



 

Explore by clicking here 

 

 





 Message 68 of 311 for search alt.clearing.technology

   » Return to search results help 

 

FZ Tech Lover 5/7 Level 0 Tapes  

Author:   Secret Squirrel <squirrel@echelon.alias.net> 

Date:   1999/03/24 

Forum:   alt.religion.scientology  

      

 

more headers  author posting history   

  







--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



5. 296 325 Aug 20,1963 THE ITSA LINE



A Freezone Bible Supporter



Here is a complete set of Level 0 Academy tapes as a

companion piece to the level 0 pack posted earlier this

year.



Much Love,



Tech Lover





**************************************************





LEVEL 0 CASSETTES - CONTENTS



SHSBC Lectures - (old & new lecture numbers shown)



   Old New DAte



1. 148 162 May 24,1962 E METER DATA: INSTANT READS PART I

2. 149 163 May 24,1962 E METER DATA: INSTANT READS PART II

3. 290 319 Jul 25,1963 COMM CYCLES IN AUDITING

4. 291 320 Aug  6,1963 AUDITING COMM CYCLES 

5. 296 325 Aug 20,1963 THE ITSA LINE

6. 297 326 Aug 21,1963 THE ITSA LINE (CONT.)

7.   5 366 Feb  6,1964 THE COMMUNICATION CYCLE IN AUDITING





These are the 7 tapes that are in the modern clearsound

version of the Level 0 academy lectures.  The first two

(on the E Meter) were not in the old level zero academy

cassettes, the remaining 5 were checked against the old

tapes and omissions are marked ">".



There was also one case (marked "#") where a paragraph on

translating line plots was omitted from the old cassettes

(probably because of confidentiality) but is included in the 

new clearsound versions. (SHSBC-319)



There was also one case (SHSBC-320) where some material was

edited out of the clearsound academy version but was left

in the clearsound SHSBC version, so that even the modern

clearsound tapes do not quite match in the two versions

that are currently being sold.



Since even the old versions of these tapes have omissions,

it would be of great help if somebody could check these

transcripts against an early set of SHSBC Reels.





**************************************************



FREEZONE BIBLE MISSION STATEMENT



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 freezoner's are "squirrels" who should be

stamped out as heritics.  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 Judiasm 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



**************************************************







THE ITSA LINE



SHSBC 296 renumbered 325



(85 min long)



A lecture given on 20 August 1963



[checked against the old level 0 cassettes, omissions marked

with ">"]





How are you today?



Audience: Good. Fine, thank you.



> Wasn't that a nice dramatic storm.  I approved of that,

> weather's been too calm.



All right. This is what?



Audience: 20 August.



20 August A.D. 13. Thank you.



> And we have a couple of new students, I'd like to have them

> stand up and take a bow.  Cynthia Pare, and Fred Pare.

> And we got a couple of retreads on course: Wing Angel and

> Smokey Angel.



Well, this is a lecture on the itsa line. About time. The

itsa line. Why is it called the itsa line? The auditor says

whatsit? and the pc says itsa. It is the pc's communication

line from pc to auditor. And it isn't necessarily pursuant

to the auditor's whatsit; it is sometimes pursuant to the

pc's whatsit; pc very often puts in his own whatsit.



> "what's that there?"

>

> "Okay, allright".



Okay. There are numerous communication lines between the

auditor and the pc and the aggregate of these make up what

you call the auditing cycle. The auditing cycle is made up

of several communication lines. A communication line is

cause-distance-effect. I call your attention to Dianetics

1955! for the full definition of a communication line. What

is a communication: intention, attention, duplication at

the point of effect, and so forth.



All those are quite important and technically accurate, but

what you're mainly interested in is cause-distance-effect.

Cause-distance-effect is a communication line. A

communication line is not cause-distance-effect,

cause-distance-effect—that's two communication lines.



Now, a communication line can be very faint, and one of

those that you'll find out routinely on an auditor is the

attention line: line 1 minor; line 1 minor, the attention

line. And that is just consistently out. But as I say,

there are numbers of these and we're not particularly going

into them. That's the first line. That's get the pc's

attention; how do you get the pc's attention to cause the

pc to put his attention on the auditor? And that line is

the one that is put in.



Now, that line itself can be complex and become two lines

or three lines. Pc sitting there and he's saying, "Gob-gob,

walla-walla," something, and the auditor wants to get his

attention on him. See, it has to have attention on the

auditor. Now, the auditor can't really give an auditing

command or do anything with his command unless he gets his

attention line in. Now, that can be done very crudely. You

can drop the E-Meter, you can cough loudly in the pc's

face, tip over your chair, get angry. There's, in essence,

numbers of ways to get this line in very, very wrong. And

the line has to be put in, however, and very often you find

a pc fogging around at the beginning of session and his

attention is not on the auditor, it's really not on his

case, it's not on anything you're trying to do, and so

forth. Well, how do you get it there? Well, one of the ways

of getting it there is, having an attention line already

extant, you then convert it to an itsa line.



Now, this is the whole trick, because there's another

attention line. There is attention on what, see? And this

looks like another attention line; it's actually 1 minor. It

just isn't putting the attention on the auditor, it's

putting attention on something else. And this is a little

trick I used to do that used to baffle everybody in ACCs.

They used to get baffled, and everybody would drop his jaw

and look at me dully when I would try to get them to do

this; and it's been wholly unsuccessful; but by dividing down

the auditing cycle into these various communication lines

and component parts, I will bravely take another crack at it.



It's slippy. I know if I give this to you, it'll become a

repetitive-command process, which it isn't. It's slippy,

that's all; is you just very adroitly, without really

putting the pc's attention on anything except what his

attention should be on, just flick the pc's attention over

to what it should be on. I'll give you an idea.



Pc is saying, "Oh, I just ... just ... just can't stand

.. can't stand these uh ... these wild parties. Just

can't stand them. Had one last night and just can't stand

them, and so forth. There's just too much ... too much music 

and everything. And I've got an awful present time problem, 

because this guy's ... this ... this ... this girl's b ... b ...

boyfriend came over and wanted to pop me in the eye because

I was getting too familiar, and it's terrible." And present

time problem, present time problem, present time problem.



And you know you're running the GPM "to be sexual," see?

This you know about the case.



This is ... this I'm giving you, also, is the itsa line.



Hey, we're getting a nice storm tape here. We'll cut the

storm off of it, and so forth, and sell it.



They go great in the Middle West. They love storm tapes. It

reminds them of home.



I had a green tornado one time in Kansas; never been back

since. Twenty-five-pound blocks of ice were falling out of

a pea-soup-green sky, and the visibility had dropped down

to about fifteen feet; bright green. Never quite recovered.

Was impossible. Couldn't have happened; but it did.



Now, your pc's attention being all over the confounded

place, the auditor sits back and says he's going to put in

the itsa line. Now, usually by this— unless he is well

trained and has this data, and so forth; this means he's

going to sit back and leave the pc's attention totally

uncontrolled. The itsa line, when you first start giving it

to people, is just never doing anything but listen. And

that's because people think it is simply a communication

line, and it isn't. But we will go on to this in a moment.



Now, therefore this pc is running on and on and on about

this party; and this is slippy auditing. I can sit and do

this by the hour. Pc never finds out about it, and there's

no command process being run and everything else, and tone

arm moves like mad, and so forth. It requires a certain

estimation of effort, you understand? And I actually, years

and years ago, despaired of getting anybody to control

attention that lightly. This is another effort to do so,

see? So, you say ... he's going on and on, "And this guy came

over and he almost bopped me, but this was a nice-looking

girl, and so forth. And t had a terrible problem because of

my wife, you know, and so on, and ..." Here we go, see?



Now, the auditor who is not well informed and who is not

well skilled just sits back and listens to this whole

thing. Now, to do anything about it suddenly is to put line

I minor in on the auditor. Clank! And boy, the pc will ARC

break, see, because it's a sudden shift of attention.



So the whole thing is the skill by which you can take line

1 minor and flick it over onto what you were doing or want

to do in the session; the skill with which you can do this.



And, believe me, this is a skill maneuver. And when you are

really skilled at this, you could almost sit down and run a

full auditing session, and even a casual observer would

think you were simply listening to the pc, which you

weren't at all; you were actually directing the pc's

attention very closely. The pc was talking exactly about

what you wanted that pc to talk about and nothing else, and

the pc never realizes that their attention has been grooved

on it.



Now, that would be the tremendous difference between

psychoanalysis listening and Scientology auditing. You see,

these things could look quite alike.



The psychoanalyst (1) did not really know what to direct

anybody's attention to, see? He didn't know the anatomy of

the bank. He thought if he could direct somebody's

attention to sexual incidents in early childhood, he had it

made. Well, now, a pc - a pc - actually follows in his

case, at any given moment, the least-charged line. A pc

will always follow the least-charged line. Get this. Get

this good, because that's one of those remarks that goes by

in the night and you wonder someday - you're sitting there

auditing somebody and you don't know what to do, and so

forth. And it's one of those things that if you knew that

well, you'd know exactly what to do. He always follows the

least charged line with his tone arm action. If you're

going to get tone arm action, it is on the least-charged

aberrative line - not the least-charged thing he could talk

about, but the least-charged aberrative line. The tone arm

action exists on the least-charged aberrative line at any

given moment in a case progress - always the least-charged

aberrative line.



Now, give you what I mean by that. Let's take dynamics.

You've got eight dynamics you could audit on the pc. The

third dynamic is what the pc is always coming up with.

Well, if you kept the pc on the third dynamic, you know,

you would get tone arm action because this happens with the

pc to be the least-charged line. You got it?



Now, the other lines do not give tone arm action, and this

does not mean they are not charged; it means they are

overcharged. There is too much charge on them. Got that? So

you're always trying to snake through the mine field on the

least-popping firecrackers to get your tone arm action. You

got that? You want little ones that'll just tingle his

feet; you don't want those that'll blow his legs off. You

understand?



Well, the mind is so regulated and safety-valved that it

will not release charges which the pc considers over his

ability to tolerate. Now, an auditor can actually punch

these charges into view; he's got all the materials in his

hand. And therefore he could actually throw the pc into

areas which are overcharged areas to be run - the areas are

overcharged.



The result of an overcharged area is a stuck tone arm.

> There is no more really as far as you are (concerned).

Stuck tone arms have many peculiarities and

particularities. You can say that if you want to really get

tone arms moving you have to get the GPMs on a case run;

that's the most likely to give you tone arm action. It's

the most aberrative in terms of time. You can say a lot of

things about tone arm action. You say tone arm action

sticks because of time - these things are all true. But with

regard to charge, what you really want to know with regard

to charge is that in the presence of too much charge—too

much charge—the TA ceases to operate. TA action ceases when

you have too much charge.



That doesn't say that you couldn't bleed it, that you

couldn't work your way around it, that there aren't means

of getting off the charge anyhow, and all that sort of

thing. But when you see a TA ceasing to operate, and

ceasing to act, then you have entered an area of too much

charge - particularly on an extremely high or an extremely

low TA. Do you follow that, now? Too much charge.



It's not because there's nothing there to run; it's because

there's too cockeyed much there. See that? And if you don't

get tone arm action, then the charge that holds the

significances and ideas, postulates, cognitions, and that

sort of thing, in place - just the corny, electrical charge,

you understand, no other significance connected with

it - this thing packed up and held in facsimiles, masses, all

of this sort of thing, won't, then, let the case advance.

And you get no case advance in the absence of tone arm

action. That is - that's it! I mean, there aren't any ands,

ifs, are's or buts about it. No tone arm action: no case

advance!



I don't care if you erased a somatic, I don't care if the

pc has ceased to have lumbosis, I don't care about any of

these things - because you're not auditing a body. As far as

this pc is concerned - no tone arm action: no case advance.



Now, can you worsen no tone arm action? Yes. You can bring

about no needle action on top of no tone arm action.

Hu-hu-hu-hu. And if you insist on running a pc without tone

arm action, you soon will begin to see it expressed over

here in the needle, which will get tighter and tighter and

tighter. And after a while everything locks up. And then if

you use real desperate measures, why, you can just freeze

the pc into something that'll feel to him like solid rock.



The longer you run a case without tone arm action, the more

you will freeze the case into no tone arm action. And the

more the case is frozen into no tone arm action, the less

chance you have of getting charge off by any means. You see

this? I mean, you're walking away from the point of

resolution. The further you go with no tone arm action, the

less likely you are to fortuitously produce some. So it's

not just "Well, he's running without tone arm action," and

brush it off, you see? It's "Oh, my God! He's running

without tone arm action! Whew. Huh.



Hey, hey, hey! Bo-bo-bo-bo! No tone arm action! Hey, hey,

hey, hey! No tone arm action.



Get some tone arm action. Ha-ha. You know? It gets that

type of emotional response, you know? Not "Well, he's

running without tone arm action, so he isn't getting any

better," and so on, see?



Guy being run without tone arm action is somebody you're

watching go down the big toboggan. And the longer this goes

on, the harder it's going to get to get tone arm action.



Now, the most likely way to get tone arm action on any

condition, any case or any anything, is getting in the itsa

line. This has processes connected with it. These processes

are designated Routine 1C (C for communication). Routine

1C: this is the soft-touch process. This is the process

that will be given to Scientology I auditors, and after

you've studied it and used it a year or two, you'll find

out that there's a lot more to know about it.



It is at once the clumsiest use - it's the workhorse, you

see? You say, "Well, you've got two processes to make an

OT. You've got 3N, you got R3R." No, you've always got

three processes. See, if you've got two like that, then

you've always got one more, and that'll always be the itsa

line, or 1C, see? This is the workhorse. This is the workhorse.



And, yeah, somebody in a co-audit; yes, sure, somebody in

a - doing a book-auditing job; yeah, somebody, some student

in the academy; yeah, these people, oh, yes, these guys

will be able to make progress with this thing. But before

he's gone very long in the academy and before he's done

very much auditing, he'll all of a sudden begin to

believe - he'll do one of two things: either, "Well, I just

get tired of just sitting there listening to him talk and

talk and talk and talk, you know? I just get tired of this.

So this itsa line isn't so good." See? He didn't even know

what it was in the first place, see? Or he will all of a

sudden begin to realize that there is a certain deftness

required here or one will just continue to sit and listen

and listen, and the pc goes on and talks and talks.



Well, look, they talked for five years in psychoanalysis

without getting anyplace. See we don't know that they had

tone arm action, but we sure know they didn't get anyplace.

They did.



They did - pardon me, pardon me. That - I'm maligning the

boys. I'm maligning them. They got careful. They did get

someplace.



Well, look-a-here. You learn, then, that an overcharged

case can most easily be bled down by the itsa line, and

you'll restore tone arm action. So the best way to restore

tone arm action to any case that has become overcharged

through being run in the wrong departments is getting in

the itsa line. Now, that's your base process. You can

restore tone arm action, no matter how badly the case has

been jammed up, if you are clever in handling the itsa line.



Now, when I say "itsa line," and when I say "clever," yes,

they're very definitely joined together. Clever. It is not

a process; it's a cleverness. And the biggest trouble you

have anything with is (as we'll come back to this) line 1

minor. Why put the attention on the auditor when all you've

got to do is shift it slightly in the pc?



This guy is saying, "Well, and so forth, and we had this

big ... big hassle at this party and I ... this ... my wife 

bawled me out, and everybody bawled me out and so forth. And 

I've got this terrible present time problem. I got this awful

hangover and I'm having an awful time in this session," and

so on and so on and so on. Yeah, under a long series of

runs you could probably take apart this present time

problem, but you were running on the pc the goal "to be

sexual." The pc is having trouble with being sexual, that's

for sure.



Well, that's where the cleverness is, is was there anything

that happened - you know, is what the pc's talking about got

anything to do with what you were doing, see? So, of

course, the adroit question practically walks up and hits

you in the head. The adroit question is ... Pc takes a

long breath and momentarily he isn't going on any further.

Just momentarily, see? He actually hasn't run his

communication line out terribly, but he's just been

floundering, you're getting minimum tone arm action. And

you say, "Did our last session have anything to do with this?"



"Oh. Let's see, what the hell were we doing in the last session?"



"Well, I don't know. Just review what we were doing."



"Well, let's see, uh ... so and so on, so on, then we had

an ARC break and we were doing something or other and uh ... 

so on. We were running out some kind of items; there's

this backtrack and there's this stairs or something there.

Let me see, now. I ... I'll ... I'm getting' it now,"

and so forth. "Oh, yeah. Yeah, yeah. Yeah, we were running

.. uh - you see, I ... I really can't get anywhere near

this, I'm so worried about my present time problem - but uh 

.. we were uh ... we were uhn ... uhn ... running

some goal, some goal, some goal, uhn ... some goal,

something along this line and so on. Oh, yes, "to be sexual.

Say, what do you know! (sigh) Yeah, I sure do have a lot of

trouble with ... with this thing 'to be sexual.' I ha ... 

Yeah, I sure do. Uh ... yeah, I ... I have a lot of trouble 

with that."



"Well," you say, "well, what items did we have there, right

toward the last?" "Well, I think we arrived at this point

on the line plot, and uh ... I think it was ... I think

it was ... uh, ‘absolutely' uh ... No, it was 'nix' ... 

uh, yeah. Well, all right. There we are." And you're

starting to see your tone arm move and your needle start to

twitch.



And he never knew what happened. Magic, man, magic! It's

gently taking line 1 minor, without actually putting it on

the auditor, and putting it back to the subject of the

auditing. And, you see, there's no process that you could

announce that will do this, because the auditing is

tremendously variable and the pc's worries and concerns are

fantastically agglomerate.



Now, sometimes, the pc has legitimately had a present time

problem and something catastrophic has occurred between

sessions, something like this is just using this factor for

just a present time problem - and it's something way off. And

the only thing you can do is to keep flicking that

attention line. Flick - it's really not a whatsit line; your

whatsit's already in, you see? And you just keep moving it

around till the pc will ventilate the PTP that he's

worrying about.



Now, the crudest - but still acceptable - example of this is

simply "Tell me about it." See, that's crude. See, that's

something like we're going to build house so we pile up

some bricks.



That's crude. That's about as adroit as the cow doing the

twist, see? But nevertheless, it's functional. You do get

some motion. I couldn't forbear to milk that gag.



Now, so there's the pc, see? And the pc can't get his mind

on what you' doing because something else has happened. And

this something else is re worried, and maybe it's worried

down to the level of grief charge, or something like this,

see? Well, all you can do is move this little attention

line around onto things that'll give him itsas. And you can

cut it down from - well, actual failing to relieve the

situation, that's how bad it can be, see? You just didn't

really relieve his problem, or you relieved it somewhat, or

you - next gram is you spent the session making him feel

better about that present tin problem. See, we're well into

the acceptable band, if we've got to be. Or, we handled it

in the first two hours of the session, or we handled it in

the first hour of the session, or we handled it in the first

fifteen minutes of the session. And that difference of time

has very little to do with the seriousness of the problem

it has everything to do with the cleverness of the

auditor - without putting the attention line on himself,

without cutting the itsa line - adroitly shifting the little

attention line there to this and that.



"Well," the person says, "but uh ... this ... But I

don't see ... I don't see why we had to fight half the

night after we got home. I told her I just was attracted by

blondes, and so forth, and she just wouldn't listen," and

so forth.



And the auditor says, "What have you found out about

arguments like that with your wife?" "Well, itsa, itsa,

itsa, itsa, itsa, itsa, itsa."



"Well, that's fine. All right. Now, how do you feel about

this problem now?" "Well, the problem is all right."



Well, he's still a little bit fluttery, so, "Well, let's

review now what we were doing on something or other." Got

the idea?



"Well, we were doing so-and-so and, well, you know what we

were doing well as I do." "Well, all right, yeah, probably.

But I may not have full records here this. There might have

been something that came up during the session, something

like this, or between sessions you might have thought of

something else."



"Oh, yes! I did, as a matter of fact." You're away, see?

Got the idea?



Actually, it's just about as skilled as building a watch,

but because there's no apparent skill there, don't you see,

it gets slightly into disrepute. People watch a session in

which this is occurring, and they really never even hear

auditor say anything, see? And the pc never really hears

the auditor; anything, because the attention line isn't

"All right, now. All right. Okay. A ... All right. Yeah, 

yeah. Yeah, I... er got all that you're talking about. Now, 

right. Now we're going to give you ... going to give you 

the next ... next ... next auditing command—the next ... 

the next ... the ... the next auditing command. You got that 

now? Got that now. All right. Here are, now. All right. Do 

birds suffocate? Okay? Got that now? Do birds suffocate?" 

Now, you've restimulated some charge. I won't say what 

charge you've restimulated.



See, now that can grade on down from just too much, you

see. That can grade on down to "Do suffocating birds have

anything to do with this?" "Were there any birds

suffocating in that?" See? To "Well, do you think your

processing has bettered this situation?" Now we're really

getting feather-light, aren't we? Pc hardly heard you say

it and neither would anybody else, you see?



"Well, let's see. Let's go over what we've covered so far

in auditing. Well now, you had a couple of cognitions in

the last session there that had something to do with this.

Have you had any other cognition with regard to goals, and

so forth - these implanted goals?" This is getting awful

adroit, see? You've actually got something he's already

been talking about, and you put it in by the duplication

factor. You duplicate what he has been talking about and

you just pull his itsa line a little bit further and put it

on something, see?



I'll give you an idea of doing this. He says, "Well,

auditing, auditing. I get these awful headaches in auditing

and that sort of thing."



"Well, have you particularly gotten them while we've been

running goals?" Few sessions later - he's forgotten all about

these headaches, and so forth - we're having a hard time

getting his itsa line in: "How about these headaches? Are

they troubling you as much now? When we run these goals and

that sort of thing, how are these headaches?" Sounds merely

solicitous. It isn't, it's a itsa line, see? See, you've

taken a dead-ended communication line someplace back down

the line and you've repeated its subject, so therefore you

have made a duplication, so you've created a communication

line. It's all very technical. And the person's attention

goes back onto this and he has to make a comparison. He has

to say his headaches are better or worse or there's no change, 

and while he's doing this he has to put his attention on GPMs, 

or whatever you're trying to run on it.



And you say, "Well, with this last one that we were running

in the last session - the last one, 'to be nutty,' 'to be crazy 

in the head'," so forth, something like that, "how were the 

somatics in the head getting along there? Were they turning on and

off, and so forth, while we've been running that?"



"Oh, well, you shouldn't really remark on this, because I

had them pretty well off." "Well, what item did they go off

on?"



"Well, they went off on uh ... Well, I really don't know.

Someplace in the first part of it. Um ... urn ... urn ... I 

had an item in there ... is ... uh, 'idiotably ...' I think 

it was 'idiotably nutty.' Yeah. Yeah, that was the one. Hey, 

I got that headache again, you know?"



You say, "Well, give me 'nix idiotably nutty'." You're

away, see? See? He doesn't know what hit him, see?



It's moving that attention line adroitly, adroitly, see?

Adroit. With the little pinky - the little finger, you

know - raised just right on the teacup, see?



Now, you'll see an auditor who really hasn't got much

feeling for it, and no tools and so forth, why, he's got

this teacup with both paws wrapped around it, you see? And

you'll see somebody else has poured the tea into the saucer

with both paws wrapped around the saucer and inhaling at a

very large number of decibels. See? So, that you'll see

this in all of its shades of gray, you see, down to

outright black.



But before you understand anything much about the itsa

line, you have to understand that there is such a thing as

an attention line - line 1 minor—and unless you can handle

that attention line slightly, adroitly, greatly, smoothly 

.. You'll curse yourself sometimes. Even the best of an

auditor will say, "Well, let's get to running this GPM

now," or something ... Cut your throat, you see? You

spend the next fifteen minutes getting out of this hole.

See, it was just too much in the wrong place, see, and it

just smashed everything up and the pc is busy explaining to

you that he is eight thousand light-years from that GPM and

his attention wasn't on it, you know? You find yourself

making these mistakes. Don't knock yourself in the head and

say "Well, I'm terrible at this" and run a big make-guilty

on self because you don't handle this well always.



Just, those times you have been clever, pat yourself on the

back. That's the one to pay attention to. I'm not kidding

you because ... Well, I gave a session last night and I

dropped - three times. Once I dropped a handful of - anvils on

the floor - shook up the session most interestingly - and

another time I put off a whole chain of firecrackers in the

midst of the auditing table, and another time practically

ran the mains volts through the cans, see? But that was

three, see? That was three. But there was two hours' worth,

and probably something on the order of 150 that were

handled, you know, with such aplomb, man, that nobody ever

found out anything about it, and it got the pc out of the

woods gorgeously. So quantitatively, see? - Course what you

put your attention [on] are those things that had to be

patched up, see? "Oh, oh. Well, your attention wasn't on

it. Well, I'm very sorry, and so on. Have I cut your

communication?" You know, "Sorry," and so forth. "Well what

would you have said if I hadn't have interrupted that?"

See? Got a recovery, see, level, and so forth.

Nevertheless, if you really were self-critical to a vast

degree, you would have been practically kicking your brains

out for having pulled any one of these three.



Pc is going on and saying, "Well, I think I have blown that

last GPM think I have blown that."



"Well, all right. All right. Good. Let's check some of its

items." Oh-oh, cut your throat, man, see? Just put the pc's

attention on the wrong thing, wrong place, it's all going

crash, the pc's needle goes dirty. Get the idea?



You see, you're split between wanting the pc to think well

of you, and getting your job done.



And these two things are very often at - they're diapola

[dipolar] phenomena. You try and get your job done

sometimes uphill against something and in the final

analysis it just merely depends on, did you get the job

done, see? That's what it really depends on in the final

analysis. But in process of getting your job done, you

happen to have ARC broke the pc and cut the pc's communication

line several times. Well, the difference between a good and

a bad auditor is not whether the auditor always audits

smoothly with never cutting an itsa line, but whether or not he

attains his eventual objective without creating so many ARC

breaks that the pc's case has not improved. That's the test!



If you go around training people on the basis of "You must

never cut an itsa line; you must never create an ARC break;

you must never upset pc" - all of these things, you see - it's

something like laying in a GPM, know? Oh, in the first

place, it's an impossible attainment. Always train them

with "Be as clever and adroit as you can," and "You can be

a little more adroit than that." He dropped his E-Meter

in the pc's lap halfway through session. Poor handling of

the attention line. Why? Pc's attention went on meter, not

on own case.



All right. Now, how many dozen ways are there to shift the

pc's attention. I don't know - dozens, thousands. Thousands.

I'll give you an idea. You got an alcoholic. You're trying

to process this alcoholic, see? Alcoholic's drunk during

sessions and you know you're not supposed to audit somebody

who's drunk. All the alcoholic'd do is sit there and say,

"Well, Alcoholics Anonymous will say you can't cure anybody

of alcoholism." That's all he's going to say, see - knows you

can't help him. He's saying, well, it's impossible, see?

And you say "Well, the case is unauditable."



Yes, the case is unauditable to everybody except those who

are surpassingly skilled with the attention line and the

itsa line, see? The whatsit line is practically missing.



"Now, what have you learned about Alcoholics Anonymous?"



"Oh, well, that's something else, uh ... Well, I met this

fella down the street, this fella, and so forth, and he

gave me this book, see? And I read this book and I threw it

in a garbage pail. Couldn't teach me anything. But I learned 

better after a while."



"When was that?"



"Oh, in about a few days later I learned better, see? I had

this awful hangover, and I just got fired and I was being

sued for divorce, and I found out they were your friends.

That's what I found out then." You're going to see that

tone arm starting to move, man.



He has just told you that you can't possibly audit him. He

has just told you that you can't possibly help him. So you

just - Hhh-hhh - polish up the fingernails, audit him, help

him, and somewhere up the line he finds out about it as a

major cognition.



But all the way up the line he's improving. Because if you

can get tone arm motion and get the guy with the session,

see, by flicking that little old attention line right where

it lives - parallel what the mind is doing, and it will do

everything you want it to. Nothing new - that's the beginning

lines, I think, of one of the first-book things. But

nevertheless, this gives you the anatomy of how that's

done. You just find out about what this guy's mind is on,

see? And if you can produce tone arm action by having him

locate things about it, then he will recover from any

obsessive or compulsive tendencies about it or toward it.

It's the tone arm motion that takes off the compulsion, not

the significance of what he digs up. Given enough tone arm

motion on any given subject, and that subject will right

itself in the head of the pc. And, man, I'm talking from

hard-won experience. I'd say, if we've learned anything in

the last thirteen years, man, we've learned that. It isn't 

the significance alone. It's the tone arm motion that can be 

obtained in relation to the significance that brings about 

the recovery.



Now, that's, the fastest recovery is, of course, the tone

arm motion plus the right significance to be run. Now,

that's your fastest recovery. But your recovery takes place

somewhat and eventually if you just produce tone arm

motion. That's all you have to do, is produce tone arm

motion on the case, regardless of what's run, and

eventually - at some vast distance - why, this pc is going to

recover from these various targets and so forth in the

case. He's going to recover from them. That's for sure. But

if you audit the right significance and get no tone arm

action, the pc will never recover. See, - those are terribly

important data.



Well now, the most overcharged areas of the case are the

case's - parts of the case that give the high TA. The high TA

and the overcharged area compare. The least-charged

aberrative area gives tone arm action.



You very often will find some alcoholic that gets no tone

arm action on the subject of alcoholism, but he's got

corns. You can get tone arm action on the subject of corns,

you see? In other words, he can't face that highly a

charged approach. So that sometimes the absolute direct

approach to a compulsion or obsession of some kind or

another will get you nowhere at all, because it's such a

highly charged area that it's over the pc's head, and you

get no tone arm action on that.



Well, the answer to that is don't abandon it; just get tone

arm action! See? That's the thing to do. Just get tone arm

action! Very remarkable. Because the mind is stacked up the

way it is, if you continue to get tone arm action, he'll

all of a sudden walk up on that thing, do you see? Now,

undirectedly - that's just not directing him toward any

specific target or goal or aberration or anything else, or

any reason he's not able or anything at all, anything - you

get tone arm action and he'll eventually collide with

something. And he will know processing is helping him!



You'll be utterly flabbergasted sometime. You have this

surprise in store for you, if you haven't collided [with]

it already. Knowing the idea about tone arm action, you sit

there and this pc babbles on and on and on, and it doesn't

have anything to do with anything you can see, but my God,

that tone arm is moving. You're getting up and down motions

on that thing - not a quarter division every twenty minutes,

man. You're getting - it's got to be a bit healthier than

that for a pc to know something about it - but it's certainly

getting a whole tone arm division every ten minutes, and

that's pretty fair tone arm motion, see? And that's

acceptable. I wouldn't buy much less than that myself - tone

arm division every ten minutes.



And that would say only down but you realize that it also

has to rise in order to go back down again. So if you added

the plus and minus, that'd be two tone arm divisions, you

see - one up and one down—in ten minutes. Well, that's just

barely, marginally acceptable see, to produce this phenomena.



You get that?



All right. Pc talking about his grandmother's jam making.

Well, cripes you know? This is about as aberrative, don't

you see, as petting the pup. But my heavens, you're getting

tone arm motion on it, man. Well, you can't do anything

else much. You've tried something else and gotten a stuck

tone arm so let's let him go on, see? And just completely

neglect your attention line. I you were very skilled, you

would be unable to totally neglect it. You would punch it

around a little bit and increase your tone arm motion, see?



Pc leaves the session feeling fine - feeling fine, wonderful.

Pc always makes gains if they have tone arm motion, see? If

they have real tone arm motion, they always make gains. If

they don't have tone arm motion, they don't make gains.



Now, I can tell you at the three-quarter point of a session

whether or no the pc will have anything to say decent in

the goals and gains. It's just how much tone arm motion has

there been during that session. That's all; it's; direct

monitoring factor, see? So this becomes burningly necessary

to produce tone arm motion. At any cost, produce tone arm

motion. And now you come into your own about the itsa line,

because tone arm motion only occurs when the itsa line is

in, and tone arm motion does not occur with the itsa line out.



Now, a lot of you think the itsa line is a communication

line. It's not. That's a surprise, isn't it? Just because

it's labeled C-distance-E and because it is a communication

line, why don't we just call it the preclear's line to

auditor? That would make it a communication line. But we

don't. We call it the itsa line. Why the itsa? Why? Why?



Well, one of the ways to get this across is to give the

student a drill. Just imagine a thetan in various

circumstances, you know, like a guy in jail. Alright, now

how is his itsa line cut? See, it isn't just on the graph.

That isn't the only way you can show how the itsa line is

cut in an auditing session. Let's just take it out in life.

And we say, "All right, this guy is in jail. Give me a

number of ways this fellow's itsa line is cut." And you may

get some awful comm lags on the part of the student, but

he'll eventually dig it up, see? How's his itsa line cut?

Well, let me give you some notions, then, for definition of

the itsa line. Well, he can't go anyplace else to see if

"itsa." He can't go anyplace else to itsa. He's right there

in jail, isn't he? Let's say he was up in London in jail.

All right. Well, he couldn't go down and itsa the coast,

could he? He couldn't say "Itsa water, and itsa beach, and

itsa resort, and itsa Brighton," could he? He can't get

there. How the hell can he itsa it?



Well, he can itsa it on a via, if somebody'd give him a map

or a book or a novel that's about the coast, or something

like that. That's itsa on a via - substitute. Itsa by

substitutes. So it's a kind of an itsa. Well, itsa by

facsimiles is an itsa by substitutes, too. So this is not

ineffective. But his itsa line - direct itsa line - is sure cut.



Now, there are other ways his itsa line can be cut by

reason of being in jail. I won't go into those particularly.



We have a fellow sitting at a table. We put a blindfold on

him. How is his itsa line cut? Do you see how his itsa line

is cut? He can't itsa! That's what an itsa line is.



What's a nightmare? What's a nightmare? A nightmare is the

inability to itsa, followed by mocking up something that

can be itsa'd that's wrong.



A thetan likes to be oriented. He orients himself. How does

he orient himself? Itsa. "Itsa ceiling, itsa floor, itsa

wall. Itsa. Therefore, I'm a ..."



You hide somebody. You hide somebody. The itsa line is cut

on himself. Nobody else can say itsa. Nobody can say itsa.

Do you see that?



Disassociate somebody from his identity. How's his itsa

line cut? He can't say "Itsa me. Itsa me, Joe Jones," see?

Can't be done. He hasn't got an identity now.



Well, we get into a whole tangled web of aberration and we

find out that that's the basic aberration: inability to

orient or declare or identify or recognize. Not just solve,

you understand. It isn't cure versus cure versus cure.

That's also itsas, but that's only part of the picture. How

do you know you're here? Well, that's easy. That's easy.

You say, "Itsa chapel, itsa chair, itsa notebook." Where

you are, "Itsa body." Up here, "Itsa Ron," see? You know

where you are. Your itsa line is in. You're oriented, so

you feel happy about the whole thing, see? Fine. You know

where you are.



It isn't necessarily how dangerous the environment is. You

could be out in the jungle, and you'd be surprised how

happy some hunter looked when he says "Itsa lion!" Hasn't

really anything to do with safety, security, and - none of

these. These are just extra considerations, see? So you

just shred all these extra considerations off and itsa.

See? "Itsa jungle, itsa me, itsa gun, itsa lion, itsa

bearer up a tree. Well, at least I know I was killed by a

lion. My itsa line is in on the subject of that death."



Well, look, if this is so important to power, and it is;

and if this is so important to sanity, and it is; and if

this is so important to memory, and it is; and if this is

so important to ability, and it is - then we would expect the

major tricks on the track to comprise of cutting itsa lines

one way or the other.



So, you're standing up there loud and clear on the parapet,

gripping dramatically the flag of the lilies of France,

being shot at in shot and shell, and all of a sudden

there's a snick, and you is disconnected. Well, you at

least know how you died. You got some idea that it was a

flying object, unfriendly directed. And by God, in the next

half an hour or something like that, they're telling you

you died some other way. It's correct? Spoils your itsa line.



And then in the ensuing actions that take place on it, why,

they give you a completely false position as far as you're

concerned and a false situation and a false here and a

false there and they throw your itsa out on time and they

give you a little GPM to carry home with you very happily,

give you some nice somatics to go along with it. You're an

idiot to ever go back, you know?



I mean, you move right around the corner of the thing, and

itsa where? If it's 70.6 trillion-seven years ago, which is

right now, that itsa is certainly for the birds, isn't it?

You understand, they've misdated a somatic on you, because

they say, "Now we're going to give you your future," and

somehow or another restimulate your facsimiles of the past

and say they're in the future and ... What's happening

here? Well, enough happened so that everybody on the planet

believed they lived only once. And that's how serious the

cutting of itsa line can be. You combine this with plenty

of force and you got it made man! I can see it now, the

development of a new psychiatry. A new medical psychiatry

can be developed out of this. You can get people so mixed

up that they'd report back to the medical doctor every

time. They do. Insane patients are always reporting back

for their shocks, and so forth, see? Well-known fact. The

report-back mechanism is just used and used and used and

used and used by these nuts.



By the way, I thought of a difference between a

Scientologist and the world at large on this particular

planet. The people think that what we doing is unreal, but

we know the substance of their unreality, which of course

makes us top dog every time. We know the substance of their

unreality.



In other words, we know where their itsa line is out. See,

they know what - they're not identifying. Their itsas are

just for the birds, you know "Man is an animal. He is a

biochemical protoplasm which goes no place. At death there

is a cessation of cellular commotion." That's a good itsa,

isn't it. That just immediately makes nothing out of everybody.



Ah, so there's a formula. There's a formula involved here.

And that your itsa line can be out on ARC, and KUCDEI Zero

and F. How many ways can an itsa line be? Well, it's that

whole scale I gave you for R2H. Known, Unknown, Curious,

Desired, Enforced, Inhibited, none of it [Zero] and False - 

absent and false. This is how many itsa aberrations there 

can be, see? Well, false, that's the easiest one of all. You 

hold up somebody—you "Here, have a piece of candy, sonny." Give

him a piece of chalk, see? He bit it. His itsa line is out,

man. Got the idea?



You say, "There is nothing here, boys. There is nothing

haunting our planet; there is nobody after you; nothing

happens. I mean, you're just natural and there's nobody

after you, see?" That itsa line is for birds, see? "You're

paranoid! You think people are pursuing you!" Of course

nobody is pursuing us - they don't have to. They got us, man!



So they say something isn't, which is. Well, of course you

can get reverse of that. They say something is which isn't,

such as the Darwin theory, which is just an old implant.



Inhibited. Inhibited: Give a guy a pair of distorting

glasses or make him look at things in a twisted mirror, like a

fun-house mirror. His itsa line is inhibited. Tell him he

must not examine such-and-so and so-and-so because it is

very dangerous, and of course his itsa line is inhibited at

once.



And of course, enforced itsa: "You better damn well know

about that or you will be shot tomorrow morning without

cigarette or blindfold." Enforced itsa.



Desired itsa - see, that's a "want to know" sort of itsa:

Somebody is happy to know that you're all right. You see?

That's a desirable itsa.



And the itsa of curiosity is not just being curious about

what is; it's an itsa which is curiosity.



It's a curiosity itsa, don't you see?



Now, you go up higher than that and you get an unknown

itsa. Hey, you know, there is an unknown itsa. I just gave

you an example of one. You had complete reality on the

unreality of people on this planet. See, the itsa is their

unknownness, see? You recognize they don't know! Well, that

is an itsa. it's pretty high-scale stuff for a thetan to be

able to recognize that it is an unknown. This thing really

boxes him around, because, of course, it mix with the

actual desire to make something known which can be known.

And amongst that, you get the accumulations of

unknownnesses that are just unknown and will always be unknown,

will never be anything else, because they're tailored to be

unknown. And if you don't think that can't be, look at the

word unknown. See, there's a perfect example. Yes, there is

such a thing as an unknown. There's a word, there's the

concept that you back it up, u-n-k-n-o-w-n, unknown, and

that is a something which is unknown, isn't it? I mean,

this is getting idiotic.



There's many a religion, man, which is built 100 percent on

a beautiful building which houses a nonexistence. And they

have created an unknown. That's what they have created!

See, it is something that can be created. And a thetan's

tolerance, as it rises, eventually gets up to a point where

he can actually confront an unknown without doing a thing

about it. He can recognize that it is unknown; it's a

manufactured unknown.



Like x, in algebra. There's another example. Somebody

writes x. All right, he can confront the fact that x is

unknown. Of course, if he's nowhere near an algebra teacher

he probably won't even be forced to find out a known for

that unknown, either. He probably won't even do the

equation. x + y - z = 0. Of course, you don't even know

what the equation applies to and neither does anybody else.

A mathematician is somebody who's gone overboard on the

subject of unknownnesses and he has to solve all of these

unknownnesses.



Now, if you don't think that isn't prevalent - if you don't

think that isn't prevalent - there is one of the things that

holds up auditors in auditing, is they get so upset about

the pc being in an unknown while he's trying to itsa that

they eventually grab hold of the meter and they say, "Oh,

well, let's see. Is it twenty years ago? thirty years ago?

It's thirty years ago. Yeah, well, we know about that now."

[Ron mimics heavy breathing] [audience laughter]



They say they're just helping the pc. It's just they can't

confront that "Well, and so, and so, za-za-za, za-za,

[etc.]. I don't know. I just don't know. It couldn't have

been so." And they think, "Oh, my God, if this goes on a

minute longer," you know? And they get the itsa line in for

themselves.



And then, of course, an itsa line can be too known. Every

once in a while some murder-mystery characters... The thing

is out because it is known. Every once in a while, some

murder-mystery writer has the postman do it, because nobody

ever sees a postman. See? It's too known. I bet there's

crime after crime on the books down here that remains

unsolvable because it was committed in too known a fashion.

See? It's a known itsa. Itsa of knownnesses.



Every once in a while you're doing an ARC break on some pc

on R2H and can't quite find out what it is, and you

eventually will hit "known communication," you know? Known.

Well, of course he knows it. He thought it was something

else. Why? Because he knew it. So you get how slippy that

can be, see? That's this "everybody knows" that is talked

about in Dianetics: Evolution of a Science, you see?

Everybody knows these things - that's known itsas - so you

never examine them. That's another way of having a known itsa.



But the pc's attention with his itsas rises up and down

this whole new version of the CDEI Scale, see? - goes up and

down, each one in those various stages. And he picks out

this and he picks out that and he picks out something else,

and all he's doing is saying "It is a ..." He is

identifying, in other words. He's identifying something.

And when he cannot identify something, then he identifies

by classification - identification by classification. "This

is a type of ..."



Psychiatry does this all the time. They say, "This is

dementia praecox case ..." They've gotten so idiotic with

it now that if somebody goes to that Chestnut Lodge, where

Graham - that publisher of News week and the Post that was so

against Scientology - where he went, and went home on

vacation and killed himself. He went home for a day; he was

supposed to come back. Up there at Chestnut Lodge ...

I've told you about it before. That's actually the name of

the joint; it's up around ...



And it's very remarkable. But it's very remarkable up

there. But if a person is transferred to Chestnut Lodge,

regardless of their symptoms before, they now have

schizophrenia. And I have asked this several times, trying

to get the answer. And I finally did get the answer and

understood it was the answer and after that it didn't

plague me. But it's a very interesting example of

interesting variation of itsa, see? And that is, they are a

schizophrenic because they were transferred to Chestnut

Lodge - because that's all there are at Chestnut Lodge! Well

now, that's by classification plus idiocy, see?



When you say "It is a cupboard," you have a pleasant

sensation of familiarity and knowingness.



You seldom stop to think that you have classified something.

You know something because you know of a similar something,

so you get your gradients. Your gradients of classification

establish familiarity in that particular direction.



Every once in a while this familiarity gets betrayed or

something like that and you get an ARC break with it. You

say, "It is a cupboard," and you open it up and find out

that it's a mouse home, or something, see? Somebody's using

it to breed white mice for something, or something. Or "It

is an automobile," you get into it and find out it's a

stage prop. A little minor ARC break then false itsa, don't

you see?



That's quite common in GPMs. Pc goes halfway through the

GPM and of a sudden does the right itsa. "Ha-ha, ha! These

are just railroad carriages with a painted backdrop of a

train going off in the distance. They're not trains." See?

Identified the character of the itsa.



This is all, then, on the subject of identification; it's

all on the subject of familiarity; it's all on the subject

of finding out; it's all on the subject making oneself

comfortable with what he is looking at; it's all on the

subject of straightening out one's various grades of ARC

with the universe. Now, what gives a thetan such a passion

for this, this is something else and not the subject of

this lecture, nor, actually, the subject of cases at the

present moment. But it opens up a very interesting channel

of research. What's this passion to itsa? See, that's an

interesting question.



But, that you do get tone arm action when you itsa and the

case does improve, this is well established. And this is

germane to all cases. So getting the itsa line in has

nothing to do with getting the pc's communication in. It's

"nothing to do," that's another action. That's more apt to

be the attention line - to you - or something of this sort.

Don't you see? That's getting communication in. That's not

the itsa line. No, getting the itsa line is getting the pc

to identify, separate, compartment, differentiate, inspect,

decide about, things in his bank - or, in an objective

process, in the room.



You want to see a tone arm fall, you could probably produce

it normally by saying "What's that? What's that? What's

that? What's that?" and have the pc itsa.



You say, "What's that?" pointing at the fireplace.



Pc says, "It's a fireplace."



Actually, you run it for a very little while ... This is

not a broad, general thing, because there are other factors

involved here. Pc is so introverted that it's painful for

him to extrovert his attention, and he can only extrovert

attention on a broad via. And other special conditions

arise here that does make this a pat process, you

understand? It's a pat process, though, as far as his bank

is concerned, always - not necessarily objectively. But I'm

giving the objective version here, which is a limited

version of it.



And you say, "What's that? What's that? What's that? What's that?"



Every time the pc says "ltsa." Normally, if a pc is not

having too bad a time and he isn't fouled up and you

haven't got him stuck on the track someplace and interested

in something else, you'll see your tone arm fall.



You can also see a pc getting very interested. All of a

sudden, he - "What is it? Yeah, it's a fireplace, but uh ... 

but ..." And he'll want to go over and take a closer

look at the thing to make sure it's a fireplace built out

of a certain kind of brick, see? His itsa's getting sharper.



You will see his identification rise.



Now, this is so good that a Touch Assist works.

Familiarization processes permit people to get drivers'

licenses who couldn't, by just touching cars - you know,

"Itsa, itsa, itsa car" is all he's running, you know? He

thought it was a buffalo for a while or something. Well,

listen, if he couldn't drive the thing, he must have

thought something weird - that I assure you.



So itsa, itsa, itsa, itsa - that's familiarization.



You want to teach some girl to type. Well, just have her

familiarize herself with the tools of the trade. Very

funny. She can get up to an itsa, itsa, itsa to a point,

and her ability will rise, rise, rise along with it, which

is very peculiar. But then this has something to do with

charge. The change of case has to do with the release of

charge because of the itsa. There's two things happen: The

individual who is really itsaing things is also blowing off

encysted charge caused by former confusions about them. And

that charge is encysted, and that is a force aspect and a

mass aspect with regard to this.



Here's the phenomenon, see? Here's this encysted little

thing here, see? And you said, "What's in there?" see?



And he says, "Oh, tsfoo-uh-zoo, and zoo-oo, zoo-oo,

zoo-oo." Tone arm is moving, see? Picking up those fingers

one by one off the clasped hands, you see? And "Well,

that's off.



Well, that's off also. I don't know. Let's see, see what 

.. what it is, what it is ... Oh! Palms!"



You didn't think anything was in there, did you?



That's just charge. And you see that tone arm start moving;

well, that's charge coming off of one of these bundles, and

the guy is looking and it's just a method of as-ising.



Now, while he's doing this, what drives some auditors

around the bend is he puts in a lot of additional itsas.

Why, that's of no great harm, see?



He says, "Itsa house. No, itsa car. No, itsa ..." See?

"Itsa fingernail - no, oh, no. No, no.



Oh, I know what this is! I ... I know what this is. I

know what this is. A watermelon!" And then (as an auditor

said to me last night) we get all set and we've both got a

watermelon and then all of a sudden he says, "No, it isn't

a watermelon, it's a diamond ring." And the auditor starts

feeling kind of confused, because, you see, his itsa line

is being thrown around by the pc. But only, only if the

auditor doesn't completely understand what he is doing.



He's trying to find something and then be content with it.

Well, that isn't auditing, man. An auditor's superior

knowledge should be that if the guy says it's a watermelon,

he for sure is going to call it a diamond ring shortly. And

if it really is a diamond ring, he'll never mention it

thereafter, because it's itsa'd.



But until it is itsa'd, he's going to call it all sorts of

things. It's going to be at a billion years, and it's going

to be 5 years into the future, and it's going to be back

trillions-five years, and it's going to be 465 years ago,

and it's going to be yesterday, and it's going to be now,

and it's going to be fifteen minutes ago, and it's going to

be trillions-ten ago, and it's going to be 18 trillion

years ago, and then all of a sudden it settles down to 125

billion trillion years ago.



Period. Bang - that's it.



You don't hear about it anymore than that, because he got

it, see? It's itsa'd.



So, a lot of apparent itsas come off in the process of

obtaining an itsa. And you almost could say that all the

running of a case, from the first moment of processing on

through to the final cognition of the case, consists of

conditional itsas. Conditional itsas. That's the way it is

for that circumstance and that certain place, you see? An

auditor should never have any thought that he's going to

get nothing but permanent itsas. Naturally, you go through

a GPM, you take off the items according to a plot - well,

that's the itsa of it!



Reason I don't have any trouble running a GPM is I have no

doubt about the itsa of a GPM, see? Thats it. It just is

what it is. There was nothing there to understand. It was

put there to louse you up and immobilize you and cut down

your power and ability, you see, and it's a bunch of

electronic circuits which go into a couple of boxes, and

they have a couple of things that fire both sides of the

thing, and they start you in the top, turn you upside down

at the bottom, and that's all there is to it. And you go

through and you see "Pow, pow, pow, pow, pow, pow, pow,

pow," and that's the end of the GPM. It's false itsa, see?

Actually, in most cases, not even much of a protest. You

know he's not saying "It should be some other way." Once in

a while a spotted intention with a false idea of the intention

will hang it up for a moment.



But that's itsa, see?



You don't have the immediate and direct itsa of "How come I

got into a situation where I started getting these things

in the first place?" you see? Well that's one of these big

itsas, see? This finally starts dawning on the pc. "What

the hell was I doing delivering myself up to a comedy like

this," you see, "every few trillion years?" you know?

"What's the matter with me? What'd I do? What happened to

me? Well, what's wrong with me 'ead? How come?" And you'll

find most pcs will start chewing on this after a while, and

they chew on it and chew on it and chew on it and chew on

it and chew and - they sometimes chew on it for two, three,

four, five, six, seven, eight hundred hours, see? "How

come?" There's no reason to blow your brains about it or

stretch your medulla oblongata all out of shape. It all of

a sudden will rise up in your midst and there it will be:

the itsa of "It is ..." See? "Oh that's why!" you see?



Now, the adroitness with which an auditor can use a little

attention to put the pc's attention into areas that can be

explored, that are easy enough for the pc to see into, that

will produce tone arm action ... is a very skilled

auditor. And that is what is known as getting in the itsa line.



Getting in the line does not consist of sitting back and

letting the pc talk for hours about nothing.



You understand, we do not frown on that if you can't do

anything else. You understand? But there is a much more

adroit level by which you put his attention on things that can

be identified by him, and which will therefor unsnarl the

thing called a problem or the bank or that aberrated area.



And it's the degree that you can obtain tone arm

action—that you can get that that marks the skill of the

auditor. That is the most skilled center zone of auditing.

It's almost so skilled that I hesitate to mention it again

because I've had loses along this line.



Now, if you can do that, there is its anatomy. If you can

do that, it would be known as this fantastic thing called "the

touch," "intuition" these other things would mount up back

of this.



It's quite awesome. So get in the itsa line isn't just

sitting there. It's actually doing something else.



Now, letting the itsa line exist is descriptive of the

lowest level of auditing on this, you see -  just letting the

itsa line exist. We'll get somewhere, see? We get somewhere

if we just do that.



But don't go speaking carelessly of getting itsa line in

unless you're doing just that. You're taking the

pc-to-auditor communication line, and you are putting it

right into zones and areas where he will find itsas. You're

putting the pc's attention in there to where that line be

"itsa a..." and a "itsa a..." and "Rur-rurrumda-ummrnmm. 

Well, a ..." you see and "rrrrr ra-ra-ra-rm, and so on, 

and so on, and so on. Well ... I guess - l guess

it was my complacence in college. That's what got ...

Yes, that's right.. That's what really got me in trouble. I

was complacent about everything. I was - that's it!" Bang!

You will all Of a sudden see your tone arm go right on

down, see? You see the charge come off of the case in the

bucket loads.



This is actually so skilled that it's the production of

cognitions. You can produce cognitions if you want to. You

can be that skilled. This is something that takes some

familiarization with yourself. You should know what the

tools are: The tools is [are] the line 1 minor, and that is

used to produce a searching attention on the part of the

pc; your whatsit line is left there more or less alone, to

produce this kind of phenomena. Why? Because the universe

is full of whatsit lines. The pc is suffering from too much

whatsit and too little itsa. And the net result of this is

of course to jam his itsa line. And you, the auditor, by

letting it flow, pull him out of the soup.



Of course, the direction of significances as powerful as a

GPM, as powerful as a super-duper engram, as powerful as

this sort of thing on the way backtrack, God 'elp us, and

so forth— man, that's putting in the itsa line on a

significance with magnitude. And that thing actually

requires considerable skill. You've got to have line plots

and the idea of cross listing, and the doingness of the

auditor is considerable. The skill is considerable, his

drills are considerable, and so forth. Nevertheless, even

those fail if you don't let the itsa line exist. You got to

leave that itsa line alone and let it roll.



Now, it also consists of not cutting it, and there are

numerous ways the itsa line can be cut in auditing. It's a

good drill to get somebody to come around and show you that

August 4 plot.



Have him find the number of ways you can cut that pc's itsa

line. Then make him pass the drill: How many ways could you

aberrate somebody by cutting the itsa line? And then he has

to find out what the itsa line is. That's an awfully good

drill, and that drives it home with a thud.



All right?



Audience: Mm-hm.



I hope you get a good grip on this one, because it's a

slippy one. And of course it's - trouble with it is, it's 

so known, see? It's an "everybody knows," you know? Itsa

line—obviously it's the pc's communication line. Even

though we went on saying "itsa" and calling it an itsa

line - well, why is it called an itsa line, and so forth?

And you'll see this one drift on through Scientology and 

always, forever, in some part of Scientology, this one will 

be too known. That I know, for sure.



But the very skilled auditor and the very well reputed

auditor and the auditor who gets terrific results will be

the auditor who has this one down cold. He knows an itsa

line backwards and forwards. Pc sits down with a present

time problem - it isn't necessarily a speed factor

involved - but the pc talks to him for a while and

mysteriously this present time problem blows up and the pc

is sitting right exactly in the middle of exactly what the

auditor wanted him to be in, and the pc is running on

exactly what they ought to be running, zippety-bop. And the

pc is happy and the auditor is happy and everything is

going as smooth as glass.



Naturally, there will be some jolts on the line. Every once

in a while you'll wish you had never opened your big mouth.

And I hope you don't get into as many of those as I have in

the last thirteen years.



Thank you very much.











--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

view for bookmarking

text only  mail this message to a friend

Sponsored by Fatbrain.com {*}  post reply    << prev · next >>  

subscribeto alt.religion.scientology 

return to search results 



 

 





SHOPPING ·  Yellow Pages ·  5¢ Long Distance 

Free Stuff  ·  Trade with Datek  ·  GET IT NOW @ NECX 

FREE downloads! ·  Auctions & Classifieds  

  

 

Home  ·  Communities  ·  My Deja News  ·  Power Search  ·  Post  

 





About Deja News  ·  Ad Info  ·  Our Advertisers 







--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Copyright © 1995-99 Deja News, Inc. All rights reserved. 

Conditions of use  ·  Site privacy statement reviewed by TRUSTe  



