Thank you.

Our lecture today involves man embroiled in the roiling toils of Earth.

The sixth and seventh dynamics are the target of the auditor. And if you consider that all thought or a think is immediately adjacent to the seventh, then you see that life could be considered to be a thetan and his immediate thoughts, to the exclusion of MEST.

In other words, we get a thetan and his significances versus MEST and its confines. This is a very important mm of theory. It seems indicated that it is a very useful approach.

Now, of course, we realize that a thetan got into it originally with his postulates, and we realize that life did postulate the existence of the universe. And we don’t much care about the theological argument of whether life had horns or was named Jove or so forth. We’re not interested in that That’s still, to some degree, included in the seventh dynamic — not the eighth.

There’s only one God included in the eighth, but if you look, it should be included in the seventh. If anybody is having any difficulty whatsoever seeing MEST, I’ll let you in on something: He’s never noticed any Supreme Being. He’s probably noticed some spirit or something of the sort mocked up in this factor. But almost anybody who was run on the Supreme Being finds himself as a priest inventing a god, which puts us back immediately on the seventh — also, on the first, and for the somewhat questionable purposes of the third which usually deteriorate into a second activity.

Now, the dynamics are the dynamics, and they are conceivable from simply the first-rank idea that they’re various subdivisions of life, but only if they’re seen purely as subdivisions of life.

Now, the moment that they become subordinate to the sixth dynamic, you get an inversion. And all things are apparently derived from the sixth dynamic, which gives us the modem world’s fixation on science, which goes hand in glove with the favorite scientific belief that man is mud and has always been mud. I suppose they get this way from changing or trying to keep clean their young children or something of this sort I’m not quite sure exactly where this idea came from, beyond the fact that it’s probably an inverted sixth.

Well, the dynamics, seen through MEST as a communication media, rather easily invert over into a parade of dynamics which are all stretched out from the sixth. That is the inversion point.

Now, all the dynamics are there originally, and then they more and more fixate on the sixth dynamic, MEST. And we get people seeing everything from the trap, you might say.

They set up traps for one another, and these traps — and MEST gets a bad name. And after it gets a bad name, why, everything begins to be derived from MEST because it is the thing which has done the total overwhelm of all thetans.

Now, in a universe such as this one, thetans complain about this. They like to see the beautiful scenery and this and that And these are now being seen through fallout — atomic fallout And they’re being seen through “How bad it all is,” and “How dangerous it all is,” and “How you mustn’t touch any part of it” And government is becoming obsessed with the control of MEST or something of the sort.

And this has very, very little to do, don’t you see, with what a thetan might have to do with He might have to do with a great many things. But when he gets too fixated, when he gets too trapped, then a trap is the basic thing from which he is seeing everything else. So everything looks like a trap to him.

You go out and you say to some fellow, “Well, we can get you over your coughs and wheezes,” and so on.

And right away, why, the BMA, the AMA, the other inmates of the institutions, all rush out and say, “No, no, no. That’s a complete trap.” They say it in various ways. They can’t confront a trap, so they say, “Well, it’s a fake” or “It’s betrayal,” or it’s something of this sort But they’re all very convinced of this. You must give credit to the sincerity of these men — this, they believe. This, they believe utterly.

And if all things are a trap, why, then, any offer to help, of course, is an effort to trap. Well, that’s seeing the world from an immersion, you might say, in the sixth dynamic.

And I don’t know what a tiger thinks walking up and down his cage, but I know it’s a very interesting thing trying to let some people out of their cages. You open the door and you say, “Look, there it is,” and the fellow — he gets very, very doubtful about this. He is so convinced that all is a trap that, of course, the freeing of him looks to him like a further entrapment.

And you get some of the wildest reactions on the part of people — very doubtful. In the first place, they’re not sure that they can be trusted with freedom. So they give you various arguments as to how they shouldn’t be, and so forth.

I dare say if you tried to let some circus lion out of his cage — I, by the way, have seen this happen — let a circus lion out of his cage, and he runs around in the free world and of course he jumps and snarls and growls at everybody and he’s very frightened. He’s very upset and he goes around expressing rage, terror and other misemotions of one kind or another.

He doesn’t go sit out in the sun some place and say, “Heh, what do you know? Some fresh air — heh.” He doesn’t do anything like this, you see? He goes roaring around and jumping at people and shying off and snarling, and so on.

And you never saw such a relieved lion in your life as when he finally has gotten back into his cage. He sits down and he says, “Wheeeew. Boy, that was a dose one. I almost got free.”

Well, what a very weird frame of mind. Well, it’s an odd frame of mind to be in, that he could be trapped in the first place.

A higher-toned animal, a crocodile — actually that’s a fact, he probably is a little bit higher toned, because of his reaction to freedom, just based on that alone. You get a gator or a croc and try to put him in captivity, and so forth, he just says, ‘Well, that’s it. I’ve had it” — promptly tries to give up the ghost and depart elsewhere to pick up a free croc. He doesn’t monkey around with this trap business to amount to anything, but of course he’s a rather snide character anyhow. He’s armor plated and he has no enemies in the world, and so on.

That’s a fact, by the way, about crocs. They have to be force-fed with poles and things like that. You have to shove food down their throats. They just starve themselves to death the moment they’re captured — otherwise.

The basis of the trap is, of course, matter, energy, space, time, form and location — any or all of which have gotten a bad name. That’s all it amounts to. A trap, after all, is just matter, energy, space, time, form and location. That’s all it is. So, therefore, to be horrible, it must be something which has gotten a bad name, see? That would be the only condition that would be a poor condition, don’t you see?

MEST is simply MEST. It’s just MEST. People must have overts against it and must have used it in discreditable ways in order to begin to believe that the stuff is dangerous.

Now, how do you suppose that you get injured by barking your shins on a stone step? How does it hurt? How is it that it can abuse your shins?

Well, of course, I wouldn’t call any names, but I can see you now up on the edge of the cliff there, dropping stones on the heads of people who were trying to climb the cliff, which is a discreditable use of MEST of course. That’s giving MEST a bad name.

Now, I can see now somebody having a wonderful time sailing around in a saucer and enjoying the wide free outer spaciousness of space and having a ball.

And then somebody saying to him, or him saying to somebody else, “Now what you do is get in that saucer and you go over to the planet Zug and knock hell out of it” — discreditable use of a saucer.

In other words, the use of these various MEST objects for destruction and for punishment, other such things, winds up in giving MEST a bad name. That’s about all it amounts to. I mean, if you can look over this simplicity, you’ll see that it had to have a bad name before it could be used as a trap.

Already, for anybody to be trapped in MEST, he must consider MEST — now understand this — unconfrontable, untouchable to some degree. He must have some superstitions about it, and, oh, there must be a very complicated package concerning this MEST. This must be a very complicated mess. It must be, for him not to be able to handle it.

Well, I’ve been having a little bit of a hard time running Havingness because of the impulse of turning chairs upside down. Do you realize that this, today, would be an overt act? It would be an overt act against people. They would say, “Aaaah!” Got the idea?

So you get this impulse and then you think, “I better not do that, you know? I better not go around pushing it down, you know, disappearing walls and that sort of thing, because basically it’s an overt act Everybody would get very upset” — it would spoil the game, sort of a computation.

Well, all right. There are very many complications as to how you could make MEST a discreditable creation.

Now, we have one particular group today that is working very hard at it And I have severely had nothing to do with them whatsoever because I know that it isn’t whether I had engrams on having done it We’ve all had a hand in the destruction of this and that and the misuse of MEST. It isn’t whether or not I’ve had a hand in it I just know it just doesn’t go, that’s all.

Using knowledge like atomic fission to make MEST discreditable to all life-forms on Earth is going to wind somebody up in the soup. I’ve taken just as much responsibility for it as knowing that it will and having mentioned it and have — overtly refusing to employ the stuff for destructive actions. I don’t even want to go into the defense manufacture of the stuff, you know? The devil with that overt-motivator sequence there, you see? I think the more attention that is paid to it, the more beefed up the thing will become. But that’s using MEST for discreditable reasons.

Now, everybody likes polished wood. How about polished wood formed into a rifle butt? You know, that’s getting just a little bit — even though amongst us guys, we like weapons — it’s just over the edge, you see?

All right Now, you have a perfectly good shooting rifle. How about misusing it? Bashing in airman’s head with it or something — using it as a club as a discreditable use of a rifle. Got the idea? It’s just another little offbeat, see this?

Now, that’s a very innocent-looking gradient, one way or the other, but these get very complicated. Got the idea?

Audience: Mm-hm.

Ford makes an automobile, and it’s a nice automobile and it has good lines and it runs right. And they work very hard to bring its price down to where people could afford to drive them, and so forth. And then the powers that be issue driver’s licenses to people that you couldn’t even get to sit in a predear’s chair. Well, you couldn’t even get them near an auditing session. “Blaaaaaaaah,” you know? Control.

And here these guys are doing what? They mm this Ford into a deadly weapon. Got the idea?

Audience: Mm-hm.

And they give cars a bad name.

Now, why the devil a car should have a bad name is kind of interesting, because a car can get you from hither to hence, and with any degree of control or sensibility of any kind whatsoever, and with everybody with a fairly decent reaction time, you couldn’t possibly get into trouble with a car — you couldn’t possibly. All you had to do was walk around it once in a while and make sure the nuts and bolts are still holding the wheels on.

Ah, but there’s always that crossroad where the truck is halfway out of the road just as you come around the comer. Now, how about that?

Actually, you walked around your car once in a while and listened to the motor. But that truck driver that morning — because he’s a driver of a corporation, you know? He’s a corporation driver — doesn’t have anything to do with ... He starts up the truck engine. It goes kkkk kkkk kkkk kkkk kkkk kkkk kkkk — pseeew. He manages to get it going, notices it’s only running on three, and it’s got twelve or something of the sort He notices the steering gear is all limp and floppy, you see, and the brakes don’t work.

Have you ever checked out corporation vehicles? Oh, wow! They’re fantastic. And of course the guy is halfway out of the crossroad when you come around the comer. But until you’ve taken responsibility for his idiocy, cars will continue to have a bad name.

Now therefore, you must have been, somewhere along the line, irresponsible for the idiocy of others. Otherwise, you wouldn’t be interested in it now. And factually speaking, you couldn’t even have an automobile accident or bung your shins on a stone step or feel unwanted pain without having become irresponsible for the idiocy, and so forth, of others.

You must have gotten awfully one-sided someplace along the line and decided to resist something and then said, “The end. .. ’’ — these are the greatest last words any sane man ever uttered. Any sane thetan, just before he took the plunge, made some statement like “The end justifies the means. Now, they are all out of control over there, and therefore it is all right for me toin order to get the situation in control again.” Get the idea?

Audience: Mm-hm.

The end justifies the means. Well, where the means consist of making MEST discreditable and being wholly one-sided in solutions, the end never justifies the means. The dynamics must be served. They are very demanding in this particular wise.

If the dynamics do not have attention paid to them, and if the solutions arrived at are not for the greatest good of the greatest number of dynamics — looked at rather — rather coldly and flatly, not trickily and coverdy so as to make it all come out to make the end justify the means, you know — why, you get into some kind of a situation where all creations of any kind are discreditable creations to somebody. That is the end product.

Now, basically, the universe in which we exist has been used discreditably so often, one has failed to take responsibility on the various dynamics so often, one has employed the various types, kinds and forms of MEST discreditably, sufficiendy often, that the universe itself gets collapsed down to the sixth. See how it arrives at the sixth — you see? The sixth is a common denominator of all overts except the overts against self, which leaves one some seventh because MEST is not a common denominator of overts against self. There is some seventh left and a lot of sixth. Well, all right.

Therefore, you can, because it keeps on inverting from that point on down, by giving a stress, this theory goes, to the sixth dynamic and the seventh, we should be able to take apart any case by taking the sixth dynamic off of the seventh dynamic. And if we do that, we will get back all of our dynamics because we’ve reinverted, you see, and uprighted the sixth. And we get all the dynamics back. You got the idea?

Audience: Mm-hm.

Well, now that is the way the theory goes. And so far, it has apparently been working out very well. Early in this course I kept telling you that a tone arm ought to move at least three divisions on the E-Meter per hour. And you all started looking at me ... “Three divisions an hour... oh yeah. I don’t know. I thought my preclear was going pretty good and he’s getting a half a division,” or “He’s getting one division,” or “He’s getting a division and a half.” And that’s where you were about three weeks ago. You were only getting a one- to two-division shift per hour of processing, which, of course, was not even off the launching pad. That was just sitting there fizzling. And ... All right.

Now, we’ve gotten it up there now till, I think, the bulk of the class is getting the three divisions an hour I told you you ought to be getting. But we had to compensate for several mechanisms in order to do this. Because we were concentrated on MEST, one of the things that happened is the stature or altitude of the auditor, particularly a student auditor, would suffer. In other words, the auditing commands didn’t have the same amount of oomph. The pc did not feel as thoroughly bound to follow the auditing command. So what we did was overcome this by a new, better theory which also took care of this.

Now, that — the swiftness of recovery of a case would have to do with the untrappedness of a case, wouldn’t it? How much thought is unwillingly trapped on this case? How much trappedness does this case consider itself subjected to, which of course is also, how much trapping has this case done?

Now, the rapidity with which the traps come apart is directly expressed in the variability during processing of the tone arm and the tightening and loosening of the E-Meter needle. These two things will express this.

Now, you can say rather critically, “Well, you’re processing MEST, and of course you’re changing the density and flows of the case like mad if you’re processing straight at MEST with no significance changes. And so, therefore, of course, you’d get more action on the E-Meter.”

Well, this would be all right and is perfectly true, but there’s one thing that is missing in that rationale. If the theory were true, that would get one out of the woods. But it is also true that a case which isn’t moving, regardless of what’s being run — thought, significance, types of terminal or anything else — isn’t moving on the E-Meter.

And a case that does move rapidly on the E-Meter moves rapidly on the test graphs which test, after all, nothing but significance. You see that?

Audience: Mm-hm.

So there’s a cross-coordination back into the seventh as to the amount of freedom which the individual is now capable of expressing.

Now, if an individual is incapable of expressing freedom in the sixth dynamic, he, of course, is also incapable of being. That is, his seventh is pinned down. He is not capable of being if he can’t be free in his employment of the sixth dynamic.

Now, you may think, by dropping all significance out of the processes, which is to say, processing no significant point, getting the pc to change his ideas and that sort of thing — getting a pc to change his ideas, of course, is freeing up old ideas that he has had parked. Well, the mechanism of how they’re freed up, oddly enough, is that they’re surrounded by MEST and they only free up if you take the MEST off of them. So, of course, you are freeing these things up. Anyhow . . .

But let’s take a look at this situation. Does an individual, becoming freer without having significances changed, become a moral liability to the society? Is this new ability to employ action going to be used well or badly as far as the rest of the society is concerned?

Well, once more, horribly enough, it only frees up if you get off those times he has employed MEST discreditably. And, of course, he notices that in passing. He sure does. He’d have to notice it in passing, otherwise he wouldn’t get any better.

It wouldn’t matter what you did to him mechanically. If he didn’t notice in passing that it was his own misuse of this stuff and his own misuse of beingnesses and identities, position, and so forth — his own misusages got him into trouble.

And if he doesn’t find this somewhere along the line, he doesn’t recover, and you haven’t set him free. So your moral responsibility, which is always something you should keep an eye on, has not been overset.

If an individual doesn’t become better capable of employing his experience to monitor his own conduct, he doesn’t get well, which is a very interesting fact — interesting indeed.

The theosophist, by the way, on an old time track that was taken out of the Buddhist philosophy, sought to enjoin moral conduct upon its people who were coming up the righteous path, and so forth. And they had ten or eleven precepts of conduct which you must do or somebody would shoot you or something, or you wouldn’t recover or something.

Well now, this is an enforced morality. And morality which is not based upon wisdom — oh, I hope we learn this lesson well this trip — is useless. Morality which is not based upon wisdom is useless. I don’t care how many squadrons of cavalry, I don’t care how many policemen, I don’t care how fancy are the ray guns, and so forth, if you enforce morality by making MEST discreditable, you’ve had it.

All you do is just upset any moral decency in the society and turn them all into a flock of criminals. And that’s how it would be done.

So as we look over this new rationale, we find out that if you take the seventh dynamic away, you get into trouble. In other words, if all you did was strip thought, strip thought, strip thought, strip thought, you’d get into trouble.

Now, we’ve known for a long time that you had to run terminals rather than significances, and so forth, so this isn’t brand-new to processing by a long way. But what it does is go to an extreme. And the rationale you’re working with, good or bad, is this extreme rationale: Is that you strip the sixth off of the seventh — that you leave the seventh more or less alone.

And we have excellent fundamentals for that. Exteriorization is very useful, it’s very interesting, it’s very exciting, it’s lots of fun and it doesn’t work.

Now, just consider this then: That if it doesn’t work — taking a thetan out of his ruddy head — if it doesn’t make him any better no matter how thoroughly he goes out of his head, then taking thoughts out of his bank as an equivalent action isn’t going to work either. And that’s what we, to a large degree, decided here — that exteriorizing thoughts from the bank is not going to make him well.

In other words, you haven’t got a proposition there. Perhaps all of the gain we’ve made up until now is the amount of sixth we’ve straightened out, see? But we could have straightened out an awful lot of sixth accidentally because all of the processes were being done in the sixth dynamic. That is to say, auditing sessions take place in this universe — most of the time.

Now therefore, stripping those things which an individual considers reprehensible out of the sixth dynamic and freeing him up, results in a freeing up of the person, his ability to act, his ability to think, and lessens the possibility or probability that he will go back into the same trap by discreditably employing the power which he has acquired, because he has already learned his lesson. He knows where it got him. He knows what the score is — wisdom with experience.

Now, wherever an individual is having a very, very rough time, I would say that his overts against MEST and against the sixth and against the seventh, one or the other or both, are sufficiently large as to prohibit him from facing either.

Now, all you have to do is undo that particular mechanisms and there’s ways and means of undoing that particular mechanisms which I’ll give you in a later lecture which you already will be using here, which is — probably amount to Presessions III and IV — just undoing those particular mechanisms.

Therefore, our theory is only new to the degree that it is being bluntly, flatly and conclusively stated. And we’re going to check it out along this line. And so far, it is checking out just fine. And I think you’re doing very well. And I want to thank you for the speed that you are making.

Thank you.