[Clearsound checked against the old reel.]

Thank you.

Speaking of responsibility, I want these classes started on time. Four minutes in clearing a man can be a matter of life and death, you know?

Well, here we come to the fifteenth lecture of the 20th ACC, August the 1st, 1958. And today we take up that long awaited subject. This is really the first lecture on - although you had had a lot of preludes - that long awaited subject: Case Analysis - Rock Hunting.

Now, because I haven't prepared any notes on this, probably be a very difficult lecture to follow, particularly if you're sitting in the middle of a Rock.

To begin with, the target of Dianetics was actually the

Rock. The Rock is no new discovery. Colloquially, we say „Rock“ because it is a relatively unrestimulative word and it does have some dramatic descriptiveness about it.

I didn't really name it the Rock. I spoke of the thing being like a rock and so forth and people started calling it the Rock and it seemed to be very, very descriptive.

It's seldom that a rock is actually the Rock but understand we've got as close to it as a lump of coal.

Now the target - the target of Dianetics was basic-basic. And you must understand something about basic-basic before you understand anything about the Rock.

The earliest incident containing pain and unconsciousness on any given subject chain of aberration was called „basic“ on that chain. Let's see - a chain of the fellow is „burned hands.“ All right, burned hands went back to a basic on the chain of burned hands. And then to each occasion of hand burning, he made a facsimile, or with each occasion of hand burning, he actually made a facsimile himself and added it to this chain of hand burns.

So we have a very long chain of burned hands. You have to find the first time, theoretically, that his hand was burned in order to blow off the entire chain. If you do not find, as any Dianeticist can tell you, basic-basic on a case, nothing moves very much. But if you don't find basic on the burned hands, you then have difficulty with these burned-hand engrams.

Now, an „engram“ is a mental image picture of a moment of pain and unconsciousness. And an engram contains pain, unconsciousness and at least fifty-three perceptions. No matter how badly this engram is scrambled, no matter how dispersed it is (reference, perfect form), no matter how chipped apart it is, or how cloudy or how black all these fragments now appear, how much of a cloud it now looks like, it nevertheless is a mental image picture containing pain and unconsciousness and fifty-three (at least) perceptions.

These fifty-three perceptions were a speculation in 1951 as to exactly what they were. And as a matter of fact, we made up some lists and they turned out to be at least fifty-three. There's „kinetics“ as one that you wouldn't normally suspect as part of an engram.

Individual climbs off an airplane - if you want to see kinetics at work as a perception, just have him look around and find something he could do. It's not a terribly good process and if you do it, for heaven's sakes flatten it, because you're liable to leave him in the apathy of that exact moment for a very long time. It doesn't just key out.

He's on an airplane, you tell him to look around and find something he could do. And the next thing you know he gets all the motion of the airplane. He can feel himself bouncing and jumping and being thrown against the cabin and thrown against the stewardess and so forth, and other incidentals to this age of flight where airplanes are supposed to be the thing.

He gets - he'll find himself picking all the military craft that's crashed with the commercial transport, out of his lap and other things, you know?

Now, he'll find also the gasp that he made and the actual noise and physical jolt and the odor of the cabin and all the perceptions of the color and so forth when the right inboard engine went couagh-couagh-caff-cah-cah-cah-caca- ca-ca-ca-ca on much vaunted ESSO gasoline. In other words, he's made a movie, a 3-D mass movie of this thing.

But if you compare an engram chain to a movie of how to burn a hand or how to ride airplanes you will fall far short, because movies are not participatory. With what comfort can you sit there and watch the villain shoot innumerable heroes? You see, you can just sit there and you're just a spectator. Well, this is the eventual lot of somebody on an engram chain.

Early on it, he's a participant. It's 3-D, color, visio, sound, 90 girls 90, see? And he's right in there being sultan, getting his head chopped off, chopping off other people's heads, you know? After a while he says, „I wonder what I got this for?“ So he chews it up, you know, and these mental image pictures are not stored. He's actually creating them instantaneously at any given instant. It's what we know now, for sure - I mean we can prove it.

His ability to see one matches his ability to mock up, of all things. So this cloud he's wearing around his head is maybe a burned-hand chain. Why isn't it around his hand? Oh, brother, he's no longer part of that chain.

And up along the line when you - way up, if you're running something way up this burned-hand chain, he's just a participant gone astray. There he sits way back watching it all happen. Doesn't affect him. There's agony, misery, degradation, overt acts, motivator sequences by the ton. All of these things are part of this chain and he sees one of these facsimiles and he says, „Isn't it a pretty picture?“ And it's called a „detached personality“ described by Sigmund Freud at the end of lecture twenty-eight. He could not help them, not even vaguely. The chain has become too painful even for a thetan. Do you see that? He's no longer a participant, he's a spectator.

Beware of these pcs that are spectators. They're just sitting way up the track, then they're looking at the bank and it doesn't have anything to do with them. Nothing! They get exteriorized pictures of their bodies and so forth. But that, by the way, does not make a full-fledged spectator. Almost anybody running the track will see his body some way or another.

By the way, an interesting thing in the papers. The phrenologists, a religious cult - they used to live in monasteries and now they live in universities. These phrenologists have remarked something quite amazing: that every once in a while you walk into a complete duplicate of yourself.

Fellow be walking down the street and he all of a sudden walks into a person who looks like him, dressed like him, is talking like him, is doing everything he's doing. Amazing! And this phenomenon has long been remarked and was even mentioned by Aristotle. Never occurred to them that we could give them the answer, so they have never come around so they are still in the dark.

Actually, the guy goes wham! out of his body, sees his body in full color, 3-D and said, „It's another person like me,“ because the jerk is too stupid to realize he doesn't have a body at the moment he's looking! You got the idea?

Audience: Yes.

All right, there's long articles in the paper about this. This is a current phrenological craze, about this.

All right.

Here we go, you see, up the chain and a person is further and further from it. Actually, he's doing an exteriorization from an engram chain. Now, you should know that an individual can exteriorize from his foot. If you want a theta bop - somebody has hurt his foot, you just ask him about that foot and you'll get a little theta bop. He's exteriorized from the foot. He's yo-yoing a little bit, and exteriorization is not stable, he's coming closer and further, and closer and further, back and forth, back and forth, a little bit, enough to make your E-Meter bop. That's exteriorization from a foot.

Now, exteriorization from a whole body is something else, but it again merely gives you the bop.

How about an exteriorization from a chain of engrams which he is persistently, constantly mocking up? Ah yes, that too, because it's really a part of his anatomy - of course, it's mental anatomy - but nevertheless he can yo-yo and exteriorize out of a chain which he is now mocking up as no longer there and all chipped to pieces. But the chain, because he copied it in the first place and then refused all responsibility for it, is nevertheless there. There is an isness about this engram chain.

And you understand what I am talking about with an engram chain now? Basic: the first time he ever hurt his hand. Succeeding engrams all contain hand injuries of one kind or another, and the later he goes on the chain, the more somatic shut-off, the more spectator, the more „it doesn't concern me“ and the more a frizzled cloud of nothingness he sees when he inspects it. Do you see that?

Of course, he's just going all to pieces as far as his hand is concerned, but here's this chain, and he just looks at the chain, and he says, „Ah-bah.“

Why do we call it a chain? Each engram is envisioned as a link, locked into the last engram. To undo the chain it is necessary to break that first facsimile. Hit that first facsimile and get it out. That one will erase. The rest of them will be dependent on the force of that first one.

Now, as we go up this chain we find some interesting manifestations. It doesn't so much look like a chain as a tree, and the basic, deepest root of the tree, or you might say the seed of the tree, is „basic.“ But now, not only just engrams add to it, but what we call secondaries which are misemotional incidents. And these misemotional incidents can contain gobs of apathy, grief, fear, anger, antagonism, boredom, conservatism and even enthusiasm.

These secondaries are what spill out of a preclear's eyes and droop and drip off of his shoulders with sudden misemotional surges. It's all part of one of these chains containing pain and unconsciousness. And that secondary depends for its force utterly - we proved this time and time again in Dianetics - depends for its force utterly upon the physical pain and unconsciousness in the actual engram chain; and that's a secondary. It means a misemotional experience which depends for its force upon the basically painful experience.

In the absence of physical pain there is no misemotion.

All right.

What else is there in this chain? There's also something called locks. These locks are analytically observed and inspected pictures. They are little incidents which contain the associative restimulators to the restimulators in that. Now, this individual has a whole chain of locks and they have to do with hands. Only it's gone so awry that it's possibly the beautiful hands of women, you see, and he's got a whole lot of locks of beautiful hands. What makes that set of locks stay there? The secondaries and the engrams.

Now, you start to run old ARC Straightwire on somebody, you go through locks. But if you run long enough you'll find yourself into secondaries - inexplicably, sometimes - pain first, but usually secondaries. And you'll find this individual all of a sudden saying, „Oh, boo-hoo-hoo.“ „Yeah, what are you crying about?“ „Well, the hands are so beautiful.“ „Oh, yeah?“ „They're so painful!“ And you run him a little bit further and you'd find yourself plowing in through actual pain and unconsciousness.

Now, if you could get the basic on that chain, get the basic on that chain, you could erase the whole condemned chain. That was the theory - it's fact - it's factually true.

But there are so many complexities to a livingness or a single life that to isolate these chains and then find the basics on those chains was actually in our times way back when, when we were struggling along the line trying to beat this one out, particularly in the absence of E-Meters, beyond the capabilities of the individual auditor. All he could do really was to either key them out, erase the worse ones, or as I did first to clear people, get people confident of being able to confront a picture and its perceptions. Just work on a confidence attitude until he could at last face the worst one without flinching. And then we could get basic-basic. That's how I found this mechanism and that's how basic-basic came into view.

Now, what is this thing called basic-basic? It is the basic of all chains. You know, there might be basic on hands. There might be a basic on heads. There might be a basic on tanks. There might be a basic on soldiers. There might be a basic on civilization at large, the time he was ostracized and so forth, each one of these things.

But below all these things there was some experience that softened him up and made him believe that he could be hurt. And that contained physical pain and unconsciousness and a certain type of experience. It contained all perceptions, and incidentally, because in those days he was far better at mocking something up than he became later.

Look at the interesting thing you have. You have an able thetan making a copy of an experience which was too excruciating even for him to confront. Wow! And every time he copies this thing again, or sees the copy again, he now feels that all he can do is chip it up, so therefore when he mocks it up he really chips it up. He breaks it up somehow or another and he's mocking it up in a broken-up form. He can't any longer mock it up, but part of its tag and part of the thing he believes necessary is to mock it up exactly as it was. But he had terrific ability to mock this thing up. This thing is a killer! And that's basic-basic.

Any one of you were to view at this instant, while in a body, a facsimile made while you were a thetan and felt very, very able and very strong and beefy, man, you'd just faint! You couldn't take it.

Do you understand? It's just - it would be wham! you know. It'd be big, tough, rough, got that? Basic-basic, however, erases if it can be reached.

Now, basic-basic has probably its own chain, but has on top of it the basics and all the chains of the basics of all engrams. And you will see this very complicated tree, then, growing from a single germ and it is the reactive mind of the person.

Now, there's one more thing in this reactive mind and that is machinery. Out of all this pain and duress and out of thetan ability and out of other things, he actually could mock up, and then remove himself from the responsibility of having mocked up, machines that did things. They did all kinds of things, as we will go into in a moment.

He assigned the making of pictures to these machines, then all he mocked up was the machine. And then he lost the responsibility for mocking up the machine and he might mock up machines that make machines. You understand that?

So the apparatus which shuffles these pictures is also mocked up by the thetan, and he mocks it up as apparatus. And when we say machinery, we mean machinery. It is not a cliche that - not a coined word, it is not a label of one kind or another that we've just dreamed up.

Every once in a while some little girl, who detests machinery, will go through an HCA class or an HPA class and they will come out saying, „I've just seen a machine!“ you know? „Thaaa! What am I doing?“ you know. „I'm Dolly in this life, you know, and I'm not supposed to make machinery. What am I doing with this horrible monstrous thing out there that shuffles out pictures every time I want pictures?“ It was a machine.

Now, the machines can also break up and sometimes you have an individual, then, who has not only got the whole bank busted up and is in some kind of a foggy dew around him; he's mocking it up broken up because that's the safe way to do. Why he keeps on mocking it up, you and I are solving.

But not only - not only does he keep it mocked up but he keeps it mocked up brokenly. Not only can he mock up clean machinery, but also he continues to mock up broken machinery. Now, these things you have to know. He sometimes will mock up machines that break machines. And he sometimes will mock up machines that break up pictures.

All of this is composed of the perceptions: mass, energy, space and time. The perceptions are part, really, of mass, energy, space and time, waves of sound and light and shift and motion and that sort of thing.

Now, the entire composite of this busted-up mess we know as the reactive mind; it acts without the consent of the person. He does not even have to look to act. What a nice thing to have.

Truck runs down the street, you know what to do, you climb a lamppost, but then you've got a suppressor that keeps you from acting badly in public, so you don't climb a lamppost. So the reactive mind tells you to climb a lamppost-not to climb a lamppost. The thetan stands back and says, „I wonder what makes me nervous?“

Now, that he is doing it all himself is not a condemnation. And I get so sick of people saying, „Well, he's sick, but it's all in his head.“ Oh, no, come off of it. This is the most squirrel, tail chasing thing you ever saw. No, if the guy is sick in his head, he's sick. You get the idea, I mean? You don't say, „Look, you stupid jerk, it's just your imagination.“ You can drive him into apathy that way.

People do it with children all the time. They say-little boy keeps waking up and finds the room on fire, you know; he keeps waking up and finds the room on fire and then when he's been awake for-really awake finally, but when he's sort of come up through it, he sees it as his-his own bedroom.

Well, now the bug in all this and the thing that made it really impossible is the modern horror of dead bodies, which keeps an individual from realizing or remembering what he has been. Every case you see really out in the street, except one Apache I ran into one time, is a total amnesia case. This Apache could remember fighting US Calvary with Geronimo and he didn't think this was peculiar at all. He didn't think it was peculiar.

Apache has a different idea of time than we do, a different definition. He hadn't been told that dead bodies were bad. Leave it to an Apache to love them.

The lives of every person you run into go back, according to the E-Meter, about 76 trillion years. Everybody you run into. This girl that says, „I know nothing about machinery.“ You try to point out to her, „Now, the way you start your sewing machine, you see, is to put in the plug.“ „Oh, I don't know anything about machinery.“ Daaa!

If you wanted to challenge her and put her on an E-Meter, you could prove to her she was wrong in making that statement. But she has every reason in the world to make that statement. It's true that she (quote) „doesn't know anything about machinery“ if knowingness is merely an analytical availability of information.

That the information is there is no reason to chop her up. If she can't get to it, let me assure you of something, she cannot get to it. And as far as the mind and imagination is concerned, that which hurts, hurts!

And some fellow who is busy rotting off the lower half of his body and can't find out why and is told by some medico… I have a perfect license these days, by the way, to criticize medicine; I invented most of the techniques they're running on.

Yeah, there's a book published in about 1870 something, on the glandular system, I wrote. Some of the wildest ideas in there you ever read. Fuel consumption, fuel conversion, thermal regulation, all this sort of thing, assigned principles of glands. And they're still wondering what it's all about.

Now, the medico comes along and tries to alter things structurally. Structure does not monitor function. Function monitors structure.

And if this individual conceives that he should climb lampposts every time he sees an auto or any kind of a car or truck or anything like that, and yet reactively must not climb a lamppost - every time he sees a woman, he knows what to do, you run.

What happens reactively? Well, you wind up in a torture chamber and are killed, of course, rather lingeringly. He knows this. He knows better than to accost a woman. He said hello to a lord's lady one time and five years later he was still alive and they were letting him have it.

But at the same time analytically he mustn't run away from woman because you get punished. Duhhhh. His final answer to the situation of must do-can't do, must reach-can't reach, must withdraw-can't withdraw, his final answer is to just get rid of his legs! And how he cooperates with the medical doctor who wants to saw them off!

I used to wonder sometime in camp after battles, during moments of high strain and duress in army life and that sort of thing, when some soldier who wasn't badly injured would beg you to saw his arm off or beg you to saw his legs off. You'd say, „But, son, you're not hurt. It's just a scratch; there's a bone splintered there a little bit. We'll patch you up and you'll be as …“ „Oh, no, I'm afraid it'll infect and do this and that and so on. Please, saw it off.“

Now, this isn't according to the historical novels you read, but they're not a good authority. There are people up here in Bethursday Naval Hospital - that's the proper pronunciation of the word -

& That's the way the colored folks pronounce it,

- that was the way they used to pronounce it, „Bethursday,“ so it must be „Bethursday“ Naval Hospital - there are people right up there lying in bed waiting to get their kidneys sawed out even though they'll only live for a few months if they do. Lying there waiting for their spleens to be removed.

There are patients who are furiously angry with doctors because they will not operate and remove large sections of intestine or something of the sort. So - „Man doesn't know his business!“

Just as it is almost a criminal misdemeanor in the eyes of a psychiatrist not to give a patient an electric shock - do you know it's against the law for a psychiatrist to refuse an electric shock when one is demanded - so it is with limbs. It's the patient who is demanding it!

I can tell you from a large, long track of experience that you generally do what they want you to do in the final analysis. Tomorrow's medicine is what the public wants today.

These people are trying to solve something and they don't know what they're trying to solve. They haven't a clue what they're trying to solve, but they're trying to solve something, and there are various ways of solving it, various ways of solution. One is to have no kidneys. Another is to have no head, you know? But it usually adds up to no something. You got the idea? We're trying to make nothing out of something; it's a common denominator of most of these things.

They're so confused they've completely lost track of what they are doing and why are they doing it.

The decay and chip-apart of an engram which brings about the final manifestation of field; you tell this person to close his eyes and what is he looking at, and he says a black swirling mass or a black still mass and so forth, you are just looking at the residue from a chipped-up picture, that's all. It has no other significance than that.

And he is trying to get at something that is doing something to something. And when you as a Scientologist add up the number of factors that can appear in a case you see what this individual is up against, because there's another one on top of it. Everybody always expected him to be bright. Nobody - very few people ever admired him for being dumb, so he never got dumbness as-ised, and he's just getting stupider and stupider and stupider about the whole thing, and it's more complex and it goes this way and it goes that way, and the little levers go the other way, and the thing chips up and goes some other way.

And he'll come up with some horribly upset solution that is nevertheless better than no solution at all. And his stable datum will get to be such a thing as, „Everybody's a crook. Now I understand people. Everybody is a crook. Now I understand traps. Everything is a trap. Now I understand farmers. Everybody is really a farmer.“ Get the idea? „Now I understand military services. All soldiers are rapists. Now I understand men. They're all alike.“ Now that isn't a solution. „Now I understand. They aren't.“ And he will hold onto this kind of a solution.

And you as an auditor get in there and say, „What the hell is going on?“ „Yes, whatever, they aren't.“ „Yeah, but whatever what?“ „Oh, I don't know.“ „Yeah, but which way are you trying to go?“ „Nowhere. Ha! Ha! If I just sit here quietly and keep my mouth shut, do not reach, do not permit myself to be reached, don't try to withdraw, I've got it made. I hope.“

You get all sorts of things. „Always use a side entrance because you could make such a grand exit up the front staircase because of the footman, because everybody are footman, please call the butler.“ Chain of reactive computations all smothered with the parts connecting missing every time the individual goes to call on anybody. And it's so burdensome, all of this thing happening every time he goes to call on somebody, he stops calling on people, see? So the final solution is „don't.“ The final solution is „not.“ Do you get the idea?

But with all this „not“ and „don't,“ you've still got fully alive and ready to be activated any and every part of this reactive mind. You got that?

Now, please look at what you're working with and in the light of that, understand what I'm now going to tell you about Rock hunting. If I don't end this lecture on time, if I go into the second hour, it'll be worth it, I think.

Let's look at this subject called Rock hunting. Rock one on a case is desirable, it is basic-basic. All you have to do - to locate the misidentifications which are basic-basic on this case. That's all you have to do, because it isn't adding to anything. It is. All things add to it.

Now look, I've talked to you enough about meters. I'll level with you. An „additive needle“ is not a rising needle when you go Rock hunting. The mechanism is that the needle goes up and it looks like a rise, but an „additive needle“ is an analytic term. This is an analysis term.

Now, we are not describing manifestations of the meter; we assume that you know those. Now let's talk about meaningful movements of that. Additive is an analytic term by which you analyze whether or not you've got a Rock. You add the same sort of thing on top of it to see if they add and make the needle rise. An additive needle is turned on on purpose. It is a „rising needle“ as far as technical motion is concerned, but look, it is not just a rising needle. Do you understand that? It's a diagnostic needle that the auditor turns on.

He thinks he has a basic-basic of some kind or another. He's got the Rock, he thinks. Let's prove it!

Now, the way he proves it is: one, does it stick and arrest the rising sweep of the needle? Does it kill that rise? Now, we've gotten rid of rise. Now don't get rid of rise so thoroughly that you don't want it - the needle ever to go up again. It's going to go up when you get into processing. You're going to see that rising needle happen; otherwise, how in the name of common sense will he ever make any ground to drop through?

When you process this with Help it is going to rise and rise and rise for maybe an hour or two and then all of a sudden it goes do-do-do-do-do-do-oooo and drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-drop-drop and then rise-rise-rise-rise-rise, not so far this time, and then drop-drop-drop. That's just the action of a tone arm while processing. We're not talking about processing here, we're talking about Rock hunting!

Now, up we go with additive needle. How do you make a needle become an additive needle? If you've got the Rock, then things you dream up which are similar to it will add onto it and nothing else will. Got this?

Now, a sudden fall of the needle, we call this just a fall, becomes a drop, additive drop, when it blows a lock off of the Rock. You got this? That's a drop, an additive and a drop.

Now, if someone were doing real clean work on this, he'd probably call it a „subtractive needle“ because it is the Rock that you are adding to and subtracting from.

Now, you are no longer working with the idle, spin-about, random motions of an E-Meter. You're at cause-point on this meter. You've located something you consider the Rock; you prove it out. How do you prove it out?

You make things add to it and you make things subtract from it. It's just like arithmetic except arithmetic hasn't any real basic purpose.

Let's say - give an example. We got a pc, he's in there and he's sitting there and the needle is rising and rising and falling and falling and sticking here and doing this and doing that and he's saying, „Ouch.“ And he's saying, „I wonder where I am going because I am not going anyplace. And if I could just get out of this, I could get into it better.“ You know, standard orderly frame of mind. And the needle reflects what he's wondering about and speculating about and which way it's going and which way it isn't going and so forth and it's just doing a bunch of randomness.

Now, you could sit there as a spectator to the end of your days without doing anything as an auditor and you'd still have this needle motion. It's as true in analyzing a case as it is in running one. You, the auditor, have to take charge! You can no longer be just a spectator. And in Rock hunting, as in nowhere else, do you have to take charge!

Now, you're trained basically to obey the Auditor's Code and not to evaluate for the preclear. The first time you learn you have to get out of this rut is when you become an Instructor. Always evaluate for the student. Never fail to invalidate the student's wrong data. Never fail to invalidate it. Don't let him go walking around in a bog believing something wrong. Now, that's the role of an Instructor and it's exactly reverse to the Auditor's Code. An Instructor's Code, Auditor's Code; they're two entirely different things.

Now, you are more or less working on an Instructor's Code when you are doing Rock hunting. Never fail to evaluate, let him have it. Work him over! Just like we used to do way back when, you always did an exploratory to find if a guy had a bullet in him; we didn't have x-ray machines. Sounds kind of grim, doesn't it? Is it better to let that bullet sit in his guts and rot, finally kill him with gangrene? No, it's better to make a little slit and stick your fingers in there and see if you can find the lead; much better, let me assure you.

Later on we got very modern, we decided to wash our hands first. And perhaps even what we're doing now, we will learn how to wash our hands.

But the thing to do now is to find that bullet, not to find it cleanly or to find it smoothly. You understand? But to find it! And if that means that there is such a thing as you stalling up the case and sending it appetite over tin cup in some fashion because of some factor you or we do not know about yet, then that's just too doggone bad. You understand?

So the first, foremost thing is guts! You got to have nerve and you have to take charge and you have to add things onto the case and subtract things off the case. It's just like you sitting there saying to the fellow, „I know what's wrong with you. You're homosexual.“ You know, you wouldn't do this to a preclear, would you? No, you wouldn't do that to a preclear. Maybe he is one but you wouldn't do that to him. No, no.

Well, if you will preserve this kind of a diffident attitude while you're Rock hunting, you'll have had it. „We must avoid homosexuals because it'll hurt his feelings.“ Oh no, we got an entirely reverse look when we're doing Rock hunting. We say, „What'll hurt his feelings but good! Where's the bullet?“ So we look for those buttons. You got it?

I was auditing a preclear one day that had a history of lesbianism and I learned this lesson but good. She was very sensitive about it and wanted to get over it. I knew this. I knew that this was a broken-up case. I mean the person was in bad shape. She was very spinny. And I wasn't hunting Rocks; I was being an auditor. I was hunting Rocks but I was - didn't realize to the degree I was being an auditor. And do you know for about twenty-five minutes I left that whole subject alone, just as clean as anything, I just left it alone. A good auditor would never mention it.

Now, having to shift valences in the middle of the stream is quite interesting. You all of a sudden are going to evaluate for people. You're going to pound them in. You're going to knock their buttons flat. You're going to restimulate them. You're going to chew them up. You're going to get this case messed up one way or the other and find out what it's all about, and be sure you've found out! That's quite a shift from healing the case and taking care of them.

It's like the medico, in trying to get the bullet out, has four loblolly boys holding the patient down who is screaming at high C and he says, „Goddamnit, sit still!“ You understand, the duress of the moment brings about the reaction.

Now, maybe later on he will be able to slap an anesthetic mask over his face and lose about 75 percent more patients this way. You don't have to add the unconsciousness on. They are better off if they never go unconscious as you can understand with engrams. We were more right in the seventeenth century than in the nineteenth.

You sit on his head and get the bullet out, and then afterwards you're a good nurse. You're gentle as you sew him up and you speak to him in a friendly fashion. You make sure he gets some good chow. You understand?

Male voice: Yes.

All right, so you sit on his head and get the Rock and then you pat him on the shoulder, patch up all the ARC breaks and roll as an auditor. See, you're two different individuals, and the main trouble most of you are having are shifting gears.

It looks sometimes to your Instructor or the Director of Processing like you're missing in nerve when you won't dive. That's sometimes the way it looks to them. But I know what it is. You're too well trained in mercy.

You've got this individual sitting there as I had this lesbian and at the end of twenty-five minutes I suddenly realized that I was being „awfully nice.“ And I was getting nowhere. Take me twenty-five minutes to find a Rock! Am I slipping?

So I just broke out my Scientological scalpel and I said, „Women are nice, aren't they? Particularly in bed.“ Dahhhhhhwwwwww! Wild needle slams and so forth. First lock of the Rock that came off of that case was being in charge, way, way back on the track, as the high priestess of the vestal virgins who weren't virgin anymore, for which she was quietly and lengthily cooked over a slow fire, and which was making her avoid being a housewife because housewives have to cook. One of the innumerable computations that came off of this case.

When I made up my mind to get in there and pitch, when I made up my mind to sharpen it up and slice, I got it.

And let's say about the only thing that is between the preclear and his Rock is not-knowingness and stupidity. That's really the only thing between the preclear and his Rock.

Well, I'll tell you the only thing that's between the auditor and the Rock: diffidence, politeness, feeling he mustn't invade somebody else's privacy, avoiding the obvious because it „wouldn't quite be nice,“ refusing to evaluate for the preclear.

Lord, it's certainly head-on evaluation when you say, „A lie factory.“ Isn't it? You say, „How about a lie factory?“ Well, what are you telling him? You're telling him, „I think you're a liar.“

How about some guy you've got on the needle like I had a couple of times in the last couple of days, and I said, „An answer factory.“ Now I was really chopping him down, wasn't it? He was giving me very glib answers to everything I said, so I just said, „An answer factory.“

Well, the funny part of it is, if you're really going for broke, it's an odd thing but they never resent it, if you're forthright and are doing your job. The only thing they resent is when you don't do your job!

So if you're trying to preserve the good opinion of the preclear, where you or the auditor are concerned, you have only one thing to worry about: Do your job! That's what the preclear wants, really and basically, and what keeps him in-session. And the longer you lallygag around it and the nicer you are and the slower you are and the dumber you are about getting in there and pitch, why, the more upset the preclear will become. So a fast, tight, short, close, bang approach is much better.

All right, let's say that we've got this individual on the meter and we're sitting there and the thing is rising, rising, rising, and we say, „An experimental robot? A spaceship?“ something of this sort, you know. We look at him first - we wouldn't do this if he had a rising, rising needle. If he just had a plain needle we would ask him, „What would reach people?“ And he comes up with a lot of computations of what would reach people. We finally get a halt on the meter of one kind or another; it's a straight, simple case. I'm now going to give you a tough case, see?

We got a rise-rise-rise-rise-rise and no matter what we say that damn needle just keeps on coming up and you finally feel like getting in the case yourself and holding the needle down! No matter what you say, it rises!

And we finally get him on something - we are finally getting real smart and we say, „A woman collector?“ And the needle goes dit-dit-dit-boom. And you say, „What, look at this thing. Ah-ha-ha-ha-ha. A woman collector, huh? Heh-heh-heh!“ Well, believe me, that must be awfully late on the track, don't you see? But nevertheless you've got a collector of some kind or another, and you look at this.

Now, how do you know if it's it? It's just now sitting there quietly and it's swinging through maybe an inch of arc and it's coming up and it's sticking and then it's kind of falling off and it's sluggish, and it's coming up and sticking. You didn't get a good clean stick; it just stopped rising. Well, boy that's good enough.

One of the first things you do, and don't let me catch you not doing it, is write it down on a piece of paper, the first thing that made it stick.

Now, about the first thing you examine about it: does he know anything about it? That's what you look at. He's being very glib about a „woman collector.“ You get suspicious of it, merely because he seems to be so glib and knowing about the whole thing, see?

Of course, circuits do protect themselves and glibness can be a form of protection, but they usually say daahh. You know, the guy is sitting in a chair and you say, „A chair stacker.“ And the guy says, „A what?“ And you say, „A chair stacker. What would a chair stacker be?“ That's one of the reasons you ask him to keep describing what these things would be is to get his not-knowingness reaction. It's the first thing you've got.

First, you got this stuck; you finally got a stuck and then you got a notknowingness reaction. Boy, that's awful good, but don't worry about the not-knowingness reaction if you didn't get it. Go right on and test this thing called „woman collector.“

Do you know how to test it? Darned few of you do. But let's take a look at this thing. Let's add on women, late on the track, right around present time that you dream up; then we can be sure they're not locks on the case. Sometimes you get kind of telepathic and as-is some. Don't worry about that. It's the aggregate dream-up and what it does. Add some women and then you get an additive needle.

And as long as you add some women that you dream up to the case - you say, „Now, nice tall blondes with fur headdresses and nothing else on,“ see? He's never met such a girl in this lifetime; they wear feather headdresses, everybody knows - or what century is this?

And now again you've got the needle starting up slightly but it's an additive needle. It isn't the old rise, you see, you added something on, see? So you say, „A green woman, bright green with ruby eyes.“ Once in a while you miss. You kind of pick it up out of his bank and you'll blow one, but that's really a miss if you're trying for an additive needle and it goes up just a little bit more.

In other words, you dream up things similar or additive to what he'd have there that you stopped the needle with. You got it?

Now, you just do this on an evaluation: bang-bang-bang- bang-bang! You see? You just say, „It's this. It's that and so on. How about this? Wouldn't you like that? Doesn't this seem this way and that to you?“ You know?

Once in a while it can get real tough. You'll slam one at the preclear and it'll really not be so much a dream-up as straight on his case and the preclear just goes boom! You know? Duh! Well, boy that's an indicative situation.

Now, you blow one accidentally or on purpose.

Now, as this needle rises, your question is this: Does it rise only to the degree that, and only as long as, you add things to it?

Now, you could blow the needle this way. You could say, „Do you recall the tall, naked blonde with the fur headdress?” Now, if it's a real tough Rock chain it might not blow, but occasionally that itself will blow off of the Rock chain. You put one on and you blew the same one off. Now, the green woman with the ruby eyes, you can blow that one off the chain. Now, that's just one way of blowing down the thing, getting a drop, being subtractive.

The most reliable way - now you added to it and it only went up to the degree that you added to it and it's still stuck. You got it? It didn't begin this rise-rise-rise-rise-rise again, see?

And you went around in back of the thing and you decided to pull it down. One of the most reliable ways of doing it, let's say it was a „woman collector,“ „Do you recall any women you've collected in this lifetime?“ Now, you've given him the computation and you've now hung him with it by accusing him of having dramatized it. You'd say, „Boy, this is the weirdest thing to do to anybody,“ you know? And you say, „Do you recall any women you've collected in this lifetime?“ And the fellow says, „Oh, I don't know dah-dah.“ And all of a sudden, „Well, yes!“ Boom! See? And it blew a lock off and then came back up and stuck. And you can just keep blowing locks off of this thing by recalling things in this lifetime. Do you understand?

So when you as the auditor can subtract or add to the stuck needle at will, you must have the computation. Isn't that right? And that's „proving one up.“

Now, supposing that one didn't prove up? Well, instead of „collector,“ let's use the word „consumer.“ These are standard words. „A woman consumer.“ You can try any kind of wording. „Female consumer“ might work much better than „woman collector,“ symbols being what they are. Might work infinitely better. Do you see how it could?

And so you change your wording around and you keep plugging at the same general computation until you take each one of the words you used in the phrase like „woman collector“ and vary woman for a while and then vary collector for a while and you may come up with a much better stuck. Anything you've got up to that time, by the way, however, will work. And that's what you should know, that it will work. Okay?

You could run it. The needle stopped on „woman collector,“ just run „woman collector.“ Oh, you're going to be a little bit wrong and the case is going to run a few more hours than it would, and you'll be into a little trouble semantically and he'll have trouble clearing the command. You get the idea? But nevertheless you could do it. It would work. All right. You add to the needle and subtract from the needle.

Now, I'm going to give you rapidly the four types of case.

The first case is the simple case. There's nothing to this case; it just sticks on an object.

Now, you always run terminals, never run the particles emanating from the terminal. Run the „hand“ not the „weapon,“ run the „head“ not the „hand.“ You get the idea? The terminal which does the emanating or receiving or collecting or giving is always better than the line. Run terminals, not lines or conditions. That's always better.

Someday you'll find yourself running a line and it'll work, but all right, don't be surprised if you get into lots of trouble and it runs for a long time. Always prefer terminals.

Now, on this simple case, you simply nail a terminal of one kind or another and the needle sticks and that's that. That's class one.

Class two is the consumer case. The consumer factory case. This person is in a secondary condition; he is adding to and subtracting from the bank at such speed that you get odd consistencies of rise or fall.

Now, you've never seen a constantly falling case, I'm sure, not a constantly falling case, but they do exist. They're just obsessively falling. They're creeping down-down-down, just as cases creep up-up-up. But it's a rarity. The one you'll mainly run into is obsessive rise and it just keeps rising-rising-rising-rising-rising. You understand?

Now, to stop that rise requires a type of consumer of something and a type of factory or a type of factory of something. Something is manufacturing or producing something and-or something is consuming something. One or the other are going to work and stop that needle. You got that?

Now, the third kind is really the broken consumer, the broken factory case. The guy accumulates broken factories. Have you got - you got that one? Hm? He's really a failed consumer case or a failed factory case. And the classes of things you ask on this particular one all had to do with things that are busted down and don't work anymore and so forth.

The fourth kind of case is really not a kind of case. It's a condition of the meter where the individual is already stuck in the Rock. He's already firmly stuck in the Rock and you're simply getting the stuck-free vacillations of PT.

And those are the four kinds of cases and the analysis of these four kinds of cases is handled in different ways.

The first one, you simply think up of items and objects of one kind or another that could reach people. You ask him, „What could reach people?“ These items and objects could reach people, and then you stick the needle with those and you run whatever you get.

The second kind of case, you get the factory or the consumer; the collector or the producer, you see, one of those things, making things or absorbing things, and you get the thing. And it may be just „consumer“; it may be just „collector“ just like that, you know, and that stops it.

The last one rises much worse. Much worse. Much steadier, more stable and so forth in its rise. More determined. It's a real vicious rise and sometimes the needle is slamming. I've already run into one person in off the street whose needle was just always slamming and he belonged in the last condition of case, but he turned into a third stage case as soon as the slam was gotten out of the road.

Now, the last type of case is of course, simply the type of case that is already in a Rock and is reacting to the Rock. Now, the way you handle that particular case, usually, if you don't know anything more about it and can't find out anything more about it, is to use Connectedness to clean off the needle reaction or use another „Mock up somebody who would be pleased with your condition,“ that sort of thing. And you clean up the needle manifestation and then analyze again for the Rock.

[The old reel ends here, the final segment is from the clearsound version only.]

You got this?

Now, you can't lose on any one of these. There are many vagaries, there are many things to say, there are many things to challenge and so forth. We haven't time at the moment to go into these things.

So, let's take a momentary break, please.

Thank you.