I want to make sure that you know how to run Communication Processing, which is what we'll call it. Because let's say that anything goes, any-thing goes in the whole formula of communication under Communication Processing. But let's take one specific and interesting part of it and let's discuss pan-determinism as related to having an individual mock up originated communications.

We discover immediately a fact which I have known for a very long time but which was too horrible to tell you. That's right, that's a fact. I have known this fact for, oh, certainly, two years and have simply stuffed it in my back pocket and skipped it until I could lick it. And that is this: The whole world around you is an automaticity. How can you win? Well, you can't. You got an automaticity in all directions.

All right. An individual substitutes for pan-determinism, prediction — let's get this right on the line here very accurately — for pan-determinism he substitutes prediction. When he cannot predict this automaticity in the world around him, he substitutes confusion — nonprediction, confusion, same breed of cat, same thing. Inability to predict leads to a confusion, startlement, amazement, upset. You see that?

All right. Confusion leads to mystery because the individual backs off and will have nothing further to do with it. Well, now, this parallels games. He does not want to predict the other side so the end product of any game played long enough is confusion and mystery and why every society when it goes to hell goes into the hands of a priesthood. And that's true of Chaldea, it was true of Babylon, it was true of Greece, it's true of Rome, and it's true today.

Every time a government — every time a society — let's go back one step. Every time a society goes into electronics — which is an unpredictability and a confusion of one sort or another, terrific automaticities sitting around — you push a button. When you first start out flying rocket ships, why, you've got eighty gadgets you have to set and sixty plotters you have to adjust in order to find out where you're going and they finally evolve it into a point where you push one button that says Mars or Arcturus or something of this sort and you're there. Just as simple as this.

And this super-automaticity goes boom into religion. And there hasn't been an electronic society anywhere on the track that did not work hand-in-glove with a priesthood and which did not move into the total control of a priesthood and which did not thereafter lose all of its technology and so emerged into another stone age. No go — that's very high technology — a monkey age.

You can only object to this sort of thing when you enter a monkey age and a — and a priesthood at the same time.

Now, you have government leaders today in the United States and else-where using more and more blasphemy in their talk. They're saying God is this and God is that and we'd better all turn to God and so on. We have the heaviest crowds turned out in Washington, not to hear McCarthy, not to hear the president's inauguration, but to listen to Billy Graham who sounds off on a biased version of the New Testament in some fashion or another. And this is — this is big stuff, see.

All right. Now, pan-determinism actually goes into desire for a game which immediately and by postulate cuts out 50 percent of those present, Blues and the Greens, the Dodgers and the Giants. You get the 50 percent.

And here by the way, in the latter days, I think this was the Byzantine Empire more than the Roman Empire although they had it in the Roman Empire, I think the Blues and the Greens are — were looked upon not as racing teams, but as political bodies. And a lot of their political stuff was settled in the arena between the chariot races and the discus pitches of the Blues and the Greens. The several near revolutions occurred immediately resulting from the result of games played by the Blues and the Greens. So about 50 percent of the population was all out for the Blues and 50 percent was all out for the Greens. You get the idea.

Now, as we look over the picture, then, we see that pan-determinism goes into desire for a game which splits your forces in half and which makes 50 percent of everything unpredictable. You don't want to predict it; desire not to predict. As soon as you really begin to predict you have no game. Or if you predict pretty well and nobody thinks they're playing a game you can have a whale of a game. But you get the idea?

Now, you see, you could reverse this whole schedule. You could take a whole — a whole society lying there, nobody predicting and nobody being pan-determinism and everybody running off on twelve different horses in eight different directions — mathematical impossibility, but it's true they can. And you get down to a point where all of a sudden in this mass of chaos and so forth, a group suddenly starts predicting. Oh, why, that's a nasty sort of game. But, of course, their target and goal is confusion; their enemy is confusion. They actually are working in the game in order to create a game out of a deteriorated game. You see?

Game goes all to pieces, there is no game, the barriers are still there, you still have plenty of confusions and mysteries arising on every hand and a small group could then become a very much larger group simply by starting to predict again. You see how this cycle could go? It's never gone that way before, something new under the sun.

We think of Scientology as something that heals people and we think of Scientology to make the sane insane and irrational so that they no longer agree with the Income Tax Bureau or something of the sort. We think of it as a psychotherapy.

We might think of it as an educational activity so much so that I believe that any Doctor of Scientology is qualified with the right to train, will very shortly be authorized to have a Master of Education degree. And the name of Hubbard Professional College, possibly will remain Hubbard Professional

College, but something on the order of maybe Hubbard College of Education, something of this sort. And this will — it's very legal, legal as the flowers of spring, a DScn knows more about the human mind, and knows more about knowingness, the woof and the warp of training is knowingness, the woof and the warp of education is knowingness; you could give cards and spades to any Master or Doctor of Education in the land and come out top dog. So it's perfectly safe degree to issue and very well deserved.

All right. You could even say it's an education. But the funny part of it is, that it is the greatest game on Earth. That is really what it is. It is the game by which even a confusion can be turned into a game.

Now, if we were to go around and tell people, if they say, "What is this stuff called Scientology?" Have a big, big squabble on this. I've been in the stores Christmas shopping and I look — they look on the check and so forth, and it gives my address as the HASI, you see. And they look at "Scientology" and they say, "Huh-da-huh Scientology?" you know.

And I say, "Well, Scientology means knowing how to know answers." And they say "Huh."

And I was in a toy store the other day and a fellow pulls this line, and there was a young boy who was taking time off from college to do some Christmas clerking, and the boss called him over — he's a mighty smart young feller, he's taking — he's majoring in Deuteronomy or something. And he looked at that and he didn't know what that was either, you know. And I said, "Scientology? You don't know what Scientology is? Why, it's the greatest game on Earth!"

And the fellow says, it's funny, he says "I haven't had any advertisements to sell it," he says "Where can you get it?"

Well, the — you could do a lot of things with the — a know-how. If you know-how about the guys who are playing the game, of course you have a superior know-how to their game, any day, don't you? So therefore the way to tell people about Scientology is to find out what they do and then tell them this is the thing that monitors it. That's the way to tell people about Scientology. That's the truth.

Of course, a fellow has to be — a fellow has a sneaking hunch that he's — or feeling that he's lying or something of this sort.

Somebody says "Well, I — I — I'm a salesman." And "I'm a salesman," and so forth and so on. And, "What is this thing called Scientology?"

"Why this, Scientology — Scientology is the science of sales promotion and selling."

"Is that so? Well, where have I been?"

"Well, it's in a technical bracket you know, of course."

"Can I get a book on this?"

"Sure."

He's interested, see? The fellow in the toy store, the fellow in the toy store he says where could I get this, see, greatest game. The salesman — it's the science of sales promotion — where could I get this? It really means that we ought to have a whole series of books, which I ought to get busy and write, every one of which says, "Scientology (second line)," you see, Scientology, The Mathematics of Psychology. Scientology, The Composition of the Hidden Factors of Medicine — let's see, something on this order. That would be a tough one because I was trying to think over how you would slow that in so that a doctor, although he hadn't heard of it, would merely consider himself stupid if he hadn't.

"Oh, Scientology, The Physics of Medicine." That's right, that's .. . that's . . . we need that book.

Anyone of these oddities — professional oddities which you see as high specializations — can be kept and monitored by this game. Why? It's because their game has degenerated to considerable of a confusion. And actually any game being played, having dropped into something of a confusion, needs some sort of a monitoring science which tells them how to play this game because they don't even know it's a game in addition to having forgotten how to play it. You see?

So then they know, however, instinctively that something fits in this bracket that tells them how to play the game called medicine. They know that something is missing up there somewhere, see. And you come along and all you'd have to tell them is "This is the archway that goes over your roadway," and they're all set.

Well, all right. Now, let's look this over from a standpoint of deteriorated games. We discover the reason a game deteriorates is because from pan-determinism it goes into division of sides which is nonprediction, which goes in — of course, that's unwillingness to predict, they don't want to predict the other side — and then that goes in immediately into a confusion.

If you want to know why modern battles are so confused, realize that they're right next door at a fast evolutionary rate to unprediction, see. A real smart general using various rules can predict the other general, you see, to some slight degree. But where you haven't got any smart generals anymore, you don't have battles you have confusions.

Now, I'm not trying to run down or make snide comments about modern generals — you couldn't, there aren't any. Last great general went with Robert E. Lee. If anybody's from Texas — with Sam Houston. He takes fifteen Texans with cap pistols and licks a Mexican army. He was a pretty good general.

Now, where we have a breakdown then of prediction we enter rather rap-idly into a confusion. And the course of a battle demonstrates well-ordered lines at the beginning of a battle and midway through this battle you will see these lines are getting less and less well-ordered. And the end of many a battle remains a mystery to this day. You look them over and you'll find out that people go on discussing it and discussing — .

For instance, there was a battle which was misnamed a massacre up on the Little Big Horn in Montana, in which three hundred cavalrymen of the Seventh Cavalry put up an awful fight with the Sioux. But nobody ever got the straight story of this. It went into a confusion fast. It started with a general who was somewhat confused and his officers who were more confused with no idea of the forces which were opposing him, which was in the neighborhood of about seven thousand well-armed Sioux — the best light cavalry Earth has known, next to the Tartars. Seven thousand were being opposed there by a small handful of cavalry and this seven thousand were very well armed indeed. And Custer went into the middle of all this; we now have a mystery. People keep on writing about this mystery. Actually there's no mystery at all about the whole thing. That few guys can't win when equally armed with that many guys.

It was a fascinating thing to see the amount, though, of mystery and upset and so forth which came out of that confusion. And it was a very, very badly confused battle, believe me. I have yet, although I have read practically all the annals and reports of the entire action as they exist today, I have yet to read one which agrees with another. They don't even agree on where

Custer lay or what condition Custer was in at the end of the battle. He was dead, but some say he was shot in the chest and some say he had blown his own brains out and some say this and some say that. But they all agree that he wasn't scalped. Everybody agrees on this and this becomes a big mystery too. So they invent a big meeting between Sitting Bull and Custer at West Point — Custer being the man assigned to guide Sitting Bull all over West Point. Probably never happened, but somebody is trying to go back into the past to solve the mystery.

Now, let's look at the anatomy of this. They finally get so confused that they invent somebody that created the whole thing. If you want to see some-body who is confused, it will be somebody who wants the prior reason why. They retreat from the confusion of the present to discover in the past some causative point. And this search for causation, when it is dropped into, is the beginning of the evolution that we call a priesthood. When you no longer have clear-cut sides, when you no longer have an adequacy of battle, when you no longer have even confusion — you just get sort of a blur — why, then, people start in — people start in then to track back to find out where the hell these particles came from. Why do they do that? It's an instinctive reaction and effort to discover the original location and time of the particle so as to make a perfect duplicate of it and as-is the game. You see that?

So you see why they get so fascinated with going back out of their confusion and tracking into the past trying to discover — . Then we will get a bunch of boys who will booby-trap the situation.

You know, the between-lives area is one of the cuter engrams on the track. It isn't described completely in What to Audit. The fact of the matter is, is there was not an entrance into the MEST universe and there isn't an entrance in the between-lives area anywhere else but in this universe.

The entrance to the MEST universe was a game which was played by a bunch of people on people who were in the universe. And they took people who were in the universe and PDHed them one way or the other, in order to bring them into a belief that they were now being shot into another universe. This game has been played several times. It'll be something on the order of you going down, traffic cop hits you over the head and tells you you're now in Chicago, only it's the same town you were in before. He infers that you have been transported some vast indeterminate distance so as to completely con-fuse you and make it impossible for you to as-is the game. See how this would work out?

So every once in a while somebody comes up and plays this game and he gives a span of time and space or universe, or a jump of universe which didn't exist so as to confuse people utterly about the game. Now, we get how to drive a puppy dog nutty. 1951, I was talking about this. You hit him over the head in the living room, knock him colder than ice, then you take him in the kitchen and stand him on his head in the corner. Let him wake up that way. See, there's something missing.

So, of course, he can't as-is that section of track. Thus we get the popularity of the engram. People think that they can plot back straight through these engrams — and I thought so too — plot back straight through these en-grams and get them arranged, we would finally locate origin of particles. We do, we very definitely do. It's however a little harder, longer job than we care to undertake today.

Question that could be asked now is, "Why as-is the game?" The only reason you'd as-is the game is you couldn't make another game out of it. The only reason you'd blow up the playing field is because you weren't having any fun. If you think nuclear physicists have fun, go meet some sometime. They have fun; the only fun they can indulge in is blowing up everything. I mean, they'll sit around and think about this. Blow up the government.

If the government only knew of the actual mood and conversational level of physicists when gathered together in polite company the government would be scared. It would be; it would be outraged. It was overhearing conversations amongst them, now and then reported by hearsay and elsewhere, that got rid of sixty-seven of the top nuclear physicists in the government. They weren't guilty of communistic practices or anything of this sort. They were just advocating the overthrow of the government by force and violence directly without any party line.

They are dangerous men. There is no doubt about it whatsoever because they're not having any fun. They get disgusted so they say, "Well, let's just blow the debris all over hell's half acre and then nobody can discover where it went from or where it came to. And that will be the end of that. Hah! We'll make the law of conservation of energy work."

See, as long as you can't find the origin point of a particle, the law of conservation of energy will hold. The moment that you can find the origin point of a particle in time and space, the conservation of energy does not hold, neither does the conservation of space. This universe would go whooh--that would be the end of that.

Now, religion, as long as we mentioned this earlier, has gotten us into a very beautiful booby-trap that way. They say God created the universe; he did it in seven days — six days and snored the seventh. This is not blasphemy, it's merely the detailing of an untruth. And then he did all this and that was that. And that's the origin point, and if you don't believe it — some of the things that have been used in the past — we will burn you at the stake, and they did. If you don't believe it we will consign you to the galleys and they did. If you don't believe it you are an heretic and you will be tortured to death in various ways and fed to lions or something of this sort.

The Christians have fed more to lions than Romans. Christians, by the way, have fed more Christians to lions than the Romans ever thought of. I think the total sum of all Christians knocked off in the ten Roman purges is something insignificant. It's something in the neighborhood of, oh, I don't know — thirty people in that vast purge that we keep hearing about that Nero undertook. There were thirty Christians knocked off. And I think in all the ten purges in both Roman empires, of Christians, by reason of the government's detestation for people who hated everybody — that was by the way the consistent Roman statement, that they couldn't understand these people who had no tolerance of religion. They didn't like other people and they hated other people who were different than they were. And so that was bad for the state. And this was the Roman position with regard to Christianity, nothing else. They didn't — the Romans didn't even believe in paganism at the time.

All right. We look over this and we find out that there were 10,000, over a period some centuries, killed by the government for various reasons, one of which in each case happened to be Christianity. And there were 100,000 Christians killed by Christians in one single year in Alexandria alone. This is an impressive statistic. That's just one year. They had that riot every year. Just get the idea — ten times as many in one Christian uprising against Christians.

So they're emphatic about this, "God designed the universe in one place." In other words this is a good between-the-lives area; you've gone to another universe; you are now completely out of this universe and your time track is now all loused up and now you will go back and join another life because it's another life. Or entrance point to the MEST universe — you have now been taken out of the universe you were in and now you have been put in another universe. You see, that gap, a gap introduced there by postulate only, and conviction. And we get this additional mechanism by which to intro — these are the mechanisms by which you introduce confusions so as to keep an as-ising from taking place — you get everybody to agree on some false origin point. And then you shoot anybody who won't agree on this origin point. And if they don't agree on this origin point, why that's the end of them. Get the idea?

For instance, in the Bible you get at least one exact date for the creation of Earth. You get and the — I think that it's generally worked out the total length of time of Earth in this system and so forth is plotted at something like 7,396 years or something like that. That's the agreed upon date. Whereas the half-life of radioactive materials demonstrates this area to be about 3.5 billion years old — this galaxy.

Physics then had to go by the boards early in the Christian activities and they hanged and burned and did things to anybody who tried to experiment in the realm of science. Why? They would trip over this lie, you see? They'd keep exploding it. They'd do something about it.

And people get pretty frantic when you really look around and say, "Hey you, you know, you could probably as-is this whole thing if you wanted to." They have been forbidden to by various lines and so on. However once an individual finds out that he is fairly indestructible when exteriorized, I am afraid that he would be harder to convince than previously.

Now, as we look over the game, anatomy of, we discover then pan-determinism sinks into choosing up of sides, which of course, is an unpredictability. So we get an unpredictability; it drops into a confusion; a confusion then goes into a mystery and individuals sitting around are looking at what amounts to almost a total automaticity. And they simply blind themselves to the amount of automaticity going on.

I'll give you a little shock here. Have you predicted the makes and types of cars going past the door in the past five minutes? You haven't? Have you predicted the destination of these cars? You haven't? How the hell are you going to ever as-is this universe? Do you realize that just that five minutes worth of randomity be sufficient to sink you. Interesting, isn't it?

So we get a guy trying to back track in his own past to find particles where they came from and yet you have been in intimate contact with a great number of particles here for the last five minutes — good solid ones. You didn't predict a single one of them. That right? Automaticity. There's nothing like such an automaticity as might go on, for instance, in a busy city. Go down to Piccadilly Circus some time. That's quite automatic. Everything runs with-out asking you. And the next time you're driving on the highway at a more isolated place, and a Greyhound bus driver stops and asks your orders as to how he should proceed, you let me know, will you.

Now, individuals get very, very set — fixed — on the idea that they have to predict all these things, you see. They have to be in control of all these things because it's a desperate and dangerous situation, you see, to lose track of all this. So they have to predict it; they have to control it. And they start control-ling, controlling, holding, so on and then brr-bow, they'll sit still themselves. You see that they couldn't — . This amount of automaticity that's sitting out there is just too great.

What does Communication Processing do?

It immediately places under control of the individual the most important factor with which he is associated: his own universe.

It's been a long time since you've heard of Scientology 8-8008, isn't it?

Now, Scientology 8-8008 was a formula. It said: The attainment of infinity (that is the first eight) is achieved by the reduction of the physical universe from infinity (that is the second eight) to zero (which is the first zero) and the building of one's own universe from zero to an infinity of one's own universe. And by that one achieves the attainment of infinity. Scientology 8-8008 was a formula. There's no particular reason why we have ever abandoned this formula. It's just a tough one to reach, that's all; a tough one to put into action.

Very, very funny things start occurring when you start to run this formula. You do various things. You start to take over more and more of this universe. You start to care less and less that it's going in wild and weird directions. You become more and more able to change those directions if you wanted to. You finally go into communication with this universe, not some via system.

Now, did you ever exteriorize somebody and found he was not looking at the wall, he was looking at a facsimile that he'd just made of the wall, which was a little bit late?

Male Voice: Yeah.

Huh? Now, as a auditor, I have actually changed my position in the chair in some fashion or another, just changed my position in the chair unintentionally — not intending to foul up this preclear — and have him open his eyes again and see that I had changed my position and receive a great shock of invalidation be-cause he had been seeing me sitting in the other position. Well, I had been sitting in the other position, but I was now sitting in this position. In other words, he was just a little case of late (as they used to say when they buried them in Boot Hill out here — still some Boot Hills around with a coroner's report was usually, "A case of slow").

Well, this is just a case of a little bit late. The fellow who makes the facsimile and then looks at the facsimile instead of looking at the wall. It's an automaticity, he's not aware of the fact he's doing this.

I was processing a preclear one time and got him out in the middle of the Sahara desert. There was a jackal or something of the sort running around. Or no, we got on a sheep dog. That's right, an Arab sheep dog. I was along with him and this dog was a perfectly good dog; I mean, there wasn't any — he wasn't a vicious dog. He had fleas but this hadn't completely ruined his temper. And this dog was running around as nice as you please minding the sheep and I was running this preclear on the basis of it. (I didn't tell him that I was there. I didn't invalidate him or make him think he was under supervision or anything of the sort.) But the sheep dog was a brown animal with a white ear. And I asked this fellow to describe this sheep dog and so forth and it turns out that it was a collie with a white ruff. And so I says, "Well, copy him. Now copy him again. Again. Again. Again. Again. Again. Again. Again." We went on like this for about a half an hour, see, making copies of this dog.

And he finally saw the dog. He said, "Yes, I see the dog now." He said, "I see the dog very well. It's a brown dog with a white ear."

Gee whiz! You get the idea?

And yet this boy himself, to some degree, had been totally convinced that he'd been looking at the universe. You see? But he was really kidding himself most amazingly.

Now, why should a thetan who can't be hurt anyhow take a dodge of this character?

Well, that's just because it's so much easier to predict a facsimile than it is the actual object. As the facsimile didn't run the way you predicted it was going to run you can always make it run the way that it should have been run according to your prediction of it. And you don't get invalidated by all this physical universe automaticity. You see how this would be? It's much, much easier to predict a facsimile, particularly if you made it and are con-trolling it and monitoring it.

All right. And by the way, only then was this fellow able to actually get the sensations and monitor the actions of this sheep dog. Cute gag. I mean, I have a lot of fun, sometimes, in a session like this. I don't bother with going off into wild space opera, something like this. I take something common, down to earth and ordinary, like Farmer Brown's cow. And get the preclear to run Farmer Brown's cow around the yard and squirt some milk in some-body's eye. Anything that is fairly routine and ordinary because it doesn't give the preclear a chance to use his imagination at all. He has to perceive. Just take the most common sort of environments instead of uncommon ones. He feels much happier in such environments, by the way, and it runs out and orients his current lifetime, not some other lifetime he's stopped leading.

All right. If we process the physical universe directly we disabuse the person of the idea that he has to hold on to so many old terminals and so many old facsimiles in order to have a terminal to discharge against and so have a game.

But when you process the physical universe entirely, completely, you run into this factor of automaticity to such a degree that you would give your preclear a good shove in the face. It's all right to have walls, but don't go down to the shooting gallery and run Reach and Withdraw from the ducks as they are being shot at by some soldiers. You get the idea? We've got to get this fellow into a better frame of mind about prediction, about controlling and about pan-determinism.

All right, then. The origin of communication as mocked up by the individual from another source than himself is solution. That is solution. That's a truer picture to him than the physical universe would be and you are in a controllable sphere which doesn't then invalidate the preclear immediately.

The odd part of it is that processing in the physical universe works at all. This is a weird thing that the processing has any workability in the physical universe because of all this automaticity and these skips back on the track and all of the twists and the lies. "And the universe was made by old man," says the Blackfoot. Don't think the Christian has a monopoly upon this legend of unit creation: Manitou, some of the tribes; Old Man, some of the other tribes. The Apache — the fellow who made Earth and the birds and so forth, according to the Apache was a fellow by the name of Black Hackton. Yeah, even the older Apaches have forgotten Black Hackton. But you jog their memories and you go around and get some toothless old crone sitting there and she's chewing away on some snoose or something of the sort, and she finally will up and tell you, "Oh, yes, my grandfather . . . we used to have some tribal rites . . . yeah, yeah, and he used to impersonate Black Hackton making birds and making men and so on. Oh, yes, yes — Black Hackton."

They've even lost the lost point. But they attribute the creation of man, birds, Earth, everything, heavens, skies, stars, so forth, to one individual, which is the same trick.

Many times you get an actual individual moving into an area. There was evidently a Norseman who did a circumnavigation of the globe, probably around 400 or 500 A.D., of whom we hear today in various parts of Earth. In the Central Americas he's known as Bowtan. And a little further north he is mixed up with the god Quetzalcoatl. And he is war and agriculture. God of war and agriculture. He had a flaming red beard; he sailed in from the sun-rise and after a long sojourn he departed into the sunset and said he would be back. Norseman who had evidently crossed over very early. And we discover this same god under the name of Bowtan in the Marianas Islands who had a flaming red beard and who sailed in from the sunrise and who was the god of war and agriculture and who left into the sunset and said he would be back. And then we move into South China and we find the god Po-han who had a flaming red beard and who was the god of war and agriculture and who sailed in from the sunrise and left into the sunset and said he would be back.

I don't think the boy ever made it all the way around because I have heard of no legend about him in middle Asia. But it's fairly easy to track the line, he taught them almost exactly the same thing in each place. He gave them exactly the same thing.

Well, now, this man, according to the legends which pursued him, actually created war and created agriculture; he created all the growth of every-thing. You get the idea? So here was an actual individual and they perverted the story so as to make this boy responsible for everything.

All right. But you recognize that if we don't make something else responsible according to the axioms; if we don't say something else built it or something of this sort; if we don't introduce some kind of a lie into it — it won't last at all.

Well, there'd be several ways of doing this, several ways of doing this. Enforcing people to introduce this lie or just letting people introduce the lie.

Well, we get this kind of a condition. The kids are not permitted to intro-duce a lie to make things persist for themselves. They can't go out and say — come back in and say, "Mama, there's the biggest battleship out in the yard you ever saw in your life, beautiful, big battleship."

And Mama says, "Where?"

And . . . "On — on the lake in the backyard."

"Now, Tommy, you know there is no lake in the backyard."

See, what did she do, she just made him as-is his lake and his battle-ship. And so he finally despairs, after a while, of ever making anything persist. So he goes out and he buys — he buys a ready-made lie, which is that it all was made in one point at one time by one person which, of course, takes away from him any responsibility of having made any part of it. It wouldn't be here at all and it wouldn't be visible to you and it wouldn't be visible to me and it wouldn't be visible to him if we all didn't have a hand in making it — the truth of the matter. We'd just never see it unless some of it was of our own creation. It just — we'd have nothing in common with it.

Here's two thetans. They start putting out anchor points to each other and then they ball up the anchor points. They do it on purpose. Two thetans appear, they start swapping anchor points. One thetan pushes the anchor point to the first thetan and then he gets one. Then he says the one that he got back was his own anchor point. Boy does it last! It really lasts.

But you wouldn't be here at all if you hadn't had a share in the creation of this universe. Anybody who enforces it upon you utterly that somebody else created the universe simply disenfranchises you and makes you an owned property. It takes you out of the category of being a player and puts you in the category of being a pawn or a broken piece. That's the way it's done. See the mechanism involved here?

So we get the combined anxieties of every person and living form. We get these combined anxieties which are that it will all stop somewhere or somebody will as-is it — that's an anxiety; that it will all go on — that is an-other anxiety; that it will approach me; that it will go away from me. And we get the state of mind which we call anxiety. And that's about all there is to it.

Now, in order to keep these things from happening they introduce various lies, fictions, implants, all sorts of things in order to get rid of some bad condition — something they characterize as a bad condition. You see? They say, "This condition's bad." Then they'll invent something to get rid of the bad condition. And life kind of goes this way.

Once upon a time in Martinique they had a great many French planters — they founded, more or less, Martinique. First, I think it was British, but then it became French. And when the French took it over the French did an interesting thing. They imported an enormous number of — well, the British had imported white indentured servants, field hands and so on, and then imported Negroes. The French imported a lot of Negroes. And only the Negroes could survive, but I'll be a son of a gun if they didn't get some of the more warlike slaves. Evidently Martinique wasn't very rich and it would take the few warriors that hadn't been bought in islands further north, like Saint Kitts and so on, by smarter better monied planters.

And there finally got to be quite a lot of African warriors centralized in that particular area and the French began to have trouble keeping them on the plantations at all. Martinique is a pretty rugged place. It's very precipitous and its topography is quite confusing to walk across; it has a volcano on it and there's lots of places to hide. So somebody got a big idea, he got this wonderful idea. What they would do would be to go over to Africa and they would get the fer-de-lance, which is a big, vicious, very poisonous snake, and they would bring him over and they'd plant him in all the swamps. And they did. And after that they had field hands bitten while they were at work but less field hands wanted to go into those swamps. Of course, the fer-de-lance — I don't — not quite sure where they got the fer-de-lance — but, the fer-de-lance in his native clime is very poisonous and vicious as a snake, but in Martinique he became as lazy as a French planter. And he stopped biting people unless he were immediately stepped on. But he did form a nuisance which the French wanted to get rid of.

So having planted the fer-de-lance, they went out and found mongooses. They imported mongooses in large numbers to kill all the fer-de-lances. And one of the favorite Sunday sports down there is to turn a mongoose against a fer-de-lance — a great big fer-de-lance and a little, tiny mongoose about the size of a squirrel. And the mongoose will play with this big sluggish snake for a while and then finally do a back somersault, just like a circus acrobat, and midway in the somersault grab the fer-de-lance by the back of the neck, just up at the spine, and with the remainder of the somersault flip so as to break the fer-de-lance's neck. And that is the end of the fight. And the mongooses began to run all over the island.

I remember one time in a street at Saint-Pierre, I saw a cur dog walking down the street. He was just a yellow dog and he was minding his own business. And all of a sudden there was this ball of fur came out from the side of the road, hit this cur dog, whap! bang! and we had a dead cur dog — mongoose.

The French are paying a bounty on mongooses now.

Once upon a time, the white men — . White men started scalping in this country by the way. It's quite an interesting fact. They paid bounties on these scalps. And they had bounty hunters, white bounty hunters down here in Arizona who were supposed to kill off Apaches and they got so much a scalp. And they had the awfullest time hunting down these bounty hunters. Be-cause the bounty hunters would go into a farm or something like that — Mexican's; couldn't tell the difference between a Mexican scalp and an Apache scalp — and they would collect the Mexican scalps and kill all the kids and so forth. And any brunette white settler was not safe and so on. And so they had quite a little war down here getting rid of fellows who were sup-posed to get rid of.

Do you get this chain of action? Well, do you realize that this chain of action has been going on for about seventy-six trillion years?

It's the most fascinating thing you ever saw in your life. Life is always doing something weird like this in order to give the game a new twist. They make a game and then they have to have a game to remedy the game that they just made; then they have a game to remedy that game.

And why do they do this?

Because each time the game goes into the cycle of confusion. See? It goes down into confusion so they invent a new game to solve the old game. And then this new game they invented goes into a cycle of confusion and then it goes into solve the old game — and the new game goes in to cycle the — and there we go, see. "Where are we now!"

It's the most fantastic thing in the world — the most fantastic thing that we sit here with a process that will solve this. Fantastic! I mean, it's incredible. Couldn't possibly have happened. But it did happen.

This process regains pan-determinism by doing one of the more interesting things. It simply takes ideas, which is all what it is in the first place, and has the individual control ideas on the communication — two-way cycle of communication pattern. And that's that! Actually, that's about all there is to it as a process.

Unless some eager beaver auditor introduces masses and has the individual mock up energies and tries to get specific on putting these things on the Know to Mystery Scale, it works. But the moment he goes in and validates all this tremendous quantity of complication which has resulted from inventing new games to end old games, the moment he goes into masses and diverges from positional ideas, the moment he starts insisting that it be in sonic it stops working. And you get one of the most arduous processes you'd ever wanted to confront.

Now, let's see how far we could theorize on this. Let's do a little theory here. Let's look at a man who is in bad condition with regard to women. He thinks he has to fight women or something of the sort, you know? He feels himself suppressed or repressed, exceedingly, by women. All right. Obviously this person could be found to be — have done a misduplication often enough, you see, to object to it. We could say that a baby is the result of the effort for men and women to duplicate each other. The pleasure in sex could be the twist on this inability to duplicate. See, we get a sudden duplication of one kind or another or something of that sort. All right. And we say then, "The fact of the matter is this man loses his manhood because he keeps emanating on a stuck flow and never gets it reversed."

So, let's be real clever as auditors and let's have him mock up men originating communications to him sexually. You see how this would work out in theory? See, that's a very nice theory. Obviously, we'd get a duplication then, wouldn't we? Obviously we would get an origination of communication which would be a duplicate of the communication on which he's a stuck flow.

Let's say the man has become impotent — our preclear, you see. So obviously, he's on a stuck flow so that sex has become unreal to him. Well, let's then have him mock up men approaching him sexually — get it to unstick, see? Or even women approaching him sexually. And we process it in this fashion. And we process for an hour and we process for two and for three and for four. And our preclear is amazingly uncomfortable. He is getting some interesting changes in a sort of a solid, crushing sort of way. So we let it go to the next session and we process him for four more hours tomorrow. And then we process him four more hours on the next. We process him for four more hours on the next. This is — I'm actually reporting a research to you — and we found out that we may have — we may have done a lot of good auditing, but our preclear at the end of twenty hours is an awful mess still. See that? We just about ruined him. Mocking up masses. The communication of a mass to him, you see. Even a mass with an idea, it didn't matter.

And then we set the same preclear down and we simply have not a man, not a woman, not a dog or a cat or even a thetan, but just a point of life out there saying, "Hello. Hello. Hello. Hello. Hello. Hello. Hello. Hello. Hello. Hello. Hello. Hello. Hello. Hello. Hello." On and on and on. No acknowledgments. No answer. Nothing of the sort. But just a point saying, "Hello." And we suddenly find out he's no longer impotent — in an hour or so.

Which tells you what?

Well, for one thing it tells you Hubbard's right. But it tells you basically this: That life is basically a consideration and that it proceeds and emanates from a postulate; and that energy exists to the degree that we believe it exists; but that energy believed to exist is not illusory, it exists; because all that exists and everything that exists is a result of a condensation of, you might say, an additional consideration of a consideration.

And if we process ideas on the communication two-way cycle, we're processing the entrance point of any difficulty anybody ever got into. The mass was the difficulty; the significance was the difficulty. The significance was the game he originated in order to overcome the game which got confused. Follow this?

When we process a mass, when we process a significance, we are simply processing fer-de-lance by introducing mongoose or Apaches.by hiring bounty hunters. And we just keep going back through this kind of a mass arrangement, you see. Gaah!

See, it was the mass which was invented to solve the mass which was wrong. Which, before that had been invented because an earlier mass had been wrong; which, in its turn had been invented because — and so on.

So we're not at — we're not processing, then, life at all. We're processing the end or byproduct of life's anxiety to have a game and to get out of the confusion resulting from.

So with all this we process ideas and considerations: the idea of communication; the idea of hello. Not even a sonic hello — we don't tell the fellow not to make it sonic, we don't tell him to make it sonic. We just ask him to put that idea out there, "Hello." Or put it behind his back — the idea "hello." Or the idea "okay," or the idea "I did it," or the idea "all right" — any one of these things and we just grind on it.

So the masses fly off in all different directions. Naturally they will. Be-cause the only masses that fly off are the misarranged communication lines he is intimately and immediately concerned with as a body right where he is at this moment and as a thetan with a bunch of hidden and enmassed machinery.

And that is the way you process Communication Processing, actually, and why you process it that way. And it's a very lucky thing that we have it because it can establish, directly, pan-determinism.

The whole point behind all of this is the fact that he has never controlled anybody else's conversation. He left it random. And never having controlled any-body else's conversation it's a total automaticity all the way back. So we have to process it to make him take control of something he has never done before. He's really never done this before. It's something new. And it completely knocks apart all the masses and everything that he gets mixed up with because they have all been introduced to solve this automaticity of not being able to predict what the other fellow was going to do or say.

Okay.

Thank you.