Сообщение auditor » 09 апр 2016, 08:42


A lecture given on 11 November 1954

I want to talk to you today about a relatively unimportant thing, and it's of no concern, really, of ours to go into this. Of course, if you had omitted it from practice and you didn't know about it, and you didn't comprehend it, you could very easily ruin your life. But, as I say, you can go to sleep if you want to.
Want to talk to you here about -63, -64 and -65 -R2-63, R2-64, R2-65. It's quite important that you know these processes. We have told you consis¬tently and continually that the basic processes of Dianetics and Scientology are processes which snap people out of it. Now, we've told you that consis¬tently, haven't we?
Well, I want to tell you about R2-63, -64 and -65 for this reason. They are very upper echelon processes. They are processes which would be done by an expert auditor. They demand of an auditor an upper echelon knowledge of Scientology. These are not Dianetic processes. But because they are not Dia¬netic processes doesn't mean they don't apply to life.
These processes are in the direction of any life form, and they explain so very much about various life forms that you actually can't do without them and still retain your own identity, actuality and complete understanding in this universe. If you did not know these processes, you would be adrift here and there in addressing the whole problem of life.
Now, Dianetics is not really very concerned with where the physical uni¬verse came from. We're not concerned with that in Dianetics. We're con¬cerned with man; we're concerned with dynamics one, two, three and four. When you get into dynamic five, animals actually process on the mimicry or psychosis level of a two-way communication. But, we're actually, in Dianetics, not into process five. We are into Scientology immediately.
Actually, you can exteriorize a dog. You can process them. It's very pecu¬liar, but you can. They exteriorize as a mass. Did you ever run a preclear who exteriorized with a theta body? Hm? Well, you will someday. You will say, "Be three feet back of your head," and the fellow is there in a black shape with claws, or something of the sort. And then you have to exteriorize him from that black shape.
Well, you're already into the field of demonology when you say "Be three feet back of your head" and you've got something which is a black energy mass which the individual conceives himself to be. You can't see him. He's invisible to you with your naked eye. But he's not invisible to you with your
theta vision. You can be eighteen feet back of your head, leaning up against the molding strip, something like that; you say to this fellow, "Be three feet back of your head," and you're looking at a demon.
Just change your wavelength and look at people while you're exterior¬ized, and you can occasionally see these individuals going around with this black body. Well, that's a dog, that's a cat, and so forth. When they exteri¬orize, they exteriorize as one of these bodies.
Sure enough, we probably could go on and then exteriorize him from that body, but we have a communication difficulty. I've exteriorized a dog, much to his surprise. And pushed him back in again. Something on the basis of reaching in, grabbing hold of him as a theta body, pulling him out, and pushing him back in again. I've also exteriorized a coyote the same way. Coyote body lay there deader than a mackerel, while this process was going on. He'd been in full flight, and I reached from three feet back of his head and pulled him out of his body.
All right. This may sound like a fairy tale to somebody who's nailed down very solidly in Dianetics and is practicing man for the betterment of man. In Scientology we're not very much interested in the betterment or the worsenment, and that is something which people have not yet completely iso¬lated or noticed, and I haven't mentioned very much in the field of Scien¬tology. Get the idea?
Scientology is an understanding of That's not necessarily a betterment of. You follow me? An auditor is much more at home as an auditor in Dia¬netics, talking to man about man, improving man, railing against the condi¬tions of man, straightening these things out, solving the problems of man, and so forth. He belongs in Dianetics if he's going to do that. If it's coming along the line to take care of the soul, and so forth, of course he's over into the field of Scientology instanter, if he's going to address man, because man happens to have a soul.
In other words, we're going to put him three feet back of his head. That of course makes a Dianetic Clear, you understand. But from there on, your Dianetic auditor had better not be too adventurous. He'd just better exteri¬orize and stabilize this guy, and say, "Wham! There we are. That's fine. Good." We have bettered this fellow better than he ever could have been bettered before, and we're in beautiful condition.
A Scientologist could go on from there, he could go up . . . And this again sounds like a fairy tale to anybody more or less pinned down in Dianetics. He could go process the storm god of India. Or he could go on over to another planet and raise hell, take over the body of some ruling factor on this planet—the king dinosaur, or something of the sort, you know. I mean, all of a sudden we're into fairyland, fantasy, science fiction—in other words, this universe.
And in addition to that, the sixth dynamic does not mean, really, the MEST universe. It means universes. See, it means that dynamic which is the survival of the universe in which the person happens to be in the time stream of. A universe is a time continuum. That is the definition of a uni¬verse. It's not even space and energy. It is a time continuum.
You see, everything in this universe is in its own time continuum. Every-thing is in the same time continuum. You wouldn't be able to see it if it were not in the same time continuum. You want to have a picnic sometime, take somebody who is very rocky about this universe and finds it very, very un¬real, and say, "What sort of heads do you dislike?" "Ohh," the fellow says,
"Ohhhh. Robot heads. I—I never liked robots. They—they upset me."
You say, "Fine. Now, just get the idea of sitting right where you are now. Just get the idea of sitting where you are, and get the idea of being in a robot's head, and spot spots in the robot's environment." And he will just fade right on out of this universe and will start to hit the time continuum of a robot.
All he has to do is postulate this in some fashion. But you asked him, didn't you? Remember, he didn't mock up a robot's head. Different thing. You asked him what kind of heads he didn't like. That means, "What sort of heads would you resist?" Which means immediately, "What head are you also a tiny bit in?" And boom, he's in another universe, another time con¬tinuum, another space, another energy mass. See?
The difference between this universe and any other universe is simply this—the time continuum. You see, they wouldn't even be jointly occupying the same space. That's nonsense.
Space is a condition of viewpoint, and is therefore a mental phenomenon. If space is therefore a mental phenomenon, energy occupying the space also must be, because the energy can't exist unless it can have space in which to be. That right? So, we get "what is the uniform rate of motion of these particles?" That's the time continuum: the uniform rate of motion, the rate of change of these particles. In other words, in this universe it's a speed of light, we say. Well, it's how fast light travels. Well, all particles of light, if they are photons only, travel at 186,000 thrr-u-rrr miles per second. It's some frac¬tional figure.
The second we go into gamma rays, however, and alpha rays and cosmic rays and any other kind of rays, or flash-camera emissions, and so forth, we go into different speeds. Right away, we go into various speeds. That's quite interesting. But what do you know, for this universe their speed is constant. It's the speed of emission of the particle which determines the speed of the particle.
All right. We needn't go into nuclear physics to understand this, if we understand simply that a fellow can simply change his mind and be in an-other universe. There's many a poor nut, so-called, locked up in a sanitarium here in the United States who has simply slid sideways into a body from Uni¬verse 81. But we don't say that Universe 81 is very different than this universe. Or it might be violently different than this universe. Who cares? This is the product of imagination agreed upon.
What is a universe? It is imagination agreed upon. And when you imag¬ine something for the future you actually build something for the future, if you get enough agreements about it. Now, if you were to take a universe such as this one and isolate its various truths—you know, the exact agreements which make it—and you undid those, and if you undid them broadly, the uni¬verse would be far less threatening and far less dangerous. It'd also have far less punch. And photons are liable to start traveling at a different speed.
In other words, you're liable to alter the time continuum of a universe by addressing the mental factor which is primarily responsible for its construc¬tion. Make enough people change their mind about this universe, and this universe will change. But it'd be a matter of enough people, or you yourself would have to be enough people.
All right. Now, all that seems very, very threatening—and has relatively little to do with what I really wanted to talk to you about. But let's nail this down. A fellow is trapped in this universe, you see. He feels that he's trapped
in this universe. He must be trapped in some sort of a decision of his own, then, mustn't he? Or he must be trapped in some sequence of agreement from which he feels he cannot untrap himself.
All right. The first and foremost study, then, of this universe or of any universe, is the study of traps. With great ease an individual can enter a door, and sometimes it's with very, very small ease that he gets out.
Let's take marriage. You can grab a hold of any girl on the street, walk up to the county clerk's office, get a license, walk over and have the justice of the peace or a minister of the church marry you, bang, bang.
Very few laws. She has to be the age of consent, which is getting older and older in this society as they try to keep girls more and more in line. The age of consent is way above the age of passion now. The age of passion in a girl is around fifteen, sixteen, seventeen. It's right in that bracket. Fourteen to eighteen—I'd say it's in that bracket, and after that, if you could make sex scarce up till the time she is eighteen, why, it'll get scarcer and scarcer, see. And eventually, the age of consent will probably be fifty-six.
In Roman times, I don't think there was one. I don't think there was an age of consent. Marriage probably could take place at two months—you know, as long as the baby could flop its hand to get a ring on, or something on that order, why, you'd be all set.
Now, South Carolina, for instance, has finally, I think, put on an age of consent at twelve. So there's a great deal of activity trying to make them raise that age of consent. Why raise it? Well, they think child marriage, child bride, beautiful sadness, yap-yap, yap-yap.
You know, child labor laws which prevent a child from working make the child, and many a child, stay in a highly antipathetic environment. He can't get a job. One of the ... Most alert kids I've ever seen were kids who were working for a living. They were working for a living. They were also living in circumstances—that is to say in an environment—of friendliness, and so forth. They were not being kicked around. They had a job and they could work and they could make their way in the world, and these were very inde¬pendent people. And I met these kids in Spain, not in the United States. I've met a kid earning a living wage at five. Five years of age, he's got a living wage.
Now, how does he make this? Well, he runs errands and carries pack-ages, and so forth, around. And one of these days he'll get up to the high status of being able to clerk in that store. He'll probably be ten or eleven then. At the same time, by the way, he's going to school.
They use as an excuse why there must be child labor laws—they use as an excuse: that a child must go to school. Well, then how is it that France, Spain and Germany send the kid to school, and all the kids work. And seems to be to me that somebody has managed this somewhere, so it doesn't hold water. Actually, what's happening here is that they are holding people from participation and this makes people desire more and more to participate, you see. Then this increases their thirst for togetherness.
Did you ever apply for a divorce? It takes a while, doesn't it? You don't walk down to the county clerk's office, and then go over and see a parson. Hm-mm. Actually, by all jurisprudence and precedent, it should work that he who makes an honor or award or a contract should be able to break the con-tract. A minister of the gospel should be permitted to divorce people with no friction or pain or strain.
Anyway, the fact of this universe is that it's easy to enter and hard to
leave, which is all the point I'm driving home. They keep people from partici¬pating, you see. They keep people from participating. They make them resist anything which prevents them from participating until at last the person in¬verts and obsessively participates.
He's no longer free when he does that. It's obsessive. You can participate in anything without any liability as long as it's not on a resistance basis. If you have to fight to participate in life . . . Let's say you could dance very, very well. And if you had to actually fight to be permitted to dance, or if you played an instrument well and you had to fight to stay in there, continually manifesting your right to play this instrument, if you had to fight to take part all the time, of course, you're piling up a tremendous one-way flow. You're getting stuck, in other words.
It's hard to leave a profession—hard to leave one—as hard as it is resist¬ing one to get into. Now, many people will simply pick up something and drop it. But could you for a moment see somebody like Harry James suddenly leav¬ing the business? What would happen if he just tried to walk off? Huh?
Anybody who has built himself up into a certain strata, so forth, has a very rough time backing out, providing it was very hard for him to get there; see, the amount of resistance going in—it's resist, resist, resist, resist, resist. He fights this resistance all the time, and the next thing you know, that very resistance is what makes energy, what makes ridges, what makes solidities and what makes the condition of entrapment.
Now, that is the evolution of entrapment—that is, you feel you have a natural right to participate and then you have to fight to assert that natural right. Like I was telling you the other day, making a person fight to survive is of course a complete manifestation of this. He can't do anything else but survive. But the whole universe gets rigged up in such a way that he has to fight in order to survive. Of course, it's only when he begins to fight to sur¬vive that he can die.
Now, how does this work? Well, it's because he is fighting against and trying to alter nonsurvival conditions, and every time he fails he sticks. Every time he fails to alter a nonsurvival condition, he's got a small stuck-point. See that? So if a man has to fight to survive, he's trying to change nonsurvival all the time, isn't he? And if he ever failed, he'd get stuck—stuck in a failed effort to change.
All right. Let's take up here the R2-63. I'll read you the text of it: "From acceptance . . ."—this is R2-63, Accept—Reject, which is the name of the proc¬ess. Now, you remember old Acceptance Level? Well, it's just a cousin to this process. It's simply a cousin to this process. "From acceptance, we get a ten-star process. Whatever else you may do with a preclear, he must be brought to accept the physical universe and his own and other bodies, all in every kind of a condition. The way out is the way through. In Eastern practices the goal was abandonment, desertion. Scientology's main difference from Eastern practices is this:..."
Somebody comes along and says this is just like yoga. Oh, no. No, no. There's a tremendous difference. In Scientology, we accept to be free. See, we're not trying to abandon this condition. We're trying to accept this condi¬tion. That sounds rather peculiar, but that is the curve which makes this universe an entrapment. You have to accept it in order to be free of it. You have to stop resisting it.
"That which one cannot accept, chains one. For instance, revulsion to sex inclines at last to slavery to sex." You can practically count on the fact
that some girl, repulsed and revolted enough by sex, will sometime, maybe the next life, become a "Sexual Betterment League" or "No Sexual Activity League" or the WCTU or something of the sort, see? And she'll become a member of that. And now we go up a couple of lives and we find her in a cathouse in Paris. See? You get this inversion.
When you run Acceptance Level you discover this very strange fact. You say, "All right. Now, what kind of a car could you accept?"
The fellow says, "Oh, a nice one."
You say, "Fine. Mock up this beautiful car and pull it in."
Hm, no. That beautiful car goes voom and it's gone. It just flies away as a mock-up. You say, "Mock up an old, rusty rattletrap that takes two hours to start, and is all caved in and was built in 1915," and so forth, and still won't come in. So you say, "Have it completely wrecked." At last, in comes this car. You see, the individual has been resisting having mechanical trouble, resist¬ing having bad cars so long, he put up a screen there against all such things, you see. And eventually that screen itself was an invitation to the condition. See, he resists them, he gets them. That which you resist you'll get. You see that? That's a tricky principle. If you work it, it'll really work in this uni¬verse.
Now, "A ruler's motto could be `Make them resist,' and his people would become enslaved." See, a ruler's motto could simply be "Make them resist." He could be so horrible, so mean, his punishments could be so bad, that if he had enough people to fight off the mobs which would of course attack him, and if he had the whole nation resisting him violently, they would eventually become complete slaves to his will.
That's why you wonder how a government like some of the cruel govern¬ments which Egypt had could possibly continue to rule the people. Willem Hendrik van Loon, in his stories and his articles and so on, continually he's bringing up the point that people will not accept an unpopular government, that an unpopular government will fail immediately. This does not happen to be true. We look it over much more closely and we find out the cruel government—if it can get over the rough point and somehow or other get over the points of revolt—actually is the one which persists.
That is today the government of Russia. Stalin did it. Stalin killed, ac-cording to his own statement, ten million Russians, personally—you know, personally ordered their execution. And Russia resisted Stalin, resisted him, kicked around, got shot, resisted, got shot, resisted, got shot. And I think on his seventieth birthday there was an outburst of presents for him the like of which no ruler has seen. There were just train loads of presents coming in from all parts of Russia for this slouch. Oh, well, we shouldn't talk about the dead, particularly when we've killed them.
Anyway, 1870 we ... In 1870 we find capitalists resisting Marx. In 1933 we find Marx the basic text of U.S. government. You might not be aware of that fact, but it's sure true. It's only people who haven't read Marx who don't understand present policy of the U.S. government. Yet the U.S. government doesn't know that it runs on Marxist policies. They think Marxist policies are communist policies. Oh, no, Marx is far, far too far for the right. He's a right¬ist to the communist today. He's not the basic party line, by a long way. They have to keep rewriting Marx.
"Resistance and restraint are the barbed wire of this concentration camp. Accept the barbed wire and there is no camp." Now, it seems to be argued with this way, you see: "You say, well, if you accept the fact that
there's barbed wire around you, of course you're trapped. So you must resist the fact that there is barbed wire around you." But by prior agreements, there is such a thing as barbed wire. So they go out and they put this barbed wire around you. And you say, "Well, I must ignore the barbed wire, and if I just ignore the fact and say no barbed wire is there," when you walk at it you'll get the hell cut out of you. That's what will happen. See?
Well, we can't go at this the other way and simply say "Well now, I'll just behave as though there's no barbed wire at all." Yes, you will. The second you try to behave as though there's no barbed wire, it cuts you to ribbons. That's the way it goes. You've either got to undo all the basic agreements that put barbed wire there in the first place, or you've got to accept the barbed wire. You've got to look over there and not think about "Well, I've got to get out of this place. I got to get free. I got to get out of this. I don't know how I am going to do it, but somehow or another I'll push my way out of here and I'll tear my way through that barbed wire, and I'll see if we can't dig a tunnel and knock down a few guards."
All those fellows had to do was sit down and be three feet back of their heads. Of course, they'd have left their body behind, but they always could have gotten another body. You follow me closely there? They fight, fight, fight, fight, fight. So they're entrapped, entrapped, entrapped, entrapped, en-trapped. See? It's a fantastic thing, the amount of struggle man undergoes to desert or abandon. He has an awful time with this.
Now, "On test, this process exteriorizes the worst case if run long enough." And that's why I want to give you this process. This is one of the main reasons why I want to give it to you. "This process is important because it is one of the few (like R2-16) which does not have alter-isness as its opera¬tive factor. It is not, then, an altering process, confirming somatics and aber¬rations; it is a freeing process." In other words, this process does not confirm somatics and aberrations. It simply accepts the as-isness of existence.
Now, of course, the main test of any process is, does it work? And the reason why you're getting this so late is because it's been under test.
"That which one cannot accept, he cannot as-is." That's quite a law. If you can't accept it, you can't as-is it. If you can't as-is it, it'll exist, won't it? And it'll trap you.
So this universe is made up of those things which haven't been as-ised. A thing without mass—a life unit to a Scientologist is something without mass, wavelength, position. We find this without mass, with tremendous understanding capabilities, facing masses which have no understanding capa¬bilities. We have a complete opposite here. Understanding versus noncompre-hension: thetan looking at a wall. Thetan, no mass; wall, tremendous mass. So we get a no-duplicate. So we can get all kinds of involvement and ensnarl¬ment, because it's hard to communicate with a wall.
"The commands of this process are as follows: `Find something about yourself which you can accept,"Something else,"Find something else you can accept,' until there is no communication lag. Then: `Find something about yourself you can reject."Find something else about yourself you can reject,' and so on, and so on, until there's no communication lag. Then: `Find some-thing in this room you can accept,"Something else,"Find something else in this room you can accept.' And `Find something in this room you can reject,' `Find something else in this room you can reject,' so forth. And then: `Find something about this universe you can accept,' and then, `Find something in this universe you can reject.' "
You get how close a brother this is between Remedy of Havingness and this process? Well, it's actually this process which makes Remedy of Having¬ness work. This is not a process extended from, or more complicated than, the Remedy of Havingness, you see. This is a more basic and elementary proc¬ess than the Remedy of Havingness.
Havingness is a crude process compared to this one. It's a good process. That's why it's the elementary, basic process. But this requires thinkingness and particularization, and so forth, but no particular significance.
Now, "This has the value of not being an altering process. It is a high-value escape process. If your preclear keeps putting conditions of change into everything before he can accept it, you must persuade him to find the things he can accept without changing them."
All right. I'll give you an example on this process. Now, here is a typical run on this process:
"All right, let's find something about yourself which you could accept." "Well, if they were cleaner, I could accept my clothes."
No, that is not a proper answer, see. That's a changed answer. In other words, he's put alter-ism in there, hasn't he? There's alter-isness right in there—condition; condition alteration, condition alteration.
You'll run some people, and they are just obsessed with this. This was one of the things I balked at on the process. I mean, when I was first testing this process it was very peculiar, because somebody would say . . . I'd get some guy who was a real spinner ... I've run this process all up and down the scale, from the worst case to the best. It has a position on the Tone Scale, of course, but it's a position above 1.5. It's a sort of a present-time cousin to Straightwire.
So, anyhow, I'd ask some psycho, "All right, now what about your body can you accept?" You see?
And the fellow said, "Well, I could accept my face if it were a little younger."
"All right. What else about your body could you accept?"
"Well, I could accept my hair if it didn't need cutting."
"What else about your body could you accept?"
"Well, I could accept the fact that it's hungry. If I had something to eat, you see, I could accept the fact that it could get hungry. But in view of the fact that I am hungry, why, then I can't accept the fact that it is hungry."
And you say, "Ding, ding, ding. Here comes the wagon," because this boy is obsessively changing anything he notices. See, he's altering. Now, time is essentially change, and people who have an obsessive change factor in them are not comfortable in the face of time. They're actually dramatizing what time is doing. All kinds of oddities enter in.
You get very philosophical about this process. Time-change. Change of
position of particles in space is time. This fellow is so upset about time that
he's become obsessively altering the condition of everything. Furthermore,
this tells you he must have been very, very afraid that he wouldn't survive.
He's so afraid that he won't survive, of course, that he's got to change things
to make himself survive. He's furnishing his own time track, in other words.
Well, he's actually building a new universe, with its own time
continuum—that's the anatomy of a universe—by this obsessive alteration.
You'll find out he's doing a period on it. It's periodic. So you don't want this
boy telling you, "I could accept my ears if they weren't so cauliflowered." You
want him to accept something he could accept just like it is, and that's the
one police step you have to take on it. The guy keeps coming up with this, and you'll have to call him on it. You'll have to say, "All right. Now, we want something about yourself, just the way it is."
Now, the other part of this, of course: It just shoots to ribbons (you'd think) havingness. But it's, I just told you, the basis of havingness. It is the basic underlying principle of havingness. And so it doesn't shoot havingness to pieces. And it does not require Remedy of Havingness. But you'd think it would. Actually, it does shoot to pieces havingness, but you're making the guy change his mind about the havingness. So he changes how much having¬ness he has to have in his mind, rather than having it change physically.
And that is R2-63, Accept—Reject. The basic commands are—actually, all you need is just the basic commands—they're "Find something which you can accept," and "Find something which you can reject," run long enough to completely flatten both the comm lag and the process.
Now, you can run it this way, as you can run all such processes: "Find something you can accept. Now something else you can accept. Find some-thing you can accept. Find something else you can accept. Something else you can accept. Find something else you can accept. Find something else you can accept."
This is your auditor's command, keeping up his comments and listening to what he says, but calling him a little bit on this business of condition. "Now, just as it is, that's what we want. You know? Want you to find some-thing that you can accept just as it is, that you wouldn't have to change all over the place before you can accept it. Just as it exists, you know." And then "Find something that you can reject. Find something that you can reject. Find something you can reject."
"Well, I could reject my head if it had a headache."
You want ... No, you want him to find something actually he could re¬ject, just as it is. And that is all the process there is. Now, you can specify of course, person, room, universe, universes—anything you want to specify. You'll notice that you probably should take up the fellow himself first and then his immediate environment. And he'll try to get the past in there. Go ahead. But don't let him flounder forever in it.
All right. That's an easy one to deliver, isn't it? Well, when you're stuck with a case and it isn't processing well—I mean, he isn't exteriorizing and so forth—this will get him out. There's no question about it. It will. You will run it for an hour or two and consider that maybe it isn't working. And you could make an error going off and leaving it. You'd also make an error by saying, "Be three feet back of your head" somewhere down along the line—you know, jumping onto Route 1. You'd make an error if you did that.
It's not indicated. In the first place, this boy is very cagey. However, there is a reason why people don't bang out of their heads and move around in the environment. And as we run acceptance and rejection, we touch this same thing, which is Touching—R2-64, Touching. You will actually encounter this to some slight degree as you run R2-63.
Now, there's many a thetan gets outside, puts a beam on the wall, sticks. He can't make the beam let go. You'll occasionally find somebody who has been exteriorized; one night he was exteriorized, and he went up and he looked at the body lying there, and he "put his hand" (quote, unquote)—or put a beam, you see, to steady himself—on the curtain, and then he couldn't get the beam to break, and it scared him, and he popped back into his body. Boom!
That, by the way, is quite common. I daresay somebody here has had that happen once. They get frightened and they don't come out afterwards, because they're afraid they'll stick to things. And they're sure that something horrible will happen to them as a result. They're afraid they'll stick to walls or stick to the floor, or they'll put beams on something, they'll touch things, and they will not be able to proceed any further than that. And this will be very upsetting to them. So they mustn't risk this.
So they don't exteriorize. After you've run R2-63 for a while and he doesn't seem to be sticking, you could—remembering to go back to R2-63—then go to R2-64, Touching. Or you could, as just a matter of course, rim R2-64 first. These Intensive Procedure things are not necessarily in order.
By the way, you'll find the bracket of Pan-Determinism, Fighting, Must and Must Not Happen Again, and Repair, are numbered backwards. That is, Pan-Determinism comes first as a step, then comes Fighting, and so forth. And there are very few bugs like this in this book, but this is a reversed procedure.
What you really do is run Repair, Must—Must Not Happen Again, Fight¬ing and Pan-Determinism. Why did I put it in that way? Well, I'll invent a reason if you want to, but there is no reason why it's in that way. It should be reverse-way-to. And it isn't. So what. You'll know that, and there's a note in the book to that effect.
Similarly, R2-64 and R2-63 could have been reversed, except somebody is going to come along and make R2-63 work like mad. Similarly, some-body will come along and make Pan-Determinism work like mad. If he can make Pan-Determinism work like mad, he might as well skip the next three steps. See? And if you can make R2-63 work like mad, you might as well skip R2-64. R2-64 is there in case he didn't free up. And that's why, really, they're numbered in this fashion.
"R2-64: Touching. Most thetans are inside because they are afraid to touch the outside. A baby is slapped out of touching things by Mama and the MEST universe." You know, "You mustn't touch. Get away from that," and so forth. He's taught not to touch. "Some thetans are afraid that if they touch MEST they'll stick to it, and so remain `safely' inside." They're afraid they'll touch the stuff and stick to it. And they remain—very safe, they think—inside. That's not a safe frame of mind to be in. See, that cuts down their freedom and fluidity. By the way, what we mean by freedom is outside: free, nonbarriered, able to move at will. That's freedom.
Now, this—R2-64, Touching—is a very elementary process. This, by the way, is not categorized with the rest of Intensive Procedure, see. It's not the same value. There are several processes in Intensive Procedure which are spotlighted. R2-63 is about a ten-star process. Some others are four-star proc¬esses. And this Touching, here, is about an eight-star process. And it's a real hot process.
Do you know that your preclear can obsessively put out flitter? Now, you know what flitter is. That is a flow put out by a thetan. And he puts it out usually on a 360-degree sphere. He'll put this stuff out. Well, do you know that your thetan can be obsessively putting this out, which then comes back on him? Hm?
You'll run into preclears that are doing this. They're obsessively outflow¬ing; maybe they're only this big, you see, anymore, compared to the size of the body. But they're obsessively outflowing and bringing their own flow back in on themselves.
A very curious condition. They'll cause a somatic in their own head. They'll put out this flow, it'll go over to their skull and then hook on, more or less, to the skull, and come back and touch themselves. The only thing this person is doing is this: Everything is dangerous to touch except himself, so he can touch himself and keep a flow going. Cute, huh? Therefore, he can't stand here in this body, let us say, and feel that wall over there. He can only feel this body when he's doing something like that. So everybody has some degree of this activity.
Well, he's afraid to touch. You know all the data and material on reach and withdraw? Hm? Well, the reason why people do not reach and with-draw and why they get locked and can't reach but must reach, and things like that, is "mustn't touch." Of course, that is the end arrival goal of reaching.
All right. There is a very easy process that can be run anywhere in the vicinity of about 1.5 on the Tone Scale, which goes this-a-way: "There are two possible ways to run this. One is simply, `What are you willing to touch?' The other is, `As a thetan, what are you willing to touch?' If the preclear `no savvy' being a thetan, use the simpler form."
Now, it's much better . . . Your preclear can go on for hours wasting your time and his time, saying, "Well, I wouldn't mind touching the wall, and I wouldn't mind touching that." Of course, he means with his body's fingers—he doesn't mind it. But touch them as a thetan? Hm-mm! No! See? My God, not that! So you say, "Now, as a thetan, what wouldn't you mind touching?" You're liable to get some peachy comm lags.
Possibly the first answer is, "I wouldn't mind touching myself." If you do that, you've got an immediate picture of this thetan. He's obsessively putting out this flitter, these little sparks, and bringing them right back to the center of the sphere. See? He's doing this. He's doing this all the time. And boy, is he balled up. See? Anything he puts out comes back on him so he doesn't dare do anything. He gets more computations out of this: overt-act—motivator se¬quence; he can't reach; he can never arrive; he doesn't dare finish a task; he might as well not start because he can't finish anyway. But you get a perfect picture of this thetan. He's putting out the flitter and it's coming back and hitting him.
"As a thetan," you say, "what are you willing to touch?" Comm lag. Boy, this is a honey. The case already had long ... a lot of Straightwire and had a long lot of things that were upsetting, one way or the other, for you as an auditor. And you get him down, and you find out, naturally, he's waiting for you to haul off his energy ridges. He's waiting for you to pull him out of his head. Naturally, because he can't touch any of these things. You could touch him, maybe, or do something for him, but it's all got to be without any real contact. And it's just about as silly—running concepts on a case like this—as asking one of these big steam engines to sit out and dredge a hole in the ground after you've cut off the bucket.
You take the bucket, you see, over here—it mustn't touch anything, so you're going to be real sure it can't touch. So you cut the bucket off and take it over and park it in the shed. And then you tell the guy on the steam shovel, you say, "Okay, now dig that hole." No scoop, no bucket. He can't touch it. Well, so he runs concepts, concepts, concepts, ideas, ideas, ideas. And he doesn't dare touch any of these ridges.
I'll tell you an awfully good way to get rid of a ridge. If you've got a ridge across your face, or something like that, why, just climb out, take a hold of one end of the ridge and give it a good hard yank, pull it off of a face and
throw it down the drain, or hook it to the light pole or do something with it.
But a case that mustn't touch anything will sit there figure-figure-figure-figure, think-think-think-think, figure-figure-figure-figure, think-think-think-think. Now, this is the manifestation directly below effort. When they get into thinking, you must assume that they can't touch. If they're in a figure-figure condition, you must assume that this individual is afraid to touch things. If he's afraid to touch things, naturally he's going to think that they have to all be done by ideas. Well, that's below making a postulate and making something happen. If a guy is way upscale, see, and perfectly confi¬dent about touching things, he doesn't have to touch anything. He simply says, "Appear. Disappear. Go. Vanish. Mock up." See, he has no trouble.
All right. The command which you will really be using is "As a thetan, what are you willing to touch? What else are you willing to touch? What else are you willing to touch?" Then: "What are you willing to have touch you? What else are you willing to have touch you?"
Well, my golly, you have never seen anything act so fast on the Mystery up to Know Scale in your life. They'll stab right into various portions of the Mystery to Know Scale. They know nothing about this scale, see. And they'll go on up it in jumps. And then they'll start at the bottom of a new harmonic of the scale and go on up it in jumps. And then start at the bottom of a new harmonic and go on it in jumps, only hitting the high spots on this scale; but plotting it, you'll see this inversion start to take place. It's a rather rapid process, compared to lots of processes you could use. It's rather rapid.
"The mind can change without bringing alter-isness into play." You got that? You ask him what he can touch. You didn't ask him to touch it. You didn't ask him to change it. You merely asked him to change his mind about it, didn't you? Change his consideration. If he changes his consideration, of course he'll become able. But you haven't changed any energy masses.
All right. "Changing the mind is the only possible way to improve with-out liability. And this process alters only the mind.
"This is a very valuable process. It's an eight-star process."
But if you didn't get him out immediately on Acceptance and Rejection, you must assume—I mean immediately, an hour or two—you must assume, then, that this character is probably scared stiff at touching things. And al-though he'll probably get over it by accepting and rejecting—if you ran that long enough—let's be more specific and let's go to R2-64 and then come back to Accept and Reject. Okay?
Now, there is another process, R2-65, and this is not a valuable process. But this is a very valuable piece of information. So it's put in here as a proc¬ess. You can use it if you want to. On actual test it's from here to China on a kiddie car. But it's a piece of information—a piece of information which actu¬ally integrates R2-63 and R2-64. And if you simply would run it in that se¬quence, you see, your preclear would suddenly realize this for himself. He'd savvy what this was all about without you telling him. You'd sneak up on him. I don't know why we have to let him sneak up on it. I guess it's because he can't be touched.
Now, "As any energy or space condition survives only because it has been and is being altered . . ." (And we get down to what I said at the begin¬ning of this lecture about the continuance of this space and energy. And you'd certainly better know this funny thing about all universes.) "The primary unmotivated act . . ." What is the primary unmotivated act? The primary
unmotivated act would be changing the condition of space, energy and ob¬jects. Wouldn't it? The primary unmotivated act. That's an overt act, in more careless parlance.
"The mind can change without liability. When a mind changes energy or space, we get a persistence of that energy or space." Now, you've learned this in your conditions of existence, and it's all in the Axioms. I'm not telling you anything new. This is just processes, which are, by the way, right straight out of these Axioms, see. "As persistence or survival is good, and bad only to those who desire to succumb, we do not see in alteration of space or energy, any crime." It isn't bad to alter space and energy. But a fellow could get so he decided it was bad. Good and bad are considerations, you see.
"But when we alter only `bad' conditions of space and energy, we make the `bad conditions' persist," particularly if we fail. "Hence, it would be of value to a case to at least straightwire out some of the times when he attempted to alter energy, spaces or the bodies of people." Of course, every time he failed, why, he really got stuck with it. He started to alter, and he didn't run the cycle, see. He'll just be hung right there. He'll also, by the way, curiously enough, get hung on tremendous successes. You know, you really change this guy and you'll find him sitting right there in that tremen¬dous change. You see, change is time. Therefore, when change occurs, time occurs. And it stays right there as having occurred.
This fellow has created time by alteration. He's created time. So he has a time continuum which he has begun upon himself, hadn't he? He's authored himself some time. So he's waiting for the next tick of his own time clock, and it doesn't tick. So he sticks at these points of severe change. You can push around the most terrific amounts of mass and do the darnedest things, and do the weirdest things with space. And there's no liability to it, actually, unless you think there is.
But remember, you're going to get persistence. Just remember that, see. You can change anything you want to change. There's no real liability to it, particularly if you know the secret back of change—that change is time. There's no liability to changing anything or anybody, any direction you want to change them—no real liability. It's only if this is a hidden fact, that it is a liability.
The fact that there's an awful lot of space around can be of interest to you or no concern of yours whatsoever. You can take it or leave it. Isn't that right? And just because you changed some space and made it persist is not bad. How do you suppose you're going to get a game at all if you can't make space persist? Huh? Well, the way you make space persist is to change it. You make some space, and then you alter it. It'll persist. It's real cute. It'll hang there. The reason it hangs there is you started it in a certain direction.
Now, actually, if you stop changing it and leave it alone, and so forth, you may go back and remember what you did, and you'll as-is it and it'll go by the boards. So, you can as-is an alter-isness. But at the same time, if you forgot about it ... You mocked up this space and you changed it into five-dimensional space and then four-dimensional space, then you changed it into two-dimensional space, then one-dimensional space, then eight-dimensional space, then three-dimensional space, and you walked off, forgot it, as far as you're concerned.
And then one day you bump into this huge thing. It can't be as-ised. But who put it there? You did. But it's persisting. Now, the moment that you
object and reject its persistence and refuse to accept its persistence, drrrr, it won't as-is. You've made it permanent for keeps, haven't you? That's how the space of this universe hangs up there. That's why it's apparently as limitless as it is. That's how these orbits of planets keep going, how these galaxies of stars are still there. It's just a universe. It's only here for you as long as you look at it. If you stop looking at it obsessively by going blind, you're in it forever. If you simply accept the whole thing, you can back right out of it or do anything you want with it.
Now, this is something you should know as an auditor: "To an auditor who works to exteriorize a preclear and change his mind there is small lia¬bility and great personal advance." You keep winning by changing people's minds and exteriorizing them, you see—you keep winning doing this—no lia¬bility to it. In the first place, you're not creating large masses of energy. You're not creating large spaces, so forth. In other words, you're omitting the mechanics. You're actually working from mind to mind. You're adding a little distance in when you say "Be three feet back of your head," but there's noth¬ing wrong with this. You consistently and continually gain, as long as you audit in that direction.
Now, "To an auditor who works, only to change the body, the ridges, the somatics, there is failure, fixation of condition in the preclear, and restimulation." In other words, changing the somatic, working to change the somatic, working to change the body, working to change spatial conditions, when you fail, fixes them for you too. So you work a preclear with mechanics, with a lot of failures, you'll be stuck with them. And that's psychoanalysis, how come you get this transfer—which they finally accepted as the only test of a cure—when the analyst becomes the patient. No, that's not right; it's when the patient becomes an analyst.
Why then, we've got a sure cure here, you see. Oh, no you haven't. You've just got a persistence of somebody else instead of the guy. You've got an aban¬donment of self, which is real poor.
In other words, as long as you work toward exteriorization, and as long as you work to get a guy to change his mind, you go ahead and win along this line by doing your work just as you've been taught to do it, the amount of restimulation which you can get is zero. You're in command of aberration. You definitely are. And as such, you can control it; you haven't anything to fear of it; you aren't resisting it in any particular way; you can handle it.
But supposing we go into less workable processes, huh?—whereby we're going to chain-scan engrams, or E-Therapy somebody. Or we're actually going to work toward healing legs, or a leg. Or you're going toward some peculiar energy manifestation. This preclear keeps telling you, "I have these electrical stabbing pains in my back, you see, and these stabbing pains in here. And I want that to be altered."
Then you worked on him for fifteen hours, and he hasn't got enough problems or havingness anyhow, you see. And he just pulls in a little bit more and a little bit and a little bit more. Two weird things can happen: One, either by your failure that condition is then confirmed in him. (There's three things can happen.) You fail, and that just sticks him even harder in the con¬dition, because he's now sure he can't get rid of it. Or by changing it, you get it. Or by making it vanish, you cause him to get another one. See, you didn't remedy his problems, you didn't remedy his havingness, or anything. See? Like psychoanalysis was working. Well, this is death and dynamite—I mean, to work this way. Pure idiocy.
You get this stabbing pain. All right, now, if you work toward this pain—that's a mechanic, pain is—you work toward the energy mass and its eradica¬tion that's doing this, why, you'll maybe fail completely and confirm the condition, so that it's worse; or you will get it yourself; or you'll actually knock it out and the preclear will simply have to mock up another one. You see, you've at least made his illness persist.
You see, what makes it complicated is he as a thetan can make another postulate anytime he wants to. And if you've made the condition of mind or energy which makes him sick persist, why naturally he'll have to have some-thing to justify that condition.
Don't work with somatics—not because it's dangerous, not because it's bad, but because it's kind of idiotic. The only thing around to be changed is somebody's mind. And the best way to change him is to boot him three feet back of his head and tell him to change his mind.
Now, the least number of steps that can go in between there, the better off you are, of course. Idiotically enough, you start working toward some-body's chronic somatic, you're going to be in trouble. You start altering them, and you will confirm them.
All right. "Successful auditing of the thetan actually improves the auditor." Even (quote) "successful" auditing of a chronic somatic doesn't help the auditor a bit. Next time he probably won't hit it.
"Failure is the biggest lock on alter-isness." You can do these things for a long time and improve people and get away with it. And then one day you fail. And that gives you a steep curve to go along with it, and gives you a change of emotion with a change of condition, and the two of them give you two time periods which are interlocked. That's a very interesting mess.
"The preclear who's obsessively trying to change himself by self-auditing, or whatever means, has failed many times to effect a change in the condition of this universe or in the bodies of others, or has the space and energy of this universe as a stable constant." Anybody who has the energy and space of this universe obeying the laws of conservation of energy, has that space still out there. Anybody who has that space still out there has tried to change it many, many times and has failed, and so it's constant. And that's the secret back of the stability of a universe. Change it and fail, and you got it. And you can be trapped in it. And that's all there is to it.
Of course, the process ... The simplest process of this—the one I'd want you to remember—is "Can you recall a time of change?" That is the process. "Can you recall a time of change?" is the simplest version of the process. Just Straightwire; it's a Straightwire process. No great value. Hasn't enormous value. But it certainly does teach a guy a lesson or two. See, it hasn't any great value because it processes toward entheta, doesn't it?
Professional auditing in any place on the planet Auditor class X, skype: timecops
Сообщений: 698
Зарегистрирован: 28 дек 2015, 12:01

Вернуться в L Ron Hubbard original LECTIONS, TAPES

Кто сейчас на форуме

Сейчас этот форум просматривают: нет зарегистрированных пользователей и гости: 3