The handling of the preclear in the early parts of a session or an intensive is a problem which most auditors give too little attention to. If a session goes wrong, it will be usually within the first few minutes after the session begins. And having gone wrong, like a Shakespearean plot, it continues to go further and further wrong from that point on and, therefore, does not become a matter of processes or processing; it becomes a matter of session-starting.

Now, we all have a superstition that those things that start well continue well, and those things that start poorly continue poorly. This may or may not be the case, but it is certainly the case in auditing: that if you get off on the wrong foot or no foot, it's a cinch that very, very shortly into the session you're going to find yourself not even close to the ground. You're not even going to find yourself on any known map anywhere.

And this factor alone, as far as I have been able to establish - and I hate to say this, this positively; I'm seldom this positive, but in this case, boy, do I know what I'm talking about - is that reality on Scientology leaves when one finds himself off the chart. And one then begins to scrabble and flounder and look around for the magic process that will now straighten this preclear out and bring him back to battery, put him in good shape and get things going here.

And we never look at the beginning of the intensive or the session to find where it went wrong. We don't look at the fact that the session has gone wrong and has probably continued wrong for some time. We look instead for a magic process, and we say, "Well then, Scientology really doesn't contain the answers to this; we've got to go somewhere else."

And where anybody has done this, it has been because he departed, as an auditor, the session and the preclear in some fashion or another very, very early in processing and never got back on any known road. And not having gotten back on any known road, he is not, therefore, oriented in any way, shape or form and, of course, has to pick something out' of the air, some magical, mystical thing; he's got to dream up some sort of a process, some sort of a snap that will suddenly make all well that has gone all wrong.

And he spends his time, usually, then trying to fathom this existing problem of the preclear, without comprehending what the problem of the preclear is. The problem of the preclear is very well embraced by Scientology, but the auditing session was not. Somewhere there was a departure.

I Now, I'll tell you how you find yourself geographically. I hope you don't think I'm being too hard on you, but this is a fact: that the failures along the line have been a certain lack of insight on the part of the auditor as to where the lostness occurred. And unless we can solve that, unless we can point this up, and unless it becomes a native and integral part of auditing itself and the processes themselves, then we're liable to continue to have slow case gains or case failures.

So it is at once a problem, where I am concerned, to give out processes which will be used and which are not too awfully arduous to teach. Because we have to teach these processes, remember. So it isn't just what works on the preclear; it's what can also be taught and relayed.

But it is not a problem of teaching a process; it is a problem of teaching an auditor an insight into processes. And the insight into the process is that the process is secondary to the preclear, at all times. And the time to use the process is the time to use the process, redundantly enough. There are places for all these processes, but the place to use them is the right place.

Now, all of that sounds very, very queer and sort of double-talkish, but the truth of the matter is that we cannot take a preclear and run him on an exteriorized type of technique if he's dead in his head. Well, we can't run an auditing session if we haven't got an auditing session in progress, and that is the first and foremost insight that an auditor should have. And that is a principle; that is not a process. Somewhere or another the wheels of the session left the rails of Scientology - somewhere they did this.

Now, the way you find yourself in a wood, if you're going to find yourself at all, is not necessarily the right way in Scientology, but it's a good example. You find the last known landmark and replot from there.

Give you an example. When we were first in London - London is a fairly large city, at least it's - it has a number of streets and turnings. It has, to say the least, some streets that are not entirely straight, and it has other streets which do not run parallel to some other streets. There are numerous things one could say about this, but it is not a city where one automatically finds himself every time he gets lost. It requires a little thought.

We had a little Jaguar racing car, and it went very fast. And I don't know, but a bobby seems to be tolerant of something that is small and fast and he doesn't particularly stop it or upset it, so we'd roar around. And the first few times we were out, we would suddenly look and nothing was familiar. I mean, nothing. So we would say, "Well …" Perhaps you too have had this experience here in London.

And we would do this very interesting thing. We would head in some compass direction in order to recover known territory. And of course, with the streets not running parallel to any of the streets, trying to run any compass direction became rapidly impossible, so this time-honored system, well-known to all navigators, didn't work.

Now, it's not true that a compass in Northwest 7 reads 90 degrees different than a compass in Southwest 5 - but almost. And when there's a fog, it reads 190 degrees different. So we eventually began to cautiously reach out from where we were to where we were going. And we had a big map_ that had all the streets of London on it. You can imagine trying to unwind a map like that in the seat of a little tiny Jaguar racing car - you know, miles of map and cubic centimeters of car.

And nevertheless, we never thereafter got into trouble when we adopted this policy: we would trace ourselves block by block on the map. Now, this was pretty easy to do. You just went whizzing along, and you traced yourself block by block, and we checked on it often. And then all of a sudden, why, we would find ourselves off the map, ddaahh. Put on the brakes, turn the car around, and go back and find the last landmark. Get the idea? And as soon as we were perfectly willing to go back and find the last known landmark and then continue on, we ceased to get lost.

Now, that's a very crude sort of an example to give you, but nevertheless, it is a very true one here. The only trouble is, it wasn't a process where you departed. It really wasn't the use of a process; it was the lack of an insight. Somewhere or other you as an auditor did not observe, did not perceive what was going on with the preclear, or even if you had perceived it, you continued to audit with the session.

You perceived something was wrong, you perceived you were somehow or other in error, you perceived this thing was not going off as well as it should have been going off, and yet you continued right on with the session and what you were doing. That happened knowingly or unknowingly. You were either off and didn't know it, you merely weren't getting progress; or you were off and knew it and continued with the session, and you didn't get any progress.

Therefore, there is this principle of insight, and the insight is not a great sensitivity - I love these - I love - psychoanalysis has been a great school; there's no doubt about it. Nothing could happen like happens in psychoanalysis. Nothing. I mean, there isn't any possibility of it. If I myself had not had many, many years ago a considerable amount of experience with psychoanalysts and psychoanalysis, and if I myself had not studied it, I would not know of 8,785,000 things not to do, and we would be the poorer all the way along the line.

But the psychoanalyst used to claim - whenever he confronted any of my results, long years ago - he would claim that it was a certain delicacy and insight which I had into human beings that produced the result; it wasn't Dianetics. And although this was very flattering and occasionally made me feel like I should disguise my flaming locks in a turban and sit, perhaps crosslegged, uttering magical incantations over the red-hot brains of suffering humanity, it nevertheless made me resist this idea of insight just to that degree. "He gets results because he has some sort of an insight."

Well, that's long enough ago and can be well enough forgiven so that we don't have to pay any attention to it anymore. I mean, we can relax and stop contesting the point with a psychoanalyst. We do happen to need some insight. You see, I just give up. I run up a white flag on the whole subject.

But it isn't a peculiar undescribable kind of an insight. It is something which today we can describe with such precision that you would have to be blindfolded and with an eyesight - you know, 20/20 is average eyesight - your eyesight would have to be about 1/20 (what you should see at twenty feet, you see at one foot), you see, in order to miss this kind of insight. And the moment we describe this kind of insight to you, I think you will see at once what we are talking about.

The subject of havingness could be said to embrace a great deal of understanding in Dianetics and Scientology, so much so that several people have said to me, "I see what it all adds up to now. It adds up to havingness."

This is an awfully brief look, by the way. It's a terribly brief look. It isn't really much of a comprehension at all, because havingness is an inverse of reach. The fellow normally wants to reach out, and this becomes inverted to where he desires a reach in, do you understand? And he desires this reach in, and this is havingness. That's really all there is to havingness.

Now, a complexity of reach in results in masses. And he didn't like those at first, either. No thetan can duplicate a mass; let me call that to your attention. He is natively no time, no space, no wavelength, no location. And we show him a mass out here located in space, and we say to him, "Communicate with it."

And he says, "I can't possibly communicate with it, really, because I can't duplicate it."

So he has to become something else than native state in order to duplicate, look at and use these masses. Do you see this - hm? So that is the other condition besides "reach in" that he must have in order to function in this universe at this time.

But havingness is basically and principally a desire to be reached rather than a desire to reach. It's really a cut communication line. Running Havingness exclusively would be something on the order of running "What wouldn't you mind going out of ARC with?" That's a very, very fine process. I recommend it to you thoroughly. Any time you get a Russian psychiatrist, run it on him. It'll kill him.

"What wouldn't you mind going out of ARC with?" It's odd. You just see people going down the Tone Scale rung by rung. And because it sounds so logical - "What wouldn't you mind going out of communication with? What wouldn't you mind disagreeing with? What wouldn't you mind disliking?" any one of these. That whole class, you see, is all a type of process. It's "What wouldn't you mind going out of ARC with?"

And they go down tone - it sounds so reasonable; it sounds so workable they go down Tone Scale so pleasantly, you know. They run it, and they go down another rung. And somatic turns on, and they go down another rung. And they feel a little bit upset with life, and they go down another rung. And they feel a little bit more upset and so on.

And they say, "Well, this is certainly working out something, this process is. I'm sure that I'm getting rid of something." Yes, they are. They're getting rid of anything like life that they possess.

Well now, here's this purely mechanical thing where the thetan mocks up a mass so that he can communicate with masses; he can get some duplication with existing masses. See, that's a purely mechanical thing. That's just by postulate.

You say, "There's havingness. There's a mass. There's an energy form existing in some space and location." A thetan can do this. And he says, "That, then, communicates with this thing over here." And every once in a while a thetan slides in and says, "You know, I am the mass which is doing the communication abroad," and this we call interiorization.

How does it happen that he slides into it? He never totally escapes the principle of no duplication. Even though he's having mass A communicate with mass B, he himself never really becomes mass A. And his anxiety, perhaps, to communicate between mass A and mass B eventually forces him more or less to assume the role of mass A, and we get an interiorization into the body. That's really all there is to it.

It is basically an impossibility for a thetan to do a clean, perfect communication with masses. It's an unfortunate thing. He can tolerate it, he can patch himself up, he can get into such a condition of understanding that he can do this, but there's always a little bit of strain on it, because he himself is not natively a mass. Do you understand this?

So we get his anxiety resulting into an interiorization. He wants to communicate, he wants a game. He wants a game between mass A and mass B. Now, for a long time he merely stands out, and he can get in communication more or less, by postulate or consideration, with mass A; he can get into communication with mass B. This we call pan-determinism. He can determine either sides of the communication.

After a while, he decides that mass A isn't communicating enough, so he gets in there to bolster up mass A a little bit more, and he puts more attention on mass A. Now he is making mass A talk to mass B. This brings about a dependency on mass B to do some talking. So he can set up an automaticity, a machine, or whistle up another thetan or something of the sort in order to have mass B over here functioning. You see this?

And he still doesn't get the type of communication he wants, so he gets in here a little closer to mass A. And he says, "Well, you know, little bit better communication" - next thing you know, he's mass A (snap). And you ask him, you say, "What are you?" And the fellow says, "I'm a body."

Similarly, he could say, "I am a building" or "I am a temple." He could say, "I am a planet." He could say any of these things. It just doesn't have to do just with bodies; it could have to do with situations and masses.

But he wants a game, and a game is an inverse reach. Now, there is nothing really wrong with an inverse reach. If you are anxious to produce an effect, you had better ask yourself are you willing to have that effect. If you yourself as a thetan are willing to have the effect which you are trying to produce, you will produce the effect. This I guarantee.

The reason people don't mock up living bodies that weigh sixteen stone and go up and down the street whistling Dixie - the reason they don't do this is because they think this would be a hell of a thing to have happen to them.

Well, just look at it. Would you like - every time you turned around, why, somebody mocking up a bobby standing across your path, hm? It would be quite interesting for a short time but rather maddening, particularly if you couldn't find out that it was simply a mocked-up bobby because he was so solid, you see. And they even mocked him up right down to his identification card.

The subject of havingness is the lowest order of manifestation for the thetan. He wants this item to communicate. He's trying to save the mass for vital communications at long length. See, at first he just wants to communicate. Now he wants it to communicate, but he knows that communication as-ises, makes vanish or disappear a mass. Communication as-ises or destroys mass, you understand.

All right. So he says, "Well, I will save this mass as long as possible and make it communicate as little as possible in order to expend this, when it is vital that I do communicate, why, then, I will communicate." And he starts saving communication.

Silence is not a desired characteristic. It is an interim characteristic, waiting for a proper subject of communication, according to the consideration of the individual. So that your big, strong, silent man must feel that communication is pretty doggone - he must feel he's just about out of mass. Doesn't hold together at all, the idea that big, strong men are silent; they're not. Little weak guys with no mass to expend get quieter and quieter and finally shut up entirely.

Now, here's the problem. The problem is "Want a game. Want to communicate. Want to talk to my fellows. Want to get in there and pitch," you see? Desire in this direction, very definite desire in this direction. And this goes downhill somehow or another, and there's less and less game. Why? Because there's less and less mass. The more communication, the more game, the less mass. You understand? So that havingness is an invitation to a game.

This individual is liable to get unsettled to this degree: He's liable to feel that his havingness disappears to such a degree that he can no longer play this game, at which time he leaves that game. He goes.

He invents various automatic ways to get havingness so he can continue to play this game, but the havingness can sometimes make him lose all sight of playing the game at all. Till the havingness gets to be an end - all in itself, and after he gets it, he doesn't know what to do with it.

When he was very young, he said, "I wanted a bag of gold. I want a bag of gold because I will buy my father a new farm, and I will buy my mother a white horse, and I will buy my sister a new pink hair ribbon," something like this, "and I want this bag of gold." Something practical.

And he goes thinking about this, and he goes on through life. And he finally gets a half a bag of gold, and then he gets another half a bag, and he's got a bag of gold. And he gets two bags of gold, and he gets four bags of gold and six bags of gold. And the old man starves to death on the wasted land, and he's forgotten why he wanted that bag of gold.

A very dignified example of this on a very huge scale is the case of Alaric in the first fall, you might say, of the Roman Empire, when he - the first sacking of Rome occurred at the hands of a barbarian general who was civilized, and he had gotten gold hungry. He'd gotten riches hungry. He'd just gotten more and more riches and more and more riches, and he wanted honors and all that sort of thing, and he wanted to be known as lord knows what. And he kept negotiating with the Emperor of the East and the Emperor of the West in order to get these things and meanwhile mopping up a few more provinces and chewing up a lot more farmland and sacking a few more cities.

And he finally got down, and he absolutely had Rome in his hands. He started out because he wanted the Roman Empire; he wanted to be emperor. He wanted to be a very fancy fellow indeed, with tremendous titles and so forth, and he sold out for, I think, about five thousand pounds in gold.

What he intended to do with this gold, we don't know. The only place you could really spend it would have been in Rome or the vicinities of Rome, and yet we have this fantastic picture of Alaric letting himself be bought off from all of his plans with this gold. What happened to him in the interim? He forgot the game, and the havingness became end - all to everything.

Now, the body, in a very marked degree, is in this condition. It's forgotten what game it was playing, if it ever had any decision about playing any game. And it wants, but it doesn't know why; and on an inversion, can not-want and doesn't know why. But its problems at this very low level center around this thing called havingness.

Body has all this way along wanted to be well cared for and wanted to be set up and, you know, put in good condition - comfortable, warm and all that sort of thing. And the body said, "Well, let's see. This is best done with gold. It is best done with jewels. It's best done with masses of one kind or another."

And you eventually would find it getting the gold and the jewels and these other riches, you might say. And then we'd read, maybe, in the paper about "Miser found dead with crust of bread in old house and eighty thousand pounds in the closet." You know, he died of starvation with eighty thousand pounds in the closet. You get the idea?

Anyway, this is this idiocy, you see? The game is forgotten, the havingness remains. And that is the condition the body is in. And if you know this, if you can just assume this in terms of any body, this thing called havingness sort of explains itself. It isn't really the thetan that wants any havingness, you know?

See, there's something there. The body has to have a certain amount of havingness periodically, just in eating, and it's just making itself good all the way along on havingness. But why does it have to have? After a while it'll just sit still and have. It no longer functions or takes part in the game, you see?

You can actually inflow havingness on a person to a point where it'll quit. You know that? You know the way to conquer Russia today? The conquest of Russia is so strongly in the power - the only reason I'm mentioning Alaric and Roman history is I was looking up communism and Russian history and that sort of thing. And the best account of it, by the way, is in Gibbon, of the beginnings of Russian invasions and all that sort of thing. And I was looking it up and read a little bit too far.

You know how you go cruising through an Encyclopaedia Britannica, and you're all set. All you want to look up is aardvark., and you find yourself, after a short time, very happily reading a long article on advertising. Well, that's what happened. I just skidded over onto the thing.

But the Chinese Empire used to send tribute up to the Huns when they were on the north border of China. They were up there about twelve hundred years before Caesar. This is very old. And, Chinese kept sending them luxuries, luxuries, luxuries, and they finally caved them in. These people were no longer as warlike as before, and they could no longer triumph against Chinese arms. And so they had to move, and they moved over against Europe instead of China, and that began the various invasions which we read about which led to the end of the Roman Empire.

It's a great oddity to find this reaching so deep into antiquity, but a very great oddity to find a very good thetan trick being employed. They gave them tribute, they said: bolts of silk, beautiful young ladies, fine harnesses, tinkly little bells, mirrors. And they said, "You are extracting this tribute from us." And eventually the Hun nations and the CNP caved in. That was the end of that.

They couldn't support all of this havingness. They didn't quite know what to do with all these anchor points. And it occurred to them at length that China was making all this space. So they said, "Gee, that must be an awfully powerful nation, making all that space," and they just quit and went over against Europe. They said, "China's too dangerous, too strong."

What happened? China just dealt them anchor point after anchor point after anchor point after anchor - all you'd have to do is start snowing Russia under - Russia has nothing today; she's in poverty. You read about "Five-year plan so the president of Russia can have a pair of shoes," you know.

The point here is that the transfer of anchor points consists of the making of spaces - actually, make for an overwhelming of the revolt, rebellion or selfdeterminism of a certain object, such as a body - whether it's the body of a nation or the body of a preclear.

Now, the preclear is trying to get his body into control. The preclear's body feels a lot out of control, if you only knew it. He usually, early in processing, doesn't quite know what he's going to do next.

Well, this havingness, completely aside from anything else, is the thetan, with his mock-up and so forth, putting out anchor points around the body. He takes the body into his space instead of occupying the body's space. Interesting, isn't it? It brings about a conquest of the body. It makes the thetan think the thought that changes the consideration of the body.

Let me go over that again, because I see that you didn't quite get from Russia here to this preclear.

If you keep throwing anchor points out against a people, even a people like the Huns or the Russians or the communists or whatever they call themselves today - if you keep throwing out anchor points into those people, which they themselves actually think they have to have, eventually they'll have to have them. They become absolute necessities after a while, you see.

They never heard of silk, and they were getting along fine. After half a century, they just wouldn't know what to do if they didn't get their regular silk. You get the idea? You keep throwing these anchor points - you're actually caving in their space, see? Solid objects. All right.

Now, let's take a thetan trying to control a body. The thetan starts throwing anchor points down around this body - primarily, the thetan is encompassed, if he's interiorized, by all these tremendously complicated body anchor points. We got it? We don't want to destroy those body anchor points. The body would go to pieces. The truth of the matter is that the thetan, the person you are processing, is less capable of supporting control of that body as long as it is the body that is the anchor point and the thetan is not the anchor point. You get the idea?

This situation becomes remedied by a remedy of havingness. You have the thetan mock up and throw into the body anchor points, or around the body anchor points, and the body then becomes controllable. The thetan is making the anchor points.

And the body is so accustomed to havingness that it knows it has to have. So if we omit havingness, we get the central effect of simply need, want, educated desire on the part of the body, you see. That is straightened out, and that has to be straightened out, because of this other principle: Every time the thetan turns up one little erg of energy or anything - a hungry body, that knows it has to have far more than it does have - will just pull that energy right into it.

And therefore, every time the thetan has a little mass or an old tin can or an old rusty chain or something, all of a sudden it goes slurp, and it's into the body. And he'll get the idea after a little while that he is being pulled dry of everything he has. He's being drained of his energies. He's this and that. Do you understand?

As long as the body continues to absorb havingness and masses to this degree, you have a hard time getting anybody out of it. All right. That's first and foremost. Now, the secondary one is the control factor. The thetan is existing in the anchor point situation of the body. The body is making his space for him, he thinks. You reverse the situation the moment you have the thetan mock up and give the body havingness, you see this? You bring the body, then, under more control. Not that you destroy its anchor points or do anything to it badly. It just somehow or other changes its opinion.

So it immediately becomes the study of the auditor of what is the absolutely necessary havingness on the part of the body? What does the body actually have to have? And as soon as he gets this cravingness on the part of the body satiated in some fashion, the body is, of course, much less demanding; eaves itself in, caves him in much less. You follow this?

It's sort of like feeding the hungry tiger so you can walk out of a cage. You get the idea? You're in a cage with a hungry tiger, and he's not going to let you walk out until he eats you. And you somehow or another, one quarter or another, conjure up a nice roast beef and a bit of Yorkshire pudding and toss it to him.

Now, here's this interplay that you must notice as an auditor, because that interplay leads to all other sins and actions that occur in an auditing session. It starts there: body hungry, thetan weak. Body putting out lots of big anchor points that have the thetan intimidated; thetan putting out practically no anchor points. See?

Now, you're not processing the body, you're processing the thetan. If the body becomes too reduced in terms of havingness, it then pulls in every kind of a ridge it can lay its beams on, and you start packing the thetan into a stronger and stronger barricaded mass. Do you get the idea? It's not really that he has to work his way through these ridges, but it does mean that every time he moves, shifts or changes his opinion or thinks something, you see, that the body goes slurp. And he has the sensation, every time he stirs, of being held. Of course, he can't be held; but he has the sensation of being held.

What is the exact insight, then, that you require in order to know where a session went off at the rails? Where did the wheels leave the rails in a session? Very simple, it's very elementary. The preclear either went more anaten or became more agitated - either way.

"He became more agitated" - now, you understand, I didn't say, "more active." He becomes more agitated, or he becomes more anaten. He becomes less alert, markedly less alert, or he becomes zzzz - strain. And the insight that is absolutely demanded of an auditor, if he's going to audit at all, is to notice that preclear's sudden drop into anaten or slip sideways into an agitation.

The preclear's been doing fine. Been sitting there, calm, everything's fine, you know? "Yes," he'll say, "my grandmother had to marry my grandfather. That's the way it was, and so on. And I used to hear about this considerably, and so on." He's going along fine. And all of a sudden, all of a sudden, he moves. He twitches. Ear itches. Wants a cigarette.

If he gets to a point of articulating the cigarette, do you know that you're about fifteen minutes late as an auditor? You might as well have come to the session fifteen minutes back of time, because you just didn't notice when that started. If he gets up to the point of wanting a cigarette, he's already off the rails; he's out of session.

Of course, you give him a cigarette. But don't be surprised if you can - not only cannot find his front trucks, but you can't find any roadbed. Something left something. And you might just at that moment consider the session lost. As far as anything you were trying to do, it isn't working, it won't work. I don't care how perfect it's marked up, how many beautiful grades it's got, on how many successes this process had on how many preclears, has nothing to do with it anymore. What has to do with it is the preclear twitched. Got it?

Now, the second that preclear began to register an agitation, one way or the other, you had something happen there which had to do with the preclear's lessened control over the body, the body's upsurge of hunger for energy, and it all adds up to loss of havingness. And that's the total thing: It adds up to loss of havingness. Preclear twitched, havingness went down.

Now, maybe the process is simply going to build back that havingness somehow or other on the next question. Maybe right now it's going to happen, you see, with the next question and so forth, and the preclear doesn't twitch anymore. Just because the preclear twitched is no reason to swap the command. But we ran it one more time and the preclear went twitch, twitch, twitch. Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha. You'd better get the hell out of there!

And the times auditors have been getting out of there was two hours later. The quicksand already had closed over the top of the preclear's head and case. He was gone. There wasn't even his coat on the bank.

You've got to get your toes bog-sensitive, see. And when you feel that ground there, as far as the preclear is concerned, shaky and quivery, don't go walking on it to find out if it's solid! Take your foot back.

Now, this may mean, apparently, a breach of the Auditor's Code. You've just started running this thing. And you've said, "Now, give me something else that your mother never said to your father," or whatever process you are running. And you were just getting along splendidly, and he was just now beginning to develop a comm lag, and he had just cognited a little bit. And you say, "Boy, that's really working. That's a nice thing."

And he develops a little more comm lag, and then he gets another couple of more cognitions. And then he develops a lot more comm lag, and … You sit there for a - half an hour, and he doesn't speak.

Well, that's not the time to change the process. Something else happenedundoubtedly happened. Something else occurred with that process.

"Give me something your mother never said to your father."

And the fellow says, "Oh, um, let's see. Let's see. Um, let me see, uh, um …

If you've waited as long to say something or do something as I have been here giving you the example, you've already got the quicksand over the preclear's ankle. You just should have walked back right there.

Agitation. Agitation ensued the command somewhere in the line. Did anything complicated happen?

Now, let me clarify a tremendous amount of material in Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health for you at once. Although a loss of havingness can take on a thousand faces, it is basically simply loss of havingness. Although it would turn on in a manifestation and an agitation and make you believe that you were walking into some pitfall in the preclear's life, something he didn't dare touch - he became agitated, he became upset because you didn't - he didn't want you to talk about his father and mother. He knew better than to talk about it out to the neighbors; he'd been beaten often enough. You've walked toward this agitation.

You can rationalize all of this all you want to. It all blows down to just one thing, and that is loss of havingness has begun. A condition of the body has changed in some fashion or another so as to bring about an imbalance between the existing havingness of the body and the hunger of the body, the existing output of the thetan and the absorption of that output. Something has happened there. Something has occurred with regard to anchor points and the relationship.

And it's the easiest thing in the world to solve it. All you do is repair the havingness. It's simplicity. But you've got to understand what its mechanism is in order to know when that simplicity suddenly has to be taken up, when you have to grab that preclear by the scruff of the neck.

The other manifestation is the preclear goes less alert. We call it sliding into the bank. Why would he slide into his bank unless his havingness was reduced? The bank somehow or other got spongelike. It suddenly wanted some energy. It went slurp, and the preclear went duuhh.

Now, it's very funny that you can ask a preclear a question that will do this to him at once, almost. It's very strange that you can do this, but you shouldn't think of it as a very strange thing.

You can suddenly say to the preclear, "What about unconsciousness? Have you ever been unconscious? Were you unconscious very long? Anybody say anything to you about being unconscious at the time you were unconscious? Did anybody speak in your vicinity at the time that you went unconscious?"

And he'll go duuhh. You'll find out that every period of unconsciousness is immediately and intimately associated with loss of havingness. The unconsciousness ensued because of loss of havingness.

There are two responses to the loss of havingness. One is the emergency response of agitation. "We have to get more alert. Somehow or other we have to be on the qui vive. We have to get ourselves up on the step. We have to get ready to take off and fly out of here. It's getting dangerous around here." You get the idea? That's the agitation.

And the other is, give up. See, "Well, we'll lose it. We'll just lose it. Wants my appendix? Okay." Earlier times: "Wanted my head. All right. I give up."

And these are turned on by the darnedest things. And we wouldn't begin to be so adventurous as to give anybody a list of the things which would turn on in every preclear all of his anaten or agitation buttons because there would just be thousands and thousands and hundreds of thousands and millions of these buttons - various things you could say or your attitudes that would suddenly turn on the response of agitation or the response of anaten in the preclear.

So the devil with trying not to do it. Don't concentrate on that. Concentrate on something much more profitable. See it (snap) and fix it (snap); that's what you must concentrate on. And it doesn't matter what you say about processes. It doesn't matter how you process. It doesn't matter the charm with which you run the session or the gentleness with which you play upon your violin. If you neglect this one, your sessions are going to leave the rails, and there you are going to be sitting out on one of the crescent drives of London saying, "Where is the preclear? Where is the session?"

Well, it's back there where havingness dropped markedly. Got it? That's where it is; that's where it is. That's where that session is sitting.

Now, that's a funny thing. Supposing you did notice this an hour late. At least please know what you neglected to observe. Know that it was there somewhere. Got it? It was there somewhere. You didn't observe it. Somehow or other, the classical schoolbook solution, the thing - a person didn't twitch. You say, "I'm sure I didn't see him twitch. I know he didn't bog. He's been sitting there perfectly alert, talking in a normal tone of voice, but we're just not getting anywhere. And all of a sudden there he is, falling off on his face on the floor or something. I can't imagine what happened. There certainly was some warning here someplace."

Well, instead of recriminating yourself and going out and buying a lot of sackcloth (which is quite expensive these days) and looking for some ashes (which very seldom fall out of an electric fire, anyway), you - instead of spending any time worrying about this, simply know, and with security - not because I tell you so, because your experience will each time dictate to you that this was the thing to do: just consider some way or other you missed the boat on the subject of havingness, that's all. You just missed it somewhere along here. And even though the preclear is lying there all crumpled up in a ball or something of the sort, let's repair the havingness.

How are you going to repair it? You notice I didn't say, "remedy it"; I said, "repair it." Well, there are several ways to remedy havingness, all of which are adequately covered in the Six Basic Processes. You have the individual mock up at a gradient scale to a point where he can mock up, and then you have him take in and throw these things away until he can handle whatever mass this was. That's a classic remedy of havingness.

Repairing havingness is something else, and you must differentiate this. Some students have gone through the HPA Course without understanding my, don't I sound accusative here this evening - but they have gone through the HPA Course without understanding that repairing havingness and remedying havingness were not necessarily the same thing at all. See, there's a difference here, very definitely.

And I have picked up some of your pcs who have had half a Remedy of Havingness run on them. They've never been made to mock up and throw away anything. That would be a necessary part of Remedy of Havingness. It would get the preclear over having to have. Got the idea? That's what a total Remedy of Havingness would do.

So actually, what many an auditor has done mistakenly is simply to repair havingness. He gives the preclear havingness. He has the preclear mock up some mass and has the preclear take it into the preclear's body. You get the idea? And he says, "Do that again. All right. Mock up another Sun. Now take it in the body. Now mock up another one and take it in. And mock up another one and take it in. Mock up another one…"

"Ah," he says, "that's fine. I've remedied the preclear's havingness." No, he hasn't.

No. He's repaired the preclear's havingness, you see. He's given the preclear havingness, that's all. That's all. And it's much less than half the process. Don't think it's even half the process. It's not. It's maybe 1/1,000th of the process.

Because if you did a complete Remedy of Havingness, you'd have to take every kind of a significant object that you or the preclear could possibly dream up, and you would have to mock it up and have the preclear push it in or throw it away until he could both accept it and reject it without any further question. You see, that would be the essence of a total Remedy of Havingness. That's a - it would be - that's a big subject. But giving the preclear havingness or repairing his havingness is a very small and easy subject.

A preclear is suddenly out of mass. You don't have to feed him up for the rest of his life. Let's feed him past the point of agitation or anaten. One or the other, he exhibited a twitch or he fogged out somehow or another. He was less alert. All right. It's up to you now to get over the hump. He has lost something. Something has disappeared in the way of masses.

Now, the exact mechanics of its disappearance is something that you're not terribly interested in exploring with that preclear at that moment, see? You're not interested in it. Why aren't you interested in it? Because exploring something is the direct opposite to repairing havingness; direct opposite, because it as-ises.

You know, almost anything a thetan looks at, if he looked at it long enough and hard enough and expertly enough, it would probably disappear. He could look it out of existence, in other words. So you make a preclear as-is or look out of existence this or that or the other thing, and you've done what? You've reduced his havingness.

So we go into it this way. The preclear all of a sudden began to, you know, show some mild - he started to scream or something like that, you know. Something like this happened. And you became aware after a while - after a long pause, you became aware of the fact that the preclear's havingness was down.

Now, this oddity, this oddity could occur. You could start to ask him how it happened and just reduce it out of sight. You could just not only have him lost in the quicksand without even his coat on the bank, you could have dropped an anvil into the pool, too. All you had to do was just discuss with him how this occurred.

You could say, "Well now, perhaps in the last few minutes you felt some feeling of loss or you felt like something was suddenly missing. Did you feel that in the last few minutes?"

And the preclear would say, "Oh, aarrvvuhh, kind of, I..

And you keep this up very long, you'll find the preclear is even beyond being salvaged by a dredge. He becomes a case for the mortuary, practically. He's just gone. He leaves the session saying, "I feel fine on account of auditing." All right.

What happens then? He gets agitated or goes anaten, you remedy havingness in the final step or you simply repair havingness. Now, we needn't close the subject down to a point where we say, "Well, you mustn't remedy havingness" - step 6 [51 of the old Six Basic Processes - "you just mustn't do this at that time." I don't know why you shouldn't, except you have other things to do and other fish to fry and other things to straighten out in the preclear, you see? You want to get some other items going.

Don't think, by the way, that a total remedy of havingness is a total remedy of the preclear. You might be led to believe that all you had to do was bring about a total remedy of havingness and you would have a total Clear. This is not the case, because mass is a specialized thing with a thetan, and he has so many other concerns besides mass, that you would only bring him up just so far, you see?

So you're totally justified in going on and doing the thing that you ordinarily would do: simply repair his havingness. You give him some havingness. So he twitches, goes anaten - either way, you make sure he gets some havingness.

Do you know there's a very covert way of doing it? I want to tell you this. This is a very special method which I very often use. I recommend it to you very highly. You take him across the street and give him a cup of tea and a sandwich. This might not occur to you, you know, sometimes. He appears to be pretty agitated all of a sudden, and so forth. Well, you just kind of two-way comm the whole thing out of session, you say, "It's time for a tea break," and go over and give him a ham sandwich and a cup of tea.

You'd be surprised, but the havingness - twitching and so forth, will reduce, and you can get on with the session - remembering that he lost havingness on the process that you were running and making sure that you don't run that process on him again until he's had a remedy of havingness. You got the idea?

Male voice: All right.

All right. Now, that's a covert way of remedying havingness, but that's a crude example of what you're really doing with the preclear. It isn't necessary to give him a cup of tea. That's the most obvious way of remedying his havingness.

There are several ways of doing this in processing, and the simplest and most elementary of these ways and the way which I have most commonly used (and which I don't necessarily recommend just because I use it), but when I find things going by the boards or something for the preclear, I find him getting dazed and - I do two things. I right away suspect that he has just found something wrong with the way the session was running. See, I suspect that this is the case. I right away assume this is the case. The preclear doped a little bit, so I can see that the ARC between us has dropped. That's the first thing I can see.

But this is also expressed in terms of havingness, don't you see? Havingness is always mixed up with ARC one way or the other. It is the excuse to communicate. So there's a communication break here of some kind or another.

Now, if I were very, very clever, I could immediately patch up the communication break and carry on with the session and have the preclear get immediately alert, providing I were not running a process at that time which as-ised more havingness. You get the idea?

Supposing we were running - we were running this process: "All right. Mock up something." Now, this is the exact process I run for this type of repair.

"Mock up something. Okay. Now shove it into your body."

I don't say, "Push"; it's too effeminate. "Shove it into your body."

And a preclear says, "Okay. Yeah, I did."

"Fine." I say, "Mock up something else. What is it?"

:'Oh," he says, "it's a big dinosaur."

'All right. Shove it into your body."

I don't say, "Pull it in," I don't say, "Postulate it in," or anything. I just insist that he get good and meaty about the whole thing, you know? We're in effort now; we're going to do effort on the thing.

"All right, mock it up. Shove it in. Mock it up. Shove it into the body. Mock it up. Shove it in."

Of course, if you mock it up and shove it in, in one quarter too long, you'll get anaten on the preclear, too. But much less so when you're remedying havingness - I mean, when you're repairing havingness. And a Remedy of Havingness, of course, is cancelled to some degree if you keep doing it from the same quarter all the time, you know. You've got to change locations. You've got to make the preclear mock it up out here in front and push it in and mock it up in back and push it in and so forth. That's the best way to do it.

Well, he went anaten. He was running this process. Then what is there left? He's repairing his havingness. You get this? He's repairing his havingness, and he went anaten. What is there left? More repair of havingness.

I've had a preclear be almost totally unconscious for a half an hour, actually no longer capable of sitting in a chair, lying on the floor, repairing havingness, so anaten that the preclear couldn't answer or acknowledge that they were doing it. But the preclear was doing it all the time and in some weird way was alert to what I was doing.

"Mock it up. Shove it in."

I've had preclears couldn't mock up anything, suddenly discover that they could mock up some blackness, and had them mock up blackness and shove it in and mock up blackness and shove it in and mock up blackness . . . They're just out, out like a light. Something is happening. Something is happening here. A whole bank full of unconsciousness seems to be blowing off in some fashion or another. Keep it up, keep it up, keep it up. All of a sudden they get - pretty soon they get bright and alert and (sigh). And the strange part of it is maybe after that, for the first time, the preclear will run. The reception of havingness in this case was unconsciousness. I say, what do you do if a repair of havingness doesn't work? You repair havingness. Got it? Because it does work. He can always mock up something.

You don't have him lift it in, in a ladylike way. You have him shove it in. You don't listen to all his yak about "I really can't tell whether I've mocked up anything or not." You don't give him that at all. You don't give in to this. You say, "Well, all right. What are you looking at?"

And the fellow says, "Nnnnnnnn - nothing, nothing, nothing."

"Oh, come on. What are you looking at?"

Now, of course, you know you're going to as-is a little havingness doing this.

"Oh, nothing."

"Come on. What are you looking at?"

"Oh, nothing but these rockets, just like always, you know."

You say, "Fine. Mock up some rockets," and you're always safe, you see?

"Nothing but this blackness? All right. Mock up some blackness." And you work with him awhile until he's mocked up the blackness. He can see this stuff, he can do various things with this.

Now, it is a great oddity, it's a great oddity that most of the techniques which straighten out a thetan wreck a GE, because they're all thinkingnesses. Only thing there with a thetan is a change of consideration, and very much thinking around a GE or a body will make a disappearance of the body. So they're antipathetic processes, aren't they? Hm?

But havingness doesn't do anything very much to a thetan, oddly enough. So it looks to me like if you lean over on the side of havingness, if you catch this moment of agitation or anaten and repair the preclear's havingness in some fashion or another, it looks to me like you will then rather uniformly win with auditing.

Always your session went off the rails with an agitation or an anaten of the preclear. And anything you did from there on was useless. Actually true. Anything you did from there on was useless. I don't - matter how many hours you did it or how beautifully you did it or anything of the sort. And that was probably in the first few minutes of play.

Now, one of the ways a preclear can be sent anaten is to have his attention fixed on something and have you insist that he take his attention off of it, and it thereupon smacks him, a thetan, in the face. You know, the present time problem may be braced out here somewhere. You take the preclear's attention off of it - and it gives him havingness, not the body, you see, in some fashion or another; but he gets a problem, and it comes right on in on him in some fashion. He's liable to go anaten there too.

But that, again, is just lack of motivators, lack of havingness on the part of the body. There are other mechanisms. They're - all have to do with havingness, and they're all gotten around, really, if you want to be big and round and general about the whole thing, with a repair of that havingness. These problems are gotten around with a repair of that havingness, see?

So you could have suddenly insisted on processing the preclear without any attention to his present time problem and have had him go anaten or become agitated as a result, see? That would be a reason he became agitated, wouldn't it? Well, the odd part of it is, without paying any attention to the present time problem, even yet all you have to do is ask him to mock up something and shove it into the body, and he will come out of it, and the present time problem has a tendency to move on out.

You got that? So you see, even that is covered by it.

It's real crude auditing, by the way, to have a big present time problem sitting out here, and then you insist the preclear look elsewhere.

That's pretty bum auditing. Because it will merely collapse the present time problem on the preclear, and it'll get more and more serious the further the session goes, because you've yanked his attention off of it. This is pretty crude. But yet it will move out if you simply start repairing his havingness.

So there is a point of insight demanded, and it is that point where the preclear all of a sudden experiences, for whatever reason we do not care, a loss which results in an agitation, an increased hunger, you might say, on the part of the body, an agitation on the body or anaten. And it's markedly, physically observable as agitation or anaten. It's physically observed by the auditor - it can be. And the good auditor notices it quick and immediately takes a good remedy for it. One way or another, he repairs the preclear's havingness.

Now, it might be interesting to you that there is - are several consideration processes which also remedy havingness and do remedy havingness. Motivators. Just inventing problems all by itself will repair havingness. There's a great class of processes, all of which furnish havingness to the preclear.

Now, it really isn't necessary to do very much with these processes, however, if you do the other. This is very interesting, you see. Now, we're only talking about an immediate condition of the preclear. We're only talking about sessions as they run. We're only talking about where they go off of their wheels. We know now where this session departs from the roadbed. It departs when havingness is reduced. And it goes back on the road when havingness is repaired.