Thank you very much.

This is the last lecture of the 20th ACC. And this time we're going to break some precedents. This is a summary lecture, okay? This ACC requires a summary. This has been, in essence, an historic ACC. More progress has been made in the subject itself in this ACC than in any other ACC we have ever held.

Of course, to some degree, looking at it, you may not feel that your case is up as far as it should be, or something of the sort. And those of you who have been sitting down auditing somebody or being audited all week have not had an opportunity of looking at what all this wound up to be.

And for that reason, I am going to go over this with you. May I?

Audience: Yes.

In every single advance of Dianetics or Scientology we have moved from being able to help the few to being able to help the many. That's quite important - from the few to the many.

Now, as we look over this, we find that when we try to help the many we wind up also better helping the few. But it's always a long look. And has always been a long look between clearing a handful and clearing many. I have tried to teach you how to clear many.

About ten days ago, I decided that we were failing for one reason only. We were failing for just one reason and that was this: auditing doesn't work with people out of sessions. You can think of all the processes you can think of, you can know everything there is to know about the mind and yet if you try to make any of these principles apply to a person whose attention you do not have, whose attention cannot be concentrated upon his bank, then nothing works.

Now, this we learned a long time ago but we didn't learn it with exclamation points the way we have this time. I do mean exclamation points. Now, it's a very funny thing for an ACC to bring this up to this degree but it did and it has.

And as a result of that I am much prouder of you as auditors than I have ever been. In this ACC I got a big win. I got a very big win. Now, you might say that one would only get a win if he had everybody OT and so forth. But no, that isn't the win. That isn't the win at all.

The basic purpose and function of an ACC is to make the best auditors we can make. That's the basic function of it.

Typically all the way along the line every time we concentrated on cases to too great a degree, we injured this basic purpose of making auditors.

Also, this ACC delivered up the workability of more data than any other single ACC we have ever had. Now, where does this leave you? One, it leaves you a better auditor. That I am sure of and I think you will agree. Isn't that right?

Audience: Yes.

All right.

That doesn't mean that amongst us there aren't a few who don't need a few rough edges knocked off. But it does mean this: we have proven conclusively that you can better auditing and then better cases and that you can only better cases when you better auditing. And that sounds like one of these foolish fundamentals that everybody would know and nobody would have to concentrate on and nobody would have to think of.

Now, there are people here who will be training auditors. It's a good one to remember. When you train an auditor it doesn't matter how many processes you know or how much you know about the mind, if an auditor isn't in there, applying it, if that pc isn't in-session, isn't sitting there for the processes to be applied to, nothing, and I mean nothing, is going to happen. This is the biggest one.

The next one is this: the actual assembly of six buttons took place in this ACC. And we can say that a person who is aberrated or has a bank has one because he has a misdefinition of one or more of these six buttons. And not in order of importance but in order of address, these buttons, of course, as they walk up the line consist of: Change - subordinately Stop, and Start, since that is the Control button - but Change.

Immediately after this, that of course, is Goals Processing and why you establish a goal. You establish a goal to establish the possibility of change. Until you establish a goal which is absolutely real to the person, you have not established any possibility of change.

Now, the more often you start a session and the more often you establish a goal, the more you make the pc cause over his own bank. So if you ran a session every ten minutes and took a break, and ran a session and took a break, and ran a session and took a break, you'd probably eventually have a Clear.

Quite - quite interesting. You would simply handle what we have been erroneously referring to as the rudiments. And wind it up and then erroneously handle rudiments - rudiments. They aren't rudiments. When you say rudiments you mean you establish them and then run a session. And we've gotten a new look at this. You have to continue them in establishment.

So CCH 0 runs throughout all auditing, and whenever it drops out, auditing ceases to happen. The roughest cases around are surrendering to rudiments alone and only. Quite interesting, isn't it? Well naturally - naturally, rudiments would contain a tremendous power. If you have to have them in force before auditing can occur, why not, then, just rudiments? You get the idea? I mean if there's this much power in rudiments, why not? Because, of course, they do establish why auditing cannot take place, as well as change.

And we get to the next button: Problems. Now, here's this problems thing. No case will advance even vaguely with a present time problem exteriorizing his attention. And you now know how fundamental a present time problem can be. It can be this fundamental, that's certain: being audited as a present time problem. The auditor as a present time problem. Auditing as a present time problem. Getting Clear as a present time problem. Becoming an OT as a present time problem. Do you understand those? Now, this fellow comes in and he says, „I want to be Clear.“ And he sits down in the auditing room and he looks at you very hopefully, and so on, and he's only got a few hours that he can possibly acquire of auditing and he sits there and nothing happens for those few hours. Why? He's got a present time problem and that's being Clear. This is this horrible simplicity that we're confronting now. Awfully fundamental.

Now, if a present time problem exists, it must be perforce a problem which exists in the real universe right here, right now, in present time. It is a thing which exists. And it has a terminal in present time. And that terminal is right now in present time.

All you have to do is key it out of present time and it ceases to be a present time problem. And let me tell you something, you don't run a present time problem when you run somebody who is not now in association with the preclear.

That is another process entirely, and that is a process. You start running „Parts of your father you could be responsible for“ and he's been dead for three years. If you permit yourself to skid off PT problem into, because he said he hates men and it's all his father, and you say, „Aha,“ and you run parts of father he could be responsible for, you're no longer running a PT problem - as a matter of fact, have avoided one.

And what do you know. The preclear won't win on that at all. It's so seldom that he'll win on that because you've dived into processing before you've thoroughly established a session.

These rudiments are fabulous.

Let's take the next button: Help. It's a tremendously valuable button. It practically is the button which makes clearing possible. So don't think for a moment that Help can exist in the absence of terminals. Help cannot exist in the absence of terminals so we get „Find the auditor. Find the pc.“ Now, we don't care whether you find the auditor and then find the goal and the present time problem and then find the pc or exactly how you go about this order of things, as long as you go about them.

Sometimes you will find it's absolutely necessary to establish the auditor before you can even talk to the pc. Now, in the case of, oh, of a case way, way, way down, unconscious, you apparently don't have rudiments.

You walk in, this person's lying in a hospital bed and you don't have any rudiments. They're unconscious. They've been in a coma. Ah, but you do have rudiments. You certainly do. And the way to get around them is to establish the auditor.

Now, one of the ways of doing this is CCH 1 „Give me that hand.“ That's one of the ways of doing it. You're establishing the auditor. „You make that body lie in that bed“ establishes the pc. You get the idea?

Audience: Mm-hm

So here, again, we have the auditor-pc, no matter how far down the line the case is. And if you walk into an insane asylum and try to do something with an insane person, you're going to be surprised, sometime, to actually be able to run an engram or do something rather heroic.

But listen, if you haven't established the auditor, nothing permanent will occur. This we know by experience over a period of many, many years. Nothing will occur. Not a thing.

Now, where you have an auditor and where you have a preclear, you can have help. And only when you have two terminals can you have help. Isn't that interesting. That's an interestingly simplified look, isn't it? So if you're sitting there and the pc hates your guts and he's unwilling for you to say anything more to him, or even if you get to a point where you hate his guts and are unwilling to do anything more to him, you have a violation of the Help button right in rudiments, don't you? Well, if this is the case, no auditing is going to get done, is it? Not very much. So, Help has as its primary activity in auditing, ARC: affinity, reality and communication. Those are not necessarily subordinate buttons but they group up under Help.

Now, you could say affinity, reality and communications are the additional buttons, but actually, they don't belong in this same order of magnitude. You see? You can't say, well, there's affinity, reality, communication, Change, and Problems and Help. No, that is not correct. ARC - you are already dealing with a seniority of data. The data is senior to these buttons.

All right. So therefore we have to have Help before a session can help anybody, which is rather fabulous.

Now we take the next button and we find what is wrong with the person is obsessive and unknowing creation or, more complicatedly, the inhibition of obsessive and unknowing creation. Now, that really gets complicated, see? The person doesn't not only not know that he is creating things, but he is also at the same time suppressing and messing up the things he is creating, which gives us a wonderful picture. Boy, what complications. And this is a second-postulate situation.

And the more you audit it, the smarter you've got to be. It isn't necessarily that you must never audit a field, but there are ways of auditing fields so that you wind up with auditing the first postulate.

So don't ever audit a field or an obfuscation or a not-isness, to go back to the Axioms, without auditing it directly toward the first postulate. You get the idea? It isn't that it's wrong to audit one, it's that there's only one direction you can audit it and that's earlier. Earlier and simpler.

And here we have this whole picture of obsessive creation. Denial of self. Denial of self. The individual must be continuing to mock up denial of self to continue to deny himself, which is a rather fabulous state of affairs.

He must have to continue to mock himself up as aberrated in order to be aberrated. And he's capable of creating those things which we call anatomy and the entire anatomy of the mind and spirit come under this button, Create.

He is creating locks, secondaries, engrams, fields, machines. And he's creating, in particular, a bank; being a combination thereof. And a thetan produces two products. He produces thoughts which solidify and become data. Hardly anybody ever thinks of data as that. They think of themselves as the data or something of the sort. They very seldom take a direct look at this. And the other are the M-E-S-T creations, and no creation falls outside of M-E-S-T, you see; that is, of the solid nature.

So you have the thought creation - the creation of thought, creation of ideas - and also you have the creation of things, all of which come under the heading of M-E-S-T. And there's nothing in a case which comes outside of M-E-S-T if it's going to have any mass or distance or anything else in it, don't you see? So you could say, then, nothing - there is nothing in a case to audit except the products of a thetan. How fascinating, if you look it over. There's nothing else present except the products of a thetan. And those consist of thought and M-E-S-T. You see this clearly? Now, wherever - wherever we see a human being, we're looking at some variety and combination of these two things. So, we learn we have to process both thought and things. And anything in the case or any bank there, is: space, matter, energy, time, on Lord knows what track, but time.

And the thought is all wrapped up in these object masses of one kind or another. The whole thing is usually disintegrated to some degree and we have this glorious potpourri which is actually a terrific simplicity.

But in order to create this thing, the individual actually has to, at any given instant, create the perfect form and disintegrate it. He doesn't just make a disintegration. He makes the perfect form and disintegrates the perfect form. So he's going „Vroom-vroom,“ you know. He makes the perfect form; disintegrates it, makes the - you know? Bang-bang. And he must be doing this so that it rides right up the track with him. What a fascinating view.

But that's all there is there to audit. There isn't anything else there to audit -some variety of thought, some variety of matter, some variety of energy, some variety of space and some variety of time. That's all.

There aren't any other demons there. They are simply thoughts caught in perpetuated matter, energy, space and time. Got the idea? So that a demon or a ghost or something that shows up in the case is actually a created thing and is really a thought or stable datum in some kind of a machine combination of these other things, which itself has products or which consumes things.

So we have this case manufacturing things and consuming things at the same time, and we get our next complexity. Creation has as its end goal the production of communication. So therefore, you get something on this order: you get substitution of communicators and this long chain of substitutes for the original communicator, a thetan. Therefore all take more or less his ideas and form. And again we aren't auditing anything else but the products of a thetan. And now, that's all we're auditing. And those are created.

Axiom 1, Axiom 2, in particular, are truths. Those are truths. All else are the creations of a thetan.

Now, because he's so widely agreed upon them and he holds them so dear to his heart, he says they're him. He says, „I am these things.“ But he has to create himself being those things all the way up the line.

Now, trying to get a preclear out of this gives us our next button which is Responsibility, which is, he is willing to be blamed for having caused it. That's the way it'd be defined by most people. And of course most people are unwilling to be blamed for having caused it. That's for sure.

Every communicator he ever mocked up and used, went through this cycle: he was curious, which is to say he wanted to communicate, and then the next one: he desired communication. He said, „I wonder what it'd be like?“ You know? And then he desired the communication. Nobody was pleased with the communication, so he said, „I didn't do it. I didn't do it.“ And we get, then, responsibility for creation dependent upon whether or not it was an acceptable communication. When he began to suspect that this thing he had, doing the communicating, such as the Atomic Energy Commission (one of the US government's Rocks), when he began to suspect that the rest of the world didn't want to be communicated with, with atomic invisible particles, he said, „You've got to be communicated with and you're going to get it.“ And the other day, according to a St. Louis paper, the War Department was writing up the terms of surrender of the United States to the enemy, or the enemy's terms of surrender to the United States. While you were busy here in this ACC, they were fixing it all up, and they were getting their proper papers arranged for a proper surrender, you see, in case of atomic war. Because they know very well that this whole thing is going to be inhibited.

Now, of course, the first and primary way of inhibiting anything is to slap the guy with the same thing. That's the first thing. Somebody mocked up a Rock. You didn't like it. He got down to an enforce. You had to figure this out and you had to cope with this thing. One of the best things you could do was to turn one around on him, was more or less the same way.

We neglect this in auditing, because all the individual ever did was mock up pictures of the other fellow's Rock. So therefore those are his mock-ups even though they were the other fellow's Rock. Now, that particularly, he was displeased with. That, particularly, he wouldn't take responsibility for. And so we get the tangle of the bank. See The Factors.

Now, that's what a bank's all about. The other fellow made up a Rock and threw it at him - and threw it through something at him - and he didn't like that but he took a picture of it and what threw it at him. But he says, „I didn't make that.“ Oh, he didn't make that, did he? Well, he took a picture of it didn't he? Well what's he still got? Has he still got the other fellow's Rock and its emanations or has he got a picture of it? Well naturally he has a picture of it and the only person that could have made that picture was himself.

So he says, „I won't take responsibility for the other fellow's Rock.“ So therefore, by some means, he doesn't take responsibility for his picture that he made of the other fellow's Rock.

And that's really the only real complication there is in the bank. He made all of the pictures but they were of otherwise owned and made things. When he gets this thing tangled and disentangled and retangled and so forth, why, you've got a nice, juicy reactive bank.

It's full of compulsions to do things because other fellows' Rocks were emanating at him. He's in a tangle of communicators. And these pictures of these communicators are what we used to call „demon circuits.“ That's all. And you'll run into these in wholesale lots on cases.

Little circuits, they move in on the guy and they move out on the fellow and so forth. They're usually pictures of the other fellow's Rock. You know, Daddy had a body and Daddy talked. One made a picture of Daddy; he got tired of this and not-ised all the picture and when he got it all bunched up it was the thoughts surrounded by a bunch of confused mass and it still talked. That's a demon circuit. So, all of these variations add up to why a person is unClear.

Now, in this ACC we have run back Rock chains - we have several ways now to scout Rock chains, and we have a dozen ways to run Rocks. Now, just the simple matter of patching up a case for everyday living - which was possibly, maybe, your highest hope two or three years ago, making him able to cope with it and so forth - is so much within your reach today that you're not even looking at it.

This is one of the easiest things that you could do. Now, you've been doing the roughest possible thing. The roughest possible thing was to audit the roughest possible chain to audit. And any one of you could have said, „Well, we'll patch this fellow up so he'll feel fine for a while, by simply addressing his present life and patting him on the head,“ and you wouldn't have had any trouble with ARC breaks. Get the idea? Now, the fact that we were going for raw meat, the fact that we were stepping all over the preclear's most tender corns, made pcs in this ACC hard to audit. The chain of Rocks consists of Rocks and the ARC breaks thereon so that any ARC break becomes a tremendous affair when you're auditing the Rock. So therefore, to audit a case to a totality of Clear requires much more skilled auditing than has ever been demanded of anybody.

And I wish to compliment you for having, on the most part, attained the ability to audit a Rock without getting knocked silly by the pc. Do you follow me? Now, what you were doing is so much more than an auditor was ever required to do before that you, yourself, haven't awakened to the fact that I have been demanding of you a tremendous level of auditing for the simple reason that it was required in order to audit straight down the Rock chain.

In the 19th ACC we avoided the Rock chain utterly and completely. I'll confess to you why. I wanted to make some Clears. I knew how we could make some Clears - wasn't trying to clear everybody - and I guess I just wasn't willing to tackle with that caliber of auditing that it would take. Now, that's kind of invalidative on the 19th, isn't it, because pretty good auditors came out of the 19th.

But if you were in the 19th and also the 20th, you will have noticed a slight difference, I think - about ten thousand percent difference in what was demanded of the individual.

Now, auditing comes up along this line: a good professional auditor should be able to undergo the discipline of Tone 40 auditing. He should be able to do Tone 40 auditing perfectly. That is really the first professional level of auditing. He should be able to get in there and pitch at Tone 40, slug-slug-slug, totally forgetting all about acknowledgment, paying no attention to origins - nothing. He ought to be able to just chop in there and keep going on a Tone 40 basis as though he was running another body.

Now, that's demanded as the first requisite of a good auditor, that he be able to do this, because he will have to do this occasionally on an insane person because their entire chatter is the chatter of circuits; and the more you validate a circuit, the more trouble you're in. Got that? The next level is formal auditing; what we call formal auditing. There was hardly a person here who wasn't very good at formal auditing. There was hardly a person here, by the way, who wasn't already good at Tone 40 auditing. Nearly everybody was excellent at good formal auditing, which are the early TRs of handling origins and so forth. They were pretty good at this. They were good enough to get by! So now, there must be a third class of auditing. And this class of auditing demands that a person can tolerate the discipline of Tone 40 auditing and keep on without blowing his stack. He should be able to do formal auditing very easily and flawlessly. And he should do all these things so well that he can originate himself whenever he pleases or take up any origin of the pc whenever he pleases. And he can start sessions and run sessions and start sessions and run sessions and put sessions back together again and patch up the ARC breaks and run sessions and take them off and run them again. You understand? And audit with understanding of the case. And that is absolutely demanded of clearing.

Now, a person has to have all of those kinds of auditing under his belt before he can clear anybody, and that I am absolutely certain of today, and you have taught me so, here in this 20th ACC.

People haven't got a prayer of clearing anybody who has the least rough bank unless he can handle a pc just like that; unless he can slap ARC breaks out, wham. You got the idea? Because you practically have to lay ARC breaks in, in order to get the Rock out, don't you? It's too easy to lay them on the line.

Now, if you were to take the exact processes which you've learned in this ACC and if you were to apply those processes to any present lifetime situation, you're in for a surprise. And I invite you to do it.

You'll find cases just falling apart in your hands and everybody saying, „What a wonderful auditor. He understands me perfectly. And my case is making so much progress.“ You won't get him all stirred up by heading for the Rock. You just pick off any valence he's had any difficulty with or anything of that sort and you just patch it up and put it back together again. Of course he won't stay that way very long, but that's fine. He'll be back.

Try it. Try it someday. Try to run Help in a Rock bracket on somebody's car that he's having trouble with. Well, he's not going to have any trouble with cars after that. That's going to be fine. It'll disentangle. Everything will come out swell.

Now, take „pleasedness“ and handle his first eight wives and his father and mother and all the rest of this sort of thing and patch the current lifetime up just gorgeously, you know? Just „Mock up your mother being pleased in front of that body. Mock up your mother being pleased behind that body. Mock up your mother being pleased...“ and so forth; he'll be very happy with his family.

Of course, the case will be kind of hung up and still stupid and a lot of other things, but be a lot better, don't you see? But you do have - you do have tools which applied to lesser chains of the Rock, produce some rather fabulous results. So you don't have to go for the Rock.

I say you don't have to go for the Rock. See? Of course, if you want to make Clears you're going to have to. And you better make Clears. Anyway...

Here are these techniques which handle rather facilely. In the 2nd ACC we used to talk about ghosts - the ghosts. Every now and then a person would look up and find out he was haunted. I mean, literally.

A psychiatrist would really go up the spout and drool and grab the electric shock machine and the brain scalpels and the skull auger and so forth if he knew how to look. Fortunately psychiatrists can't look so they never notice these things about people so they never do anything. Good thing for the civilization that they all wear „sporn rimmed hectacles.“ Now, they'd find this out: there's hardly anybody who walks down the street who isn't accompanied by a ghost. And that ghost isn't he. Pretty, pretty interesting. But he's carrying along his second cousin or a school pal or some old space jockey that was a pal of his or his grandfather or something. And a lot of people, you just ask them to look around rather searchingly, just look around with their eyes shut, sort of, and see if anybody else is there.

And this we learned out of doing the 2nd ACC. Now, in the 20th ACC, quite incidentally and almost unremarked, we find out how to get rid of all the ghosts.

Well, it's a process that runs this way, (this by the way will go on down the Rock chain if you keep it up long enough): „Mock up a person who likes change. Mock up a person who likes problems. Mock up a person who likes help - or to help. Mock up a person who likes creativeness - or who likes to create things. Mock up a person who is responsible - or who likes to be responsible,“ is the best command.

Now, if you say „likes“ on all of these, you don't have to do anything with „pleased.“ See, he likes change. He likes problems. He likes help. He likes to create. He likes responsibility.

And the way you'd run this would just be one, two, three, four, five; one, two, three, four, five; one, two, three, four, five; one, two, three, four, five. Get the idea? You wouldn't say, change, change, change, change, change. You get the idea? Because the case you're running this on would probably require lots of randomity to keep interested and so forth. But he'll mock up things as he goes along. And you'll find that this matches up to all the ghosts. And you'll find ghosts standing around.

Now, this is something that came up and was handled here to a marked degree in the last week while you were doing something else. Got that? Well, here we had a problem in the 2nd ACC which we incidentally solved and never even did mention in the 20th ACC. How to locate ghosts. Just run the five buttons on „likes.“ Got the idea? Well, you get one of the more powerful processes and it's quite a remarkable process all by itself. So that's a piece of data not all of you had.

And here's another datum which is a fascinating thing. A person whose case doesn't move may have aberrated ideas; may have very aberrated ideas of Change; may have very aberrated ideas of Problems, Help, Create and Responsibility. But any of these buttons would come free if we went up to the senior data - which is affinity, reality and communication - and used almost any part of it. A case which would have five of them - these first five buttons - messed up, of course, would never alter in processing. Got that? Now, you could slave to get these five buttons changed unless you changed a senior button. And there is a senior button to these and that is „Pleased.“ It's the „A“ of ARC - the „A“ of ARC. Affinity, if handled directly and independently, will make somebody well and will permit all of these things to change.

Now, when an individual is totally shot, he goes through a series of inversions. When he's totally shot on the subject of „please,“ he goes through a series of inversions of „pleased,“ whereby he himself tried to please something else and he failed. So therefore he made up something else which was supposed to please something else, and this failed. So he made up something else which sought to please something else, and that failed. And we just get this flip-flop; and all it amounts to is trying to please.

And that's one of the things that you, as an auditor, are getting kicked in the teeth with; you're trying to please the preclear in some fashion.

And a bad auditor goes overboard and tries to please him rather than to be effective - Q's-and-A's with him, you know - tries to make him happy. The more you try to make a preclear happy, the less auditing you're going to get done, because it seems rather remarkable that you don't have to make a preclear happy and yet will not make ARC breaks.

Now, that's the one big lesson this ACC has really yet to learn subjectively and totally: that you can audit quite overtly as long as you're being very effective. If you aren't being very effective you can always fall way downstairs and please the preclear.

But if you please him very long or very much, he'll become very displeased with you. Got the idea? It is better to control him than please him any day of the week. Therefore never Q-and-A with a preclear.

He said, „I think we ought to run some other process than the one we're running.“ He actually loses confidence in you to such a degree, if you do what he says, only because he now knows you're merely trying to please him. He knows you don't intend to be effective; he knows you just intend to please him.

And some cases here in this last week have gone off the rails on a process which was producing results. But because something else was brought up which the preclear thought ought to be handled, it was handled by the auditor or some semblance of a Q and A occurred and when this semblance of the Q and A occurred, the pc, even though he hadn't been Qed-and-Aed with, felt that he had been.

And you see, he is the question and the auditor poses the answer is why we call it Q and A. And of course the ideal answer to any question is to be the question. So when the pc becomes the question, the auditor becomes the question, you see? And this can upset a case no end. So we learn this one all over again: that any blunder we ever made in the past - any blunder we ever made in the past - can be magnified a thousand times over while you're running the Rock.

Therefore such a thing as Q-and-Aing with the preclear produces not just an unproductive session, it produces bitterness, to say the least.

So the auditor has to remain in control of the session. And therefore we get this change here as applied to auditing. Control: Start, change and stop; that is all there is to control. And we learn this astonishing thing which we've known for a very, very long time. And this astonishing thing is simply that a thetan controls things, not not-controls them. Get the idea? So if you try to run a not-control process, you're in the soup.

Now, I conducted many experiments on this several months ago and found out routinely that mocking up a confusion, while it has a limited result, is not really a thetan activity. You see that? He will not himself mock up a confusion. He will try to throw somebody else's mock-ups into a confusion. So if you run a confusion, you are running somebody else's mock-ups.

So you always audit a thetan on the positive factors of control. He mocks up order. He mocks up positive stops, positive changes; orderly, predictable, positive starts. All of these things are orderly.

From the viewpoint of the preclear it must be a world of order even when he is trying to create a world of disorder in somebody else that is an opponent. You see that? So that certainly you can never get into trouble being orderly and controlling everything with great precision.

You'll notice music, as it deteriorates in a society, becomes less and less well controlled and more and more disorderly. Have you noticed that?

Audience: Mm-hm.

Now, as we look then at any subject we find out that it is liable to become less and less well controlled. Now, the proper course of evolution of Scientology, if it matched the course of evolution of this universe, would be to become more and more pat-a-cake, more and more permissive, less and less well controlled. More and more „Please the preclear.“ Get the idea? More and more „Back it all off.“ You see this? Less and less effective.

Now, we're going exactly the opposite direction to this. We're getting more and more positive in our control. We're demanding more and more order. And as such we're running contrary to the cycle of action of this universe. Now, that's a hard thing to do for any group because it tends to leave unas-ised some of the cycle of action of the universe in which he finds himself.

But let me ask you one favor. Never cease to be orderly because you think it is more pleasing to be otherwise. Don't fall for the „Pleasedness“ button.

Now, we can say, then, that any case now that is very badly withdrawn has basically something wrong with the „Pleased“ button. A case that is in bad shape or is hard to run, where things won't as-is and so forth, has something wrong with the „Pleased“ button.

This evidently is that level of ARC that can be entered by the preclear. And although „pleased“ is not the most important version or part of ARC (communication is, you see), the communications themselves are not sufficiently real to the preclear to be run, but „pleased“ is.

All aberration could be said to be, on a very narrow look, a great pleased-ness followed by a total collapse. He was very pleased with something and it let him down. Now, everybody agrees more or less upon this particular cycle. So we have to run it backwards in an auditing session.

We spot the fact that he is protesting against the unpleasedness. We spot the fact that pleasedness is holding the unpleasedness in place. The only thing that has any power is ARC. Non-ARC has no power.

So you think you're getting an ARC break off the case by spotting it. Listen, it's only your ability to have affinity in present time with the preclear which permits you to blow that lock. Do you realize that? See? That's the only thing.

The lock all by itself won't blow because it doesn't have any force, you see? What you've got to do is reopen the channels of affinity, reality and communication.

All that is, is a nonexistence of - a failure to create at a point. The moment that you get an ARC break, there's merely there a failure to create at that point. There is a „not livingness.“ The person who is simply - who is in an ARC break is protesting about not having lived for an instant. He's protesting about „not being.“ He's protesting at the absence of communication, the absence of mass, the absence of all of these things. He is „not“ at that point.

And when you take it up, the fact that you're taking it up with him reconfirms his existence at that point and gives him life at a point where no life existed. And of course we get the thing „wheeling.“ But what did it? It was the ARC before it which could stop. This is one of these - a thetan doesn't like nothing. See? And the fact that there was ARC made its cessation come before his notice. So it's there because there was ARC. And it blows because new ARC is injected into it when you do it with two-way comm. When you do it with a process, you just blow out the old ARC.

One of these fantastic tricks is to simply get the person mocking up men or women or something, or gods or demons or devils, or Instructors, until he gets an automaticity that's real pleased. And then you grab the automaticity and have him mock that one up many times and you're liable to blow five or six lifetimes. It's one of these goofy ones.

Death is only severe when you have lived. That's no reason, however, to be afraid of living. But the preclear is afraid of living because he has died. And he was only afraid of dying because he had lived. So it all goes back to the fact that the fellow made a mistake (he thinks) of ever coming to life in the first place.

And when you lead him to come to life and then close a trap on him (he thinks), then deny him life, why, you have betrayed him. But the betrayal, basic-basic on the betrayal, was coming to life in the first place. And that is the first postulate and bottom of the Rock that you are looking for.

Now, I've given you a summary of most of this material except one, and that is the Rock is in a perfect form; it is a perfect, simple, geometric form and we have confirmed that in this ACC. We've had enough cases to inspect it.

Now, as far as your own case is concerned, I'm not the least bit worried because there isn't a single case here, now, that isn't solvable. If any of you did not get as far as you liked, why, I'm sorry for it, as far as your cases are concerned. But I think it's remediable. We've been through seventy-six trillion years and we've come to this point. We've certainly got another seventy-six trillion to get out of the first seventy-six trillion because at least we can now hold our own. And if you come back to an ACC any time between now and the next seventy-six trillion years, I'm sure you'll find somebody still on post.

You've all been taking a very narrow look and trying to get Clear and trying to get your preclear Clear by the deadline: five minutes of eight, Friday night. Tomorrow you get your tests. If any of you made it - if any of you made it - here's your Clear bracelet, already here.

See them? They're very pretty.

It's been a pleasure to have you here. Thank you very much for coming to this ACC. And you, and I do mean you, have contributed to it. Thank you very, very much. Goodbye.

Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you very much.