5510C03 4LACC-2 The Fundamentals of Scientology -- The Rudiments of Auditing
                (Part 2)

     Here are the reasons why the human mind has not been solved:

           1. I don't know.

           2. No idea.

     To know about something, is is necessary to not-know it first.  This was
an incomprehensibility to philosophers of all ages.  To understand the source
of ideas, you had to understand "no idea".  One has to be able to not-know
something in order to know something about it.  Dialectical Materialism is a
dramatization of "no idea".  "No idea" is a workable concept, but as long as
the Dialectical Materialists are only dramatizing it and don't know it, it is
unworkable.  Dialectical Materialism says that all new ideas are the result of
two old forces.  Hence no idea can bs really new.  So there is no possibility
of getting a new idea.  If someone dramatizes something, as with the
Dialectical Materialists, it must have existed earlier as a postulate that
went solid.  Things begin with a consideration and end with a solidity, e.g. a
dramatization or a solid reality.  So an idea is senior to all matter and
conditions.  Above that is the thetan in his native state.  If a thetan wishes
to return to his native state, he often bungles it by assuming that hs is in
native state, when he is actually in very bad shape.  This leads to the idiocy
that everything that is true of a thetan's native state is what continues to
be dramatized, clear down to the bottom of the barrel, and that every
aberration is a reflection of native state and the first and second postulate
theory [Axioms 36 and 37].

     Native state is having no idea.  The thetan knows all about all.  He has
no ideas, because he has all the ideas there are.  Now he says that he will
have an idea.  Here, we get Axiom 36: the first postulate gives the second
postulate power.  So the thetan in native state knows all.  He then makes a
first postulate: that he has no idea.  From here, as per Axiom 36, he can make
the second postulate: that he can have an idea.  This is an harmonic on native
state, but it is alter-ised, so it persists and we get time.  The force of
having an idea is the statement that he didn't have an idea before.  An idea
is a barrier, a stop on the track.  Even a manic idea or a win can be a stop.
So we get:

           0. Native State: The thetan knows all but has no specific idea.

           1. First Postulate: No idea.  I don't know.

           2. Second postulate: A specific idea.  This is an harmonic on
              Native State: "I know something."

           3. Third Postulate: Forget.

           4. Fourth Postulate: Remember.

     For the first time in the history of mankind it has become safe for man
to know something.  It was not safe before because you'd stick to it, because
every mystery could then pull you into it.  The more you knew about it, the
more you were enveloped by it.  This gives the manifestations of a thetan's
blackness, dropped havingness, illness, etc.  Things known on a second
postulate basis are solid and persist.  Studying anything will produce this
phenomenon.  Scientology has been a safe subject because it has progressed
toward simplicity and has never pretended to contain all knowledge.  There's a
limited amount of knowingness and unknowingness available.  What gets scarce is
unknowingness.  We let "unknow" go on an automatic basis; we don't take
responsibility for it [so it gets pulled in on an unknowing basis.] You'd
never get into trouble in processing if you kept on supplying lots of no-idea
instead of using old no-ideas.  When you keep on using old no-ideas to get new
ideas, [eventually] the new ideas jam into the existing no-ideas which have
become so precious that we interiorize into them.  Here, we've ignored the
first postulate which provided the power for the second postulate.  One gets
stuck in dramatizing no-idea and loses the volitional ability to postulate an
idea into existence.  People who get stuck in "know about" are in the second
postulate.  If they exteriorize, it's into the blackness of the third
postulate, which is the harmonic of the first, not-is-ing the knowingness;
thus: "I've forgotten it.  " The fourth postulate is "remember": an
alter-isness of a not-isness.  This is getting to be very persistent stuff.
From this sequence, we get most solidities and spaces, except for directly
postulated solids and spaces.  [Perhaps the fifth postulate would be
"occlude".]

     All you need to get space is lookingness, which is a dramatization of
knowing.  In lookingness, space is on an automaticity.  That's why space
continues to exist.  This automatic space, because it's automatic, tends to
fold up on people, producing condensed spaces and figure-figure at lower
levels.

     The above was discovered by the fact of the relative effectiveness of
running "something you wouldn't mind forgetting" compared with the bogginess
of "Something you wouldn't mind remembering." Not-knowingness evidently is the
only solution to prevent interiorization into bodies of knowledge or solid
objects.  Per Axiom 36, if you take out the first postulate, you can knock out
the second one.  For instance, "You realize that over there there's a bus
running." It doesn't affect you, does it?  Until you knew there was a bus over
there, and then you probably got a picture of it or something.  Get the
trick?  Probably a counter-trick would be saying, "I don't know what's
standing right here," inventing something to stand here, then remembering you
said you didn't know what was there.  So there's automatic "I don't know"
before the knowingness.  Running an "I don't know" process for two hours gives
more gain than 50 hours of "I know".

     The unworkability of "remember" processes shows that psychoanalysis never
gave stable gains.  It gives solid ridges if you keep remembering.  You can
as-is it by having him recall all the times he remembered, or better still,
use forgetting to dissolve the ridge.

     Take any troublesome engram, ask the PC what he doesn't know about it,
and it will blow in minutes.  It upsets the PC to have him make a perfect
duplicate.  But this way only causes fogginess if you don't acknowledge well
and stay in two way comm.  This also solves the case with the stuck picture.
It's also safe to use

     "What don't you know about it?"

on chronic somatics.

     Not-knowingness is not the goal of humanity or scientology; it's just the
barrier that has to be crossed.


