Golden era productions

RESPONSIBILITY FOR MOCK-UPS: Q&A PERIOD

He sits there, and every time the case veers around toward this person, he comes off of it at once and he won't have anything to do with that section of his life, you see? And he keeps flinching, and the case tries to run around this thing. Well, this is the explanation for it.

You can run the problem, and you better had run the problem. "You got a present time problem?"

And the fellow says, "Yes."

Well, you'd better run it. "What part of the problem can you be responsible for?" "Problem of comparable magnitude to it," or any other way you want to handle this present time problem, since nobody is telling you how to handle a present time problem beyond giving you all available ways of handling it.

Now, you start to clear Help on him. And you notice that this is rules governing the running of CCH Ob, Help. Well, at this stage when you start to run that, this should have said, " If the pc had a PT problem which the auditor had to clear up," (got that?) "then he should select the most intimate terminals on these and run Help in brackets, a few commands in each bracket." Just to make sure that these people aren't any longer hung up. Do you understand that?

Female voice: Yes.

The person can—the case can hang up because a problem is there, and then can hang up because the terminals are there that he would rather kill than not.

Yes?

Female voice: Do you always run that, "What part of that problem could you be responsible for?" without terminals, just using the word "problem"?

Oh, you can run that. That's a limited run. His havingness will chew up like mad, but you can still run it.

Female voice: Well, I thought you had to have a terminal there.

I see what you're hung up on. You don't want to run a condition. And you have been thoroughly told, coached and you believe that you must never run a condition, that you must always run a terminal.

Now, I'll tell you something: Auditing is something you get away with. That is what auditing is. And for a little while—now listen to me—for a little while before the Havingness button gets too thoroughly chewed, you can always run a condition. But if his Havingness button is chewed right at the beginning, you're going to have trouble.

So you could say to be safe always run a terminal, never a condition. That's a safe look, don't you see?

Female voice: Yes.

But you can get away with an awful lot. You can get around the edges of this thing and sweep at it. How else would you ever undo an Axiom?

You know you can take all of the Axioms and just tear them to pieces? One right after the other. A datum of incomparable magnitude to the definition for space—that's running a condition, isn't it? You're liable to get the fellow up along the line somewhere and all of a sudden he'll have some space. You've shaken up the definition. The definition is right there in the preclear. You've got all these—rack of Axioms; you could take them from the bottom to the top or the top to the bottom. You could, actually, if you did this and . . . But as you go up toward the top you get more and more conditional. And then when you run into the fact of a thetan, you say, "Give me a datum of incomparable magnitude . . ." " Invent a datum of incomparable magnitude

143

144

14 FEBRUARY 1958

to a thetan." Oh-oh. This is a murderous operation; it is just totally inoperative; it is not something that would work, that is all.

But you can say a datum of comparable magnitude on almost any other Axiom and get somewhere, providing you didn't strain at it. You'll get somewhere for maybe forty-five minutes. Case will feel fine. You shake him by the hand, get off of it, get away from it, run something that has a little havingness connected with it, (clap) and you never notice the difference.

Run it, maybe, for an hour and a half or two hours, or something of this nature. Case all of a sudden goes grog and bog and wiggle and agitate and two or three ridges collapse on him, and you've had it then. Now how are you going to dig him out of this one?

Well, you just have to wait three days and try over again. That's what I always do.

Okay. Does that answer a question?

Female voice: Yes. Thank you.

I'm glad the question came up, because you realize that although auditing runs safely on fixed rules, an auditor can be a reckless driver. See, he can still get around a few curves.

Yes?

Male voice: How would you phrase the Help question on a preclear who has a stuck flow to trying to help a person, who failed and they died? How would you run that bracket?

I'd handle it the same way as any other bracket. I don't see anything special about it.

Male voice: The person's been dead twenty years. Can you say, "How could they help you?"

Oh, sure.

Male voice: And the preclear keeps saying, "Well they can't anymore; they can't do that..."

Good. Well, he'll say that for forty times, and then come up with one.

Male voice: I see. All right. I wonder if there's a gimmick we could use.

No. Well, you could do a lot of things with that. You understand? You've got—always got a lot of answers to it. You could sit down and run the secondary of the person's death. That's one thing you could do. Another thing, you could just have him mock up the person and mock up the person and mock up the person and mock up the person, and all of a sudden something else would blow on the thing. You know? That'd be another answer to the same problem.

Another thing is just to persevere with what you're doing. Or lead him in a little bit, make it conditional, "What if they were still alive, what—how could they help you?" You know?

Remember a thetan is always in a time called a thetan's time. See? Only, you couldn't call it a thetan's time because he's just—he's just not in a time stream. So that any facsimile that he has, has the time tag of "now" on it; then later on gets altered and has the time tag of "then" on it. And you get this sort of thing: Every once in a while a fellow cheats and they get déjà vu; he knows he's been there before, he knows he's done this exact thing, he knows this circumstance, this moment is happening once more. He cheats, in other words. And he thinks it's happening over again. But that isn't what it is; he merely has a terrific knowingness on what is happening.

RESPONSIBILITY FOR MOCK-UPS: Q&A PERIOD

British movie of the fellow gets invited to a party and he knows horrible things are happening. The thing keeps running this idiotic cycle through and through and through.

For instance, I have an interesting gimmick. I sometimes have to consciously concentrate to watch the nowness of a television screen, because it is much, much too easy—since the whole program is in existence anyhow— it's much too easy to look at the will-be-ness of the television screen. Don't you see? Much too easy.

Or it's very, very easy to read the back of a book before you read the front of it, just as you start to read the front of it, you know? Say, "What's this all about?" Well, you have to localize yourself very precisely in time, see, and you say, "Now I am reading this book, now, and it is two minutes after eight on this date of February the thirteenth, and this is the beginning of the book." It's almost by postulate that you see now.

So an individual answering a question about a person who's been dead, you see, is actually running the thenness of his deadness too thoroughly. And the whole engram is in there with the nowness of the deadness.

You know that was why Dianetics—that was one of the things Dianetics took apart. It was "it was happening now," and you told the preclear to go back on the track. What is interesting was that that was an incorrect command. Actually the track had to go up on the preclear and . . .

Yes?

Male voice: Would there be any possible value on helping a preclear to get mock-ups, of running a control-type process, something on the order of "You get the idea of making a mock-up you can see"?

Yeah. Interesting.

Male voice: Might turn up some interesting things.

Oh yes. I can turn on somebody's mock-ups with an awful wham on this one: "Get the idea of making a brilliant mock-up. Now get the idea that would spoil the game and decide not to." They'll turn on mock-ups that are . . .

That, by the way, was the critical process which told us that ability was never lost. Unwillingness was gained, but ability was never lost. And they'll turn up mock-ups. You can even say this to a preclear who was the blackest black V you ever saw and you—but the shock is so great you have to audit him for shock. And that is, say, "Get the idea of not putting a mock-up out in front of you." And a mock-up will appear. This is old reversal processing— "Try not to be three feet back of your head," you know?

Yes?

Female voice: I'd like to ask whether you think that clearing the word "help" in the sense of definition, as we did in the PE Courses, would pick up a group that's kind of snarling at each other.

A group?

Female voice: Yes.

Oh yes. I think that would be a terrific idea.

Female voice: Just throw it out and let them hack it over.

That's a very interesting idea, clearing Help for a group.

I could say something about clearing Help individually, on individual auditing. You know that if you clear carefully each word of the command separately, all by itself, all the way through, every time you bridge, you really shake this case up. And you'll find out somewhere along the line his definitions for these words begin to shift. And I have been doing this lately, with considerable profit. And I finally got a person who was giving me a

145

146

14 FEBRUARY 1958

dictionary definition of help to actually look at the word. That was quite a triumph. The person says, "Help—well, that's just help" and so on, "and somebody helps you." That was his definition for help, which I think was very cute. I let him get away with it. And after we'd run it for a little while, he says, "Help: that means if somebody is sick you do something for them." I knew we'd get to that sooner or later. That's help. He finally came out with a definition for help.

Yes?

Male voice: The other day, talking about running flows on Help, you said you would change when you got the wide swings . . .

Yep.

Male voice: . . . and as you continued going through the bracket these wide swings would narrow down till they approached null. Now, should we run it till it has come back, so it is pretty nearly null again, or while it's still swinging very widely?

Oh, I'd just keep running it wide. After a while it won't swing at all. It doesn't go down to a null, it just goes down to a no-react.

Male voice: Well, to less and less swing.

Yeah. Well, it just doesn't act anymore. You keep holding up your hand as though the needle is registering something. The needle no longer registers.

Male voice: It just nulls.

You get .the idea?

Male voice: Mm-hm.

So it could swing or not swing, or rise or not. And all of these would be just the action—that what you're doing now with the preclear has no relation to the needle. And that's what you run into.

Now, if you wanted to define that as null, and you wanted to say that the needle was being set for body resistance at that point, yes, you'd get a needle . . . You see what I'm making here?

Male voice: Oh, I see.

I'm just cautioning you against assuming that the idea of help is now doing anything at all with the needle.

Male voice: Oh, I see.

What it does is just swing it wider and wider and looser and looser, and after that it just settles down to being the simple resistance of the body on the meter. See, it actually—the actual thing about it is it gets wider and wider and then goes off the meter. And that you still have a reading, however, is no longer a reading on Help.

Male voice: One other question is, the most intimate terminal on this sheet, what's the "intimate" mean?

To the problem. Let's say his problem of comparable magnitude is the fact that he's getting divorced on Tuesday. Most intimate terminal would be his wife, of course.

Let's say that he'd been fired yesterday. The most intimate terminal is the boss, or the person who fired him. See?

Male voice: Then it would be—would it be necessarily the one nearest to present time?

Yeah. You'll find the fellow will comb back onto other bosses, other wives. The tremendous number of wives that men have had and the tremendous number of husbands that women have had make marital relations quite complicated, you know? But you're Q-and-Aing with the bank if you take another one. And you shouldn't Q-and-A with the bank. You can go right on

RESPONSIBILITY FOR MOCK-UPS: Q&A PERIOD

down and trace this thing clear back to 1000 b.c., you know? Almost every time a person lives he gets married, if he lives long enough.

Male voice: Wasn't there a whole track incident called the Helper?

Oh yes, there sure was.

Audience: (various responses)

Yeah. Yeah, you're liable to run into that. You run into almost anything.

Male voice: And practically all of these volunteer deals on the track, too— "Won't you help us?"

Oh yeah.

You can always count on this factor: That any time you had a road which led out of the morass, somebody used it to go in. The greatest argument against putting a good highway to Alaska was the fact that it could be used to come from Alaska to the US by tanks, which otherwise would have had a hell of a time getting here. Get the idea? So any time you had men of ill will, or thetans of ill will, you could be absolutely sure of two things: One, that they would use any button which would have freed, to trap; and the other, that they weren't around very long and got quickly trapped.

Male voice: Yeah.

You could be sure of those two things. The second is very gratifying.

Male voice: This brings up a point here. You mentioned the other day that ability goes along with willingness to help.

Mm-hm.

Male voice: But there seemed to be some apparent variances from this. Such people as Hitler and Mussolini who apparently had a great deal of ability along some lines—at least, by golly, they sure caused effects all over the place—and yet, I wouldn't call that particularly high on the Help button. How would you explain that?

I wouldn't even try, beyond saying that the ability of the man that was left, the ability of the man that was still apparent, that was still functional, was only a small portion of the actual ability he could have exerted. I would say here you had somebody who was practically in a Clear state who was in no understanding at all, whose understanding was very poor and whose hates overrode his good sense. And the faster they overrode it, why, the quicker he went down the slot.

Yes?

Male voice: There's one thing that hasn't been cleared up on this specific universe terminal: Do you use the entire nine-way bracket, nine-step bracket, on the specific terminal?

Yes.

Male voice: Oh, you do.

Sure.

Male voice: Thank you.

You don't have to. That's actually banging it around too much.

Male voice: Yeah. I use five.

Yeah, you've got a five-bracket that still works just fine. You can even get away with a three-bracket, you know?

Male voice: Okay.

It's what you can get away with, you know?

Male voice: I see.

If the fellow seems to be having difficulty with them, he's struggling with it and so forth, then is the time you pour on the coal. Then you say, "Well, we'll just run this nine ways and get it really cleaned up."

147

148

14 FEBRUARY 1958

Take some guy whose father, for instance, sent him through school, whose father gave him all of his money, whose father stopped him at every turn, you know, so he could help him and so forth.

Male voice: How do you know?

And he's having a hell of a time. Yeah. Now, we run, "How could Father help you?" and he gets a brrrr—automatic. "How could you help Father?" and he goes into a total decline.

Well, right away we would say, "Father. Aha! Nine-way bracket, if you please. We'll beat this one to death." Get the idea?

Second male voice: Hm.

Male voice: Thank you.

You bet.

Female voice: If you ran Not-know Union Station on a recent Clear, what would you expect?

Oh, I'd expect that he would probably enjoy the novelty of it, and it would probably flatten rather rapidly.

Female voice: Okay.

You bet.

Male voice: A real fast comment on this Help thing. Apparently, comm lag by itself is not an indication of stickiness, this is something we came up with.

Interesting, isn't it?

Male voice: But one level of comm lag was definitely stickiness—there just were no ways around. And another level of comm lag was, out at the higher level, was looking at the individual saying what his goals were and whatnot, for sure, with a certainty there was a way to help increase knowingness of the individual. And it was apparently a fairly free needle there, although the comm lags were, some of them, fairly long.

Yeah.

Second male voice: And the — now — the preclear can tell what the needle's doing, too.

Yeah. Should be able to.

Yes?

Female voice: Would taking Dianazene help in making faster progress?

Would taking Dianazene make for faster progress—the answer is no. Dianazene has been found to slow down auditing, not speed it up.

Female voice: Oh. Thank you.

You bet.

Male voice: Dianazene and pregnancy?

Rather violent. Dianazene moves engrams up and down and around and about and so forth.

Female voice: How about just taking extra b₁ ,something like that?

Well, if you're going to take B₁ , you will have to take calcium and ascorbic acid with it. If you do not take those two with B₁ , you won't have any bones after a while. And that the chemical industry has not found this out tells us that they're not as serious as they might be about what they're doing.

Female voice: Well, would it help to take those three?

For fifty-five minutes of a session, you get a faster, more alert run, any time you take some B₁ , at the beginning of a session. Any time a preclear begins to have nightmares while he's being audited, he should be fed some B₁ If you feed him some B₁ ,at the rate of every 50 milligrams of B₁ he must have a minimum of 20 to 25 grains of dicalcium phosphate and must have a