This is December 15th, first afternoon lecture, first hour. Today we
 are going to continue with Standard Operating Procedure and uh.. although 
 the last couple of lectures were on Issue 3, uh.. today I realized that I 
 had started to give you, really, Standard Operating Procedure Issue 4; since
 it was at variance with the next you have there. And uh.. you see more and 
 more details and data comes in, tougher cases start to crack and the 
 question of "What did they crack on?" and so on becomes very pertinent. 
 
 Uh.. you don't have to worry at all about a Step One case or really 
 a Step Two or a Step Three case but brother, when you get down to Step 4, 
 Step 5, Step 6, uh.. anything that can be done to chop down the amount of 
 auditing time on this case is a boon to the auditor. 
 
 So we now have Standard Operating Procedure Issue 5. Now don't ask 
 me what happened to Issue 4. Issue 4 sort of went by while I was standing up
 here talking to you. And uh.. as far as the lecture material is concerned, 
 which I gave you earlier I kept saying Standard Operating Procedure Issue 3
 and uh.. wherever I said that, you can put in there "Issue 5" because Step 
 One is completely unchanged; it's just exactly as I gave it to you. 
 
 The Standard Operating Procedure Issue 3 which is in the book is - 
 and don't underestimate this - an intensely workable procedure. But Standard
 Operating Procedure Issue 3 simply changed Step One and put Spacation in and
 Step 5 took the Case 2 right on down the line - from Case 2 down - and 
 rather radically changed the procedure so as to simplify and codify that 
 procedure to make it very easy for the auditor to go on and spring these 
 5's. I've done enough tests on this later material now, that uh.. I'm very 
 confident in handing it over to you. 
 
 The facts of the case are that a Step 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 are badly 
 out of orientation and are in one of two conditions. They either have so 
 thoroughly fought loss of any kind, fought loss; they've so thoroughly 
 fought it, that they are now in a situation where they hold on to anything.
 And we go just downscale on the DEI cycle just a little bit and we find out
 that the case below the level who resists all loss is the case who has lost
 so much that it abandons anything. And we can categorize then any and all 
 cases above and beyond Case One in these two categories and it doesn't 
 matter whether we have a.. an "abandon all" case or a "hold all" case; the 
 step is the same for that case. 
 
 Now I have to go into this a little more deeply with you. Now 
 fortuitously we have talked a great deal in these 'lectures about cycles of
 action. I've just beaten cycles of action practically to pieces here. Some 
 of you have thought perhaps these lectures are not.. not very thoroughly 
 plotted. Truth of the matter is when you have a plot like this book here you
 don't need much plot in the lectures because you're going over the same 
 material over and over and over from different viewpoints and different 
 angles until an individual can compare it with his own experience thoroughly
 enough so that by that alone he grasps and owns the subject. And one day 
 you'll suddenly find yourself in complete ownership of this subject. 
 Nobody's trying to.. to either give it to you, you're not trying to take it;
 the point is that it is knowledge and the knowledge must, to become your 
 knowledge, become yours. You are not on a standpoint of being convinced of 
 the truth of this knowledge. That is the wrong tack. To look for proof, to 
 demand proof and that sort of thing is no part of knowledge. That is a very
 wishy-washy uh.. way to get away from knowing anything. A person who is 
 demanding proof and trying to obtain conviction is playing a game of 
 pretense that is above all pretense. Because from the first moment you 
 decided to be, the next instant you asked for conviction that you were. And
 
 -1- 

 of course a conviction that you existed, coming exteriorly from yourself, 
 was antipathetic to your best interest. And so we get the first instant of
 conviction that you were you - that was yours, but then you asked to be 
 convinced that you were and back and forth straight down the interwoven 
 track of aberration and down tone scale, it is simply this play of "Let's 
 pretend I am convinced" instead of "Let's pretend I know." That's of very..
 you.. if you've.. if you grasped that principle by itself you will 
 understand, perhaps for the first time, what is meant by knowingness. 
 
 We're going right on here with Standard Procedure Issue 5. But you 
 have to know these things because this is the condition your 5, 3, 2 case 
 levels are in. They are not in a state of knowingness; they are in a state
 of convincedness. An entirely different thing, and part of that conviction
 has come about through the cycle of action known as DEI. 
 
 If that has any similarity to God, I'm sorry. 
 
 True knowingness is a capability to know and to ascertain within 
 oneself, truth. There are many kinds of truths as I've talked about before.
 There is also a theoretical level of pure truth. Some of you know of the 
 earlier lectures of Bin 1, Bin 2, Bin 3; remember those earlier lectures? 
 What was in Bin 3? Man only knew relatively what was in Bin 2 was a route to
 knowledge and knowingness and what was in Bin 1 was all true - theoretical,
 absolute - Bin l. 
 
 Well, now an individual comes out of Bin 1, and goes through Bin 2 
 and winds up in Bin 3. When he is in Bin 3 he has travelled the course of 
 aberration in that he has to be convinced. And this being convinced is the
 handiest little mechanism for aberration of which you're ever heard. A 
 thoroughly gorgeous piece of nonsense. There's only one thing you can do, 
 really, and that is, know on the highest level of your own beingness and 
 capability, and the day that you have to ask somebody to convince you that
 you are you're practically done from there on. 
 
 That's why I say when people come around and tell you that you 
 should prove something to them about this subject, go ahead and prove it. 
 ZAP them, drown them, throw 'em into birth but don't bother proving it. If
 we were operating simply with a conviction or a convincedness, we could talk
 about anything, I can prove to you completely that black is white and pink
 is blue. I'm the best handy little jim-dandy convincifier you ever heard of.
 Any fellow who has been through engineering to prove this and to prove that,
 is the essence of engineering. And any fellow who has been through writing
 is doing nothing but setting up 'convincedness'. The reader is convinced the
 story is true. The odd part of it is, and all it is, is just a chain of 
 probabilities which are so put together and usually interwoven with 
 aesthetics, that one achieves at the end a belief that something has 
 occurred. 
 
 Of course that's a pretense. That is a complete pretense. You step 
 off the level of your own knowingness into conviction and you'll get into 
 the same situation an individual is in who is demanding to be hypnotized, 
 who is demanding to be drugged, who is demanding to be operated on. He's 
 just trying to say, "Convince me it's real." That's all he's interested in.
 He wants to be told that it's real. He wants to be convinced because 
 basically, of course, it is not real, and he is dwindling out down the 
 bottom on being convinced instead of knowing; and knowingness could be said
 to be, itself and within oneself, and at best, a capability for truth - just
 a capability for truth. It is not data. All the data you run into anyplace,
 unless it tends to place you back up into a capability where you yourself 
 have knowingness, is false data. Any route that you follow that returns to
 
 -2- 

 you your capability of knowingness or returns to the preclear that certainty 
 of knowingness is a road to knowledge. If it contains data, it contains it 
 solely to communicate. So that an individual can perceive, in these steps, 
 the eradication of those barriers which intervene between himself and 
 himself. Between himself and his actual capabilities. And if we have data, 
 it is the data in those barriers and we know it to remove it. 
 
 Processing in this universe is a process of negative gain. You will 
 very often run into this with a preclear: you will process him very 
 arduously and very arduously and very thoroughly and.. and the first thing 
 you know, why, your preclear will be saying, rather dully uh.. to you, he.. 
 he obviously feels fine now, and he will say to you uh.. that, "Really uh.. 
 we ought to get down to cases now and.. and do something," and you look at 
 this fellow and before he would have said, "Do ya.. do ya.. do ya think it 
 ever.. ever any.. anything uh.. uh.. uh.. wha will happa.; happa.. happen to 
 improve.. improve me?" And he says, "Well I think we'd better get down to 
 cases now, and get my case some improvement." You feel like killin' him! 
 You'd just cheerfully shove him into the nearest Iron Maiden and turn on the 
 spikes and juice. But don't be upset because you are following a course with 
 him of negative gain. He is gaining by eradication. And of course those 
 things which are gone no longer bother him. And in view of the fact that 
 they no longer bother him, he is now in good condition. 
 
 But this universe vector is "In order to progress you must have," 
 and that of course is 180 degree falsehood. You can progress with or without 
 having. But this universe tells you only by having and acquiring and by new 
 possession can you progress. And so you turn the vector around and you start 
 unhaving and of course the fellow gets freer time, more action, more 
 capabilities in space, and a much more desirable ability or capability in 
 all directions, including that of knowingness; and then he says to you, 
 "Having acquired nothing, I feel I should acquire something." 
 
 Up at the top of all this you see is this terrible mania "Acquire,"
 "Have," "We must be in the time span," "We must be timed according to this
 universe." 
 
 Well, a conviction must exist before a possession can exist. You 
 must be convinced, one, either out of yourself or from another that you 
 desire something. And then next, you must be convinced by it, by yourself, 
 -- or by another that its havingness is actual. And of course it isn't actual; 
 it's real. Get the distinction between those two words we're making? 
 
 So all of a sudden here.. here nothing existed. Nobody had to desire
 anything, but could; and now desiring it, two conditions can ensue: One has
 it, and then has to have it, and then of course mustn't have it. 
 
 And that cycle, which I will draw to you with even finer detail, is 
 the cycle of your Step 2, Step 3, Step 4, Step 5, Step 6, Step 7. Until Step 
 7, you can no more alter the possession of a man just by snapping your 
 fingers, than you could cut a rock with a feather. Of course you could cut a 
 rock with a mocked-up feather. But he isn't going to part with anything. Or, 
 he's got to part with everything. 
 
 So convincedness proceeds from desire and actually mostly exists 
 before desire, but it is not so rough just before desire, in the early 
 stages of the track, but it becomes rough immediately afterwards. Then a 
 fellow has to convince himself that he has to have - and that's all 
 pretense. He doesn't have to have anything. 
 
 -3- 

 The story I told you and that is quite popular in Asia about the 
 shirt of a perfectly happy man as the only cure for the princess is, of 
 course, itself a misleading statement, because even though that perfectly
 happy man did not have a shirt, he had possession, and therefore he was not
 a perfectly happy man. A person has to be willing to have, and willing to
 lose before he can completely be. He must be willing to hate and be hated,
 leave and be left, before he can love. Because all of these things, so long
 as they contain enforcement and loss as terrible things which mustn't 
 overtake any man, are therefore debarred to an individual. 
 
 You have to be able to want this whole universe, to be hated by this
 whole universe, to be smashed by this universe and to smash it - you have to
 be willing to - before you could control it. Really even before you could
 really desire it. And that desire must be a thing that you can monitor too.
 You must be able to desire and not desire at will. You think that's a pretty
 cool way to look at existence... No, I'm afraid that is a lot hotter than
 any of these heat engines I see are running just now. It's very, very warm.
 
 Somebody said I should say more about love and sort of understand 
 something about this thing called love. I told you that the lower part of
 the track was a mockery of the upper - uh.. pardon me, tone scale - was a
 mockery (lower part of the track too) of the upper part of the tone scale.
 The upper part of the tone scale was far wider and far stronger than the 
 lower part of the tone scale, but that the lower part of the tone scale was
 very serious and everything was very real, and the brotherhood of man was
 something that we must have, and uh.. all that. And yet before anybody at
 the very bottom of that tone scale would form a brotherhood of man he'd slit
 his mother's throat. He's too little theta and too much matter. Too little
 order and too much confusion. Too little beingness and too much havingness.
 He's your "Joe Gotbucks," the famous tenement owner. 
 
 He's uh.. in a very sad state who is in that mockery level. If you
 don't think that it's mockery, you should watch some of these people 
 operate. If ever there was anything like complete contempt and disdain for
 you to feel anywhere in this universe, you'd find it there. "I am your 
 friend; now turn your back - that's good. Now just hold still while I adjust
 your collar button and you feel that steel sliding in between your 
 vertebrae." And they always start with that line, "I am your friend." 
 
 You get some little character completely in apathy, just 'flop,' 
 pratically catatonic, and so forth. They apparently are so sweet, so 
 needing, so this, so that. Go ahead, commit suicide. 'cause you're looking
 at something that would make a black widow spider appear to be a pet. 
 
 Not at that end of the tone scale do you find affection or love. You
 find these things used for death, not for life. And up the tone scale, 
 however, there is sufficient theta, as compared to the amount of.. and 
 sufficient space, compared to the amount of particle present, that the 
 actual capability of theta can pervade and express itself. You've got a 
 latitude of action, you also have a latitude of expression. And up there at
 the top of the scale, you find love as something which is strong enough to
 practically monitor, or control anything - a warmth of feeling of which homo
 sapiens sometimes, in sad and nostalgic moments, dreams. 
 
 But it's that toward which he is yearning, not toward "I'm your 
 friend. Turn your back. There's the steel." And he sees that operation at
 the bottom of the tone scale and he's revolted. And he said, "Ah well, 
 there's no such thing as love; then there's no such thing as valuable 
 possession, there's no such thing as any honest or worthwhile emotion. There
 is no ARC, there never will be any ARC, and it's all a delusion and I'm 
 
 -4- 
 

 better off without me, without the race, without anything." And that's just
 exactly what that level is trying to do to him, and it accomplishes his 
 purpose the moment it makes him strike his flag and say, "There is no love. 
 here is no beauty. There is nothing." After that he's MEST. He's very easy
 to control. You could make a slave out of him, you can do anything to him. 
 
 But up high on the scale, one can possess and be fond of possessing;
 one can be strong and be fond of strength; one can live and feel love 
 returned; one can have and take joy of having, and lose and not care if he 
 loses. And the difference between the top of the scale and Step 2, Step 3, 
 Step 4, Step 5, Step 6 and Step 7, is the degree to which the individual has
 sunk in abandoning any effort to have ARC, affection, possession. 
 
 He's to a level where he's afraid to be, afraid to love, afraid to
 have space, afraid to have time. He's apathetic about any of.. possession 
 that he possibly could have. Because he well knows, even though he continues
 to want, since he's still in the time stream, that if he has, he will lose,
 and if he loses he will die. He's well educated into this. 
 
 So that possession of any sort to him becomes terribly dangerous and
 he becomes very, very upset at the idea, for instance, of owning a pet. Why?
 Because the pet might die, and the loss of that pet, if he gave it 
 affection, would be more than he could bear. So he doesn't own; he doesn't 
 love; and the reason he doesn't love, is because if he loved it would become
 unbearable if he lost the object of his affection. He cannot further lose. 
 Your big D is at the top of the scale, your big E is at the center of the 
 scale, your bing I is at the bottom of the scale. And he's down to a point 
 where he inhibits all of these things either by trying to hold on to 
 everything or trying to abandon everything. And he's someplace on that lower
 scale. 
 
 And a Step 2 isn't at any particular level on the scale, or a Step
 3, or a Step 4, they are not at particular levels on the scale; they're all
 way below, as homo sapiens, 4.0. And as thetans they're all way way below 
 0.0. And you'll find some 'One's' kicking around who are both above zero as
 a thetan and above 4.0 as homo sapiens, but not necessarily. You may find a
 'One' who is above zero as a thetan, but as homo sapiens, because he could 
 never quite fit, he was maybe 1.1. 
 
 So you see, let's not get these values tangled up because they're 
 easily entangled. Don't suppose then that you have to unentangle them. 
 Because of course they're all messed up when you get to the bottom of the 
 scale because they're mixed up with MEST and MEST is chaos. MEST has no 
 affection; it only has the pretense of affection. You can well remember the
 morning when your automobile said to you, "I'm sorry I am so cold and I am 
 starting so hard." No, it doesn't have any feeling down at that bottom of 
 the track. But somebody puts some havingness on it. Somebody fixed the 
 fenders good and painted it up brightly and therefore it appears to be 
 something that is terribly attractive and something which an individual 
 personifies. And he said, "My car.. My car's name is Bingo. And Bingo has a
 personality." Who gave it to him? He did. Then one day he loses Bingo. The 
 world's full of cars. There's a lot of cars. They can be manufactured - just
 endless chains of cars. And yet he will sit down and completely sag. 
 
 What's he.. what's he feeling in terms of loss? The utility of 
 transport? No, he knows basically he really doesn't need transport. No, he's
 losing that which he created to be alive. And as such he feels sorrow at its
 loss. And the study of all these cases is the study of the chaos resulting 
 from having gone too far, too long, of becoming too afraid, or too apathetic
 to have evenly and well. 
 
 -5- 

 You'll find the people at this end of the tone scale, these cases 
 are badly.. are badly out of orientation in terms of what we call, 
 laughingly, time. 'Course this is.. they're out of orientation of 
 havingness. A day to one of them might appear five minutes to you. A year to -- 
 one of them might appear to be only a few hours to somebody else. 
 
 Do you recall the interminable afternoon of childhood? The 
 interminable afternoon... Johnny went out to play with somebody else, and 
 you sat there and you had nothing to do all afternoon - it would be the same 
 thing to you as.. now as saying you had nothing to do for a whole month. 
 
 Havingness. This is an expanse of havingness, a capability of 
 havingness, which gives us all kinds of apparent time. It's almost a reverse 
 vector, you see? One.. the.. the particules of havingness are really so 
 easily controlled. A child lives mainly in a world of mock-ups and those 
 particles are so easily controlled, and they're shifted so fast, that one's 
 havingness can increase with such a rapidity, and decrease with such a 
 rapidity, that a child's time track looks like a roller-coaster. 
 
 But wait till we get this child up to the age of 35, 40, 45, 50 and 
 he goes to the office in the morning - he doesn't have any universe of his 
 own, he just has the havingness which is given to him, by suffurance, and 
 which may be taken away from him at any moment. And he sits at a desk, he 
 has pieces of paper, or if he's a labourer, he has a drill press. He has a 
 locker, he maybe has a car, he has a Sunday suit, he has a cubicle of some 
 sort, his space where he has a few items parked away, and that is the extent 
 of his havingness, and he knows very well by this time that he cannot 
 enlarge it. And so his time doesn't go by interminably. He can't change 
 his havingness. Time just is fixed for him. He's living forever, but the 
 days go by with a rush. A complete chaos of orientation. 
 
 Now you step up to this fellow and you say, "Be a step back of your 
 head." 
 
 "What head?" He'll be in a.. various stages of disrepair. And we'll 
 cover these fellows with the steps and it'll be just that gradient scale, 
 but back of all this work that we're doing from Step One on down is the 
 formula of DEI and Forget and Remember as a result thereof. 
 
 And it goes on this use. The man cannot be certain. You are looking 
 for certainty in a preclear. Is he certain that he has put a mock-up in 
 yesterday? And he can't be certain of that. Is he certain that he has 
 changed it from the front to the back? And he can't be certain of that. It 
 keeps moving on him, and he can't be certain that it can be stopped. This is 
 faith of capability, but it.. it's also to the degree that he desires to be 
 convinced. As he is unable to know, he becomes desirous of being convinced. 
 As he is unable to know, he has to be convinced; until at long last he is 
 s.. solely and only capable of being convinced and he is not capable of 
 knowing. And the lower part of this scale is a hideous thing to see - really 
 low on it. If you were to tell him that it were so, it would then be so. But 
 would this man be free or would you have a slave? 
 
 Do not operate as they have operated in the field of psychotherapy. 
 Do not tell a man to be certain. Give him a skill, give him an exercise, 
 suggest something for him to do, but do not tell him where he is or what he 
 is doing. Let him tell you and you find out where he is and what he is 
 doing. 
 
 -- 
 
 -6- 
 
 I

 How do you control homo sapiens? By placing him in space and time 
 and in creating space and time in which to place him. That's the way you 
 control homo sapiens. Ql. 
 
 Now if you at the bottom.. had a preclear who was going out the 
 bottom, believe me, the only method he thinks he has of knowing is if you 
 tell him. Why? He's in a hypnotic trance. He's in an hypnotic trance from 
 2.0 down and a bad one. And at.. then.. he gets to a point where if you tell
 him that's why, it isn't true; but if you do the opposite, then of course it
 becomes convincing. He becomes sure that you're going to kill him because 
 you're so nice to him. He becomes sure that you are his enemy in that wise.
 You are so mean to him that he's sure, then, that you are his friend. 
 
 Reverse vectors walk in, and those vectors reverse back and forth, 
 and we get this dwindling spiral of belief. And here you see the sandwich on
 the tone scale. Those little sandwiches come down the line - distrust-trust,
 distrust-trust, distrust-trust, and up high on the scale, all those trusts
 are trust of self and all low on the scale, those trusts are trusts of that
 which convinces him - only. 
 
 So let's.. let's be a.. aware, then, of this first fact in handling
 any case below 2 and that is that he will take your word for it ordinarily,
 or take the reverse of your word for it, before he will take his own 
 knowingness. And that's what's wrong with him. And if you evaluate for him
 you can kill him. Just remember that. If you've ever had anything to do with
 people who have been consistently and continuously hypnotized you will know
 the truth of what I am saying. These people have been slain. Because 
 somebody else took over their knowingness for them. 
 
 How do you reverse this vector then? You work on the highest level 
 of certainty obtainable and each time discover a highest level of certainty
 obtainable. And what are you trying to discover a certainty on? On that 
 thing of which he is convinced falsely, the existence of the NEST universe?
 No, Sir. His level of knowingness proceeds up the scale along the line of 
 his ability to create, change and destroy his own universe. So your levels
 of certainty in his own universe lead directly to knowingness - not 
 conviction. And you go straight up scale with this fellow. 
 
 But if you ask him to be convinced by reality, he will go down 
 scale. You can get resurgences by making him suddenly aware of reality. But
 you're not interested in reality; you're Interested in actuality. And the 
 only actuality there is for this man is the actuality of what he can do with
 his own mind and all of its skills. And that's his actuality. And you build
 on certainties, and certainties lie in the field of actuality. They can 
 appear to lie in the field of reality. But all reality is a farce. A very 
 broad statement, but it's a farce. If you can't play a game, don't fool with
 reality. If you were capable of the spirit of play and playing a game and 
 pretending, if you're capable of action which you merely postulate should be
 undertaken and still know the fact that it's only being undertaken because
 you've postulated that it should be, you're in a position where you can play
 the game called reality. But the game called reality cannot be played by 
 somebody, safely, who is in a state where it is real, where it is important,
 where it is serious and where he must agree with it or where he's even 
 abandoned agreeing with it because it is so strong and powerful. 
 
 Now let's look over this situation with the preclear and really know
 what you're looking at when you look at somebody who doesn't, the first 
 instant, step out of the back of his head. Don't immediately suppose this 
 person is mad. He's not. He may be in much better shape than most homo 
 sapiens you've run across. But, he's not in a collected and orderly 
 
 -7- 

 condition with regard to his environment, and he's out of orientation on 
 these two points only: Space and Energy. And Energy, lumping up, becomes 
 Havingness. He's out of orientation on these two things. And being out of 
 orientation on them, that orientation must be remedied before you find him 
 capable of becoming a Step One and working accordingly. 
 
 Your job from Two down is to create a Step One and then follow the 
 rules back of running a Step One. Very simple, isn't it. 
 
 You can make a Step One and then you have Step One to do. When 
 you've got that done, you've got a Theta Clear - that's all there is to 
 that. 
 
 So you treat a Two, Three and Four and Five and Six, Seven - these
 ashtrays uh.. you create these people solely to get a Step One case, that's
 all. 
 
 Now what.. what do you.. how do you remedy this situation? You could
 have an awful lot of formulas; you could have an awful lot of pecularities 
 fn these cases. Let's get the common denominator of all these cases, solve 
 that and go on from there. That would be a good idea? That gives you only 
 one thing you have to know and that's DEI. 
 
 Now let's look over this Standard Operating Procedure Issue Three, 
 and we will use these headings: "Step Two by Orientation. Ask the preclear,
 still inside, to locate the inside of his forehead. Ask him to put a pressor
 beam against it and push himself out the back of his head. Supplement this 
 by asking him to reach out through the back of his head and grab a wall with
 a pulling beam and pull himself out. Ask him to steady himself outside and 
 then by means of beams, to raise and lower himself while outside," and so 
 forth. 
 
 You can go right ahead and use that as Step Two - just as it is 
 right there. With this single point: The moment you start to have trouble 
 with this, this man is convinced already that he has to have energy to move
 around. And that in itself is an upset. It's not true, you see. You don't 
 have to have energy to move around. You have to learn how to use this stuff
 called energy, but you don't need it. You have to use it so that you need 
 never thereafter be afraid of it. You must not only learn how to use it, but
 you must be completely willing to use it. And use it better than you ever 
 used it before. But, that does not mean this person is working well, just 
 because he can run energy. He will fix himself up so he looks like a 
 grasshopper to himself. Quite often people get quite upset. They say, "I 
 must be an insect, or.. or something of the sort." They go walking around on
 these beams. They find out they can get around by doing that. 
 
 This simply means that he is convinced that all space is NEST 
 universe space and that you need NEST universe type things to move in it. So
 he's short on space, isn't he? Well, therefore you had better devote some 
 time with this case to orienting him with regard to space in the MEST 
 universe. And drilling him into moving by thought. You walk him out of his 
 head with beams, and add now to Step Two "Now drill him until he can move by
 thought." And you do this by saying, "All right, now move over, or walk 
 over" - which is what's he's doing - "to the mantle. All right, now you're 
 there? All right, now let's just 'think' yourself on the other side of the 
 mantle and be there." 
 
 Well, we won't have a good time with this at all. You'll probably
 have to hit 1t at a gradient scale. "Think yourself as two inches over to
 the right. Think yourself two inches over to the left" - little tiny 
 
 -8- 

 gradient scales until he's used to shifting himself around in space. And all
 of a sudden he finds out he can do this; an awful lot of things will clip 
 out of the case immediately. 
 
 So add that drill to Step Two and then just go right on with Step 
 One as outlined in these lectures, not as outlined in this book. You get 
 that little addition there to Step Two - "by orientation" it says. Well "by
 orientation" means you've got to train him to 'think' himself around in 
 space before you go back to using energy. He's got to find out that he can 
 move in space by thinking himself from one point to another. You've got to 
 teach him that by gradient scales and then you run Step One on him - very 
 simple. 
 
 Now he isn't in very bad shape, if you can do this, by the way. He's
 in pretty good shape. If he fouls up to some degree on this or if he gets 
 upset or the use of energy suddenly makes him feel terribly degraded or he's
 in bad condition about some of this, why what do you do? If he falls from a
 Step Two - he walked out of the back of his head and all of a sudden he 
 can't now - he of course has done what? He's just fallen into a later step 
 case. That's all. 
 
 He used energy for a short time and then all of a sudden the energy 
 folded up on him; he couldn't use it. Well, he's just a later step case. 
 
 So when you pick him up and find out he's no longer able to move 
 himself out of his head this way, or something has happened to him or some 
 waitress has banged a tray over his head or.. or somebody shot him with a 
 shotgun, or something of the sort, between sessions, work him then as a 
 later step case. Don't get confused about that. We had a Step Two; he could
 move himself out of his head by orientation. And we moved him around in 
 space by getting him to "think" himself in space; and then we went on to 
 Step One and went on from there. 
 
 But the next time we saw him, he wasn't in as good a shape as we 
 thought we were, and uh.. you tell him, "Move out by energy" and he can't do
 it - this doesn't mean that some new and heroic something that Ron didn't 
 tell you about is necessary. No, he's just a later kind of case, that's all.
 Do you get the idea? 
 
 Any.. don't.. don't get fixed on these cases. Don't get arbitrary on
 these cases. As.. a Case Five, a Step Five case can and should become a Step
 One case. He might even become a Step Two case. These categories change, and
 you will be alarmed by this fact: There will be some preclears, Two's and 
 Three's and Four's particularly, who do the darnedest things. They keep 
 moving all over. One day they're a Step Two, and the next day they're a Step
 Five. The next day they're a Step Three and the next day they're a Step Two.
 They keep moving around on this. 
 
 Well, the only way that this is upsetting, and the only reason this 
 is upsetting, is because they are, actually, incapable in some line or 
 another and your presence gives them sudden hope. And this hope is 
 sufficient to boost them up from what they are: A Five. It boosts them up 
 and they're very optimistic and as long as you're there, they'll all right.
 And then they go off down the street and they take a step a foot in back of
 their head and Pang! Zing! And they're all upset. They're being bolstered by
 the auditor, and the auditor has artificially bumped them up a couple of 
 steps in auditing them. And of course, they're not there and they can't do 
 this. Don't worry about it. Don't get any worry about this stuff. This is 
 s.. really too easy. 
 
 -9- 

 Now Step Three is by Spacation. It says here that "The MEST universe 
 has forced upon the thetan its space.. spacial dimensions and directions. 
 The thetan is likely to become a point which is being subjected to all the 
 counter-efforts and emotions of his environment, for his entire concept of 
 space as being determined by the MEST universe. Have the thetan who's still 
 inside find his feet in the opposite direction." 
 
 All right. Step Three, Space Processing. Let's call that now 
 Spacation, and I will give you Spacation. If you had your books, you could 
 strike out - and when you get your books and hear this tape again - strike 
 out the rest of that beyond what I read. He's out of orientation. The MEST 
 universe has forced space and dimension upon him to a degree where he can't 
 handle it. 
 
 You say, "So far, we've had this case this way: We've said to this 
 case, "Be two feet back of your head." He wasn't." You say, "All right, put 
 a beam against your forehead and push yourself out." He didn't. Okay. It.. 
 that.. that took how long? That.. that took 45 seconds. We've done an 
 assessment on this case and we've spent about 45 seconds now following 
 through Standard Operating Procedure, and we're at Three. And we find out 
 that he can't do this. 
 
 Here's our test.. immediate test for a Three: Have him put a point 
 out in front of him. This is the next thing you do to this case. Put a point 
 out in front of him - a mock-up. See, after he couldn't step out of his head 
 with a beam, the next thing you do is, "All right, now have a point in front 
 of you. All right. Got it there? Now hold it steady. What's happening?" 
 That's just as simple as that, see? 
 
 If that point is stable and if no strange new and peculiar 
 facsimiles start shooting through, and if he's obviously in very good 
 control of this point and can conserve it and keep it stopped - with no 
 further processing and so on - this fellow is a Three. And he.. he will give 
 up right away on Spacation. But... 
 
 All right, now what happens here? He.. he holds the point. You say, 
 "Put a point out there." 
 
 And he says, "What kind of a point?" 
 
 And you say, "Well, make it just little gold point of some sort or --
 another. Now just put that out in front of you. All right, now. Look at it. 
 Now hold it steady." 
 
 If he has even the vaguest difficulty with this, if he has even the 
 tiniest uncertainty as to what this point's doing, go right on to Step Four. 
 If he holds that point, you can spring him by unmocking him. 
 
 And I'll tell you exactly how that's done: You unmock the body and 
 leave the thetan sitting there. And then he moves off. Very simple trick. 
 Because if he can hold that stable, he's just within an ace of being able to 
 handle space. If he can't, he doesn't know yet. That's why he wasn't a foot 
 back of.. two feet back of his head. That's why he couldn't push himself out 
 with a beam because space is kinda dangerous. But he still might be able to 
 handle a little bit of energy and so forth. But if he can hold this point, 
 if he has no trouble with this point, you go with Spacation. 
 
 And from here on, this is the way you do Spacation. 
 
 -10- 
 

 Okay. Gonna give you a whole hour on how you do Spacation, and I'll 
 just go on with the rest of this right now, this.. immediately follow this. 
 
 It's just this: The manifestations which take place around that 
 point must be carefully examined before you determine that this fellow is a 
 Three. If he can hold that point, he can be stable in his own space. You can
 make his own space for him and then stabilize him in it. 
 
 And if any one of the following conditions occur, however, you go 
 right straight on to Step Four. 
 One, the point jiggles out of control. 
 Two, it sweeps in on him. 
 Three, it sweeps away from him. 
 
 Four, the point uh.. holds, all right, but a lot of facsimiles start 
 showing up and flying around. 
 
 And six, if it keeps blinking on and off, if it's intermittent. 
 
 Any one of those conditions, he's not a Case Three - not a Step 
 level Three. 
 
 Now there's a very distinct possibility you won't f1nd too many of 
 these. But whether you find them or not, Spacation is doable by a Step One, 
 a Step Two, a Three, and has to be done by a Four, and has to be done by a 
 Five before you'll get anyplace with these cases. 
 
 So therefore, Spacation is quite important. But right here at that 
 point, can you, at Step Three, can your preclear hold this point? If he can 
 hold this point, you go right straight on with Spacation and unmock him. And
 just.. he moves out. That's that! He's out. 
 
 Now the additional data which you need as you go down from Two and 
 Three and Four and Five and Six and Seven is simply this: The fellow has 
 lost too much, so that he abandons everything. Or loss is so frightful to 
 him, he's just a little bit above that on the scale, that he holds on to 
 everything. The one who is abandoning will be very thin, and the one who is 
 holding on will be plump. You can tell them on sight. And they'll both use 
 the same process for this. 
 
 This does not become marked until a Four, Step Four, but you're 
 still dealing with those factors on the earlier ones - still dealing with 
 them. 
 
 Now in the next hour I'm going to talk to you about Spacation. It's 
 a very special technique, and you've got all the theory that you need on 
 this. But it has not been assembled for you into a very neat, one-two-three,
 little package. Well now, you can use it with great ease. 
 
 Let's take a break. 
 
 (TAPE ENDS) 
 
 -11-