. And down goes the bucket a little bit as you process this. The next thing you know, you have an enthusiastic gambler.

Now, this is what's weird. You've got an enthusiastic gambler about the same time as you have a dead pc. And these two things give us an odd view.

And then it goes down a little bit more, and you have a person who says, "Well, they're bored with gambling, and they don't think they will gamble anymore now," as they pick a packet of cards out of their pocket and start to deal you a hand. But it really doesn't interest them, and they can really leave it alone. And they now know that they can leave gambling alone, and so forth. Leave life alone. Leave everything alone. They'd still deal you a hand, however. While not being interested in what you have.

Then they go down, and you get an angry gambler, and you would then, about the time, you see, you have got an apathetic pc, you've got an angry gambler.

And then pretty soon, why, you have a weeping gambler. You don't see every level of the Tone Scale. Very often in processing, they're passed by fairly rapidly, or they don't express themselves or manifest themselves very cleanly. And you see a skip. Go from for instance, from anger to fear, and there'd be no anger.

And then the pc — about the time the pc is getting sort of griefy about it all, why, the gambler is sort of scared. And that is an interesting time to process him because you've no stable high tone. There's no stable high tone to fall back on.

The valence is now frightened. And the pc is weeping Well, which can the pc be, you see? The pc is weeping and his normal escape from it would be to be a serene gambler, but the gambler is now afraid. So there's just no place to hide along about that point.

And the pc really starts really unloading about this point because he finds out that if he's gone this far, there is no backtrack that he can reverse on in processing. He's got to face up to the lot.

Next line of action, of course, is the gambler just sort of fades out of view, and if you looked around a little while later you might find a degraded fragment left. And then it sort of disappears. The pc meantime has gone on up the Tone Scale.

Now, after this interchange of the counterbalance on the Tone Scale has taken place under the action of auditing, tell me, now, what happens? What should you do? How would you know whether or not this interchange has taken place? How do you know if that valence is flat? If your rudiments are totally in, and the tone arm is getting no motion, the valence is flat. But you make awful sure that you sweat hard over those rudiments. Azurrrrrr. Get them really in before you make a final check and make up your mind. Because the most fruitful source of fouled up cases is unflat valences, next to wrong goal, wrong terminal.

Now, what occurs here. What occurs? You've got a valence flat. You've checked it out. You've had another auditor test it very carefully on the pc. Check the pc for rudiments. Get the rudiments in. Check the terminal very carefully. It is apparently no longer active. Rudiments are in, and it's not active.

The pc is not Clear. What do you do now? You do it all over again. You do everything that you did before, step by step, the whole works. You do the lot. Except please don't take so long at it. Because if you take thirty hours to assess each new goal and each new terminal you're going to find on the pc, thirty hours for the goal and fifteen hours for the terminal, you are getting up into astronomic figures, because at the end of it they will blow it something on the rate of fifty an hour. So, you see, your plot of time is — starts being thrown.

Your next assessment is done exactly the same as your first assessment was done. you get the original list, and you try to add any new goals to it the pc now has. you get the rudiments in with great thoroughness and you assess that list and try to find a goal. And that time, you probably will find one.

You take that goal and you do not use any old terminals list at all. you simply go over this situation with the terminal — what terminals, cause, effect — and try to find the terminal that will hang up and will register. And you assess that exactly the same way as you did before.

Now, you take the terminal, fit it into the commands which you have been given, or in the old way, the Prehav Scale . . . And there are a lot of pcs, by the way, that you will have to run on the old Prehav Scale run, children particularly. Children, you won't be using any other than Prehav Scale. So, the Prehav Scale has not disappeared out of your lives. We simply upgraded some of it.

And the individual's terminal is then assessed on the Prehav Scale and you run that level and so here we go. And it's all perfectly okay.

Same way as before, except don't expect that to run very long. Don't expect it to run long Don't expect it to run forever.

I don't know. It'd be a wild guess. You couldn't tell how long the second terminal is going to run. There'd be no guessing it at all. But it should be much less than the first terminal took. But, of course, many other things could happen. And if it starts taking long or as long as the first terminal took, you should really get in and check your rudiments, and check your — do a Security Check and find out what in the name of common sense is going on here because his rudiments out. There is a difficulty here that had to do with the rudiments, not to do with the other.

Now, you run that one flat and you do the same thing all over again. All in the twenty-minute test of the tone arm. And you just keep doing this over and over. The only trouble is, you will very shortly get into this kind of a situation: It is utterly, completely impossible to do an assessment, but the thing that you have to face up to is you have to keep trying. Because the "keep trying to do the assessment" is actually auditing. And you'll just blow them by the bucketload. You'll blow goals, goals, goals, goals, goals, goals. You get a goal and it stays in, out, thuu-thuu. "We got that goal. That goal's staying in. Thank heaven.

"Well, we got that goal staying in. All right. Now, how is the terminal now? How is the terminal? All right. Let's get a list of eight, nine, ten terminals. Oh, we got these terminals. Now, if we find one reacting there — oh well. Are there any more terminals?"

"No, there are no more terminals."

"Are there any more...." you can't get any reaction. No more terminals. And the guy hasn't got any more terminals for that particular goal. you go back and you look at the goal. It isn't reacting, so you get the rudiments in with the greatest of care, you see. Because two reasons the thing can be reacting, you're always in the bind as an auditor.

It isn't reacting because the rudiments are out or it isn't reacting because it's flat. Until you get to be a flat-out expert on it, you won't sometimes be able to tell which, so you have to make sure that those rudiments are in.

And you go back to find the goal which you just found and it's gone. And it's like trying to shuffle quicksilver. It just keeps disappearing. And the tone arm settles closer, closer down to Clear, and the needle begins to float more and more. And then the needle does nothing but float. It's totally free needle.

Needle is totally free. you have to be terribly quick at that particular stage of the game. you have to be fantastically fast to get any kind of a read at all. The pc is — the pc isn't stabilized as a Clear yet, see. The pc's just a borderline Clear. And he's got a stomachache so you sit down and you try to find a stomachache and give him an assist or something or find something. And trying to get the needle to react enough to find any kind of a confusion that would give him a stomachache or anything that's left out. . . It's just straight on the fly. you can't — it is not possible to build a meter that will react little enough that will still react on the reaction. I mean, if you cut down the reaction of the sensitivity enough, you wouldn't get any reaction of any character whatsoever on the thing that was wrong. And the thing is just defeated in all directions.

But that's perfectly all right. There's nothing really wrong with that.

You merely have to be real fast. you have to watch the needle very carefully, and you suddenly see that at a swing of the needle, it did a slight hesitation as it went by you. Got it. you got that engram. It has to do with murdering eight babies and being operated on and so forth. And then you have the pc look it over, and you're going to straighten it all out except now it's gone. And it's still there. And the pc can put it back and confront it and handle it, and so forth.

Well, what do you want to know about it? The name of the doctor? Well, it was Jones. And you're not getting any reaction on this thing There's no reaction on the pc. Oh, a pc has still got pictures. That's all it says. It blows.

And that is about the way it goes. That is the way the thing rolls on up the line. Now, we just speeded and accelerated this enormously, but at the same time we have done this, we have taken away one of the tests which you had. The test is the Prehav level.

If a terminal is wrong, or if a goal is wrong and the terminal is wrong — of course, the goal is wrong, also the terminal usually is wrong. But if the terminal is wrong, and you give the pc a run on the Prehav Scale, you'll have maybe ten levels alive at the first assessment of the Prehav Scale. And you give him a run on the Prehav Scale, and then if you've got — less levels are alive or react on your first assessment, chances are your terminal is right. And if there are more, your terminal is wrong And you are forewarned from running that terminal any further. It isn't necessary for you to run the terminal any further.

You've got to go back and check the whole thing over again. But you haven't got this now that you're not running the Prehav Scale, that you're running a packaged process. You have no prevention whatsoever from running a bad terminal. And let me assure you of this: that if you run the wrong terminal on a pc, with this particular process particularly, you will just foul up his bank like fire drill. That will be one awful mess. And I just cannot warn you too much about it.

It gives us an administrative problem. How in the name of common sense are we going to be absolutely sure that everybody who is run to Clear all over the world is always run on the right goal and the right terminal. Because this has been invariable now. It's very solid. It's leading right straight through to clearing How can we guarantee that every one found will be the right one. How can we guarantee this because there's not even now a secondary test to find out if it's the right one.

There is a point of skill. There is a point of skill and excellence. So you can only say, never run a goal and terminal unless it's been checked by an expert who has been well trained at Saint Hill. That would be the most conservative thing that you could — possibly could do about it. I mean — I mean, the most sensible thing you could. I can't see possibly how we could do anything else but that, because let me let you in on an interesting datum that maybe you don't know. We have had a lot of people arrive here — a lot of students arrive here — with their goals and terminals already assessed.

And let me tell you they have been assessed with the greatest of care in the best possible spirit. And they have been 100 percent wrong. And if run, they just would have spun somebody right into the ground. Food for thought, isn't it.

I'm not exaggerating or trying to tell you how important Saint Hill is. I'm telling you a point of danger on the road.

Running the right terminal does not react the same on a pc as running the wrong terminal. The misemotional states the pc gets into is not an index of wrong terminal. Misemotional states will only occur if the right terminal is being run.

What you get on a wrong terminal is a rising tone arm which eventually sticks and doesn't blow down. You've beefed up the bank, and that's what a wrong terminal will do on a run.

Now, there are other things that can make the tone arm do this, too. The rudiments can be out, and the tone arm will do this. So, if your rudiments are put in, then you have an opportunity to sort out the goal and the terminal and make sure they're right. But there's a terrible danger — I'm not exaggerating this — in actually running very long a wrong terminal. It is very dangerous.

The whole bank goes solid, and although it will key out in three to seven days if the fellow just — you just leave him alone, see. Three to seven days, why, it'll key out. He'll be feeling all right. Any psychosomatic he's got is going to get worse. But not with any misemotion about it. It's simply going to get worse. The pressure in his chest is going to get harder. The pressure on his head is going to get worse. That is all. It's just going to get worse, all the way around, and the tone arm is going to come up and stick because the bank is getting more solid.

If you are running the right terminal, you generally get more and more action and a looser and looser needle and more and more misemotion. You get emotional changes if you are running a right terminal. And if your pc is crying and everything and you're just having a hell of a time because you haven't got a big enough mop, and if it's just terrible what's going on in life, and it's all so grim. And you say, "Well, it must be the wrong terminal," come up and see me sometime. I have some antique dueling pistols. And you can load them up with ground glass and other bits of razor blades so I can shoot you. I have to add that preventive just for one reason because we have had cases of auditors who ran from emotion.

You know, the pc is getting too emotional so let's change the process. There must be something wrong because the pc's getting emotional.

No! That's the reaction. No, if the pc isn't getting emotional, there must be something wrong. It's just exactly the reverse, you see? The pc sits there, "Yeah, well, the Rosicrucians, they read things. Yes. I left them. Yes. All right. Good. What is my problem? Yes. No."

And this goes on by the hour. And there's never any cognitions. He never sheds any tears. He never says, "What do you know!" You got the wrong terminal.

So there are ways to tell. There are ways to tell that you've got the wrong terminal on the pc. But the best way to be absolutely sure that you have the right one is the best way. And that's to get the right one in the first place. And make sure that it's the right one before it's run. That's the Achilles' heel right now of Scientology on Routine 3 is getting the right goal and the right terminal. Because I've just packaged you up a set of processes that perhaps will have to be downgraded or rearranged as we run into cases and so forth, but for the usual case should blow it straight on through.

And you don't have to worry about Prehav Scale if this continues to work out properly. May run into some bugs, but I don't think so. I've been working on it here for months, actually, and just for the last two weeks have been doing nothing but orienting this set of commands. And it looks to me like they're pretty well oriented.

You could add to them. There are quite a few commands you could add to them. And you get a 15-, 30-, 40-, 60-, 112-command bracket. You could go on and on and on. And what you're trying to strike is the intermediate, whereas you give the effective commands which are adequate so they won't hang up the case.

All right. Do you understand a little bit more of what you're about now with regard to this? You say, "Well, what — where does this leave a Class II Auditor?"

It leaves a Class II Auditor right where he is. Security checking and running problems. You say, "Well, what happened to all these Problems Intensives?"

Well, nothing happened to these Problems Intensives. You can still do Problems Intensives. But I have learned this about a Problems Intensive, and you taught me: that after you found the problem, just as you've been going about it, you don't dare run the problem. The problem is simply an index and an indicator to give you the area of confusion immediately ahead of it. And you do nothing but Security Checking after finding the problem. And you never do a repetitive run on the problem of any kind. you disregard the problem.

You find the problem — find the area of change, find the problem. And then, disregarding that, list the personnel in the area of confusion immediately ahead of that and do a Security Check on them. And that is how you do a Problems Intensive.

I'll write all this up on a form. It's all good going. It's just fine. It'll just work dandy, and everybody will be pleased with it, and a lot of cases make a lot more advances than they're making now. People will be set up so that they can be assessed and cleared that never have been before. All this is very valuable. But just at the present moment, why, this doesn't happen to be for you. You're on your road to Clear. So don't strike any barricades. Just go right on through, will you?

By the way, by the way, you can always talk to me. Did you ever realize that? You can always talk to me. you never realized that? Well, you always can, you know. The least way you can do so is send me a note. I always see all of them. This works for people all over the world.

I see an enormous amount of correspondence, believe me, and although I sometimes snarl at people on staff for sending me a note or letter, and I sometimes don't see letters and so forth, if they're just totally routine and that sort of thing, if somebody really has to, I generally — I generally listen.

And before you drop yourself off London Bridge, I can probably — I can probably give you some pointers on waiting on tug schedules so that you won't. . . so if it gets too horrible, why, you can write me a note or have a word with me. Okay?

Audience: Yes.

Thank you.