[Start of Lecture]

Thank you.

All right. Now, let me see, this is February the what?

Voices: Twelfth.

Twelfth, 1957.

And this is Lincoln's Birthday. Really? And the...

Voice: Twenty-ninth.

.twenty-ninth lecture of the 16th ACC. Very good. Very good.

This is the last lecture of the ACC, and it is devoted to questions and summary material. And the first thing I'm going to tell you if you ever forget this — if you ever forget this — that I am about to tell you, illustrate and demonstrate, I myself will come around and zap you personally. And that isn't good.

Now, forgetting this material, you might just as well not have studied Scientology, ever. You understand? If you forget this material, you might just as well never have studied Scientology - - this material I am about to give you at this moment!

And if you go out and make a bunch of case boo-boos and case flops, it's because you're forgetting what I'm telling you right this minute! And that goes for everybody present: in the back of the room, the front of the room, to the right of the room, the left of the room and underneath the room. Got it? This goes here.

This is the difference between the results of a figure-figure process (a thinkingness or significance or change-the-mind process), as compared to a process addressed directly to terminals (a process which makes things solid, a process which remedies havingness, a process which increases a person's ability to confront), whether or not that process is 8-C or Find the Auditor or anything else. The difference between those two classes of processes is success and failure.

The only reason some people don't get any results on bad-off, way-low-scale preclears is because they've never taken this to heart. They just Q-and-A with the preclear. You understand this? They just Q-and-A with the preclear.

The preclear's sitting there, figure-figure-figure-figure-figure- figure-figure, significance-significance, complication - complication, figure-figure-figure-figure, worry-worry-worry- worry, anxiety, figure-figure-figure. And the auditor sits there, „Ah, I know what to process this case with“: figure-figure- figure, anxiety-anxiety, worry-worry-worry, significance- significance, figure-figure, change the mind, figure-figure, assign a value, figure-figure. You get the idea? Significances! The auditor Q-and-A's with the preclear.

The preclear is so concerned with the significance that he misses all the terminals from which he got these significances. And on such a preclear you run a process which processes total significances, and you are only running the secondhand manifestations of the terminals he has failed to confront. You're running the secondhand particles, the manifestations which have flowed off terminals he's failed to confront. And those things are countless, they go to the number of infinity squared.

The number of terminals he has confronted, even in seventy-six trillion years, is a finite number. But the number of significances he has picked up from those terminals is infinite.

And on any preclear that you would think you had to process, the processing of anything but terminals is a waste of time! Now, by golly, if you know this you'll never lose!

And if you go Q-and-A-ing with figure-figure-figure, worry-worry- worry, significance-significance-significance, what is the meaning of this? what is the meaning of that? you'll lose all the way down the line. And that's the only difference in Scientology techniques between success and failure. Now, your procedure could be perfect, and you would keep the guy from going out the bottom with a figure-figure technique. With perfect procedure you could probably hold him even with a figure- figure technique. You got the idea? But it would take perfect procedure to do it. And if you added bad procedure to a figure- figure technique, he'd go right on out the bottom.

This is important! It's important what I'm telling you. Because there's no sense in auditing people if you're not going to do something for them. If you want to butcher somebody, they make knives. If you're mad at somebody — I know no auditor is ever guilty of this, by the way. It's a marvelous thing. But sometimes he unwittingly does something that is very, very detrimental to the case. And that thing is always summated under significance. He figures and adds and subtracts, and does Change-the-Mind processes on somebody who is total secondhand significance.

Whose significances are you changing around? Changing around Mama's, Papa's and teachers' and cousins' and aunts' and sisters', you see? Those are the significant processes — those are the things that significant processes address themselves to. See, it's just secondhand thought! You might say he's a used- thought market! And are you going to change this around in this fellow?

Well, the wonderful part of it is, today in Scientology, that you can change this around in this fellow. By doing what? By making it possible for him to confront and hold together and hold still and make solid, terminals. And you can bring about a major change in the person.

Now, I'll give you an example. Had a preclear once; he talked to me about the Akashic Record. This is a wonderful mechanism that somebody dreamed up on the backtrack, and it runs like this: It is everywhere at all times and it has no time in it, and it's got everything written in it that ever happened, and everything written in it that ever will happen. It's a library which is without time or space, which contains a totality of significances. And this fellow had this thing on the brain. He didn't have it on the thetan because he didn't have one. But he had it on the brain.

And he just went round and round about this Akashic Record and Akashic Record. And it would know everything. And if you could only get at it; but it had no time and location in space. In other words, he was insane on this one subject.

In other words, everybody who had ever processed him had been processing a piece of this Akashic Record. And how far do you think this case had gotten under auditing? He had gotten exactly nowhere.

And I took hold of this case, and I made him carefully locate the person and place he had learned about the Akashic Record. And I made him make that one solid. And that was the end of the Akashic Record! Just like that! We did a recordectomy — bang! By doing what? By locating the terminal which shed the record. Do you see that? So we could have processed significances on this case forever! And we would have gotten nowhere. But we processed a solid and we got somewhere just like that — bang!

Now, look-a-here. Here are two cases. I had these cases specially drawn up and delivered over here today just to show them to you, and these two cases are very recent cases.

They were processed this way for a purpose. The case I hold in my right hand and the case I hold in my left hand are actually the same basic profile. Do you see this? They're the same profile. You got that? All right.

This case was audited on significances which matched the way he had to change his mind in order to live right — this case I'm holding in my right hand. And what do we see? We see the blue line and the red line almost coincident. We see no change of case. There's no change of case there because the auditor was so good, the case didn't sink. Do you see that? It's an HGC auditor processing this case on total significances, and he didn't go out the bottom.

Now, this is the same basic case. This is the same basic lines: the blue line is the first one, the red line is the second one. Take a look at it; there's a difference between those two lines. There is a difference.

These cases are basically „unsolvable cases.“ Freudian psychoanalysis would have quit on these cases about eighty thousand miles above where we're willing to quit. Freud characterized these cases as „detached personalities“ that found that nothing was real, and so forth. Now, that's what Freud classified them as, and nobody in Dianetics ever moved these cases either, no matter what they were processed on.

All right. Now, let's look at these cases and see that this one stayed the same on figure-figure processes with good procedure, and this one is the result of twenty-five hours of Hand Contact Mimicry only! You see that change? He came up. What do you know? Not only does the change reflect in the profile, but it reflects on the preclear.

On this one that benefited, the sessions were closed with a little bit of walking around, and they did just a tiny little bit of Havingness on the room — tiny bit; not enough to worry about — just to extrovert the preclear slightly from the process. It was just to get him out of session a bit.

Now, there is the result of twenty-five hours of Hand Contact Mimicry. Now, I could tell you I had this done for you here in the 16th ACC. But as a matter of fact, somebody at the HGC figured out I would want something like this. And without my asking for it, he knew I'd want this so he went ahead and did it for twenty-five hours and turned in the report.

Now, this is quite remarkable, since this case is now into a more solvable level and is actually changing upscale. Now, we don't say that this case had a wonderful win in twenty-five hours — case is still below the line — but the case can now do other processes with gain. Now, we don't know when in that twenty-five hours the peak gain was reached, which afterwards did not advance. But we do know that we brought this case a change, that had never been changed, and we never would have done it with any figure-figure process.

Now, let me show you what was run on this other case. „How could you waste an auditor?“ for three-quarters of an hour. This is no change in this case. „How could you waste an auditor?“ and some Tactile Havingness was run. (But Havingness is a very far level above this case's ability to audit.) These are things the case said it was worried about, and everything the case was worried about was run on the case. „Tell me something that could be of value or use to you. How could you waste that?“ That's a good figure-figure, isn't it? „Tell me something of value, use or worth to you, and how could you waste that?“ And „How could you waste an auditor?“

Well, you say the auditor is sitting there in front of him as a terminal, and it's kind of a terminal process. It sure didn't work that way. He was too far from the auditor to know the auditor was there, and the auditor just let him sit there and figure-figure.

„Describe that wall, ceiling and floor.“ Now, you'd say there's some benefit in this. I mean, after all, he is looking in that direction. But that would be a questionable process.

„Tell me something of worth or value to you. How could you waste it?“ „How could you waste a body?“ was the next one. „Look around the room and tell me something worth noticing.“ My goodness, that's a lot of figure-figure.

This case, by the way, ate this up. Tremendous interest!

„What evidence is there that there's a room here?“ That wild?

Male voice: Wow!

Another voice: A real sharpie.

And various comments here: „Pc feels like he has an existence other than just a body, which pleases him on this.“ But yet all the auditor asks is „Look around the room“ — trying to wind up the session in five minutes worth of „Look around the room and tell me something a body can't have.“ Actually, this was run for two hours at the end of the session. Already this process was above the preclear's ability to handle. And he ran „Tell me something the body can't have,“ and the pc immediately felt he had an existence other than just a body, which pleased him.

Oh, now look, it was suggested by the auditing command, and the auditor gave the command, and the pc cognited on the command by reacting to it completely.

Now, that's the story. That's the story. You want to look these over? Pass them around.

Figure-figure-figure-figure-figure means down-down-down-down- down. Significance, meaningness — any one of these things — will not undercut a tough case. All that case is doing, however, is figure-figure-figure-figure-figure. And it doesn't undercut the case. But Hand Contact Mimicry with a little increasing distance, run for twenty-five hours, did move such a case up the line.

Female voice: What happened to the IQs?

The IQs, oddly enough, were never stable. We have a long series of tests on these, and in these cases, the IQs are not significant. The APAs were always constant. And on this particular test, the one that was run on the figure-figure processes went up in IQ, and the other one stayed almost the same. But the one who went up on the IQ, in this particular case, is an invalid IQ. He was bothered or pestered during the first test, so it's meaningless. His IQ has been up there before, and it's been down there before.

In other words, a little disturbance to such a person while he is taking a test will mean a throw of the IQ. You got the idea? All you have to do is disturb him a little bit while he's answering the IQ paper, and he is so susceptible to disturbance that he goes completely off, you see, and he doesn't get a good IQ. Now, you give him a quiet IQ and you get a better IQ. See? And you can just do this. You could throw one of these tests any way you want to.

Psychologists try to throw these all the time. If anybody ever asks you to get validative-type tests, or something like that, that a psychologist is going to administer, you get a nice sawed- off shotgun, and stand there and make that psychologist be quiet! Because he will take the „before“ test and not bother the person. And in the „after“ test, he will rag him and nag him and say, how does he know this is true? and how does he know that's true? and get him thoroughly upset, and he'll get a low grade. And he'll demonstrate that Scientology doesn't work this way. They've already done it a couple of times.

And then we get a sawed-off shotgun, and we say, „Two tests. And then they're going to be left in the room by themselves and that's that.“ And the tests come out properly.

Here, then, is the biggest statement I have to give you, the biggest message I have to give you as a class unit, the most impressive thing I have to say: Granted that you can now do procedure well, granted that you know a technique from a pitchfork, granted that your auditor ability to handle emergencies and so forth, when they occur, is good — granted all these things — you still can fall flat on your face by auditing significances on low-scale pcs.

Now, Rising Scale Processing and Change-the-Mind processes are very, very good processes to run on somebody who is an Operating Thetan. Now, you see, run on an Operating Thetan, they'd be of some benefit. You'd give him a hand changing his mind — which is all he does anyhow: he changes his mind.

All right. Now, on the other side of it, you could selectively change some portion of somebody's anatomy by making him do a figure-figure type of process on that portion of his anatomy. You could throw it.

How would you do this? You would simply unsettle him on that particular subject and push it around the way you wanted to. And you actually could do something for him. You could heal a cut, or something on this character. But you're not processing the preclear, you process the body. That's the only thing you're processing!

In other words, you can get a person's mind changed on the subject of some particular portion of the body, as a limited process, and you're actually doing something terrific.

Rising Scale Processes, run on the average person taken in off the street, will sometimes change around his whole glandular system. But he won't know anything about it; he'll simply go out with his glands operating. Do you understand? You're doing a sort of surgical operation there. You see, it's way over the person's ability. But you, having a power as an auditor, can actually move in on the person's body and change it around by getting him to think a different thought.

All of Christian Science is based upon this — getting him to think a thought. It has a workability; there's no doubt about it. But you're not doing anything for the person. You're not advancing him; you're not advancing his ability to handle anything.

Of course, he can pattern this process after you get through processing him and say, „Well, any time I get a sore leg, all I have to say to myself is 'I have a sore leg; I don't have a sore leg. I have a sore leg; I don't have a sore leg. I have a sore leg; I don't have a sore leg. I have a sore leg; I don't have a sore leg.' Yeah, that'll take care of a sore leg. Well, it obviously will, because it took care of my headache when that auditor was auditing me. And now, I have an 'egg lake,' and that will take care of it.“ And it doesn't, and he is much amazed. Why? Because the auditor could do it but he can't. See, it's that much difference.

So where do these processes belong? They belong where they belong in the Procedure CCH. And Rising Scale and Change-of-Mind processes are way up to the top. And boy, that's a top you won't see in Homo sapiens. That person's already Homo novis when you're running this thing. See, you're way up there. Then you can run such a process, and you just give him a hand changing his mind. That's all a thetan does anyhow.

But in lower-scale cases you want to ask the question „Whose mind am I changing?“ And unless you know that, don't bother to change his mind.

See, when it's a fait accompli — he is exteriorized; he does conceive himself to be himself — of course, he knows whose mind he's changing. He's changing his mind, of course. Because that's the only mind he's influenced by.

But the fellow who is down the scale from that is influenced by every mind he ever met. He's been bowled over from all directions. He is a walking library of other people's misopinions. And you can just scramble those as easily as you can scramble eggs. You can do anything you want to, to them and it won't do anything for anybody, unless you aim at the body. „I have tight shoes.“ „All right. Get the idea you have tight shoes. Now that you don't have tight shoes — just change your mind and get the idea you have comfortable shoes.“

It's something like you Svengali this person. The person is telling you, „I have tight shoes.“

And you say, „You do not have tight shoes.“

The person'll say, „Gleep! I don't have tight shoes.“ See? And he wouldn't have tight shoes, to him; but it wouldn't keep his feet from swelling. See, he'd still develop bunions, but he wouldn't notice it. He's been told not to. Well, so you can run these lower-scale cases on significances, and get them to change their minds, and do all kinds of weird things with thought. But don't think you're doing anything for the person, because the person never thought that thought in the first place.

A terminal thought that thought. And unless he can confront fully the terminal that thought the thought, the thought will still bother him. So that's the way you go about it. And please learn this for me. Hm? Examine it all you want to. Make tests of your own. But it's taken me pretty nearly seven years to get this completely straight, and it's straight now.

You do Hand Contact Mimicry with some of these people that are having a bit of a struggle. Things aren't too real. Havingness doesn't run for two hours and suddenly they're able to have spaces with great ease. You don't get a fast advance with this. If you have him keep things from going away, and there is no particular change, you get in there and play pattycake with the hands, huh? You do something about terminals. Go over and have him pet the wall. If you've got to add significance to it, why, just say, „Pet the wall.“ Anything you want to do, but you get him into contact with physical objects and used to them, and you'll have done it. And you won't have any of these floppo cases.

It's an interesting thing to be able to tell you that with that much positiveness. I'm very proud that I can.

Okay. Now we had a few questions here. Somebody wants to know, here, what Shakespeare had Hamlet say in act 4, scene 3. Hamlet didn't appear in that scene. Well, next question.

All right. Somebody wants to know, what are the commands for Series VIII, Rising Scale Processing and Postulate Processes?

The commands for those are in Scientology 8-8008. You, actually, can rather amusingly alter the physical beingness (just as I've been talking to you about) of somebody with a bit of Rising Scale Processing. But remember, you are doing it to the body, you are not doing it to the preclear, and it's very easy for you to Svengali anybody into anything. And you can use these Rising Scale or Postulate Processes just to do this. You can run old dichotomy processes with considerable action on somebody's marital trouble: „I have to have a wife. I don't have to have a wife. I have to have a wife. I don't have to have a wife. I have to have a wife. I don't have to have a wife.“ And if it bites before he spins in, you've changed his mind on that subject. You got it? And you could actually make it stick sometimes. It's quite remarkable. Thought is remarkable.

Of course, if it doesn't bite before he spins in, you can't remedy his havingness anyhow, so he'll just spin in. The commands for these, however, should be well known to an auditor in case he ever audits a psychiatrist. You want to audit nothing but these on a psychiatrist. The psychiatrists love them, think it's wonderful.

Okay. Now, we seem to have a second-dynamic question. He wants to know about men and women causing each other trouble by failing to be satisfied in their marital relationship.

If anybody is going to have trouble in marriage, they have trouble with women. If any woman is going to have trouble in marriage, they have trouble with men. With men what? With men spitting? Chewing tobacco? Wearing hats? No, with the terminal called „man,“ with the terminal called „women.“ You got it? See?

It isn't a significance at all. They're going to have sexual trouble with the other sex. They're also going to have financial trouble with the other sex. They're also going to have trouble with the other sex's clothes. And trouble with any service performed for the other sex, or anything done with the other sex. You got that? They have terminal trouble — opposite sex. And the remedies of that are simply raising a person's tolerance to confront the other terminal. That is about that.

If you want to know how to control women, first be able to confront women. If you want to know how to control men, be able to confront men. It is rather childishly pathetic, when you finally fall into this with a thud (whereby you have somebody there, and you know that that type of person — because they're low scale, because of this, because of that, they're very hard to control), and find out you've worried yourself unduly.

If you've had some processing, you can confront the living daylights out of that particular sex. And you sit back and you say, „Well, what should I do?“ and so forth. And then you'll just relax and tell them to do something, and of course — or tell them to change in some fashion, or something like this, and they just go, „Yep, yep, yessir,“ you know? And you say, „Well, I've taken all the fun out of that game.“ They become almost totally controllable from your level of case to their level of case, if you can confront them. If you can confront men, you have no trouble with men. You confront women, you have no trouble with women.

It's very mystic, by the way. If you can't confront police, you'll have trouble with police. You know? If you can't confront cars, you'll have trouble with cars. I mean, it's really remarkable.

Also, if you can't hold a terminal together, in general, then any terminal you have has a tendency to shed, including a car. Remember the old comic-strip drawings of the cars going down the roads throwing out nuts and bolts in their dust? Huh? Well, that's just a car shedding. And if you look around at the cars parked up and down the street, and you look at a car that is shedding — bolts gone out of its license plate, and the back license plate is missing. There's one of its lamps gone. There's this and that and the other thing missing from this car. In other words, the car has been shedding. And just get an idea of the personality or personal characteristics of the person that owns that car, and you will be absolutely right, you see, because the person himself sheds. This is just a symptom. Here's a second terminal rather intimate to him, and it is shedding like mad. Well, that means he sheds.

People that lose things all the time and forget things all the time, and so forth, are just shedding. And their terminals Q-and- A with them. Now, they get along fine with other people who shed too.

The shedding rate of man is something we will have to take up sometime, having to do with the friendliness of man. It's very, very interesting: If a man cannot hold a terminal together, he has no business shedding at all. But if he can hold a terminal together he can afford to shed. Don't you see? He can or cannot shed, as the case may be.

Or then there are other people around that don't think you're any good unless you shed. It's quite interesting. Internal Revenue is an example of that.

All right. You got where these processes belong now? If you want to know anything specific about a second dynamic, a second dynamic has a lot more to it than just a couple of terminals, but it is the darnedest methodology for making a mock-up you ever noticed. That's right. It's the most terrific methodology you ever ran into in your life. A thetan is going to all this business to create a mock-up, who can in whole cloth create a mock-up! And he goes through this and that, and he gets marriage licenses, and lives this way and that way and...

If you're not friends with your wife or your husband, it's not worth it. Honest. You can make up mock-ups too easily. See?

All right.

I didn't say sex wasn't worth it — an entirely different view or attitude. There's supposed to be a certain reward for sexual activities and so forth. And undoubtedly there is. As a matter of fact though, they vary from race to race, and person to person. There's a lot of variability about it.

I myself wouldn't be much experienced in this, but other people are!

Okay. Now, somebody says here, „I understand the eighth dynamic as a terminal which, when not held solid, allows thetans, which might be called particles, to exist. Is this true?“

No, that is not true.

Look here, guys. Look here. There are eight dynamics because we agree that there are eight dynamics. And we agree to these eight dynamics. And they, of course, exist because a pattern of life is based upon their existence. Don't you see this? This doesn't say that there isn't a supreme being. But it does say, definitely, that unless you have agreed to it, you haven't had any part of it.

Now, there is always somebody coming along with the idea that God blew up and made all of us. And you can actually run that off the track. It's the most ridiculous thing you ever saw. In other words, a big god exploded and that made all us little particles. That is not the way it is. That does not happen; it is not that way. It is simply an implant and an incident which is implanted into people, so that they believe this.

Female voice: Ron. I didn't mean it that way.

Oh, that was yours.

Female voice: Yeah. Oh, you're fessing up. Give it back now. We've had a confession.

Female voice: No, I didn't mean it that way.

All right, you read it.

Female voice: Okay, you read it right.

Well, you read it again.

Female voice: Okay.

I don't mean to beat your ears down or punish you. Because there are only two things you can do in this universe, you know, for which you can get punished. There are only two.

Female voice: Yeah.

One is to be there and the other is to communicate. That's right. So I'm not punishing you. Go ahead.

Female voice: Okay, well... I'm glad you're there. Go ahead and communicate.

Female voice: This is sort of difficult.

Yes, it is!

Female voice: But the way I see it is this: that there is an... Well, I think there is a God.

All right.

Female voice: And this to me is an isness.

All right.

Female voice: A somethingness.

Good.

Female voice: And it seems to me that I am this thing, as anybody else is.

Hm.

Female voice: And that this thing exists, and because this thing exists, that's what you might call a... well, a somethingness which would be affirmative.

Hm.

Female voice: And then I got the idea that there could be any number of these things.

Right.

Female voice: Okay. So then you could have two or three or four beings of this kind, which have a potentiality of communicating.

All right. You made yourself articulate. Don't ever miss this in what I teach you, Jan — don't ever miss this: I am telling you how to get there, not what is there.

Female voice: Mm-hm.

Got that? My teachings are entirely a Tao, see?

Female voice: Yeah.

And people miss it because I don't keep describing some of the paradises or some of the way stops or some of the pay stations. Once in a while I do this because I find them interesting, but I comment on what has been discovered. We are studying a way of traveling rather than a series of destinations. In this we vary.

Now. To answer that question which you have just expostulated would be for me to enter the realm of, to many people, philosophic speculation, to you, a certainty...

Female voice: It is a certainty.

All right. To many it would be a philosophic consideration. To others it would be a certainty.

Female voice: Mm-hm.

Why? Why all these variations of opinion? That's because the agreement upon this particular identity or existence...

Female voice: Mm-hm.

.and so on, is in varying states of dishabille.

Female voice: Well, the reason I asked this was because I thought, „Well now, if this is an implant or some such, I want to get it straight, because it is what I feel.“

All right.

Female voice: Mm-hm.

Nobody is arguing with you. You have a perfect right to feel what you feel. You can feel anything you please.

Female voice: Hm.

This is a truth to you. It is not necessarily a sweeping and pervasive truth. But I am merely warning you...

Female voice: Mm-hm.

.concerning this, that „A big god blows up and made all of us“ is a type of implant which exists...

Female voice: Well, that isn't what I mean.

.and which a person way-stations into in trying to find his route along. It's one of the ways you could get onto a spur track. You get the idea?

All right. Now, there is an eighth dynamic...

Female voice: Mm-hm.

.which so far exceeds the ability of man to describe, and so calls into paucity his language, that for a couple of thousand or twenty-five hundred years, he has been totally confused and inarticulate on the subject. And never at any time would I put my foot in that morass, unless I wanted to go morass swimming. You got the idea?

Female voice: Mm-hm.

I just wouldn't. It is not outside the sphere of my willing to look, but it is certainly outside my sphere of willing to describe. Do you see this?

Female voice: Mm-hm.

Do you see why this would be?

Female voice: Mm-hm.

Why do you suppose man has been in so much trouble on the eighth dynamic? Why do you suppose he has had so many arguments on the subject of one god or many gods? Why do you suppose all these things have taken place? Go ahead.

Female voice: Well, to have a game, I suppose.

Well, yes, yes. That would answer it. That would answer it. But there's more reason than that. One man has a concept...

Female voice: Mm-hm. Well...

.he does not have the ability to articulate it...

Female voice: Yeah.

.and the next thing you know, somebody else has a secondhand concept.

Female voice: Yeah, because he couldn't articulate because it wouldn't begin to communicate.

That's my girl.

Female voice: Mm-hm.

Very good.

Female voice: I have another question on that.

You are already at the head of the class, so there isn't any reason to ask you to go there.

Female voice: Okay.

I've answered the bulk of these. You said, „Is it possible to have a facsimile of this?“ Yes, I just told you that there is one. But that isn't any reason you are being influenced by it.

Female voice: No, I'm not being influenced by it.

These all follow. Your last question...

Female voice: All right.„How do you run Then and Now Spaces?“

Female voice: When a person gets that far, I mean.

Tell me a command.

Female voice: Huh?

Tell me a command. You've just been through a course, now let's you talk.

Female voice: Okay.

Come on.

Female voice: Well, „Locate a space.“

Well, all right. What's the next command?

Female voice: I don't know. I get confused on that one spatially.

Then and Now Spaces.

Female voice: Mm-hm.

Spaces are contained in pictures. A crude way of saying it would be „Get a picture of a space.“

Female voice: Oh, yeah.

You know?

Female voice: „Locate a space.“

No, „Get a picture of a space.“

Female voice: „Get a picture of a space.“

„Make it more spacious.“ „Look around here and find a space. Make it more spacious.“

Female voice: „Make it more spacious.“ Hm-m!

You're making space, aren't you?

Female voice: Yeah.

Well, all you're trying to do is exercise out of existence the obsessive space-makingness of the person. He can get so obsessively making spaces that he makes nothing out of every mass.

Female voice: Well, why don't you say to him „Make some space,“ then, you know?

You asked me how to run Then and Now Spaces.

Female voice: Mm-hm.

There are a dozen techniques which include the making of space, none of which are Then and Now Spaces. See, there are many of these. You can put up eight anchor points.

Female voice: Mm-hm.

As a matter of fact you can tell somebody, „Can you get the idea of a guidon?“

Yes.

„Can you get a picture of a guidon?“

Yes.

„Can you get a good, solid guidon?“

„Oh, certainly.“

„Fine. Mock one up. Plant it right there. Fine. Get another picture of a guidon. Plant it right there. Good. Get another picture of a guidon. Plant it right there“ (back of him). „And another, and plant it right there. You got them now? All right. Now, just hold them there.“

Female voice: Hm.

The wildest bank action you ever cared to witness is the immediate insurance of this. Why? You've had him create the eight anchor points of three-dimensional space in the top and the bottom of the guidon. He has surrounded himself by these.

What do you think happens in an obsessive facsimile which a person has in his vicinity which is obsessed space? He's obsessively making a space.

How about a man in a crowd? His obsession is to make a space around him, make a space around him. Well, one day he realizes his ambition and he gets one of these spaces. He's got his ambition, but now the rest of the bank is all unhinged and upset. He is occupying a space of the past in the space of the present.

Female voice: Mm-hm.

All right. Now, your job is to exercise pictures of space and spaces in present time. And pictures of space and spaces in present time. Got it?

Female voice: Yeah. Uh-huh.

All right. Now, there is a specific exercise in terms of spaces which is different than all other spatial types of processes.

„Recall a space“ is an old, moss-eaten...

Female voice: Mm-hm.

That's a wild one. „Recall a space. Recall another space. Recall another space.“ It's very funny. You can make the fellow's thinkingness turn on and off with this process. It's the queerest process you ever ran. I mean he figure-figure-figure-figure- figure-figure-figure-zizzz — blank! Recalls another space: Figure-figure-figure-figure-figure-figure-figure -figure-figure- figure-figure-figure-figure-figure-figure — blank! He'll say, „What peace! What peace there is after all.“ Well, his blank may be just a forgettingness.

Space itself is a forgetting mechanism. Space is a pretty wild proposition. Now, Then and Now Spaces undoubtedly could stand some improvement. And in view of the fact that very few people get up to being able to do it, there hasn't been very much processing of it. And someday, why, it'll be refined and maybe some quirks found about it, and it'll be much more fully explained. But that'll serve as of now.

Spaces kick in a little bit with Confrontingness, a heck of a lot more with Contributing-to-ness and mainly in the vicinity of Creatingness.

I'd say after you'd finished everything there was to finish with terminals, you would turn loose on spaces, but not until.

All right. Yes, Phillipe.

Male voice: When you say, „Look around here and do so-and-so,“ aren't you relying on a tacit agreement that „here“ is the auditing room?

Mm-hm.

Male voice: Or the local environment or something like that for the space?

You want to be awfully precise. You'd say, „your immediate environment,“ or „the environment of the auditing room in which I and you are both sitting at the same time,“ and you would look at your watch and tell him the time. I mean, you could get that specific. You could go out to a heck of a specificity.

To a minor degree you always do, but you should not stress any past agreement for a continuing agreement. You can get down to the point of establishing every auditing command every auditing command. You reestablish the session every auditing command, you reestablish the command, you reestablish the environment, you do everything for every auditing command. And doing it that way is sometimes quite beneficial on a very bad-off case.

However, just your continued awareness of an auditing session in progress is enough to influence most preclears. You haven't got a backtrack agreement coming up.

I made somebody drive the other day — just drive, you know? „Just drive — right now, on this road, with this car.“ You never saw such an amount of driving machinery crack up in your life. The person was all over the road in no time. Evidently, that person hadn't been driving that car for a long, long while. And just the idea of telling the person to hold so many inches in from the white line, and so many inches on the other side from the edge of the road, and to drive in that precise fashion, and to be alert to everything that goes on, and to consciously do everything that was to be done to that automobile — crunch! You never saw such chewed-up machinery in your life.

The person was groggy and going half out, and all sorts of things, but wound up at the other end of it much more able to drive. Didn't take too long. Of course, that's adventurous auditing.

Male voice: We can spare you but we'd rather not.

Yeah. Well, that's one way of calling time to the present-time environment, is have it moving.

Okay, here's another question: „Is there any time during the nine months of pregnancy when a woman should not be processed?“

Not today. You can process any woman on anything today at any time.

By the way, we just did a fantastically interesting job of auditing, which auditing is being undone almost faster than it was being done.

Julie just went up to Baltimore and audited a friend of hers who was hemorrhaging — nosebleed — and they didn't expect her to live, and had several pints of blood. And Julie had tried to be very encouraged about this, and I'm afraid I kind of stamped on her fingers a little bit, because I said, „Now, remember, she is in the hands of witch doctors, still.“ And sure enough, they were going to leave her nose packed so that she couldn't hemorrhage anymore for another forty-eight hours. And now they've changed their minds, and they're going to leave it in for seventy-two hours.

The person had an obsessive nosebleed; under auditing, got all right; and of course, being stirred up and repacked with about ten yards of gauze shoved up into the head, and that sort of thing, naturally was worsened. In other words, the auditor is auditing uphill. But Julie evidently saved this girl's life last Sunday evening, and she probably will pull out of it.

If she does pull out of it, it's because Julie went and audited her. Well, she's going up tonight and give her a little more auditing and get rid of four or five more yards of gauze.

But it's a case of somebody doing a very brave and a very good thing, you see, and having a bunch — a crew of ghouls standing around making sure this person kicks off. You know, I mean, it's the old question of the auditor pushing them up and somebody else pushing them down at the same time.

You get into that more often than you think. You sometimes are trying to raise somebody up the line, get him to pull the things up by the bootstraps. And he goes home every night, and somebody puts him in the well bucket, and lowers him down into the cold water.

What you've got to be able to do is audit them up faster than they can be pushed down. That's the answer to that always: better processing.

Well, in this particular case her attention span was only about a half an hour's worth. And Julie had her hold her face and keep it from going away, and hold her pillow and keep it from going away, and hold her face and keep it from going away. A number of explosions turned on in the head, and these explosions seemed to ebb and flow, and come and go. And masses of this and that shifted around. And the person was quite frightened for a short space of time, and then straightened out and smoothed out. And having had a headache for many, many years, at least, got out to a point of where she felt very easy, and in very good shape relatively. The bleeding stopped and coagulated, and so forth.

And that was the process she used. A process you've been taught on. Except „Keep your head from going away“ will always exteriorize a preclear if you don't watch it. You've got to be careful with that. „Keep your head from going away. Keep your feet from going away“ with your hands, you know — or „Keep your knees from going away“ if they can't reach that far. „Keep your head from going away. Keep your feet from going away. Keep your chair from going away“ — that round-roundels. If you keep this up your preclear's liable to get outside.

If it flattens without the preclear exteriorizing, then you've run into something peculiar. You would simply run „Hold it still“: „Hold your head still. Hold your knees still. Hold your chair still,“ round and round and round, until that more or less flattened.

And then you could go into any one of a number of things such as „Make your head more solid. Make your knees more solid. Make your chair more solid,“ or go back to „Keep it from going away,“ see, and „Hold it still“ again. But just working these, one against the other, the person that can stay in his body has not yet been discovered.

If I had somebody — the eight-hundredth person who would've walked up to me and said, „My mother, my father“ (it doesn't matter), „some relative, my boss, is dying, and won't you please come at once to the house, the hospital or something of the sort, and do something for this?“ -- see, if I kept this up, the world would get overpopulated after a while. What I'd do is go blow them out of their heads. I do do something. I go blow them out of their heads and say, „Goodbye,“ show them they can get out, and let them climb back in again. I don't care how sick they are. And they say (to themselves, you know), „Hey, what do you know! If this kicks the bucket, I don't kick the bucket. And I'm in pretty good shape and I... hm-hm-hmmm... Well, all right! Good.“

In other words, I use a process to teach them something. I teach them the answer to this: „Why are you worried? You're not going to die.“ You often get sudden, soaring reversals of condition. You often get immediate demise. You know? You've left. A half- hour later, they — „It's very funny. I know she was happy when she went. But half an hour after you left, why, she heaved a deep sigh and told me very placidly, 'Goodbye, son. I have another body in Puerto Rico!' And I don't understand what she meant by that. Do you?“

Male voice: Wow!

It's quite remarkable. I mean, don't ever develop a reputation as an auditor.

This is the way it goes, though, treating people who are on the verge of dying. It's not a case of putting a body back together, but putting a thetan back together. And if you can remember that, you just won't have any trouble with it. It's just a case of putting a thetan back together, see?

Now, where we have had difficulties in this line, everybody is „Got to patch up the body, got to patch up the body, got to...“ It's too late to patch up the body. You see, they misapprehend. If there's any body patching going to be around, the thetan has to be at least willing that it be done or be able to do it. And if a thetan cannot, what's the use of bringing the body back to life. You see, you just missed the whole point. The funny part of it is, in the highest percentage of cases, somebody about to die is in a rather delusory state and very worried — and as a thetan, very worried.

All that havingness, all that communication, all that just about to be lost! And in addition to that, facsimiles flying all over the air and diving in through the room, and the bed getting large and small, and Lord knows what's going to turn up next. Demons fighting over the bedclothes. You know? It doesn't matter whether this person is crazy or sane, when they get that close to death, the bank starts acting up, and they get into interesting mental conditions.

And as a matter of fact, I've often thought that delusion in psychosis was simply the restimulation of a moment of impending death. That's probably all delusion is, is somebody gets restimulated on the subject of a death where all this happened.

And the energy ridges move in and the energy ridges move out. And the pictures move this way, and the great black masses move that way. And Mother walks into the room — a mother of fifty-two years ago — and says, „Come with me, my child,“ and walks out again. And of course, that's just a picture, too.

They sometimes look at you and say, „I don't think she was real, do you?“

You say, „Who?“

„Oh. Hmm. Hmm. They didn't notice.“ And they seldom answer you. You never get any clue to this sort of thing. Very delusory.

So what needs reassuring? A thetan needs reassuring. And the way you reassure them is to show them they can hold on to things, and show them they can still touch things, they can still sense things. Locational Processes and „Keep it from going away,“ that sort of thing, are terrific benefit. Okay.

Now, very rapidly here:

„Would you advise processing a person who has just had a heart attack? If so, what would be the best process?“

„Is there any information written on para-Scientology?“

My golly, I'll say there is: a whole book called A History of Man or What to Audit. That is total para- Scientology.

„Will you advise processing a person who has just had a heart attack? If so, what would be the best process?“

The day you think that you will never process anybody without them running into a pain in their heart hasn't arrived yet. People get heart attacks.

You know, almost any illness shows up during auditing and runs out if you're really auditing it for blood? Some symptom of it, something in it, will show up and disappear. You'll run through it.

And it is not unusual for somebody to suddenly leap in the air and say, „Dahh!” and faint dead away or do something peculiar.

What do you do in a case like that? Well, the first thing you do is you keep your head. That's the first thing you do.

The next thing you do is don't think there is any unusual panacea that Ron would know about at a moment like this, see? You have not had an omitted piece in your education. You got that? That's the first thing you'll believe when you run into one of these emergencies. A person does a bunk, has a heart attack, exteriorizes suddenly, caves in on themselves, faints, all of a sudden is confronted by a fire-breathing monster. Well, don't think something in your education has been omitted, that there are a bunch of panaceas to do things with.

First thing to do is keep your head. Be perfectly willing to engage in communication with the preclear. And do something very positive about it, even if it's simply insisting the preclear go to bed now and have a good sleep. And if you're just completely lost and you can't find out what to do, and you've been auditing until three o'clock in the morning (which you shouldn't have been anyhow), and a bunch of other things are all present, why — a person has a heart attack and is gasping or vomiting or doing something horrible and... What are you worried about? You haven't got a heart attack.

Just shake them by the hand, pat them on the head and say, „Well, feel my heart.“ One of the goofy things you can do is always enter into some kind of tactile, touch communication in some form. Don't leave your hands off of them. See? „Touch my heart. Now, I'll touch your heart. See? I touched your heart. Do you know I touched your heart? All right. Now you touch my heart. All right. I'll touch your heart. Now you touch my heart.“ And the guy will feel better after a while. Got it? I mean, it's quite remarkable.

That's the kind of process you run on a little kid that's injured. You can always get his attention enough to touch you. And you can always lead his hand over to swat that part of your body that he is injured in. See, he's injured in, let us say, his shoulder. Well, you can get him to touch your shoulder, and you touch his shoulder. What is that but a kind of a solid-line, two- way communication? Quite useful to know.

All right. Now, somebody wanted me to capsule an ACC in an hour.

Male voice: I think you did it in five minutes at the start. Thank you.

An ACC is an activity dedicated to the installation of enough automatic machinery... No! That's not right!

Now, it's an activity dedicated to the putting of auditors into enough present time so they can put somebody else into present time. And that's about all there is to that. And it could go a little bit further. It usually gives them ideas, at least, on how to create a present time. And beyond that I don't think you could say very much.

It's been a great pleasure to talk to you. I'm very glad you were here, and I will be seeing you.

Thank you.

Audience voice: Thank you!

Thank you.

[End of Lecture]