Golden era productions

115

116

13 FEBRUARY 1958

Naturally a person higher on the scale wouldn't consider it a problem to him—or lower on the scale—wouldn't consider it a problem to him. You'd have to be sure that this fellow really didn't consider this a problem. He might merely be in apathy about it, which time he would walk up to the level of problem.

But an individual, let us say, to whom that would not in any event be a problem, running it might very well—because a thetan, higher he goes up the scale the more effective he is—might very well knock it out much faster.

Maybe we ought to find somebody to whom the atom bomb is no problem at all.

Female voice: That's what I was getting at. I wasn't worried about the pc. I was concerned about. . .

That's very good. Female voice: . . . whether this would in fact help the city.

Yeah, that's good. That's a very good question. I'll have to make a note of that, try something on it.

Yes?

Female voice: Well, along the same line, I thought—I had two women whom I processed who were separated from their husbands. And there was no influence. And when I ran the husbands off of them, the husbands, completely separated, completely changed.

That's right.

Female voice: You see that?

Right. This is a weird one.

Female voice: Mm-hm.

This is a weird one. If it gets much worse, we'll have to buy Buddha's "oneness of all," won't we? (laughter)

Yes?

Female voice: What kind of process would you use to help a person handle time?

Time. Dianetics 1955: Make Some Time. However time, in the final analysis, is havingness. Time and havingness go close together. And as a person runs out of havingness, he runs out of time, which is quite interesting. The whole society dramatizes this until we consider it the natural thing. We just don't think it's a problem, we think it's natural.

You should beware of these things that are so "natural" because they actually are problems that have sunk into subapathy. An individual, let us say, has to have a great many things in order to do something so that he can get some money quick enough to pay his debts before everything he's got is taken away from him. Now, that is routine in this society. And Havingness all by itself, just a Trio, run for seventy-five hours on a case that is not in very good shape, finished off with the case reporting on time for work every morning thereafter for the last two and a half years. And the case has not been late. And the case never before was able to get to work. The only thing that was run on the case was Trio. See, there's the coordination between havingness and time.

But as you move somebody upstairs, if you wanted to just take over this particular button, you'd ask him to make some time. I've had a preclear say—never answer the auditing question for two hours, hour and a half, just not even answer the question; give all sorts of oddities and got rather annoyed with me after a while because I kept saying, "Now, I will repeat the auditing question, 'Make some time.' "

OTHER PROCESSES, THE HELP BUTTON: Q&A PERIOD

I said, "I'll repeat the auditing command, 'Make some time.' "

And the individual said, "Well, to make some time I could walk over and wiggle the window shade. That'd make some motion, and we'd have the apparency of some time made." And he'd smile smirkingly.

And I'd say, "I'll repeat the auditing command, 'Make some time.' " About a half an hour deep he woke up to the fact that I was repeating it. I wasn't giving him a new question.

He said, "What's the matter with you?" Said, "I'm answering this question every time. I'm telling you how I could go about it."

And I just kept it up. "I'll repeat the auditing command, 'Make some time.' "

And the individual says, "Well, I could fly around the room somehow or another, and we could do something or other, and that would make some time."

I'd say, "I'll repeat the auditing command, 'Make some time' "—no acknowledgments anywhere along the line.

An hour and a half, we finally had to knock off, but we arrived. The individual had a tremendous cognition. He said, "Well, I'm not answering the auditing command. I am not making time. Now, let's see, make some time . . ." So he says — and waved his hand up and down.

I said, "Thank you! End of session."

Yes?

Male voice: A question on time. Does the solution appear with the problem, ahead of it, or can you have it either way?

The solution to the problem of time appears immediately and exactly with the thetan. Because he is making time. It's in his present.

Male voice: I was thinking about problems and solutions to problems.

Yes, that's right. It will actually go up the track, back down the track. It goes into the past, it goes into the future. Any process which is directly processing time moves all over the place, but eventually winds up exactly parallel with the thetan because he finds out that he himself is never moving in time.

Male voice: I didn't say it right. It's—do the problem and the solution occur simultaneously?

They would have to, wouldn't they?

Male voice: That's my opinion.

Yes.

Yes?

Male voice: Wondering if you could give an estimate of the total amount of auditing hours that have been done in the last eight years on Dianetics and Scientology processes.

I wouldn't even be—I wouldn't even make a guess. You mean by all auditors everywhere?

Male voice: Mm-hm.

Oh, I don't know. I suppose it's easily in terms of the millions and millions. It must be.

Male voice: It's something of havingness, isn't it?

Hm?

Male voice: Something of havingness for all isn't it?

Oh, yeah. It's way upstairs. Goodness.

Yes?

117

118

13 FEBRUARY 1958

Male voice: I'd like to know if clearing—just mechanical fact of clearing would handle postulates and decisions? Or would you have to do something else?

No. The exact processes you're running, the last process of which is simply Mock Up Something and Make It a Little More Solid, has a tendency to just null out, and the individual moves up, then, into postulates. He's already found that he could do it in session; he's already found all the mechanics of it, but he goes on a wobbly course of actually doing it in life. And it sometimes takes him weeks to unwind this thing.

And he sometimes will drop back down to agreement because he says it's too complicated. And he'll drop back down to agreement, and he'll go along for a week or so and he'll say, "Well, this is a silly thing to be doing—use all these other old shopworn postulates. I can make postulates." And he eventually gets used to it. And his familiarity with it is necessary before you can make a pronunciamento on the subject. Okay, does that answer the question?

Male voice: Yes.

All right.

Yes?

Male voice: I'd like a stable datum on just what the dividing line is between the desirability of invalidating and evaluating a trainee in a training drill, and not evaluating or invalidating a preclear.

There is an Instructor's Code. And we have found that the only way that you can be effective in instruction is doing almost exactly reverse the Auditor's Code. And we had trouble with Instructors in Dianetics and Scientology consistently until we wrote up the Instructor's Code. And they were all being auditors, and they were afraid to evaluate for, they were afraid to invalidate.

Now, just earlier I told you, the direct line—you get the idea—the aggressiveness, actually put the person you're teaching, as well as the person you're processing, directly into the sphere. Well, you cannot put a preclear into the sphere with invalidation, evaluation, but you can a student.

Male voice: What makes the difference?

The difference is exactly what the goal is—what the person is trying to do or trying to be. You have the preclear pared down to a third dynamic, don't you? And the individual to that degree is rather inverted, introverted, he's a little bit fogged out, he's not quite as alert, ordinarily, as he would be in the walkabout world. You're actually training on the third dynamic—you're training well up on the third dynamic. And as a result, the individual is expected to be alert, he's supposed to be on his toes and he himself is learning to handle certain things.

And we found out that an Instructor had to be gotten over his unwillingness to evaluate, his unwillingness to invalidate, before he was a good Instructor. It's quite a trick for an auditor to be both an Instructor—have one beingness for an Instructor, another beingness as an auditor. But this is rather necessary.

Now, funny part of it is, is as he is trying to handle this and as he's still having a little difficulty with it, and he's still being diffident, he will evaluate and invalidate more savagely than when he gets into good handling of it. And he goes on up through such a stage up to a point of where his help factor is very high and where he can say, "I have never seen anyone quite as clubfooted in an auditing session as you were today," and it helps this auditor audit his preclear. It's his intention to help that answers this. We find the

OTHER PROCESSES, THE HELP BUTTON: Q&A PERIOD

best way to help a student is overwhelmp him. The best way to help a preclear is to set him free. It just works that way. There actually isn't any more reason to it than that.

But the question is, do you make a student into an auditor? And the question is, do you make a preclear into a Clear? It's the way you make the pudding. And it's almost a trial-and-error proposition.

You'll find, however, that you can most err on being diffident and keeping the Auditor's Code with a student. You keep an Auditor's Code with a student, and he'll get out of your class and he won't know what he's doing. He has to know what makes you excited, then he can evaluate the importance.

Who hasn't asked a question here for a while? Yes?

Female voice: Is there any other way of auditing a baby besides this one, reach and withdraw from objects?

Oh yes. The golden rule about auditing a baby is to give him something to do that he can do, and "Lie in that crib. Thank you," that sort of thing, don't you know?

Female voice: Yeah, but he can't understand the words.

Give him a win—I beg your pardon!

Now, here's somebody that's got a wonderful experience coming. It's everyone's assumption—I never jump on anybody for not knowing—but it's a wonderful assumption to say a little baby cannot understand you. As long as you make that assumption, they won't. But the very funny part of it is that most of them have just gotten through a life of being erudite, and they're tired of it. And they'll fake it as long as they can. But if you talk to them as though they understand you, they very rapidly do.

That's been one of the more interesting experiences that every auditor has had in handling children, in handling babies and so forth. What can the baby understand? Well, the baby can understand almost anything.

It's like Diana. She's a little bit angry with us because we haven't sent her to school. And her I'm-supposed-to runs that at five she should go to school.

Now, the main difficulty is here that she thinks, evidently, that she ought to be learning something. So she is now going around being very forthright about it, and she'll hand you box tops and labels, and she'll say, "Read this." And you read it and it says, "Royal Crescent Turkish Delight"—a candy box top, you know? And she'll look at this.

I said to her the other day, I said, "Do you know, you put up a wonderful mock-up of not knowing how to read." I said, "You're really doing well at it. Congratulations." I said, "It's the nicest job I've seen in a long time."

She looked at me rather oddly. Of course, I can't say anything wrong to her. Oddly enough I can yell at her and she just smiles. She knows that we're having a good time. The most terrific trust level, see?

Well, she went and thought this over and this morning, why, was busy reading a paragraph to me out of the newspaper.

Here's the point, you see? It's what you consider is their communication potential. And if you consider a baby's communication potential is zero, it's liable to remain so. But the truth of the matter is, he knows how to talk.

Now, you could theoretically get a child who has only spoken Asiatic tongues who now picks up a white mock-up, he'd probably have a rough time. He'd have a rough time learning if—we might not have this child talking until he's three or four years old. And then he'll really start to gear up on it.

119

120

13 FEBRUARY 1958

But that's an experience you're going to have.

Female voice: Thank you.

Okay.

Yes?

Male voice: I just want to say in answer to the question about how many hours have been spent in auditing, I recall when you were up in Ireland one night we worked it out as, I think it was eight thousand hours a month. I don't think it was a week. That's what it averaged out at, over the last. . .

Must have been.

Male voice: . . . well, it would be over the last eight years, now. About eight thousand hours a month, it was.

That would be a very definite minimum.

There have been more preclears in processing and more hours of Dianetic auditing delivered as such—I figured this out in '53—in the three years immediately prior to that, than there had been handed out by psychoanalysis or psychiatry or both. So it's high.

We're the people in the world who have been processing people. Other people have been talking about it.

Yes?

Female voice: I'd like to know if you can run a present time problem with a terminal by running Help. If it would work as well as Problem of Comparable Magnitude.

Yes, I've run an experiment on this, and I find that the processes which handle a PT problem in the mest universe, however, are in this order:

One, limited process: some part of it that the person could be responsible for.

Two, Problem of Comparable Magnitude.

Three, Invent Something Worse Than and Problem of Comparable Magnitude.

And then Help.

They go up in this line when it's a—when it was a real present time problem which is present out here in the physical universe.

Female voice: Mm-hm.

Now, I couldn't even tell you at this moment exactly why it falls into this as a test pattern. But it does.

Female voice: How about if it's a chronic problem, something that's in sort of a wise . . .

Well, understand, I am sure that Help will run on this. But a chronic problem has already been tested, and it was only chronic problems that were tested to give these results I've just given you.

Female voice: Thank you.

You bet.

Male voice: Is that the order you'd use them in, Ron?

That's the order of attack, yes. Yes, definitely. That's the order you would use them in. This first one is quite limited. And if it didn't produce a satisfactory result in a short time, I'd get off of it and I'd go on to Problem of Comparable Magnitude. And if that didn't get it, why, I'd say, "Boy this is really something!" And I'd start him inventing things worse than that. And I would undercut the whole thing and take over the automaticity of the dwindling spiral—get in ahead of it before he sank out of sight. And then run Problems of Comparable Magnitude. And that would take care of it. I don't know that it—it wouldn't survive any longer than that.

And then to finish it off, so that there was no liability connected with it at all, you would run Help. And if you were to run a fifth process on the same

OTHER PROCESSES, THE HELP BUTTON: Q&A PERIOD

thing, it would be the first process: "What part of that problem could you be responsible for?" And you would come right back to the beginning.

Yes?

Male voice: You mentioned the other day about setting up a clinic. I just wondered if you'd staff it with HCAs or graduate students?

What's this, a ...

Male voice: A Scientology clinic. I just wondered . . .

Where?

Male voice: Oh, you just mentioned that if someone did, in passing.

Audience: Missions. In the field.

Oh, it'd be perfectly safe to staff it with HCAs today. And you just won't find that many graduate students. They're quite rare.

The HCA who's going through school today is quite able when he finishes up. We have a lot of little private jokes about that. We had a pc who was going through the HGC and who was being hand-petted through the HGC, nice as you please. You should understand, the HGC has been considerably crippled because of this ACC, see? Some of its people are down here. And this person didn't have the best auditor in the world but had a very passable auditor.

Well, this auditor couldn't get this fellow Clear within the length of time, and it was very upsetting to this auditor. And everybody in the HGC figured out that this fellow must be in much worse shape still than he had been. We turned him over to the Academy, and he'd gotten a student intensive from a raw student who had only been there about three weeks. And the student cleared him. The guy is Clear today. And the Academy is laughing at the HGC now like mad.

Of course, what happened is the HGC set him up, but the student ran it off. But it makes awfully good telling the other way.

You understand that an HCA in the future will have a very thorough earned HAS before he goes into HCA. And then he studies in HCA, training drills. And then he studies the types of processes. And he yet is not specialized in them at all. And he comes out of there, then, a technician and a theoretician.

Now, if he was to go—if he were to go to HAA, or something like that, he would be taught how to clear people. But then you could teach him now, certainly after this course, how to clear people.

Male voice: Yeah. Now, did I understand you to say that before a person is allowed onto the HCA Course sometime in the future, he'll have to have an HAS?

That's—you said it. Mm-hm.

Male voice: Thank you.

Yes?

Male voice: When we're auditing in the field, is there any way of determining when we've got a preclear to a point on Clear Procedure where he will just go on and flatten out to Clear?

Oh, yes. If he answers the various requisites which are part of the HCO Bulletin of a couple, three days ago . . .

Male voice: Yeah.

... a week ago—if he answers up to those requisites, you can count on the fact that a lot of his time in the next two or three weeks, all by himself, will be drifting out of it. You see, you didn't solve his life or give him back all of his things. He will—in any event, even if he passed all the tests—will drift higher than he is.