Thank you.

Okay. Good enough. We do this one sitting down. Okay.

«Отсутствие ответственности» является общим знаменателем МПЦ, (массы проблемы целей). Этот конечный продукт МПЦ поддерживает существование любого контура или вэйланса.

This is what?

Вот как пан-детерминизм вырождается в ходе игры и превращается в «отсутствие ответственности »:

Audience: 17th.

The what?

Audience: 17th.

Of what month?

Audience: January.

Масса проблемы целей состоит из прошлых личностей или «вэйлансов», каждый из которых включен в общую группу и в большей или меньшей степени является частью группы.

17th of January. What year?

Таким образом, свойство части (вэйланса) является свойством целого –

Audience: AD 12.

коллекции вэйлансов, которая известна как «масса проблемы целей».

AD 12. And where are we?

Audience: Saint Hill.

Духовное существо застревает в устойчивых массах из-за механизма, который заставляет его поверить, что определенные вещи нежелательны. Поэтому существо не может их иметь. Оно может только бороться с ними или игнорировать их. Но ни в том, ни в другом случае существо не воспринимает их «как есть». Поэтому они продолжают свое существование.

Huh?

Только нежелательные свойства имеют тенденцию продолжать свое существование. Поэтому наименее желательные вэйлансы или черты вэйлансов устойчивы.

Audience: Saint Hill.

Чтобы не иметь чего-либо, нужно либо игнорировать это, либо бороться с этим, либо избегать этого. Эти три действия: игнорировать, бороться или избегать – выливаются в неспособность иметь. Они также выливаются в отсутствие ответственности за это.

Yeah, I know, but what planet?

Таким образом, мы можем определить ответственность как способность заботиться о чем-либо, достигать этого или быть этим. В действительности, чтобы нестиответственность за что-либо, необязательно заботиться об этом, достигать этого или быть этим. Человеку необходимо просто полагать или знать, что у него есть способность заботиться об этом, достигать этого или быть этим. «Заботиться о чем-то»

Audience: Earth.

– понятие более объемное, чем понятие «начать, изменить или остановить», но похожее на него. Оно включает в себя защиту этого, помощь этому, любовь к этому, заинтересованность в этом и т.д.

Earth. Okay. Thank you very much. All right. Thank you very much for orienting me. I've been flying about here and haven't had much time to look up.

Когда человек делает это, но затем терпит неудачу из-за овертов и висхолдов, он движется по спирали вниз и начинает компульсивно и навязчиво заботиться, достигать и быть, затем происходит инверсия, в результате которой он начинает избегать этого, бороться с этим или игнорировать это.

All right. I have a lot of data to give you about 3D Criss Cross. And Ill try to make it graphic to you in spite of a lack of chalk. Piece of chalk around here?

Игнорирование чего-то сопровождается забыванием и закупоркой этого. Поэтому у человека закупориваются прошлые вэйлансы, и он больше не видит прошлых жизней. Память обо всем этом возвращается только тогда, когда человек вновь вернется к мысли о том, что этих вещей можно достичь, или что ему не страшно ими быть, или что он может заботиться о них.

And you don't know from nothing I mean, you're stumbling and fumbling in the dark in all those black masses. I never saw people get so lost.

Вот в чем заключается причина закупорки полного трака и вот как от этого можно избавиться.

3D Criss Cross is the natural outgrowth of Routine 3. Find a goal, find a terminal, run it. But of course, you cannot guarantee that the auditor will find a goal that is the pc's goal. Might be an oppterm goal, you see? Or a terminal that is the pc's terminal. Might be just a lock terminal. Might not be checked out and it might be done in California. I shouldn't be hard on California. Actually, these are sufficient overts that we can take over the lot. Have to run up a few overts before you mount the attack, you know.

So this Routine 3 was successful in a relatively few cases to produce a Clear. Now, its percentages are quite poor. I never gave you anything but the facts I know. And the percentages on the thing are quite poor. I suppose they're something ridiculous like about, oh, I don't know, 85 percent, 90 percent, 95 percent flunk. Meaning only about a 5 — somewhere between a 5 and 15 percent is about all you get out of Routine 3 Clear. I've been telling you that for years, that we're just clearing a few and we're looking to clear a lot more.

Эти принципы можно использовать множеством разных способов.

Well, there are two things there. You see, the goal could be an oppgoal and it could not be something the pc wanted to do anyhow and the terminal could be the opposition terminal, at which time you'd wrap up the pc and he wouldn't know which end he was standing on.

Благодаря проверке на безопасность человек избавляется от овертов и висхолдов, и для него открывается дверь к тому, что раньше было недоступным.

And in view of the fact that these techniques always get done by somebody who doesn't know what he's doing — that's true. That's true. These bulletins get out. You'd be surprised the distribution we have which is out from under. And somebody reads half a bulletin and hears the lecture backwards and then they're all set, see. They miss all the things you're not supposed to do, you know and so they do those. And then they can't duplicate all the things they're supposed - to do, so they don't do those. And you can't have around too long techniques that have a terrific liability to them, don't you see? Too many people get cut to pieces with them through unauthorized use and untrained auditors and all that.

Все хронические соматики и образцы поведения содержатся в вэйлансах, и их истоки нельзя найти в текущей жизни, поскольку человек может достичь текущую жизнь, он заботится о ней и сам является этой жизнью, и, следовательно, текущая жизнь находится в его области ответственности.

So Routine 3, however, did produce Clears. Now, the way it produced Clears was to produce a Key-out Clear. You ran this terminal out and when it blew, it disconnected the pc from the Goals Problem Mass. That is how that produced a Clear. And it did lead the person out into an area of free track and you might as well get used to that idea that there is a lot of free track on the case, even when there's a Goals Problem Mass, you see? The person can — does have track to run on that does not impinge on the Goals Problem Mass.

Причина всех настоящих трудностей заключается в отсутствии ответственности.

But one day he's running an engram that has an airplane in it and the left wing of the airplane is black. Oh, oh. And you run it and you run it and all of a sudden, the pc has got a field. And he has never had a field before, but now he's got one.

Тем не менее можно использовать эти принципы даже в текущей жизни и получать значительные достижения.

Well, you see, he was running on free track. That is to say he could move on the time track because he was not keyed in on the Goals Problem Mass. Well, what you did then when you found his terminal was to find that terminal most intimately connected with the Goals Problem Mass which could be run on the pc and when that was discharged, it disconnected him from the Goals Problem Mass, but it left the Goals Problem Mass floating about unchallenged by the pc.

Therefore, a person cleared by those particular technologies — were unstable. That is to say they might have gone for a century, they might have gone for a minute. It was all in the lap of the gods how rapidly the Goals Problem Mass would move in on them.

Now, they had a good chance that it wouldn't because they were already well separated from it, you see. But there was still something in the bank that could bite. Now, the Clear, then, was an apparently stable person only so long as the Goals Problem Mass didn't key in on him. But there was something that you could key in on a Clear which was unsuspected and that was a Goals Problem Mass. That is the thing that could be keyed on him and that was the thing which was unsuspected. That is it. That is the weenie as they say in Hollywood. Except the weenie is something by movie scenario technology which everybody is after. Everybody is after the weenie. That'll be the gold and the gold mine or it'll be something of this sort. It's what the hero is fighting the villain for and if the villain gets it, that's bad. And if the hero gets it, that's good, you see. That's a weenie.

Well, this is not quite a weenie because nobody wants it. So it's a kind of a reverse weenie.

And the Goals Problem Mass is the reactive bank. These things are synonymous. There is no difference between the Goals Problem Mass and the reactive bank, aside from this little addition. The reactive bank includes or could include sections of free track, you see. And actually, analytically, the pc can touch these things, too and is quite often surprised to find out he's lived before and that sort of thing, by touching free track in past lives. So you could say the reactive bank also has it, on a borderline, some free track.

But these engrams that the preclear was so excruciatingly screaming about and was so upset about and that you've run pcs through and they were all tangled up and rolled up in balls and had their heads come off and so forth, brother, that's nothing That's free track. Huh? Vail looks at me. Huh, yeah, it's just free track, that's all. You can run this stuff. Not aberrative. Analytically approachable.

You're the executioner at the tower the time that you smothered the two little princes. They're still looking for that guy, by the way. Did you do it? We'd like to get the thing cleared up. We never could determine whether they were smothered or not smothered, you know, quite, you know. Anyhow, we'd like to clear that up over here in England. We like our crime, us English. Anyhow . . .

So that's free track. You can run engrams and you can have a ball, you see? And you can run free track and everything is fine and wonderful and very inviting and it's all very colorful and very nice and one day you get near the Goals Problem Mass and after that, you have black and white. And then you get a little closer to the Goals Problem Mass and you get two-dimensional pictures.

And then you get into the Goals Problem Mass and the lights go out, and you haven't got any pictures from there on. You see how it works?

But of course, you could get keyed out and all of a sudden, you get two-dimensional pictures and then you'd get three-dimensional black and whites and then brilliant three-dimensional color and you're back onto free track again. See, this thing could be keyed in and out. Well, that's what you auditors have been fooling with when you're auditing a pc, you see? And you probably right now could think of many instances where you've done this on a pc. Can you?

Have you ever run a pc — run a pc along gorgeously and all of a sudden he didn't have any picture? Huh? Very embarrassing, isn't it? And you all of a sudden got yourself into a situation where everything was black and the next thing you know, it was white and beautiful and green and gorgeous and 3-D and everything was fine. Have you ever done that? It's more — rarely done, but auditors have done that — all of a sudden turned on a pc's pictures.

You run enough responsibility on a black mass and you will get the pc out into pictures again. And the keynote of that is responsibility and there's been a lot of material on that that you've already had. It's in bulletins of last — of 1960.

Therefore, something was in the road of Dianetics. Something lay directly across the path of Dianetics. And that was a thing that . . . What was it? You know? Nobody knew.

Well, all these years, a decade afterwards, here it is. It's a Goals Problem Mass and that's pretty good. In terms of geological time, it only took ten years to dig it up. All right.

That is the thing which keeps you from running a person to Clear through running engrams because sooner or later you run into some edge of the Goals Problem Mass and of course, it doesn't go out with engram running

If people didn't have the Goals Problem Mass, Dianetic processing by running engrams could send somebody to Clear rapidly.

But because of the Goals Problem Mass, hitherto undetected and called in Book One — it's all covered in Book One, by the way. It's circuits and valences. And circuits, valences, machinery, stuff of this character. Machinery isn't mentioned in Book One, but circuits and valences are. And I think there's a page and a half or two pages or something like that, listing types of circuits.

Well, those circuits add up to and become, in modern usage, the Goals Problem Mass. Because we can now tell you what a circuit is. And it's taken quite a while to find out exactly what a circuit was and exactly how to handle the circuit.

Now, the first technologies of clearing were better than Dianetics: Modern Science of Mental Health. The earlier technology was the better technology, which was simply to key out, key out, key out. See, what picture could the character confront? What could he tolerate, you see. What could he tolerate? Sort of a gradient scale of tolerances and so forth. And eventually, of course, he'd blow off the Goals Problem Mass and off the free track, too. And he would give an appearance of Clear. Of course, we don't know what the needle characteristic was of the first Clears because we didn't have any meters.

That's a good reason why we didn't know what the characteristic was. But, nevertheless, these people acted Clear and they weren't troubled with engrams and they answered up to these various characteristics. But if they did have any track, as it says in Book One, it was free track.

In other words, an individual could be dug out of what lingering edges of the Goals Problem Mass or circuits there were and put onto nothing but free track, he himself, a thetan and he would then feel wonderful and he would give the responses which we have called Clear. That's all elementary stuff.

But ten years after the fact, here it is — the Goals Problem Mass.

Now, when a person has lived a life in which he deserved no free track — in other words, he wanted to do everybody in or he wanted to get done in himself; you know, that sort of thing — he got into a grouper of some kind or another, which collapsed the track on him. About the time he blew out of his 'ead, he collapsed his track.

And this made a relatively black mass full of pictures and made out of energy masses. It had behaviors and characteristics. It had goals and everything else because it was that lifetime packaged. He packaged it all right.

In other words, the whole track collapsed on the person — boom. One minute, why, there he was merely executing everybody in the British Isles and the next moment there he was — a twig fell on him or something like that — and that was enough motivator and he blew out of his body and collapsed the whole track of that lifetime into a ball. And it will; it'll collapse into a ball if it's got enough groupers. Electronic phenomena.

It'll also disperse and explode, by the way, and you haven't got a ball. You've got it all over the universe. So you got a dispersal-type circuit and you've got a condensed type circuit, which are quite interesting. You also have an inert circuit, which isn't condensed or dispersed. It's just persistent.

All right, you had a ball. And this individual then, thereafter, carried along with him a black mass which was a whole packaged lifetime. But it was a personality. And it had all of the characteristics of a personality because it was his identity in a whole lifetime. It was an identity which was carefully built up over a whole lifetime.

Now, that is a circuit. And that is all a circuit is. And if you think I'm going to belabor this on and on and you want to know about the engrams the guy developed and how he developed them and how the mental energy got into the circuit and what a grouper is and how it all collapsed, read Dianetics: Modern Science of Mental Health. There's phrases and all kinds of things and actions of one character or another.

You live a life as a communist and you'll get a nice circuit. Why? Because it's total togetherness. It's marvelous, you know. And you just get total togetherness, you see? Anything appended to that life where the total ambition was total togetherness, why, we get a crusher and we get a black ball of some kind or another. In other words, that's a grouper. Got it?

All right. Now, that is in essence a circuit. There are three types of circuits under two classifications. There is an inert circuit, which is neither outflowing nor inflowing and there is the active circuit. The active circuit is divided into two classes — inflow and outflow circuits. So you have an inert circuit, an outflow circuit and an inflow circuit. Actually, three circuits, but actually two types only. There is the active and the inactive circuit — the inert circuit.

Now, this is quite important to you because every now and then you will assess and assess and bang your brains out and assess and assess and so on. You finally get the pc and the pc reads beautifully and everything goes along fine and then you audit with the auditing commands of the latter part of December, early November, 61 and you just audit and you audit and you audit and you audit and you audit and nothing seems to happen and nothing seems to happen.

And there isn't anything happening and the pc goes on in the same characteristics and apparently gets a few cognitions and all going along. The pc's getting better, but you're taking the long route. Now, what kind of a circuit you got? You got an inert circuit. That's right. That's inert circuits. Why? Why does it behave that way? Well, it's neither outflowing nor inflowing And that's the characteristic of an inert circuit. It doesn't outflow and it doesn't inflow. It's sort of an isness of beingness. But nevertheless it's packaged and it was pretty vicious in its day, but its activities were mostly the crimes of omission.

So you could say the crimes of omission characterize such a circuit. The pc, in running it, seldom recognizes omission as a crime. They cannot conceive of omission as a crime, you see.

They're a bunch of people standing on the bank of a river. This person comes along, notices the bank of the river is caving in, you see. Stands there and watches the bank of the river cave in and never mentions it to the people that the bank of the river is caving in, you see. And then the bank of the river caves in and all the people go into the water and drown and this person then says, "God is wonderful as he works his ways," you see.

That is very inert activity and they don't recognize it as God-awful overts. You see, it's — the desirable communication is totally missing. They don't ever communicate, see? And actually they don't withhold either. And you'll run into this type of character and it's quite fascinating because they haven't got any withholds. When they're in that circuit — when they're in that inert circuit, they don't have any withholds.

If it happened to — if it occurred to them to tell you about a rape, they would. If it occurred to them to tell you about a murder, they would. They just murdered somebody, they'd come around and say, "Yes, well, I just murdered somebody." But it doesn't occur to them to withhold but it also doesn't occur to them to ever mention it. See, that's no overts, no withholds; in other words, inert. The sins of omission. These are more or less the characteristics. These characteristics could be broadened and embroidered of an inert circuit and they have more mechanical importance to us than they do mental importance. The mechanical importance of this I'll get along to in a moment.

All right. Now, you take an active circuit. Now, an active circuit could be a total outflow circuit or a total inflow circuit. When I say use total, remember absolutes are unobtainable. No such thing as a total outflow or a total inflow, but you know what I mean. I mean this character really outflowed or this character really inflowed. Now, when that circuit is found, you get pocketa-pocketa-pocketa-pocketa-pocketa, audit, audit, audit, bing-bing-bing, cognitions, cognitions, terrific, terrific, terrific, you know.

Or, actually, when an inflow circuit is opposed to an outflow oppterm, you see or an outflow circuit is opposed to an inflow oppterm, see, or even when an inflow or an outflow circuit is opposed to an inert circuit, you'll still get these various characteristics, one after the other. You see?

So what do you got? What do you got? You got various reactions of circuits, but you also have interactions with other circuits. You see how this is building up? Quite elementary, actually. Oddly enough, the whole of the Goals Problem Mass is about as difficult to understand as a kid's game of skittles or something It's very, very elementary. That's why man has missed it. He's looked for the deep significance. You see, the deep, deep, deep significance of it all, you know. "And we were all made by God in a sea of ammonia by a scientist," or something, you know. And "Where did we all come from?" And he gets all involved and this sort of thing and goes on and on and on.

And he has never looked at what he is composed of. His own composition and mental thinking and that sort of thing, has never been inspected. In fact, we are the first to inspect it anywhere in the vicinity of this planet.

All right. The three types of circuits. Now, an active circuit, outflow or inflow, let me give you examples of these two.

Active circuit outflow: This fellow was a messenger. A messenger dispatcher is better. He was a messenger dispatcher that brought tidings of dismay or something in all directions.

In other words, he was always sending out messengers and eventually, of course, he became a messenger. So you'll find "a messenger" is mixed up in "a messenger dispatcher." So that circuit will be appended as a lock. So you'll have the messenger dispatcher. And the first thing you'll find, as an auditor, that goes tickety-tick and reacts, of course, is a messenger. And then you will find a messenger dispatcher as you move in on into the bank, you see? Because actually you're moving in against the outflow of that circuit. This case outflowed. This case outflowed.

Industrialist. Arooomrooooom — made cars. See, outflow, outflow, outflow, outflow. Agitator, issued propaganda. Outflow, outflow, outflow, outflow. Gangster, outflow, outflow, outflow, outflow. Knock everybody off, you know. Any type of terminal, you see, that's engaging in actions which outflow is potentially a circuit. Now, there's something else it takes to make a circuit and we'll get around to that in a minute, too. But get the idea that an active circuit is a circuit which outflows.

All right. An inflow circuit: An inflow circuit would be something that inflowed. A temple priestess. There's a honey. There's a doll as far as inflow circuits are concerned. A man comes up — inflow. People come up with offerings for the altar — inflow, and frankly, we haven't got them on this particular time span right this minute, we just have people dramatizing it.

But, I can remember in the old days of the temples of Astarte and so forth. Boy! Wow! You talk about an animated vacuum. Wow! I've seen somebody absolutely torn to bits, the flesh torn right off of his bones. It was just schleep. Vacuum. Give me! Give me! Well, you see them once in a while, today. But they're just dramatizations, that's all. And that was for good. That was for keeps, see. So that makes a — that makes an interesting valence. And that is a well packaged valence, always. Because, of course, the inflow characteristic of it pulls everything else in, too.

So everything is assistive to "pull in." Now, there's — there's your three classes: the inert, the outflow and the inflow.

All right. Now, let's go a little bit further, now. What is it that makes some lives package and some lives not package?

It's the degree of overt and withhold connected with the life. It is the withhold which packages up the tightly packaged ones. And it is the "must communicate" which packages up the active ones. You get a dispersal type valence accompanied with a very solid pack-type valence.

Now, I told you it isn't just withholds, you're only running half of the picture when you run withholds only. You've got the other side of this situation. "Must communicate," see?

Now, exactly what you'd call that, I haven't bothered much to investigate. But I imagine it would be a "moutflow," you see "must outflow" or something like that. A "moutflow," or something. But it's a "got to communicate." And it is the reverse of a withhold. Instead of "hold in," the guy must go, "flow out." And I was taking that up in yesterday's lecture.

Now, you've got the individual has compulsive pushouts which are desirable, which tend to mask, then, undesirable actions or prevent undesirable withholds, see? So the withhold in that particular case is undesirable. This is less usual as a mechanical mechanism, but nevertheless exists and you see it around most anywhere.

All right. Now, what hangs up the Goals Problem Mass? I refer to you my lectures of December and you can recall those — they, the lectures of December concerning the characteristics of the Goals Problem Mass, see? You've got a terminal and an oppterm and the terminal and the oppterm are fabulously balanced one against the other and it's absolutely impossible how these two got that well balanced. But you've got postulate-counter-postulate, effort-counter-effort or pull-counter-pull and you've got a problem as a result of this. In other words, you've got your problem. The idea of a problem. You've got the — the Force 1 versus Force 2. And that hangs up and they exactly balance, so the pc has a problem.

Whenever the pc has a problem, he's got one opinion, somebody else has got another opinion. Or he's got one force, or the — somebody else has got another force. And these things are counter-opposing. And all things we know about problems, back through the years, are all applicable to the Goals Problem Mass. Everything we know about problems applies to the Goals Problem Mass because it is a problem in magnitude.

Now, we've really got a problem. It is the problem of an identity versus an identity or the problem of an identity versus identities. It is not the problem of a thought versus a thought.

"We will go to the movies," he says.

She says, "No, we won't go to the movies."

Well, of course, that's a common domestic problem.

All right. This is blown up to "Priests must perish. Gods must perish," see. This is a little bit higher magnitude, isn't it?

All right. Now, let's blow it up further. During a whole cycle, all temples must cease and all temples must be created. Versus versus. Packaged into a total identity. Identities versus identities.

Now, you have the idea of the man against the man. The army against the army. The civilization against the civilization. The system against the system. You've got these things crush, one against the other and how they remained balanced so neatly for two hundred trillion years was one of the things which I told you was the vast delicacy and matter of interest to the Goals Problem Mass.

So I have, therefore, been studying this and believe me, I've really done some studying on this particular item. This is quite an item. And don't think that studying it isn't something like boxing with your hands tied behind your back with a grizzly bear. It's uncomfortable cuffing.

It's quite a — quite a ball. You know, it's something on the order of examining the characteristics of dynamite as it explodes.

Now, take a valence or circuit A. Valences or circuits, we don't care which is which is which. Not even synonymous. They're an identity. And that has a mission. "That has le mission it must accomplish." And then we get circuit B. And circuit B is "Zat mission she shall never be accomplish. Ha-ha."

In fact, "We concentrate on nothing else but ze nonaccomplishment of that mission. Ha-ha." And there they sit. In ze bank for zeveral zycles.

Pc runs into them. One minute he doesn't know whether he's accomplishing the mission or trying to stop the mission from being accomplished. And this is one of the things that absolutely baffles people. How, with such terrific enthusiasm, they will go straight along the line, you see and try to — try to get this thing done, you see? And then the next thing you know, sit down calmly and tell everybody it just must not be done. That's all. I mean, that must be stopped. Such an activity is totally undesirable anyhow.

Usually they — to make — to keep themselves from looking silly, they sort of sit still and sort of disparage what they've been doing, when in actuality they've run in from the one valence into the other valence.

Now, a thetan is a handy little character and he's very slippy, but he is susceptible to vacuums. And he is liable to get pulled into most anything and he's liable to go into most anything So he gets in the vicinity of one of these valences — which he himself, by the way, has kept mocked up and is keeping mocking up.

But remember, during the lifetime when he lived this... You see, he's lived all the lifetimes there are on the Goals Problem Mass. That you must know about this character, you see. There isn't a lifetime in the Goals Problem Mass that the thetan himself in person has not lived. You can talk all you want to. He can sit there and talk — "Oh, those damned tigers, you know." "Us waterbucks, now, we're the thing, you see. And those damn tigers, we're not going to have anything to do with tigers." And he'll give you a big sales talk and hire Batten, Barton, Durstine and Osborn to run propaganda campaigns against tigers and you know, he's going to have a ball.

But the truth of the matter is, he's been a tiger as long as he's been a waterbuck. In fact, he probably used to be a tiger and then be a waterbuck and while he was being a tiger, he'd say, "Oh, man, those waterbucks. Absolutely delicious. Absolutely delicious. The thing to do right now... Now, a freshly killed waterbuck is fine, but cured waterbuck is just — that puts the edge on it. You go down by the stream, you see and so forth and schlurp, schlurp." And if he happens to be in this valence of the tiger at the time you're auditing him, he has entirely different viewpoints.

And the next thing you know, if he swivels around the next time, he goes into the valence of the waterbuck. He has entirely different viewpoints.

What you want to worry about is the fellow who never swivels. And you only get that when you're running an inert valence. He never swivels on an inert valence, see. No motion involved in it at all. He kind of drips out of it or falls out of it accidentally one day or something like that.

Now, he's lived both of these lives and during that lifetime he created like crazy. Either he created impulses to keep himself from impulsing or he created withholds to keep himself from withholding. He created something to contradict something which was usually the same thing. He was busy. He was busy.

And during that very lifetime, of course, as a waterbuck, he was death on tigers and all the time he was a waterbuck, he was mix — he'd just keep mocking up things about what he was going to do to tigers. You know? What he was going to do to tigers. And tigers, you know. Tigers.

And because those things are hanging in space, they're never resolved. They're still mocked up, but the valence, waterbuck, continues to mock these things up. Which is quite remarkable. He spent a whole lifetime mocking up, so that valence just goes right on mocking up. It keeps itself mocked up, in other words.

Well, of course, what is everybody that is a being doing here on Earth? He's trying to keep himself mocked up one way or the other, you know? Survive, survive, persist, persist, persist. And we get back to the common denominator, Dianetics: Modern Science of Mental Health, and the dynamic principle of existence is survive. And this is the common denominator of all life.

Nobody said that we threw this principle out simply because we said create and destroy. That restored the rest of the cycle. Some beings are on "destroy others." And some beings are on "create others" or "create self" or even "destroy self," but the funny part of it is that they destroy themselves to survive and they create to survive. And survive is the thing they get pinned up on most easily, you see? So it is a common denominator of existence.

So every one of these valences has as its common denominator that it must survive and persist. And it must create in order to persist in some way or it must withhold in order to persist and so you get the thing totally packaged.

Now, it really wouldn't do very much if it weren't opposed. See, it would resolve and it wouldn't be floating in present time unless it were pushed against another valence of equal crash. You've got to have these two things pushed one against the other in order to get a timelessness. And that's how these valences float into present time. That's actually how they jammed into valences. See, oppose, oppose, oppose, oppose, oppose. Whether they're opposing by withholding or opposing in any other way, it's opposition. They're agin it. They're agin something.

Now, this principle is quite interesting This is a broad auditing principle I've talked about. I've said what you resist you become and that sort of thing But actually if you want anybody to get locked up in this universe very nicely, just get him to agree that certain things are bad and mustn't be had. That's all there is to it. Just get him to agree that certain things are bad and he mustn't have them.

Now, what is the definition of bad is: mustn't have it. It's actually the only real definition of bad. That's the fundamental definition of bad — something you mustn't have or something others mustn't have.

Now, if people mustn't have it, it of course persists because it is never as-ised. So you get a non-as-ised thing And the basic trick which makes this universe is simply this one trick. And a very interesting trick it is, which is just get everybody to agree that something is not haveable.

I imagine Immanuel Kant — somebody will run into Immanuel Kant sometime or another with his great unknowable unknowables and unattainable unattainables and how real truth — real truth, you see — transcended all human knowingness. So you couldn't have anything like real truth, you see, that sort of thing See, you couldn't have it. Lord knows what you could as-is then, you see. So that any time somebody — if he really got that into a circuit, why — any time somebody would say, "This is the truth," it would be non-as-is-able. If you can't have truth, then it's non-as-is-able.

You should have the experience sometime of actually just running "have" subjectively. It is not very therapeutic, but you run "have" subjectively, you'll actually see a mass vanish as you can have it. You can sometimes run it on a somatic and you'll see the somatic vanish because the person has made up his mind he could have it.

So the non-haves persist. So it becomes a non-have universe. So it's the "not-have" characteristics of that valence that are persisting It's something he couldn't have about the valence, so therefore it must be those things which oppose. So the valence actually is only composed of those things which oppose. Nice trick, isn't it?

I mean, the total energy mass left in this valence are those things which you can't have. So therefore, those things are oppose, so the total common denominator of a valence is oppose. Whether it is opposing by inflow or outflow or being inert or anything else, the characteristic of one of these packages is oppose. And none of its characteristics, have ever been had. The pc doesn't have these characteristics, you see. He can't have anything that's in that package that remains in it.

Now, he might . . . This is what is funny and what leaves your pc grasping in thin air once in a while. He's trying to find the rest of the life as a waterbuck.

He gets into this valence, you see and he can't find the rest of the life of a waterbuck. He can find spitting at tigers, running away from tigers, but he can't find very much grazing in the pasture, see, or swimming the stream, you know or lying out on a rock someplace and no lady waterbucks. He can't find that. He'll look for that, you see. And he'll look in vain in this valence, you see.

Hell know that there must have been good times in this valence, you see, but he can't find them. He's had all those. See, he could have those, but what he couldn't have is a tiger. He couldn't have death, he couldn't have a tiger, he couldn't have this and he couldn't have that and all the things he couldn't have are then packaged in that valence. So you get a Goals Problem Mass as a can't-have. It's a total can't-have.

Now, oddly enough, its characteristics are usually more desirable than an ordinary life the pc lives. See, there were some things in there that were very, very select chop. Ummm.

Well, there's a temple priestess. See. I imagine that could be quite exciting at times. Yet the poor pc runs into the life of the temple priestess, which is all packaged into a circuit now. "Where's the bed, you know." Nonextant. Doesn't exist.

But reaching hands — they exist. Stabbing knives — they exist. The slit throat under the shadow of the idol — that exists complete with blood. But only the less desirable blood because maybe they had an appetite for blood while being a temple priestess, you see. And so — it's the things nobody wants that are left in this lifetime. And the pc almost goes around the bend trying to run it, see. Where's something nice about it all, because he knows something was nice about it. He knows it was exciting. He knows a lot of things about it, but he can't find them anymore and they're sort of all eaten up.

That's an interesting characteristic of valences. So you don't get pictures. One of the things that you run the pc — you run him in a Goals Problem Mass, he says, "There's no pictures here." Well, you know at once he's in a Goals Problem Mass. He says, "There's kind of a ridge and there's a thin veil and then there's a mmmm. And I sort of have an impression of the hand of an idol." And he keeps getting problems and it'll all give him the same pictures, you see. The ridge, the veil and the hand of the idol. Never seems to run into anything else while he's running it. That's because that's all that's there.

That's simple. I mean, it's elementary, my dear Watson, because there isn't anything else present.

Now, he himself as a thetan could mock it up again and will mock it up when it's no longer that undesirable and could put it all together again and would, except, of course, it would be sponged into the undesirable characteristics and he's not about to do that. And the attention of the person was always fixated on the terminal itself and on the opposition.

So there's two things of fixation. It's on the terminal and on its opposition.

Now, how does this Goals Problem Mass get so thoroughly condensed? How does it get so condensed?

Well, if you drew a picture, you'd get — really, you'd get something like this. There would be free track. All is well. And you have free track and the free track is going along, doing well. And then all of a sudden you've got a Goals Problem Mass, you see? Well, that's all right.

So there's a — there's a mass there. Well, let's don't call it a Goals Problem Mass. Let's just call it a circuit, an isolated circuit.

All right. The person had a trillion years of free track and then he's got a Goals Problem Mass, you see, because of his overts and restraints and inflow and outflow and all this sort of stuff and, all — you know, all that kind of business. And it just packaged that lifetime, crunch! And he went along for another million years and so he's got another Goals Problem Mass. Well, let me tell you — pardon me, another circuit. Well, let me tell you the track could be just a series of free track with some beads on it. See, it'd look perfectly all right. I mean, a person would run back over it. He'd hit these things. He'd go into them, he'd come out of them, maybe get stuck on the track and you wouldn't have any trouble separating him from them. See, these are just isolated circuits spotted along in time.

And that's actually the way a Goals Problem Mass looks. It is not double. It is single, see? It's just — well, it's like a ladder. Free time track for maybe a trillion years and then there's a cycle. He spends a whole cycle in this weird game of a waterbuck, you see. And — but he's got a valence there of a waterbuck. Crunch! And it's all condensed. There's no free track in it at all. It's the unhaveables of the waterbuck.

And then you got free track for a million years and then you got some other valence. But this time he was an eagle and you got a — you got some kind of a terrific inflow-type terminal there, you see and it all went crunch, so that area's — no free track there. And it's just a little black lump on the time track and so forth.

And then go another half a billion years or something like that and then by that time he'd become a turtle. And there's nothing more inert than a turtle. And the inertness of it and the omissions of what he should have done as a turtle were overwhelming, so eventually the turtle's track caved in and that would just be there, you see. And then it'd go another billion or trillion years and he'd have another one of these crunch valences, you see? And it'd go along like that. And you, running the pc back over the track, would not have any trouble. None.

But that isn't what the time track looks like. That's what the time track should look like and what the pc thinks it probably does look like. And it doesn't look like that at all.

What happens? Well, he went along for a trillion years and one fine day found a waterbuck and a tiger. And there's a waterbuck and there's a tiger and everything's fine. And he sicked them on each other or something, you know. Made a game out of it. He was totally pan-determined over this thing. And by the way, pan-determinism and self-determinism and otherdeterminism have as their controlling common denominator responsibility. All you have to do to get pan-determinism run down into other-determinism and self-determinism — all you have to do is just cease to take responsibility for zones. And if you take less and less responsibility, when your responsibility goes to zero, you've got an other-determinism, you see? You've no longer got pandeterminism. You've got an other-determinism and now you're only responsible as a self-determinism. So you get maxims such as "take care of number one. That's my philosophy in life. Take care of number one," you know.

Well, I can show you somebody who has no responsibility for anybody else and at the same time has no ability to stand outside two sides of anything He's always got to take one side. He's always one-sided in every view. He could never, in other words, handle anything but a fight. And the only — he couldn't handle a fight. He could only be in a fight.

You'll have a person that is never able . . . If you had a cop like this, see, he'd always be coming in with beat-up criminals and he himself would be all beat up and so forth. And his neighborhood would always be beat up. Something would be beat up in this neighborhood and they've never had this much beat up in that neighborhood before so they merely figure it's getting to be a tough neighborhood. That isn't the case at all. They have a totally selfdetermined cop, who by the way has a Goals Problem Mass where he is a cop that is against them thar criminals. Rrroooop. Well, the second he's got this type of a Goals Problem Mass, he can only take one side of a situation.

So anybody who is doing anything instantly falls into the oppterm characteristics and he can only do a fight. He can never see two people talking together without boosting it up into where one was fighting the other and taking sides with one. He'd identify one with himself and he'd identify the other one as other-determinism and he'd make a fight out of it.

In other words, he'd never bring peace. He would just bring war. And there'd be more war and more war and more war. Wherever he went, there'd be trouble, just trouble, trouble, trouble, trouble, trouble. He wouldn't be able to understand this and neither would anybody else.

But this guy would be all out, too, for number one. That would be his idea. He's a totally self-determined individual. He'll tell you the virtues of selfdeterminism are enormous and let the other fellow take care of himself.

Also he would never stand alongside of a chess game and watch two players. He'd just never do that. It would be a point he just could not stand to be. He could never be from town A and watch a football game between town B and town C. He just could never do it.

He would never go to such a football game. He just never would go. That's all. He would have to be part of town B, you see, to attend the football game and he could only attend the football game between B and C, you see. And he would always be violently against C and always be terribly pro-B. You see? And that's very embarrassing because his company moves to town C. He has to go to town C now, you see.

So now he's forced into a position where he might have to change sides or be pan-determined or be something else but what he's doing And he can't do either of those, so he'll just find a new game. He'll just cease to be interested in football. That will be that. Bing, out, gone. That's it.

Well, he used to care for football. "Don't care for it much anymore. Horse racing's my game now. Us horses . . ."

Anyway, there's nothing really wrong with other-determinism, pandeterminism, self-determinism, to be other-determined or pan-determined or something like that. It's no criticism particularly because it would never be a game. But to be obsessively self-determined and not know about what and to have a whole category of things which were always other-determined and then never know what they were either is to sort of walk in a weird mishmash of "God 'elp us. Who's against what?" And the person would always be rather upset. He'd never know what side he was on or why.

You see what's happened, though. His pan-determinism has deteriorated into total self-determinism.

Now, God help the fellow who goes out the bottom and becomes the mockery of pan-determinism which is "reasonable." It’ll go down scale to a reasonability where you can never take sides. But you ask this person about taking sides and they kind of shudder horribly and they get a little bit sick at the pit of their stomach, at the idea of taking sides. "Ohhhh. Wouldn't be able to do that. Ssssss. No, no, no, no. Wouldn't do that. No, no. No not now, no. No, we must be impartial. We must be reasonable. We must never take any sides of any kind whatsoever."

You get judges, United Nations, untouchables in general. And they're liable to be quite reasonable. And it'd drive you batty.

There can be somebody standing there with a knife in his hand, just having murdered somebody. The corpse is lying on the ground and they will be reasonable about what went on and who did it and so forth and they'll be very reasonable. And everything they say will be impartial. And they sound like a ruddy screaming maniac when you listen to them.

"Now, all right. Now, who committed this murder?"

"Oh, well, uh — well that — the — there can be several thoughts about that. There could be quite a bit of the — there'd be uh . . . You could take many points of view with regard to that murder — if it was a murder, uh — and so on. We don't know whether a fellow did it, really and we don't know what his motives were. Frankly, we — we don't — we're not even positive the other fellow's dead, you know?"

It'd drive you batty. You've talked to such people. We run into them sometimes in Scientology. They always have an open mind. They have an open mind to Scientology with the wind blowing straight down the hall, and you've got somebody who can't take sides.

And frankly, they're very close to an hypnotic state. If you really want to do something for them, you'd have to treat them more or less as an hypnotic person. It's quite interesting The open mind.

"I'm open minded about your ideas." I hear this every once in a while from somebody. They're real weird. Maybe somebody's stumbling in the front door, hit both sides of it, collapse over the stairs, you know and so on. And they turn around to the Receptionist, who's a girl and say, "Well now, Dr. Hubbard, I uh . . ." It's quite remarkable, you know.

Because they don't know where they are and they don't know what side they're on and they don't know because it isn't safe to be on any side of any kind. That's the end of that. It's not safe to be on any side anyplace or to be anything

Now, you nevertheless — this would all shake out in a Goals Problem Mass. They aren't any harder to process than anybody else by Routine 3D Criss Cross.

All right. Now, what happens in actuality? What happens in actuality? Well, it's a very simple mechanism actually.

The guy gets the tiger going toward the waterbuck and then he decides that he's been a little bit too rough on waterbucks and he starts favoring a waterbuck and going against the tiger, see? But he can't quite restrain himself from following the fir8t postulates in the game which was to get the waterbuck fighting with the tiger. So he just gets more waterbucks eaten up, see? But he keeps going against the tiger more and more and more and more against the waterbuck and he gets terrific overts finally on the waterbuck and he becomes a waterbuck. He can no longer differentiate between himself and a waterbuck. He is a waterbuck. That's it.

Now, the waterbuck gets tremendous overts on the tiger of various types and other, usually very covert waterbuck overts, you see, and by being so beautiful and being so destroyed.

That is a marvelous type of overt and hardly anybody ever recovers from it because they can't quite spot what it is. Girls do this occasionally. My God, a girl could certainly get even with you after a spat. They're hollow-eyed, caved-in, you know. Their beauty is shot, you know. Their beauty is absolutely ruined and so forth. Such mechanisms.

And these are overts of one kind or another. And so he just stacks up enough overts against the tiger and one fine day finds himself being a tiger and eating waterbucks.

Well now, you see, waterbucks are an ally, but he's being a tiger and to live he has to eat waterbucks and he will develop all sorts of vegetable faddisms as a tiger. "Us tigers should be vegetarians. Tigers of the world, awake! You, too, can have glossy coats by eating grass." Can see it now. And he writes a book and calls himself Gayelord Hauser — this sort of balderdash, you see.

He can't quite face up to committing this overt against his terminal. But he's being a tiger and he inflows waterbucks.

Well, after he's inflowed enough waterbucks — he's now gone down scale considerably, you see — why, one fine day he has so many overts on waterbucks that he becomes a waterbuck again on a second curve. He says, "Now, being a waterbuck" — very obsessively and hating it because “Us tigers”. He'd always really gotten friendly with the tigers, you see. But "Us waterbucks" is just a little bit thinned down and he sort of has a vicious attitude toward waterbucks because, after all, he's eaten waterbucks, you see?

And while in the waterbuck's head, he's busy eating waterbuck, you see, because he's still in a tiger valence, only he isn't. He's in a waterbuck valence. Or he's in a tiger . . . No, he's in a wate — water — tiger — water — water . . . See? And he embarrasses himself because he's down drinking water one day along with the other waterbucks and he says, "Grooooowr." You know. And all the other waterbucks look up and say, "Good God!" you know. "And I say, old fellow, that isn't done, you know."

So he has to withhold that because he might do it again, you see — an antisocial characteristic.

And he just starts avoiding tigers and avoiding tigers and after he's avoided enough tigers, he obsessively exteriorizes from a waterbuck and interiorizes into a tiger. And now he's a downscale tiger indeed. And he will take this tiger mock-up that he's now got and it gets mange. It gets mange, brother. Its teeth drop out. It loses its claws with the greatest of ease, see. He becomes a very moth-eaten tiger. Even when he is young, he is a moth-eaten tiger. His mother meeting him on the trail turns her head sadly. And he does this confounded yickety-yak, bickety-bop, boopety-bop, you know. Waterbucktiger, tiger-waterbuck, waterbuck-tiger, tiger-waterbuck. He can't stay away from either of them.

He finally one day runs the game out and skips it and manages not to be a waterbuck and manages not to be a tiger and lives some free track and everything is fine. And he goes along and everything is dandy and gets involved with a temple. And here goes some kind of a wild game that has to do with a temple priestess and the evil priest, you see. Oh, some mad game going on of some kind or another and becomes the temple priestess, you see, because she's so beautiful.

And actually she goes out and with great purity talks to the multitude, you see and makes people happy and effects cures and it's all — all just so terrific, you know. High-toned. Ethical. Everything's fine. Nothing wrong with this, you see and gets after the — gets after the priest occasionally, you know. A little bit, you know. Not much.

Here we go! Because the next thing you know, why, the priest gets too much money and is agin all of these nice people and she realizes this priest is shaking the populace down. The offerings put on the temple of Baal are never eaten by Baal. They are eaten by the priest and his friends. And this is a great shock and is a very unethical action. The priest should withhold doing this.

In other words, she gets an overt on a priest and you know, goes out and exposes the priest to the multitude or something like this, you see.

Well, she goes and picks up another body as a temple priestess, you see. Life is going on beautifully, you see, but there's still another priest and she gets more overts on the priest and some more overts on the priest. Been quite pan-determined about this originally, but she's sliding over into becoming only a temple priestess and the next thing you know she's bumping off priests left and right. A guy shows up, says, "I'm a priest." Bang! That's it.

She says, "Oh." But it's quite overt, you know. He's just dead, that's all. There's hardly enough time to breathe between the announcement and the demise. And gets enough overts on priests and one lifetime suddenly finds herself a boy and walks on down to the local temple and signs up as a neophyte and becomes a priest and takes all of the food from behind the altar that was intended for Baal, and sort of avoids temple priestesses. Doesn't have too much to do with them. Has an open mind about them, and so on. And then one day gets exposed by a temple priestess. Ohhhh.

Well, that's an overt, you see — that's a — that's an overt by the temple priestess, but it's a motivator the guy can't have because he's already got overts on this line, you see, so he goes yickety-yak, bingety-bang.

Next time he picks up a girl's body, becomes a temple priestess and now, it's a little bit different the way to handle priests now. Now, she's got overts, more overts on a priest. A little bit different.

A fellow walks up and says, "I'm a priest." And she says, "Well, dear, have a drink of nice wine." A little more comm lag between the announcement and the demise, you see, a little more covert, but the same end product.

And then picks up a body as a boy and goes down to the temple, enrolls as a neophyte, walks up the steps and that's it. Takes one look at the newest crop of priestesses and goes quietly down to the cell and begins to grind up the arsenic, you know, and stir up the tails of the asps and sharpen up the . . . Oh, it's a marvelous game, you know. Kills more of these girls, you know?

Finally, so a temple priestess shows up and says, "I am a temple . . ." It doesn't get that far, you know. Clank!

And eventually this game has gone boom-bang, boom-bang, thud-bang, thud-bang, you see. Back and forth, temple priestess, priest, here we go. And he gets tired of that and gets pan-determined about something else. You see, that's the cycle. Well, that still would be all right. You wouldn't have any trouble solving that, but look what happens.

One of these packages gets into a terrific outflow and one day the person misidentifies somebody in present time with an old game and the valence will restimulate and make one of these Goals Problem Masses.

In other words, an old game on the track suddenly comes into present time as a direct opposing problem to the game they're playing

Now, it's bad enough to have the waterbuck and the priestess games. You see, they themselves form problems, oppositions, but they're not delicately poised and they don't hang up easily. They're just overts and withholds and so forth.

That's — that's not good enough. You've got to get one of these whole games opposed against a whole game. You get the idea? I mean, these things have got to become confused by the pc so that he doesn't know which is which so that he doesn't know which part of the track is which part of the track. You see how that is?

He's got a whole game series composed with a whole game series, so he becomes an order of priestesses which are dedicated to the preservation of waterbucks. And when asked to design a new headdress for the priestesses, of course, designs a pair of waterbuck horns. And — th-th-th-th — it's all getting sort of confused.

And as time goes on, the Goals Problem Mass, of course, is overlapped on itself many, many times and is becoming itself quite condensed. Just as the valence became condensed in time, so can a series of valences become condensed in time and so can all of the serieses of valence become condensed in time and occur right now on the track in one lump. And that is a Goals Problem Mass — everything opposing everything, cycles opposing cycles, everything opposing everything else.

Now, that would be all right if the person didn't live side lives which themselves condensed, which aren't on any main game at all, which get locked onto main games. So they live these lock valence — they're lock valences. They're not main chance valences. They're lock valences. And they don't have too much to do with the game, but one day, right in the middle of being a temple priest, all of a sudden he becomes a merchant. Has a lot to do with temples, you see, but he's a merchant. He's going to reform. He's going to get out of the game. That's the unusual thing, you see. Going to reform and finds himself dealing with nothing but the temple, you know, as a merchant. And lives a life as a merchant — kind of sick, but lives a life as a merchant. And then goes on and lives a life as the — as a priest, see?

So in the middle of all this — but then years later, ages after this game is all dead, decides to take an education at a university in a country. Goes to the university. Everything is beautiful. Everything is fine. Only you have — the only educated people in this particular country are, of course, members of the ministry.

He goes along with this because to be educated, of course, you have to be a member of the ministry and that's perfectly all right. And everything is fine until one day he's standing there and he picks up an altar cup. You know, it's just form, you know. Nothing to do with anything. It's just form. And he picks up this altar cup, you know and is going to put it — put it up on an arch. All of a sudden gets terribly dizzy and comes down with pneutyphoid ammonicoccus or something

And he kind — nobody can trace what happened to him, so it must have been a bug. You see what happens? That lifetime, in other words, moved in toward one of these main games that he doesn't ever want anything to do with again and doesn't have anything to do with, moves in and latches straight onto it.

Now, you, in assessing it, can find that life going to the university as a parson or something, you see? And it’ll assess out and then disappear. You see? Because as you assess it and discuss it and differentiate it with the pc, of course, he differentiates it off the main game. And he sees that it isn't the main game and that it doesn't oppose anything and it just blows, just like that. See?

But up to that time, it was totally latched onto the Goals Problem Mass.

Now, the danger in 3, 3A and 3D is just getting one of those things I just described to you. Just getting one of — getting your hands on one of those. It of course, if it were proved out and checked out expertly, it wouldn't stay. It wouldn't stay in. It would blow. But you can't count on every auditor that's ever going to run this checking it out expertly.

Furthermore, it is very difficult, with the original 3D type of assessment and the original package, to know whether you had a terminal or oppterm. Quite difficult to know this.

They sometimes are all mixed up and you can't tell which is which. And one imbibes the characteristics of the other and it gets very confused.

So, what have you got here? You've got a method, then, of peeling off — in 3D Criss Cross, you see — you have a method of peeling off and blowing all of these lock valences that don't have anything to do with the main chance. And then peeling off cycles off of cycles and straightening the thing out and getting it back on the track again so it's in some shape to run. And you could find the center pins of the whole mass which would cause it to come back together again and you run those out. I'll go into more about that later.

We're talking mainly about anatomy now and the ways of handling this anatomy, I must advise you, of course, are susceptible to change. But the anatomy is it. This is the stuff. This is the anatomy of what you're handling.

All right. Now — now let's show you how you get a total collapse of the main chance. And if anybody's bank collapses at this particular time, and it disturbs the lecture any, I won't forgive you. Now, so just — just hold on to it now. And here's the way it does it.

A heavy inflow package, the heaviest on the track, opposing a heavy inflow package will make a double vacuum. You will then have a vacuum between two valences. Two inflow valences, you see. If you got the idea of A and it's inflowing madly and B and it's inflowing madly, you see, it leaves a vacuum in between A and B, doesn't it? And, man, that's quite a vacuum.

All right. Now, let's take two outflow valences. This is an elementary exercise in the Goals Problem Mass, you see. Two outflow valences. And they're outflowing madly, C and D. Boy, are they outflowing See, they're terrific. Boom, boom, boom. Outflow, you know, glare fight, kill everybody, you know, that sort of thing

And as — if these two things were facing each other, you'd get a blow-by. In other words, you would get everything flowing from D at C and everything flowing from C at D, leaving a vacuum behind the back of C and a vacuum behind the back of D. It's a study in enturbulances is what it is.

And then you'd get all of this other stuff spraying all over the place, caroming In other words, you'd pin C and D together by just the violence that they were blasting at each other because their blasts miss, of course. See, you got a lot of missed blasts.

In other words, they're pinned together by mutual force against each other which caused vacuums back of each. This is electronic phenomena I'm giving you, standing waves. Electronics men turn gray when I start talking to them about this kind of thing because this is more than is known about electronics on this planet. Electronics have standing waves and they have all sorts of things. And we think, on this planet, that we've really conquered it all because we can throw a light switch and turn on a very expensive light and mortgage our wife to the power company to pay the bills, you see. We think we got electrical stuff pretty well taped. We can also turn on a radio — turn on a radio with bad tone and pull in something a few miles away that sounds like music and that you hear through the static and we think this is pretty good. So we know all about this stuff.

In actuality, it goes a lot further and a lot more about this. There are standing waves, motionless waves. Energy itself has various characteristics It has traction qualities and so forth. It can produce some different and odd phenomena.

Give you an idea. Even in the universities they know of the ground wave phenomena. You can pipe electricity or programs through the ground. It doesn't go through the air. And you ask anybody about this, of course, and they don't know anything about it. They say, "Well, that is a field that has never been studied and that, of course, closes the book, because it has never been studied, you see. Ha-ha-ha." Great! Hope they wake up someday and find out that that phrase "never been studied" does not excuse ignorance. So there's a lot of electronic phenomena of one character or another.

Now, you don't have to be concerned with this electronic phenomena or identifying this electronic phenomena. It's of no particular use to you to become that learned on the subject, but you've got it right where you sit. You've got standing waves and you've got electronic masses and you've got all kinds of enturbulances and so forth and these things are the reactive bank.

All right. We get C and D blasting away at each other and by the very action of blast, hold each other together.

I'll give you an idea. A gunman facing another gunman may be shooting at the other gunman, but do — can you conceive of anybody really distracting his attention from what he's doing See? And he also doesn't want the other gunman to go away. So you see, there's a traction beam between C and D which holds them together while they blow each other's heads off.

And that stuff is represented in electronic flow and it's still there, in the bank. And then you've got two inflows, as I was just giving you. And these inflowing madly, each one, of course, leave a vacuum and the time track can be sucked up right into the middle between A and B. Schrrup!

In other words, electronic mass, it's timeless, and so on. There's no reason why it couldn't be pulled in and it does pull in and it can be pulled in. In other words, you've got a terrific vacuum between A and B by the nature of two — they're both inflows — and therefore you have a nonexistence of electronic potential in the middle. So therefore, any electronic potential will instantly fly into that hole. There it is. Bang! You see?

Now, between C and D, anything coming near will be pinned down — either pulled into the vacuums back of C and back of D. . . You see, things can be pulled in. Objects, electronic objects, masses, standing waves can be pulled in back of C and D and just sucked up against these two outflow terminals. And what do you think is happening at the same time?

Of course, you get this tremendous blast of action. C versus D gets activated occasionally and naturally makes an awful enturbulance. So you get a — you get a like a cyclonic storm going around, around everything that is sucked in against C and D, you see.

So there they are pinned in, but the currents are going by like mad while they're pinned in. You get the — you get the notion?

Such phenomena as this — I haven't described to you all the phenomena, but these are the principle ones: mix up an A-B mess now with a C-D mess, then pour it full of a bunch of inerts-masses just to give it mass and now pour it full of other things like actual vacuums, pictures of vacuums. You know, you have engrams full of vacuums and that sort of thing, you see? And now pour it full of stuff that have got traction beams that are condensing beams and so forth and, man, it looks pretty forbidding It looks pretty rough. And you get the pc near this stuff and, of course, he can't — feels like he's getting his head blown off in his physical body. And of course, he practically is.

There are ways to approach this thing and it's very easy to approach it. Now, it's there because he is afraid to reach into it. He doesn't want to go anywhere near it.

If left to his own devices, he might, however, putter with it, but not seriously. He's somewhat of the frame of mind of the child wants to go down to the river, which is a roaring torrent and is perfectly competent to sit there on the bank and make mud pies providing the bank is fifteen or twenty feet away and Daddy is near. But no closer, thank you. Too much of a roaring torrent going on, too much action.

Now, every time, of course, a thetan . . . This is all individual. Each segment of this is keeping itself mocked up because it was a living thing at one time and it still acts like a living thing. The thetan thinks of himself as haunted by these things.

You know, he hits them and they go bing You know, he's liable to put an energy beam into it and it says, "One, two, three, four, five, six, seven."

"What's this?"

"One, two, three, four, five, six . . ."

"Oh-oh. You know I think I've got thetans in my head."

In other words, he gets action. He reaches and something else flies back at him. And therefore he becomes very timid about handling his own mind, so he forgets things and he does this sort of thing.

Now, the individual, of course, gets pinned into this Goals Problem Mass. He can get into any valence in it. He can scatter in through any valence in it. And 80, of course, coming near he activates it and he gets into these valences and they restimulate valences and valences restimulate valences, you see. And he can make this thing pretty live and pretty electronic and he can be in one side of it and the other side of it and he can go through it and exteriorize out of it and exteriorize in — interiorize into it. And — in other words, he can just have an awful lot of fun messing around. And this is life as it is lived on this planet. It's an endless, random, falling out of and into circuits in the Goals Problem Mass.

These are known as personality, human characteristics, human behavior, psychology, psychiatry, anything you want to call it. These are characteristics. And all they've done is study these characteristics of various reactions, of package reactions.

Of course, you get the anatomy of what the thing is, you can change those characteristics almost at will.

Now, 3D Criss Cross is a very smooth and gentle approach to this because you peel off. . . 3D Criss Cross will improve and change. The characteristics of Goals Problem Mass and so forth, are what they are. But I'll give a note here on 3D Criss Cross anyway.

These things peel off and by recognition and differentiation . . . You see, you just assess, but assessment is devoted to finding as many, isolating as many parts of the Goals Problem Mass as you possibly can and proving them up as actual parts of the Goals Problem Mass.

And the action of doing this, of course, blows off all the package valences which are standing out on the outskirts, starts straightening up the mass by getting rid of it and unburdening it and getting rid of things which aren't the mass and assesses it right on down into the actual pins that are holding the mass together.

Now, it is time to run a pc, if you have to, only when you have the active terminals which have got the mass inextricably pinned into present time and are in present time.

Now, a pc having done all this, of course, has no great fear of the situation and possibly you could go back and date and straighten out these lives almost by inspection. Perhaps you could do it all by assessment. But that's beside the point. The point is that it is therapy by assessment because you established differentiation.

And when I see somebody at this present moment sweating like mad to find the package, see, I know he hasn't got the word. He should be going like mad to get as many items differentiated by the pc and isolated as possible because items fall into three characteristics: Completely null items. They have nothing whatsoever. They're free track items. They have nothing whatsoever to do with the Goals Problem Mass. They're out — way out and, you know, it had nothing to do with it. Never got locked up on it. Nothing

The next, of course, is the lock item. And that is something that didn't have anything to do with the game on the main chance. The main games. It has nothing to do with the main game. It's just an identity which, unfortunately, got moved in toward one of the main games and therefore stuck and at the moment is considered by the preclear to be a part of the main game. But actually it had nothing to do with the main game. When he looks at the thing again and inspects it, it blows off. And he is much less confused about what it was all about.

Like he got — he got into merchanting and one of his customers was the temple. And just to that degree, he's pinned onto the Goals Problem Mass, so he'll run into the life of a merchant and it is not runnable. You can't run this. The bank will beef up and everything will go to pieces because, of course, it's right next to the Goals Problem Mass. And it's agitating the Goals Problem Mass without doing anything to the Goals Problem Mass.

And if you agitate the Goals Problem Mass by running false items that have nothing to do with the actual games in the Goals Problem Mass, it charges up the Goals Problem Mass without discharging anything. And you've got to have items that discharge as fast as they charge in order to keep the pc this side of going around the bend, see. But you can get the Goals Problem Mass all charged up like mad by running these oddball, offbeat valences, lock valences.

Then the third type of valence is, of course, those which are intimately associated and were part of these games. Actual games.

You could find a goal for any item in the Goals Problem Mass. You could find a goal for any item in it. You could find an opposition goal. You could find anything in it. And 3D Criss Cross, of course, you'll find it very easy to do on any pc because you go in with test items and you establish as many lines as possible. As many as possible. Run ten. Who cares? Run twenty. Who cares?

I'll give you a sample of how you could go about this. There is a method given to you on the 3D Criss Cross mimeo and it said you'd run General O/W on self and then say, "Who would you treat like that?" and make a list and assess it. And you'll come up with one of the items. And you'll come up with a test item. Then you can take — with opposition terminaling that test item, you can move on into the Goals Problem Mass with actual items. And you can differentiate like mad.

All right. You can take a list of the things a person liked. And you run a long list of those and differentiate them and null them and he'll come up with an item which is part of the Goals Problem Mass.

And you can take things a — a long list of kinds of people that the pc disliked and, you know, liked — the like-dislike lists — and you can do the same, so you got another item.

In other words, you got three items now. All right. That's dandy. They just give you points of departure for more oppterms going — sorting out track. That's all you're doing — just sorting track. All right. What else could you do?

Well, almost any way of locating an item you have ever been taught in Dianetics or Scientology would be usable. You could do a Dynamic Assessment on the person. Use it as a test item and depart from it. See? There'd be another method of doing it.

In other words, you've got method after method. Anything that ever found anything that - stayed in with the pc as a method could be used as a test item for 3D Criss Cross. And it doesn't matter how many channels you have. Have twenty, have thirty. You get up above that, your pc would probably be very confused.

I would prefer to be running about five. About five lines. Line A, line B, line C, line D, line E. Why? Just that much more chance of getting differentiation. Because, you see, as you enter these things, you enter different corners of the Goals Problem Mass, so you don't dead end. You don't get a chance of dead ending You're pulling the whole mass apart rather than some little section of the mass. And if a line dead ends on you, well, what the heck, you've still got five — I mean, you've still got four.

All right. Let's say another line dead ends on you someplace or another. You've still got three. In other words, you're playing in abundance. Then develop some more lines some other way and keep them running

In other words, keep assessing Keep assessing Keep finding items and the process of finding items blows off null items. And it goes by null items, blows off lock items and locates actual 3D items.

And eventually you'll either get into a position where there is only one package. Every time you take one of these lines and ask for its opposition terminal, the pc says, "A tiger." And every time you take another one of the lines and you say, "All right. What is the opposition terminal of this line?" The pc says, "A waterbuck."

All right. Let's try and find something else now. So you find something else. You find a tiger. And let's try finding something else. All right. You'll find something else. You'll find a waterbuck. And you can't go anyplace else. You're just there. That is it. And so you don't have any further difficulties with differentiation of what the items are. And nobody has to check them out for you. And those are the items you'd run if you had to run items.

You'll find these things are in ribbons by the time that you've done that much assessment on them all. They're unburdened to such a degree that they're just easy.

All right. Now, how accurate must an item be to do an oppterm. I would say it had to be pretty darned accurate. I'd say if you bypassed an actual 3D item on a list and got the wrong item on the list and took a departure from it, your pc would be uncomfortable and your line would dead end or something weird would happen to the thing.

So I think the item should be very, very accurate. You should do your assessment very, very carefully with a maximum of differentiation and a maximum of care. I'm not encouraging you to do less than that. For heaven's sakes, check them out. Prove them out. Make sure the whole list was null. Get the thing absolutely in the package there.

All right. Everything is right. And then take off from that point and go on for another item. Then by doing that, you will find you get lots of processing done.

If you fail to do that, however, in 3D Criss Cross, the liability is not very great. You'll just dead end and the thing will go up in smoke and you'll lose that line. You won't arrive anyplace and you'll wonder where you went astray and so on.

Now, in that preclears lost their goals terminals — lost their lists of goals and lost their lists of terminals and then that took fifty, seventy-five hours sometimes to assess a terminal and a lot of other things and so forth, 3D Criss Cross should be a great relief to you because it wouldn't matter if a — if a pc had lost all of his records, you could still do a 3D Criss Cross on him.

And he'd stumble around, he'd miss a few, but they'd eventually turn up in the long run, see.

In other words, you — we've got a type of package now which doesn't have liabilities, (1) of improper assessment doing the pc in and (2) which doesn't matter if the pc's records have been lost, you could still establish the whole of it and (3) where the assessment is just fantastically therapeutic.

And completely aside from everything else, I think you would find 3D Criss Cross well done in a preclear with the proper steps as given is more therapeutic than any other single action you could undertake on a pc. Properly done it is fantastic! And until it looks fantastic to you, you probably aren't doing it right.

Get lots of items, differentiate them, find your item, check it well against the list and you will find out that just by doing that all by yourself, the pc will start walking on air. It's the best processing you'll ever have done. And the easiest.

All right. Now, there's the Goals Problem Mass. Regardless of the way we approach or attack the thing, there is the anatomy of it. It's a ruddy mess. That's what it is. And it's been quite heroic trying to find — first find it and then find the way through it and then settle down technology that rather easily took care of it without tremendous liability. And I think we have all of those things at this present moment.

Thank you.