Subject: FZ Bible - PDC Final 16 Lectures 12/18
Date: 3 Feb 2000 14:02:08 -0000
From: Anonymous-Remailer@See.Comment.Header (FZBA Scandinavia)
Organization: FreeZone Bible Association of Scandinavia
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,alt.clearing.technology

PHILADELPHIA DOCTORATE COURSE, FINAL 16 LECTURES
- PART 12 OF 18

Brought to you by:
FreeZone Bible Association of Scandinavia

*Please see Part 00 for the Introduction & Contents

===================================================

STATEMENT OF PURPOSE

Our purpose is to promote religious freedom and the Scientology
Religion by spreading the Scientology Tech across the internet.

The Cof$ abusively suppresses the practice and use of
Scientology Tech by FreeZone Scientologists.  It misuses the
copyright laws as part of its suppression of religious freedom.

They think that all freezoners are "squirrels" who should be
stamped out as heretics.  By their standards, all Christians,
Moslems, Mormons, and even non-Hassidic Jews would be considered
to be squirrels of the Jewish Religion.

The writings of LRH form our Old Testament just as the writings
of Judaism form the Old Testament of Christianity.

We might not be good and obedient Scientologists according
to the definitions of the Cof$ whom we are in protest against.

But even though the Christians are not good and obedient Jews,
the rules of religious freedom allow them to have their old
testament regardless of any Jewish opinion.

We ask for the same rights, namely to practice our religion
as we see fit and to have access to our holy scriptures
without fear of the Cof$ copyright terrorists.

We ask for others to help in our fight.  Even if you do
not believe in Scientology or the Scientology Tech, we hope
that you do believe in religious freedom and will choose
to aid us for that reason.

Thank You,

The FZ Bible Association

===================================================

SUP 7
SOP 5 LONG FORM STEP IV - GITA

Philadelphia Doctorate Course
21 January 1953

[Start of Lecture]

And this is what? The twenty-first of January, 1953. Lecture
consecutive to the January nineteenth evening lectures, giving a
further rundown on Standard Operating Procedure Number 5 Long
Form.

Tonight we're going to take up Step IV. Step IV is characterized
in Standard Operating Procedure Short Form as getting a mock-up
of one's childhood home or that home which presents itself out of
one's childhood, and being able to handle that mock-up
completely. That is its start. And it goes through into a
technique known as GITA: Give and Take. Actually, there's give,
null and take: the three motions possible. I needn't take this up
to any further distance than that, because it's on other tapes.
But I need to take this up to this degree: to give a whole,
overall, well-defined goal to Step IV so that you can use it as
itself a complete processing for a certain level of case.

Now the level of case we are interested in at Step IV is a person
who is pretty badly stuck on the time track. He's usually found
to be stuck in electronic incidents and is very thoroughly mired
down in energy and is incapable of taking charge of 'any great
amount of energy. Therefore, things can sweep in on this
preclear. He is usually rather badly restimulated, and his body
is rather out of whack. He is stuck.

Here's the first one we get on this step: he is stuck in his
head. He can't get out of his head, and when he does, he's all
over the shop. He just disperses, and he just doesn't quite know
whether he's out or in or where, and he gets back in.

Step V is characterized by: if he does get out, he snaps out and
snaps back in again. But this person just doesn't get out, and if
they get out they're not sure they're out. Great insecurity on
that subject.

You'll run down an awful lot of preclears, you say, "You're out?
All right. So-and-so and so-and-so..." and all of a sudden you'll
find out they don't know whether they're out or not, and they
haven't known. Well, he's a IV or worse. And the first thing we
suspect he is, is a IV. So we ask him, Can he get a mock-up of
the old homestead? Okay. If he can get mock-up of the home of his
childhood, we have then fellow that we carry right straight on
through with Step IV. Now you can carry him through with Step IV
Short Form and get along all right.

You'll find cases as they progress down to this level become
relatively difficult for you, and so therefore Step IV Long Form
will probably be performed by you many times. Don't disabuse
yourself of this. It means lots of hours of auditing.

But let's not be as optimistic as I've wanted to be in the past.
I can talk from a security now; I can talk from a level of static
that is liable to make me very disagreeable: I don't care whether
anybody agrees with me now or not. And the reason for this is I
know what can happen; I know what can happen with any case if
given enough auditing. And one of these days, why, I'll probably
hit a better button or a new button or something of the sort
that'll snap out a IV or a V. But actually, right now, our only
real problem is a IV or a V; they're a problem for us. And
they're only a problem for a length of time in auditing. You can
knock this case out -- a IV, V, VI or VII -- you can knock this
case out with Self Analysis. There is the technique that will
knock it out. Now you have that security. That's a security: you
can do it. We won't think in terms of numbers of hours now. You
just go on for 80 or 100 or 200 hours. We know it will happen.
Furthermore, we know we have a technique which will remedy any
way we go wrong.

You know, it's a great satisfaction to be able to operate from
such a security. I don't care how long it takes, it's a security.
You can always say to yourself, "Well, if it won't happen any
other way, it'll happen with this. And it'll take a long time,
possibly, and maybe it won't, but it'll happen."

And the only insecurity about it is, Can I get this fellow to do
it for this long, but well can I spend this much time with him?
Well, what do you know? You don't have any insecurity on that
either. Because you as a professional auditor had better prepare
yourself to take charge of and to have and put into existence an
auditing group.

Self Analysis will operate on a group. It does tricks with a
group. And all the various cases that are sitting around in your
area that you just don't like to fool with, that are real tough,
that sort of thing, you make a group and you have it meet on
certain nights and you make a pact with them that we will do
this. And you just set that group up as a ragbag. It'll just be a
professional auditing unit. And instead of sitting around and
worrying about whether or not the HAS is going to go by the
boards or whether or not it's legally executed or something of
the sort, your group has something to do, and that's get clear.
And that's what they ought to have been doing all the time
anyway.

Now, if you have -- if you have, let's say, two cases and these
cases are just "Oh, my God! Not -- not  -- not that; not -- not -
- not -- not one of these cases again! " don't go into the hall
and cry for a little while before you come back into your office.
Just say cheerfully, "Well, let's see now, I've got two cases
like this and next week I'll probably have five like this! What
we'll do is just turn over the living room at such and such an
address at this place, and this is the auditing group."

Now it doesn't matter whether you have put a new case in there or
this case has been there for a long time. This is unimportant.
You have got to make sure that they do just one thing: that they
do group auditing on Self Analysis, that's all. You just make
sure that happens. And when you do -- when you figure out they're
about ready to get some auditing and get sprung and straightened
out in the other categories and so forth, well, you can check the
guy and tell him so. Therefore, you'll find yourself on a
consulting basis.

In the U.S. early, if this had been possible this would have been
a godsend to an auditor, because about ninety percent of his
cases were cases that would have just hung around and gotten lots
and lots and lots of auditing by the techniques we had then and
which required continual advice. And the next thing the auditor
knew himself was doing, he was appointing co-auditing teams and
he was trying to run co-auditing teams. And at any time between
eight o'clock in the evening and three-thirty in the morning he
could expect phone calls: "I've just stuck my wife in birth
and..." And he'd have a dozen of these teams running in a
neighborhood. Well, it was very often wonderfully successful. But
it also, where it wasn't successful -- oh, was it a beautiful
migraine to the auditor!

So, in lieu of your co-auditing team setup, you can compose a
group which does group auditing. And they just go by the book,
just the way I laid it down to you the other night. And I'll go
over those steps very rapidly right here, because you're going to
do this -- I'm sure you're going to do this with people who get
down to Case Level IV. I'm just sure you're going to do this with
them, because it's the only really sensible thing to do. Instead
of taking thousands of dollars away from them or millions of
pounds and beating yourself up by some case that is just a long
series of loses and no wins, the sensible thing to do is to set
up a group auditing setup.

Now, the people are there. They are audited by one or another of
them. Just say you have a rotation of assignment on who reads the
questions. You don't read the questions. The reason you don't
read the questions is because it gives a monotony of voice, which
has a tendency to take some randomity out of it and put it into a
static. Furthermore, it gives these people self-confidence to be
auditing a large number of people and builds them up quite
startlingly.

And so, period by period or night after night or whenever your
group would be meeting, you have one of those people reading this
long series of questions. Now, if that meeting is going to take
place for two hours, you'd have two of them. That's so one of
them would get -- each one of those two is going to get at least
an hour's processing out of this. Because the person doing it
shouldn't be getting the mock-ups. Nor necessarily should he be
repressing getting them: You'll find that's quite inhibitive. A
person reading these things and he keeps getting the mock-up
himself, and he thinks he's not supposed to pay any attention to
it so he puts up a resistance to the mock-ups; and the next time
you give him Mock-up Processing, he can't get a mock-up! Why?
He's just stuck on "I'd better not get this mock-up because if I
get this mock-up, they won't." So he just should disabuse himself
of that and just go ahead and do that.

Now he gives the line and the perceptic together, in Self
Analysis. It says: "A time -- can you create a scene when you
enjoyed something?" Now, if you were to give that line and then
wait for a while and give the perceptic that he's supposed to get
out of the mock-up, a person would have lost the mock-up or have
gotten it and kicked it aside or something and he'd have to get
it back again; and he'll get confused. So he would have to get it
back again to get the perceptic out of it, if you give a lag. So
the proper way to read it is quite important: "You enjoyed
something. Touch." You just read it off like that. "You enjoyed
something. Touch."

Now another thing is you'll have a tendency and your student will
have a tendency, your preclear will have a -- I mean your group-
auditing preclear will have a tendency to start with Sight, at
the bottom of the page, every time he starts a new page. In other
words, he starts the new page, and he'll start down here at the
bottom with the first perceptic at the bottom of the page. In
other words, you'll never get a change of perceptic for that
mock-up. So make sure that as he turns the page, that he picks up
the perceptic next to the one he left off with on the former
page. In other words, it says External Motion and then it says
Emotion. All right. He's -- the last one on the last page he gave
was External Motion; now in the next one of this page, he picks
it up as Emotion. If he's not sure quite where he left off on the
other one, just have him pick up one out of the list at random.
But don't get this, whereby the first of every page of Self
Analysis starts out -- the first line on each page starts out
with the perceptic first announced in the list at the bottom.
See, it would cut down the randomity. Because if you keep
changing the perceptics, you have actually an infinity of mock-
ups.

The book contains practically an infinity of mockups. There's
just no limit to the number of mock-ups that you can get out of
this book, providing you keep altering those perceptics. And if
you, however, every time you went through the list, started in at
the first of the page for the first question on the page on the
perceptics you would have, of course, every one of them being the
same each read-through. That's just to add randomity. I'm not --
I'm stressing it far more than it should be stressed.

He reads these things in a clear voice and enunciates them very
clearly so that people don't have to say "What?" Because that
breaks the communication line and it slows down their ability to
mock up. So your people reading the mock-up should read it in a
clear, ringing tone. It's very good for them to have to do this.

Can you recall a time... is not repeated, by the way. That's not
repeated over and over. All that we repeat is just the line. "You
enjoyed something.... You went fishing.... You had a date." He
doesn't keep saying, "Create a scene in which you had a date....
Create a scene in which you went fishing." He just reads that
line, just the line that appears there, with the perceptic
immediately following.

And he reads that clearly, He said, "You had a date." He doesn't
say, "Yahadadate." Everybody says, "What?" It's very bad form,
and it's quite an obfuscation of the whole process.

Now, we have, inevitably, several people who can't see a mock-up.
Well, it's just marvelous that it happens that just imagining
they're there -- as long as one imagines they're in a specific
place in present time, he imagines they're there, he just
imagines he's got a mock-up out there; he doesn't see it, hear
it, feel it or anything. When he gets the perceptic, get him to
get a concept that it's got that in it. There will always be
those people and they will always say -- they will always say,
"Well, I can't get a mock-up." Well, by our present definition,
believe me, they can.

"Can you get an idea of you going fishing?"

"Yeah."

"Well, where do you get an idea there might be a scene about you
going fishing?"

"Well, I don't know. I can get that idea anyplace."

"Well, can you get it over by the door?"

"Yeah. Yeah. I can get an idea that it's over by the door."

"Well, all right. Now can you get an idea that there's sound in
it?"

"Yeah, I can get an idea there's sound in it."

"Well, all right. You've got a mock-up."

The fellow says, "I have?"

Now, you wouldn't think offhand that that would be productive of
very much result. As a matter of fact, I thought at first the
same thing. But on test, it has proven otherwise. It is very
good. A person's ability picks up quite rapidly.

All right. You, then, along about Case Level IV have a choice of
forming an auditing group which does this trick on regular and
stated intervals at regular and stated times at regular and
stated places or (you'll have to do this to this Case Level IV
anyhow) of just starting in from scratch and just slugging
through with GITA. You'll make it as an auditor -- as a
professional auditor -- and you have to do this step anyway to
make a theta clear.

But you could just sit down, and you find a Case Level IV -- yes,
he can get a mock-up of his childhood home -- and take it from
there and go through it all the way through the long form. If you
did that, your preclear is going to be remarkably well off.
Remarkably well off. Because this is, to be very technical, a
bitch kitty. This solves concentration and fixation of attention.

The goal of Step IV is to resolve problems related to the
dispersal and fixation of attention. It resolves it for this
reason: it is totally devoted to concentration on points which
themselves are anchor points. And a person gets concentrated on
these points, and when he gets concentrated too thoroughly on
them his concept is that he no longer has a great deal of space
and so he must have a great deal of energy hitting him.

Soon as a person believes he doesn't have very much space, he
begins to believe that he's got too much adverse energy. The
reason for this is he has no place to put this old energy, and so
he says it must be all crowded up here. Therefore, he conceives
that he is stuck on a track. Why is he stuck on a track? It's
because he can't handle the problem of fixing attention. That's
all there is to that.

So Step IV is the too-much-energy problem. And any technique
addressed to fixing or unfixing attention belongs, in Standard
Operating Procedure Issue 5 Long Form, under Step IV. Any
technique which is addressed very exclusively to this problem
would be a Step IV technique. So you can take any technique that
you know about that has to do with fixing or unfixing attention,
including that oldie of "Let's get the idea of your attention
being greatly dispersed. All right. Now let's have it suddenly
fix on something, this point right here."

The fellow does that a few times, and who shows up? Mama. Or who
shows up? Papa. Or a school teacher. Or somebody else. Or an
automobile. Or something; anything.

Or you get this -- you just hold a rocky, erratic ball out in
front of you and make the preclear hold this and hold it, in
spite of the fact that it's wobbling and everything else. (You --
this isn't a Step III. A Step III says, Can he hold it stably and
know it's there? Then you go on with Step III. But if it's too
erratic and so forth, you go on to Step IV.) If Step IV -- if you
said to him "Hold that ball there," the damnedest things would
happen to him. You want to test this. Why? It's because you're
demanding that he fix his attention upon some new arbitrary, and
his attention promptly starts to come off of all the other spots
it's fixed on. Isn't that wonderful?

He has an infinity of attention. All of these control mechanisms
and other things have abused him into believing that he has an
insufficiency of attention. There is no limit to the amount of
attention he can have. He could be a hundred thousand people
doing a hundred thousand different things, and he has enough
attention units to do all of that. But control mechanisms have
been exerted against him to a point where he believes he can be
just one person and do just one thing at a time. Well, boy,
that's way down scale and that's a IV. And sometimes you get a
IV; his attention at the level he's at is awful thin.

By the way, attention starts to go onto a negative basis by the
time you get down to V and VI and VII. And by the time you're in
VI and VIII, attention is just all over the place and a guy can't
fix it on anything. That's because it's fixed too far, then he --
therefore he can't fix it on anything. So if he can't fix it on
anything it just wanders around all over the place, and what's he
going to do with it? Well, he can't do anything with it, because
it wouldn't fix on anything anyway and if he fixed it on anything
it'd bite him.

You ask that fellow to fix his attention on one thing, and you've
done a quite remarkable thing for him. You can show him that he
can fix his attention on something without getting bitten. He
gets well. All right. That's treating a psychosis. Now, teach
somebody that he can -- he's safe to fix his attention on
something, that's all. That's the shortest statement I've ever
made on the address of psychosis, and I think you'll find it
bears up.

Now, with Step IV our problem is essentially a problem of not
enough space. The fellow is down awfully close to stop on the
tone scale, isn't he? He's having trouble with anchor points and
that sort of thing. You make him hold this ball out in front of
him there, and the darnedest things will start happening to him.
He'll get all sorts of things suddenly showing up in front of him
or at the side, and he'll get somatics popping in and popping
out. All kinds of things happening to him somatic-wise. Very
uncomfortable.

Just because he's fixing his attention on an arbitrary point out
in front of him. You just put a ball out there, and the chronic
engrams in which he's stuck on the track will tend to fly in on
him or fly out and show up in general. My God, you are liable to
have him being run over by trucks; you're liable to have him
being dropped out of airplanes; you're liable to have him sitting
there, all of a sudden he'll say, "You know, I can't -- I can't
hold it any longer."

"What's the matter?"

"Well, there's great big balls of fire and they're about to come
in on me. They'll blow my head off."

And you say, "Hold the point."

So his head blows off. (We haven't the facilities here with an
undertaking parlor next door but... ) He'll get that. He'll
actually want to put a pillow over his head or something of this
sort, because things are liable to hit him. What's -- that's
because he's thought for the last umpteen-umpteen billion years
probably that he had to sit there with his attention on this ball
of fire to hold it out there. He thought he was holding it off
from him. Somewhere during -- you see, he got killed in the
incident; he never found that out. His attention stopped when he
tried to stop that thing from coming in and hitting him. See? His
attention stopped there. And it stopped there so thoroughly he
went right on and got killed, but he's still holding it off from
him, see? There's where his attention is stuck. Now you suddenly
put it on an arbitrary point out in some other direction, and
what happens? It starts to come off of this thing and he goes on
and he gets the full sensation he's liable to be killed at any
moment. He won't be. (That is, ordinarily. That's why you should
always collect your fees in advance for professional auditing.)
Anyway...

Any technique, then, which has to do with collecting one's
attention into present time is a Step IV technique. And worse
than this -- worse than this -- any technique designed to
increase the beingness of a person, in terms of personal
beingness and living here on earth and that sort of thing, is a
Step IV technique.

Your Step IV case believes he can only be himself, he can't be
anybody else; he can't pretend he's anybody else. He really can't
pretend this: he can't pretend -- it's all got to be true, or he
can't say it or do it. You ask a Step IV -- and particularly a
Step V (this is what characterizes Step V, by the way, a Step IV
just a little less of this) -- you say, "Now tell me a lie. "

And the fellow will just sit there and look at you.

You say, "Well, tell me that an airplane just flew in the
window."

He can't do it. He's lost his ability to lie; and that's an awful
thing, isn't it?

One of your first tests by the way on one of these cases, you
really want to say, is just this, "Tell me a lie. " He can't.
That tells you that he's in vast agreement with the MEST
universe. It's got to be true; believe me, it's got to be true.
And he is so upset if it's not true, that he just goes into a
complete flip sometimes. Well, this is wonderful because there
isn't anything true in the MEST universe.

The highest level, in this universe, of truth is theta in its
purest form. There is a truth strata way up there. Has it got
anything to do with energy or space or time or women or whiskey
or any other interesting things in this universe? No, it
certainly doesn't have. They're all a lie.

You'd think a soldier out in the battlefield being shot in half
by a tank gun, you'd think, "Boy, that's really true." No, that's
not true! He is under the doggonedest spells of illusion and
hallucination in order to be there in the first place, that you'd
have to get an encyclopedia to list them all. He believes the
darnedest things. He believes it's important whether or not he
salutes his captain, he believes this, he believes that, and so
on. On and on and on and on and on and on. Actually, it's more
important that he salute his captain than it is that he got shot
in half with a tank gun. Why? Because there's some aesthetic in a
salute; there's no aesthetic at all in being shot in half.

Now, what's the level of truth of this incident? None. So we have
this soldier, and he's lying in a veterans hospital and he's in
terrible shape and so forth and he's got an arm missing because
he was shot with a tank gun. Well, he's sick. There's no getting
around that. No, it's not in his imagination; therefore, we
shouldn't slight it and all that sort of thing. He's convinced!
Boy, is he convinced!

How do you make him well? Unconvince him.

How can you unconvince him? Run the incident. That just takes the
tension off of being hit by the tank gun. That'll unconvince him
slightly. But it should strike you as very strange that you can
just recount this incident a few times and it blows up. Couldn't
have been there in the first place, could it have?

So, what are we changing there? We're changing his idea about the
incident rather than erasing anything. Although erasure's a
better explanation to him. He can envision erasing the energy
recording of the thing, but he couldn't envision on going over it
until he's just tired of the idea.

You'll find the darnedest things. We can run the incident or we
can just say, "All right, now get a concept of glory. Now get a
concept of nobility."

He'll say, "Wait a minute. Something happening to me. It's just
that -- there's something happening. I -- I----"

You say, "Well, just go on and get this concept of glory."

"Hmmm. I don't know whether I like this or not," he'll say.

What are you doing? You're pulling the underpin under all
soldiering. The highest level of soldiering happens to be glory
and nobility. And what do you find out? When you start running
glory and nobility, you'll find that it's glorious and noble to
get wounded! The boys who stand up and get themselves hit by
bullets: I think they actually have to reach out and train the
guns on themselves, practically, to get shot.

I've played hopscotch with slugs and that sort of thing, and they
really don't even look dangerous. They keep talking about your
"number" on them -- your number on the shell and that sort of
thing. And so there was a shell fragment lying down one day,
great big thing, and I went over. And what do you know! It had
the serial number of one of my watch officers on it. Its shell
manufacturing number was the serial number of this watch officer
-- his flag number, same number (and Japanese and German
numbering systems are English, same deal). So we took this
doggone thing and put it in a beautiful frame and put it down
above his bunk. One night we drop an embarrassing barrage, and
the thing falls down and almost fractures his skull. I swear, the
man had -- the man had to reach up and pull the darn thing down
on him, and there was his number on a shell all right. Had his
number.

Well anyway, this doesn't minimize that sort of thing. But what
do we find on a battlefield? We find -- my, it's unaesthetic. The
dirtiest trick they ever did was to take the drums and bands out
of war. That was the dirtiest trick they ever did, because as
long as there's that kind of glory around you don't have to get
wounded to have glory as a protest against it. But if that kind
of glory disappears, then you've got to get wounded. Sounds
strange, doesn't it?

Glory -- if there's no real glory in it and if you think there's
glory someplace else in this battle and you're on a shore station
someplace and you don't get a chance to go into battle or
something of the sort, you can go almost loopy.

It's bad! It's bad. The worst place to be in a war is where
there's no shooting going on. You want to -- you want to get out
to where the shooting is going on just as soon as possible. And
everybody knows that. Troops always try to move out. (And when
they get there, they try to move back!)

But your basic concept on that sort of thing is a concentration,
implants, convictions -- phony as a seven-pound note --
convictions that such a thing as glory exists. Yeah, there is --
you can play a game called glory, but it's only a game way up on
the tone scale. And when you take that out of war, you don't end
war; you perpetuate it. The way to -- the way to stop war is to
really make it nice and glorious. All right, and just make it
glorious and then everybody will be very happy to go around and
be glorious about the whole thing and then they don't have to get
shot up.

Now this possibly won't become too apparent to you until you work
your first veteran who is in bad shape, and the most bitter
tirades will come out of this guy on the subject of glory. Why?
He knows he's been fooled. When was he fooled? 1936? 1939? 1942?
Oh no, these weren't where he was fooled. Uh-uh. Way back down
the track when he fought his first war -- he fought his first
war. Somebody got him all hepped up: Gloria et Patria or
something of the sort. Somebody sailed in on a white horse and,
boy, did he look aesthetic and everything and glory. And there
was a lot of band and music and all the girls said, "You know --
you know we love soldiers. We don't have to go out to fight -- we
love soldiers. How about you going and being a soldier?" Glory.

Well, he probably did have several glorious wars and it was all
very fine and very noble, and it finally petered out to what?
1939-1945. And if that wasn't a nasty, piddling, two-bit little
mess, I never saw the like of it. It had gotten to a point, as
far as glory was concerned, of where they wouldn't let you fight.
About the quickest way you could get balled out in the last war
was fighting. You could really get into serious trouble for
fighting, with your own officers and generals. Now you think
that's funny, but the object of war isn't even to fight anymore.
I don't know what it is. It's, I guess, to destroy property or, I
don't know, or to raise taxes or -- people get awfully confused
about this.

In the first place, it's all based on a bunch of lying
convictions that don't have any basis in truth anyhow. And the
concept of its ugliness or the concept of its beauty or the
concept of something else is simply a concept based on the basic
concept of conviction that such a thing as glory exists.

You'll find a guy all wound up and unwound and backwards and
forwards; any one of your veterans lying down here in the
hospital will unwind on concepts of bands and glory and so forth.
It's very interesting how fast these cases will snap on those two
points: glory, nobility.

Of course, they're being directed in the use of force and they go
into war in order to be able to demonstrate force with impunity,
and then they're restrained from demonstrating force -- their
sergeants, everybody else, demonstrates they mustn't use force  -
- and they finally wind up in terrible condition. You can look in
vain for any further reasons. There's a lot of made-up data
resulting from a lot of bad data; but as far as basic stuff, the
basic convictions then are there. So they've got a concentration
on glory on one part of the track, and they're trying to evaluate
what just happened to them on another part of the track and it
won't evaluate. Therefore, you'd better pick up the basic
conviction and alter it in order to do anything about any of the
altered -- other convictions.

Now, I'm not going afield when I'm talking about this sort of
thing, because essentially all that's wrong is that the person
has got his attention snarled up one way or the other. He's stuck
on the time track.

I want to call your attention to the fact that a person, to have
beingness, has to have space. Space is beingness. That's good
theory and, boy, that's a way upper-echelon piece of knowledge:
space and beingness.

If you think you're short on space you will all -- automatically
become short on beingness. Therefore, put this down -- put this
down: A person is as free in space as he is willing to be
anything in that space. Space is beingness is your highest
echelon about space and that one -- that one contains the
technique. That's your first level of application about space.

[from audience] Beingness.

Yes, beingness. A person is as free in space and has as much
space really as he is willing to be anything in that space.

That's very important. If you -- it's one of those techniques
that you've just got buckets full of data over here and you've
got buckets full of techniques and you've got card-file systems
galore, and you would look through them in vain to find out
what's wrong with Augustine Gilplatz that you're processing and
you just can't figure out what's wrong with Gilplatz. Don't throw
in the sponge. There's your basic security: Self Analysis.
That'll do it.

This is another security: What isn't he willing to be? Because
that means that that much space is denied to him. And when you
get a person into the horrible situation where he doesn't want to
be anything else but himself or in the horrible situation where
he only wants to be himself, you've got an aberrated boy right
there. How much space has he got? He's got as much space as his
body occupies; or the Freudian alter ego: as much space as his
body and toothbrush occupy. That's all. He could be his
toothbrush and he could be his shaving mug and he might possibly
be his gloves, only they probably belong to Papa or something.
He's gone right there. I mean, he'll just get out any further
than that. He doesn't even -- isn't even willing to be his own
breakfast. That kind of belongs to the cook and the cook --
that's the cook's breakfast and he doesn't like the looks of it
too well. And maybe his wife nags him or something of the sort,
and he wouldn't be his wife. Well, boy, he's in bad shape if he
wouldn't be his wife, because there goes fifty percent of his
immediate space area, zong! right in the home. And if a guy is a
Homo sapiens and if he's living in the year 1953, God help us!
He's already so short on space that he has no attention span
that's worth talking about in terms of potential attention span.
So the amount of space a fellow has determines the amount of
attention he can demonstrate.

Now, he runs into something in the society which is evil. He
says, "This is evil." That evaluation comes down the line, "This
thing is bad and this thing is evil," and he goes back from it --
nyeow! Well, unfortunately, he went back from just that much
space. That's what you mean by "driving in anchor points." The
way you get a guy solid and the way you get energy solid and the
way you do these various things is to drive in his anchor points.

How do you drive in his anchor points? You show him things which
he doesn't want to be. Now one of the worst tricks is just stand
there and tell him that he doesn't want to be him: "Look at
yourself, mud all over you. And look at your manners. And look
what you're doing, and you know people don't like you. Now I was
talking to that -- and if you were a good little girl, like Mamie
Gilplatz, why, you were a good girl, that would be different, but
you can't even be yourself, you little mug! " And this person
does what then? They won't even occupy the space their own body
is in.

So they go down below the level of IV, because at IV we're
assuming the person can occupy the space his body is in. He can
took at his hand and he can say, "That's my hand." He doesn't
say, "That's my hand." He says, "That's my hand." See?

A I -- you can tell the difference between a I and a IV, just
like that. You could say, "Do you own your own hand?"

"Sure, I own my hand!!" That's a IV -- I mean, that's a I.
"Sure."

All right. Get the difference: occupation of space. Now let's
look out through this MEST universe right now, each and every one
of us, and realize the number of things in it that you're not
willing to be. Well, every one of those things is space you don't
want to occupy.

Now, a IV has gotten to the point where he has to concentrate
attention on certain things. And that attention is really fixed.
His attention is concentrated upon Mama, who is now in a
different space and maybe in heaven. His attention is on Grandpa;
he's maybe in heaven too (although the neighbors had a lot of
doubt on the subject). He's concentrated upon school-teaching;
he's concentrated on this. In other words, they -- his attention
was dragged out to ugly things and he was told he couldn't be
those things so he has to be very alert not to be those things.
So he doesn't occupy any space which is occupied by anything
which looks anything even vaguely like anything that he's not
supposed to be. Because as space decreases you get association.

Association is at 20 on the tone scale, so that means there's
less space at 20 than there is at 40. And why do people begin to
associate too closely, and what is this stream of consciousness
called association? It happens at 20, down. And that means when a
person really gets down the tone scale his energy is condensed,
and it is condensed but thoroughly. And it's condensed so that he
has ridges. It's condensed to such a degree he has heavy
electronic engrams. He has thisa and he has thata and he has
something else -- packed! And why is it packed? That's because he
hasn't got any space to spread it around on, if he has to have it
at all.

So he associates too well. And every time he associates too well,
he can look at his wife and realize that's really Grandma! That's
what you're trying to -- trying to fix up in a preclear, isn't
it? Misidentification.

Well, when a person goes down IV and below, his attention is so
fixed in so many places in space and at the same time he doesn't
have any space. He can only be his immediate body and maybe not
wholly that, and those parts of the body which are ill are those
parts of the body he can't be. Boy, is he limited!

And you wonder why this fellow has heavy engrams come in on him.
You wonder why he has a hard time. You wonder what all this stuff
is when he talks about occlusion, and why can't he see past his
face and so on. He hasn't got anything to see out there. There
isn't any space out there; he knows that. He has to take his MEST
eyes' word for it. So you just ask this preclear, "What things
aren't you willing to be?" And then make him mock himself up as
those things. That's a fantastic technique.

"All right. Mock yourself up as Grandpa."

"Okay. Now do everything Grandpa does."

"Oh, no! That old ba----"

"Now, come on, come on, come on. Spit on the floor. That's right.
Get yourself spitting on the floor. Get yourself scratching
yourself. Get yourself being mean to everybody in the
neighborhood."

"Now, now mock up Grandpa out there doing all the things you 'd
like to do."

"Oh, no!"

The guy will practically get ill on this. But when you get
through with that, it isn't that he's now willing to be Grandpa:
He doesn't care. He's no longer concentrated on that point of
space, so he has that much more space. And all these techniques
are devoted to that.

Cycle of Action Processing belongs under IV, because interrupted
cycles of action say "Stop." And what is a stop? Stop is at zero,
and it says, "There isn't any more space." So the fellow has been
able to start a cycle of action, and then one way or another it
has been communicated to him he has no more space to operate in.
If he has no more space to operate in, that means he has no more
beingness.

This is death, by the way. This is the upperechelon explanation
of how the phenomenon of death comes about. This isn't death's
explanation; this isn't data pertinent to death. This is death.
Death would actually work out in this fashion: if given that
datum, then death would be an inevitable result as one of the
resulting phenomena. You see?

Space is stop -- I mean, no more space is stop. So space, cycle
of action, runs this way. You can make this test, you know. We
start in at the beginning of a cycle and we find we've got three-
dimensional -- get the idea of starting something, you've got
three-dimensional vision. It's halfway through, you've got --
dimensions are flatter. And when you get stop, it's flat, isn't
it?

Now you can run that test, by the way; it's empirical data and
was one of the things that demonstrated this technique. It --
actually, starting things is three-dimensional and there's no-
dimensional in a stop. That's because one way or the other the
person was convinced on this cycle of action that he didn't have
any more space. If he didn't have any more space he couldn't move
of course, because motion is change of a particle in space.

So you can say -- instead of saying he was stopped, you could say
he ran out of space. How would you tell him he'd run out of
space? Tell him he's run out of beingness. One of the ways of
telling him to run out of beingness is to shoot his body out from
underneath him. He's really convinced then that he has run out of
beingness. Now he has to be another being; and he preferably will
be another being in another space. He'll even jump over to other
families and so forth rather than go a consecutive line in a
family. He deserts a space because there's no more space there,
that's all.

You want to know what's aberrative in a child's background is,
When didn't he have a bed of his own? No space. He couldn't be,
then, could he? That's silly, isn't it? We're not dealing with
logic now; we're dealing in actual physical manifestations which,
when applied to the human mind, become aberrated thought.

So how do we convince somebody he's stopped? How do we convince
him he's stopped? We just say, "There's no more space." Well, how
do you do that? You can run him into a brick wall, you know. He's
sure convinced there's no space there then! That's a good, fast
way of convincing him there's no space, is throw him into a brick
wall at about five hundred miles an hour or something.

Another way to convince him there's no space is to put in a
series of explosions all around him. You can't occupy a series of
space in which the body which you own and which you are can't
live. You never add it up, you see, that you can live in it and
that you aren't your body and it doesn't matter really whether or
not there is a big explosion going on there or not.

You value the body. Now, value starts to enter in and evaluation
starts to enter in as space begins to get limited. Value is a
phenomenon of reduced space, and those things which are really
valuable (such as teeth) have the least space per particle in
them. Oh, you -- people really get upset when you pull their
teeth; they get upset all out of proportion. Dentists have the
most beautiful teeth: they can diamond-set false teeth, and they
can do all sorts of things. But you start taking somebody's teeth
away from them, they get very upset. It's the most solid thing in
the head; therefore, the most valuable. Also the most scared.
Teeth are really scared. You start running GITA with teeth, and
you have yourself a wonderful time.

Now, the basic method then of convincing somebody he's stopped is
to convince him that he's run out of space. That, of course,
would end his beingness. So whether you're dealing with a minor
cycle of action or a major cycle of action -- the minor cycle and
the major cycle are related. Death is "You've really run out of
space, fella; therefore, you've got no more beingness." Or it
said, "Look, you've got no more beingness, fellow; therefore,
you've really run out of space." This is just stop!

Why do you find deaths in restimulation on the track? That's
because they're stops. That means there's no space; that means
the particles are solid packed in them. So if there's all those
particles and no space to put them in, of course there's a jam
right there on the track. And a fellow has the concept that he
can't walk through one of these solid particle things, so he
sticks there on the time track.

His attention units are out there on all those particles, and all
of a sudden all these particles are gathered up in, right here,
right close to him. And the second they're right close to him,
he's got no space. He knows he's got no space. And if you can
bring in attention units fast enough, a man dies. Yeah, this is
mechanical death.

You can produce death any time just by making a person bring in a
spanned, widely spread attention to a very small point, quick.

You can hit the biggest bear in the world in the paw with a
British Swift (4400-feet-per-second muzzle velocity) bullet, .22
caliber. You understand that you can take an elephant gun and
stand in front of this same bear and blow his brains full of
bullets, and he will probably still come right on and chaw you
up. You aware of that? Heavy, slow-caliber bullets do not stop
that bear; but you just hit him in the paw with a terrific, high-
velocity, small-caliber slug and he drops dead. That's very
interesting, isn't it?

You can check this. Hunting books and so forth will give you that
strange datum. That's what's known as shock. It's the shock that
kills him. All the attentionness and beingness that is a bear
suddenly is centered upon that hole in that paw, and that hole is
too small. Bang! All his beingness is in that hole in that paw,
and he ceases to be. He runs out of space quick. You convince
anything it's run out of space, and it's convinced it's dead.
Well, then how do you unconvince it that it's dead? You get it to
have more space.

And you know what you've got to do with every preclear -- every
preclear you've got? You've got to convince him he's not dead.
And how are you going to do that? By giving him more space. Well,
then to do that, then you'd better be able to give him more
beingness.

Your preclear at IV level is dead. He knows he's dead. He's been
dead for a long time. He's just cheating a  little bit; he's
moving around now. But he's stuck, you see? And you'll find as
you move him back down the time track, if you were to move him up
and down his time track a few dozen times and do it very
carelessly and you were using the whole track, he'd hang up in a
death. It's just inevitable that he'd hang up in a death.

Now, do you keep on processing deaths? No. You'll just keep on
concentrating his attention tighter and tighter and tighter and
tighter, and he can't run an engram. He hasn't got any space to
run it in. All the beingness he is, is right here and now. And
that beingness is the whole track, and the whole track's
particles are right here and now, and he's really concentrated.
This person will succumb to a much lighter shock than another
person. Therefore, he begins to be concerned about his own
injuries.

The motto of IV is Give Him More Space. Give him more space. And
that is done by taking his attention off old anchor points. This
is so elementary. This is just -- what's he been using for anchor
points? The first thing he uses for anchor points is the first
anchor points that he had in his youth. He's still holding them,
still holding on to them, still evaluating his present
environment with the house in which he was raised. That is the
most easily accessible and generally obtainable datum from this
preclear -- that he can get this house. "Yes, I very often think
about that house."

"Well, mock it up out in front of you now."

"Now turn it blue."

"Oh, I can't do that."

"Well, have you got it mocked up?"

"Well, yeah."

"Well, turn the front doorknob."

"Yeah, I can do that."

"Well now, let go of it."

"Well, I didn't really have a hold of it, I just had it turning."

"Well, all right. Have it open a little bit. Now have it shut."

"Yeah, I can do that."

Now you open and close all the doors and open and close all the
windows. And then turn the place around and see it from another
angle. And boy, that is the first time that he -- " Oh, wait,
wait, wait!"

You're going to turn his anchor points around? He's still
operating, he might be now -- have arisen to the enormous -- I
mean he might have gotten up to some completely vast, otherwise
unattainable, height in life (like a clerk on the ration board)
and still be using -- still be using, if you please, the anchor
points of some house that has long since -- was torn down and
another house erected in its place and that was bombed out and
they built another house in its place, and the whole neighborhood
is changed and everything. It's a nonexistent locale. And he's
still using for his anchor points a newel post at the bottom of
the stairs and a mailbox out in front of the house, and maybe
it's quite specific -- maybe there's a snowman or something he
built there once, and he's using that as an anchor point. And
those are the anchor points of life. That's this whole life is
all tied up in those little anchor points.

And how big is something? "Well, let's see, it's much bigger than
the distance between the snowman and the front post, so it's
pretty big."

How long is a block? "The blocks in London are twice as long as
the block in front of my house."

How big is big? "That big." The entire system of linear
measurement is taken from those anchor points in his childhood
home.

Fascinating! You'll learn to handle that childhood home and then
make lots of them and then put them behind him and above him and
to the right and to the left and... You get all finished: "To
hell with it," he says. "I'm not interested in those anchor
points anymore." And what do you know, he has more space.

Now, that's the first step, because you've pulled his attention
off those anchor points. He was safe and secure in that area, and
he hasn't felt safe or secure since. So he's still holding on to
that area. There goes a lot of his attention. So give him more
space.

You say, "How far is it from London to Manchester?"

He's liable to do an odd one on that. He's liable to say, "You
know, it's only a block." He'll say, "It's very strange, but it's
only about a... You know that they're coexistent? Half of London
is lapped over half of Manchester. Ooooh, this is bad. I never
knew that before. Because they aren't actually that way: I know,
I've seen a map and I've gone down there and it's quite a ride
and... ooooh!" This will startle people.

"How far is it between your office and your home?"

"Oh," he'll say, "wait a minute. Heh! I know it's a lot longer
than that because I ride it on a bus every morning, and yet
they're only that far a..."

In other words, his idea of spatial dimension agrees with his
idea -- general idea of space, and when you ask him to get mock-
ups on this basis he gets what's his actual concept of space. And
that means there isn't much of it.

He goes out into the MEST universe and plows around and rides
here and goes there and does this and does that, and he protests
these long distances between his house and the office. Why?
Because he knows the distance isn't there. Actually it isn't
there, but he conceptually, actually he conceives them to be very
close together. And he protests. It's an imposition upon his
credulity that they're actually that many miles apart. He knows
they're not: conceptually, to him, they're right close together.
His anchor points are all jammed!

Now, the main problem with a IV is that he's using everything and
anything for an anchor point. He's taking his cue about space
from everything. He makes all kinds of mistakes on the subject of
space. That is not in putting things around, but he'll lose
things fairly easily and get rather frantic about finding them
again.

Now, he overlooks such things as -- he generally, by the way, is
"Time is two feet to the left" or something, or "Yesterday is
five inches above your left eyebrow," or something like that. I
mean, he's got spatial upsets about time. He's got havingness and
space all mixed up. That's because they're jammed, they're
getting too close together. His particles are too close together.

So what is your main object, then, in processing him is to get
these darned anchor points scattered out where they belong and
give him space. And you can make him hold anchor points out there
or tear up old anchor points. Now he's using bodies, he's using
actual milestones and bric-a-brac, he's using incidents which
have happened to him. He's using anything and everything you
could think of as anchor points. Everything becomes an anchor
point to him. He long since ceased to get frantic on the subject
of anchor points.

A I, by the way, will get very frantic on the subject of anchor
points. Every once in a while you get a I and you say, "All
right, now do this and do that and such and such is the case----"

And he'll say, "Wait a minute. I'll have to put my anchor points
back there again."

You didn't even -- he doesn't call them anchor points maybe. You
-- he said, "I have -- don't you know? I mean, I have a couple of
bright spots and they came together for a minute when you asked
me that." He's actually using anchor points. They aren't
something mythical I invented. A I will every once in a while get
quite frantic and put those things back again and orient himself
-- reorient himself on something that happens.

But a IV has been in apathy on it for a long time. Anything that
shows up is an anchor point. He has somebody he's lived with for
years and that somebody stands in front of him most of the time
or sits in front of him, or when he sees that person that person
is in front of him. And he tries, then -- when you ask him to get
rid of that person or do something about it -- he tries to move
that person. He's never moved that person. That person has been
chronically there; in actual -- in real existence, that person is
there. It's his wife, let's say, and she sits at the table and
lies in bed in front of him; when he sees her, she's in front of
him.

What's the only thing you can change there? You can change the
environment. The anchor points of the environment can be changed
all over the place.

He sometimes, if he's lost his wife or something like that, will
have a chronic visio on her -- always there -- or a chronic
occlusion on her. That means that she's always there right in
front of him. And it has never occurred to him that she never
shifted from that position with relationship to him, but the
environment shifted all over the place.

Those anchor points shifted. Get him to shift those anchor
points, and all of a sudden that occlusion will go away.

And of the various rooms:

"Now see her in a palace room."

"Now see her in a theater."

"Now see her here; now see her there."

"Now see her on a snowfield."

"Now see her walking on water."

"Now see her..."

And all of a sudden, why, he's got enough space surrounding that
object so that the object will blow. He expects the object to
sort of carry itself away or something. He's not sure how he's
going to get rid of this occlusion or this person that's always
in front of him. He's not at all sure of this. You shift his
anchor points with regard to that. She never moved with regard to
him, but the anchor points moved all over the place.

So we again come back to the problem. The problem of IV is a
problem of anchor points, and the problem of anchor points is a
problem of fixed attention. So you got to repair that on a IV
level before you're going to do too much in the line of
processing.

Let's take a break.

[End of Lecture]
