The genus of computation, then, is: "Is there a hidden influence or isn't there a hidden influence?" In other words, "I don't know and I'm not sure." And the way to — and the way to set up, then, and run out all the computations in the bank would actually be to run up this doubt. "Is there a hidden influence?" versus the doubt, "Is there a hidden influence?" Double Terminal, in other words, as thought. "Is there or isn't there?"

The darnedest things will fall out in the fellow's lap because you've just pulled the bathtub plug on every circuit he's got. Every circuit he's got is based upon that thought: "Is there a hidden influence or isn't there a hidden influence?" And what do you mean by hidden influence? That — it means communication, then, that means beingness. "Is there, in that blackness, a beingness I do not know about?"

Now, I'll tell you about blackness. You have a lot to do with blackness, a lot of worry about blackness. Why? Because blackness is hard to tell apart; therefore, it identifies with each other.

You want to know why you want an identity? Why you're carrying a face around? You know a face is a terrible liability, like fingerprints — bad liability.

The soul doesn't have a face; it doesn't want one. You don't even want to concern yourself for two seconds with this idea of an identity, "My name is Jones," and yet you think it's terribly desirable. You actually have this feeling, an enormous desire to have an identity.

What happens to a man who is trying to get famous? You know, for a long time I've been scared stiff that somebody someplace or other would really nail down this work. And sure enough, once in a while it kind of starts to happen this way. And that's because they might as well take you out and shoot you.

Identification is solid, immovable, not fluid, has nothing to do with motion. I'm very fond of motion. I like to move around. And what do we find here when we — when we get identification? We find no motion.

Well, why would you want to saddle yourself with this? Why would you want to saddle yourself with this identity? And what is this thirst for identity, and what is this thirst for fame? And what is this ambition "I've got to amount to something. I've got to be something."

Was it something somebody implanted in you? No, it wasn't. You did it yourself.

You could say this: The whole thing is done by mirrors. It's all done by mirrors. You'll find your preclear, by the way, sitting around with mirrors around him. If you wanted to really startle your preclear, you say, "Look to the left and right and tell me what you see?" And a lot of your preclears will suddenly say, "You know, I see a . . . There is a mirror sitting down on the floor, and I am reflected in it." He'd say, "I never noticed this before. Why, there's one out in front of me! Why, there's one behind me."

There sure is. Now, I've never mentioned this little phenomenon because it worries people to death and I couldn't give you an accurate rundown on how to use it or what it was. That's the way you kind of double-terminaled things, once upon a time. Mirrors rub things out. Instead of using a felt on the blackboard, all you do is use a mirror on the facsimile and it rubs out. You can mock up mirrors and make mirrors and they'll do this trick. People think they can't make these mirrors anymore; therefore, they've got to have the facsimiles. They — it sounds very incredible but they are — these mirrors sitting around.

Now, the one thing that a mirror could never differentiate very well was something black because you didn't want to put the mirror up to it because you didn't know quite where the blackness started and where it ended and how deep it was, or anything else. You couldn't tell about this blackness!

Furthermore, you're continually liable to this: Something is liable to reach out of the blackness and grab something that's yours — no good, no good at all. So this stuff blackness is something you stay away from.

And if you face blackness and push against blackness, you are a mirror, you see? In essence, you are a mirror. So what's it look like? It looks like if you push against the blackness, the blackness is pushing against you. And if somebody can sell you on the idea — just overbalance it slightly — that the blackness is pushing against you, you will then fight evil. You will fight blackness and fight evil and that will mean a closure of terminals with everything bad. That's all anybody has to do is come along and say, "There's something bad about something or other" and immediately somebody will start fighting it. And then he'll wind up with it.

Blackness, blackness. Why does your preclear have blackness sitting above his head? Well, one of the things is he's liable to put blackness above his own head. Why? He wants to be a hidden influence, that's what. He wants to be a hidden communication line and he'd just love to operate as he's operating, and go right on and somehow or other survive it, although he knows there's bad liabilities to it. And he's put the blackness above his head to protect himself. Against what?

Against a mock-up that has been used on him: God. "Now I lay me down to sleep. I pray the Lord my soul to keep. If I should die before I wake, I pray the Lord my soul to take . . ." and a kid starts screaming quietly inside him-self and he says, "My God, I thought things were bad enough in this universe, but now, by golly, something's going to reach down out of the night sky and pick my body up and cart it off and I'll never get it back, and I like this body." That's the way the kid interprets that sort of a nonsense.

And the Devil — the Devil is down below. All religions, primitives and so forth — there is Yamalek a queen of the underearth, and so forth. This devil has this approximation just everywhere! Oh, you've got this devil as a standard idea all over the place, and he always lives under the ground. And he's liable to reach up out of the ground and grab you and drag you down into the ground so you'd better put a lot of blackness under you, and then he won't find you. So you see, blackness is desirable; it hides one.

From what? From hidden and mysterious influences. What kind? The kind you can't be sure whether they are there or not. So to control people, to get them to computing, to nail them down, to pin them in one place and so forth, you just give them some kind of a fancy stock story about "There may be a hidden influence there; there may be not a hidden influence there."

It's a very strange thing that the Western civilization at this particular time is fixed upon a particular god who is kept in a trunk. But it's a funny thing but they just don't even have a good identification for this particular being.

It's fabulous, fabulous. You go from religion to religion and everybody says, "This is a Christian religion." And every one of them tells you something different about this hidden influence.

"Is it a good influence or a bad influence?" Well, people will argue about this, and argue and argue and argue. The whole civilization — throughout Europe and America — went mad over this, and have been crazy on the subject for a long time. They're not near as mad as they used to be.

But two thousand years ago, twenty-five hundred years ago, you wouldn't have heard much of this sort of thing. You'd have heard much more about — arguments about whether or not — whether or not the bird flying overhead was carrying a message from some spirit.

You would have heard a lot about that. But you wouldn't have heard about a mysterious, outright hidden influence.

In other words, I want to impress upon you that this is a new idea. It is a new idea! It is not an old idea, and it is not held in common with the greater part of the peoples of the earth — that God is something that exists every-where and is above your head. That's a new idea. And that the Devil — the Devil is always underfoot and is about to grab you. That is not an old time-worn idea. But primitive peoples will cook this other one up.

Well, what do these ideas come from? Why do we have, though, this kind of an idea of influencing spirits above and below and on every side — these hidden influences? And what's this got to do with you wanting an identity? Well, if you have an identity, then such a god could get you, couldn't he, if you have an identity. So therefore you don't want an identity but you have one, and you have a desire to be identified.

Is it something anybody did to you? No, it's a mistake I'm afraid we all made, a very simple error. What this — you see, a person could be extremely religious and not buy this particular deity. It's a very funny thing, but you don't have to buy this deity at all. He's a highly specialized deity. As a matter of fact, oh, I'd say something on the order of three-quarters of the people on earth don't happen to believe in this kind of a god today, so it's specialized.

But, all deities and all devils and all spirits have this in common: They're liable to come in from somewhere and grab you. And then what — then what we're arguing about is — when we argue about deities and devils and so forth, we're really talking in terms of somebody trying to make a physical actuality out of something which would never present a physical appearance. Isn't that odd?

In other words, you do not have to call yourself "irreligious" simply because you don't happen to buy a materialistic god or devil. You'd say, "Well, I don't believe God or the Devil is made out of matter." That makes you more religious than the guys down the street because they claim that materialism is bad, and yet they have a materialistic God. Why? Well, he can grab you. He'd have to have something with which to grab you.

This is interesting; you can go around and around on this one. I'm only stressing this at this time; I'm just threading this in sideways. You're much closer to a religion than man has ever been before.

All right, let's take this hidden influence. All right, it can most easily hide in blackness, can't it? So you've come along, time after time, you see this blackness and you don't want to get your mock-ups close to it, because it's — you're liable to get your mock-ups stolen. You don't want to put anchor points into it because they're liable to disappear.

By the way, don't think it's peculiar that a fellow has blackness around him. You know, you can have black anchor points, blue anchor points, yellow anchor points, clear anchor points, orange anchor points — any kind you want. And black anchor points is routine.

But you'd want a black anchor point to sort of shoot into that cloud of blackness and then bring it back and find out if there was anything in there. Let's penetrate that cloud of blackness and find out, because otherwise we couldn't perceive in there.

What are you doing when you do that? You're saying, "Who are you?" "Who are you?" And of course, you always fail to find out because he isn't anybody. Because 99 percent of the blackness has nothing in it, so therefore you continually fail with this question "Who are you?"

And then you say, "Well go ahead and be something. What is this blackness?"

People talk about coming into the MEST universe. Their first warning about the MEST universe is the fact that a whole lot of blackness came over them and they were quite upset about it, and so they were scared. "Who are you?"

Now, if you asked this question and failed to find it out long enough, you'd finally wind up starting — asking yourself, "Who are you?" "Who are you?" "Who are you?" You'd go nuts, in other words, and you'd want an identity.

You'd get an identity to demonstrate to the blackness that it should have an identity — there is only a kind of a reason there. But you're acting as a mirror. You're acting as a mirror. So the questions you ask of the blackness, if you fail, you will ask of you. And you'll say, "Who are you? What are you trying to be? What are you going to be?" Anything like that. And from that genus you get into the error of wanting desperately an identity, and wanting to be something! Because you want that blackness to be something, not to be that black nothing!

And that anxiety, you find a little child, he's going out "Who's in that night outside?" Show him the dark and he takes a look at that darkness and he says, "Hm, no! No, there's things in it."

And if you observe a child in a primitive culture, if he has to walk abroad at night, "Who's there?" he will say around the corner of the roads and so forth. "Who's there?" And he might eventually wind up in this pure fright and he'll say, "Well, I'm here anyway." Well, then he'll start asking himself "Well, wait a minute, who are you?" Why is he asking himself that? It's merely because he asked out there. He doesn't care who he is.

It's to his advantage not to have any identity. Identity is a liability.

You won't understand this, your preclear won't understand this completely until he double-terminals blackness — matches two black terminals, two black patches, each one asking the other one "Who are you?" And that is a technique right there; that is one of the things which you must do in this process is double-terminal two patches of blackness, each asking the other, "Who are you?"

And the fellow will say, all of a sudden, "You know, I've been trying — trying to get an identity all these years, and I don't want any identity. I don't know what this is that just came over me, but I really don't want an identity!" Well, now, he doesn't have to understand this mechanism. That's what will happen to him. All right.

Then what's Standard Operating Procedure here? It concerns itself with primarily clearing up the thetan rather than stepping him out of a body. You are clearing him up and clearing up his universe. And that sounds very funny "clearing up his universe," but his universe is sitting right there — he's in it. He's sitting right there, and it happens to be in confluence with the MEST universe. And you're trying to square him around so he's got a recognition of his beingness.

Of his identity? No, you want a high level of "I am" and a very low level of "I am Joe." You see?

And you want all that blackness out of there and you want all those anchor points under control.

Well now, the best ways to do this, you can get him out of a body, and so on. So therefore, the first step in this Standard Operating Procedure would be identical with the first step you have been using right straight along.

You just tell the thetan to be a couple feet back of his head, and operate him from there.

Now, do you run him with Double Terminals? Yep. You have him double-terminal things.

Do you operate him in locating himself throughout the universe in various dangerous places, and mocking things up to be them? Yes, yes.

Now, your second step that you would do would have to do with "mock-up of beingness." Mock himself up as this and that — double-terminaled. And you put him on an E-Meter, you'll find out what he's afraid to be. Then you have him make a double terminal of it out here until he's perfectly willing to be it. Now, you get that as a technique?

Give him a run on the E-Meter and say, on the E-Meter — and he says well, one thing he's awful afraid of is, boy, is he scared of being Pop! "Ohhh! no, I don't want to be my father!" Well, if he doesn't want to be his father, he isn't going to step out of a body. The reason he isn't going to step out of a body is because he doesn't want to be something. The second he doesn't want to be something, you're going to get a double terminal setup that collapses terminals.

If a person doesn't want to be something, he's going to become it. So therefore it's necessary for you to double-terminal Pop out here; double-terminal Father that he is trying to be so different about.

He doesn't want to be Father, so you want to get the people in this lifetime — for Step II — the people in this lifetime he doesn't want to be and just double-terminal them. He doesn't want to be Sister, he doesn't want to be Papa, he'd kind of like to be Mama. Well then, if he'd kind of like to be Mama, you going to double-terminal Mama? Skip it. He wants to be Mama, doesn't he? Therefore, Mama isn't particularly aberrative.

He should want to be Papa, he should want to be everybody! He should be completely relaxed about it.

Now, that would be Step II: is clean up the personnel that he doesn't want to be.

And by the way, Step II, I point out, is the step you would enter automatically. You see, it's a very light step; this is not an important step. It's thetechnique you would use in an office on an individual who has some worries.He comes in and he says, "I'm worried." Well, if you want to gunshot out all those worries get him to double-terminal his wife facing his wife and just hold her there. He's a man; he's trying not to be a woman. The obvious part of his trouble is that. There's something he doesn't want to communicate with.

You can spot it on the E-Meter what he's particularly upset about communicating with. It will usually be an opposite-sex member, because he can't be them, therefore he has to stop their motion, and he's failed to stop their motion so he therefore doesn't want to be them. So if he doesn't want to be them, then he's going to have trouble with them. He doesn't want to communicate with them, but he has to communicate with them and this upsets him. So just double-terminal somebody like this. All right.

Let's go into Step III of this. And Step III is an important step and is consecutive with Step I. If he didn't step out on Step I, do Step III. And Step III is simply this: Make him double-terminal postulates; make him double-terminal the feeling of doubt against the feeling of doubt. Make him have — double-terminal the feeling of "I don't know" against the feeling of "I don't know." Get a feeling of "I've got to keep my pictures" against "I've got to keep my pictures." I've said this, you know, as being very aberrative — pictures.

And they've got to — various things. And if you just look at him, you'll know that's — he's worried about something. You just ask him what he worries about.

"Well, I worry 'cause I don't know, I think all the time. I worry all the time. I think all the time. I worry all the time."

Well, you could even go so far as to just get himself facing himself worrying all the time. But just get the idea "worrying all the time" versus the idea of "worrying all the time." To a large degree, he'll stop worrying.

But what's at the bottom of that pile of worry? Is: "Is there a hidden influence or isn't there a hidden influence?" Now, you just face that thought facing that thought. Well, what could you do? You could say, "Is there a devil or isn't there a devil?" And he'd say, "Well, I don't worry about God and the Devil anymore. I used to do that when I was a little kid. But I remember I used to have nightmares about it, but I haven't worried about it for years. Ha-ha." Oh yeah?

Well, if this fellow can't get out of his body, he's got a big, black, weighty patch right on the top of his head — pow! He put it there. He figured it out when he was a little kid. "Let's see, God's going to get me and grab my body. The best thing for me to do is to put a big, black patch over the top of my head and make myself invisible from above. I'll try anyway." It's silly — silly.

So you would terminal, "Is there a God or isn't there a God?" "Is there a devil or isn't there a devil?" Just double-terminal this idea — this question.

So that if you're dealing with computation, what you want to do is double-terminal questions. You see that? The questions he's demanding all the time.

So that tells you immediately that you take the bottom of the Chart of Attitudes on your Double Terminal questioning. You say, "Who am I?" versus "Who am I?" Or you'd get a patch of blackness saying to a patch of blackness, "Who am I?" versus "Who am I?" Just take the Double Terminal postulate idea on the Chart of Attitudes right there at the bottom. Bottom of the chart, bottom of the columns — those are very easy to run.

Or any kind of a question you want or think of or anything this fellow tells you — worried about — you tell him, "Just put it up on the wall and make it face that."

Now, you're going to take care of what we've been calling V Level Cases — we're not calling V Level Cases anymore. We don't care about classification of cases anymore, beyond this classification: You tell somebody to step out of his head; you work him there. If you tell somebody to step out of his head and he doesn't work there, you just work him where he is and then tell him to step out of his head. We really don't even need a step to tell you that he has to step out of his head.

All right, your next step on the line after you've handled some postulates and so forth like that, you'll find out this — you'll find out that you bet-ter do, then, a mock-up of people grabbing his anchor points and so forth. And the technique is a very simple one. You just get people picking him up and dragging him away — double-terminaled, in the form of mock-ups. And then people pushing him back to himself again, in the form of the mock-ups.

Just get them dragging in and pushing in — dragging out and pushing in his anchor points. And he has his anchor points. He's pushing in and dragging out anchor points. And then get him to work anchor points. And you'd call this step, the full step, the "work anchor points step" — you see, work anchor points.

And now, number two of that, of course, is very trivial. You don't care anything about mocking up members of the family — you can omit it. But it's a nice one to have around, because it's a good workable technique and people really react on it rather rapidly. And you're not interested in that technique, then, so much — number two.

But boy, are you interested in this fourth one I just gave you. Boy, you're really interested in that. And your — could be interested in it to this degree: When your preclear shows up, you start running this in all of its varied forms. Anything you can think of being taken away from him on a double terminal basis — anything you can think of.

And what do you call this whole step, this fourth step now? It's the resolution of loss, fear of. And that, of course, is the resolution of ridicule and betrayal. Loss, ridicule, betrayal — they're all done there in Step IV. And how do you do this? You just have people on a double terminal basis or things on a double terminal basis, any variety of things you could think of.

You see, I don't have to lay down a pattern for this because you could just take a dictionary and start running through a dictionary. You could take anything that gives you a list. And they pick up and take away from him an anchor point and hold it out there. Or they take it out there and they laugh over it or they wreck it or they do anything of the sort on a double terminal basis, you see?

Any kind of a thing, whereby here's your preclear, and they pick up his body or his wallet or his cap or his automobile or his wife or his cow, or any-thing you want to think of in terms of — anything a person could possess, and they carry it away.

And you know what you want to do as the roughest part of that step — and hold your hat on this step, and don't hit this step into a preclear who is bad off — is remember that the sixth dynamic is the main target. Take planets away from him and give planets to him. Planets are surrounded by blackness and planets are bright. They are apparently faces, and he has faces so tied in with planets that his interpersonal relationship is horrible.

For instance, he sat here and looked at the moon just for ages. There was the moon up there, see? And it's got hidden influences every — all over on Earth here primitive people such as the US Department of Agriculture believe in the hidden influences of the moon. You have the entire sexual cycle running on the hidden influence of the moon.

You know what you do with the moon? You just have people take the moon away from him, and people giving him the moon, and people taking the moon away and giving people the moon — double-terminal, you understand, either side — two people always, two moons always, in and out.

Now, the first thing you know, he'd say, "You know, my — I — all of my sexual experiences . . . I just recall a whole lot of things. And you know, I think we've kind of solved this whole case because, you know, I can see the whole Freudian imputation and comfloration on the left-hand side of the ruddy rod here. And I've got it all figured out, and I'm just delighted and now that I have solved uh …"

And you say, "All right, now. Get the moon and have them drag it out here."

"No, no! I've got to tell you about this."

But the point is that it just happens that sex was so hidden and misunderstood and not understood, that you get the principal hidden influence of night when sex mostly took place, and it's all locked in together. And is sex important in that regard? No! Not even vaguely.

What is important? The moon has gravity; it causes tides. A person actually can sense a change in his own body of gravitic influence. Anything that's got as strong a pull on Earth as to hoist twenty-eight feet of tide up in the Bay of Fundy — the — picks up the whole bosom of the ocean, lifts it into the air feet every time it goes by. You think your preclear sitting there isn't going to notice this? He's just been noticing it for a long time and he doesn't think he notices it anymore.

And you get planets in general, and the whole system of planets will start to unwind. And he'll start again a new yak. He'll tell you, "My golly, what do you know, I'm sure that I have crashed on a planet sometime or another. And he'll start to tell you all kinds of incidents of this and that.

And do you listen to these? No, you don't. Don't double-terminal crashing on a planet; just double-terminal up planets being taken away from him and planets being given back to him again.

Now, hold your hat and don't run that on a case that's about to spin, because he'll really spin in on you. Now, that's the resolution of anchor points under that Step IV. Now, you could even call these techniques rather than steps and get away with it.

Now, there's another one with that same step. "Throw two anchor points up to the ceiling and hold them there." And it's all part of the same step. You find out this person doesn't easily let things be taken away or pulled back or anything of this sort. Well, he's out of present time. You can give him some time on just putting up a couple of anchor points and holding them there. That's all under anchor points — that whole technique.

Then what's V? V would be double-terminaling the body and doubleterminaling — guess what? The MEST objects which the body is ordinarily surrounded with because these are much more aberrative than the body.

He is in the body because he is protecting himself from walls, sofas, chairs, vases. I just demonstrated this a little earlier. We got action on doubleterminaling MEST objects, so number II is quite a different step than number V.

And number V is down there in logic because he's so mixed up in gravity and so mixed up in hidden influences and so mixed up in this other stuff that you've got to double-terminal the living daylights out of an awful lot of MEST objects before this person is even vaguely aware.

Your scale of ARC is the scale of how much MEST has entered into the eing. A person behaves like MEST low on the Tone Scale and behaves like a thetan high on the Tone Scale. So there's your Tone Scale. The Tone Scale is the gradient scale of the amount of MEST which has been entered into the beingness of a person.

MEST, of course, runs backwards. It does. And very low on the Tone Scale you'll find this. You start — tell him to start to put out his anchor points. And he says, "You know, the more anchor points I put out, the harder facsimiles push in against my face." Why is this? Planets, that sort of thing, have so often overcome his own concepts of height, gravity, control and so on, that at last his own anchor points are beginning to work backwards.

When he says, "Out with the anchor points," they come in. When he says, "In with the anchor points," they go out. And he's gotten very upset, so he abandoned the use of anchor points.

How do you cure this? You just throw them out and bring them in a few times, and he says, "They were running backwards." So what's that mean? He goes up the Tone Scale the second he recovers this control and handling of anchor points.

So this level of step — this V Level of step — you could call the resolution of MEST. You've got to resolve MEST. Then it is for a low-level case. You've got to resolve MEST, that's all, or you're not going to get anyplace with this case.

This case tells you he can get computations, he can get ideas. Don't — don't bother to run those very much. Try and double-terminal up some MEST for him. Get him — see if he can't get — see if he can't get a chair facing a chair, a black spot facing a black spot. Spot control is right there on that level — only you want two spots, not one.

Any one of these techniques will apply, actually, to any case. You've got to resolve MEST before this fellow gets very happy about it. MEST has kept betraying him.

Now, that's — leaves you another whole case level, and this is for the neurotic person. How do you solve a neurotic person? ARC Straightwire, next-tothe-last list of Self Analysis. And he just goes over it and over it and over it.

And then you continue on with the list of mock-ups of Self Analysis, that's all. Simplest technique imaginable. In other words, you've got the whole technique in a book.

You say, "The person can't get mock-ups; he can't get anything; he can't figure anything; he just wants to think; he just wants to do this" — ARC Straightwire. You get him to remember something real, some time when he was in communication, and so on. So he finally says, "Look, I have lived."

And then from there you go on to making him make up mock-ups. Well, you can make him make up mock-ups for quite a little while, but all you want is just stability out of him. You want some kind of stability and then you just start over these other steps.

Where do you enter these other steps? Anyplace. What are you trying to achieve? You're trying to achieve a lot of beingness for this thetan — as a thetan. You want him to get back his own facsimiles; you want him to be able to handle his own anchor points perfectly. That's what you're trying to achieve.

And I could stand here, and it would be very nice if I could just go on and talk about this for a long time and give you a complete blow-by-blow. But you know something? We have entered a level of technique where you can't go wrong. What do you know?

Because you start playing around with things being taken away from and brought back to, and so on, this individual, he's going to start telling you, "There's something very strange around here but you know, I'm really not me. I'm not . . ." so on. In other words, he'll start telling you.

On that level of drill, then, of regaining the control of anchor points, you have the essence of all of this. Will he get out of his body afterwards, automatically? Yes, sure. He'll get out and he'll come back in or he'll do anything he wants to with it. But you're rehabilitating an individual. And it isn't a tricky technique; that is to say, it's not going to suddenly trip you up.

When it's done on you, you will understand all of a sudden, that you're coming up to a level of knowing you know. And when you know you know, of course you know, and that's the end of that. So you have Scientology, able at last, to arrive at a level which says, "Scientology, the science of knowing how to know."

And what's your preclear — what's your goal with the preclear? Well, you bring him up to a point where he knows how to know, that's all. And he knows he knows. And that's — and so it's very pat, isn't it? It's almost as if I thought it up much earlier and had named it just that for that particular reason, and had all this data all the time and was making all of you poor people labor along with bum data. It's one of those accidents.

Anyway, your preclear is brought up to a level of knowing how to know. Then do you have to tell him he's a thetan? Do you have to tell him how to operate? Do you have to tell him he doesn't belong in a body? Do you have to tell him what the soul is? Do you have to tell him what God is, something of the sort? No.

But you're going to find, as you start doing this, there's a lot of things he's afraid of, and so you have to know that if one thinks there is something bad about something — one: He will close terminals with it.

And anything he's doing that is bad — boy, nice little rule right here, the operating rule of auditing: Anything he thinks is bad is something he has closed terminals with against his will. Other-determinism, in other words, has entered in.

You're not even now trying to restore the self-determinism of the thetan. You're trying to put back into its operating condition a human soul.

Now, let's take a look, and it's . . . The soul, of course, knows how to know. There's no good in having a soul that doesn't know anything about knowing. You don't even think you're it, and it's not there and all this maybe, and a lot of other things wind up.

Now, the beautiful rule here is that anything he's afraid of is something with which he has closed terminals. Anything he is doing that he thinks is wrong or that you think is wrong and so on, is being done because he thinks it's wrong too. Anything you or he thinks is wrong, is wrong. And what's wrong about it is because you or he think it's wrong. In other words, what's wrong with wrongness is wrongness. Isn't that simple? All right.

So how do you get away with this? Double Terminal. It's a double terminal. He thinks black is bad, so he closes with blackness. Why does he close with blackness? Because he can't control his anchor points, not because he has to have a facsimile run out! His anchor points are going backwards!

He's a mirror and he says — somebody came along, and they said, "You know, all policemen are bad." At that moment he starts to fight policemen and he pushes on policemen. If he pushes hard enough on policemen, police-men will arrive right in his lap.

People — criminals go around trying to find out how they can break the law. They always wind up in the wrong place. All right.

Now, there's your modus operandi of aberration. It's a mechanical modus operandi. The person forgets how to use his anchor points because they start turning backwards. They go backwards because he's in this universe with heavy gravities and with MEST that can't be punished, and so forth. And so his anchor points — he abandons using them. He said, "I won't use my anch — I will never put out my anchor points again," or something of this sort.

So therefore, anytime he sees something that's bad, he closes with that terminal. So you've got a problem here of closed terminals. How do you resolve closed terminals? You've got two ways to resolve them. You just double-terminal them out here and let them discharge, or you simply have the preclear mock somebody picking them up out of him and carrying them off again.

He's — all of a sudden say, this is silly, he'll say, "Well, I've always been scared of streetcars," and we've just double-terminaled two streetcars, see, being carried off from the preclear out here into the darkness and dumped. "Now, I can get rid of streetcars any want — time I want to get rid of street-cars. I always thought you had double terminal streetcars. I mean, I thought that streetcars were always going to fall in on you." Of course, he'd never had a chance to run one out because he only had one streetcar. And he never mocked up a second one. He didn't know that his mock-up would work better in this universe than another one. All right.

One of the main things, then, is communication lag index, and that rises and you're trying to arrive at a communication change. How do you arrive at a communication change? By handling anchor points. That's the next one. All right, now if we have a communication change in the individual, we have a change of beingness, don't we? Well, we want to change the beingness of the preclear for the better, so if we want to change his beingness for the better, then we change his communication index, which is changing his anchor points, or changing his beingness, which is changing his anchor points, because it's changing his space.

And if we want to change the things he thinks are bad, all we've got to do is resolve the fact that he has collapsed on his terminals with something that's bad and we've done it. We've done it. And all other techniques are rococo. They're just gilding the lily. But these other techniques are valuable.

There's one tiny, little special technique — I give you an idea of this — special technique that comes out of this matching postulates. It's terribly interesting. It's the order lag. There's a communication lag and then there's the order lag.

When a person gives himself an order how long does it take for it to go into action? He says, "All right," and he says, "now I'll put on the brake." How long does it take him to put on the brake? Five hours or a fifth of a second?

Well, you know fellows have setups on certain circuits that are — have terrible order lags, so they think the order is never obeyed. That is when somebody else has handled their body for them too often and too long, and they get a terminal set up in there and a circuit set up in there so that they've got a big order lag on one subject. That's one subject, and they've got such a big order lag on this subject that they can't handle it.

Now, in other words, an order should go through immediately. You should say, "Eat," and the body eats. And yet the order lag will be "Eat." Well, the fellow goes and washes his hands and he puts on his coat, and polishes up his shoes and he walks out, and he reads the afternoon paper a little bit and he comes in and he says, "Dinner ready yet?" He's known it for a half an hour.

Then they get a new cook next week and that's the way it goes, you see?

Now, that would be an order lag. He tells himself to eat and then he does eighty other things. What is this? This is a circuit, same kind of a circuit that gives you a communication lag and it's hidden on a hidden influence. There's some kind of a hidden influence about eating and he's . . . so on.

But somebody has controlled his eating for him. This is where an inter-posed control has happened. And what do you know, the hidden influence is a study of interposed controls. Hidden controls have been put in the line. He gets so afraid of hidden controls that he knows he's got circuits.

So you find out he has a habit, or the preclear has something you don't — he doesn't like to do, you'll find him going backwards.

He says, "I don't like to smoke. I'm not going to smoke; therefore, I'm smoking. I don't like to smoke! And yet I'm smoking. So I don't like . . . Oh, dear! Well, I don't think I will smoke anymore. Where's a cigarette?"

Now, there you're just getting the reversed angle on this. Now, you'll get somebody saying, "I think I'd like a cigarette" and twenty minutes later suddenly lights one spontaneously and recalls nothing about having ordered himself to then. So he'll say, "You know I get — I get impulsive! I have impulses which tell me to do things. And I don't know where they came from because I don't remember back two hours."

Order lag time. You've got a communications lag index and an order lag index, then, and you could measure out of any individual his capability, his beingness and so forth. What interposes this? Is just can't handle communication points over a certain period of time or in a certain area or on a certain subject. What do you do with this, then? You get him to pick up this mock-up and push it out and pull it in and push it out and pull it in, until he can at last push this subject out and pull it in at will. And the darnedest things will turn up.

He's never able to get up in the morning; he's always tired when he gets up in the morning. He doesn't want to get up in the morning until 8:30 and he knows he ought to be up in the morning at 8 o'clock and he can't get up in the morning. And this is what he's telling you about and this is why he's worried. That's just because there is a period in his life when somebody else got him up when he was groggy, something like that, all the time. That's interposed control.

Now, you'll find out, he says, "I can give up cigarettes, I can give up cigarettes, I can give up cigarettes; I try and I try and I try." And what do you know, you find out that he's been punished into having an order lag so that he has to smoke cigarettes. He got punished for smoking, which gives him too much MEST universe, so that he says, "Mustn't smoke — smokes." And it's just a snapped-closed circuit just of that character, and it's just as idiotic as that.

The MEST universe goes backwards. He's got too much MEST universe in him. When he says do one thing, he does the opposite. That's a habit. And that is not an order lag time, that is an order lag reversal or an order reversal.

You'll find these things are solvable in forms of communications points. The fellow says, "Put out your communication points" and all the communication points go backwards. You solve that, you've solved his habits. You've solved all these various things that he couldn't control otherwise.

That is really the subject of auditing. Now, there's a great deal that you could practice; there's a great deal that you could know. There are a lot of techniques here. I'll give you just a brief rundown.

You could double-terminal anybody or you can double-terminal any MEST object facing itself and the object will discharge and run out all of its aberrative content — that's all. You can double-terminal postulates — any postulate facing another postulate — and it will run out, desensitize. That's a technique.

You can put up two communication points up to the corners of a room and simply hold them there. And if you'll hold them there long enough, you'll come up to present time. That's another technique.

Double-terminaling MEST objects — planets, suns, walls, furniture, cars and so forth — is really another technique, because it's so effective. All right.

The double-terminal of the corners of the room is merely a technique to get somebody to present time. It is not nearly as effective a technique as the last technique I'll mention, which is simply getting his anchor points carried in and out by him and by others, on a double terminal basis.

And that, at this time, is the most effective technique which I know, because it brings the person up to knowing how to know, by restoring to him the ability to handle the only thing by which he can know: anchor points. And it solves the case and it solves his curiosity, and it solves his knowingness and it brings him into present time, and a lot of other things.

Now, you can interplay these techniques, however, and interuse these techniques to get yourself out of any sudden little difficulty you'll run into.

He comes into session and he's so worried, he's just so worried, he's just so worried; he doesn't quite . . . So you say, "What are you worried about?"

"Well, my boss, and so on and so on and so on."

And you'd say, "Mock up the boss facing the boss."

"Well, that wouldn't help because it's something I don't know, you see? I mean, I don't know whether or not . . ." and so on.

Now, you say, "Mock up the boss facing the boss."

"Oh, all right. Mock up the boss facing the boss."

"You got him there?"

"Yeah."

"Now, mock up the office wall behind him versus the office wall behind him and get the boss too. Get the whole scene there facing the whole scene: the wall, the chair, the desk of the boss versus the wall, the chair, the desk of the boss. Get those facing that on a double terminal basis. You got that?"

"Yeah, yeah, hmmm. What am I worried about this for? What are you doing this for? Why don't we get down and do something important on the case?"

"Well, it's because you're worried about the boss."

"I'm not worried about the boss. What are you talking about? You must be crazy!"

You can take any kind of a standard reaction on an individual, and do that with it, either by thought or by terminal. Then can you alter your own mental state of beingness at will? Yes, you sure can. Can you alter a preclear's at will? Boy, you've said it.

Now, how do you process a whole group of people? You could process them with Self Analysis, mock-ups only. Or you could process them very broadly on beingness. Let's double-terminal these things, and be them double-terminal, then, and be them.

And a guy doesn't have to be able to get two terminals on these things. And you say birds and bees and fish and chairs, and be a chair and be a light, and you just keep on with this for a long time with individuals.

Can they single-terminal these things safely? Yes. Because they always double-terminal them. That's a joke. Of course, they can single-terminal them because they can double-terminal them. Because they're a terminal and any-time they mock one of these things up you've got two terminals there, even though one is superimposed over the other, so it's always a double terminal. But it doesn't run out very well.

So you group process in terms of double terminal mock-ups, preferably of MEST objects, and preferably easy MEST objects to look at. And you give — if you're giving double terminal stuff, give quite a lag, quite a long time after your command, that you give the next command.

In other words, say, "All right, now let's be a wall. Now get a wall facing a wall. Any wall." Be satisfied to let it rest for a few minutes, and give your next one.

"All right, be a chair facing a chair."

Not fast is it? But desperately effective, desperately effective, and that's what you want.

Your optimum Group Process, however, is Self Analysis for large groups (very large groups) because it'll get them there, eventually.

Why? Because it's telling the thetan that he can do the one thing which he can do, and that's create.

All right. Let that be a talk on this subject. I know that you're going to have success with these techniques. And I know this is very easy.

If anyone should ask you what you were doing and why you were doing this, and that the thetan is so-and-so and such-and-such, and they try to draw you into a big argument; they're trying to tell you there are hidden influences around someplace that tell you you shouldn't monkey with this, or something of the sort, all you have to do is drop a real slug on them and it just knocks off the whole conversation rather rapidly, and said, "Well, you see, we do happen to be freeing the human soul, and bringing salvation to an individual before he dies." That settles the argument.

I want to thank you very, very much for your attention.

Good night.