If you were at a level of pan-determinism that permitted you to utterly escape the mechanism of the one-way flow - your auditing is simply a game with the preclear because the truth of the matter is that you could be the preclear, be well, then be yourself and that would be the end of the session.

Now, that actually, more than anything else, is something of a description of how hot you ought to be in order to escape a one-way flow mechanism. I - almost anything up to that point has some slight one-way flow liability to it in auditing.

Now, I took an auditor who had audited and audited for a long time and he hadn't gotten very much auditing. And he, since the earliest days, had actually been self-auditing a little bit, you know, here and there. And he'd gotten so he self-audited more and more and he took care of everything via self-auditing, you see. And he was very good at it, you see, he could clip out something he felt bad about or something that was a shock to him, and so on. He was very comfortable about the whole thing because he knew he could maintain status quo; but nevertheless he was self-auditing.

Well, what I put this poor boy through on one process only, shouldn't have happened to anybody. And this process was simply mocking up something out there to say all of the various types of commands that you could say in auditing. Now, it didn't matter what the significance of the command was as long as the intention of that life unit - you know, Stage Two, there's got to be something there to talk to. All right, the intention of this life unit was to audit him and that it did verbalize or talk or have ideas. And this was the total consideration.

And this poor guy, while he was running this, went through birth, conception, past lives, deaths, he was being stabbed by - Greek fire dumped on his head and everything else. But they were coming in and out with great rapidity, you see. There was no real somatic to it, but the whole track was flying by the way it's supposed to fly by when you fall off the yardarm and you're about to die or something. And he had never had any recognition, never any recognition at all, because he was so good at this - taking care of this via a circuit - never had any recognition that he was suppressing any vast degree of engrams or anything like that. Well, this boy could not exteriorize easily. He could exteriorize, you know, create taffy, you know, sort of a taffy-type of exteriorization. But he wasn't doing too well. And he was simply suppressing, on a one-way flow basis, any possible obedience of his own auditing command by himself. See, he was suppressing the obedience of his command by himself. He would say to somebody, „All right, now touch the wall,“ (and this is the way the mechanism works) and then he would suppress himself you see, from going over and touching the wall.

Every time - he had gotten to a point where he was actually - he was on his way down very definitely - where he was handling things within himself with energy. You know? He would actively suppress himself back into the chair when somebody went over to touch the wall. You see? And he would say, „All right, uh-now, uh-uh - oh, okay now, uh - let go of it,“ and he would hold on. Isn't that cute? In other words, he was suppressing every auditing command. So, therefore, he was putting the reverse command on himself And we had a ball!

Now, if you tried to audit this out, command by command, auditing session by auditing session, this would have been about the grimmest thing anybody ever could have attempted because this fellow would actually spend thousands of hours in the auditing chair.

But, as I say, it started to peel off and he really got another look at his track. He was using facsimiles to suppress facsimiles. The devil wouldn't have it.

All right. Any type of a one-way flow of this characteristic where an individual is maintaining, maintaining individuality with great exclusiveness - you see, he's maintaining his individuality with great exclusiveness and he's sitting there getting somebody else to perform the commands, yet he himself has - expressing his individuality in his form to such a degree that his form could act in those commands. If he were doing this, naturally he would just get more and more mass; he would accumulate more and more mass or he would be holding off more and more mass. And this would be a ball that he would be wound up in.

All right. There's another side to existence which is very interesting - standpoint particularly in relationship to this, but much more general than this point. And that is that an individual has to make himself duplicatable. If you are going to communicate with an ant you at least have to work in the frame of reference of an ant or the ant can't receive you.

Now, let's take skip-skop Schopenhauer and take this guy, and read over his lumbering prose and realize why he isn't more read. He's not duplicatable.

Immanuel Kant is not duplicatable with great ease, so people don't read him. He possibly has a lot of wise things to say. There's - this is doubtlessly true. But he had walked out into an „only one“ characteristic to a point where he didn't consider it necessary to make himself duplicatable anymore and so he went on out of communication. See that?

Well, so it is with anybody working - if he doesn't make him - or communicating in any way, if he doesn't make himself to some degree duplicatable, the funny part of it is that his communication never arrives. Now, that's what's fantastic. His communication never arrives. That means to say, that if you are operating a widow-maker, one of these pneumatic drills, out here on a cliff side, do you know it won't - wouldn't run for you at all unless you were slightly that pneumatic drill? Do you know that as you drive a car, do you know that its brakes would not work, its clutch would not operate, its motor would not run for you if you were not to some degree a car? You wouldn't even see it. You wouldn't even see this car.

So it is when individuals get into fixed individuality; a fixed role of one kind or another, an intensely fixed role. One of the things they do, by the way, is they begin to assign more and more importance to this role, you see.

That, by the way, is a byproduct of this, it's rather - than a processable thing; processing importance is fun but it doesn't get you very far.

They begin to assign more and more particular importance to this role and begin to freeze in it more and more and more and more and they become less and less malleable, you might say, less and less pliable as far as existence is concerned, until they get down, of course, to an obsessive pliability so that they just look at something and there they - you've probably seen people that are bad off this way, they look at something and they're immediately it, you know, obsessively. They couldn't prevent themselves from doing this.

If you've ever had - have you ever talked to a psychiatrist? The psychiatrist, not to amuse you, he says, „Well, we have these patients who are curled up in a ball.“ Got the idea? He says, „Uh - and, uh - the way that uh - we generally uh - work uh” - around one of these fellows - it's all strapped up.

You know, he couldn't for the life of him prevent himself from putting his hands up there across his chest to get into restraint.

Now, you talk to somebody who is simply a good talker and he wants to give you information, why, he's liable to make gestures. Well, these gestures have a certain freedom to them - one line of demarcation between these two states - these gestures have a certain freedom to them. He knows he's doing it, you see. He has a very good idea of what he's doing. There's nothing compulsive or obsessive about what he's doing at all.

So let's get the idea there very clearly that malleability could be obsessive and an individual could be shoved into various roles, one after the other, by the environment or by a particular individual.

Let's take, oh, let's take Grandma. You know, Grandma she was - had something wrong with her communication setup, one way or the other, and she gradually has enforced this and that upon the individual and has furnished insufficient communication to a point where the individual obsessively takes over the role of Grandma. See, an unknowing adoption of a role or a form.

And that's what we call valences and valence - life continuum, a lot of other manifestations stemmed off from this. But the important thing is, the important thing here is that an individual assumes a role more and more fixedly. They can assume a role knowingly at will; and just because they can assume one role is no reason why they cannot assume fifty roles. See, that's a desirable life basis. Now, that individual can stay in communication or get out of communication with anything he addresses. Anything will run for him. Anything will patch up for him. You see?

The other side of the thing is the individual who is in a fixed role who will not go into the valence of those things he looks at, you see. He's just more and more out from it. You know, he's fixedly himself or some object. He is a cop - to give you an example - or he is a criminal, or he is a senator, or he is a - a lord or he is a street sweeper. You see, he's got himself terrifically fixed over here in this role, see. And the environment gets dimmer and dimmer and dimmer and things work less and less. And when he gets up to make a speech the only place it ever goes is into the Congressional Record. And when he - when he addresses you as a citizen he looks at you and you're Pretty Boy Floyd as far as this cop's concerned. I mean, he doesn't know the difference between addressing an honest citizen and a criminal. He just more or less all addresses it kind of fixedly in the same way, you know, „Guess that's it.“

We've got one down here in the Phoenix police department in charge of forgery. And this man is in the incredible state - as many cops get into. You notice that if you put a complaint up to a policeman he's liable to find out what - try to find out what you're guilty of. You know, he can't differentiate. The complainant is not the defendant. He isn't in communication.

So we get this cop down here, if you were to walk in with a forged paper and you were to explain to him very carefully how you came into possession of this forged paper and exactly how this forged paper was affecting your life and probably who forged it and why, when you got all through, he would ask you, „Why did you forge it? You realize it's illegal to forge things!“ He's psychotic. He's completely out of communication. He's enough in a niche and what he's supposed to say is sufficiently formulized that nobody notices this. See, it's not noticeable. He's evidently talking about the situation. But I imagine the Chief of Police could walk down there to him - and one of these days it will be like this - Chief of Police will go down and find out something on the subject of forgery or something like this and he'll want to know why the Chief of Police forged it! About that time, why, the Chief of Police will recognize all is not well in that department and will replace him.

What happens when he's replaced? He's got no role left, has he? There's no role. In other words, this fellow is in a fixed set of communication lines and with no role remaining, he can't be there, can he? So he just goes entirely out of communication.

Now, this is a fascinating thing, watching this whole business of roles and so forth take place. Because we find out if an individual rigs himself up as a man, he stays fairly easily in communication with men. But as he gets more and more fixedly a man, and an individual man, he starts going out of communication on any other life form.

We're talking to a public right now that cannot conceive of an awareness of awareness unit with any ease at all. „Life forms? There's only one kind of life form I know, that's a man and he's supposed to eat everything else or something.“ Boy, that's really a fixed role, isn't it? Just like this guy down here in charge of forgery.

The fellow says, „I am a girl, I am a girl,“ this fellow says. He's an awareness of awareness unit and he's lost his adaptability; he's lost additional beingnesses; he's lost a pliability about life and after a while he wears glasses. He wears glasses, this is a direct relationship. You see somebody with some glasses perched on their nose, you're looking at a fixed beingness. How did he get fixed? What's the mechanism by which they get fixed? It's the two-way communication after no two-way communication for some little time. And the scarcity is so great that an additional or other two-way communication - you know, an other origin - then becomes obsessive, fixed or even hypnotic to them.

Let's look at this. Here's this fellow sits out in space. He's out in space. He doesn't have any second communication line, see - just him self He isn't really on the ball. He doesn't know what he could do to get himself out of this situation. He's just, you know, more or less halfway down and halfway out and his visio while exteriorized is real poor. And let's just look at the high accidentalness that this could have. And he hasn't had any two-way communication for a long time, see? Dog senses his presence and barks at him. What happens? „Woof!“ See, the scarcity of the communication makes the next communication he gets on this at the level of obsessiveness.

Now, let's take a little kid who doesn't communicate - he's communicating fine but he's debarred from communication quite a bit. He has to come in at a certain time, he has to go to bed, he has to stay in school and he can't whisper. He's - you know, yappity-yappity-yap; he can't, can't, can't, can't, can't.

And there's one person who communicates to him quite a bit. Hm. Let's say that was Grandma. Let's say Grandma is just terrible as a communicator. Let's say she has communication lags and silences and obsessions on certain things and so on. She's in real poor communication condition, you see. But, nevertheless she does talk to him, addresses him directly somewhat on the line of an equality, you see. I mean, she's interested in what he's interested in. Anything she says goes home with the value of a phrase uttered during a blow, only more so.

Now we're talking about the factor - the aberrative idea, phrase or beingness - above the level of impact. This is the mechanism above the impact.

Now, we know very well what happens when we sock an individual on the jaw and say, „You're a dog.“ He's liable to wake up barking. We're quite well aware of this, you see. It is the idea there opposed to the no-ideaness of the blow. See, the impact: no life, no idea. In fact, antipathetic toward a life form. And in the middle of this we at least have some life; we have an idea sitting in the middle of this blow. And brother, he just takes that idea and he holds it to his bosom.

I dare say if there was an old desert rat out here somewhere who hadn't talked to anybody for years and you walked up to him, and you found him and you walked up to him, and you said „My, you're a beautiful looking burro.“ He would undoubtedly think he was one. He would have the idea that he was one; he would at least have an idea of trying to get rid of this idea. No matter what else you said to him, this sudden idea appearing in the - in this terrific desert of no-ideas, no-communication, would have enormous value just because it's an idea. Now, it has additional value because it has a significance. Gee! Really got something there!

Why do beings get stuck as ants? skunks? men? Why do they get into this fixed idea? Well, ideas are so scarce; emanation of ideas are so scarce. And this great scarcity of ideas, this great scarcity of communication origins, actually fixes these individuals into the valence of that which best or least worst communicates with them. Got that? Fixes them on what least worst communicates with them. See that, how easily this works?

Now, an auditor, an auditor who isn't getting around talking to other auditors, who isn't in a free frame of mind with regard to talking to people in general, gets another weird one - at least a preclear talks to him. The least worst thing that talks to him is a preclear. Huh? Now we get this parity of identity. Parity of identity you can use that as a technical phrase, you see, comes about on the level of the least worst communication origin to the individual. Parity of identity. In other words, if you were to float around and you hadn't been talking to anybody for a long time, you didn't have anybody to talk to, nothing had originated any communication to you and a soldier ant turned around all of a sudden and took a look at you and said, „Hey, boy, what a halo that is, huh! How did you get that black?“ You know, some sort of an idea like this. „I'm a soldier ant,“ you would say. „Where's my body?“ Now, that's about all that is necessary to fix anybody if he were terrifically flat on communications; communication origins zero. Something comes along and communicates to him: Powie!

The aberrative quality of the phrase then depends upon the relative desert of phrases surrounding it. A thetan will pick up for communication the most life present and it doesn't have to be very doggone much. See, he'll pick up as communication the most life present.

Now, if you wanted to lead a group of men - let's say that you were in the longshoring business and you wanted to lead a group of men - all you'd have to do actually is talk louder, talk faster, talk more continuously and pay less attention to the rest of the men at the same time than anybody else, and they would agree that you were foreman and so would the boss of the longshore union. He would agree that you were foreman of a crew. Even though that isn't very much life, you see, merely talking and ignoring and going along this particular line, just making a big furor all the time. Nevertheless, that's more life than is present in the rest of these boys, isn't it? Now, that's what's - that's what's a very fascinating fact.

These people who talk obsessively or who at least move a little bit, wind up in the higher places. Now, in view of the fact that people depend upon other - necessity, you see, other-determinism to start them talking, why, we see to a marked degree then that man would be lead by mostly somebody who just had some kind of a pet peeve or a saw and he was 1.5-ing about it. Wouldn't matter how clever an individual was.

Now, the other thing a leader would have to be would be duplicatable. Or a form would have to be, it would have to be duplicatable. You'd have to have some idea of what it was in order to duplicate it. Now, in view of the fact that everybody has had such erroneous ideas as to what an awareness of awareness unit was: It might be a spirit, it might be a ghost - ghosts are bad, you know, they walk around completely naked and clank chains. These things are not duplicatable, they do strange and peculiar things like go through keyholes. Their duplicatability is zero.

So an individual has gotten into the state of being that, „I have no self“ you see, „I have no identity because a self-assigned identity is not good enough.“ And as a self-assigned identity isn't good enough, therefore an other-assigned identity, you see, is much better and „If I were just myself why I would just be a ghost; and I don't want to be a ghost. Or I'd be a demon or I'd be something or other,“ see. He doesn't have a well-formed idea of any identity and because he is so starved for communication origination, you see, so starved for this, that he takes these other ideas - he's got plenty of ideas of his own.

Now, the funny part of it is that the silences don't process, there's no life in silence. Life is a quality. But it gets quantitative when it comes up against time. There can be a negative life, you might say. It seems to be able to get into a fascinating state of not being present. It really goes down - it goes asleep and then it goes to sleep some more. You got the idea? So if we had to run out all the unconsciousness or all the silence there was on the track, why, we would be in - just up against it as auditors.

As a matter of fact, we don't have to do this at all. We don't have to supply a quantity. We have to deliver into the person's hands an idea that he can handle and control, through pan-determinism, communication origin on two lines at the same time. And when he learns that he can originate communications from somebody else to him, why, he's in pretty good shape. And he doesn't get into obsessive identities.

If he found himself getting into an obsessive identity all he'd have do is have that identity talk to him for a while. Just say, „Hello, hello, hello, hello, how are you, Bill?“ Boom! It's the most workable form of the process and actually self-auditing can be done with this.

But what else is it but self-auditing? Follow this? What else is it but self-auditing? But it's the only process I know of that can be done by self-auditing. Processes almost as good as this, almost as strong as this yet wind a fellow up in the soup right away because they miss this particular facet. Now, it's a funny thing, we're right there at what seems to be a very, very narrow hairline; just below this point no self-auditing could possibly be accomplished, above this point, any kind of self-auditing.

A desert of ideas, a desert of life, the manifestations of life are very few and far between. Most people sit around lacking imagination or ideas. What is this imagination or ideas? It's simply a lack of the other communication origin. That's the only thing imagination, lack of; is. It's just lack of origin of communication upon another line.

When you see this with some clarity you'll understand how people get into fixed identities. They get into the identity of that thing which at least communicates with them somewhat, you see. It communicates with them somewhat so they can, to some degree, assume that identity.

Now, if the people, who are being communicated to by a life furnishing an origin of communication, are in a rather fixed state anyhow - they're living in an enormous desert - and if there is no method, no way and no understanding how we could resolve this particular problem, that would be a rough go; see, that would be a real rough go.

Therefore, auditing has a value and this technology now has a value to life that life evidently didn't have. Life up to that time would stumble along, you see, life forms would simply stumble along remedying this scarcity in the real universe wherever possible. So we had an almost totally stimulus-response operation in progress. Happenstance, accidental, practically no planning - everything going off by experience and evolution. See?

Now, the rationale of why you should be something isn't there. There is no rationale on why you should be something and why you should be something else and this is a good thing and that is a bad thing and so forth. There's no real rationale unless you were fitting all of this into some sort of a frame of reference and you decide we can have a good game here if we have certain beingnesses well established and certain rules of the game in progress. But, in the highest echelon of it there is no rationale beyond that which communicates the least worst as communication origin to the individual, tends to fix the individual in its valence or identity.

A thetan will get so bad off - mind you, this is - this is horribly true - he'll get so bad off that a theta trap which re-echoes or has some musical factor is better communication than none. They will take on the valence of the trap. Just as neat as you please.

Did you ever see in running a preclear, did you - or in yourself - did you ever run into a pole-type trap that echoes everything the individual says or does or tries to push away from? Well, honest, a pole-type trap- which is simply sort of a mirror trap; it picks up the wavelength of the thetan and reechoes it - it has no force or power in itself People will swear when they first run into these things that they have electronic potential, that they have voltage and wattage running through them. No they don't. They are - that is the trick of the whole thing. They have nothing in them at all except the ability to reactivate against the source any impulse which comes at them. Mirror image sort of a thing.

Now, we have a little psycho who was - last report yesterday - was getting extremely well. I just saw his auditor going back to the office, I suppose after about a two-day exile with this boy. Mama did not take care of an attendant on the basis - and there was no relief for the auditor. And this boy looks at himself in the mirror all the time. Well, brother, that tells you how much life this individual's had around him. All right. The most life communication he's going to get is from the mirror. Right? And if left to his own devices this individual would simply slab down to take on the form and shape and function of a mirror. He'd have a tendency to try to get that thin and that reflective. His skin texture might even get shiny. I've never seen this preclear but I could have probably described him very, very closely just from his manifestation - he's looking in a mirror. So this is the most life form there is. Now, this is a real short circuit, isn't it? And a real confusing one because the person he sees in the mirror is not, of course, the mirror but it is a person in the mirror but this is himself Da-da-da-da-da. But that is the most life there is around.

Now, why does a thetan continue to mirror a body? It's the most life he can experience, because auditing and thetan-plus-body are third dynamic functions - third dynamic, not first dynamic. So the individual will continue to go on taking the form of the body sort of on a pole-trap basis because the body will mirror and reactivate every time he puts a beam into it of any kind and because it's the most life there is around. He doesn't actively perceive any life in the space in his vicinity. But if you show - if he happens to have some engrams and push some engrams up there, why, he'll go into the obsessive beingness of those engrams, won't he, because they're occupying the space around him. He has some real cute mechanisms by which he makes some life to put in the space around him. He invests an energy mass, like an engram, with some life. He does all kinds of obsessive and unknown to him, evidently, actions. He'll fill up the whole environment full of engrams if you'll let him. Gee, that's better life than none, isn't it? Well, what a lousy form of life: a Fac One engram! Still, a Fac One engram's better than empty space.

It isn't the mass. Now, this is the - this is where we pass out and exceed the theory of havingness. It isn't the mass involved here, it is what the mass will hold in form of life or existence. Therefore, a remedy of havingness of planets is extremely satisfactory - they sure hold life. Suns - they certainly look like life. A sun, by the way, even a dark star, is better than no movement manifestation.

Now, in the absence of life, they will start to pick up emanating masses. In the absence of emanating masses, they will start to pick up nonemanating masses as still better and - because they're capable of motion, you see - than nothing. And that is havingness. And the gradient scale as we go down is an idea, a consideration, something capable of forming an idea or consideration - something forming it is best of all. Next to that the idea and consideration is acceptable. And below that some symbol of an idea or consideration - you know, a printed word or anything like that - is still better than no idea. And we go down from there - an emanating mass and a nonemanating mass. And all these things are better than nothing, but on that gradient scale.

So, you'll have - let's have this thetan and he's scared to put out a force beam. You know, he's perfectly all right on an idea level he thinks maybe, but he's kind of leery of putting out a force beam. Why is he leery of putting out a force beam? That's communication origin, isn't it? That's an origin of communication. As an origin of communication it can then get into the most remarkable state of confusion you ever wanted to listen to.

Why? He didn't want anything else to put out a beam, it'll destroy the form which he himself has. It'll destroy the identity he's already fixated on even though that just may be a mass of facsimiles. Something putting out a force beam at him? Nah! How about him putting out a force beam? That's again communication origin. So he stops putting out force beams.

And you wonder why you can't see. Your preclear when he's exteriorized, your preclear's energy masses as produced - he has simply gone down this gradient scale. He's been communication origin point as an „only one“ so long that the moment he starts to try to emanate he just runs into the stuckest stuck flow there is. So, he doesn't emanate energy.

I had a preclear the other day who got into a very sad state. Preclear was coming way upscale, sonic, visio on, everything was on, oh boy, just running beautifully, just gorgeously, nothing wrong at all. And all of a sudden on Route One of the Handbook, got real sad. He was copying things, yes; but he was worried because his body couldn't see the copies. His body couldn't see the copies and the auditor couldn't see the copies and nobody could see these copies and this made him sadder and sadder and sadder. Of course, the more he was doing this, the more he was sticking himself on the idea of creating energy, see. And he was going down through grief on the subject.

Now, if we had had him make copies with another - attributed ownership, we would have had an interesting situation there. We had - would have had communication origin running. So that actually, you could - you could do this. You could take Self-Analysis, and you could run it on a preclear just come hell or high water without doing any of his side at all. Just run it this way, just main strength, force and awkwardness:

„All right. Have somebody else create a time or a scene in which . . . „ „Have somebody else create a scene in which. . . „ „Have somebody else create a scene in which. . . „ „Have somebody else create a scene in which. . . „ „Have somebody else create a scene in which. . . „

Just take those scenes, one right after the other and keep the guy slugging away at it. Theoretically, we would again boost back up to the point where the individual could produce energy which was visible to one and all - theoretically.

The experiment has not been tried because the idea is so superior and so senior, the origin of force itself from a life unit is so junior to the production of a quality or an idea, you see, that it evidently will run it out without taking recourse to this particular energy pattern. See, we'll run out the force manifestations too, just with this same process which you have been doing. We'll run out all of these as long as we remember that communication origin is definitely a part of this auditing pattern. And if we forget that communication origin is a part of this auditing pattern, the preclear is liable never to remember it. You see, it's just so long gone since there was anything alive around producing an idea.

Now, pity the poor psychoanalyst. Someday we will have to - when we get some grounds and tombs, city of our own and so forth - we will have to have a little tomb there and we will have to dedicate a day and we will - and it'll be the „Unknown Psychotherapist.“ What a sad boy. He actually was trying to remedy his own scarcity of communication origin by making somebody talk and talk and talk and talk and talk and talk and talk, see? If he just could have! And he'd make this person talk and talk and talk and talk and talk and talk and talk.

He would have won except for one thing: he was looking for something else. He was looking for something in this talk. Well, why didn't he just make somebody talk? It would have made the psychoanalyst well. You see that? It would have made the psychoanalyst well; it would never have made the patient well. Never till the end of time would anybody ever have gotten through a psychoanalysis. Because the thing that's wrong with the poor old thetan is that he has had to be the communication origin forever if there was any communication origin done to remedy this scarcity.

He didn't understand the mechanism he was facing because the mechanism is not necessarily native to the thetan. Not necessarily, you see, it's merely one of his agreements. He's agreed that this law of two-way communication will now take place. It was done from that moment thereon.

Of course, you can say theoretically, „Why don't we just run out this agreement and we'll be all set?“ The agreement runs out eventually, but it runs out on this system. And then it gets solider and then it runs out again and then the guy brings it into being again because he hasn't got enough problems and he hasn't enough interest in life and so on. So you run into complexities on it.

All right. As we look over this field of pan-determinism, we better have a very, very, very good idea of what we're talking about. I want to say just a few words about this - and we'll talk about it again. The pan-determinism is the willingness to exercise control - determinism, same deal - along more than one dynamic. That's pan-determinism. It's the willingness to exercise determination - control along more than one dynamic. And the more a person is willing to control the various dynamics the better he can see them. There's an old saw: “A thetan can be what he can see; he can see what he can be.” So if he can't - if he can't be individually and collectively these various dynamics, of course he can't see them at all.

Now, a thetan can see what he can be; he can be what he can see. Now, have any of you ever seen God? Well, come on, come on, have any of you ever seen God?

All right. You've never seen God, huh? Okay. If you have never seen God, this proves conclusively that God is the Supreme Being at the eighth dynamic. Isn't that right?

Oh, yes it does! Because you've never seen God and - and you're being self-determined, which is the first dynamic. So this merely demonstrates to you that individuals are not pan-determinism. You follow this?

Typical Catholic Church reasoning of several centuries ago - or today.

Well, you mean I don't make my point?

Well, let's look at the fact that we have an enormous prohibition about pretending we're God. Look at this. Boy, about the awfullest thing you - that you could possibly level at anybody, „Oh, my God, he thinks he's God.“ See. „He's real nuts, send for the wagon.“ This is synonymous with, „Get a butterfly net!“ Well, that's curious, isn't it?

Look at the prohibition we have against somebody thinking he's an object. See, people keep these insane manifestations afloat as warnings. You know this fellow who's in the insane asylum and he thought he was a bedpost. She thought he - she was a tree. And I notice the comedians on TV and so forth use this quite a bit. It's quite a mechanism. Don't be the sixth dynamic, in other words.

Certainly nobody would possibly pretend to be a spirit because a spirit is something good, you know. Now as we go down the dynamics - fifth dynamics - why, he lived like an animal. Now anybody who has tried to do anything for mankind or as the fourth dynamic, and so forth is immediately suspect - he must be nuts.

Now, maybe McCarthy doesn't need psychiatrists. He doesn't look to me and he doesn't have a comm lag like somebody who needs a psychiatrist. But every one of his opponents has been label - leveling at him the fact that because he thinks communists are going to do something to man, why, therefore this proves immediately that McCarthy is crazy. It's probably not true at all.

All - by the way, one of the little points of strained relations - I love this emphasis on strained relations; I don't know anything very strained about the relations between Great Britain and the United States. They did have a point there where old Winnie was awful sore. I think - I think somebody wouldn't loan him some money or something and he got real mad and for a while there - Anglo-American relations were having a rough time.

But they were - this was given a good high skyrocket by McCarthy's refusal to let British seamen land in American ports for liberty just on so many - just representation that they were British seamen. And he said that they were - the British crews and so forth had a great number of communists in them which was highly detrimental to the security of our own ports. And that these people were influencing our labor unions and longshore unions and that British seamen were acting as carriers of literature and messages and so forth to longshore unions encouraging strikes and tying up ports and so forth.

Well, after we stopped letting foreign seamen land - that was not a British seamen, it was a foreign seamen; and it was Great Britain that took exception to this - after we stopped letting them land, we stopped having these terrific, cataclysmic longshore strikes every time we turned around - we only have them every day or something now.

But, Great Britain has just experienced a communist inspired longshore strike of devastating magnitude. Of course McCarthy should have a psychiatrist, there's no doubt about it! But I think this was real funny because the only thing the British people really got mad at McCarthy about was the fact that he said that British seamen mustn't be permitted to land without showing a proper passport and demonstrating the fact that they weren't communists, you see? And all of a sudden here's British shipping just tied up in knots by a communist inspired strike. There's a communist someplace! So this gets to look very funny.

But what happens is that any time somebody would come out on a fourth dynamic basis he'd have his head cut off - one way or the other. They - really, the only one that came out on a fourth dynamic basis in recent times, and that two thousand years ago, got himself nailed up rather neatly.

Male voice: „Wilson.“

Hm?

Male voice: „Wilson.“

Oh yeah, there's - practically every one of them. Wilson, every one of these guys gets mowed down sooner or later, one way or the other.

We have a great suspicion on those upper dynamics, just as bars to pan-determinism.

Now, we get down into third dynamic and we find this much less suspect - as long as it's a small third dynamic - national or lesser size unit. A person can be to some degree there. But don't let anybody try to get pan-determined on the second dynamic. Think of that one for a moment. You're not supposed to have anything to do with this second dynamic at all, are you? This is very bad; everybody agrees this is real bad. And the most fascinating aberrations occur on the second dynamic.

Freudian analysis tried to rise up into the second dynamic. At least that was a further walk away from the first dynamic than anybody else had adventured. And, boy, did old Freud get - take a beating! Did he take a beating! Oh! He, at the time, was labeled as a fraud, a bum, a hoax, a dog by every medical doctor there was in Europe. They were all breathing fire. He dared to move up into the field, the sacred realms of - we don't know what medical science has to do with the mind, nobody has ever understood this completely but the doctors seem to or maybe they just don't understand things.

But they considered it their province to really slam this particular one flat as far as Freud was concerned. And when he got more and more insistent on the second dynamic, boy, people got madder and madder and madder about this thing. And it was a hurrah's nest created in the whole field of medicine and everything else. But this announcement of the fact that somebody was going to think about the second dynamic, ah! One of the quickest ways you could get arrested would just be to have a packet of French postal cards. You know, I mean real French postal cards. Yeah, boy, you get arrested and thrown in jail maybe throw the key away. What business of this is theirs? I imagine if you had any Greek statuary around you'd be in the same boat. Or would you?

I was rather interested that The Arabian Nights can now be owned and read in the United States by a Supreme Court ruling. They're a work of art. They previously were not permitted. You get the British edition of The Arabian Nights, you were subject to arrest if you had a volume of it. Second dynamic.

First dynamic: I wonder if that's blocked any? „Well, I'm a pretty good fellow.“ „Nyah, always talking about himself“ You see? I mean, you're not supposed to be you. Looks like they just push right on away to zero - a no-dynamic situation.

So this pan-determinism would be - we could just as well call it „some-determinism“ on the dynamics. And if anybody argues with you too violently about pan-determinism - they get the idea, „Well, wait a minute, if you have pan-determinism, why, then - „ and they'll think it over real good - they'll say, „Oh, you mean, you want to control everybody!“ You see, they're real scared of being controlled. No, willing to control. Just reinterpret it immediately as some-determinism on the dynamics. They'll buy this. They'll think people ought to have some determinism.

So, actually the word pan-determinism is there because it is an extreme; it is an absolute height, you see, which we know quite well is not even vaguely obtainable. See? We just know that this is not obtainable, even vaguely. But we can - we put it there so we can at least strike toward it, see. At least somewhere up along the line have something to say in two sides of a conversation, you know. Mild conversation like, „What will we have to eat for dinner?“ - be able to take both sides of the question.

Well, an individual who is not firmly fixed in an identity is suspect and people will try to fix him firmly into an identity. They want to have - everybody to have a label and this is gorgeous. There is no reason why anybody should have a label. But, it makes the wheels run more smoothly.

As a matter of fact the society suffers, really, from a lack of labels rather than labels. The label „citizen“ for instance, is a meaningless label in this world of 1950s. Citizen at one time meant something absolutely terrific. For instance, you could not have been arrested or held or tortured for testimony of any kind if you were a citizen; your property could not be confiscated without the most complicated processes of law and so on. I mean, it was - it really meant something.

And you're liable to get a bad going-over in some jail if you happen to bring up some point of the Bill of Rights today. I mean, that's a bum deal - you better keep mum about it. The way they handle a citizenship today it's not issued, it's sort of inherited and then a fellow can disprove his qualifications by murdering fifteen babies; I think if he only murders fourteen he can get away with it, something like that. But after he is on everybody's police blotter and on all the records and the FBI has also agreed and so on, and he has been sent to prison and so on, why, then they will take his citizenship rights away from him. That's - this is called „accessories.“ Generally attached to military crimes more than anything else. Loss of citizenship is sometimes part of the sentence. I think penitentiary sentence of such and such a period of time usually results in a loss of citizenships or civil rights; it doesn't result in a loss of citizenship, it results in a loss of civil rights. They don't even take citizenship away anymore.

You get the idea? Here we don't have a fixed identity so the whole world tries to surge up to a safe period of identity - a safe point of identity or discover a safe identity. Of course, the unsafe thing about the whole thing is an identity! So we make a scarcity. We say there could be an identity like „citizen,“ you see, that was real good and we make everybody charge up to that - when he's in the Boy Scouts or some such thing - we make him become a „good citizen.“ This is a safe identity. And then we find out that the Gestapo, today really finds a criminal just a little bit dangerous to arrest and the people they arrest normally, apparently, from - I've been doing some checking over here the last couple of days since, and I've been having a ball. All the arrest records I can find are ordinary citizens. The people who get investigated, questioned and so forth, or brought in are citizens; they're not criminals. And yet we find one hundred robberies a day occurring in a city of 100,000 people. That's a lot of robberies. That means every citizen in the United States will be robbed on an average once every two years.

All right. So we're given this pressure, you see, to believe that there is a safe identity and it's just a complete inversion. There is no such thing as a safe identity. A secure job; there's no such thing as a secure job. The only thing that's secure is „no job.“ The only identity that's safe is „no identity.“ All right. There is, however, a way to have an identity and still have a game and that's to have an identity that's not an obsessive identity; to have an ability, an ability to alter or assume identities. Unless you can assume identities, you can't see anything anyhow. You wouldn't be able to see anything anyhow if you couldn't assume some identity. It makes you wonder how men can kill, by the way. It makes you wonder. That is a very, very fixed identity. They are a man and as a man are not even part of the human race, see. They're sitting way back here by this time. And you've got your average Homo sapiens. Although he is a man, he is not part of the human race. He feels like he's a stranger and an alien everywhere he goes.

Okay?