Yes?

Male voice: Say, on that problem — test — think it was last congress, you were studying about how the problem disappears in the mest universe when the problem of comparable magnitude to this particular problem is really flattened. Have you gained any new data on this subject?

Yes. Yes. Sufficient that I have now a series of about four cases where the problem folded up in the mest universe when a problem of comparable magnitude was run on it. And they were done with malice aforethought.

Male voice: Uh-huh.

Malice aforethought. In one case, the file even got lost. Somebody was in trouble and ran Problem of Comparable Magnitude to this circumstance and ran it and ran it and ran it and ran it, and he was at last only intellectually curious about the experiment we were doing. He tried to go locate the file, and it was no longer in existence. I mean, it just went poof. I don't know what happened. It's quite an amazing, amazing phenomenon.

Male voice: Have you, in working with this particular thing, have you noticed any, really, disappearance of mest — something like "Invent a problem of comparable magnitude to a dog" or something like that and have the dog (snap) disappear?

No. This file's the closest we've got to it. And that can always be explained by a bum clerk. Right.

I just — I have another experiment. Let me tell you about this experiment — may I, just one moment?

Audience: Yes.

This experiment was already on the docket, and it was an opportunity to make it ahead of schedule. Somebody came in, a man, he was dreadfully upset. He was a professional auditor once upon a time, HCA, non-validated. He was terribly upset. His marriage was going to pieces and everything was going to the devil. And I just turned him loose with Help. I gave him the sheet, Part 2, HGC Procedure of February 6, 1958. And I handed him that sheet and I said, "Well, just wipe up your tears, there, and go home and run this thing. That's all."

His wife was spinning. He went home. He ran it. His wife promptly got a good night's sleep. He flattened it off pretty well the next day and squared it around. He didn't understand about flows; he overran some of the flows too long in one direction, knocked her anaten. And this was the only question he had about it.

Here was a man in a terribly disturbed condition of mind auditing somebody who was quite antipathetic to his auditing, and he got away with it. And that was on the docket, to find some and see if they could. Quite amazing. I think we've got "maritalosis" whipped. That's one of our more serious diseases.

Yes?

Male voice: What would be a good process or series of processes to use on retarded child, age five, to bring the child up to par?

The first process in any event would be a communication-line, communication-type of process. This would be a touch process of some kind or another whereby, perhaps, you would touch the child in various places and say, "Feel my fingers," or something like that. It's an assist-type process. Quite amazing, but it creates a communication line.

CCH 1 has been found to work in this particular regard, with the session well opened and so forth.

Help has not yet been tried.

But the same processes that you would run on an injured person or a person who was pretty anaten would be run on a retarded child. They are not very awake. And you have to actually wake them up.

But the age five is really not old enough to run a repetitive-type command and expect an answer with. Their attention span is very, very poor. And for that reason I have not tested clearing procedures at that age yet. I intend to, however.

Does that answer the question?

Male voice: Thank you.

You bet.

Yes?

Female voice: I'd like to know what kind of procedure to use on a man who's been — something — stammering and stuttering practically all his life.

He's been what, psycho?

Female voice: Stuttering or stammering, I don't know just which you would call. . .

Stuttering and stammering — a very interesting type . . .

Female voice: He's married and he has children, but. . .

All right.

Female voice: . . . he's able to work.

Let me answer it this way: I've always answered this thing the same way. This is a pretty stable datum with this. We have found that a communication inhibition, such as sight, speech, anesthetic touch — you know, they couldn't feel anything they touched — these types of communication breaks or cuts are the last to surrender. And they are, as far as a person is concerned, symptomatic of much more sweeping difficulties. And one never starts to walk in on this case with the communication break in mind, or he will always fail. It's quite interesting. He's just asking for failure. If he tries to clear a person who is stammering by aiming at stammering, he is aiming at the wrong target.

Now, he actually should aim at something much more fundamental, which would be the basic end of the Reality Scale. He should work this case up from a very, very low level, well suspecting that the realities of the case and the certainties of the case were extremely poor.

And you would audit this case just about the way you would audit the same case George was asking about — a retarded child of five.

Female voice: I thought so.

That answer it?

Female voice: Yes.

All right.

Yes?

Male voice: This has some application to what my auditor is doing at the moment. As far as I'm aware, it is an intellectual question, but I'll tell you that so you can answer it or not. If you're running a person on Help, nine-way bracket, and it's quite sticky and you find one or two individuals on which the Help bracket is stuck pretty damn tight, would you feel it would be faster to more or less stick to those individuals and get them loosened up ?

Good. Let's sort this out with regard to a present time problem.

Male voice: Okay.

Now, if this person has a couple of people in the environment who are being present time problems and actually have him a little distracted from the session, they will distract him from running Help.

Male voice: Okay.

And they should probably be the first targets of Help.

Male voice: Okay.

That answer it?

Male voice: Yes.

Good.

Yes?

Male voice: On the question of how Help is working out on mentally retarded people, a case that is running at the moment, a twenty-year old, mental age four, hemiplegic spastic epileptic: Sit That Body in That Chair produced a desire to help. Just started running Help. The first reaction was that he pushed the window out of the room — out of the room.

He pushed a what?

Male voice: Kicked a window out.

Oh no.

Male voice: Frame and all.

Yes. This is an interesting thing, isn't it? A ...

Male voice: She'll be reporting on that.

Good. Well, the psychosomatic case is normally — hits several violent destroy strata in running Help. But it's been my experience they came right back into session. Did he?

Male voice: Well, I haven't heard yet. She was upset because the window got kicked in, I know.

All right. Thank you.

Yes?

Female voice: I have a question about problems. Suppose you ran somebody on a problem that didn't concern him — I wonder what would happen to that problem. Like you got a guy who'd never been to Omaha city, and suppose they were having government trouble there.

I think this is a very interesting thing.

Female voice: If you ran a problem of comparable magnitude to that, he might eventually begin to see this was a problem enough to run it.

Naturally a person higher on the scale wouldn't consider it a problem to him — or lower on the scale — wouldn't consider it a problem to him. You'd have to be sure that this fellow really didn't consider this a problem. He might merely be in apathy about it, which time he would walk up to the level of problem.

But an individual, let us say, to whom that would not in any event be a problem, running it might very well — because a thetan, higher he goes up the scale the more effective he is — might very well knock it out much faster.

Maybe we ought to find somebody to whom the atom bomb is no problem at all.

Female voice: That's what I was getting at. I wasn't worried about the pc. I was concerned about. . .

That's very good. Female voice: . . . whether this would in fact help the city.

Yeah, that's good. That's a very good question. I'll have to make a note of that, try something on it.

Yes?

Female voice: Well, along the same line, I thought — I had two women whom I processed who were separated from their husbands. And there was no influence. And when I ran the husbands off of them, the husbands, completely separated, completely changed.

That's right.

Female voice: You see that?

Right. This is a weird one.

Female voice: Mm-hm.

This is a weird one. If it gets much worse, we'll have to buy Buddha's "oneness of all," won't we? (laughter)

Yes?

Female voice: What kind of process would you use to help a person handle time?

Time. Dianetics 1955: Make Some Time. However time, in the final analysis, is havingness. Time and havingness go close together. And as a person runs out of havingness, he runs out of time, which is quite interesting. The whole society dramatizes this until we consider it the natural thing. We just don't think it's a problem, we think it's natural.

You should beware of these things that are so "natural" because they actually are problems that have sunk into subapathy. An individual, let us say, has to have a great many things in order to do something so that he can get some money quick enough to pay his debts before everything he's got is taken away from him. Now, that is routine in this society. And Havingness all by itself, just a Trio, run for seventy-five hours on a case that is not in very good shape, finished off with the case reporting on time for work every morning thereafter for the last two and a half years. And the case has not been late. And the case never before was able to get to work. The only thing that was run on the case was Trio. See, there's the coordination between havingness and time.

But as you move somebody upstairs, if you wanted to just take over this particular button, you'd ask him to make some time. I've had a preclear say — never answer the auditing question for two hours, hour and a half, just not even answer the question; give all sorts of oddities and got rather annoyed with me after a while because I kept saying, "Now, I will repeat the auditing question, 'Make some time.' "

I said, "I'll repeat the auditing command, 'Make some time.' "

And the individual said, "Well, to make some time I could walk over and wiggle the window shade. That'd make some motion, and we'd have the apparency of some time made." And he'd smile smirkingly.

And I'd say, "I'll repeat the auditing command, 'Make some time.' " About a half an hour deep he woke up to the fact that I was repeating it. I wasn't giving him a new question.

He said, "What's the matter with you?" Said, "I'm answering this question every time. I'm telling you how I could go about it."

And I just kept it up. "I'll repeat the auditing command, 'Make some time.' "

And the individual says, "Well, I could fly around the room somehow or another, and we could do something or other, and that would make some time."

I'd say, "I'll repeat the auditing command, 'Make some time' " — no acknowledgments anywhere along the line.

An hour and a half, we finally had to knock off, but we arrived. The individual had a tremendous cognition. He said, "Well, I'm not answering the auditing command. I am not making time. Now, let's see, make some time . . ." So he says — and waved his hand up and down.

I said, "Thank you! End of session."

Yes?

Male voice: A question on time. Does the solution appear with the problem, ahead of it, or can you have it either way?

The solution to the problem of time appears immediately and exactly with the thetan. Because he is making time. It's in his present.

Male voice: I was thinking about problems and solutions to problems.

Yes, that's right. It will actually go up the track, back down the track. It goes into the past, it goes into the future. Any process which is directly processing time moves all over the place, but eventually winds up exactly parallel with the thetan because he finds out that he himself is never moving in time.

Male voice: I didn't say it right. It's — do the problem and the solution occur simultaneously?

They would have to, wouldn't they?

Male voice: That's my opinion.

Yes.

Yes?

Male voice: Wondering if you could give an estimate of the total amount of auditing hours that have been done in the last eight years on Dianetics and Scientology processes.

I wouldn't even be — I wouldn't even make a guess. You mean by all auditors everywhere?

Male voice: Mm-hm.

Oh, I don't know. I suppose it's easily in terms of the millions and millions. It must be.

Male voice: It's something of havingness, isn't it?

Hm?

Male voice: Something of havingness for all isn't it?

Oh, yeah. It's way upstairs. Goodness.

Yes?

Male voice: I'd like to know if clearing — just mechanical fact of clearing would handle postulates and decisions? Or would you have to do something else?

No. The exact processes you're running, the last process of which is simply Mock Up Something and Make It a Little More Solid, has a tendency to just null out, and the individual moves up, then, into postulates. He's already found that he could do it in session; he's already found all the mechanics of it, but he goes on a wobbly course of actually doing it in life. And it sometimes takes him weeks to unwind this thing.

And he sometimes will drop back down to agreement because he says it's too complicated. And he'll drop back down to agreement, and he'll go along for a week or so and he'll say, "Well, this is a silly thing to be doing — use all these other old shopworn postulates. I can make postulates." And he eventually gets used to it. And his familiarity with it is necessary before you can make a pronunciamento on the subject. Okay, does that answer the question?

Male voice: Yes.

All right.

Yes?

Male voice: I'd like a stable datum on just what the dividing line is between the desirability of invalidating and evaluating a trainee in a training drill, and not evaluating or invalidating a preclear.

There is an Instructor's Code. And we have found that the only way that you can be effective in instruction is doing almost exactly reverse the Auditor's Code. And we had trouble with Instructors in Dianetics and Scientology consistently until we wrote up the Instructor's Code. And they were all being auditors, and they were afraid to evaluate for, they were afraid to invalidate.

Now, just earlier I told you, the direct line — you get the idea — the aggressiveness, actually put the person you're teaching, as well as the person you're processing, directly into the sphere. Well, you cannot put a preclear into the sphere with invalidation, evaluation, but you can a student.

Male voice: What makes the difference?

The difference is exactly what the goal is — what the person is trying to do or trying to be. You have the preclear pared down to a third dynamic, don't you? And the individual to that degree is rather inverted, introverted, he's a little bit fogged out, he's not quite as alert, ordinarily, as he would be in the walkabout world. You're actually training on the third dynamic — you're training well up on the third dynamic. And as a result, the individual is expected to be alert, he's supposed to be on his toes and he himself is learning to handle certain things.

And we found out that an Instructor had to be gotten over his unwillingness to evaluate, his unwillingness to invalidate, before he was a good Instructor. It's quite a trick for an auditor to be both an Instructor — have one beingness for an Instructor, another beingness as an auditor. But this is rather necessary.

Now, funny part of it is, is as he is trying to handle this and as he's still having a little difficulty with it, and he's still being diffident, he will evaluate and invalidate more savagely than when he gets into good handling of it. And he goes on up through such a stage up to a point of where his help factor is very high and where he can say, "I have never seen anyone quite as clubfooted in an auditing session as you were today," and it helps this auditor audit his preclear. It's his intention to help that answers this. We find the best way to help a student is overwhelmp him. The best way to help a preclear is to set him free. It just works that way. There actually isn't any more reason to it than that.

But the question is, do you make a student into an auditor? And the question is, do you make a preclear into a Clear? It's the way you make the pudding. And it's almost a trial-and-error proposition.

You'll find, however, that you can most err on being diffident and keeping the Auditor's Code with a student. You keep an Auditor's Code with a student, and he'll get out of your class and he won't know what he's doing. He has to know what makes you excited, then he can evaluate the importance.

Who hasn't asked a question here for a while? Yes?

Female voice: Is there any other way of auditing a baby besides this one, reach and withdraw from objects?

Oh yes. The golden rule about auditing a baby is to give him something to do that he can do, and "Lie in that crib. Thank you," that sort of thing, don't you know?

Female voice: Yeah, but he can't understand the words.

Give him a win — I beg your pardon!

Now, here's somebody that's got a wonderful experience coming. It's everyone's assumption — I never jump on anybody for not knowing — but it's a wonderful assumption to say a little baby cannot understand you. As long as you make that assumption, they won't. But the very funny part of it is that most of them have just gotten through a life of being erudite, and they're tired of it. And they'll fake it as long as they can. But if you talk to them as though they understand you, they very rapidly do.

That's been one of the more interesting experiences that every auditor has had in handling children, in handling babies and so forth. What can the baby understand? Well, the baby can understand almost anything.

It's like Diana. She's a little bit angry with us because we haven't sent her to school. And her I'm-supposed-to runs that at five she should go to school.

Now, the main difficulty is here that she thinks, evidently, that she ought to be learning something. So she is now going around being very forthright about it, and she'll hand you box tops and labels, and she'll say, "Read this." And you read it and it says, "Royal Crescent Turkish Delight" — a candy box top, you know? And she'll look at this.

I said to her the other day, I said, "Do you know, you put up a wonderful mock-up of not knowing how to read." I said, "You're really doing well at it. Congratulations." I said, "It's the nicest job I've seen in a long time."

She looked at me rather oddly. Of course, I can't say anything wrong to her. Oddly enough I can yell at her and she just smiles. She knows that we're having a good time. The most terrific trust level, see?

Well, she went and thought this over and this morning, why, was busy reading a paragraph to me out of the newspaper.

Here's the point, you see? It's what you consider is their communication potential. And if you consider a baby's communication potential is zero, it's liable to remain so. But the truth of the matter is, he knows how to talk.

Now, you could theoretically get a child who has only spoken Asiatic tongues who now picks up a white mock-up, he'd probably have a rough time. He'd have a rough time learning if — we might not have this child talking until he's three or four years old. And then he'll really start to gear up on it.

But that's an experience you're going to have.

Female voice: Thank you.

Okay.

Yes?

Male voice: I just want to say in answer to the question about how many hours have been spent in auditing, I recall when you were up in Ireland one night we worked it out as, I think it was eight thousand hours a month. I don't think it was a week. That's what it averaged out at, over the last. . .

Must have been.

Male voice: . . . well, it would be over the last eight years, now. About eight thousand hours a month, it was.

That would be a very definite minimum.

There have been more preclears in processing and more hours of Dianetic auditing delivered as such — I figured this out in '53 — in the three years immediately prior to that, than there had been handed out by psychoanalysis or psychiatry or both. So it's high.

We're the people in the world who have been processing people. Other people have been talking about it.

Yes?

Female voice: I'd like to know if you can run a present time problem with a terminal by running Help. If it would work as well as Problem of Comparable Magnitude.

Yes, I've run an experiment on this, and I find that the processes which handle a PT problem in the mest universe, however, are in this order:

One, limited process: some part of it that the person could be responsible for.

Two, Problem of Comparable Magnitude.

Three, Invent Something Worse Than and Problem of Comparable Magnitude.

And then Help.

They go up in this line when it's a — when it was a real present time problem which is present out here in the physical universe.

Female voice: Mm-hm.

Now, I couldn't even tell you at this moment exactly why it falls into this as a test pattern. But it does.

Female voice: How about if it's a chronic problem, something that's in sort of a wise . . .

Well, understand, I am sure that Help will run on this. But a chronic problem has already been tested, and it was only chronic problems that were tested to give these results I've just given you.

Female voice: Thank you.

You bet.

Male voice: Is that the order you'd use them in, Ron?

That's the order of attack, yes. Yes, definitely. That's the order you would use them in. This first one is quite limited. And if it didn't produce a satisfactory result in a short time, I'd get off of it and I'd go on to Problem of Comparable Magnitude. And if that didn't get it, why, I'd say, "Boy this is really something!" And I'd start him inventing things worse than that. And I would undercut the whole thing and take over the automaticity of the dwindling spiral — get in ahead of it before he sank out of sight. And then run Problems of Comparable Magnitude. And that would take care of it. I don't know that it — it wouldn't survive any longer than that.

And then to finish it off, so that there was no liability connected with it at all, you would run Help. And if you were to run a fifth process on the same thing, it would be the first process: "What part of that problem could you be responsible for?" And you would come right back to the beginning.

Yes?

Male voice: You mentioned the other day about setting up a clinic. I just wondered if you'd staff it with HCAs or graduate students?

What's this, a ...

Male voice: A Scientology clinic. I just wondered . . .

Where?

Male voice: Oh, you just mentioned that if someone did, in passing.

Audience: Missions. In the field.

Oh, it'd be perfectly safe to staff it with HCAs today. And you just won't find that many graduate students. They're quite rare.

The HCA who's going through school today is quite able when he finishes up. We have a lot of little private jokes about that. We had a pc who was going through the HGC and who was being hand-petted through the HGC, nice as you please. You should understand, the HGC has been considerably crippled because of this ACC, see? Some of its people are down here. And this person didn't have the best auditor in the world but had a very passable auditor.

Well, this auditor couldn't get this fellow Clear within the length of time, and it was very upsetting to this auditor. And everybody in the HGC figured out that this fellow must be in much worse shape still than he had been. We turned him over to the Academy, and he'd gotten a student intensive from a raw student who had only been there about three weeks. And the student cleared him. The guy is Clear today. And the Academy is laughing at the HGC now like mad.

Of course, what happened is the HGC set him up, but the student ran it off. But it makes awfully good telling the other way.

You understand that an HCA in the future will have a very thorough earned HAS before he goes into HCA. And then he studies in HCA, training drills. And then he studies the types of processes. And he yet is not specialized in them at all. And he comes out of there, then, a technician and a theoretician.

Now, if he was to go — if he were to go to HAA, or something like that, he would be taught how to clear people. But then you could teach him now, certainly after this course, how to clear people.

Male voice: Yeah. Now, did I understand you to say that before a person is allowed onto the HCA Course sometime in the future, he'll have to have an HAS?

That's — you said it. Mm-hm.

Male voice: Thank you.

Yes?

Male voice: When we're auditing in the field, is there any way of determining when we've got a preclear to a point on Clear Procedure where he will just go on and flatten out to Clear?

Oh, yes. If he answers the various requisites which are part of the HCO Bulletin of a couple, three days ago . . .

Male voice: Yeah.

... a week ago — if he answers up to those requisites, you can count on the fact that a lot of his time in the next two or three weeks, all by himself, will be drifting out of it. You see, you didn't solve his life or give him back all of his things. He will — in any event, even if he passed all the tests — will drift higher than he is.

Male voice: Mm-hm. Would there be a point where you could say, "Well, now I've got him halfway or three-quarters of the way, he will now flatten out"?

Yes, there is a point when he can make things not go away, hold still and be more solid in mock-ups by postulate alone. And you can let him cruise out at that point. He's not confirmed and so forth, and you will have to pick him up again somewhere along the line and check him up. But that is the point up from which he will drift. But I don't know how long it would take him to drift up from that very, very minimum point.

Male voice: Gives me an idea. Thank you.

But that's the minimum point, for sure. Well, all right.

Tomorrow is the last lecture. Saturday is the last day. And I don't even think Saturday's an official course day, is it?

Male voice: No, it's just testing.

But you'll take your tests. And then there is a Clear questionnaire sheet that'll be handed out, and it'll have to be filled. And then I will — I have a Clear check sheet and I will check those out in the afternoon that want to be checked out on this.

Male voice: What time?

Oh, that will be in the afternoon after you've finished up your ... It will certainly be after one o'clock — yeah, Saturday. But — up in my office. It doesn't take very long.

There are and will be this co-auditing, professional co-auditing that we're trying to get squared away here. And any of you, of course, are welcome to continue co-auditing here after the course officially ends if you wish to do so.

I think that there are some here that could stand a little bit more. And you may wish to do this in the same atmosphere, rather than to get wracked around and go someplace else and do something else.

Also, HGC schedule is pretty crowded, but some professional auditing is, of course, available from the HGC at your professional rates if you want to do it up the quick way, without paying for it with any auditing.

HGC staff, of course, goes back together again after this ACC. ACCs are always ruinous to the HGC. Always. See? Take some of its people away and throw the administration haywire and so forth.

For some reason or other we normally have more preclears during an ACC.

Okay. Yes?

Male voice: Are you going to repeat this ACC or any of the data on it, in London?

Highly probable. Later at the end of summer, perhaps.

The 20th ACC, by the way, has an advance enrollment of one hundred and five people.

Audience: Wow! (whistles)

The news has gotten around!

Audience: (various responses, laughter)

Male voice: Anybody from Chicago in it?

Oh yeah.

Pretty wild, huh?

Audience: Yeah!

Because usually — usually not more than half of an ACC pre-enrolls, and that, two months before. And this is what? Six months before, almost. Five months ahead of the time, and a hundred and five pre-enrollments. Therefore, I would say that there's some possibility of having an ACC that's almost as big as a congress.

Audience: (various responses)

Pretty wild, isn't it?

Yes?

Male voice: What are you going to do, hire a hall?

We don't even have this building.

Male voice: No?

What we will do with that is in the lap of the gods.

Audience: (laughter)

Yes?

Male voice: Ron, in the normal run of events field auditors do not get HCO Bulletins, but since a lot of the graduates of this ACC, for example myself, people I can think of who are a little outlying, will be spending quite a lot of their time clearing up field auditors — clearing field auditors — would it be possible for us to receive HCO Bulletins concerning Clear Procedure, since we've got most of the understanding of it?

Well I think that you can receive HCO Bulletins on this in terms of compilations. That's what I am doing right now.

Male voice: Mm-hm.

They are available in any event at the HCO.

Male voice: Got a few of those ?

Second male voice: No, Ron. You can't get those . . .

Pretty hard to pry them out, huh? Well I can promise you compilations. Rapid, rapid compilations.

Now, one of the things is these — the notes you're taking, for instance. There will be a set of notes compiled and sold on these lectures which are just past. There will be that already because this is a fairly broad subject that we have just embraced. And what I have given you is pretty snap-up-to-PT and it will probably continue so for quite a while. For instance, the 20th ACC will probably run on the exact pattern of this ACC. Probably almost the exact thing. Their technique or procedure will probably be better, to some slight degree, from what we've learned from this one. But that's always the case.

But I wouldn't say there'd be all that difference that there was between, for instance . . . The 18th, you know, was a training ACC, and people who went through the 18th learned how to train. They learned how to validate. And it's very possible that we may alternate ACCs — a training ACC, a processing ACC — one, two, one, two, something on this order.

Now, I am trying to get together some system of compilation whereby these materials will be readily and easily available. Now, I can't tell you exactly what that system will consist of because the communication lines will only stand so much. But I think some arrangement could be made to give you these materials rather easily.

Male voice: Okay, so we'll just sit tight on it and expect that something will come out.

Yes. It certainly will be done.

I'll tell you, the secret of success is the subject of the next — of an article in the next Ability magazine, and this might interest you, "The Secret of Success." A lot of people believe that the way to be a success is to grab hold of some materials and sit on them. Well, they act that way. Somebody has some tapes and he wants somebody to come in and hear them, and he says, "Well, that'll be two hundred dollars apiece." You know? I mean, something on this order.

Now, the truth of the matter is that this doesn't pay — doesn't pay. It doesn't work out that because you have the materials you will necessarily triumph unless you hand them out. The secret of success, then, is passing them along. And the more and faster you can pass them along, why, the more successful you are. Now, this has proven to be the case over a long period of time.

For instance, almost anything that was really known about Dianetic auditing was included in Book One. Some people, a year later, read Book One and said we hadn't covered it at all during the year. In other words, there were a lot of things in Book One that were in advance of what we were teaching. And that was quite interesting. But as long as we just handed processes out and everything out, just wholesale, you see, auditors had preclears, the Foundation was jammed and so forth.

After a while people started to sit on materials and hold them down, and the whole parade slowed down.

The secret of success is: Pass it along. Fortunately, as I was telling you earlier in the lecture, it is possible to pass them along now without getting your block knocked off by the AMA or somebody.

Thank you very much.