Want to talk to you about the difficulties an auditor may have in processing a case. Although we're still fighting for that last 2, 3, 10 percent of the cases the auditor doesn't resolve readily, anything you know about a case, of course, solves the easier case faster. So the stress here is really not on the difficult case, not at all, the stress is actually on the most fundamental factors which we can assemble concerning cases in general.

The primary weapons which we have are what we know about the physical universe and universes at large; the static-theta; the cycle of action of the MEST universe - create-survive-destroy; the theory of communication; the triangle ARC; the role that agreement plays in reality; the particle composition that comes to be effort and everything else which is actually basically affinity.

When you study particles you're studying affinity. You see that? Should be very clear to you. When you're studying matching particles, you're studying reality, and when you're studying space and particles you're studying communication. So the ARC triangle, of course, falls immediately below that point where theta deserts the complete pervasiveness, complete knowingness, but no action - falls below that point where theta first makes some space. And the ARC triangle proceeds on down from there.

Actually, the first point of it is actually communication. Theta takes a look, which itself creates space. Just by taking a look, space is created; viewpoint of dimension. And the next step into that is, of course, the A part, because in order to have something to be in affinity with something, the first step of that would be to have a particle. And then we swing around into the R part of the triangle, the ARC triangle. There has to be a second particle because it takes two to make an agreement. „One stick won't burn,“ as they say in Norway. They mean by that, of course, that it takes two to make a fight, and this is essentially the fact of the case.

Now, if you could look at the ARC triangle as something that was spiraled into, first on a look and then on a particle, and then on a couple of particles, alike or not alike, why, we would see how this whole setup known as universes (the MEST universe particularly) apparently gets set up.

You see that? So we've got ARC there. When we know some of these fundamentals, a case looks much easier. We have several principles which take prominence in all processing. One of those principles is „That which is not admired tends to persist.“ Another method of saying this is „That which is surviving was once upon a time detested.“ That's sort of a grim backwards look at the thing. There's another principle that goes in there is „Well, if they all say it's wrong I'll keep on doing it until I prove it's right.“ Did you ever see a kid do this?

Well, your preclear's hanging onto a body because, boy, is that wrong. If he can hang onto one long enough though he'll prove he's right. He's got all this space around here in the physical universe because basically he detests hell out of it. And as far as the particles are concerned he'd rather be dead than see a particle, but he does all these things.

You see if you could keep mocking up and unmocking particles there'd be no sense in keeping a particle around. So some time or another you must have mocked up a particle that was just horrible. Everybody says, „You ought to destroy that thing.“ That's other-determinism. You can't admit other-determinism so you say, „Well, I won't. Keep it around.“

So we get something like the Chrysler Building's dome, and it still sits there, architectural unsplendor. We get a military man for president. You see, that's one thing the American people have said for generations they would never do. And they finally broke down and elected a fellow by the name of Grant, and he was so dumb that he let every financier in the country loot the place, and so they said, „Well, now we know we'll never do that again.“ And so they eventually elected Eisenhower. And you know, just as soon as you can get somebody fighting a terminal and closing terminals with it, why, he'll sooner or later shift valence on his opinion.

A very clever thing to do if you really wanted to make this society completely plow in to a point of where it would have a weapon for sanity would be to write every medical doctor a beautifully printed brochure telling him how he must fight Scientology, telling him what it means to him if Scientology remains alive. Describing how awful it is and trying to enlist his aid in stamping out this horrible reptile that is sneaking in to gobble up his practice. And he'd eventually be sitting there saying „Well, all right, now give me another place where your head would survive.“ He couldn't help it. If he knew nothing about the modus operandi of existence, of course, it would simply trap him fair and square.

Well now, what good is it for you to know the modus operandi of existence? Well actually, it's therapeutic just simply to know these various principles which I just got through stating.

The theory of communication, C dash E - Cause to Effect across a distance - is, of course, necessarily either a duplication or a no-duplication; one or the other, or close to either. So that we get somebody trying to talk to somebody who's entirely dissimilar and you get no communication or you get a very janglesome communication.

Here's a thetan, who's essentially nothing, conversing continually with something. What'll that do to him? I mean, all he ever pays any attention to is something. There's something there and he is communicating with it, but he is a nothing. He'll eventually mock himself up as a something, naturally, and then he will tell you, „Well, I'm something. See, I'm an object. I'm a collection of particles. See, here I sit - that proves it.“ Well, the mere fact that there he sits must tell you there's something wrong with it. That's an unfortunate fact but a true one.

If you wanted to test this out, let's find out if; sitting there being something, if he is as able as if he were freely still being nothing. No, no - he isn't anywhere near as able being something. You have to flip him out of the body and get him to adjust the vertebrae and the old pinched nerves and pat the body on the head, and all of a sudden he's in control of and master of this body. Well, that's real good, that's fine. We've returned to him his therapeutic capabilities. But how long is he going to stay out there if he keeps on obsessively communicating with the body? See, it's only when it gets obsessive this communication gets bad.

If he doesn't recognize the theory of communication just as part of his modus operandi of existence, why, he will sooner or later slip back into the head - maybe before the next session, maybe in a couple of months. Naturally. Why? He's a nothingness communicating with a somethingness, and sooner or later he's going to get into some small failure in trying to guide this somethingness around and, of course, he will concede then that there's something wrong with his communication line, which is true. So he thinks he'd better shorten his terminals. You know, let's get in there close; must be something wrong with the communication line.

Well, he'll figure-figure-figure all sorts of things to be wrong with his communication line, such as, „Well, maybe I'm talking to it in Latin or something, and maybe I don't quite appreciate that the body is more delicate than I thought, and maybe, so on, and let's see now, and it may be that there's some interference coming in. Maybe the TV stations have a wavelength like I'm using, and maybe it's actually obeying Bob Hope.“ You know, there's something wrong with this communication line. And he'll go off then doddering around, „Something wrong with the communication line, something wrong with the communication line, something wrong with the communication line.“ Well, he's sunk because it's the first point of entrance into space, and his space'll collapse.

What is wrong with the communication line? A nothingness trying to communicate continually with a somethingness. Of course, to get a perfect communication the nothingness has to communicate with a nothingness at least once in a while, or know what he's doing. See?

So, you'll get two reactions really. A fellow will go around saying, „There's something wrong with my communication line, there's something wrong with my communication line“ - even when he's stuck in his head he's saying this, you know. He isn't perfectly communicating - he knows that, he knows he is a something, but he just knows that he's a body. Fact of the matter is though, even more basically, he knows he's nothing communicating with a something. And even though he's sitting right in the middle of the something, that does not mean he is that thing. So we get this interesting problem of something wrong with the communication line, there's something wrong with my communications, there's something wrong with other people's communications, they shouldn't talk that way, they should write some other way, the style isn't quite right, the movie wasn't quite as aesthetic as it ought to be - yap, yap, yap, yap, yap. All he's saying all this time is „Nothing is trying to be duplicated by something and it doesn't work.“

All right, here we have this fellow now - the second instance - and he recognizes this principle and he's on the destroy end of the curve, you see. He recognizes that a nothingness should exist where that body is. But he doesn't know why a nothingness should exist - he doesn't know anything about communication or duplication - he just knows that the best thing to have where that body is, is nothingness. So he goes and blows his brains out. And if the society insists he has too many responsibilities to go blow his brains out, why, then subterfugenously he lowers himself under the wheels of a taxi cab or steps on a third rail or lands himself. .. and some people haven't quite nerve enough to make the good clean job of it, so they keep making themselves sick. And that's psychosomatic illness.

That's all there is to psychosomatic illness, it's a covert effort on the part of the thetan to make nothing where the body is. But it is an effort which is balked by the society to such a degree that he knows he can't quite get away with it. So he still goes on with this faint impulse which is just make the body sick, don't reduce it to zero.

You know that the society frowns upon killing bodies. The biggest advertisements - biggest advertisers and so forth on television, for instance, and radio, movies - are all dedicated to a commercial to the effect that „If you murder somebody, the state'll get you.“ You know, have you ever noticed that? Detective stories. And do you know that there's even a law on the statutes of every place you've ever heard of; to the effect that you mustn't commit suicide. You must not commit suicide. Do you know that if you commit suicide and fail you'll be arrested? That's right, they'll pick you up and hold you in a ward of a hospital or something of the sort, but you're under arrest, actually, for having tried to commit suicide. In other words, the society is making persist something which is not admired, which is „Keep those bodies alive.“

Well, however that may be, just amongst us girls, a thetan who… a thetan who forgets the prime principles of communication is in an interesting state. He tries to mock himself up as something so he can agree with the body and have some reality on being a body, and when he exteriorizes you find he has a theta body. Well, this is just goofball stuff; this theta body. Well, you have to get him out of the theta body but he knows this isn't quite right because actually he'd still have to communicate with the theta body to get out of it, and so he'd better be a something again and he will at least exteriorize into a mock-up.

Well, you finally shake him apart and get him out there to where he's being comfortably nothing and then he communicates with the body a short time and he starts to get very, very unhappy because he doesn't have any mass and the body does. So he can't agree with the body, so therefore his reality - and incidentally, his ability to perceive - starts going to pieces, if he's still using the body. See, he doesn't have to have something to perceive, but if he's still using the body to perceive, why, he has to stay in agreement with the body. So in an effort to stay in agreement so that he can perceive (he doesn't need the body to perceive at all, it's just one of those concatenations of logic that he got involved in), he's got to still have something at least. So he has to have something in order to be a somethingness so that he can agree with the body, at least to the effect: „The body has energy, I have energy, therefore I am in some slight agreement with the body, therefore I can use the body's eyes to see.“

Why doesn't he just take a look? Well, that's because the rest of the society is all involved in using bodies. And of course, using bodies themselves, on the plus side of the ledger, happens to be quite a game.

Well, let's take a look at the individual's impulses in terms of communication; find out that when he doesn't get a duplication he doesn't get an agreement, so therefore in the absence of some semblance of duplication he doesn't have any reality on his perception. Let's just look at that as the first principle. What cuts down the reality's perception? Well, it's the individual's obsession that he must have an agreement, that he has to look and therefore has to have a perfect communication. And when he goes into that one, the next step is, well, any time he falls out of duplication he doesn't see. He doesn't see worth a nickel.

And now we swing it on around to affinity and we find out that if he doesn't see, then he doesn't like anything. I mean, we're just going downhill on a toboggan at an awful rate of speed. He considers then he doesn't like anything. Why doesn't he like anything? Well, it's quite simple: That's because nothing agrees with him. That's a double-entendre of course. So every time he sees a something he's liable to take exception to it.

Well, if he has any clear recognition of what he's doing, if he's in fairly good shape - in other words, if he's still in a state of knowingness - of course, he gets around all these things. He recognizes what they are. He doesn't have to run on a stimulus-response mechanical basis because he is always senior to any mechanical operation, even the ARC triangle.

The ARC triangle is actually, for people low on the Tone Scale, the first step up to salvation. And for a thetan at 40 is the first step to destruction. The ARC triangle lies below him at 40, but it sure lies way above him as Homo sapiens.

Well, let's take another look at the problem and let's find out then that the individual is trying desperately to cause a persistence. Why is he causing a persistence? Well, creation, destruction are very far apart on the curve at first, and the more he believes in his ability to create and destroy, the less necessity he has to cause any form, state or idea to persist. If he can create and destroy he doesn't have to make anything persist at all. He can always have something else, something new - he can even have a duplicate of it any time he wants. So there's no reason to have the primary form or state or condition persist.

So let's take a look at him and find out that a person who is making something persist must have lost in that department, in that category, the idea… See, he has never lost anything more than an idea. That's all a thetan can lose is an idea. If he's making anything persist, then he must have lost, in that category, the idea that he could create or destroy it. You just look at that. He goes to the center of the curve when the two ends of the curve - create and destroy - turn up missing. See that? He must believe it's necessary. He must believe that there's something about it that is worthwhile, he thinks, simply because he can't create and destroy it. Well, how does this come about? Well, it must be senior to him. If he can't create and destroy something, then that thing is his senior. And if it's his senior, then if he has any connection with it at all he'd better make it persist.

Persistence simply comes about through an inability to create or destroy something. One makes it persist because he can't create another one, and one doesn't destroy it either because he feels he doesn't have the power to destroy it or because he is capable in many ways of doing it but is prevented by the society or other concerns. Now, it should follow then that there are many categories which are quite desirable in their persistence. A consecutive time track is not undesirable, very far from it. Consecutive experience of whatever kind is better than no experience at all. That's another motto the thetan runs on: “Any experience is better than no experience. Any thing is better than no thing.” Sort of the way he operates.

All right. We find out the number of things which he's causing the prevention of destruction and the number of things he's causing to persist are actually basically rather desirable to him. In other words, if we bailed him out of everything he'd still say, „Well, there's a lot of fun involved in this.“ You see that?

I mean, it doesn't all derive from a mechanical basis, you see, because he can always make a postulate and change the whole works. Let's restore to him the freedom to make a postulate, and he would change a lot of his postulates, but at the same time there are various factors in the game which he would like to have rolling. It's only when this game gets him into exceeding trouble that he wants to knock off the whole thing. And then he starts insisting upon his rights of mechanical communication. He's nothing, so it better be nothing too, and various other things. And so he starts working down into the mechanical line, and the next thing you know, you find him stimulus-response. In other words, what is the basic definition of stimulus-response? It is obeying mechanical reaction. Stimulus-response, somebody says, „You're a horse;“ the fellow says, „I am now a horse.“ He must be obeying obsessive duplication mechanics in order to do this.

Now, the curve then, create-survive-destroy, is very important because it's telling us that there's a peak there which contains most of the wrongnesses of your preclear. Now, it sounds very funny to somebody in an orderly society to hear this remark I know, but it isn't really. The thing that's wrong with people is not that they destroy, and not that they create; no, those things are not wrong with the individual. Now, we're just talking about the individual or wrongness or aberration, see. Creation and destruction, that isn't what's wrong, it's that S up there, that „Survival“ on the peak of the curve. After a while in spite of all preventions he says, „I'm going to kill that guy if it's the last thing I ever do.“ Why has he got to kill him? Well, because the guy's surviving. Fellow weren't surviving, you wouldn't have to kill him. Sounds sort of open and shut and Q and A I know, but the point is that you get this fellow going over hot coals, and in front of the foul breath of detectives. There isn't very much wrong with being arrested except the people who arrest you. Anyway… They seldom wash their teeth and so on.

And here we have survival being causative. Well, now this is the most idiotic thing in the world that anything that is simply persisting is causative. Well, there are certain elements there contained in S on the peak of the curve, certain elements that the thetan - your preclear - is making survive that he almost knows darn well he detests.

In other words, there are two classes of survival. One is self-determined survival - he's very happy about this, you see - it's what he elects to have survive. And there's this other one, this other category of S (survival) objects and conditions, that have survived in spite of anything he did. They kept on surviving and he went into this inversion on it: „Well, I've got to help them survive.“ He absolutely detests their survival, and he's got to help them survive. See, he tried so hard to knock them out, he couldn't; he finally realized that these things, no matter how much he detested them, they were senior survival to him.

Now, we won't try any percentage on this thing, but to give you an idea more or less of the fact that survival, the peak of the curve, then, is composed of two types of elements or conditions, let's look at it as: class one, persistencies which are not in any category objectionable to the individual; and persistences which have been intensely objectionable which he now compulsively considers desirable. And those are the deadly ones.

And in a case fortunately - now this percentage is not true; it's just to give you some vague idea of it - in a case, fortunately, there's about 98 percent of the things can just go on surviving happily and everything's okay. And I mean even if you cleared the case all the way on up to the top, you wouldn't find these 98 percent of the items going through the DEI cycle. In other words, they don't keep shifting up to Desire, Enforce, Inhibit, and so on.

But this 2 percent, you'll find them run through the cycle a couple of times and they blow, and boy, they're hot. And the first time you strike the key survival point on a case - compulsive survival, in other words - the first compulsive survival you strike on the case that's really hot may bring you a communication lag from the preclear of anything from fifteen minutes to a couple of hours. See? There's one there that's hot. And what is it? It's a complete communication foul-up. Why? Well, the fellow wouldn't duplicate it and he had to duplicate it, and it won and he wanted it to lose, and he's jammed in against it, he's fought it, he's talked about it, he's slammed it around, he's tried to figure his way through this thing and he just couldn't get anyplace. And he'll finally hit a communication dead spot on it. It's just a complete dead spot, and when you hit that thing you have hit the stupidity on the case. You just hit one of these compulsive survival items on a case, just one, and you'll change the IQ of the case. Because that's true stupidity. He has smashed into and is compulsively being an energy which he still considers antipathetic, basically.

This is the thing probably which Freud called the unconscious mind. He was aware of a bundle of energy of some sort sitting around that was upsetting, and the auditor can today put his finger right on that bundle of energy.

Compulsive survival. We get it with the individual once in a while. He's been operated on or shot up or made unbeautiful, and he decides to drop the mock-up. „We'll just leave it right there on the operating table. Just like that. We'll leave it right there on the battlefield and shove off and go get another body. We'll leave it right there in the gutter. Skip it. To hell with it. We'll go find another body.“ And then the darn thing insisted on keeping on breathing, keeping on moving, communication lines still to it. He had to stand by with it; he had to take care of it. And the next thing you know you've got a hypochondriac on your hands. Oh, this fellow's so worried about the body, it's got a little ache or it's got a little pain and he has to do something about it this way and he has to… Why? Well, he said, „Don't survive.“ He said, „Destroy,“ and it said, „Survive,“ and he said, „Destroy,“ and it said, „Survive.“ And he said, „Destroy, destroy, destroy,“ and it said, „Survive.“ So he says, “All right, it can survive. Now, let's see, what do I do to make it survive? Well, I've got to make it survive, I've got to make it survive. Gee, you know, I've got to make it survive.”

And the next doggone thing you know, here you've got this guy going around and he cuts his finger and he says, “Hhmm, ooh, I've injured my body. I've cut my finger.” He develops a slight quiver of his left ear and he says, „Oh dear, I wonder what this horrible symptom is,“ and so forth. In back of all this we find what? He tried to destroy it and it persisted.

You start to audit this case and you'll find him talking to you, and what we might state colloquially is he's tried to drop the mock-up. He'll talk to you about dropping the mock-up. „If I could just get out of here, I'd leave.“ You just start auditing him a little while and he gets up Tone Scale a little bit, and this early ambition comes back. „Knock it off; knock the body off; get out of here.“ And every once in a while, some professional auditor says to somebody who is quite ill - particularly somebody who is quite ill - and he says, „Be three feet back of your head,“ and the body dies the next day. Just like that - bing! You gave the preclear a chance to carry out his own basic goals. They don't do it very often fortunately, but it happens every once in a while. Usually it's some incurable illness or something of the sort. And it's not up to you, you know, to make that body survive. This person's got cancer - they'd probably live for another six months and it'd get worse and worse and worse and they'd smell worse and worse and worse and it'd cost the family more and more and more money. And they recognize there's no reason to keep this mock-up running and you say, „Be three feet back of your head,“ and - pop! bang! And they say, „Oh yes, well thank you so much for a good session. I feel fine.“ And then the husband is on the phone the next morning saying, „You killed my wife.“ „I didn't do anything to her.“ „Yes you did, because she's dead this morning.“

What did you have to do with it? You did the rather knightly deed of saying, „Madam, this broad highway is the road out.“ And the husband is illogically insisting on keeping a body ticking over in agony at vast expense for many months.

Euthanasia is frowned upon. Mercy killings are not the thing of today. It works a great hardship on the society, by the way, because it continues to give them psychiatrists. The psychiatrist uses electric shock and the prefrontal lobotomy - and this is true, you know - only because he is not permitted to totally kill the patient. And he can't kill this insane person but he can render this insane person as good as dead with an electric shock or with a prefrontal lobotomy. So he does. He can't come any closer to it. He is actually quite well aware of what he's doing, and actually the family around such a person is quite often quite well aware of what he's doing, and therefore you don't get a society objecting to it too madly. It's murder!

I haven't just now said, by the way - I caution you - I have not just now this moment said that all psychiatrists are murderers. I haven't said that they all have a compulsive impulse to murder all their patients. I want you to note that carefully, I have not said that. It's true, but I haven't said it.

Now, where we get a thetan in difficulty, we get a compulsive survival. And let's use that just as a technical term - that's a compulsive survival.

So now let's be a very, very good auditor, hm? And let's understand this principle of a compulsive survival. Whether it appertains to the body or anything else on the part of the individual, let's look at it for what it is and let's solve it.

There is a process which solves it. It's „Where would (blank) be safe?“ Where would the item which is being made to survive or is compulsively surviving - where is that item safe? Quite often you'll find this item with a stuck needle on the E-Meter, because it's a blank spot.

The E-Meter has to be looked over a little bit with a few more preclears than I have already run on this in order to give you the most optimum reaction. I find the needle sticks, and sometimes it sweeps. But I'll have to codify it a little bit. It's a no action or terrific action on the E-Meter that you're looking for. There's some little evidence right now that the E-Meter does its steep dives only in the presence of a vacuum, and does its sticks only in the presence of a mass of unwieldy, unthinking energy. Some evidence to that degree.

But you have a better test than an E-Meter. You say to this fellow, „All right now, where would shoes be safe?“ He doesn't answer you for a half an hour. He's sitting there, wide awake, trying to answer you, and he can't even think of shoes being safe. He just jams right on that point. And you just sit there and look at him. Ask him once in a while some little coaxing question to make sure he's still around. And he'll come out of the other end.

Now, that essentially is the guts of a communication lag. What's a communication lag? It's one of these things, one of these compulsive survivals, in the mental anatomy of your preclear. And he hits it and he comm lags. You say, „Good morning,“ and he says, „Hm. Oh, hello.“ What happened? You said, „Good morning,“ he thought something and it went through one of these compulsive lags. Well, unless his attention is actually and exactly called to it the thing never runs out. It just gets worse, it doesn't get better. Why? It's just being added to. He's less and less looking at it and more and more dodging it, and so we have this as an interesting manifestation which leads us right straight through to the heart, soul and center of aberration itself.

You understand this: The key test of aberration is communication lag. You see that? The inability of the person to get two things connected easily and rationally, and to disconnect them at will - to connect and disconnect at will. You could say this is in essence good communication: to connect and disconnect.

All right, when an individual can't get something connected, the common statement of the society is that he's stupid, he doesn't get it. He just is unable to put his ignition key in the ignition of the car. He just can't get this direction. You keep telling him, „Well, to start the car, there's… Why do you keep running your battery down? You start the car; you put the ignition key in the switch there and turn the switch. And don't just sit there and grind the - you'll run your battery down.“ Fellow gets into the car the next morning, hits the button - grind-grind-grind - hasn't put the key in the switch.

Now, you'd say that fellow was awfully stupid, wouldn't you? And yet essentially that's merely a communication lag. He just can't register; he can't get this thing across the line.

How long is the communication lag? Well, next year sometime… The longest lag I know of; by the way, that could actually be easily traced, was ten years. A fellow was told something and ten years later recognized it. Well, this fellow, sometime next year, will all of a sudden - it'll come to him, suddenly and abruptly, that he ought to put the key in the ignition, turn it and that will start the car. That's communication lag.

All right, now you stopped talking about something about an hour ago, and company is still there. That's communication lag. See? I mean you stop talking about… you've said everything you had to say and heard everything you wanted to hear from them about an hour ago, and they're still talking, they're still sitting there, they're still… huuuuh. Can't disconnect. You start looking at this, you get frantic after a while. Huuuh!

I've known more salesmen, for instance, to completely ruin a sale simply by keeping on selling after the sale was made. Well, all he's doing is running another type of communication lag which is an inability to disconnect. Well now, the society calls this crazy - calls the inability to connect, stupid and the inability to disconnect, crazy. What do you combat as an auditor? You're combating aberration and you're combating stupidity. Now, on the part of a body you're combating psychosomatic illness - an illness on the part of the body - the persistence of an illness. And all we've got here is, in each case, a persistence of some sort. Here's a condition that goes on persisting in spite of anything that you or anybody else or the person himself can do about it. Now, it's up to you to do something about it.

You're trying to handle a condition which has not been handled before, regardless of whether or not it is a twisted foot or a twisted brain or a fellow who could never learn to read. Regardless of what it is, it's a persisting condition. And that is the common denominator of everything anybody complains to you about, is the persistency of the condition. Even the persistency of the intermittent condition: „Every five days I get a headache.“ You see, it's the repetitive persistency of the condition which is upsetting. „Every twenty-one years we have a war,” you know. Condition is repetitive, but that's a persisting condition. There is, you might say, sine wave persistence and intermittent persistence, but however it is, that's what you're in there supposed to do. You're not actually being asked to create anything new. You're just being asked to change the persistence curve of something. Either make it more persistent, such as some fellow wants you to audit his wife because she doesn't love him anymore. And I suppose you could. That's really a job for a hypnotist, though. And you're supposed to, in other words, change a persisting condition.

All right, what do we have as weapons for this? Well, our best weapons on it are SOP 8, SOP 8-C, Advanced Group Procedure, and the class of processes which we are calling SOP 8-D. Now, this SOP 8-D is simply being worked out as an ability to discover the persistences - different classes of persistences. SOP 8-D takes care of - just as itself - takes care of the persistence of personnel, universes of personnel, persistence of universes of personnel.

SOP 8-DA takes care of the persistence in terms of sex - sexual persistence. It's almost a Freudian process.

And SOP 8-DB takes care of the failed goals of the individual which are yet persisting. Now that's a real neat one. There's no reason for me to go into Opening Procedure and Step I and Step II and Step III, because these are just the „D“ class. Now, why are they there? That's so that you, after you've run a fragment of this process, will remember to go back and start with Opening Procedure, Step I, Step II, Step III and back into the thing again or into the next one. In other words, let's always cross that bridge, because we want this guy exteriorized. That's why we keep crossing the bridge.

All right. Now, goals is another E-Meter job if you want it to be, but it can simply be arrived at by looking at what the individual is doing in present time or just talking with him. You can talk with him and discover what his goals are. You can also discover who was mainly in the front of those goals. But in DB we're not interested in who was in front of the goals. We're just interested in the goal.

Now, you see how this little process here differs from a Universe Process. It works just like Universe Processing is worked because it's heading right straight toward compulsive survival. But it's handling the goals of an individual which come under rather nebulous headings. You want to know what this individual's basic ambition in existence is, and that's one of the first questions you'll ask him: what was his basic ambition; what were his ambitions in life; what were these ambitions; what was he trying to do and so forth. And probably his second or third answer will be the answer you want. I mean it's that fast, you really don't need even an E-Meter.

You ask this person, „Well, what did you want to be?“

He'll first tell you, „Well, I… nothing,“ if he's having an awful bad time, „Well, nothing.“

„Well, what are you being successful at now?“

„Ohhh“ - see, the guy is just miserable the second you ask him this question. He isn't being successful at anything now.

„Well, what would you like to be successful at right now? Well, why do you want me to audit you?“

„Oh, well… if… if you audited me you'd make… might get me in some kind of shape so I could write music again.“

You've got it. That's the answer. That's the answer you want.

What's the next thing that you're liable to run into? If you've hit the compulsive survival that you want, you'll get your comm lag right now with this question: „All right, where would music be safe?“

And if you've hit the compulsive survival right on the button, your preclear won't be talking for the next fifteen minutes, half an hour. He'll just sit there kind of bogged. We're not interested in the long history of this, he won't give it to you. You just want a place where music would be safe, that's all.

You'll find out he was a little kid, his mama and three aunts all taught piano. And they beat him, and they kicked him around, and they booted him outdoors, and he couldn't stay around the house, and he couldn't touch those pianos, and he couldn't have anything to do with music, and his life was just hell because of music. So eventually music won. Now music has to survive.

He may or may not have any talent at all for writing music, but you'll find out that when he got to be eighteen or nineteen he wrote several pieces for the high school band. And some latent talent showed up here and there and he fooled around with music. He just fooled around with it, that's all, but he'd sure like to make it his life's work. That's what he would have told you at thirty, and here he is maybe thirty-five and he's lost his grip; he can't write music anymore.

It's a totally idiotic picture, you see? Music is doing a compulsive survival in his life. He is doing his best to make that career fail. He's doing his best to make that career survive. And he's interlocked right there - bing, bing. Compulsive survival. Deadly communication lag.

Now, there's a… there are two denominators to this type of processing. One is a goal. It must have occupied the category of a major current life goal - must have occupied that category. That's one that it has to have. Your current lifetime must be studded with this goal. And two, it must be something that he's had some success at. He must have been slightly successful with it.

Now, you dive into a case on that one, you're liable to unlock the case. What'll happen? The old laws of engrams are still in here. This individual got beaten around so much about something that he eventually got to a point where it won. In other words, he went into the winning valence of something. But he didn't go into the winning valence of a person, he went into the winning valence of a condition or a goal. See, he went into the winning valence of a goal, and that's just a different category of a winning valence.

Now, you ask where that'll be safe and you will get eventually the most hair-raising material out of that compulsive survival. Oh golly, it seems like this happened and that happened and something or other happened all the way down the line on this. It just is the one thing that keeps turning him back and kicking him back and pushing him forward and being argued about. He's doing a defending of something.

Well, you will eventually trace it back, you will think, to one person's universe, then maybe two people's universes, then maybe three people's universes, and you'll be very surprised but you have suddenly disclosed something which didn't just spring up in this lifetime. This has been going on for a long time. If it was music, the fellow was once upon a time in one lifetime a successful composer, and he got poisoned. And another lifetime, why, he was a woman and he was married to a successful composer who ruined him… her. And there's lots of interweave here. And he just finally hung up dead center on this thing. He just can't move any further, any way, he can't think about it and so forth.

Now, another condition that must answer here: It must be a communication lag. Must demonstrate itself as a communication lag, and you must get a fairly rapid change of perception with regard to it.

Case that gives you any trouble for any length of time, if you can't run just bing-bing-bing; if you can't run „D“ itself; separate out a couple of universes; you can't run a little bit of sex off the case and bing, he exteriorizes; he sure as hell will on this one. Because it's compulsive survival goal, and he has to have a body to make the goal good. And he's just going ahead and it's… boy, is this the world of unreason. He has just ceased to be reasonable about it at all. He's identifying and cross-connecting and all mixed up.

Now, those of you listening to this lecture may have the idea that you have compulsive survivals which are giving you communication lags and which are impeding you. Of course, nothing I ever say should ever apply to an audience's individual case. And having told you about this, I'm quite well aware that having told you without it being audited that I am liable to just plow right straight on into the button. See? And there might be two or three amongst you who are simply sitting there looking at me now in a dead blank. So let's just finish it off with a little group processing.

Give me some places where you are not.

All right, now give me some conditions you're not suffering from. Oh, get one for sure that you know you're not suffering from.

And let's spot some places in the physical universe space where your own condition does not exist at this moment.

All right, now just for variation give me some kinds of hats you're not wearing at this moment.

Some kinds of animals now you're not being at this moment.

Now, give me some fates you will not experience before the day is out. Get one for sure - some horrible end you're not going to come to before the day is out. For instance, you're not going to be beheaded.

Okay, now some things you could drink without being poisoned.

Some friendly intercourse you could engage upon without ruining your reputation.

Some things you could say now to another human being that wouldn't drive him crazy.

Now, some things you could say that would not lead anybody to suspect that you're crazy.

Some things you could wear that wouldn't tip off your actual condition.

And now name some things that are not looking straight into you and through you at this moment.

Now, let's check over your body and see if you have all the necessary elements of a body.

Okay, now let's look around you and see if you can find a nothingness that would be very pleasant to contemplate.

Okay, let's find the two back corners of the room.

Now, let's find two nothingnesses back there.

And let's let go and find the floor beneath your feet.

End of session.