Thank you. Thank you.
I take it by this time you've found the congress.
Audience: Yeah.
Good. Good. Well, I have too.
I have here a very, very, very impressive set of APAs. These were the Group Intensive APAs. And quite remarkable, quite remarkable the changes which occurred in that Group Intensive. Of course, these changes don't compare to an individual intensive, but that they changed this much is quite remarkable.
For instance, I don't know whether you can see these or not, but for Group Auditing that's pretty good, isn't it? Can you see that? The blue line is the sordid wreck the person was. And the red line is where the person ended up at the end of the intensive. These profiles are quite deceptive, by the way, because people have a tendency to move on up a little bit as they settle out. And sometimes a person is on a total serenity, you know, totally serene, and they answer these things straight across the top. And then you give them five minutes of Tone 40 process and they go straight across the bottom. And then they start up. But it is quite remarkable.
Now, you take a profile of this character; that is a fairly high profile already. You see the blue line there? I don't know if you can see it all the way back there; you'd have to have a telescope to do so. But there's a blue line here in the middle. Here's the divisional point. This person was well above what you might call a danger mark on an intensive profile, and has moved up here with several spots clear at the top. Quite remarkable.
Now, to get a change in a high-toned preclear is more than we used to be able to do.
Now, you take a profile of this character, which is still on the floor - see, that's down there, still down there. But this person moved up considerably, quite remarkably so for a Group Intensive.
Now, a profile of this character is terribly interesting, because this was Tone 40 Group Auditing. And to have a profile of this character turn up on a Group Intensive is quite remarkable and is news. Because a person with that bottom profile would've come to your group or come to you, you'd have done some processing one way or the other on them and they would have said, „Well, nothing happened, nothing happened, nothing happened, nothing happened.“ And just to change the monotony, „Nothing happened.“ And then hideously enough the profile would have confirmed it.
But therefore, Group Auditing merits a little bit of a bow right here, because it has moved up. And using a Tone 40 type audit and the Tone 40 processes for groups, which were used on this particular group, you could be fairly sure that people coming into a Group Auditing session, which you as a Scientologist were conducting or which you as a Scientologist were interested in - you know you bring somebody to a group and you want to have something happen; somebody's auditing them, you're just as interested in something happening as the auditor - and this person is way on the bottom. Let me tell you that three years ago he would have still finished up on the bottom. And for cases that are all the way down to start moving up, that is really something. But it is so eclipsed by how far south we can go today with processes that we've just sort of overlooked saying anything about it. Group Auditing can pick people up off the bottom and do something for them and show them a remarkable increase.
How many hours of Group Auditing it would take to do something for this particular case, I would not be able to forecast since we've never made the test. But it'd possibly be something in the neighborhood of seventy-five hours of Group Auditing or something way up there. But this person changed quite markedly in just that.
Furthermore it's quite significant that this person is in the age bracket which was particularly stated to be impossible by - huh! - psychotherapy.
It's very fascinating here.
This Group Intensive, by the way, it might interest you, had a curiosa: the IQs were either low or high. That's fascinating. The IQs were low or high. In other words, Scientology doesn't include one breed of cat. Some of these IQs were down around 70. And some of them were around 160. See, I mean they're just zzhhh.
Obviously people with that great a disparity do not associate with each other! But a great many of these people were… would have been described by an old-time Dianetic Auditor as impossible cases, or difficult ones to say the least. And several of these people who experienced significant changes in this Group Auditing were above the age level when any psychotherapy is supposed to act in any way. But we don't think they knew anything about it.
Here's an interesting intensive, here. I'm probably avoid… I wasn't an auditor of this group so I've just had this material handed us. So if you happen to see somebody's name on this or something of the sort, why, it's out of my responsibility. The group auditors could complain, but I wouldn't.
Now, you notice this profile was way down here, way on the bottom and moved all the way up to the top. Well, just to show you that that was no fluke in answering the personality questions and so on, the IQ of this person went from 87 to 126. Yeah, it's true. Thank you.
This person, by the way, will have to be very, very careful around psychologists, because that's … I think they're supposed to shoot people above 110. I think that's too bright, 110 is.
But it's quite amazing the number of people here who moved up into genius level; and the number of people who were at genius level who moved up into ranges that nobody's ever looked at before. Well, that's the way it is.
I just wanted you to know we had the… we had the - what's this? Haven't those things gone off yet? Here's some sparklers. Well, the glorious Fourth wound up, I'm told tonight on the radio. The glorious Fourth wound up with the explosion of the biggest atom bomb in history. „And it shook the earth,“ the news report said, „It just shook the earth. It just shook it. Oh, boy!“ How do they know that wasn't us coming to the congress?
When better earth shaking is done it will not be done by the AEC. Thank you.
Now, I mustn't get off into that particular line because I promised you that this congress was about you and that we are out of the business of what they laughingly call the third dynamic on earth.
The third dynamic, as it is mocked up here on earth, governments that are at the throats of other governments and so forth - third dynamic - isn't too good an example of what a third dynamic should be. Nor do I wish to make any questionable or disloyal remarks with regard to any government on earth, because we couldn't care less.
But it occurred to me the other day, something that I just must pass along to you. I promised you I wouldn't mention this, so I'll just glance over it and I won't mention it, see. Did you realize that the only people who can legally rob, kidnap, murder and commit other crimes is a government? If you don't pay your internal revenue the government can kidnap you and hold you for ransom. Did you realize that?
Audience: No.
Well, it's true isn't it?
Audience: Yeah.
All right. Now, every time they execute somebody, why, they're committing murder. I don't care what you call it. Murder is the violent death of another human being, premeditated. They certainly premeditate it, don't they?
And if you had neighbors that shouted at their neighbors to the degree that these nations shout at nations, you'd get the idea after a while that they were batty.
But I was very interested in this phenomenon that rage, psychotic rage, kidnapping, murder and all these other crimes are only allowable to a government. And I had that thought and I sat and looked at this thought for a little while and I said, „You know, we better get busy! We're getting… we're slowed down there.“
Now, I've told you I would tell you something about the actual practice of CCH. And you have been experiencing some of this in your seminars. Want to show you something about how to do these various drills. Okay?
Audience: Yes.
All right. The first drill requires two chairs. (Get me two chairs.) This drill is totally devoted, 100 percent dedicated to just one thing, and that is to get a person over having to be or having to act in a peculiar fashion just because he has another human being in front of him. Got that? That's its total purpose. Total purpose.
Now, you'd be surprised how in the old days auditors used an auditing technique to cover up the fact they were nervous about facing somebody. We've learned this since I invented this and put it into the Comm Course. (That's all right, you can sit right there. Thank you.)
We discovered, oddly enough, that this one was tougher to do than the rest of the drills, which is why the lamas - you know, they were the squirrels of Buddhism I've told you before; they took Buddhist stuff and corned it up - why they run this tremendous gradient scale. See, they have a terrific gradient scale which starts with human being and mind essence. You see? And those are the two steps on this gradient scale.
And the way they get there is this process, modified somewhat. Now, all they do in order to do this process is simply sit here. That's all there is to it. He's been run on it.
[to student] Flunk.
Flunk. You laughed at the audience. Male voice: Oh.
Okay. You pass. That's all there is to it.
Now, move your feet around. All right. Now just start moving your feet, see. If I were the coach here, I'd say, „Flunk.“ „Flunk.“ They get this fixed look on their eyes sometimes. You know, get an absolute daze. That's what he's got now, whether he can see it or not, see.
Well, that's it. That's confronting.
Now, I point out to you that necessary equipment in order to do these drills consists of two chairs, space in which to put them, something solid for them to rest on, such as an earth, and a couple of bodies. Now, that's actually not very much equipment. Almost anybody can drum this up one way or the other here on earth.
Now, the best way to do the process is just that way. One acts as auditor or student, and the other acts as coach. And for a coach to sit here… That is not the role of the coach. It's quite rough to be a coach, by the way; it takes hours and hours of this sort of thing to make a good coach. A coach is quite active. But a coach mustn't use his activity to mask the fact that it makes him nervous to see somebody sitting there. And you'll find some coaches doing that.
Now, it really requires three to six hours of this confronting before it's fairly flat. And things happen while a person is practicing it. Three to six hours - fairly flat.
Well now, if a team of two was doing this, one would be the student and the other would be the coach. And then they would do that maybe for three hours and take a turnabout, you see? Well, in view of the fact that if you were doing this by yourselves you wouldn't be going through it on a regular schedule - you'd be doing it evenings or something like that - you'd certainly better lay out a period at least three hours long in order to do this particular one in it.
The only other process that has a demand on time… This has a demand on time, because actually the longer a person sits there, why, the worse off he's liable to get, up to a certain length of time; and that certain length of time is from three to six hours. But an individual… an individual who puts himself into this particular drill ought to have at least three hours to carry it on. Don't you see? The only other process that has this duress on it that I can think of at the moment is what we used to call Op Pro by Dup, which is old Book and Bottle, which is duplicative command. And if old Op Pro by Dup starts to bite, you don't stop.
Somebody, the other day, took this literally. We're doing it again at the Academy. And somebody took it so literally that it started to bite on the preclear and the auditor wouldn't let the preclear go for the entire period of its biting, which was fifteen hours! That's pretty good. Give him a hand.
All right. Well, we've got the first one of that. Now, you've had a taste of the second one of that.
(Give me a book. You got a program or a book or something? Okay. Good.) All right. You can start there. You can start there - across there.
Student: (chuckles) „That is the end of this issue. If you intend to take a subscription, let's get with it. Don't leave those intentions hanging around in the bullpen. They will hurt you and sure won't help you.“ That's the end of it. No more. Blank page.
LRH: Well, read the blank page.
Student: Oh… .
LRH: Okay! All right, do it again. Read the blank page.
Student: All right. The cow came walking down the road.
LRH: Didn't say that. That cow he's got there isn't walking. All right. Just take any line here. Just read me any line. Now, read it as badly as you can read it. Now, go on now.
Student: The thetan is a glutton.
LRH: No! No.
Student: No?
LRH: No. No. I won't pass that. Read it again.
Student: The thetan is a glutton.
LRH: No. No. Now, listen. You pick up the sense off the page and then you get that as your own thought and then you say it to me.
Student: I understand. The thetan is a glutton.
LRH: Well now, that's better. But I'm sure you can do better than that. Now, let's try it again. Let's try it again.
Student: Got more beef than mutton.
LRH: More beef than mutton? All right.
Student: The thetan is a glutton.
LRH: Well, okay. That's better. That's better. That's fine. But you can do better than that. Let's try it again.
Student: The thetan is a glutton.
LRH: All right. All right. Okay. All right. That's good enough. Read another line.
Student: For more than beef or mutton.
LRH: No. Okay.
Well, that's all we do on this Training 1, don't you see? The fellow picks up a line, he reads it as his own thought. And we don't care how… We're not going in the direction of elocution. Whether he says it with his little finger raised or not verbally is completely beside the point. What we want him to do is get some idea that it's his own thought and say it to us.
Now, run a gradient scale as a coach and don't keep knocking a fellow's head in when he's doing not too badly. You see? Give him a little bit of hope. And as he does it by the hour he will get better and better, don't you see? And then become more and more strict.
Now, we don't worry too much about intention in a Comm Course until a person hits it the second time. He goes through it once, he can get through and he does fine, as I showed you that little stair-step. All right. The next time he hits it though he's been through Indoc and he knows about intention, so it's whether or not the intention gets across to the preclear that counts. But that is what you're coaching. And that is the only thing you are looking for. You want, of course, confronting, which is good posture and able to sit there, plus the ability to say a line to a preclear so it sounds real and natural. Now, you see how far we've gone there? All right. Now let's take the next step. (You're still auditor.)
Now, in this particular case, the coach does the reading of the line. And the only thing that the auditor is supposed to do is acknowledge it. That's all there is to it. And this is just a drill in acknowledgment. This is TR 2. Now, you see we've added up being able to sit there, being able to read a line and now being able to acknowledge. See that? All right. (Now, don't be any better than a student would be. Now, come on.)
LRH: See you at the Freedom Congress.
Student: All right.
LRH: Let's try that again. See you at the Freedom Congress.
Student: Good.
LRH: No. No. See you at the Freedom Congress.
Student: Fine.
LRH: See you at the Freedom Congress.
Student: All right.
LRH: That wasn't bad. That wasn't bad. I'll let it get by. The thetan is a glutton for more than beef or mutton.
Student: Good.
LRH: Okay. That got by in spite of him. He yearns for games and pelf for threats to home and self
Student: Thank you.
LRH: All right. He loves a combat fair, on earth or in midair.
Student: Thank you.
LRH: This is no fair. You're running Tone 40 now. Now, come on, come on.
Student: I'm sorry.
LRH: He loves a combat fair on earth or in midair.
Student: Okay.
LRH: See, that's good. Good average low tone. A problem he will find, no matter what its kind.
Student: All right.
LRH: Oh, do better than that. A problem he will find, no matter what its kind.
Student: Fine.
LRH: No. A problem he will find, no matter what its kind.
Student: Good.
LRH: You got to get it across. I got to get it. Now, come on, I've got to get it. A problem he will find, no matter what its kind.
Student: Fine.
LRH: I didn't get it. A problem he will find, no matter what its kind.
Student: Thank you.
LRH: Well, we'll let him squeak by on it. So long as it is snappy, the thetan is quite happy.
Student: Thank you.
LRH: All right.
That is actually all there is to this. Now, you see what we've done: taught him to confront, to issue a line, you see, read it to the coach and then acknowledge. And that's… we re up there now to Training 2.
The reason we call it Training 0 is simply for the excellent reason that it got numbered that way.
All right. Now, we go into the Duplicative Question. Training 3 - Duplicative Question. Now, it isn't … doesn't require just a little skill, just a little skill, to duplicate an auditing question.
For a person to say the same question over and over and over and over again - this is regardless of end of cycle or anything else - but for a person to say a question, repeat the same question over and over again usually taxes Homo sap most horribly. He can't duplicate it that much. And in some auditing session he all of a sudden pulls some awful boo-boo. He was saying, „Look at that wall,“ and he says, „Notice that wall.“ And then he doesn't like that so he says, „Well, take a glimpse of the wall.“ And he keeps varying the question. And we've found this is necessary… It enters a terrible amount of confusion to a preclear to have his auditing question that he is receiving not duplicated. Makes a very rugged, ragged session.
Give you an idea of just the powers of a duplicative statement: Little boy, he's crying. (Now, this is not an acknowledgment; this is something else.) We say, „Hello. Hello. Hello. Hello. Hello. Hello. Hello.“
All of a sudden he says, „Hello.“ That's just the power of getting through.
Now, the favorite Homo sap method of getting through would have been this: A little boy's crying. He'd say, „Hello. What's the matter with you? Damn it! Why don't you answer me!“ Doesn't work. It is totally unworkable.
But try it sometime. See somebody who's being misemotional one way or the other - you think it might sound funny maybe, if out in the workaday world somebody sailed into the office with a big snarl on his face and he hates the world, you know, and you say it'd sound very funny if you kept repeating, „Good morning.“ You'd say, „It would look funny to him.“
Listen, he's out of communication. You're making a mistake. You believe these people are in communication, that they can observe, they see things and so forth, just because you can. They don't. This person doesn't notice it; it doesn't seem queer to him that you do this. You say, „Good morning.“
The fellow, „Ynah-grrr-ynah.“
You say, „Good morning. Good morning. Good morning. Good morning.“
Actual case history on this is that one fellow had to tell his boss good morning, repetitively for over a month, before he finally got a cheery good morning back. The boss had never noticed that he was saying good morning repetitively to him. Quite amazing. So that all by itself has a therapeutic value. Well, now listen. Does acknowledgment have a therapeutic value? Does training on acknowledgment have a therapeutic value?
Boy, I tell you. You ever hear of the Great Amen? Huh? The Great Amen. It just ended everything; everything quit right at that moment. Well, theoretically we're talking about something of the same order of thing. If you could give a good enough acknowledgment - if you could give a good enough acknowledgment - everything would stop everywhere and vanish. Because all an acknowledgment is, is an end of cycle, you see?
So this has terrific therapeutic value all by itself. You just tell somebody „Okay“ or „Good.“ You give him the great, not amen, but the Great Okay. And an individual is at once… an individual is at once ended on that cycle of action.
Are you aware of the fact that if you can give a good enough acknowledgment the facsimile the person is working upon disappears in its entirety? Were you aware of that? That every place he's been halted on the track by the auditing process is swept away by that acknowledgment. It's a great big broom. It is so effective that a person can be sitting there running a problem of comparable magnitude to his job or something of this character - running problem of comparable magnitude to the office, see. He has a picture of the office, people moving around in the picture, he's all interiorized and introverted and everything else. And you've asked him the question, he gives you some kind of an answer and then you tell him, „Okay“ - phht - there's no picture of the office and he's in present time. Quite therapeutic, isn't it?
Well, do you realize there's therapeutic value in having somebody speak to somebody? You know there's a lot of men died in this world because nobody would speak to them anymore. Well, there's value in just being spoken to. Ah-ha. And for somebody to sit down comfortably is itself havingness. Look at the number of processes which we have combined right up to this simple level of the repetitive question.
You see the processes? That somebody would give you his interest (which is confrontingness), plus somebody would speak to you (therapeutic), that somebody would acknowledge (ah-ha), and that somebody would make a question repetitive until it's thoroughly and completely answered - all these things added together in just the woof and warp of an auditing session accomplish miracles all by themselves. And you can use such an odd question as „Do fishes swim?“ Which is the one we're going to get at now.
(Go ahead - „Do fishes swim?“) This is merely the repetitive question, that Training Drill devoted to that.
Student: Good or bad?
LRH: Bad.
Student: Do fish swim?
LRH: Sometimes.
Student: Good. Do fish swim?
LRH: Sometimes.
Student: Good. Do fish swim?
LRH: No.
Student: Do fish swim?
LRH: No.
Student: Good. Uh, do fish swim?
LRH: No.
Student: Uh.... . do fish swim?
LRH: No.
Student: Yeah, okay. Uh .... do fish…
LRH: I think so.
Student: Oh. Do fish swim?
LRH: I don't know.
Student: Good. Do fish swim?
LRH: All right. Now, I want you to speak more loudly.
Student: All right. Do fish swim?
LRH: No, not quite that loudly.
Student: Do fish swim?
LRH: Yes.
Student: Good. Do fish swim?
LRH: Now, are you putting the intention across with that? All right. Let's put an intention across with this. Let's intend for me to wonder about „Do fish swim?“ at least.
Student: All right. Do fish swim?
LRH: Gee, I don't know. Oh, I'm the coach!
All right. Now, that's all there is to a repetitive question. „Do birds fly?“ „Do fish swim?“ You got the idea? A person gets to a point of where he can flawlessly utter the repetitive question and acknowledge the reply. That is all there is to it. And he just keeps that up and practice gets him good. See that?
The finishing touches on a perfect duplication is done by getting run and running on something like Op Pro by Dup. But we're not trying for these high ranges; we're just trying for the repetitive auditing question.
All right. Now, let's take the next one. Right with „Do fish swim?“ - the repetitive question - we have comm bridge. Now I'm going to give the fastest comm bridge on record. Now, I'm going to be the auditor and he's going to be the coach. Okay?
Student: All right.
LRH: Do fish swim?
Student: Yes.
LRH: Do fish swim?
Student: Yes.
LRH: Do fish swim?
Student: Yes.
LRH: Do fish swim?
Student: Yes.
LRH: All right. I'm finished with that process. Are you in-session?
Student: Yes.
LRH: All right. This is the next process. Do birds fly? Do birds fly?
Student: Yes.
LRH: Do birds fly?
Student: Yes.
We found… You see, we've gotten pretty smart here in the last seven years. We know a lot of oddities and odds and ends floating around. Such as, we know that a sudden change of process throws somebody into a stuck. A swift change of process sticks the preclear on the track. You can find a lot of old-time preclears who are stuck on the track merely because the auditor kept changing the process all the time. You know that?
To keep this from happening, when you change a process you use a communication bridge. And all a communication bridge is, is three agreements: an agreement to end the process we are running, an agreement to continue the session, and an agreement to begin a new process. It's three agreements, and that's all a communication bridge is.
Now, I'm very glad to have this opportunity to tell you that there's been a bad communication bridge drifting around. People have been saying, „I will ask this question five more times and then we will end the process. Is that all right with you?“ Boy, that certainly could never be all right with anybody because when do you end a process? Well, you end a process when the comm lag is flat or when an ability is regained or when a major cognition has come up. And you mean that if you re going to say „five more times,“ you will never really get the process smoothly ended, because it flattened on the second command and then you were pledged to do three more commands! And by that time it unflattened and you're stuck. So you say, „Well, can I run it five more times?“ hoping you come out even.
A proper communication bridge is always phrased „some more“ or „a few more.“ „Well, we'll run this process a little more.“ „We'll run this process some more. 'We'll run this process a few more commands. Is that all right with you?“ see, leaving it indefinite.
Now, if you're going to be terribly precise, you're going to throw in something like „This is the last command.“ You can risk one more command. Particularly since you've said it's the last command, the preclear usually doesn't execute it. All right. Then that's „a few more times.“
Now, I'll give you an example of a rather fast, crude communication bridge. But it's nevertheless a communication bridge. Now, the process we were running on the preclear or the conversation we were talking about to the boss or the salesman - it doesn't matter; what's the difference the process we were running on the preclear was „Do birds fly?“ And we want to … change that because it's kind of flat - not for the old-time HDA reason that we're bored with it. I'm not being hard on HDAs. Do you know that your Validation Committee is working hammer and tongs, and they wanted to issue a new certificate on validation. And I think it's a direct insult to the old HDAs. We've got some old HDAs around in the operation; when they… whenever we move their offices the first thing that goes up on the wall - clank! - is an old Los Angeles HDA with a gold border, you know.
But we say, „Do birds fly? Do birds fly? Do birds fly?“ and then shift over, with this communication bridge, to „Do fishes swim? Do fishes swim? Do fishes swim?“ Now, I'll just run this - a crude, fast bridge. Okay?
LRH: Do birds fly?
Student: Yes.
LRH: Good. Do birds fly?
Student: No.
LRH: Good. Do birds fly?
Student: Yes.
LRH: Good. Now, I'd like to run this process just a few more times and then end the process. Is that all right with you?
Student: Mm-hm.
LRH: There's no reason I shouldn't do it?
Student: Hm?
LRH: It's okay if I do that?
Student: Yes. Yes.
LRH: That's okay?
Student: Mm-hm.
LRH: All right. Do birds fly?
Student: Yes.
LRH: Good. Do birds fly?
Student: Yes.
LRH: Good. Do birds fly?
Student: Yes.
LRH: Good. Do birds fly?
Student: Yes.
LRH: Good. All right. And this is the last command. Do birds fly?
Student: Yes.
LRH: Good. All right. Now, that's the end of that process. Now, how do you feel about this session?
Student: Good.
LRH: All right. Is it all right with you to keep on with the session?
Student: Hm-mm.
LRH: Notice anything happening that you ought to tell me about?
Student: No.
LRH: All right. Good. Then I'd like to run another process. And this is „Do fishes swim?“ Now, the actual wording of it is „Do fishes swim?“ And is it all right with you if we run that process?
Student: Hm-hm.
LRH: It's all right?
Student: Yes.
LRH: Okay. Now, here's the first command. Do fishes swim?
Student: Yes.
LRH: Good. Do fishes swim?
Student: Yes.
LRH: Good. Do fishes swim?
Student: Yes.
LRH: Good.
That's a bridge. You see all it was, was in essence three agreements. You got that?
Audience: Yes.
An agreement to end a process and let him down slowly, an agreement to continue the session, and an agreement to run a new process. You got that?
Audience: Yes.
Now that's a good, smooth bridge. And you can even take a preclear with a process not really very flat and shift him with a bridge and it doesn't upset him very much. Of course, I know you're not supposed to do that, but once in a while it's necessary. You're running a process on him and his Havingness is going down, down, down; he's going gug, gug, gug, gug, wug. And you say, „What do I do now?“ Well, don't keep on running the process because you'll be picking him up out of the cellar. Run a fast bridge on him, see, and bridge him into Havingness of one kind or another, then bridge him out of Havingness onto another process or flatten the same process. You see? But anytime you change a process you use this bridge.
Well now, that comes under the heading of a repetitive question simply because it is very easy and we are not trying an endurance run in the Communication Course. You got the idea? Now, he'll get his endurance run later on when he runs Book and Bottle, Opening Procedure by Duplication.
But a fellow has to be able to get this knack. And you'd be surprised how few people could really, at first glance, say this twenty-five times without stumbling. Just say one of these commands twenty-five times: „Do birds fly? Do birds fly?“ They get into all sorts of arguments. They get ways and means of shifting off the process. Let's show them one.
LRH: All right. You ask me the question.
Student: What? Do birds fly?
LRH: Yeah.
Student: Do birds fly?
LRH: Well, what do you mean by birds?
Student: Well, they have wings.
LRH: Oh? What kind of wings?
Student: With feathers in them.
LRH: Oh? I don't remember seeing any feathers around here.
Student: Well, the question was „Do birds fly?“
LRH: That was a belated yank back. See?
Now, people do that. They're not supposed to do that. They're just supposed to ask the question. It doesn't matter what answer. You get the idea? Because they're not doing the next one which is Pc Origination. You got it? So any reply from the coach is a reply. That reply gets acknowledged and the repetitive question is asked again. Do you see that? Now, we just add to this little house of cards just a little more steeply. You see, we've already got this now; we've got the repetitive question, we've got the comm bridge. And now we get Pc Origin and take care of this problem which we just mocked up here. See now, he was not supposed to have done this far out of session, you see, on the repetitive question. And the coach would have called him on it.
All right. Now, let's take this next one however; and let's take Pc Origin. All right. I'll be the auditor and you be…
Student: Okay.
LRH: All right. Do birds fly?
Student: Um, yes.
LRH: Good. Do birds fly?
Student: How come you have dragons in your auditing room?
LRH: Huh?
Well, as coach he would call me on such a thing, see. Now, that's a pc origination. You got it? Now, just exactly what I did is what usually happens with a green auditor. He gets some terribly surprising remark handed to him right straight off the cuff. He was sitting there minding his own business, and the pc wanted to know if he had dragons in the auditing room, see. And he goes glah!
Now, there are various ways to handle this. And we've had some arguments about it. It's still a debatable question. The first series we had on it would take care of this. Actually there are different types of origin; all of them come under the heading of „understand, acknowledge and get the pc back into session” - they all come under this heading. Now sometimes you have to state this variously; you have to say „answer it“ - „understand it, answer it, acknowledge it, maintain ARC and get the preclear back into session.“ And that would be the fullest description of it that you could possibly make.
So properly speaking, this should happen this way. This would be properly done. (Give me the same one.)
LRH: Do birds fly?
Student: Uh … Yeah. But how come you have dragons in your auditing room?
LRH: We don't ordinarily keep them there. Do you see some?
Student: There's a little fire going in the eyes there and the mouth.
LRH: Okay. Where is that?
Student: Right there.
LRH: Oh. Good. All right. Is it all right with you if we continue the process?
Student: Yeah.
LRH: All right. Do birds fly?
Student: Yes.
LRH: Good. Do birds fly?
Student: Yeah.
LRH: Good. Do birds fly?
Student: Yeah. How many ribs do mice have?
LRH: I don't know. I don't know.
Student: Oh, all right.
LRH: All right. Is it all right with you if we get back on the process?
Student: Mm-hm.
LRH: All right. Do birds fly?
Student: Yes.
This is the most debatable of one of these. But to be safe, to be absolutely safe and to teach it so that it would always be well done, you would say „You answer it, acknowledge it, maintain ARC and get the preclear back into session.“ You see that?
Well, to answer anything you have to understand it. So actually this could be handled this way: „Understand it, acknowledge it and get the pc back into session.“ Now, those are the essential points. But sometimes they make a rugged, thud, crunch, thud!
I'll give you an example of how thuddy this can be.
Student: Same one?
LRH: Yeah. Do birds fly?
Student: Yeah.
LRH: Do birds fly?
Student: Yeah. But how come you have dragons in the auditing room over there?
LRH: Oh, yeah. Okay. Do birds fly?
Student: Yes.
LRH: [to audience] See, that's not handling a pc origin. Actually an origination not handled can throw a pc down into apathy very quickly.
[to student] Let's try it again. Do birds fly?
Student: Yeah. But how come you have dragons in the auditing room?
LRH: Where abouts?
Student: Right over there in that corner.
LRH: Oh? How big are they?
Student: About six, seven feet high.
LRH: Okay. They been there very long?
Student: Oh, for five, six minutes.
LRH: All right. Are they doing anything now?
Student: No. Just smoking.
LRH: Okay. Thank you.
Student: All right.
LRH: Thank you. That's okay. Are you doing all right?
Student: Yeah, I just wanted to tell you about that.
LRH: Okay, good. All right with you if we get back into session?
Student: Sure.
LRH: All right. Let's do it. All right. Do birds fly?
Student: Yes.
LRH: Good.
See? Now, that bridge would handle most anything. You say „you understand it, you answer it, acknowledge it, maintain ARC, get him back into session.“
You realize, don't you, that if you don't handle it adequately - if you handle it too choppily the preclear will go out of session, if you handle it too lengthily he'll go out of session. You want me to give you an example of how too lengthily to handle it?
LRH: All right. You ask me the question.
Student: Ask you the question?
LRH: Yeah. You be the auditor.
Student: All right. Do birds fly?
LRH: Yep.
Student: All right. Do birds fly?
LRH: Yep.
Student: Okay. Do birds fly?
LRH: I'm eighteen feet back of my head! Say, isn't it a funny thing!
Student: Um…
LRH: It's awfully hot in here.
Student: Is it?
LRH: Have you been very uncomfortable too?
Student: No, I haven't. Where are you?
LRH: Who?
Student: You.
LRH: Well, I'd said I was eighteen feet back of my head and it's terribly hot.
Student: Hot?
LRH: Say, have many preclears been… been hot that way?
You see? I mean, the guy is no longer in-session. He's just swap-pow and out he goes. And if the auditor mucks it up, you see, and doesn't catch it quick, why, we've got a bad deal on our hands.
Now, it would be preferable, rather than let him get out of session, to handle it with a complete chop.
Now handle that one with a complete chop. Go ahead.
Student: All right. Do birds fly?
LRH: Yeah.
Student: All right. Do birds fly?
LRH: Yep.
Student: Good. Do birds fly?
LRH: I'm eighteen feet back of my head. It's awfully hot…
Student: Good. Do birds fly?
LRH: Yep.
Student: Good.
That is the direction to err. But you should recognize it's an error.
Now, Tone 40 auditing doesn't admit of a pc origin at all. It's a different auditing style entirely. All right. I'll give you an example of that. We don't run this one on Tone 40, so I'll run Give Me Your Hand on you and you originate, okay?
Student: All right.
LRH: Give me your hand.
Student: Uh, all right.
LRH: Thank you.
Student: Say, you look nice this evening.
LRH: Give me your hand. (This is the wrong way to run Give Me Your Hand, by the way.) Thank you.
Student: What are we here for?
LRH: Give me your hand.
Student: How come you want my hand?
LRH: Thank you. Give me your hand.
Student: I didn't eat breakfast this morning.
LRH: Thank you.
Student: I'm starving!
LRH: Give me your hand.
Student: I have a stomach ache.
LRH: Thank you.
Student: Goodbye.
LRH: Give me your hand.
Student: I don't wanna.
LRH: Thank you.
Well, now you've actually covered the essential drills-the essential drills right up to that point - in the field of communication. We put these together on what we call Hand Mimicry, which you have seen in other years; but it is not necessarily a basic or important part of the Comm Course. It's not anywhere near as important in the Comm Course today because we have CCH processes which are quite like Hand Mimicry.
Now, we have covered, just as I've given you, the basic steps of communication. And these exact drills are done just as I've been showing you here - just as we've been showing you.
Thank you very much.
Student: Thank you.
The beauty of them is that they don't chop anybody up or ruin anybody to practice them.
Now, Tone 40 drills can be quite ruinous. Even High School Indoc can blow somebody out of a session.
But these are pretty easygoing.
What you would do if you were doing these just as a practice: you would simply make out a slip of paper and you would make them off as a checksheet, and you would do them with somebody, with him as auditor, yourself as coach for a few hours at a time on each drill until you really had them down and thought you could do them rather well. And you'd find out quite amazingly that even just with those, and even poorly done by you, that your communication level toward your fellow man would come up quite amazingly. Something would happen, in other words, just with that all by itself And it's a pretty good indoor sport; it's a pretty good thing to do.
And a fellow who has had to do an awful lot of auditing probably every now and then should get himself checked out. A couple of auditors ought to get together and check each other out on these things, find out how they're doing. Mostly to discover that they're much better than they've ever been before and much better than they were last time. Auditing doesn't damage you.
People used to think that auditing did damage you. Well, the only thing it damages is the valence and the computer. And it raises the devil with those. Modern auditing is non-restimulative. That's one of the big arguments in favor of Tone 40 auditing. And these drills have a tendency to knock out any factor of restimulation.
We've worked up to a point now where concourse with the human race is not aberrative in any way. That's pretty good. That's pretty good.
I'll take up some more of these tomorrow afternoon. And we'll go on upstairs with some High School Indoc and a few other things if you would like to go into that. Would you?
Audience: Yes.
All right.
Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you for being a good audience. Good night.