Well, how is it going today?

Audience: (various responses)

Good.

Now, I'd like to make a few remarks, here, on the subject of fields. You're coming right up on the clearance of fields. And we can take as a question, hypothetically put, "What is a field?"

A field is that area of subjective energy which the preclear sees, and which bars his view from mental image pictures. Got that? It's really two things: It's a barrier to mental image pictures and it is a screen, subjectively viewed, which he considers himself to be surrounded with. There are a great many things you could say about fields, but the main thing that you would say about them is that they are variable. And the one law there is that sweepingly gets rid of them is you mock — have the preclear mock up a terminal of the same character as the field and shove it into the body.

When he does this, he normally goes anaten. And the auditor continues to utter the auditing commands regardless of any motion or assent from the preclear. Actually, the preclear himself does not go anaten, the body goes anaten.

Now, a whole session may get buried in the preclear's memory. And he's liable to tell you afterwards that he didn't do a thing. Be totally prepared for this. He did it all the way. The test is simply this: Does he now have a field after you have done this, you see? Does he now have a field?

If he still has a field, the answer to this is: "Mock up a terminal similar to the field and push it into the body." And at the end of that session, if he has gone anaten and says he didn't remember and so forth, we simply ask this one question again, "Do you have a view? What do you see?"

And he says, "I see sky blue purple."

And you say, "All right. Here we go." And you do it again.

Now, sooner or later, you will find this field caves in.

The oddity of a field is this: it is a dramatized not-know. It is that physical mechanism, in terms of mental image pictures, which the individual uses to prevent vision. He is mechanically not-knowing his pictures. In order to not-know his pictures, he hangs up a "poiple coitain."

The commonest field is a black one. The next commonest field is an invisible one. Now, when we say a black one, if you get a picture of the preclear sitting there totally surrounded by hoods of blackness, you actually have the picture. He is not sitting there — a point sitting there — surrounded by huge masses of blackness which go out to infinity. This is not the case. He may tell you this is the case, but the funny part of it is, is the blackness is quite finite in depth and seldom exceeds more than a few inches.

Now some fields disappear in a couple of minutes. They disappear simply by calling his attention to them. That's a very light field. He's simply stuck in a black incident, you might say. You call his attention to it and away he goes.

I remember one field that cleared up in fifteen minutes, back in 1953 in London — cleared up so spectacularly that all the Instructors were hanging over this fellow as though he was about to give them all the hot dope. He told them a weird, long and involved tale, which is simply whole track — good old whole track mechanism. Seems like he'd been a navigator on a spaceship and he'd gotten himself beautifully lost, gotten off course, collided with a bunch of asteroids and blown up the ship and the passengers and himself. And when he reported back to the area and identified himself as that lost, errant navigator, as a thetan, you see, why, they (whoever "they" — this "they" that prowls around in the elsewhere — was a wonderful pronoun) — and they had clobbered him for this and had sentenced him to Earth. And since that time, why, he'd been standing there on the bridge waiting for the asteroids to hit the ship. And the moment that anybody just jiggled the case just a little bit, see — just jiggled it — why, the asteroids went right on through and the incident wound right on up. And he came down here to Earth and he came right on up to present time. And he hadn't been here for many generations — the adventures of a rocket jockey.

It's quite amusing for this much space opera to be turning up at this time. Actually, space opera is restimulated by science fiction. Or science fiction is restimulated by space opera. But we're walking, right now, into a space-opera age. And we are probably the only people that know anything about what Uncle Sammy and Uncle Khrushy face.

Press gang turns up, grabs somebody in the center of town, they take him aboard and they shove him into a bunk. A very small speaker up above him, surrounded by pinpoint holes, seems to attract his attention quite wonderfully. A gas or something comes out of the holes around the speaker and he goes (snore). And the voice begins, which they have on a magnetic tape, and it says, "You're a member of the ship Astrolatus. You are bound and barriered by the following rules and regulations: You may not speak to an officer. If you speak to an officer, you will kill yourself."

Interesting. Guy, later on, a few generations later, finds himself kidnapped in the middle of town, taken to a ship, taken in — up into officer's country, put on a bunk; gas or hypnotic lights suddenly hit him and a voice begins to speak: "You are now an officer of the good ship Astroidus. If you speak to a member of the crew, you will kill yourself." These fantastic regulations, fantastic caste systems, fantastic barriers — all in the name of science. It's quite wonderful.

And the old gag of telling somebody that he has to witness something, and then running off a three-dimensional picture of some horror or another, and then threatening him with it — funny part of it is, it never happened to anybody. One of these things whereby they put the fellow in a chair and electrocute him from top and bottom at the same time — huge cones of force hit him. Well, he is told to witness this and told that he had to sign the papers to get it done. He witnesses it, he's told how this ruined somebody and then he's threatened with it happening to him.

And then you as an auditor try to run this as an incident out of him. Of course, it has never happened to him, but he is doing everything in his power to mock up a comparable incident because he is sure that it has happened to him — these outlandish, confusing punishments. And I suppose, sooner or later, they'll start banging people from one head into another head, and we'll really have space opera.

Space opera always consists of a dog-down-belly-to-the-ground dementia praecox sort of scientist who is dedicated to the nth degree. The reason they dedicate a scientist is so he can't keep his information from going away. This is very handy; they don't have to pay him for it. That's what dedication means: no necessity of paying the scientist for anything he does. It's brain-bleeding.

And this dedicated scientist is so enmeshed that he is totally sure there is no such thing as a soul, a spirit or anything — that men are animals. This is the philosophy he normally goes forward on. Except he can only go so far along that line and then he'll flip and he'll go out into mysticism which is an inverse materialism — inverted materialism.

Well, along with this generally a priesthood grows up. And this is some sort of a psychiatric priesthood and this is used by the state to keep everybody in line — gorgeous. Everybody is now in line. And what could be more beautiful? We have a nation of slaves and gadgets. And the gadget rates more than the slave.

And we go along with this type of society for a while and generally, then, another priesthood will grow up which overhangs the materialistic priesthood. And that is what is meant by the they that you get out of the preclear; they're talking about one of these thetan priesthoods. And those people are guys like you and me that are trying to help somebody out, and they find it pretty tough to do. Now, that's a thetan they. You get the idea?

Now, some of these "theys" are quite interesting — are quite interesting in that they're very involved — extremely involved. They get report centers and they train everybody to report to that center. They maintain insane asylums. There are insane asylums scattered all over this galaxy. They maintain this and they maintain that.

But you're talking about a thetan operation now. And only when that thetan operation goes sour and starts to make slaves too, do you get the total denouement of a space opera and its vanishment down to a point of, well, let us say, India ten thousand years ago. That was the end product of space opera.

And all of this history goes on totally below the surface and is probably much more real than "Andy Jackson stopped the Redcoats at New Orleans." I mean, it's real history. But nobody dares look at it very closely because if he became very familiar with it, it would totally blow, and that would be that. But this is a space-opera sort of thing.

Now, the only reason I'm going over this and I'm telling you that this and the magic societies — you know, there's another whole civilization type: the magical society where everything is done by levitation and houses are built by postulates, you know? And you don't get too much from that society, but you get an awful lot from a space-opera society at this time.

And the space-opera society that I've just described to you is the most fruitful source of fields. Most of the people you run into — by far the largest percentage of the people you run into who cannot at once mock up and see a mental image picture — have been over some roily coaster like the space-opera society I've just described to you.

Over the last five — we've been through — just been through a space-opera cycle, by the way. It's for the last — well, the last shortest cycle is about five million years. And the last five million years have had more space opera in them than anything else. Consequently, it's closer to present time than magical societies and so forth, and you're apt to get more out of it. There are more things in the environment, there are servomechanisms and automobiles and star-flight rocket-ship Oldsmobiles and that sort of thing. And they tend to restimulate the periods that are just past. And we're probably in some Johnny-come-lately, last-gasp state of space opera. We're attempting space opera without having any dolls which is one of the wilder things to do. That's sure going to pose some Scientologists some wonderful problems.

The Russians assured us that Mutnik, up to the time when they slipped him the Mickey — I think that's a wonderful thing, that — newspapers calling everybody out into the streets a couple of times a day to look at a dog coffin going overhead. It's really wonderful. I mean, did you ever hear of anybody calling you down to the cemetery to look at a dog's grave? Well, I don't know why they should call you out in the street to look at a dog's coffin, but it's just one of those things. Anyway — it shows you the age.

And the restimulation of all of this space opera, compounded by the possession of a body, makes the ejection of an individual human being into space probably one of the most adventurous things that would ever happen. You start shooting somebody into space, and the first thing that happens to him is total loss of havingness. And, of course, the body is so dependent on havingness. It's not like a doll which you just feed it a new battery every couple of months and it's all set. You have to feed it three times a day. The body is so sold on havingness that the moment that Earth is a little small button down there, someplace, the guy simply will go stark, staring mad. That's all. See, he'll go nuts.

The forward progress of acceleration is such that the elsewhere-factor robs him of reality. You see, he's elsewhere so quick that his reality goes boom — just about like that. He's moved too fast, you might say, and he gets unreal. Well, you compound this with the fact that probably most of their early instruments will be faulty, and their oxygen masks will probably do all right, but the first time they really test one will be a hundred thousand miles out, you know. You get the idea. The first time they find out that their valves stick at subzero is a hundred thousand miles out. This isn't a very thorough society. And you're going to have a picnic.

And somebody will come back, and he'll say, "Well, there was already a couple of insane asylums on the back of the moon," and they'll — of course the psychiatrists have no choice but to put him in the nearest asylum as having gone mad. He'll have gone mad anyway, but if he reports anything that is straight dope about space opera he will probably then be pronounced mad. Why? He has varied the reality, you see? The insanity is measured as to whether or not you agree with the other fellow as to what's real, you see? And the moment you send some boys out into space and they come back, of course, they aren't reporting on anything that anybody has any reality on to the reporting center, and therefore they're told that they're nuts.

It's like back in one of the ancient Polynesian — I think the Polynesian campaign that took place in the Dark Ages of this particular country, in World War II. You'd go in — you'd go in and you'd say to somebody who was fresh out of an attorney's office in New York or fresh out of the Bureau of Ordnance down in the Navy Department, you'd say, "Well, the Japanese submarines are swarming out there like flies."

And he'd say, "You're nuts," you see? Well, you saw them and he didn't. And yet he has a much more positive opinion than you do.

And you say, "They're using little funny balls that float up on the surface, and they breathe through them, or they send them up to get radar or something. But if you get alongside of one of these subs and throw a grappling hook in one of these balls, why, you can't pull it up."

And he says, "Oh, nonsense — pish, tush, woof," you know? "Heh! What nonsense!"

As a matter of fact, I'm talking about an actual thing. For a couple of years in World War II they thought all the ASW people were crazy because they kept reporting snorkel submarines.

We used to say, "Well, German subs will do sixteen-and-a-half knots underwater and go down to a depth of six hundred feet." You know, we're always reporting this.

Huh! They were — practically sentence you to a firing squad. "What nonsense! You've probably been pinging on a wreck." That was always non sequitur. If they couldn't think of anything else to say, well, they say, "Well, it must have been a wreck or a school of fish."

Well, these boys had never had their hands — really, had never had their hands on any sonar. They'd never had their hands on the business button of a rocket or the hydraulic lever of — depth charge racks, you see? They'd never listened in any other way than maybe on a phonograph record — we didn't have tapes — to the ping-pong of a Doppler effect. They knew all these things, see, but they'd never listened to them for real.

And their consistent opinion drove the morale of people who were combat officers down to a point of where I have seen a couple of them sitting there lovingly fingering a five-inch because, as they were moored against the berth, it happened to be pointing at the commandant's window.

In other words, when we get a divergence of reality between a desk officer, or in this case, an Earth society and these space jockeys that have come back and seen all that, you see — when we get this wide divergence of opinion which will occur, you get a rather mutinous state of mind. But you're releasing them into a total freedom of action. Think of that for a moment: You're releasing them into a freedom of action. In other words, they're beyond the supervised perimeter. And if there are some planets around someplace that have air on them, you have your first space pirates.

So the government will be screaming and saying, "There must be some way to guarantee their loyalty." So the first thing they think of is this hypnotism gag. And they find out that doesn't work, you know? And then they figure out something else, and that doesn't work and so on. They'll, in possibly — in our own generation, they will be asking us to do something desperate to guarantee the loyalty of somebody. Well, a person's loyalty is as good as he is sane.

And we could work out rather easily a regimen whereby you could take somebody and let him pilot a rocket ship successfully. It'd be rather easy to do. Well, one of the first things I would do would be to send him out to all of his destinations with no ship. You get the idea? I'd make him a good exterior, and then send him to all the places he was going to go and let him look them over, you know? Get a whole map drawn up, exploration all done, the whole thing packaged, and then let the government do what it wanted to do with sending a ship, you know? To do the whole project backwards, in other words. Now, this is actually on the calendar for our immediate future.

Somebody has just compounded the felony by proposing, in committee, a Department of Science and Technology. Boy, that's one thing we don't need. We don't need a Department of Science and Technology. This is just another pork barrel. This will make a new irresponsibility, don't you see? All the services say, "Well, our science and technology is being taken care of by this new department." And everybody is being irresponsible. And you've got somebody there as secretary of science and technology, and his reassurances that it's all in good order will lull everybody to sleep until something blows them up, you know? The one thing we don't need is that thorough a governmental organization. Yet, it's in the cards right now.

There's some rocky r ads ahead and in the world of science. And most of these will center around a mental aspect. Well, just now, for the first time, a science has arisen which is — probably will prove to be much more powerful than any of the other finite sciences, don't you see? And this makes a different view and a different future history for space opera than there has usually been. Usually this sort of thing developed long after space opera had been developed, you see? They waited for the scientists to become a bunch of mystics. And then they developed something about thetans and began to handle them in some crude way.

Well now, before they have done this, we have a better technology than they have had before which puts us somewhat in the driver's seat.

Now, the only reason I'm talking about this at all is it all has to do with fields, oddly enough. When you start stirring a fellow up with a bunch of unrealities and start slapping him with hypnotism and start upsetting him this way and that, his only constant and consistent reaction is to blank out the unwanted data. And if he cannot not-know it, he will then curtain it. Do you follow me?

So the space officer who comes back to Earth and says, "There are mushrooms a hundred and eighty feet tall up there, and the principal provender of these two-inch-high elephants are these mushrooms," and so forth.

They say, "Well, the boy has flipped a lid."

And everybody will say, "Well that's a bunch of bunk." He'll go around trying to prove it for a while and he'll be looked on, maybe, as an odd character. And eventually he'll have enough accumulated facsimiles that invalidated him, that he'll start blanking them. Don't you see? And you'll have a fellow with a field.

Now, this has always been a successful mechanism. The mechanism has been totally successful for millions of years. It is so successful that your preclear picks it up the moment that you ask him to look at something he doesn't want to look at. Now, that's a fantastic thing. But that's the immediate source of it. You get some randomity such as I've just described to you in space opera and the fellow pulls a curtain. He just literally drops a mental image picture called a curtain over it.

Well, he generally picks it up from the backtrack, and it generally comes out of space opera. And the amount of force, blast and duration and upset in one of these space-opera incidents would make anything that could happen to anybody at this stage on Earth look pretty pale. It would be something on the order of firing a guy with a catapult mechanism at a couple of hundred thousand miles an hour, or something like that into a stone cliff, you see? You got lots of impact, you got this and that. So the amount of savageness which occurs in these incidents makes them very resistive. And so it has taken a very, very long time to solve this thing called fields and it's quite a triumph today to be able to solve one.

I have an announcement to make right now with regard to fields. And that is to say that the slowest-on-the-ball auditor in the HGC that we had this week — and our best auditor, but the one at the other end of the spectrum — just took somebody, with what you might call a highly resistive black field, and cleared the field up in a couple of hours of auditing. Now, that's pretty good, you know?

A good auditor could always do something about one of these fields one way or the other, fooling around with them and using his imagination. A good auditor could always do this. With great care and our very, very best auditors — could crack one up if he spent enough time on it.

But for somebody to take this technique which I've just given you and bust up one of the worst fields we've seen in a long time, in a couple of hours — the auditor not even on the ball — he's just halfway snoring through the sessions and so forth — and get away with it, was quite remarkable. Quite remarkable.

And you say, "Well, if the fellow wants the field up that badly, then why does he let it surrender to anything?" Well, the technique outguesses him. That's all.

Well, when you think of the amount of incident which is back on the track — its incredible nature, its total lack of agreement with anything that was going on a few years ago — it's no wonder people thought they were nuts when they saw some mental image pictures. People could actually go mad, you see? They'd say, "Well, this can't be; therefore, I'm having illusions or delusions."

I think that is a tremendous compliment to the creative activity of the usual run-of-the-mill thetan in this society at this time — that he could create that fancifully. I don't think he had it in him. And he was obsessively creating experience which he'd actually observed.

I've had some of the most remarkable arguments with psychiatrists, just regard to prenatal banks. The psychiatrist, right in the asylum, every day, sees dozens of people who are in prenatal positions and behaving on prenatal behavior patterns. They're curled up in balls. They're doing this, they're doing that. Everything you could think of that you've ever seen a preclear do when he was hurled into the prenatal area, these people are doing — are doing over at Saint Elizabeth's at this very instant. There are scores and scores of patients in prenatal positions.

Out here at Walnut Lodge — which they don't — the psychiatrist doesn't think that's a funny name. By the way, out at Walnut Lodge, I don't know if you know this, but they reclassify every patient who is ordered to Walnut Lodge. Everybody who is transferred there becomes a schizophrenic because Walnut Lodge only handles schizophrenics. You try in vain to point this out to anybody on staff at Walnut Lodge — you draw a total blank. You will say, "Well, what sort of insanity does this fellow have?" — you say out at Walnut Lodge.

And they'll point at somebody and they say, "Well, he's a schizophrenic."

And you say, "Well, how did he get to be a schizophrenic?"

And they'll say, "Well, he's here."

And you say, "Well, where did he come from?"

"Well, he came over here from Saint Elizabeth's."

"Well, what was he at Saint Elizabeth?"

"He was a manic-depressive."

"Well, what changed him from a manic-depressive to a schizophrenic?"

"Well, he was ordered here."

"Well, what did that have to do with his classification?"

"Well, it's right here on the record, you can read it."

Their administration — their administration is just as wild as the insanity they handle.

But these boys — these boys out there — these psychiatrists can see this. And then they tell you that it has no source in a mental image picture, and there's no such thing as a prenatal engram.

Do you know what they're asking you to believe? They're asking you to believe in nothingness as causation, you see — that the thing doesn't have any connections. They conceive it to be causeless. And if you question them carefully, they are so far gone in the field of effect that they can no longer conceive cause. If they do conceive a cause, it is a hallucination. You see, they won't conceive anything like a direct cause. They will conceive something that is an improbable cause and label that as cause. Now, that is as close as they can get to looking at cause.

And it's wonderful to have an argument with one of these fellows. He's just so far gone in the unrealities of this sort of thing that he will wog you every time. You, logically and sanely carrying forward, can't possibly conceive that the individual could be this irrational and still be prowling around, driving his own car, you know, and going back and forth to the office and so forth. And so you start to question your data because his is so far out of agreement with it. Do you see that?

Well, then your biggest danger in having anything to do with space opera is finding it far out of agreement, one way or the other — or anything you have to do regarding a bank — is to find it wildly out of agreement with your bank. Got it? See?

Now, you take an auditor who has a black field and has never seen a mental image picture — it's quite a testimony to such auditors they've actually been able to run engrams successfully. They actually have been able to do this quite successfully. Well, that is quite a testimony. They do it eight times as well, however, when they themselves have had one run. Therefore, probably the most terrific thing that happened in Scientology happened in '56 when I finally found out how to crack up one of these fields because it made possible, then, a subjective reality on both sides, so far as auditors were concerned, and did get straight at the mechanism. It's rather wonderful that you can crack through one of these mechanisms without any further protest from the preclear.

What happened to all the things he was trying to restrain? You broke up his field and he had it there to bar out things he didn't want to confront. And then you happily remedy his havingness with it. Well, what happened to his desire to restrain all these things? Did you just overwhelm him with them?

No, you didn't. He found out there wasn't anything in back of it.

Let me give you an example. A fellow has got a steel plate out here. Now, he put up the steel plate because there was a soldier there with a bayonet during one of the- — the March revolution of 1962, in Washington. And he put up this steel shield because there was a soldier standing there with a bayonet, and he cowered down back of this steel shield. Now, there was nothing to tell him when the soldier went away. And to be absolutely safe he would have to figure that the soldier never did go away. You got that?

A lion attacks you, you throw up a native shield against this lion, see? And how long do you hold it there? Is there still a lion back of that shield? You got the idea?

Well now, as you have him push the material into his body he can peek on a gradient scale. You got that? And that's really all he does. He keeps pushing it in and he says, "Well, there's nothing behind this stuff," because finally he gets the idea he's out there pushing it in. And nothing bit him, so there must not be anything on the other side of the shields.

When a fellow has done this for a tremendously long period of time — he's put up a red shield in order to prevent something from happening, or a blue shield, or he's put up a pattern of rockets of something just to screen it all away, grabbed the first facsimile he could think of, you know, bang, in order to block something out — he thereafter does not quite dare remove it.

Probably the greatest shocks he's gotten in his whole career — has been just this one great shock of removal of the shield, and the lion was still there. Thetan says, "Well, I'm a brave man today," you know? Pssew. "Yaaaa!"

So don't ask him to pick up one suddenly and you're okay. Got it? Hence the gradient scale of "Create one and push it into the body."

Any shield, any color, uses the same rule. You mock up a terminal similar to the screen. In other words, you've got a terminal, now. If it's a black screen, you have him mock up a black object, see, and shove it into the body. If it's a red screen, why, you have him mock up a red terminal and shove it into the body, you see? If it's an invisible screen, you have him mock up an invisible terminal and shove it into the body, you see? Although the screen is out like this, the terminal is probably some small finite mass. Got that?

And this has yet to fail us. Actually, I have seen no failure along this line if it was carried on long enough — which is pretty good.

But I have seen this phenomenon happen: You get rid of a black screen,you've got an invisible one; you get rid of the invisible one, you get a blue one;and you get rid of the blue one, you get a red one. You say, "When is this guygoing to get around to it?"

Well, he does eventually. Funny part of it is, you can strain at getting rid of the field so hard that you fail to notice that he has attained a point where he can mock up and see his mock-up, see? You can go right on getting too interested in shields, see — get fascinated with these shields.

And you only wanted to go up here to Baltimore or something like that. (Although I don't know why anybody would ever want to go to Baltimore.) You only want to go up here to Baltimore. And you got to Baltimore okay but you didn't notice that you were doing that, and you finally wind up in New York. And you didn't notice that Baltimore was further behind you and you kept on going and you wound up in Portland, Maine. And you still keep on going, you know? And at no time do you ever look around and say, "Where is Baltimore?"

Well, you could walk on like that forever, never asking the question, "Where is Baltimore?" and apparently never fix up this field proposition with a preclear. Get the idea? Because you haven't established what sort of a field you want.

Well, if you say, "I don't want any field at all," you're being very foolish indeed because he'll always have some sort of a field right up to the moment when he's cleared. I don't say he'll always have some blackness or he'll always have some invisibleness or something of the sort, but if you had him look around carefully, you'd find out that somewhere he's still got a backdrop. See? Somewhere. Maybe yards and yards over to the right or something of the sort.

One fellow used to carry around the corner of a room all the time. It was about ten feet away from him. And every time you ask him to get rid of a mock-up, why, he'd evidently throw it over in the corner of the room. And I asked him — I asked him one time — I said, "Where are you putting these things?"

And he says, "Oh," he says, "over in the corner of the room," and pointed to the middle of the wall. So it was up to me, then, to ask him what corner of the room was he talking about. Well, it was his corner of the room and he always had one so he could put things in it and they wouldn't fall down. I mean, totally wonderful — thetans go around with old chains, tin cans, useless locks and anything you could think of.

Now, that would be, actually, a consistent field — would be a corner of the room. Even though it didn't surround him or anything, he did have something in vision, don't you see? Now, he'll keep on having something in vision until you clear him. And when he's finally cleared, he can then put something in vision at his own determination. He can then put something there when he wants one. But he doesn't have one there unless he puts one there, which is quite remarkable. That he lets you get away with this and that he makes no protest is probably the most remarkable part of it, however. But he does not protest; he does not feel a tremendous loss of anything. And he feels much better at being able to create something when he wants it than having to drag it around with him all the time.

He has to be assured of two things when he's mocking something up, by the way. He has to be assured of the fact that he mocked it up and that he kept it from going away, held it still and made it a little more solid.

You don't ever strain at the, "Did he mock it up?" That will come out in the wash sooner or later. And it's enough when he says, "Yes, I made it more solid," for you to say, "Good." Not, "Are you sure you made it more solid?" "How do you know you make it more solid?" "More solid than what?"

The only case — the only experimental case this has been run on with any failure, has been a case that had nice mock-ups, and they finally went out into a black field, and finally the black field turned invisible, and the guy was going on downstairs at a trip-trap rate. Why was this happening?

The auditor was badgering him: "Now, mock up an apple."

The fellow says, "Mm-hm."

The auditor says, "Now, did you mock up the apple? How do you know it was you who mocked up the apple? Well, if you didn't mock it up, where did it come from? Have you ever wondered where they came from? Well, how do you know that you would mock it up in the first place?" You know? And then, "Well, keep it from going away. Now, did you keep it from going away? No, did you — you — did you keep it from going away? Are you sure there's no automatic mechanism around there keeping it from going away too?"

Interesting thing — the auditor who was doing this, by the way, on an experimental run had, himself, no reality on any mental image pictures. And what he was doing was being so curious at the idea that somebody could get a mental image picture that he himself couldn't believe the mechanism of mental image pictures. He couldn't believe they existed. And he was dramatizing this disbelief during his auditing. And he turned a guy off from good mock-ups to blaaah. And somebody else has to pick up the preclear, now, and put him back into good mock-ups again and take him on upstairs.

Now, it is true that you'll occasionally have somebody with total automatic mock-ups who will run up to a black field, who will run to an invisible field, to a red field, to a clear field and be able to put up mock-ups again and see them. See, you very often take a wide-open case and he goes through a black band — no reason he should do that at all.

You'll find cases around that have such solid facsimiles, that when you ask them to take the facsimile anyplace they will groan. They will wonder where they're going to get the block and tackle. You know, "Oh, my goodness!"

"Move that facsimile," you said, "from the back of the room to the center of the room."

"Well, I don't know how I could do that."

Actually work on it as an engineering problem.

Density of the thing was so great, how could anybody ever get in and move that facsimile or do anything with it? Totally baffled at the idea of how anybody could ever do anything about it. Well now, that's more solid on a total inversion. Don't you see?

Now, when you ask this preclear to make it more solid, you get a total apathy. You can ask this preclear to mock something up and keep it from going away and the person can win gradually. But what happens to this solidity?

The mock-ups get thinner and thinner, and worse and worse, and more and more transparent, and they finally disappear entirely and they're gone. And you're liable to have an invisible field or a black field show up about this time. And you keep on going. And then the person finally gets to that state of having terribly thin, ephemeral mock-ups, you see — gets back to having very thin ones. And then these thin ones get better and better and better. And he finally goes through and on his own determinism is able to have thoroughly solid mock-ups. Get that?

That's an interesting datum for an auditor to have because it often makes him wonder, before he himself is sure of it and cleared, that, whether — what kind his are.

Well, the only way you could take your finger off your number is too great an insistence, too much challengingness, which breaks down ARC.

I don't know anything, really, more about fields (they are a fascinating phenomenon — how a fellow simply blinds himself to everything), except for this: is I believe that blindness itself is a field. Bad eyesight is a field of sorts. They are all the same effort. They are the effort to restrain oneself from seeing. They have that common denominator.

So you take somebody that has very bad eyes, you would rather presume that they were below the field (you know, they were below a black field), or they had a great deal of trouble with mock-ups or something of this sort, or they simply had bad eyes. You know, bad eyes don't have to be caused by a field.

If you come around and shoot somebody in the eyes or something like this and throw some acid in his face — something like that — you'll find out he doesn't see so good. You have to bring him up to a point of where he can mock up some eyeballs.

But as far as the psycho-physical aspect is concerned — the psycho-physical aspect of sight, it is restrained by these fields — not-know. And the common denominator of all fields is not-know.

And if all else failed, you'd run Waterloo Station on the pc — if all else failed. This is just an invitation to you not to flop on — when you're having this run on you, you see? Don't flop because there's another remedy after Waterloo Stations — only I'm not going to mention it in public.

By the way, we've never had to turn to Waterloo Station: "Tell me something you could not-know about that girl," "Tell me something you could not-know about that picture," "Tell me something — visible picture — tell me something you could not-know about that tree," some sort of thing like this. In other words, just get the fellow to keep saying not-know — he could not-know.

And all of a sudden you get this interesting phenomena of physical articles disappearing to his view. Tree disappears. The tree is there for you. The tree is there for somebody down the street. But the tree is no longer there for him.

Now, I've never made this test: Can he walk through the place where the tree is not? Somebody has got to make that test for me someday. I've never had time to make it. You see that? It's highly possible that this person can walk through that space because, boy, does that tree disappear when it disappears!

"What could you not-know about that girl?"

"Her hat."

Well, after he's run it for a while and become very good at it, the pc himself is usually the first one to be alert to this and startled by it. And he all of a sudden says, "Well I could not-know her hat — huh!"

And the auditor says, "What's the matter?"

"Well, her hat disappeared."

Well, the auditor at this time should not say, "Are you sure it was her hat that disappeared? You didn't blink, did you? You're not just making this up, are you?"

I had an auditor go on for two hours one time, questioning the preclear as to what exactly had happened. He just stopped running the process and he was so flabbergasted at a building disappearing, lock, stock and barrel and not coming back, that he didn't continue the process. It upset him. He could still see it and the preclear said he couldn't see it, see?

This same thing about reality that I'm telling you about — about ASW and the Operations Officer, the rocket jockey who's made an exploration, and the high-command science department of the "I-Will-Arise States of America" — whatever organization is here at the time that happens. You get this wide disagreement, don't you see — this terrific disagreement. And that is basically a disagreement: One man sees a building, the other one doesn't see a building. You see that?

But if he goes on with this, these automaticities of disappearance (snap, snap) when he says so, turn out to be automaticities (snap). You see, he (snap) triggered an automatic mechanism. He can eventually put this under his own control. (snap) And when he puts this under his own control, then we would say we would have something very, very unusual there. That route, all by itself, is a route to Clear. It puts a person in total possession of being able to vanish anything.

Now, you know what stands between a person and becoming Clear, don't you? A theoretical question here: What stands between a person's present state and a cleared state? What stands in between these two things? What's the principal thing that stands in between these two things?

You would say offhand — the biggest barrier to getting Clear, you would say offhand, would be no game. Well, he might have some fear of that, but that isn't the barrier. You might say, well, he'd run out of problems. No, that isn't the barrier.

It's the Frankenstein effect. The Frankenstein effect — that's a technical term in Scientology. A fellow, too many times, has mocked up something horrible, which he has then found himself unable to unmock. By some trick somebody else has fixed it up so he couldn't unmock it.

Let's say he made a Frankenstein, and it started on down the street killing little babies. Kills a few, that's all right with him, but it's getting too much of a good thing. And furthermore, it's getting near his house. So he says, "Oh, dreadful monster" — whatever incantation he should use at that time — "Oh, dreadful monster — unmock." And the monster goes on monstering most monstrously. And the fellow makes the postulate — the thetan makes a postulate; he says, "I will never mock up such a thing again. Until I learn that I can unmock things, I'd better not mock them up."

So he begins to study how to unmock things. Naturally, he isn't trying to unmock his own creations; he'll be trying to unmock anything in sight. He doesn't wish to improve his mock-ups until he is sure that he can unmock them. You got that? Unless he improves his mock-ups up to a total solidity, he will not stop obsessively mocking them up. In other words, he will go on mocking them up because he's got mocking them up on automatic because he himself won't do it anymore. You get the idea?

So they have to appear magically. He must not take the responsibility for their occurrence anymore. Thus you get a mental image picture and a facsimile. That's because of the Frankenstein effect. He's liable to mock up something that he is unable to unmock, you see? And it isn't really that he wants a game or anything else. The fellow is actually scared.

You'll occasionally have somebody say to you, "Well, I will mock them up well when I'm sure that I can unmock them afterwards." You probably have had somebody say that to you.

But that's the crux of the situation. A fellow will willingly mock up anything that he feels he can unmock. And that is the biggest barrier between an uncleared state and a cleared state. A man will create anything that he feels he can still uncreate.

The reason why people don't go around creating bodies is very interesting: There is a law against murder. There is every kind of a law you could think of to keep them from unmocking bodies.

Now, they become the total effect of bodies simply because they cannot vanquish bodies. You get that? They cannot make bodies disappear. Therefore they hate to start them out.

But they start them out, and what happens? The body, then, overwhelms them from that — there on because they cannot unmock the body at any time. Do you see that?

Now, we have other myths. You're very familiar with that one, but are you familiar with this one? We have other myths concerning this particular physical universe — about ummocking it. There are many such myths. But the principal one which is adrift right now is that it was mocked up by one man and is sacred. See, one being mocked it up, and it is sacred. And you mustn't unmock any part of it because every part of it is sacred. Sooner or later, physicists and so forth, run into this postulate with a dull crash and go stark, staring mad.

I think that Jeans did. He's one example. Finally he says it must have all stemmed from God. You see this? God must have made it all.

Oh, there's nothing wrong with this. And I'm not even casting aspersions upon the Supreme Being. But you'll notice that people wince at the idea of blasphemy. What is this blasphemy? It's merely a statement, "The physical universe has overwhelmed you, son." You get the idea? It is sacred.

Now, I've got just time here in this particular period to give you a little story concerning this descent of overwhelmingness, and which it connects with the Frankenstein effect. And that is, once upon a time there was a hunter and he went out hunting and he was paid by the government to go out and hunt bears. And the bears were running all over the place killing off chickens and steers and having a good time. And this fellow kept shooting at bears and shooting at bears. But it was very discouraging because bears very seldom fell down and played dead for him. Government paid him, but he just couldn't get rid of any bears and he couldn't shoot any bears and he couldn't kill any bears and he couldn't kill any bears. And you know a grizzly bear will take some — use, sometimes, seven bullets before he drops dead. It's rather discouraging shooting at a grizzly. (I took to roping them myself. Anyway . . . that's a fact, by the way.)

And so after a while, what did he do? What did he do? He sat down and he stopped hunting bears. Although he was still being paid for bears, he tapered off in his enthusiasm for hunting bears to a point where he didn't hunt bears anymore. You got it? Hm?

Well, now, the bears never had done anything to him, personally. See, there's no overt act-motivator sequence going on here at all. It's not — they're talking about an entirely different phenomenon. I'm talking about the Frankenstein effect. Overt act — motivator phenomenon can be seen in this, but the one I'm talking about is much senior to it. All right.

So here he is sitting there drawing his pay and he'll sit there for quite a while. He won't hunt any bears. Bears tearing up everything, you know, and chewing up all the steers and knocking chickens to pieces and knocking apart herds and just having a fine time. It doesn't matter how active they are. He won't do anything about it.

One day, you turn up. You've got a gun. You've got a bazooka or something. You're going to kill yourself some bears, you tell him. "I'm tired of this," you'll say, "I want to kill myself some bears."

He'll say, "No, I don't know that I would. I wouldn't be too anxious to do that if I were you." The guy will dramatize his inability to kill bears (you get that?) by restraining you from killing bears. He'll say, "After all, I'm the government officer of this area. Here's my badge. And I frown on people irresponsibly going out — actually, you might get killed doing this," you know? But the truth of the matter is, he is dramatizing this restraint upon killing bears. You got that? All right.

A few days go by — a few years, perhaps — it doesn't matter. You come back in the area again and you'll find him talking to the natives and the Indians and so forth on the subject of bears this wise: "Bears are stimulating to have around. They keep you on your toes. Now, you have to be much better at breeding stock if bears are around all the time killing off the excess stock. And actually, it's the survival of the fittest and Darwin, Darwin, Darwin, Darwin, Darwin. And it's a good thing for the bears to kill off the weaker stock."

You can argue with him in vain and say they always pick the choicest morsel. But Darwin never listened to this argument either.

But they kill off the weakest and therefore it is a very, very good thing to have bears around. He'll be telling people this.

Bears just keep on killing everything in sight, see? No change, as far as the bears are concerned. But his attitude toward these bears is changing.

Well, you come back a year or two later and you find out he's writing books about bears, very, very carefully researching their habits. And there's rather the flavor to these books that it's all cute, you know? What a good father a bear is, you know? By this time he's pretty far gone.

You come back a few years later and you find out that he's now telling his kids bear stories. "There was the papa bear, the mama bear and the baby bear," you know, "and porridge." And he's telling the natives around and about the place that they should get down and worship bears. They should build shrines to bears. You got that?

Audience: Mm-hm.

That bears are sacred.

And the very funny part of it is, I have just told you the absolute truth. To the Indians of the early plains, the grizzly bear was sacred. They worshiped him. To the Polynesians, the shark, the one thing they cannot overcome, is sacred.

And wherever you look, the one thing they couldn't overcome has become sacred to them. And it tells you at once that this created thing was, then, not uncreatable — not even that the fellow had to create it, but it was an uncreatable thing.

A thing that could not be destroyed will go that cycle. Now, let's look at the cycle very quickly again because it's quite important to you. In understanding politics, in understanding the conflict between the United States and the Russian Bear, in understanding a preclear and his mock-ups and so forth, you will find this cycle present.

The guy, after a while, decides he can't knock them off. He tries physically to knock them off. When he cannot knock them off physically, he skids right on down the line to restraining you from knock he stops knocking them off; he restrains you from knocking them off. He starts to say how it's a good thing that somebody fired Sputnik. You get the idea?

And then he will go down to the point of investigating the habitat and so forth. And he'll finally get down to a point of worshiping. Do you follow me? Now, that is the cycle. He runs right on downscale.

Let's look at those steps again. The thing is created. He tries to destroy it. He cannot destroy it so he just sits quietly. You know, he doesn't make overt actions against it.

Your next motion, right on down the line from that is a very simple motion: His attitude toward it has become slightly to protect it. He's the sort of fellow who runs game preserves and that sort of thing. You get the idea? But he'll restrain you from doing anything to it, you see?

And the next step immediately below that line is, he will start an investi. He will begin to tell people around him how stimulating it is or how good it is or all the good things it is to have the Frankenstein monster present. There's where psychology is now with regard — well, they're below that — to the mental image picture. But there are a lot of them — when they think of the mental image picture, they say, "Be glad you're neurotic," when they think of neurosis and so forth. You get the point? This thing has overwhelmped us and so we must be happy about it, and it's stimulating and it's a good thing.

Now, below that point is the fellow does a deification. He directs the worship of this thing.

By the way, just below that point — there is a point below that. You could say the hunter looked all around. There are bears killing steers. There are bears — three days ago killed his wife. Bears killed four campers that moved into the area. And bears customarily knock off all Indian babies. And you say, "Why in the name of God — you're drawing your pay — why don't you do something about these bears?"

And he looks at you and he says, "What bears?"

And so you get your various types of fields and reaction to them.

Thank you.