This is types of processes.

Various types of processes fall into two categories, two general categories. And one of those are those processes which process considerations; and those processes which process changes in space, or mechanical processes.

You see, even if you made the space and then put something in the space you would still be running something under change of space. It'd have to change slightly in order to persist at all. (You get that, under alter-isness.) So then it's considerations or change in space. And you can just say those are the two processes — two classes.

And as we look over considerations, we find that all we have to do with a thetan is get him to change his mind and he becomes well, and therefore, apparently, the easiest way to process anybody would — just get him to change his mind.

The funny part of it is, is he is depending on so many mechanisms and machines and he is so closely in communication with things which have considerations about it that he feels himself very often overpowered.

When you run into an automaticity, you can take it or leave it alone or process it or otherwise, but the rule is you simply make the preclear do on his own decision what is happening automatically. That is just a basic rule.

And all of a sudden the fellow says, 'And the room keeps spinning and spinning and spinning and spinning."

And you say, "Say to yourself, 'Now I am going to spin the room.' Now spin it." "Oh, I can't do that. It just keeps spinning."

"Well, say to yourself, 'Now I am going to spin it faster,' and make it spin faster."

And finally get him to vary the speed a little bit and then slow it down and then faster and slower and then faster and faster, and then slower and slower and slower, and stop it, see? We put it under his control.

The way you get anything under control is, on a gradient scale, make the preclear do it. That is the law back of this.

All right. All of these processes, then, actually stem from consideration, even though they are mechanical processes. So we find that although we could divide processes and do divide them into considerations and mechanics, or change of space — although we do divide the two into such a thing — we discover that the monitoring process is consideration.

But strangely enough, we find out that when consideration itself is immediately addressed to a person who is already in a body, and who is interiorized very thoroughly, we find out that it does not work.

In other words, the mechanics have taken precedent over considerations. And his changing his mind is only resulting from a mechanical manifestation. So you sit him down and make him change his mind and change his mind and change his mind and change his mind and change — and nothing is going to happen to the case at all.

Why is he changing his mind this way? Well, other things, including the auditor, are simply telling him to change his mind, so he changes his mind, he changes his mind. He has arrived at no basic consideration that he has the power to originate or handle mechanics.

So, in order to get around this factor, we discover that the first echelon of processing on Homo sapiens happens to be mechanics. Although it is the junior manifestation to considerations, it is the first one addressed. And of all these mechanics, we discover that time, of course, is the common denominator. Persistence: repetition of change of space. Change in space.

All right. Now let's take the most elementary of these processes: We simply ask an individual to pick up a matchbox — notice where it is, pick it up, find another place, put it down. You know, not do it again. I mean, there it is. Now we ask him to take a cup and pick it up, find another place, put it down.

And he does this a few times and the strangest thing comes over him. He says, "You know, I can change the position of things in space." If we carried it along far enough — but how long would it take him to make that consideration? Whee. With some preclears, they are running so much on their highly individualized time — they are their own time factor and the physical universe has nothing else to do with it — they have to at least come back into agreement before they can run anything like a consideration. So you have to get them back into agreement at least with the walls. And you get them into agreement with them and you will find out that they will start changing their mind.

So with most preclears, the time that you would care to process them, they are so far gone that getting them into communication with the walls is sometimes quite a little process. And as an auditor you are liable to say, "Hadn't I better shortcut this? After all, there is some better way to get this fellow to change his mind."

Why don't you go out in the back yard and set up some pipes and things, and make a little gunpowder, and so on, and get all set to send a rocket straight up to the moon? You might as well — might as well spend your time doing that. It will probably be less harmful on the preclear.

He is completely out of time. He is completely just as out of time as though the distributor cap was off of an automobile, you see? Just as mechanical as that. He is out of time. He is lost, therefore how can he possibly come into this space if he is not in the time of this space, you see? He is therefore lost, and you say, "Change your mind."

"Oooh, yeah."

Well, after all, it is experiment that tells. And believe me, if there is any consideration process that we haven't covered or any type of concept of existence that we haven't yet approached, and so forth, I suppose someday we'll find it out. Having found it out, we'll probably file it where we have filed every other type of consideration process: in the unusable basket, as leading to no stable gain for the case.

Interesting, isn't it? So our first approach is a mechanical approach: Not because mechanics are true; not because we have "no better way to go about it"; but we have — for heaven's sakes, we have to get our preclear into the same space we are in. And we have to at least occupy the same room with him, we have to give them processes which won't immediately spin them. And if we take, immediately, cases that we intimately know about, we find out that those cases apparently were doing all right, they were apparently perfectly rational people, they were in not too bad shape where Homo sapiens was concerned. And we find out that these people were run on such things as Exteriorization by Distance, which was a mechanic.

But remember, that's not a close association with walls or actual physical-universe barriers. It's with the body. And we found out they didn't get well, and they felt worse. We did strange and unusual things, connection to the body. And every time we addressed the body we found out the body was out of time, too. See? So just running the body didn't do much good. We've run concepts on them of one kind or another, which didn't immediately address the environment. And again, what did we discover? We discovered, just in no uncertain terms, that these cases either hung fire or got worse, or if they got a little bit better, why, it was just by sheer luck or something of the sort — or because the auditor was pleasant, or because they were simply talking.

But as therapeutic as that might have been considered by some old-line priest or somebody (or, witch doctor) — probably considered the amount of therapy administered there pretty doggone good, you know? But it wasn't, not compared to the gain and stability you could have achieved simply by getting them to touch the walls or do Opening Procedure by Duplication, which is touch repetitive objects — which is a much tougher one, of course, than touching the walls. Much tougher!

And we found out that by getting them to touch the walls and to walk around, they were at once moving a particle in space by moving the body around, and they were actually in contact with things which were themselves doing pocketa-pocketa-pocketa-pocketa, timetime-time-time-time-time-time — uniform rate of change of space which was itself the present time, so that they did not then feel this weird one. that they were out of time.

Of course, a person couldn't get out of time, actually, he could only consider that he was out of time. Well, you'd say, "Well, a good thing to do then would be to sit the preclear down" — you wouldn't say this, but somebody would — "and just give him a good talking-to on the subject of being out of time and things, and just tell him to change his mind about it."

Oh, yes. Now, of necessity, then, a direct change of position of a particle in space — i.e., a body in a designated space, intimately in contact with the barriers and positions at that moment of the particles, which themselves said time-time-time-time-time — put him back into agreement at least with this universe. And having gotten him into agreement to some degree with this universe, we at least got him back on something besides an individual time track.

You understand that a preclear's time can be so bad that it's all a black chunk in the middle of his body, and he is in contact with that time, and that time is going so fast and so furious that it appears to be a solid object?

Did you ever see something turn so fast that it appeared to be a solid object? Well, the same manifestation is taking place with this fellow's facsimile bank. You see? It's on its own time, and its timing is so fast and it is so out of pace with the walls and everything that he puts his attention on that, because that is his time factor that he has to stay in communication with, in order to stay in communication with it, I guess. He is out of contact with the walls.

What happens to all that mass as you get him to touch walls? Well, in view of the fact that it isn't there, it isn't too unnatural that it goes away.

Therefore, we got him into agreement with present time — pardon me, got him in contact with present time a little bit. Now let's make him tolerate exterior time manifestations, and let's do something like Opening Procedure by Duplication, very arduous, very monotonous.

The trouble with our case is, he doesn't dare go through a monotonous and repetitive line. He can't go bop-bop-bop-bop-bop. So how can this preclear have any time? Because time is going bop-bop-bop-bop-bop, you see. So he can't have any time. And so we get him on such an arduous process. We could run him on that until he is fairly comfortable in it. And we'd probably go in there, into something like Exteriorization by Distance, because by this time he'd have some space.

Well, there are other things which we could do — other things which we could do. But, as I say, all processes falling into this bracket can be divided into these two blocks. And these two blocks are simply classifiable this way: Considerations independent of time, and considerations which include time.

Considerations which include the consideration of time are themselves mechanics. So the first processes that we hit with a preclear is to get something resembling time going. And get him up so he is comfortable about the whole thing. That is just by Opening Procedure 8-C, and Opening Procedure by Duplication. He is comfortable about it. Now we can start to consider something else like a more complex consideration.

Now, if you were to walk up to somebody who was being chewed to death by a lion, and you were to say to him quietly, "Now, where did you put the frying pan when you were back in the tent, there?" do you know you probably wouldn't get him to change his attention at all?

He just wouldn't change his attention. In fact, he probably wouldn't answer you. He would probably be completely unmannerly and ignore you — even if you shouted at him. Why? That's because he is being eaten up by a lion.

What do you suppose this thetan is having happen to him? He has resisted agreeing with time so often and protested so often about time, and his body has protested so often about time, that at length he is a total protest against time, which of course is a total closure with time.

Boy, you'd certainly better get his attention somewhere in the vicinity — at least off of that lion. There would be various ways to do it. You could take the lion off of him. You could do all kinds of things. But then ask him where he put the frying pan or ask him to remember something or calculate something, or change his mind about lions.

Yeah, after he was nicely in the hospital and he was lying there and he was all patched up, he was getting well, and he had hot and cold running nurses taking care of him and life seemed to be very pleasant indeed, you could probably come around and talk to him for a little while and get him to make up his mind that lions weren't so bad. All depended on how pretty his nurse was, actually.

But you could get him to change his mind about lions if he was far enough from lions. But not thoroughly — not thoroughly. So immediately that he went back and saw a lion, hmmm. That would be something else, wouldn't it?

All right. Now let's look, then, at an entire bracket of processes. If we are going to talk about mechanical processes, there are four conditions of existence. And these conditions are (and they occur in this order, really) as-isness, alter-isness, isness — what we commonly call agreed-upon isness is reality. Now, between this isness and the next one we have another alter-isness. And then we have not-isness. And not-isness is "with energy we are going to make it cease to exist." So that, of course, is a kind of a not-isness, too. Only it is liable to result in a complete stick of not-is.

And then we would slide over into another bracket of alter-isness, and then we'd go into another bracket of not-isness, and then we'd go into another bracket of alter-isness, and maybe then into a bracket of isness, by the way — how bad it is. Because he has now confirmed in existence — by trying to change it — a horrible condition. You have to get this very clearly. Otherwise isness and not-isness just don't make sense. It would seem to you that any time you tried to change something, you would immediately get yourself stuck with it. You see? And that isn't true. You get a continuing reality on something by altering it. But remember, you can always as-is it and cause it to cease to exist and always mock up a new one, and then alter it and keep it going.

So this is not a trap. See, you could always say, perfect duplicate, you know? As-is. Zzzzmp. And there's a condition — okay. Now, here is an as-is. Now we will change it. Now, we'll change this as-is and change it and change it.

By the way, I was quite interested the other day on an experimental session — totally experimental as a session — just running this as that basis. We got what this fellow's ideal was in terms of his intellect. You know, how bright he ought to be? It was unattainably brilliant. I said, "How long have you had this ideal?"

"O-o-o-oh, just for years and years and years. And I just get stupider and stupider and stupider."

Of course. Of course. He is saying, "My stupidity must not be," is the way he was going about it.

So I had him sit there and cogitate on the idealness of being stupid and the sadness of being stupid, and got him to look at stupidity.

"Now, how does it look to you now?" you know? "How does it seem to you now?"

His stupidity "seeming" to him? How could he possibly be "seeming" anything out of the fact it's… You know. He wouldn't be looking at a stupidity; stupidity is a consideration. Only there happened to be mass around there, and boy, this was stupid mass.

In other words, what this fellow had been doing all these years had been unmocking any brilliance he had, see? Any brilliance he had — that was the as-isness. But his stupidity was a must-changeness. And he just got dumber and dumber and dumber.

Any time he would show up a brightness he would say "Well! That's as it is." See? Gone. And any time he would be stupid about something, "Oh, I have got to change this." Do you see?

So I had him — rowww, how stupid he was, see. And then I had him do this: I had him mock himself up, you know, "Just get the idea of being very bright." "Got it now? Got the idea of being tremendously brilliant? People coming from all over the place to ask you about things? All right, get the idea of being tremendously brilliant — not about anything in particular, just very brilliant."

And he would say, "Yeah, I… Yeah, I can do that! I can do that! But it fades right away."

"Now, all right. Well, just get the idea, now, of being tremendously brilliant." "Now try to get stupid." Hung him with it!

All right. There would be a whole battery of processes, and these things would address immediately, one after the other, these things: as-isness, alter-isness, isness, not-isness, and that's all.

So there'd be those types of considerations, you see, so there would be a type of process to each one of these things.

Well, we've never really talked about alter-isness to any great degree. And I want to mention it very rapidly. "Start lying" is an alter-isness process. You understand that. You get this individual to be able to practice alter-isness. Unless he can practice alter-isness… If he has to tell the truth all the time, that is to say, he'll just keep everything unmocked, won't he?

If he told exactly how it seemed to him every time, he would wind up — he would never have a thing, would he? All right.

So this is the processing of significances. I am going to tell you about this very rapidly, but it is a very important process. It is very easy to do. "Start lying" is one of the simpler methods of doing this. Another method of doing this is show a guy an object and have him call it other things, start naming it and calling it other things.

In other words, seek to change it. And you know, that object gets solider and solider.

That's alter-isness.

We pick up a book and we ask him — the way we run this — we say, "What is this?"

And he says, "It's a book." And you say," What is this?" "It's a book."

Well, he may keep it up for an hour. He insists it is a book, he insists it is full of print, he describes the style, and it is getting fainter and it's foggier and all kinds of things are happening there that are unappetizing, and so forth.

He finally gets a little bit disgusted or something of the sort, and he says, "Well, it's a giraffe."

You say," Well, that's approximately what I see here too." And you show it to him again and say "What is it now?"

"It's a car." "It's this. It's that. It's this. It's that." And you know, he will get sharp, he will get bright. And the first thing you know, it will go back into its proper proportion in the room and it will sort of occupy the rest of the universe, and it won't be very prominent, and so forth. Because he's willing to let time progress as far as that object is concerned.

He is willing for that object to change. And if he is not willing for that object to change, it will stick on the time track. That is what sticks most of your preclears in childhood: They don't want their mama to change toward them. And Mama, when they get to be five and six and very combative and destructive, no longer cuddles the little child to her bosom. And ail Freudianism actually is just out of that one fact, you see — I mean, childhood is everything.

Mama changed. You don't want Mama to change! Papa changed. No, you don '£ want Papa to change! You saw all of a sudden that beautiful diamond ring you had going right off of your finger and into 150 fathoms of water. You didn't want that to change! Did you?

Well, this is right on the borderline between consideration and mechanics. And that is the processing of alter-isness. And it's right on the borderline. If you get your preclear perfectly free to call everything anything he cares to and he doesn't care how much it changes, it will then be permitted by him to go pocketa-pocketa-pocketa-pocketa-pocketa. He will at least stay in communication with the time track, because the time track itself is alter-isness.

And change and alter — and we could call it change-isness, if we wanted to, you see? Time-isness; shift-of-position-isness. And if he is unwilling to let the environment around him change, the environment around him will hang up at 1770 or something. And here he is in 1954, but back in 1770 he decided it was all going to stop and change. Now, do we get that clearly?

We just have him name objects, name objects. We don't even tell him to call them something different than they are. We just have him name the object and name the object and name the object and name the object. And that's really all there is to the process, any significance, there.

You could have the objects name him, too, but that is very circuitous. And I do that, by the way, when I process that process. Because, occasionally, bing! It will produce a fabulous change of consideration. Have objects name him — he has always been naming objects — have objects name him for a while, just for variation. He gets quite a kick out of this. (Not a necessary part of the process, you understand. But it can simply be done.) The basic process is simply have him name it and name it and name it and name it and name it and name it, until he doesn't care what it is known as.

You will get, by the way, an individual right straight and immediately out of stuck on the time track with this, because time is change. Time is not an is-ness. Time is not an asisness. And time is not a not-isness. See? Time is an alter-isness. And if you want the individual up in present time, you'd better process in the direction of alter-isness.

Now, you could strip away a whole bank by processing as-isness. "ow does it seem to you now?" is the total command. Except you just keep talking to the preclear, saying various things, but remember that that is the command.

"How does it seem to you?" And you mean right now, and the next thing you know, his engrams and various other energy masses and so forth will disappear. Right?

Okay. How do you process an isness? You can't. Because of all things, that one doesn't exist. An isness cannot exist in the absence of an alter-isness, so we have to assume that it's an alter-isness. Right?

How do we process a not-isness? The best way to process a not-isness is to have somebody feel the walls. We got that now?

Now, all mock-up processing belongs in the bracket of as-isness. It belongs in that bracket, except when you change the position of the mock-up in space, which went into alterisness.

So you could say existence is made up of these factors: As-isness, altering. See? Asisness, alter-isness. So we get an as-isness, and then all we've got thereafter, really, is alterisness, alter-isness, alter-isness.

But isness is a hypothetical consideration, and not-isness is an energy prevention of the hypothetical situation from taking place. So what people think of as not-isness and isness — they think of these things and they recognize these things as great truth. Well, that's fine. Only, they are not true, either one of them. There is just this action to make things not-be with energy pressing against them, and there is this other action of saying, "Well, it is. That's the way things are."

That is an as-isness, isn't it? It is just right like they are. Well, you say, isness, in terms of reality — we think of reality as a static thing. It's not, it is totally changing.

The fellow says, "That's the way things are," and points out to the universe. And you know, two seconds later you can still see the universe! And five minutes later you can still see it, and an hour later you can still see it. Did he really say "That's the way things are"?

No, he sure didn't. He said, "That's the way things are altering."

"This constancy is the way things are altering" is what he said. Now, do you see that?

So our processes boil down, actually, to as-isness and alter-isness.

Okay. Now, with this time, and with these other considerations and processes, there is one datum I am going to give you awfully fast, and I hope you will keep for quite a while.

And that datum is simply this: The trouble with the preclear is he thinks he is a symbol. He has ceased to be an orientation point, and he thinks he is a symbol. And he contains mass, meaning and mobility. If he himself has mass, meaning and mobility, he is therefore a symbol. What is wrong with your preclear? He has mass, meaning and mobility.

Whatever process strips those out will, of course, make him well, because as long as he has mass, meaning and mobility he is agitated and does not himself have possession of and is not an entire static. He considers already that he is less than a static. Now, you got that?

Okay.