Русская версия

Site search:
ENGLISH DOCS FOR THIS DATE- Solids and Chronic Somatics (PAB 116) - PAB570715

P.A.B. No. 116
The Oldest Continuous Publication in Dianetics and Scientology
Via Hubbard Communications Office
35/37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1

15 July 1957


I am giving you in this PAB my latest findings in the handling of chronic somatics. However, I would like to point out that before this technique can be run on a given preclear, you must have him thoroughly under control — i.e. the person, his attention and thoughts. It is a way of running Problems of Comparable Magnitude to a chronic somatic.

Not all people can do this immediately if they cannot make things solid. It may even be very dangerous to run, but it does handle the chronic somatic, providing you have already run the preclear on CCH (Communication, Control, Havingness). When you have done this you can come back again, substituting this process for Problems of Comparable Magnitude to the chronic somatic.

The preclear must be able to make things solid. He has got to have his attention under your control and have his body under control. He must also be able to make things solid objectively (i.e. “Look at the wall and make it a little more solid”) and subjectively (i.e. having the preclear make “the mock-ups a little more solid”), which is to say that you would have to take the preclear through Procedure CCH before this would work, but on the next time through you could kill his chronic somatic deader than a mackerel. You would simply omit running Problem of Comparable Magnitude to the chronic somatic and run the intensive in this manner:

  1. Present time problem.
  2. Control in all its facets.
  3. 8-C: “Keep it from going away.”
  4. 8-C: “Hold it still.”
  5. 8-C: “Make it a little more solid.”
  6. Subjective Havingness: “Make the mock-ups a little more solid.”
  7. Then and Now Solids.

Then go right back to wondering if he had any problems about auditing, which is now the present time problem — if people are very low on havingness the auditing always becomes a present time problem. Go up again into control and make sure that you have the preclear thoroughly under control. Run through the 7 steps again. Only then would it be safe to run this technique.

This process joins up a phenomenon which has been around for years and which was never known to be turned on at will. This phenomenon is: “He knew about it all the time.”

All auditors know this phenomenon. The preclear has sinusitis — it is from Johnny punching him in the nose when he was five — and he says: “Yes, but I knew it all the time.” Well, he never knew it all the time, because he had sinusitis. It is only after he realizes that he knew it all the time that he gets well. That is the recovery of the game which underlies the game he has been playing. That is the hidden game.

The most disturbing thing in the world is to have a preclear that you have been working on cognite. He says, “Well, yes, my mother was actually a prostitute.” He never realized that before. And you say, “What do you know about that!” and he says, “I knew it all the time.” He knew it all the time, but he couldn’t identify what it was that he knew all the time.

When we talk about cognitions, we are actually looking for the master cognition, which is “I knew it all the time.” Only he didn’t know it all the time; in other words, he recovered the hidden game. It is the other game that we have suddenly got sight of. Football made him sick, but all of a sudden we spotted Lacrosse, or vice versa. He knew all the time that it was Lacrosse that made him this sick, or football that made him this sick. He knew it all the time, but only now is he well.

How do we trigger this at will?

The postulate of change is “ought to be — should be.” Limited, just as change is on any other level, but awfully effective.

The postulate which underlies havingness is “enough.” Havingness is quantitative. So you cannot run this without running the whole works evidently. He would have to be able to mock up, hence the first pass at this in CCH. He would have to be able to make things a little more solid, otherwise you wouldn’t be able to risk this one. But it evidently turns on rather at will this “I knew it all the time,” in other words, the hidden game.

You run the process this way: Tell the preclear to “Mock up enough __________ (whatever the chronic somatic is)” and “Make it a little more solid.”

For example, take a case of obnosis — if you are not good at observing, you will miss on this every time. This is one of the reasons why we have more or less unconsciously been stressing obnosis. The auditor has to be able to look at somebody — and it is not the fellow’s belief that all women are bad. He is sitting there with a chronic sore throat, complete glandular arrest, with a club in his hands and you are trying to read his thoughts. Out of all these things, take the one thing he is complaining about — a sore throat.

The first thing you do is run the bad condition. Then just run the condition, after that the terminal, and you will shift his attention and turn off this “I knew it all the time. I knew my mother used to choke me.” Only he didn’t because before that he told you, “Well, mother’s a very sweet girl, very nice to me. I don’t know why I never turned out all right.”

Have him “Mock up enough sore throats” and “Make it a little more solid.” Then “Mock up enough sore throat (singular)” and “Make it a little more solid” and “Good.

Mock up enough sore throat” and by this time he will say, “Well, yes, so and so and so, probably.” His attention shifted and this is a method of doing it. It has shifted his attention from the badness of the condition to the condition. “Mock up enough throat.” He has a condition known as a throat, and this oddly enough in this particular instance becomes the solid for the terminal — enough throat. Only it will mean two different things to the preclear and you want the preclear to duplicate your commands exactly, which he will only do if he is thoroughly under your control.

Let us take “bad eyesight” for an example, although this is not necessarily the process you would use. The preclear came to you to be audited because he had shooting pains in his right kneecap. He has never been able to work because of it, draws compensation. As a result of the compensation he has an easy life and this is a control mechanism. If you take this away from him against his better “judgments” the difficulty you will have in keeping him in session thereafter is absolutely zero.

He has bad eyesight and you have him “Mock up enough bad eyesight” and “Make it a little more solid ” — a few times “Enough eyesight,” a condition or circumstance, “Make it a little more solid.” “Enough eyes,” and “Make them a little more solid.” There is his chronic somatic.

I have no guarantee whatsoever that this will work in all cases at all times, because I cannot guarantee that you will have him in condition whereby he can execute the commands when given. He must be in a condition whereby he can execute the auditing commands, and if the auditing commands are “mock it up,” which means he has got to be able to get mock-ups — which you can turn on with CCH — he has to be in a condition where you have some guarantee that you can control his thoughts. You can say, “Put an emotion in the wall.” He will feel the wall mentally but he didn’t do what you said, therefore you don’t have his thoughts under control.

In other words, the person’s attention and thoughts must be under your control before this works, but when you have accomplished this, this process works with a thud.