Golden era productions

67

68

11 FEBRUARY 1958

This is the other thing the Registrar is ordered to do up there. It doesn't matter how much he actually buys, he must sign up, you see, for an adequate number. Therefore, his expectancy matches the reality of the situation. This is all we're trying to do.

Female voice: Thank you.

You bet.

Yes?

Female voice: A Clear would be Tone 4.0 or as good as that, wouldn't he?

Well, that was the original test of Clear, was somebody 4.0 ...

Female voice: Oh.

... or above.

Female voice: Good.

Yes?

Male voice: Can you see how a preclear in running Help could, in actual fact, be running out havingness?

No.

Male voice: By what squirrel can they be doing that?

Oh, it's easy to do. It's easy to do because when you're auditing him he starts doing some other things that aren't in the command, which would mean that your control of the preclear would be poor. Or he is doing some mass-chewing. Or because your communication with him is so as-ising—in other words, just the fact that you're communicating with him gives him an as-isness of mass. You understand that?

So any process can apparently run somebody down in havingness. Therefore in running Help, if you were suspicious of this point, it wouldn't be the Help that was running it down.

You should turn around and run Connectedness. Run a button, bridge to Connectedness. You know, run one of the bracket and bridge to Connectedness. Run Connectedness for a while or some such process—Havingness or something—objective. And then bridge back into the second button and—of the bracket, and then Connectedness. You see, there's lots of ways for this to run. This would prevent that from happening, and probably should be done on a very low-scale case.

Yes?

Male voice: Uh . . . Oh brother, it disappeared. . . Oh, yes!

As-ised, huh?

Male voice: Yeah. Would there ever be a situation or could you—would there—would it be likely to turn up a situation wherein a preclear was so relatively out of control that you would have to run SCS before you run the Help?

Hmm . . . Well, I can tell you there are a lot of preclears you're going to have to run CCH 1 before you run anything else.

Male voice: Yeah.

Now you're talking about anaten preclears, and that sort of thing.

I'll tell you a funny thing. You know the arrangement of the bracket in HGC of February 6—Procedure of February 6—the bracket is simply listed as itself, not in the order it's supposed to be run. "How could you help yourself?" is not the best first button to run on a cycle—he goes immediately out of control, don't you see? "How could I help you?" "How could you help me?" are easily the senior brackets to this. And you let this "How could you help yourself?" cruise on to a later point of the bracket.

THE KEY PROCESSES OF CLEARING: Q&A PERIOD

You've got to—there is no substitute in auditing for knowing what you're doing! I have less and less inclination, if I ever had any, to can it all up so it could be done without understanding what you were doing. Less and less inclination. I think you could probably can up Clear Processing so that you could make a Clear without understanding it, but. . .

Male voice: Without either of them understanding.

. . . wow! Yeah, without either of them understanding it. That's very good.

Any other questions here?

Yes?

Male voice: Well, when I asked you about how we should set up Clear Procedure project for the people in the field, you said they should make technicians out of them.

Yes, you can, as long as you are standing at the backs of their necks. But remember, we're not clearing somebody without understanding it. There's somebody there who's understanding it, didn't they?

Male voice: Okay.

And namely, that'd be you, wouldn't there?

Male voice: Right.

And they run into some difficulty and you straighten it out. This is the way a clinic in the future would be organized, which is quite interesting.

I'd just love to do the US Army. Boy, wouldn't they wind up to be a fantastic organization—after you'd totally flattened Help! But supposing you were doing somebody like the army or something of this sort. And they were— well, there are just too damn many preclears, that's all. Well, you'd take some auditor that knew his business and you'd give him ten or twelve technicians. And then he could keep it monitored and keep it straightened out.

We'd probably introduce an earphone system—this is just how to get it done, you see? We'd give them a rote procedure and then we'd give them a little earphone that the monitoring auditor could talk through, you see? And he'd listen to the session on a speaker. And if he gave instructions to the auditor, he'd just tell him. You get the idea? Well, he could run an awful lot of preclears just by dropping around back of the chair. Don't you see? You'd tell him—straighten him out, tell him which way to go. Now, that's what a technician would do. And a technician, I don't think, could be trusted over the hill. That answer it?

Male voice: Yes.

There would be two ways of approaching this, but neither one of them escapes sensible auditing.

Male voice: Right.

Right.

Yes?

Male voice: Just on a point of interest—interest, on your ideas on the US Army: the British army just bought their first extinction pass. (laughter) They've agreed to get this started, in Aldershot, with Colonel White.

Oh yes?

Male voice: He bought what I'm calling a Power of Command Course.

No kidding! Tell us more.

Male voice: Well, I haven't got much more. He's writing to you on the NAAP—National Academy of American Psychology . . .

Right.

Male voice: . . . for more information.

Right.

69

70

11 FEBRUARY 1958

Male voice: But briefly, it'll—/ sold him on the idea of educating NCOs . . .

Right.

Male voice: . . . and my intention is to run a Comm Course and Upper Indoc . ..

Very good.

Male voice: ... on them.

Very good. I'm sure you'll be successful.

Male voice: And when I get back I'll be sorting this one out. It's one of the things . . .

Good.

Male voice: I heard last night that, you know, he's nibbling.

Good. Well, that's—that will take a lot of sorting out.

Male voice: True.

When we look over the potentialities between destroy and help, we find out that the function of an NCO toward his own troops is to help them. Oddly enough it's to help them destroy. Now, I don't know where we go from there. (laughter)

Yes?

Male voice: Start a school for people in the army and then take the graduates from that and run them onto OCS.

Oh yeah? Now, tell me this again.

Male voice: Start a school for soldiers that. . .

Right.

Male voice: . . . are in the army.

Right.

Male voice: Then run those graduates onto OCS.

Oh, sure.

Male voice: You'd have a valid point there. These people change so much in your course that they're ready for OCS.

Oh yes, yes very definitely.

Audience: What's OCS?

Male voice: Officer Candidate School.

Officers. That's where they make the "ociffers."

Okay, what else have we got here? Yes? First question for you.

Female voice: Is it necessary to bring up tone to tone on Help, as well as null to null?

A careful auditor—a careful auditor normally does. And lately I've been finding out they recovered tone rather easily on Help. And if you're having difficulty, it's because you're overrunning a part of the bracket.

Could I recommend that you read Scientology 8-80, on flows? Now, you— all of you, look over flows.

Now, here's what you can do with a fellow. It's too bad we're not running with an oscilloscope, but they're so fantastically expensive. They tell you the direction of flow. "How could you help me? How could you help me? How could you help me?" The fellow will come up to a point where the needle is very floppy, very loose. And you'll find out, if you run it much further, that the needle will start to tighten, tighten, tighten, tighten. What you've done is overrun the flow. Stuck flow is what you've run into.

So therefore, you don't flatten any part of a bracket on Help, you merely loosen the needle.

Male voice: Loosen?

THE KEY PROCESSES OF CLEARING: Q&A PERIOD

Yeah, and you'll get that needle pretty floppy so that you actually have to turn down sensitivity. And then later on, you'll find out you had to turn sensitivity back up again if you overrun it. It's a nice point of judgment. And you get the needle so it's nice and floppy, you'll find out he's more or less recovered tone. And then tone will start down again and you won't get it up again on that end of the bracket. You've got to turn around and run it the opposite direction.

Let's say you're processing a pastor. He's been helping people and helping people and helping people, and nobody ever gave him any help. All right.

Now, you decide, very dully, to run him on "How could you help me?" The needle might have been fairly fluid to begin with, but it'll just freeze because you're running him on a stuck flow.

Now, the thing to run him on is quite something else: is, "How could I help you?" This will be a terrible shock to him. He's already overrun it, you see, in life. And as you run it back at him, he's liable to go anaten and everything else, but eventually the needle will get unstuck, and that is the time to leave that edge of the bracket. You don't null, null, null, null, null, null, null with this Help. You simply get it better, better, better. Every time you get the needle action better—the sensitivity is wide and so forth, he appears to be fairly free on the thing—you go on to the next side of the bracket. And what you do is run the bracket many times around rather than run each one flat.

If you could run—if you ran a bracket this way, you'd make a mistake. An hour and a half on "How could I help you?" Oh, I'm afraid that's much too long. He'll overrun it and stick the needle again, and you'll get trouble with your tone arm. Your tone arm will have risen back up to where you started, but then it will fall off again. And now you won't be able to get the thing up easily. So you say, "Well, the process that got him into it, why, huh! get him out of it, so we just run some more of it," see? But you get stuck flows.

And the idea of a flow is quite an interesting mechanism, and the fellow can overrun a flow, and it sticks. Anything running too long in one direction will eventually stick. The easiest thing about it is, if you were running water on a slight grade into a pool down here, you would eventually get the pool so full that the water would no longer run. See? Now, that's just a physical universe—a crude manifestation.

Electrically, if stuff runs too long down this line, something will happen to the line. The electricians call it electrolysis. It starts to carry away particles. It starts to chew things up. There's more and more resistance. And it's expressed in terms of heat. The line gets hot. Don't you see? The resistance rises; it's harder and harder to get a flow to go through that line.

Well, you should be able to read that on the meter because the meter suddenly starts to say, "Freeze, freeze, freeze." And I could take any one of you and freeze the needle on flows. I can just freeze it so doggone tight that somebody would say, "Boy, how did we get this low-toned character in the course?" You know? Just on a basis of, "Get the idea of pitching something at that wall. Pitch something at that wall. Pitch something at that wall." And after a while the thing would tighten.

Now, mocking something up and keeping it from going away is not a flow. Only for a while will it act as a flow, and that works itself out. But a thing like Help acts as flows. It's quite amazing. And this I was going to take up with you tomorrow, but you're running it today so I better tell you.

Run those needles loose; run them loose and switch. And as soon as I tell you run them loose, you'll see what I mean, second you get it on a needle,

71

72

11 FEBRUARY 1958

because it's very apparent. It means that your needle action, which was fairly mild to begin with, is now getting pretty strenuous. It means that you could actually turn down your sensitivity knob over here; see, you could turn down that sensitivity knob because the action is now too wide.

Well now, after a while, if you continue to run the same direction, see— "How could I help you? How could I help you?" gets fluid after a while, and then it starts sticking. See? And you'll find, then, that it would be necessary to turn your sensitivity back up again. You say, "What's happened here?" Well, what's happened is, is you ran through the null that—we're working with Help on a null of flows, which is quite different than a null of no needle actions.

I probably should have taken this up with you yesterday, but you got it now?

Audience: Yeah.

You're still looking a little baffled. Is there anything wrong?

Female voice: It's all right. Thank you.

You got it made?

Female voice: Yes.

You'll just have to see this action on an E-Meter to understand it. For instance, I picked up a case one day and I ran Help, "How could I help you?" and I ran it two times. That needle was sticky to begin with, and it got an awful lot sticky. And I said, "Well, at this point is it all right with you if we bridge? How could you help me?" And the needle just—plaaaah. I mean it—all of a sudden here we had a needle going all over the place. That's fine. That's fine. And I went on to other parts of the bracket, and then came back to this first part of the bracket. And this time I got it to flow, and the needle got loose on it.

Theoretically, part of clearing is to have a totally fluid needle.

Male voice: This brings up a point: At the start of the course when we were first talking about E-Meters, the idea was pretty much to set the sensitivity at one point and, by God, leave it there so that you get equal readings all through the thing.

Right. Then you would for sure see . . .

Male voice: Yes, I know.

. . . the tremendously expanded action of the needle.

Male voice: Yeah. Well, I've already seen that.

Right.

Male voice: My feeling on it now is that I could do a better job of auditing with occasional variance of the . . .

Well, do so. Do so—it's your meter.

Male voice: Okay.

You bet. It is!

Male voice: Yeah.

Just so you know what you're doing.

Male voice: Yes.

The reason you give somebody a bunch of fixed sets for a meter is so they can tell what's varying. Now, if they want to vary things after that, that's fine.

Male voice: Okay.

You bet.

Okay. Yes?

Male voice: Would you clarify a little bit for me how goals and help are connected or associated?

THE KEY PROCESSES OF CLEARING: Q&A PERIOD

Well, you've just popped a question that I hadn't even had — ever examined.

Male voice: Mm-hm.

Never examined this question. Goals and help: You'll find out that the true goals of a person would be to help, I am sure.

Male voice: Mm-hm.

And goals could establish where he was on help, just by listening to him for a short time, and would be more of an indicative thing than it would be therapeutic. We've already tested goals out and found out that it's not necessarily therapeutic. It feels so good, but it isn't necessarily therapeutic.

Yes?

Male voice: Thank you.

Second male voice: Would it be the reason Help is on a flow basis because it's basically a "contribute to" and involved with other people, whereas the "create" is strictly involved with oneself?

Right. You could say that if you were clearing somebody, Help would run the dynamics, and you would get a takeoff from the first dynamic on up with "mock up" and "create." You see? I mean, that's a first dynamic rehabilitation. Help takes the higher dynamics.

The reason why cases get along better when you flatten Help first is because normally you've taken out a bunch of inversions. You haven't taken out the other at all. When he really gets up to a first dynamic he can create, and then he could take off through the rest of the dynamics just through that, and they would all work out eventually. Hardly a case around that isn't running on some inverted dynamics.

Yes?

Female voice: When you process "Action against that body," wouldn't you run into the same phenomena of the stuck flow on the meter?

"Action against that body," stuck flow on the meter—if a person was running it with the actual particles and the actual flow you would certainly get it. You would certainly get a stuck flow phenomenon. That's right.

Yes?

Female voice: You mentioned striking out the Union Station processes at the HGC. Did I get that correctly?

Yeah, that's out.

Female'voice: What about us?

Oh, you don't have to do it. It's not a bad process. It's good, it gets you acquainted with people, gets you around, gets you some air.

Yes?

Male voice: Well, if you run Help to a floppy needle on each leg. . .

Mm-hm.

Male voice: . . . where do you stop?

Your needle will eventually null.

Male voice: Oh.

You eventually get no reaction on Help at all. But the road out is the middle of the flow. See? I mean, it's not stuck this way and stuck that way, it's an unstuck needle. And then you get a more unstuck needle; eventually you get an unactive—an inactive needle, totally inactive. Floppy needles eventually cease to be there at all.

Yes?

73

74

11 FEBRUARY 1958

Male voice: Would there be a relatively null point—not a stuck needle, but a relatively rising point of a relatively free needle—somewhere in the middle of that flow ?

Yeah.

Male voice: That would be the place to leave it.

Yeah. Well, you'll get a phenomenon which is quite amusing to watch, where the fellow takes a whole tone with a tone arm drop, on one single question that isn't very significant at all.

Male voice: Yeah.

And he'll get a whole tone drop, and then he will blow the charge on that, and the needle will soar upwards to a whole tone rise. Boy, that's a real floppy needle. Wow, that's wild. And that's the time to just get off of it.

Male voice: Yeah.

You say, "That's fine. Let's bridge. Let's bridge before we get into some trouble around here."

Male voice: Good.

Okay, we've had it. Thank you very much.

Audience: Thank you.

A LECTURE GIVEN ON 12 FEBRUARY 1958

Thank you.

Well, maybe you will really appreciate this lecture today because it's practical for a change. None of this theoretical stuff. And the name of it is "Havingness and Anaten and Flows in Relation to Clearing." You poor people, there's so much you don't know!

That's a terrible thing for me to say, isn't it? I should tell you, "Well, you know it all,"—this is my usual tone—"you know it all, but I'm just fixing up a few rough edges."

Truth of the matter is when I get into this particular subject I say, "Wow! How am I ever going to get anything even vaguely resembling this across?" Because it has taken years to sort this one out. This is totally technical, totally mechanical. But it has taken years to sort it out.

What is boil-off? I refer you to Scientology 8-80, 1952. Boil-off is a How which is run too long in one direction. Doesn't matter whether that's up, down, backwards or forwards, from the guy's head to an infinity behind him or from his face forward, it for sure is a flow that has run too long.

Now, this is quite remarkable. You are busy talking to somebody, and he never says a word. You know, we say, ". . . and so-and-so and so-and-so and so-and-so and so-and-so, hm?"

And he says . . .

And you say, "And so-and-so and so-and-so and so-and-so."

And he says . . .

And you say, "And the fact of the matter is the ruddy rods go on the other side of it."

And he says . . .

After a while you start to go downscale. But if you're far enough downscale already, you start to go anaten. Unconscious. There's no backflow. No backflow occurs. Don't you see? I vaguely mentioned this in passing the other day, in electronic terms.

There are some electronic data of comparable support to this. But the phenomenon of stuck flow is not well understood, but it's probably why you have to have capacitors and resistors and other bric-a-brac and feedback and so forth in an electronic circuit. Probably is the reason if you analyzed it from that basis. But I don't know that it's ever been analyzed from that basis. And it might be if it were, you would get a better electronic setup.