FREEZONE BIBLE ASSOCIATION TECH POST



EXPANDED DIANETICS (XDN) TAPE 4 of 4



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



The XDN Tapes:



XDN-1 30 Mar 72 Expanded Dianetics

XDN-2 7 Apr 72 Expanded Dianetics and Word Clearing

XDN-3 7 Apr 72 Auditor Administration

XDN-4 7 Apr 72 Illness Breakthrough





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



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 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





********** TAPE XDN 4 *************



[We don't know the source that was originally scanned,

but we checked these against an original set of reels from

the 1970s and found various omissions which are marked

with ">"]





EXPANDED DIANETICS LECTURE No. 4



To the Flag Dianetic Auditing Team on 7 April 1972



7204C07 XDN-4





ILLNESS BREAKTHROUGH





> All right you got it! Now I'm going to give you the $99 kick.



I have been researching very, very hard. I have been

researching very, very, very hard actually to find out why

they kick in bad pictures and why they kick in pictures at

all. And, well, it's been a very long time I've been

looking at this, a long time. And I finally unraveled it.

So it is one hell of breakthrough.



I've been interested in it because we're working with

Expanded Dianetics, and it is one hell of a breakthrough.

It is actually why people get sick.



Pasteur came along in the last part of the 19th century and

he invented germs, and it gave everyone and his brother an

awful curve, because they do exist. But in the practice

there is a thing called predisposition. Here's some

marvelous words for you - predisposition. In other words,

before the fact, the guy is disposed to get sick. And then

there's precipitation and that means what precipitates this

illness.



Now he's already predisposed; this guy's going to get sick.

Now he's suddenly sick; that's precipitated. The illness

precipitated. And then he doesn't get well and that's

called prolongation. In other words, it's just continuously

gone on with. There's these three factors: predisposition,

precipitation, prolongation.



Now in most of these cases you were handling prolongation.

But you also could be handling Preventive

Dianetics - precipitation. Now those facts are merely

academic, and they have been known to medical professions

on this and other planets for a very long time. They've

never known how anybody got sick.



Now why do you get sick? Well, actually a body is made sick

or is given accidents by the being who is running it. Now a

fellow can be standing in the wrong place at the wrong time

and be hit by an artillery shell that is the only one fired

in this century in Central Park. Well, that's not

necessarily his fault. So barring that accident, which is

sort of the thing that triggers it in the first place. He

predisposes himself to a very marked degree to become ill.

If he's going to become ill he predisposes himself to

becoming ill.



How does he do that? Well, he misses the boat. He takes his

finger off his number, other cliches of this character. He

forgets to eat his Wheeties for two months, you know.

Something like this you see. He does something. He knows

this babe he's going with is out-ethics and yet he goes on

going with her, that sort of thing. She knows this guy has

already had 115 girlfriends but she thinks she's going to

be permanent. In other words, she predisposes herself. You

got the idea?



Now the precipitation is exactly at this point, EXACTLY at

this point - the threat of loss. Any inkling or belief or

idea that the person is going to be unsafe or insecure or

is going to lose and go a little bit further south and a

little less viable, if you want to use such a word. It

would be innumerable, absolutely innumerable reasons why a

person believes that this is going to occur.



But that is what is going to occur. It's going to be some

loss. His existence is threatened. His positions or

possessions are threatened or somebody around him is

threatened. It could he on the other two flows. It could

also be on flow 0.



In other words, he's going to become less secure, because

he's going to lose a body.



Something happens to his friends, therefore, he's not going

to have any friends. So, not going to have any friends, why

that will make him stand alone. He knows he can't - quote,

unquote - that he can't stand alone so therefore it is

inevitable that then something will happen

to him and then he won't be able to support the body and

then . . . Do you get the chain, the chain think? And that

will come down to his loss of a body. And that will come

down to loss.



All right. Well we know people get sick when they're

threatened with loss. We have known this for a long time.

As a matter of fact, on TV, in front of half of San

Francisco that was at their TV sets one time, I took the

announcer or the girl who was showing this. She was on

before the camera, she had a cold and she was before the

camera with a cold. She went off the camera. I saw her in

the waiting room. I had just given a talk, by the way, on

TV. Saw her in the outside vestibule waiting to go on

again, saw that she had a cold, just gave her a couple of

commands of straightwire. Ping, ping and that was the end

of her cold. I just asked her who she'd lost lately or

something like this. And got the exact person and that was

it. And she all of a sudden brightened up madly. Terrific,

terrific PR. And she walks back in the room to announce her

next product and instead of announcing what she's selling,

she says, "You know that fellow who was just on here . . .

You know I had a cold when I was talking to you before and

he said a couple of things to me and it's gone." Very good PR.



I used to do this occasionally, almost a parlor trick. And

I tried to teach the MOs to do it down here, and so on.

They kept it up for a little while but because TRs are not,

you know, just not, not being swift about the thing, they

dropped it out. But it probably would he, bunged up anyway.



But there you have an interesting display on a minor recall

basis of somebody getting well by having a threatened loss

spotted or a loss spotted, see?



You can actually take somebody who looks about 49 or

something, some girl maybe about 30 and she looks about 49.

She's lost her husband. You erase it just as a narrative.

It might take you hours and hours and hours and all of a

sudden have her again looking good. And if you carried it

up and did the whole chain and that sort of thing why you'd

have somebody looking about 25, see.



Well, we've done that sort of thing. We know about that but

what's the mechanism? Why does this exact thing happen? We

know that it happens but why it happens? Now if you knew

why it happened, boy could you do something with it.



Well, I'll tell you why it happens. The thetan promptly and

immediately mocks up mass to substitute for the loss

instantly. And that is exactly what he does. And if his

acceptance level or he is feeling goof-goof, his acceptance

level, you know, what he really could have - is low -that

is, he couldn't have very much - he will mock up pretty bad

things because nobody else wants those.



And now hold your hat. One of the basic uses of mock-ups

was magic curing, curing by magic. Now the way the magician

works in even primitive tribes, like in the Philippines, is

a woman has a horrible pain in her stomach. And the

magician, with sleight of hands, will lie clown and groan

and so forth and produce a brightly red painted stone from

his own stomach, at which moment she gets well and walks away.



Well, that would he very difficult to understand if you

didn't know old time match terminaling.

You can actually get two things to discharge, one against

the other if they are the same or very similar. So she's

got a pain in her stomach and she's told him that it just

feels like a red hot stone is in there and she's chattered

along. So he goes out and he gets his boy to paint a stone

red in a hurry and he comes back in, he lies there and he

got rid of it and so therefore she would get rid of it. And

he's given her a matched terminal.



There's a lot of technical stuff that we used to have about

this. This is all out of creative processing. But the way a

thetan cured himself - quote, unquote - was if he, body got

bashed in, he mocked up the incident so that the body would

recover from it.



Let's say his face was bashed in. So if he mocked up a

bashed in face - I'm really giving you stuff way the hell and

gone out of levels to end off the thing - but if he got a

bashed in face, the body got a bashed in face, then if he

mocked up that bashed in face, then the bashed in-ness of

the body's face would of course discharge against his

mock-up. And, theoretically the body's face would get all

right. Well, what do you know? It works once in a while.

What an idiot trick. And that's why he has mock-ups of all

his accidents, and all of his illnesses. And because he did

this urgently when loss is suddenly threatened and he

urgently mocks up, he tricks the other mechanism. He tricks

the cure mechanism. Curing by mocking up bashed in faces.



So he's about to lose the body, so the thing to do is to

suddenly mock up. And his impulse to mock up will

unfortunately trigger the fact that he has mocked up in the

past - bashed in faces; gutted stomach, half eaten by a

lion - but that was loss too. So it's a sympathetic note in

it. You see, one incident's similar to the other incident.

He didn't mock up a bashed in face excerpt he's might going

to lose his body. So his impulse to mock up is just (shout

word) see. And he just hits. He doesn't say, "Now I'm going

to mock up about 8 witches", nice, you see. He doesn't do

that. It's pung!



So Bessie Ann standing there, you suddenly say, "Your

father was just killed." And she goes, "Pow!" and she turns

white and she does this or she does that and she has a

horrible pain in her stomach, you got it? But because he's

now lost, she will continue to mock that up and you'll get

prolongation.



Now she either ceases to mock it up and she gets well or

she continues to mock it up and will get sick. And I don't

care how many gallons of antibiotics you pour into this

girl, if this happened to also result in a stomach somatic

or an infectious type of wound or something, it's not going

to recover. It's just not going to recover. You can pump

the penicillin to him just left and right and any other

antibiotic or drug that you can think of. And you could

make them more comfortable but that's about all. And then

they suddenly break out with it again and the trick is,

it's just whether or not they cease to mock up.



Now when they first were working with penicillin, it, they

thought, prevented inhibited, suppressed the reproduction

of the disease cell. The disease couldn't breed cells anymore In

other words, couldn't mock up. That was one of the first

theories on it. I don't know what theory they're operating

on now. But that was one of the first theories - that it

prevented mockup.



And I think it does just that, only I don't think it had

anything to do with the bugs.



If you can restore circulation to an area, the body itself

is perfectly capable of healing up almost anything except

maybe having lost both legs. But there are some animals

which even grow new tails. I remember a bunch of little

lizards that I had terrible overts on in my teens. Because

a lizard would be sitting there and so forth and you put

your finger on his tail, and he'd walk off and separate

from his tail That was it; he'd just leave his tail sitting

right there and so forth and you watch him a few days later

if he crawled around on screens and that sort of thing He'd

just grow a new tail.



So Lord knows what bodies will or won't do because they are

so considerably interfered with.



I'm not saying that bodies will grow new bodies and all

that sort of thing. So what is this cycle, see?



Threat of loss, mock up. Mock up what? Mock up having

matched terminals, something to cure it. He'd double

terminalled the thing. If I remember rightly, matched

terminals was four.



But he'd just "bang".



So you tell this fellow that he has lost all of his money

in the bank. You can't say now that he will always get

tuberculosis. You can't say he's going to get a cold. You

can't say he's going to get pneumonia, you can't say he's

going to come down with a nervous breakdown. You can't tell

what the hell he's going to do. do you follow? Because it's

only what he has in the past mocked up, to match what

things have happened in the past. So the sky's the limit.



So you've got this terrific variation, see. You got almost

infinite variation so nobody could get down to the bottom

of the mechanism because they just ran into pieces of the

mechanism.



Threat of loss, pong!



Now we already have had people running secondaries of loss

and all that, and there's a lot of technology about that.

We're not necessarily talking about that now.



Now I could give you more, I could go on talking about this

in its theory. But I'm sure you grasp it. There are various

reasons why they do this, that and the other thing. But the

main point that we've got here is that Expanded Dianetics

has just moved into the realm of havingness.



Now we used to run havingness for a few months and then we

would forget it for six months.



And then I would say to people, "I don't know why this

works but it's a good thing to run havingness." If you

listen to old tapes and that sort of thing you will find

that was the case, see. It's the discussion of the thing.

Puzzled me. How come? How come? "Look around here and find

something you can have. Good. Look around here and find

something you can have.



Good," and the guy feels better.



You say, "All right, all right," but the physical universe

isn't necessarily his friend. Now yes, by observation,

running havingness in any one of its hundreds of different

processes or forms would do some remarkable things. It

often did very remarkable things. Objective processes like

the CCHs, they do remarkable things. You know this is

Command Control Havingness whatever this line is.

Havingness is all I'm giving you the point on. Havingness,

see, was part of the CCHs. It gave people havingness.



And what is havingness? Is that is simply the idea that

they can have something. It's changing their mind and

basically you could put it down to a reassurance. So

they're sick, so the cycle goes this way. Pardon me.

They're threatened with loss, they mock up something

obsessively that they used to cure themselves with, bang,

and then you come along with havingness. And you show them

they still have something, and so they cease to mock these

pictures up.



Now as you run these things out, you are also performing a

very remarkable thing because they did those obsessively

and they really don't know they're doing them, and they

appear so magically and there are some other factors

involved, which you needn't pay much attention to.



But there they are. So the next time they lose something

they don't mock up that chain.



Now this can go so far that a person knows that he's losing

and he's got to keep it mocked up all the time. And you try

to audit him, and he's rather resistive. He isn't quite

sure that he wants to, "What do you mean...." So it looks

like he wants his stomach ache. He doesn't know where his

stomach ache comes from. He just knows above all other

things that he had better continue to mock up as solidly as

possible, because he's had it.



Now if you run out the shocks of loss, his fathers death,

you run out these various things, any somatic chain, do

down the chain, any emotion, any attitude - you are in to

some degree or another straightening out this threat. But

the fellow who will only run one chain, and I told you

earlier that I was going to tell you some more about that.

Now what he's really withholding is the fact that he's not

about to give up any mass because, boy has he had it.



Now the acceptance level of people is what gets in your

road in havingness. They have the idea that if they've lost

something then they can't have - And havingness is just an idea.

Like money, money is just an idea backed up by confidence

but don't try to tell a pawnbroker that. It's terribly real

to him. If you tried to tell somebody in one of these

international bankers and so forth that, or not, no, they

know money isn't anything. They just throw it around in

scoop shovelfuls. But you try to tell the local small town

rich man, who counts on his cash as the totality of his

power. Otherwise a very nasty character. You take this guy

and now you try to tell him and educate him into the idea

that money is not that important, you're going to lose.



And you're going to lose that argument. As a matter of

fact, he's going to think you're a silly ass. He knows

what's important.



Now that's what you're doing when you're talking to some pc

and he just runs one chain after another chain. Now there

can be something very bugged in this pc's auditing that

causes him loss. Now the strange part of it is that a

person can't exteriorize and apparently not have anything,

and he perfectly happy. Now there's an oddity. But they

didn't at that moment really lose anything.



Now why is it that after they've been exteriorized their TA

goes up? If they accidentally exteriorized and weren't

smoothed out in any way, what would happen to them? You

hang him out of his head, all of a sudden he said, "I've

lost," mock up - boom - mass, high TA.



If he accidentally startles himself half to death as having

exteriorized or something - I've had a pc stuck on the

ceiling that was begging me, for Christ's sakes, to do

something. I've had phone calls in the middle of the nights

from auditors and so forth. "What do we do, she is in the

attic and we can't get her out." That's right, fact!



Five auditors sitting around, one of them had exteriorized

and he couldn't get her back in her head and dumped her

body. And there she lies. Nobody could . . .



The funniest tale of all of that is, we've never had a

catastrophe with it. But the funniest tale of all of that

is the auditor who all of a sudden had a pc - the English

slang term was "do a bunk", which meant run away or

desert - and they started calling this "do a bunk". Actually,

this auditor had a pc and the pc did a bunk. Well, when

they really do a bunk, boy they do a bunk.



They're going past Arcturus, as I've said before, at 90

miles an hour, or two light years a second, and really did

a bunk. When they do that the whole body collapses and

their arms will hang down and they look like an old rag

doll that somebody has just grabbed half the stuffing's out

of. They really Bzuhhhh, that's it. They don't roll up on

the floor in a prenatal or something like that. They just

go. That's it, you know, boom.



And this auditor talked and talked because they're still in

dim communication, you see. And he talked and talked to

her - "Think of your husband, think of your children, think

of . . ." and so on and he talked and talked to her. He

couldn't get her to come back and pick up the body at all.

Till all of a sudden he happened to think, "Think of your

poor auditor," and she came back and picked up the body.



I was just a couple of minutes late. State cops were in my

way, but a Negro had been drowned and I was just . . . They

were in my road to a point where I couldn't get to the guy

and tell him to pick up the body again, where he would

have, don't you see. And they were busy resuscitating him

and that was the end of that. It was too late. He really

had done a bunk. He finished.



We've actually brought little kids back to life and that

sort of thing - just tell them "pick up the body," you know.

Now, you just tell them with tone 40, just say it around

the vicinity.



They're still around. And back they come again.



As a matter of fact, Washington, DC. got very mad at a

Scientologist one time. He decided he was going to do a

bunk and he was, going to drop the body and he did. He just

had an unpleasant afternoon with IRS, and he came back and

he just kicked the bucket. That was it, colder than ice and

he just wouldn't pick up the body again. And they told him

and they told him and they told him and he wouldn't. That

was it. He, by the way, has shown up again calling for his

favorite cigars at two years old.



But anyhow, the upshot of all of this is, is this opens the

door to a fabulous amount of action on your part which will

sometimes look very magical, because remedy of havingness

in various ways. Now the only thing that gets wrong with

the thing is, "What can the guy have?"



And you will find that I have just given a demonstration

here to the Flag Medical officers which is HCO B 7 Apr

1972, "Touch Assists, Correct Ones", which I call your

attention to. Now what's that all about? Yes, well, this is

all about equalizing and it says at the beginning that this

is how you tell a medical doctor about it. "On assists,

when you are speaking with medicos you talk to them in

terms of restoring comm in blood and nerve channels."

Notice that is in there; because that isn't what you're

doing. You're giving him back the havingness of his body.

And if he finds he can occupy this body and he can have it

back, he will start turning off the obsessive 'mock it up'.

Guy runs into a wall with a car. First thought - lose the

body, mock it up. So he's got a nice engram sitting there

and he will let go of it when you run a touch assist

because he becomes aware of the fact that he still has the

body. It might be in a little second hand shape but he's

still got one. And if you remind him of this today, and the

other thing that people don't do with a touch assist is

they don't give them the next day. I don't know, what the

hell, we got quickie touch assists of all other things.

Sure, it's short sessions. You just run it to a cognition.

But where's the touch assist the next day, and where's the

touch assist the day after that and where's the touch

assist the next day? Oh, the guy didn't get totally well,

so there must be something still there.



The body's ability to recover is phenomenal. Why won't it

recover? Well, he gets to thinking it over and he meets a

friend and he says, and the friend says to him, "Boy, you

sure were lucky.



I had my brother was killed in an accident like that. Yeah

. . ." It's a little loss, you see, And he goes out and

sees his wrecked car, a loss. You give him another touch

assist, the guy says, "Well, I still got a body." You get

the idea.



Now that could keep up, you could also run out the

incident, which is fine, and what you should do. But the

touch assist will go all the way down to somebody who was

very unconscious. And you tell them to, they can say yes by

squeezing your hand once and say no by squeezing it twice.

And they're unconscious and they've been in a coma for

weeks and you come in and you start picking up their hand

and making them touch the bed and make them touch the

pillow and that's another type of touch assist. Now all of

a sudden they come out of the coma but it's sort of little

by little. They're just mocking up being awful dead, that's

the only thing they're doing. They got a loss so, well, I'm

dead now."



So they're just mocking it up so thoroughly and it's too

horrible, facing life is just too horrible for words so

that on a gradient, why, they come up the line gradually

and come out. It looks quite magical. Well, what are you

really doing? You're restoring their havingness. In other

words, you are bringing about, again, a higher state of

security.



You'll find out that every person you are operating with at

this particular moment and anyone who will be run on

Dianetics, on Expanded Dianetics, is suffering if - because

they're ill and not doing well - they're suffering from a

threat of loss. Their security is bad. You'll find out that

you'll pick up people after their comm evs or before their

comm evs or something or they're about to be off loaded or

shot or demoted or, this goes hand in glove with it. What

is that? Security.



Now their security is so had that nothing will restore this

security apparently. If you just go on auditing out those

pictures, they themselves are the last thing they've got,

in spite of the fact they're killing them.



John McMasters, after he got tagged and so forth, the poor

guy let himself in for a hell of a blackmail line-up. And

this guy, however, afterwards began to go around and say,

"Well now, Ron should let people have their pictures." But

he said that after he himself got into severe trouble. He

actually apparently got across the lines of the Mafia. They

really set him up to fall on his face. And the loss was

great and then he was busy trying to compensate for this

one way or the other, which he easily could have done. But

he was finding some fault about it and the though, you

know, "Well Ron ought to let people have their pictures".

Well, what the hell.



It says a Clear can mock anything up. But you don't have to

do it unknowingly. It says it in Book 1. You want to know

how far a Clear can go. The ability to mock up is an

ability. But if it is done unconsciously it's hell of a liability. 

But nobody says people shouldn't have pictures.



Only let's be a little selective about it.



Now if the guy was good enough, he could mock up another

body. So he dimly recalls that this is true. And that

probably is what gives him this sudden impulse to mock it

up. But he knows he can't have, and knows he can't mock up

another body so he's got to repair the one he's got. So the

first thing he does is send for a doctor. Because the

doctor comes in, he, himself, is engaged in curing himself.



Now how is he engaged in curing himself? Now he's engaged

in curing himself by mocking up the terminal which matches

the condition of his body when it was killed in the Roman

Army in, only that isn't what's wrong with him.



So anyhow, the doctor comes in. He instantly keys in. But

he still has some reassurance. So the bedside manner is

very, very important to a doctor. Because, because he's

there reassuring the guy, he's trying to reassure the guy

the guy will at least still go on having this body. So

actually if his bedside manner was good enough, the guy

would get well.



Now, I mention to you and have mentioned in lectures, a guy

who treated TB could always detect TB just by laying his

hands on a person's chest. Now the people got well because

he expected them to. Just as simple as that. And that was

all there was to it. It sounds too simple.



But he was very, he's a person that you would be very aware

of. So they expected him to, he expected the patient to get

well. The patient had no other choice, to get well. He was

down there just south of Pasadena in California. He had a

hospital down there for a long time. He was very famous.

He's probably the most famous name in TB and his work was.

So what's this? What's this?



Well actually, if you run out the bad pictures, now the guy

has an explanation for what has been worrying him. Because

each time, do you see, he was about to lose something and

then he mocked something up and so forth, he was worrying

about whether or not he was going to lose it and this

problem and so forth. So he's still got the problem of how

he might have lost it, and he's still trying to answer

that. And when you run the engram chain you erase that and

then you erase his overts on the things and you erase a few

other things, and what have you got?



Well, he is relieved now because he isn't obsessively

mocking this up. But he will only be relieved if, at the

same time, you haven't overwhelmed him by trying to take

too much away.



Now if you suddenly go down the track and try to run pain

out of this character and try to run heavy engrams out of

this character, that's too much loss. So he doesn't do

that, so he will come back and not respond. He'll natter at

you and so forth, and he sounds like he's got withholds.

Well, yes he does have withholds. And the main withhold

that he's got is he's just not ,about to give up any mass,

thank you. He's finished it, only he doesn't even really

know that he himself has the withhold.



So he's very uncommunicative. So therefore, we have two

things that a Dianetic specialist would have to be able to

do. And one of those things would be to run a touch assist.

Sounds remarkable. And then run a touch assist sufficiently

well that you remember to run it the next day, and the next

day and the next day. And really run a proper touch assist.

And we have this 7 April HCO B. I did this quite a little

time ago. It is not the date of the touch assist. It's the

date of the HCO B just to keep the time track straight.



But this gives an explanation that will pass most anything,

and it does respond like that.

Standing waves, and the thing you're liable to come up

against is the standing wave is not necessarily described

in basic elementary physics. Now you're talking about

nuclear physics and so forth, and that is, a wave form

comes up and either because it meets another wave form, or

for some other reason, it just becomes a rigid form. And if

you can imagine an ocean wave not any longer rolling but

just sitting there all peaked. Well, electricity strangely

enough will do this and a thetan is very good at this because 

he's trying to stop further injury so when he mocks up at that point,

he mocks it up with a stop. And he's got the standing wave

stuck in his spine and his arms, legs. They're all through

the body. He'll just be a mass of standing waves.



As you do a touch assist, two things happen. It smooths

those out because his intention is, attention's going down

the line. But that's just the mechanical action. The truth

of the matter is you're making him aware of the fact that

he's still got a body - smoothly, smoothly, smoothly.



Now if you add to this a good bedside manner and you expect

that he will recover, he is reassured. And his reassurance

is such that he's willing to have another go at it, without

keeping it all so muddily mocked up. There's some hope.



Now the medical profession and other, the drug professions

and so forth talk about hope.



That's all they talk about - hope, hope, hope, hope. So it

must be a somewhat interesting thing. But it's a rather

pathetic thing to read a medical conference where they've

talked for 7 days and it's all about some miracle drug that

somebody someday might develop. It's really remarkable.



"We have a series of two cases we have tried this on and

there is much hope for it and we expect, and of course we

must be conservative in it." These wild, wild imaginative

something or others. They don't read their last decades'

minutes. They had the same number of drugs for which they

had great hope ten years ago but most of them are gone.

Most of them are gone.



Now it's not that they can't do a job. It's not that they

aren't needed. Nobody's saying anything about this at all.

When you get a broken leg, you had certainly better have

somebody who could put the leg back together again.



But now to get it healed. Because the guy has got a broken

leg over this broken leg. And now we're into the whole

explanation of what is psychosomatic medicine. That is the

whole explanation of it.



Now latter on, if somebody said to him, "You're a dog," at

the moment he got his leg broken, he will think of himself

as a dog while he limps, perhaps. And there we get mental

aberration.



This strange thought that keeps occurring to him. You got it?



So there really isn't anything else to it but the fact that

you, by reassurance - you've got a hope factor there. You can

imagine running a touch assist now, "Well, feel my finger.

Thank you, very good. Well, there's probably not much

chance for him so I. . . Feel my finger, you know.



OK, fine." You could say, "Well that matches his tone." But

it doesn't match what's wrong with him.



Now sometimes he'll tell you, "Oh, there just isn't any

hope for it anyhow," and so forth. He's just chattering. He

was responding to the same mechanism. But his havingness is

so low that he doesn't think it's possible. But at the same

time he doesn't think it's possible and he's given up and

practically quit and so forth. Why, he is still accepting,

to some degree or another, his havingness.



So therefore your first level of entrance which you can

pick them up from, from all the way into total

unconsciousness, coma for three months m a hospital on up

through to doing a touch assist to do something or other.

The guy is really quite, he's quite ill. He has pneumonia

or something. He's quite ill. They've come in, pumped him

full of antibiotics, fine, alright. Touch assist is about

all you can do to him. He can't even, he can't even

concentrate long enough to talk to you. High temperature,

something like that. It makes him aware of the fact he's

got it.



You say, "Yeah, well it's a sick body so who'd want it?"

Well, once in a while you run into somebody who says, "I

don't want this body anymore. It's too old and too messed

up and I don't want this body anymore. And I don't want

this body anymore," and so forth and they're going on and

on and on. You're just talking to somebody at the lowest

rungs of havingness.



Their idea of loss is fabulous.



So a person who is very, very ill, you could pick them up

the line with techniques like a touch assist, of which

there are several. I won't even try to catalog them at this

particular time.



There's an awful lot of literature on this. I did this

basically because there's some errors in the literature.

Other people have written them. They've never seen me do

one. So I did one, so let somebody write it up.



You call actually make an unconscious person touch a

blanket, "Touch that blanket, you know," "Touch that

blanket." Still talking, still communicating, "Touch that

blanket, thank you," moving their hand. And so forth. You

can do a touch assist on them and so forth. Hold onto their

hand and say, "When you have felt my finger, squeeze your

hand." The guy's totally unconscious. You wouldn't believe

that he would, but he will. He'll give you a little pulse,

a little pulse and so on. Touch at the knees, thighs and

the feet, the head and the ears and so forth each time. And

he'll start picking up on it after a while. He's getting

what medical care he can, fine. That's all part of the same

thing.



Now where does havingness come in? Well, now you've got the

session, and you had certainly better learn how to run

havingness. And if you're going to do anything at all with

Specialist Dianetics, you better learn something about

using havingness. And I'm not going to tell you all there

is to know about havingness in this particular lecture

because there's a lot to know about it. But PAB 72, page

25, gives you material about havingness.



Now you realize, of course, that all of this material is

giving you, by observation and experimentation, is giving

you the observation experimentation and so forth, that went

on about the subject of havingness. It isn't until now that

you have the exact reason it works. Now in the tapes on the

subject, in lectures and in this literature itself - I

haven't read it all - it maybe, I said I do not know how it

works or why it works, so just ignore that in the

literature. This just tells you how to do some of these things.



We also have PAB 23, 2nd April 54, and it's an

item - Havingness, "Starvation for energy is the keynote of

any case that maintains facsimiles in restimulation." Now

as you read all this, you will say, "Well he knew all this

all the time. Why are we talking about this now?" No,

that's an observation. I didn't know why. See, I didn't

know how, it's true starvation for energy. Yeah, but

starvation for energy, that's saying something else. So the

guy's energy-starved. so he'll maintain a facsimile and so forth. 

Well, see that's not quite on the groove. You got it? But 

again it is perfectly honest because I did not know exactly why 

it worked. But I knew it's a starvation for energy. Guy's

starved for energy, he'll maintain a facsimile. Why?



All right. There's Professional Auditor's Bulletin number

49, The Remedy of Havingness. Just why a thetan should get

himself so completely snarled up in energy might be an

entire mystery to anyone who did not realize that a thetan

has to cut down his knowingness and his total presence in

order to have a game. True, perfectly true, but it is not

the basic reason.



All this, however, is material which you should know. Now

it's not for release HCO Training Bulletin June 11th, 1957

"Training and CCH processes not to be copied. The

variations in some of the most potent processes are not

included in this Training Bulletin but will appear in the

Student Manual when published in September, '57." Now this

was labeled that way simply because it was experimental at

that time. You find out this is all standard now. What are

you looking at? You're looking at the TRs. But they

basically were a havingness process.



Now we have CCH 88, Enforced Nothingness - HCO B April 11th

'58. Now you'd say, "Well, the easy way out of this is just

to cure him of mocking up these facsimiles and take away

this automaticity. This automatic "mock-it-up" the second

he's going to lose something.



That'd be easy. Noooooo, nooo, no. I'm afraid that isn't

true and that's why you saw creative havingness, the

creative processing laid away in mothballs, it's not in its

grave. Because he can restimulate moments of loss and think

he is losing harder and therefore mock up harder and they

get solid. You can shoot a TA up every now and then on pcs.

You could do remarkable things with creative processing but 

it has a limited action in that every few pcs you really lay 

an egg. So it's too limited, see.



HCO B of September 12th '58 gives havingness, new commands.

Factual havingness - "Look around here and find something

you have. Look around here and find something that you

would continue. Look around here and find something that

you would permit to vanish." Now that isn't one, two, three

because they can't do the third one usually until you've

done the first one. But sometimes they'll obsessively do

the third one - Permit to vanish and so forth.



Now that opens up a process which I don't know if we have

on record here. That opens up a process which is fabulous.

it's absolutely fabulous. It's the weirdest process that

anybody ever had anything do to with. And you know the

process but it may not he expressed in these issues which

I'm giving you here. And that is, "What will be here in

..?" "What around here will be here in one minute?" Now

that's right on the button because that's continuum into

the future.



And that's why it was so weird. The reactions to that

process. "Look around here and find something that will be

here in ... " and you keep extending the time span. And

sometimes you, the guy is, says no, he can't find anything,

you see, for a minute, you know. Well, it's too bad because

you've given him a lose. So you always cut it early, you

know. What'll be here in one half a second? One second?

Something like that. Oh, yeah, he can find things that will

be here in a second. Then you can build him up to a minute.

"What'll be here in ten minutes?" "Uhhhhhh." But you keep

building him up. You see what you're doing? You're giving

him a future, which is right on the groove of this. Loss,

he thinks he's going to lose it forever. All right.



Now we're really getting down someplace here. Here's April

21, HCO B April 21, '60 "Presession Processes", HCO B 1

September 1960, "Presession II", HCO B of September 8th

1960 which is the Presession of the first Saint Hill ACC

and it gives commands for presession II-X - that's

experimental. And by the time that had been grooved in, we

then got - HCO B 22 September 1960, "Presessions and

Regimens". Regimen would be a certain settled schedule of

things. Now strangely enough this Regimen One-Six in here

is ask the pc what's wrong with him and we will run,

something else. Sounds like if you read it fast and if an

auditor just did it time and time again, it'd be perfect Q

& A. So it's things like that that laid some of these, so

that the auditor starts going something like this: "What do

you think is wrong with you?" "My wife." "OK, we'll run a

wife. All right, what about your wife? Good. All right,

what's wrong with you?" It won't work. You'd have to

flatten what you ran. You had to know something about F/Ns

and so forth.



All right. And then we've got 29 September 1960, HCO B,

Havingness and Duplication. And then we've got 6 October

1960, Thirty-Six New Presessions. Got such things on it as

"Point out something in this room you could confront". And

what this did would be have and confront which merely asked

the fellow to go slightly toward something when you said

confront. You know, there it is, don't run away. And have

would be an actual in-flow of some kind or another.



But actually these are not necessarily "run a have and a

confront". You can still do this. These things are all

runnable but it isn't necessarily true that you would have

to run an alternate side.



The only, you're not worried about flows. Most of these

things were put out on the basis that there were flows, and

there could be a stuck flow and the fellow would boil off

and so on. So there had to be a balanced flow of some kind.

Boil off is usually a flow running too long in one

direction, is the datum back of that. So you broke the

command to get the flow going the other way.



And here's October 27, 1960 "Revised Case Entrance", and it

gives you failed help which, of course, is reassurance. Did

you ever think of help as a havingness process? Yeah, well,

that's the bedside manner of the doctor. If you're a

confident sounding and looking auditor why you will find

out there is no great difficulty in getting a pc up the

line. Well, so if you ran out all the time he wasn't helped

he might have some . . . and he's sure been trying to help

himself.



Now this gives you 14 September '61 is "New Rudiments

Commands". But we wouldn't be too interested in that at

this time. And CCH data. I remember when I really ran some

CCHs at Saint Hill on a TV demonstration. And all of the, all of

the auditors in the lecture hall groaned and Reg Sharpe was

terribly disappointed and people were actually quite upset

because it was quite obvious that I didn't know how to run

CCHs. The way you ran the CCHs is you acted like you were

mad as hell and overran each process. And I was just going

to a change or a no change on the pc from one to the next

to the next to the next to the next. The pc felt great, but

that was beside the point. You could have knocked me down

with a feather. They were all very polite about it, of

course. I had to reteach everybody how to run CCHs and they

started getting some results.



HCO B 9 February '69, here's some havingness and so on. 

And then there is Scientology 8- 8008 and in this edition at

least there is Expanded GITA. Now this was a mockup

process, positive gain and this is a mockup process. But

this all of a sudden opens the door to something with you,

because this is a marvelous list of items, what a gorgeous

list of items.



You're gonna half kill a pc if you ran some of these, I

mean, ran them as engrams. I'm just looking, men stopping

at motion, changing motion, women changing motion and so

forth.



Things, God, the devil, spirits, bacteria, glory,

dependence, responsibility, wrongness, rightness, insanity

and so on. A lot of those items, though, are very hot

attitudes, very, very hot attitudes.



When you ask a pc to give you his altitudes, you're really

leaving him in the dark. The guy has got 1,665

misunderstood words just on the morning papers he's read,

much less anything sensible. You expect this guy to say

something to you; he isn't going to say anything to you.



Say, "What attitude do you have?" They don't know the word

for it, see? But if you did this sort of thing you'd have

to clear words. See, if you're giving him the words they

have to be cleared. If he's giving them to you, why, you

usually don't.



But this is interesting because it gives you really what's

going on. A person can waste something before they can have

it. And you can actually watch somebody walking around and

working and you can tell after a little while exactly what

he has to waste. That's the funniest thing you ever saw in

your life. You know what he can have but, you'll be able to

you'll be able to spot finally what he can have. But you

can spot what he'll have to waste. One of the tricks.



Well, one guy, he could waste file cards. I was watching

somebody work one day and boy could he waste file cards.

Wow. He actually needed about four file cards, so he wasted

about 50 to get about 4. I was watching all this proceeding

and so on. That was all he was wasting around there. He was

wasting file cards. He really could waste them. Gave him a

great deal of pleasure too. Now, by the simple action of

just handing him file cards and which file card did he

have, so on and throw them away dramatically not covertly,

and put a hundred file cards in the waste basket one at a

time and so forth. Why, the guy finally got reluctant to do

this. What's the matter? "Well, they might have some value,

you know."



I used to wonder if sometime some persons weren't wasting,

if some persons actually weren't wasting processing or

wasting something like that. They couldn't have it and so

on. And I've never, found anything to support this really.

But I know they will waste things in an organization, like

machines and things like that. And they will sometimes say

they don't want to, be audited or something like that. But

it usually has another explanation. Processing is terribly

valuable.



Page 120 of Scientology 8-8008 and then we have PABs Book

4, PAB No. 50, "Remedy of Havingness - The Process". It

says, "When in doubt remedy havingness." This was a motto

which can well be followed by an auditor doing any process

on the preclear. That's so true.



Now what does this do, what does this do to your Expanded

Dianetics? I'm going to tell you everything you do with

havingness because, as you see, there's quite a few

references there and there's probably quite a few tapes on

the subject, if they're still around. Well it means you can

start a session with havingness. And it means you could end

one with havingness. And it would be something like putting

a high speed zip onto your line up.



We've got one case right now who always runs the same

thing. He's not about to run anything. It doesn't handle

what's wrong with him, too, he said. I think it's

remarkable. Been audited all over the place and now he's

telling us he has a hidden standard. He's sort of fending

off the auditor, he's being rather contemptuous, sneering,

snide is the term being used and so on. But he's - here he

is now telling us that he never made any case gain, or

words to that effect, or something of that sort, and he

always runs the same thing and we haven't handled what he

did. Well, he's had XII auditing and everything else. Now

what's the matter with this guy. From what I've told you in

this lecture, it should be rather obvious! He is on his

last thetan penny, boy! If you made him spend that he would

be a bankrupt thetan.



So, now, I can't tell you precisely whether this is true or

not, whether he would best respond to some touch assists or

to some havingness, but that would depend on how sick he

is. That would depend on how sick he is. If he's so sick

that it's difficult for him to sit in the chair, it

certainly would be touch assists. Where the touch assist

might have some slight advantage over trying to talk to

him, because he's very withholdy. If you can get him to

answer you on a touch assist you could at least get him

into communication.



Now, in-sessionness could always be increased with a touch

assist. Now I find out touch assists have normally been

thrown into - relegated, I was going to say, which means put

over into - the category of, the guy has banged his hand or

burned his wrist, and they think that is it. Otherwise, if

he's just got a slow pain in the back or something like

this, or a constant earache or an infected boil or

something, you wouldn't use a touch assist. Well, I don't

know where that think would come from. You see, it was

never there to begin with, it's just that they get used for

that, so people think they are for that. Somebody has a

tremendous amount of stomach upset. Well, if you gave him a

touch assist, you couldn't audit him maybe too much, but

you could give him a touch assist every day you would find,

until all of a sudden, he'd start improving. As a matter of

fact, if you gave touch assists long enough you can get rid

of warts.



He's probably weeks and weeks of five or ten minutes of

touch assists a day, weeks. See, two things have happened,

nobody has continued the process to find out what it could

do and it's just been relegated to a quickie emergency on a

little local injury. Well, it has much wider application

because you're giving the guy a body. He knows he hasn't

got one, so he can only waste one or something. But you can

change his orientation.



Now you leave a touch assist flat or you overrun one or

something like that and you mess it up one way or the

other, and then, of course, you're in trouble. But it's

pretty hard to mess one up unless you get very

absent-minded. The guy has the faintest of cognition's and

so forth, come off the thing. Where he has a surge of pain,

and so on, that was a jolt somatic, you say "Well, that's

good, that's fine." If the person was in very good

condition it would be fine too. It wouldn't be needed the

next day. But you're dealing with sick people. They're

going to be sick the next day, and do you follow? They've

been knocking themselves off for the last many quadrillion

so they're expected to get sick in a split instant - I

mean, get well in a split instant when they been sick so

long, it isn't going to be done. There is no magic button

because a thetan doesn't convince that fast.



So, the long and the short of it is that you could take

that case that we were just discussing and you might find

out just experimentally, just run him on a bit of a touch

assist or something like that. You could also find his

hidden standard because there's a computation sitting there

someplace or another. But, it would be very very smart,

before you began that session to find out anything about

hidden standard or something like that, is find a

havingness process that worked. Run that, briefly at the

beginning of the session. If you can get a havingness

process to run to an F/N, why great. Then if you get the

right one why, it'll produce an F/N. And at the end of the

session, why, finish him off so as to make up for the mass

you've taken away.



That's what's important. Now, what you're doing, is

straightening up his obsessive, cockeyed mocking-upedness.

So you see, as you're running it out you're straightening

up the bank.



Well, that's important to do, that because, that's what's

making him goofy. But at the same time you give him back

some physical universe.



Now, you're going to find some guys who won't want anything

to do with this physical universe. Now they're not about to

have anything to do with it, and so forth, but they will

take some reassurance and that's havingness too. So, in

such a case they will respond to one or another havingness

process. And the test of a havingness process is to go way

the hell and gone back, I'll give you a thing, is you get a

can squeeze, run a couple of commands of the thing and if

it broadens the command squeeze you've got his havingness

process.



Now, it might be of interest to you on this case we were

just discussing, that if we simply gave him a little bit of

a can squeeze, you might find that he had a very very small

movement. Now, as long as, then, a person on a can squeeze

has a short movement you know you're up against havingness.

That is, it doesn't give you much of a surge when the cans

get squeezed. So you just better make it the standard

operating procedure; pick up the cans and he's comfortable

and you've got the session all going and so forth, give it

a can squeeze. Now, if he's got a whole dial wham, and that

sort of thing you're just going to be wasting your time

running any havingness. Go ahead and run what you're going

to run. But if this person was ill you would still follow

it up with some havingness at the end of the session. Now,

you say "Well but he had this terrific win and he's F/N,

cog, VGIs and he just feels marvelous and something changed

then and boy that's great!" Well let him tell you all about

that and so forth and run some havingness. Because he's

been sick. Now what's the test? He's been sick that's the test.



He wouldn't be getting Expanded Dianetics unless he were

running a bit sick. Do you follow? Well, why is he sick?

Because he is mocking up obsessively trying to make up for

his great loss! That's all there is to it. That's why he's

sick. And it's as simple as that. So now if you weave

havingness into it by a can squeeze test, if you don't get

much surge, you better find his havingness process right

away. And it doesn't matter, you don't wear one out today,

and never use it again tomorrow, and that sort of thing.

They run for a long time, eventually they'll run out. And

then you find a new havingness process. You're alerted by

the fact that the fact this guy isn't doing too well on

this havingness process now. He was, but he isn't now. And

it's not a precise action.



But it is a precise action to get a can squeeze, find out

how long it goes. If it isn't going to go very much he's

not going to give you any engram. Also, he isn't going to

erase his pictures.



And you have somebody who will not erase a picture, who

does not get an erasure. Now, you can straighten it out

with an L3B, and you should. But, you will find, magically,

that the individual will, all of a sudden, begin to erase

pictures when his havingness is up enough to make up for

the fact that he is certain that he has lost all. It's

certain he's losing, losing all, mocking up obsessively,

and so forth. Well, you show him he's still got something left.



Now, there's probably more that can be worked out on this

subject because you make a breakthrough like this, there's

more can be worked out. But there's sure plenty of material

here to work with. And if you do that, and you make that

your standard operating procedure on the thing, well, I can

assure you, you will have some remarkable changes of case.

Not only will the guy then straighten out his bank, but

then he gets into the reassurance that it's okay.



Now those incidents then which have to do with threat and

loss and that sort of thing are of great interest to you.

They're of considerable interest to you. And when he gives

one of those, let us say, you had a long fall on "mother's

death" and you had a long-fall on "exhilaration" I am sure

that you would take "mother's death." You're not going to

push the whole subject over into running nothing but losses

because there's many covert ways to lose things.



Now, do these guys make sense to you that you're auditing

right now? They make more sense.



All right. Well, I'm sure we can make some fast headway on

the thing. And there's one or two or three of these cases

you would find yourself grinding a bit on, otherwise. But

the thing to do with them, the thing to do with them is to

restore their havingness. Those that are chronically ill

and are gimping around and falling on their heads, of

course, hard to get into an auditing chair, and talk, that

sort of thing, well, you've still got touch assists that

you can work on them. So, just as a standard action you can

add it in the program.



One more thing I want to tell you about a program is every

time you add something onto a C/S except rudiments, you put

it over on the margin in the program. In other words, you

don't write a C/S, something or other, something or other,

without putting it over on the program, if it's extra to

the program. 



TRANSCRIPT ENDS HERE





( The Tape continues)



> So therefore the program doesn't look like you ran three 

> actions but actually the C/Ses say that you ran 14.

> Do you follow? You never, by the way, run a case at all 

> without a program. Don't ever pick up a folder and run it 

> without a program of some kind or another. Always do a 

> program. Don't say, "Well it's only gonna be one C/S that's

> different. Well there's one session. We're just gonna do 

> one session on this thing. There's no sense in putting 

> up a program." One session - one program. Because you'll

> find out that'll become two sessions and then it'll be something 

> else and then you'll wander off into the far blue yonder and 

> nobody's got a ... he hasn't got a programmed case and that's 

> where they all go adrift. So that means that you had better amend 

> the programs which you have on these people. Just amend it to 

> whatever action you're going to take with Havingness. And that 

> could be simply amended by just writing across the top of your 

> program or over to the side and so forth, "Havingness added each

> session", or something, or "Havingness added before the body of 

> the session has begun", or whatever you decided to do with this 

> guy with regard to Havingness because you're not going to start

> all of your sessions by running Havingness because it won't be 

> necessary but you're going to have to start some of them for sure 

> and actually if you just ask the guy to can sqeeze once you can 

> tell whether you're going to have to run this case with Havingness

> before we start a session and then run it afterwards. All of them 

> you're going to run the Havingness afterwards. That's for sure.

> 

> Okay? All right! Well I hope I haven't given you too many 

> misunderstoods and I'm giving you a rather long lecture here. 

> Actually, it's a pair of lectures and if you notice, they're quite 

> separate one from the other, so that you should have very, very 

> good luck on this because you're straightening out the two things 

> which make a person ill. 

> 

> When I look at the number of doctors and the number of places 

> and times and when I look at myself back in the West Indies or 

> some place like this God knows when and where and so on, I 

> always used to look at these cats and I used to say, "There's 

> something to know - there's something here to know. What is it?" 

> I"ve been asking the question for a long time and finally answered 

> it with a crash - so there you are. Thank you very much.



END OF TAPE 

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

