Русская версия

Site search:
ENGLISH DOCS FOR THIS DATE- Does Clearing Cancel the Need for Training (ABM-70) - ABM580300
- Scale of Withhold (PAB 131) - PAB580300

CONTENTS THE SCALE OF WITHHOLD
P.A.B. No. 131
PROFESSIONAL AUDITOR’S BULLETIN
The Oldest Continuous Publication in Dianetics and Scientology
From L. Ron Hubbard
Via Hubbard Communications Office 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1

1 March 1958

THE SCALE OF WITHHOLD

Edited from L. Ron Hubbard’s 17th lecture to the 18th American Advanced Clinical Course in Washington, D.C., on 6 August 1957

CCH 9, Tone 40 “Keep it from going away” is a withhold process. We know it to have a considerable workability. The road to solids, toleration of solids, lies through withhold. Only we never had a straight wire version on this before or anything that clipped it directly and immediately, but we have it here with Tone 40 “Keep it from going away.”

CCH 9 proves that we are dealing with the automaticity which goes as follows: everything that comes along is used by a thetan to keep things from going away. He gets a cannonball in the stomach and says, “Ah, that moment of impact kept the body from going away. So I’ll make a picture of the impact” — hence the necessity for pictures — ”and have it keep the body from going away from here on out.”

That is why people hang on to impact engrams. It is fear of loss — fear that they will lose a body. They do other things. They fill the atmosphere around the body with machinery so that other thetans will be afraid to come into it and take it over, take it away.

“Keeping things from going away” is a basic mechanism which guards against loss. As you know the mind runs on a gradient scale from thought through effort to solids. Actually the mind is already graphed on the tone scale. That is the gradient scale of approach between something that is nothing and total solids at the other end. It isn’t that the person himself becomes a total solid, but his approach to solids is on a gradient scale through less solids and misemotions and plain emotions and energies, like aesthetics, to just thought.

When an individual gets hold of something like a cannonball in the stomach, he says, “That certainly got there in a hurry. That I can directly handle because it handled me so well.” He keeps things from going away. He guards against loss with impacts. He also does other things with impacts. He uses them as control mechanisms. It would not be put beyond a thetan to take a cannonball engram on the right to move his body to the left and vice versa. It is handy and requires no effort. He just puts a slight thought into the line and says, “Move to the right.” The cannonball goes into restimulation and he moves over to the right. This could be a good system.

He uses these “keep-it-from-going-aways” as control. In other words, he lets the body be shoved around by things and he keeps those things there and thus he can control the body rather easily — but he deteriorates at the same time.

An individual can also very easily take a cannonball engram and hang it on somebody else’s head to make him bow. Very often you start to audit a preclear and you find out that you are auditing a stomach out of his right arm or a head off his left foot. This is the interchange of facsimiles, and thetans do use facsimiles on others.

Way back on the track there is a thing called the Engram Police. It is quite amusing to get a thetan into some kind of condition where he can be policed — to be confined for thirty days in the space opera trap.

Facsimiles have a use and then they have the lovely attraction of also being mass. A fellow who keeps money for its own sake is the type of person who would keep facsimiles for their own sake.

You, as an auditor, start to look for the significance of why this preclear has this thing stuck in front of his face and you may find that he is merely keeping it for its own sake.

Facsimiles either keep you where you are or the body where it is. They are control mechanisms. Sometimes a thetan will get a series of engrams all hooked together — shoulder with an arrow, stomach with a crossbow through it, leg with a spear in it and a few slinging stones that are back of the left eye. That is a nice combination and moves the body rapidly. You start to shift the engram a little and the body jumps, and you move this at somebody else and he jumps as well.

Istanbul escort over 100 istanbul.

The service facsimile is a series of facsimiles which you call a facsimile, which can be applied to the control of others very nicely. But after the individual has been on the track for a few billion years using one of these combinations, he sooner or later flops.

If an individual is to have anything to do with facsimiles, he is going to be somewhere between solids and thought. By gradient scales of concatenation and by lots of postulates about association, which gets into identification, finally this scale can become relatively solid. He can think a thought and turn on the solid at the other end of the scale.

We look this over and we see that the movement and the motionlessness of people can easily be handled by facsimile patterns.

Throwing things away or dispensing with them is much inferior to holding on to them. I near killed some preclears trying to find this out. Which side of the reach-and withdraw mechanism is the one which can be audited? I have found that the “reach” one is good and high toned — not games condition activity. That is communication. Unless you have an opponent situation you would certainly run “reach.”

In view of the fact that everybody has some games condition on almost everything we can run withdraw, and withdraw is the side we can run rather endlessly. (By withdraw we mean “withdraw something from” because this builds up and increases havingness.) “Withdraw it from” or “Hold to yourself” the object holds good anywhere up to a couple of hundred hours of processing. Man will communicate outward to the degree that he can hold inward and the monitoring thing is the “hold inward.”

Every time a psycho comes into the foundation we find that they cannot separate anything from them. I used to try to process them on getting them to throw away a single scrap of paper and with very good results. That is an extreme case of hold, hold in to self and withdraw it from others. You will find out that as a person heads on down the scale it gets that bad — but what complicates it is that it has inversions, and right above this “clutch it to the chest this tight” would be an inversion of “throw it away.”

Which one solved it — the “throw it away” or the “clutch”? People cannot throw away ad infinitum. They run out of havingness. We are really only concerned with a person’s holdingness to himself. That gives us an engram bank, puts the bank in restimulation and upsets things endlessly.

Now, “hold it in” solves both “hold it in” and “throw it away.” An individual’s communication is raised by holding things in. Here is a nothing that couldn’t duplicate any mass busy holding mass in to himself. He comes to harm because of it. His abilities go to pieces and his penalties and that sort of thing all accumulate on him. Everything a thetan has done wrong he carries around in little pictures to remind himself how guilty he is. It is probably the result of a number of considerations peculiar only to this universe.

We have to increase a thetan’s ability to hold. When this ability to hold is emphatically good and he himself can do it, he will abandon all these cannonballs in the stomach. In other words, he abandons all this lower scale automaticity of having things held for him.

Holding on to, when it becomes automatic, goes out and beyond one’s power of choice, which automatically can start by power of choice, but after that it has to violate it all the way to be automatic. One doesn’t stop an automaticity. An automaticity, when and if it stops, wears out.

If we have everything holding on to things for us, such as gravity, body holding on to you, and all kinds of things holding on for us, we eventually get to a frame of mind where we feel we are being totally cared for. But at the same time we don’t dare reject anything because it might be some of our hold-on-to mechanism and a thetan doesn’t reject.

For a thetan to re-acquire the ability to hold on to things, is not necessarily the same as a thetan having to destroy all automaticities. Automaticities, quite incidentally, fold up when the thetan starts to re-acquire the powers and abilities contained in an automaticity. We do not take over automaticities to destroy automaticities. We take over automaticities only to rehabilitate the ability of a thetan. We just take them over because they are robbing the thetan of his ability to perform. (The inflow principle of the universe is being used to hold on to things rather than the thetan’s ability to hold on to them.)

Power is contained in the ability to maintain a position in space.*Refer to Scientology 8-80 by L. Ron Hubbard. If you can’t maintain a position in space you will never have any power. If everything is holding things in to you, they will eventually start moving you around and the moment this happens you no longer have power. An individual’s ability to withhold, his ability to hold and his ability to keep something from going away, are part and parcel of his ability to maintain his own position, situation or location.

Some people start confronting and immediately fly out of their heads. Eventually they get so that they can sit there and confront and hold their position. This is a necessary point in confronting. You have to be able to hold the position in the face of something. Higher than this, or lower down since it goes either way, we realize that to keep something from going away is a sort of confrontingness. Keeping things from going away is an ability which gradually cultivates the ability of the thetan to remain where he is.

If you can keep a wall from going away, the ability to hold still in general is regained. One then is able to confront things and can then recognize solids. First you have to acquire this ability to keep things from going away, then finally discover that you yourself can be stationary — which gives you the idea of confronting — and as soon as you are willing to confront then you can make things more solid. And that is why these three processes, CCH 9, 10 and 11, are run in this manner.

The solids and the solidity that you are willing to confront have an awful lot to do with your ability to hold still or hold things still, and your ability to hold things still has a lot to do with your ability to keep things from going away.

But here is a basic ability in the keeping of a secret — being able to withhold things from others. We have a whole span of keeping things from going away, all of which simply begin with the withheld thought, which is what a secret is, and it scales on further to a withheld object.

When an individual has regained his ability to keep certain things from going away, he could then start in on the basis of holding things still, but he will never hold himself still for the excellent reason that he isn’t there to be held still. He can only suppose he is in a place. And this depends upon his ability to hold other things still.

Now, “Keep it from going away” solves both outflow and inflow. “Hold it still” solves motion and no motion. We have motion and no motion and you really don’t solve motion with motion. You solve motion with “hold stillness. “ And the ability to confront and confound solids solves alike something and nothing. To be able to confront a solid, then, makes a person capable of confronting no-thing.

Here we have six items and their gradient scale. The first two of these items are a pair called “reach” and “withdraw,” or “throw it away” and “hold it to you.” And that bracket is solved only by running “Keep it from going away.” The next one up is “motion” and “no motion” — action and stillness — and those are solved by running “Hold it still.” The last bracket, we have somebody who is terribly fascinated with vaporous “nothingness.” To solve nothingness we run solids. The person will graduate rather rapidly up to being able to confront nothing if we run solids. But we don’t run nothings — conceiving statics. We run solids and what we do is pick him out of those places where he is totally convinced of solids and you walk him back to the world of thought. The gradient scale goes from nothing through emotions, through effort and facsimiles into solids, and you get him back up to where he can handle it on the effort band and up above into thought.

These processes can be run by formal auditing and are not necessarily Tone 40. If you have a very figure-figure case you better run it formal. It will run more easily for you. But first flatten CCH 0, 1, 2, 3 and 4 and then run this combination of processes and win like mad.

L. RON HUBBARD