SEMINAR, QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD:
WHAT IS KNOWABLE TO THE PC
A lecture given on 20 September 1961

Well, your day today is—what day are you in?
Audience: 20th.
You're in the 20th. Well, hello, I'm glad to see you're in the 20th.
Now, those that have been in engrams, in either session today, this is the 20th of September. So come up to present time. Come on, come up to present time. Come on, present time, 20th September 1961. Okay? Did anybody come up to present time?
All right. Well, it's your turn to tell me what you don't know, and ask questions about what you want to know. Don't ask questions so somebody else can find out. That is a common trick in Academies. Students are always asking questions in order that the others can be informed. I'm not interested in that; I'm interested in the direct communication. Okay. Anything? Yes?
Male voice: we know in Security Checking we're not using "forget" or "not-know." Equally we're not saying "in this life." Therefore, if a pc has a certain amount of not-isness on his case and we ask a question, get a reaction on it, but the pc doesn't know what it is, and it probably is a past life, what are we to do?
Pull it. If it reacts, he can know about it. You've asked whether or not, when we're doing a Security Check and not using a "not-know" version and not using "in this lifetime," we get a knock on the E-Meter, what are we to do about it. That's a very good question. Let us take up immediately the datum that most applies to this, which is, why do you get a reaction on an E-Meter at all? All right. That is a very simple thing.
That which is in the ken of reaction is in the knowledge of the pc. That which will react, is knowable. That's the first and foremost rule of an E-Meter's reaction. It doesn't mean that it is known at the moment the question is asked, but it means that it is knowable. Because an E-Meter can only react on those things which are instantly and immediately restimulated by the preclear himself. So therefore, on a circuit version, of course, it is reactive, but it is knowable.
The reason why you assess for an engram is not to find the hottest charge. The reason you assess is to find out what is real to the pc. This would be the realest goal to the pc. Therefore it reacts. This would be the realest terminal to the pc, therefore it reacts. This is the realest level of the Prehav Scale, therefore it reacts. This is the realest incident to the pc, therefore it reacts.
It isn't really even what the pc is in. It isn't what is wrong with the pc. It's what the pc can connect with. And I would say offhand that with a great deal of clever interrogation—E-Meters always require to be backed up by the clever interrogation. And a Security Check must always be done by variant questions. You must never use a Security Check with a repetitive-question approach. If I find anybody in this unit saying, "Have you ever raped anyone? Thank you. Have you ever raped anyone? Thank you. Have you ever raped anyone? Thank you," I will let the floor disintegrate under you! That's what I will do. I will not-is the floor. So if you feel yourself falling in the middle of a session, you know what you've done.
Now, there is the score on anything of this character: if it reacts, it is knowable. Reaction means reality. And you can just put those two together. They're easy to remember because it's so alliterative. Reaction is reality.
Now, although you know what's wrong with the pc, although you know what incident it should be, although he's sitting there going glup, glup, glup, and every once in a while tightens up the space mechanism and it turns out to be a shepherdess. Well, that violates your reality. But remember that the pc was read by the E-Meter's reality. That's why we use an E-Meter. It's reality-reaction. If it reacts, it is real.
Sure, you have to get the shepherdess off before you get to this space mechanic. You get the idea. So therefore you, at no time, must be guilty of enforcing a reality on the pc which is contrary to what the meter says. Pc's reality is what the meter says. Always what the meter says. And it is never what you say or what the pc says.
But in interrogation—a clever interrogation on any given question— "Have you ever raped anyone? Have you ever thought of raping anyone? Have you ever remembered having raped somebody? Have you ever had consistent dreams of having raped somebody?" And this needle keeps falling, you see. And all of a sudden he says, "Well, I had a dream about it once."
"Oh, you did? All right. Let's go in for Freudian dream analysis. And give me what it is."
And "But it's not in this lifetime."
"Well, all right. So, it's not in this lifetime. Who did you rape?"
"Oh, well, you're being direct about it. That's not fair."
And he all of a sudden will have some foggy recollection of something or other, and the pc says, "It isn't real, but I sort of remember, but it's somehow or another, and I've got a picture of. . ." and you go—he goes on like this.
And you say, "Good. Who did you rape?"
And he finally says, "Well, I guess that's the right answer." And it clears on the meter. Well, you don't care if his reality is any greater than that.
And you can clear those that do that. But I'm glad you asked the question for two or three reasons—we haven't covered this subject of why does an E-Meter react, for some time.
And an E-Meter would only react on a past track thing that was sitting right there ready to be triggered. You know that you can have a pc sometimes, half out of their chair—leaving. You know? They just suddenly say, "Ahhhhh! Buuu." And they want to blow. They want to run. They want to get out of there, and so forth. And you say, "What's . . .?" And they've hit something, you see.
Well, the space police have been looking for them for two and a half billion years, and it'll come through with that much charge. It really will. They know—they're being looked for right now. If somebody found that out, that would be that. And they've been consciously alert. You know, they haven't known why they've been alert, but just that you asked the question, triggered it. And when you can get one of those off the case, you've done the case an awful lot of good. Because it was right there. If it reacts, it is real. It is attainable.
Now, you compare this to your ordinary experience as an auditor that past track is almost out of sight where any ordinary person off the street is concerned. You say, "What were you doing in your last life?" You can't ask that as a casual social question. All right, you're not going to get an answer to that. So you compare it with that experience, and this other experience then seems frightening. But every so often you're going to get one off the street, and you're going to say, "Have you ever robbed a bank?" And it's going to go bang! And you're going to say, "Well, when was that?"
And "I don't know."
And you're going to say, "Good." It falls again. You say, "When did you rob this bank?"
"Oh, well, umm. That's another story. Uh . . . I don't know. When I was a little boy, I used to have dreams about this sort of thing. Used to have nightmares about this sort of thing." And he's liable to get a sudden terrific reality on having robbed a bank and been in prison for eighteen years in Cook County prison, or something like this, in his last life, you see. And he's been scared ever since. But he may get a direct recall. And when you get one of those, you've actually freed up a considerable amount of track. So it's very valuable to do that.
Don't limit your question on a Security Check to this lifetime. Those directions do not apply on a processing Security Check. And don't bother to run a "not-know" version. Why? Because you've moved the whole thing up. You're upgraded now to where you're going to find a goal in an HGC. Straightaway, you're going to find his goal, you're going to find his terminal. Simultaneously going to be doing his Security Check. And what's this going to amount to? This is going to find the guy on the backtrack, straightaway. And it'll only be, maybe, the first couple, three sessions with the Security Check that you might have much trouble with. And next thing you know he'll be running engrams. Within the twenty-five hours he might very well be running engrams.
When an HGC auditor gets real hot; first day, he gets the Assessment Sheet and he gets the person's goal. Next day, why, he gets the person's terminal. That's by noon. Two o'clock, the fellow's on the first run. That's the way it ought to be. I won't settle for anything less as expertly done. The amount of floundering which is being done with goals is technical floundering. It is not anything to do with the pc. It is technical floundering.
Similarly, the Security Checks—the length of time it takes to do a Security Check or clear a question is just technical floundering. It's just not looking at the needle, not getting a reaction, not asking the question, not pressing it home. You're sitting there security checking a sheet, you're not security checking a pc. you get the idea? All these various conditions are present. It's technical that slows it down. I hope that answers your questions.
Male voice: Yes, it does. The only doubt I have now is how to help the pc. You have this as more knowable when it does react, when I know there's something that ought to be potentially knowable to him.
I wouldn't do a thing for him.
Male voice: Just sort of keep on questioning around him?
I wouldn't do a thing for him beyond clever questioning. On a straight Security Check, that is it. you start auditing a Security Check, and hard and running repetitive-command processes while doing a Security Check, and that sort of thing, and it's never paid off here. We've just never had it pay off It sounds like it might be a good idea.
But the way you'd help him is to point up your questioning And that is by compartmentation of the question. "Have you ever robbed?" "Have you?" "Have?" "a bank?" Bank doesn't fall. "Have you ever robbed?" falls. "Have you?" that doesn't fall. "Robbed?" "Well, what have you robbed?"
"Oh, well, you get down to that. It was never banks, you see. It was just clothing stores." And the locks will blow off He might have robbed a bank on the whole track, but you'll actually blow the question on compartmentation. It won't bother him then. That is how you help him out. Is that more of a specific aid to you?
Male voice: Yes, I've got it now. Thank you.
All right, good enough. What other question do we have? Yes, Virginia?
Female voice: You might have no reactions on a question, but what happens when you do a Prehav assessment, and you don't get very much reaction? What error has been . . .
What happens to a Prehav assessment when you don't get very much reaction?
Female voice: Hm-hm.
Go on.
Female voice: That's all.
Just that?
Female voice: What error has been made, or what can we do to get it . . .
What error has been made?
Female voice: . . . so that it will . . .
Well, the error could be that you've cleared him!
Female voice: . . . back up a ways.
Just back up a ways. All right, all right.
You don't get much reaction. Well, there's several things that can happen. And that is that during the entirety of the last run of the last level that you were running, your rudiments were out. That is the most common suppressor of a Prehav assessment. The rudiments have been out during, maybe, hours and hours and hours of the past run. And this has made that level submerge. And now, it is the only level that's alive, and the other levels are not going to react. It's not flat, it's submerged. You see what I mean?
If you run a level with the rudiments out, it's just like doing an assessment with the rudiments out. The level submerges. It drops out of sight. It doesn't go flat. It invalidates.
So you get, number one, your goal can disappear because rudiments are out. Now, we know what to do about that. you put the rudiments in and reassess on the goals list.
Terminal disappears because the rudiments are out. We know what to do about that. All you do is get the rudiments in and reassess on the existing terminals list. You've already got his terminals. Get the rudiments in, go over those, and you'll find the terminal lives up again.
Now, it's just the same with a Prehav level run. You're getting no tone arm action on running the level. And you think it is flat. And you think you had better reassess. And you try to reassess. And you can't get any reaction on the Prehav Scale. Hmmmmmm!
Female voice: Can you be more specific?
Now, what you've got there is rudiments out. And now the rudiments have not been out just before the assessment. The rudiments have been out all during the run.
Female voice: Mm-hm.
Aha! So, what do you do? You take up every session the person has had on that run, and you put all of the rudiments in—the whole lot. And now you do a reassessment. And either that level will now be alive again, at which time you keep on running it, or you'll have a new level that will pop up, ready for running. Does that answer your question? It's the same in each case.
Female voice: Mm-hm.
It's exactly the same action. Except what you might overlook, is the fact that the rudiments have been out ever since you've started the run.
Female voice: But I got one reaction. And the other times I had had more reaction. Though I'd had four or five levels reacting, well, I got just a tiny tick on one and nothing on anything else. And this was one that had dropped before.
This was one that had dropped before?
Female voice: Mm-hm.
I don't understand the question too tightly here.
Second female voice: Well, what she's worried about is that she says that she went through, and she had five levels reacting before.
She had five.
Second female voice: And she found the level, and she ran the level, and she flattened the level. And now she did an assessment again, and she found one level only reacting this time on the E-Meter, and that level stayed in and stayed reacting, didn't it?
Female voice: Mm-hm.
Second female voice: It stayed in.
But that's what's supposed to happen.
Second female voice: I know.
Female voice: No, back up a little bit more. On the last time when I made an assessment and ran the Prehav, well, there were several that dropped. Well, so then I made another assessment. And on this assessment only one level dropped at all.
Well! What is wrong with this?
Female voice: Well, it seems to me like there ought to have been . . .
Has the sky been blue all day?
Second female voice: It's all right that way?
I mean, that's the same order of magnitude. You're complaining because the sky's been blue all day.
Female voice: Okay.
That's what you should get.
Female voice: Good.
You shouldn't get anything else, Virginia.
Female voice: I should be so lucky!
Yeah. You should be so lucky! There's nothing to sort out. However, if something like that did happen—and I'll tell you something to keep you from worrying. She needs a magnetic compass!
Female voice: I've got problems.
She's got problems. I'll give you something to keep you from worrying. You've assessed the Prehav Scale, and found only one level dropping. You should be so lucky. That's what's supposed to happen. Very often you find four or five levels dropping, you have to sort out the one. But you go into a Prehav Assessment and find just one level dropping. Great! All right. Your work's been done for you. So everything is dandy.
But, I'll give you a stable datum. When in doubt, check rudiments. And that's a good stable datum for anybody to have. you say, "Well, there must be something real wrong with what I have just done. There must be something wrong here, because I've only found the person's goal, and they eventually had just one goal. And then I found their terminal, and they only could have one terminal. And then I found their level, and they only could have one level. There must be something wrong here." Check rudiments for every session you've given the pc.
Female voice: I could do that.
Check rudiments for every session you have given the pc, from beginning to end. Just check rudiments all to pieces, in all directions, consistently. And then just find out if those rudiments have been in all the time. And you still only have one goal. And you still only have one terminal. And you still only have . . . You've got no choice but to go on clearing the person. All right? All right.
Yes, Bob?
Male voice: Ron, what are the mechanics involved when a preclear flattens a level? What's happening?
What are the mechanics involved when a preclear flattens a level?
Male voice: Yeah.
It is, everything pertinent to that level has been pulled out of that chain. It doesn't mean you have discharged the whole engram chain or the bank on a terminal, but it means that the significance of that level has now been nulled out of every incident that the pc has contacted while doing a five-way bracket. And it simply means—no more, no less—(let us say, "failed leave") let's say there is no more impulse on the subject of "failed leave." This, however, may leave the whole bulk of an incident. See, a whole incident may be there, and the only thing taken out of it now is "failed leave." You got the idea?
Male voice: Yes.
All right. So what we've done, in running Prehav levels, if you get an idea—get a mental image picture here of a whole bunch of picket fences. And here's a picket fence, and then on top of that we'll put another picket fence, and then on top of that we'll put another picket fence, and we call each one of these picket fences an engram.
All right. Each one is the whole Prehav Scale. And each picket there is a level of the Prehav Scale. So we run "failed leave." Well, eventually when the level is flat, in these three picket fences we're not going to find any "failed leave." That's going to be gone. So this many pickets is going to be missing. One picket out of each engram. Got the idea?
All right. Now the way you clear, eventually, is that you just pull all the pickets off all these fences. And, of course, you have run all of the engrams. Now, there's a shortcut way to do it. That's a shortcut, is after you've got these things stirred up and the pc is doing an escape mechanism on these things and really isn't pulling up many pickets, you put the pc wherever the pc was in valence and run that particular fence. And run all the pickets off of the fence but not with all of the levels of the Prehav Scale. "Not-know" runs the whole lot.
Now, don't be amazed if later on when you're running the Prehav Scale, there was one picket left in that engram. He says, "What's this? I thought we ran that." This would be quite common. "We thought we ran that, and here I am parked at this crossroads." Well, it's gone now.
And you say, "Well, how about parked at the crossroads?"
Well, there's nothing to it now, but there was that part of that engram left of being parked at the crossroad. What you've done is left one picket on the fence. And that is the whole thing. So there would be two systems of running a bank. They're both successful. But independently, taken one from the other, they are not adequate. Neither one is totally adequate for all cases. So you can run both systems.
Now, both systems in combination, are totally adequate for all cases. So you've got the system by which you remove a picket from engram one, a picket from engram two, a picket from engram three and then a picket from—oh, eighteen hundred pickets from the remaining locks, and so forth, that have to do with these things. All right. And that is the end of a level. There's no more postulate of that character left in those pictures.
Next, you take your new level, and you pull all of those pickets out. And then you take a new level, and you pull all those pickets out. And theoretically, at the end of all of this you've pulled all the pickets. And the pc is capable now of blowing pickets faster. So any new bank that shows up, he as-ises it.
All right. Now, that system is one system. And the other system is, you find the person's goal terminal and now find all incidents relating to the terminal. Assess the engrams—this is no level running, you see—assess the engrams necessary to resolve the case and run those as engrams, one after the other. No Prehav levels, see? Run them one after the other, after the other, after the other, after the other, and get rid of engram after engram, and lock chain after lock chain. All having to do with that. Well, the odd part of it is, if you did a very good job with that, you would wind up with a Clear.
All the pickets gone, with Prehav levels, you wind up with a Clear. All the engrams gone, with this other type of engram running, you run—you wind up with a Clear. You're addressing the same thing, only there are two different ways to handle them.
The best system is to take both systems and mix them. use a mixed system. Why?
Well, you use the Prehav runs and that throws the engrams into very plain relief and gets rid of a tremendous amount of locks, and then finds the pc sitting in places that aren't easy for the pc to blow. So we pick up an engram—or two or three—and we run them. Differently or indifferently, it doesn't matter much as long as we get them relatively flat.
Now, we go ahead and go back to Prehav level running and when he hits these pins again, of course, the only thing that's left is something like a card house. And all that's left in there is "faith." See, we didn't hit any "faith" while we were doing an engram run. And we hit "faith" on a general Prehav run, and bang! That is the end of that engram, and he gets the delayed reaction on the benefit you think he should have gotten from having run the engram.
You will very often find yourself sitting around having just run an engram that explains the whole pc's life condition, everything else. We know everything now about the pc. The pc has run it fully. And they say, "Oh, that's fine." And they don't change very much, they think, and it never really lifted, and so on, and you get kind of disappointed.
All right, you go back to a Prehav level run. And you'll be running along very happily and all of a sudden you've assessed him at "faith" on this terminal, see. And "faith."
The pc will say, "Well, I could have faith in . . ." It was an engram with a polar bear, you see. He and the polar bear were fighting over a fish or something. And he has faith in his ability to get this fish away from the polar bear. That's the answer, see. And he'll go . . .
You say, "What's happened?"
"It blew up."
"What blew up?"
"Well, that—that whole—you know the engram we were running last week? Well, you know, I hadn't really ever noticed, but I never really did get the fish away from the polar bear, you know? And there's nothing left of this thing. You know, here we are, out on the ice. And you know, ice isn't bad. you know, I'd always figured before it was bad. And fish tastes pretty good, you know? What do you know!"
And you'll get the relief on the Prehav run, after the fact of running the engram, see. Delayed reaction.
So these two systems work to do the same thing. Which is what? Get the pc to confront, as-is and handle his reactive bank.
What actually does happen, is the reactive bank gets confronted and handled, understood and within the realm of control of the pc. As soon as this occurs, he no longer has one. you have a Clear. Okay?
Male voice: Right.
All right. We won't go into the technicality of he's got these things and standing ridges of electronic waves, and they have flow systems connected with them. And that we're really running an electric eel in the first place. There's too—we have too great a stress these days on the scientific balderdash. You know, the ergs and the ohmiwhums go whoom-pa-poom, and now we know something we don't know anything. Okay?
Yes?
Male voice: Are the Change Processes still being used in auditing— straight auditing—and what is their importance in auditing today?
Well, the Change Processes . . . You're asking if they're still being used in auditing and what their status is right now?
Male voice: Yes.
All right. Tell you that very briefly.
Simply been relegated to the Prehav Scale. On assessment, you run into Change, you can still move over into the Secondary Scale, and you run it. But you will find that general runs on the Prehav are nowhere near as beneficial as specific runs on the exact terminal of the pc. In view of this fact, it is actually practically a waste of time, in comparative times of running, to run anything but the pc's terminal.
So the whole idea of Change, Change Processes and everything is still in, but it operates only against the preclear's terminal only at that time when the preclear, in being assessed on the Prehav Scale, gets a reaction on Change. Change is the level, so you run Change. And everything you know about Change is applied to running Change at that level that you find the pc at. Okay? Right.
Yes, ma'am.
Female voice: Ron, can you give me some more data on how to unravel the grouper?
Can we get some more data on how to unravel the grouper? Have you got a grouper? Did you yourself get whammoed into a grouper?
Female voice: I have, but also I've had pcs who have, too.
Has your grouper unraveled?
Female voice: No.
It hasn't?
Female voice: At least I can hope on tonight!
Hmm?
Female voice: I hope to have it unraveled tonight.
You hope to have it unraveled tonight. Well, I won't tell you that grouper is one of the most insidious, one of the most horrible, one of the most fantastic . . .
But I actually will tell you that a grouper can be a thoroughgoing bitch. It is mean. And when you run a pc into a grouper, his apparency is that all time jams. In actuality, he has come up against the whole time jam. He is confronting something.
What is a grouper? A grouper is a number of incidents becoming located, apparently, in one time instant. A number of instances have apparently all occurred in one time instance. So we have a number of incidents located at one point on the track.
Now, I have had pcs say that they felt them all pull in. Or that it all collapsed on them. No, no, no, no and no, no. They ran to that point of the track where it all collapsed on them. But the collapse occurred at another time than it occurred. They think it happened in the session. It actually happened a few million years ago. you get the slight difference here? All right, now that time misnomer, all by itself, would throw a red herring at the pc, and he would be thinking about his grouper having occurred in auditing. When it—as a matter of fact, it didn't occur in auditing.
Now, I'll give you a number of ways of taking apart a grouper. There is no doubt about the fact that groupers are fairly serious breeds of cat. First place, let us look at the anatomy of the grouper before we worry about how to take it apart. Let's find out what we're taking apart. Let's not do the Egyptian stunt of repairing radios before we know that they receive broadcasts. Civilize I mean, the psychiatrist, the ancient physician, all alike, were guilty of this.
The grouper most commonly is a vacuum. It is a cold installed vacuum. And a grouper is normally found associated with implants. And the person who has a grouper has implanted people. There you are. Now, that is what that is all about.
Now, I didn't mean to make you ashamed. I see you blushed. Because . . .
Female voice: I ran an incident doing that Saturday.
You what?
Female voice: I said I ran an incident doing that.
That's what it is. All right.
Now, you have to know what you were doing. What were you doing? Now, that is the main thing. Because, of course, a grouper cannot hang up on a pc unless the pc has done it. A grouper—anything that can mash electricity— the only thing which can mash electricity with a crunch like that or cause an individual to slam pictures into his bank like that is a cold vacuum.
There are many systems of doing this. For instance, the Russians—ha!— talk about brainwashing! Ha! If you wanted to go . . . After running into a grouper, it'd be very, very hard to convince the pc that he ought to engage professionally in brainwashing. I think it'd be very difficult to convince somebody that had hit a grouper, that he ought to go ahead and fix himself up for new groupers.
But the way it is done is this way: is all you'd have to do is take a handful of dry ice and throw it—and smash it into the fellow's face and hold it there and that would be that. That's a twenty-second brainwash. He'd have very little memory of what he was doing, his whole bank would collapse and that would be it. Just get a handful of carbon dioxide and smash it into the person's face. That is the way a grouper is done. Now you know.
Now you can—it takes the Russian seventy days and it should take you something on the order of seven seconds. Cold. Cold is an extreme stillness. Time is a temperature. Therefore, you must not run no-motions, in the vicinity of a grouper. You must not run no-motion anyhow, but don't run it particularly in a grouper. Don't start asking somebody who's in a grouper, "Who is that standing there?" Because the only thing in a grouper is supreme no-motion. It is no-motion fringed entirely with motion.
Now of course, the tiniest temperature, such as forty degrees below zero, is hot compared to the vacuum in which a grouper is sitting. Think it over. That's a hot—that'd be a hot day. Because most of these groupers are at the temperature of about minus two hundred centigrade. So you see, forty degrees below zero, Fahrenheit, would be a warm spring day. But that is motion. There is enough motion in that temperature to cause motion and a stable datum. Follow that? That's an unhappy fact.
Look, you look at extreme cold as extreme motionlessness. All temperature is based on the phenomena of motion. If you have motion you have temperature. If you don't have motion, you don't have temperature. Time is a temperature. If you don't have motion, if you don't have temperature, you don't have time. This is the way a thetan has got it all figured out. Now, you understand that?
So if you say extreme coldness equals no motion equals no time, then you will see that the only thing that you can run in the vicinity of a grouper is motion and time. So a grouper can be taken apart, laboriously, by motion and time. Do you see how that would be?
All right. This fellow's sitting there in a whole bunch of plastered up pictures and he can't make any sense out of it whatsoever. Now, the way to get him into it very solidly would be to say, "When have you been cold? Thank you. When have you been cold? Thank you. When have you been cold? Thank you. When have you been cold?" It would group and group and group and it'd be tighter and tighter. And then to vary the agony, say, "All right. What in that grouper isn't moving? Thank you very much. Is there anything else in the grouper there that isn't moving Thank you very much." And he'd really be in the grouper tight. See, you could actually take somebody and audit him this way, and he'd get tighter and tighter and tighter into the grouper. You understand that?
Well, understanding that, then the road out of a grouper should be very plain. All you have to do is ask him about motion, or ask her about motion, and ask them about time. So questions about motion and time will free any pc from a grouper. But don't consider that it's necessarily a fast action. It does not necessarily take place in two minutes.
All right. Motion and time will free up a grouper. Now, if we put unknownness in connection with that, now we really have something interesting in the way of processes, see. We got time and motion as our basics. Now we're going to add the ingredient of unknowingness. So these three, now, would be a double-barreled whirl devil as far as a grouper was concerned. And we could ask somebody a question of this character about a grouper: we could say, "When was the time unknown to you?" Yeah, "When was the time unknown to you?" "What time was unknown? What haven't you known about time? To what person has time been unknown?" You generally get the most delinquent and procrastinating member of the family, you see.
It doesn't matter how you phrase these. I'm just giving you the skeletal structure of commands.
All right. Now, we take motion. And we'll say, "What motion wouldn't you care to undertake?" Now, that will lead in the direction of a grouper. "What motion . . ." I mean if you're processing somebody who has a grouper. "What motion wouldn't you care to undertake?" Which is the idea of motion and restraint at the same time. Motion and restraint. Motion and restraint.
All right. That has some workability. Give you another nice one, is, "What motion was unknown?" And you'll run every surprise the person's ever had. Now, people who are in grouper are very allergic to surprises. They don't like to be startled. Their hair stands up straight. When they have long blond hair it reaches the ceiling, practically. They don't like to be startled.
So, "What motion was unknown?" will produce some of the bitchier, meaner somatics that you have ever had anybody run into. "What motion was unknown?" "What motion was unknown to you?" "What motion was unknown to another?" This kind of thing. And you'll get all sorts of bank phenomena of various kinds. And you'll get a grouper—looks like the grouper's stacking up. And it isn't. All you're doing is running off the instant when it stacked up.
Now, this is what makes a grouper hard to run. Because no matter what you do to it, it looks like it's stacking up. Do you see why? Because you're running a moment when it stacked up. So that every instant that you're running in the grouper looks like an instant—looks like it is stacking up now. There is no time in it. So therefore, the stack-up then is what the pc sees and conceives it to be a stack-up now. So it always looks like the grouper is getting worse. And pcs become very disheartened when they start seeing one of these groupers start going to work. All you have to do is keep running the stack-up.
If you had an idea—I'll give you an idea of what a grouper looks like to a pc. But this is a rather poor view of it. We've got an art gallery. We've got an art gallery. The Corcoran, the Metropolitan, some such art gallery, and you got pictures all over the walls, everywhere. And there's a fountain in the middle of the art gallery. And suddenly and mysteriously, every picture flies off the walls and hits the fountain and sticks. And you have nothing on the fountain but a mound of pictures.
Now, having hands and a truck, it would be very easy to pick up these pictures. So to get a little more sense into this grouper idea, we have to go just a little bit further. If, after they all flew off the walls and hit the fountain and laid there in a pile, the fountain then began to spurt permanent glue and was left to do so for some years; we now go back to the fountain to pick up the pictures and put them back on the wall. And that's about the way the pc looks—to it—it looks to him, you know. And he says, "This would be the grimmest thing that ever happened to me. This is terrible."
The horror of it is, is he thinks it happened in the session. See? It looks to him like it happened in the session. Why, he triggered the incident, didn't he? In the session, didn't he? It's obvious. Didn't he? Only, of course, he didn't trigger the incident in the session, he ran into an incident where all the pictures were flying into the fountain. And he ran into this in session, and because it's got timelessness, he gets fooled at once.
Now, if you wanted to relieve the pc of having run the grouper, you would run the auditor that ran into the grouper, and you'd run the session out. And the grouper would disappear. And then the pc would get audited, very carefully, by somebody else, and the grouper would appear. And the person would think that this collapse again occurred in this next session. And of course, it never occurred in the session at all. you see where we're going now?
Now, if you wanted to free up a grouper, all you have to do is find the picture the pc isn't grouped in. And run it. Don't keep running the pc through the grouper. Find another picture. Because although you will find there's a grouper, there are other pictures north and south of the grouper in which the pc is in valence and which will run. So you rehabilitate the pc's confidence in the ability to run a picture. And eventually the grouper itself will work out.
What does a grouper look like? Well, I've just told you. In action, that is the way it looks. But how is the engram—what is the actual engram which contains a grouper? The actual engram—well, I have personal acquaintance with one of them. A rocket jockey lying on a bed being hit by electronic rays. He's strapped down to this bed, and he's being hit by electronic rays so as to disabuse any further idea of him exteriorizing and going out and running one of those confounded planes that's been strafing the capitol so regularly. Get the idea? They want him pinned, and they want him there, and that's it. And they do an implant.
Well, he thinks he is being hit by moving rays. Where, as a matter of fact, they move in a cold vacuum on him and plow it straight into his body. And of course a thetan doesn't move out of that very easily. Particularly, if he's done it. see that?
All right. So you'd have an incident where the person was actually—the incident, really, is a person lying on a bed with pictures flying at him. All you got to do is keep the pc's attention on the bed, not the pictures.
If you're going to run the grouper, find out where the pc is located in the grouper—whether as a person who was administering groupers (the overt), which is the better one to run, or the motivator (lying on a bed)—and then keep his attention on that.
All right. "What don't you know about that patient?" See? Not "What don't you know about his pictures?" or ". . . your pictures?" or something like that. "What don't you know about that patient?" or something of the sort. Now, all this is very interesting. Not very serious. You can unbale—I have seen this done; I have subjective reality on this—you can unbale a grouper by running ARC Straightwire. "Recall an ARC break. Thank you. Recall an ARC break. Thank you. Recall an ARC break. Thank you. Recall an ARC break. Thank you." And the person will unstack right down to the actual incident in which the grouper occurs. That is an old process that happens to do this exact trick. "Recall an ARC break." Doesn't matter what time or place they're recalling the ARC break, they will eventually wind up in the grouper because that is an ARC break to end all ARC breaks.
All right. So you could unstack the case and find the case lying there.
And now your auditing must be very careful. And you must go on running, "Recall an ARC break." Don't go switching it off just because you've found the incident. Flatten "Recall an ARC break," while having spotted where the grouper is. Don't go Q-and-Aing. Just because you run into an incident, don't ever stop the auditing session and run the incident and then run a little more Prehav, and then he runs into another incident, so you decide you'd better run that incident. Awn! That is—that is for the birds.
Run what you're running according to your plan. And when you have flattened it, now take up what has happened, perhaps in the next session. Got the idea? That's the way you audit.
You always assess engrams. You never at any time run an engram just because it seems hot, or the pc seems to be in it, or something like this. you assess them. If the E-Meter says so, they can be run. If the E-Meter reacts, the engram can be run. If the E-Meter doesn't react, the E-Meter is right, the engram can't be run. No reaction, no run. So you always assess engrams. You never switch off in the middle of a Prehav run to do this.
Now, you're in a rather deep and complicated subject when you're into the subject of groupers, because it has to do with the fact that somebody's collapsed a bank on somebody with a thud. It has happened to everybody. And there's practically everybody who has got a grouper at one time or another. And it needn't become fashionable. The truth of the matter though, it requires good, well-skilled auditing to handle this kind of thing.
Just in the common course of human events, a grouper would come apart anyplace. But the first rule I would lay down on it is, don't run the grouper. You can uncover it, that's all right, and so forth. Don't bother with it. Find an engram that the pc can run and get the pc to run it. Because the pc can be moved out of that grouper area as easily as out of any other engram. But a pc is so fixated on it, and a pc believes so implicitly it happened right in the session when they were being audited, that they say that the session should cure it. And that, of course, is what is intended when you're implanting people: that if they ever run into it, they're not going to get out of it.
Now, what kind of person applies groupers? Almost anybody in space opera is liable to one fine day take his finger off his number and decide that the enemy's habit of exteriorizing from bodies shot down, and going back and picking up a doggone Woolworth second-hand body, and picking up another scout craft and coming over and attacking again with all of his information must cease.
So space opera very commonly develops practices by which the enemy is made to forget. Forget what? Well, that's very essential because after you've captured somebody or shot him down in your operational area, of course, he knows it. And if he simply flies out of his ruddy 'ead and goes back to base and picks up another body, he'll bomb you out of existence. This kind of thing was quite common on the track. All right. Sounds pretty wild, but it nevertheless was very common. Far commoner than being a streetcar conductor.
Now, the answer was specialized implanting. And it became very, very specialized. Now, what is the most antipathetic thing about space? It is cold. And the next most antipathetic thing about space? It is lonely. And the next most antipathetic thing about space?
Female voice: Black.
Hm? What?
Female voice: It's black as tar.
You see? You get what it is. So you just take the elements that the— space opera doesn't like, and you put all those things together, and you've got a grouper, a very nice one. Naturally, somebody's sitting in a scout craft all by himself, and it's only two and a half years to the next system, you see, and he's being sent over there, and he sits there for two and a half years. He'll start to self-audit whether he likes it or not. Yeah! The only memories he's got, the only thing he can see, you see, is his own pictures. And he'll pull his own pictures around, and so forth.
And then space itself does a lot of brainwashing You're hoppity-guppitting along at umpteen light-years per whumph, and there's a meteorite shower.
Well, the manufacturers were very good. They were very good, reliable people, but remember it was war when this craft was built, so there is no shock absorbers for meteorites in the nose. And the windscreens, and so forth, have nothing like a double panel. And you're traveling at such fantastic rates of speed that when you hit the meteorite shower, all you know about it is that you are in space someplace, probably falling quietly into a sun. one moment you were traveling at three light-years per oomph, and the next moment, why, you were falling into the sun. And you hardly know what the hell happened.
Well, what the hell happened is that the meteorites came through the ship with a whoosh, you see, and even though they missed you, they took all the air out of the ship. They took everything out of the ship. And having done so, they let in this tremendous cold.
Now, what becomes very interesting is, is the meteorite is very often hot when it does this. It was cold a moment ago, but it has just hit, remember, a very fast traveling object. And the disintegration of the meteorite and the disintegration of the object, alike, have heat. So it's nothing to be standing on a ship and be hit with a red-hot object, after which you're instantly very cold because space is cold. Red-hot, ice-cold. Boom-boom. And they're not a split second apart. You couldn't even measure the microseconds, you see, of difference between them. All right, that makes a nice, hefty engram. It makes a nice one. It makes a lovely one.
Well, of course, when they start really implanting the boys, they naturally will ARC break it as much as they can, because that really makes it stick. They make it betrayal. And they tell this fellow, "Now, you have a good rest, because we're going to exchange you tomorrow. And you can go home, only we're having a hard time putting your ship together, you see, because it was so badly shattered by our ack-ack. And you have a good rest, and so forth. And here's a book to read on our ideology, and so on. And when you get back home. . ." They build him all up, you see. "And here's some nice electronic soup to eat, and you're a nice boy and a whale of a fellow." And the chaplain usually comes in and talks to him about his soul. And it's all wonderful, you see. And he's just in this beautiful mood, where these fellows are the princes, they're just the princes of space. He really—they've almost won, if they only knew it, you see. And so he stretches out on his bed with a deep, relaxed yawn, and a panel drops on the other side of the wall, and red-hot soup hits him. Which then turns ice-cold, and there goes his bank.
Now, what he never knows is whether or not he is hit by pictures created by them or created by him. That's what he doesn't know. Are they his pictures or their pictures? Well, he thinks he's being hit with an assortment of pictures. Why is he being hit with an assortment of pictures? Well, they're all of the same class. Well, he's in that kind of a circumstance, isn't he. So the pictures he's mocking up actually are all of a class. They'll be something like 180 pictures of deaths stacked up on 180 pictures of wrecked ships stacked up on something else, and he's sure that somebody shot these pictures at him.
Well, this is a nice trick, because he disowns them. He says, "They're not my pictures." Well, who the hell else was around there making pictures? Just him! So another characteristic of the grouper is that it's totally disowned, and the preclear is totally irresponsible for it.
Now, he dramatizes this irresponsibility by saying it happened in the session. He dramatized the irresponsibility by saying he can do nothing about it. Don't you see, all these things add up together. Because these things, when they are vicious, always go in as an ARC break, the ARC break— "Recall an ARC break" process unstacks one, and so on.
If you worry about them too much, you're at fault, because the pc who is in a grouper can be run, I assure you, in many other incidents which will react on the E-Meter, and you needn't pay any attention to the grouper at all. A grouper is a grouper. And sooner or later the pc will fall wise to the fact that while being a space jockey, or something of the sort, he was one fine day recruited as part of the propaganda corps. And he was supposed to take the little people they were fighting and lure them in by some kind of statements or another, so that they walk straight into a red-hot electronic cauldron which goes ice-cold, and then they don't go back and pick up new bodies and keep the war going And sooner or later, you'll run into some kind of an implant like this.
I see I have certain people present who don't like this idea at all. Well, why get emotional about it, I always say. It's just a space opera. It's not real. There's really nothing to it. Of course man has never lived before. We know that. He's never been up in space before. These, by the way, are just the common defenses of people stuck in space opera.
You get some fellow telling me that he never under God's green earth would read that trash called science fiction. I'll say, "Okay, get the idea of implanting somebody," and leave him in a grouper. I mean, it's easy. Scientologists should not be antagonized. You have too many weapons.
Anyway, I repeat, the best advice is to find an incident the pc can run, and run it very nicely. And all of a sudden, light will dawn and bells will ring, and so on. Of course, the keynote of any grouper is not-knowingness.
Now, a grouper that turns on with a hell of a somatic accompanying it, is another horse of a different hue. So this grouper turns on and it's—the pc finds it uncomfortable. All right, so it's uncomfortable. But the grouper turns on and starts ripping a hole in his stomach—I don't mean this literally, but it sure feels like it, something of this sort—and it is hot and it is heavy, and he does not like any part of it—Ohhhhh!—can give you a process, fortunately, which happens to handle this exact circumstance that applies only to a grouper and applies only to one that is running hot and heavy, with a heavy somatic. A special case. And that is, "What was unknown about that pain?" Interesting target, isn't it? "What was unknown about that pain?"
And before I give a—get off this subject—you'll find out that's good anyhow. That's an awfully good assist. All by itself. It's that pain. It's the one he's got right now; that's the only one you're interested in. You're not interested in what was unknown about pain, because you've got the whole track flying now. It's just that pain.
And on this same subject, allied to it: A pc who is suffering a tremendously fixed attention, as he is in a grouper, becomes very hard to audit. And if the pc has gone into an incident, which is a grouper, and then you are trying to audit the pc, you may have a time on your hands. You may have a bit of trouble on your hands keeping the person in-session and not recognize that you have a pc in a grouper. And the pc has a horrendous somatic of some kind or another.
Well, it's time to investigate what the pc is in. And if it is this action of there's pictures, pictures, pictures all over the doggone place. They're all plastered up a la art gallery, and it's all gone black, and that's what happened and God knows, it's all terrible, and so forth. Then you use these same mechanisms that you use to take the grouper apart. Okay? Use the same mechanisms I've just given you. If he is in a serious somatic condition this other one handles it. "What about that pain was unknown?" or "What is unknown about that pain?"
Now, you must have this datum with regard to running engrams: How did the engram chain come up? How did it come up? Why are you handling this particular engram?
Well, let's not try to look it up in the encyclopedia. You were running a terminal, weren't you? So a continuous mistake that could be made in running engrams is to forget that they are on a terminal chain and to run them as "you," "you," "you," "you," "you." "What don't you know about that picture?" You get the idea? Because remember, you're running a terminal chain, here. The only reason the thing came up is because of terminal. Well, you are now trying to get the pc, as "you," to run something which is a package called a valence. And I've already told you the reason you're running valences is because the pc has disowned the somatics and so forth, of the valence.
So if you remember this when you are running engrams, you will get into much less trouble: that the engram is actually the engram of the valence in which the pc is. And therefore, therefore and thereby and thereunto, you should mention the valence while you're running engrams.
Well, all right, we get fifteen engrams. The pc's been in and out of fifteen engrams; we're running Prehav Scale on a looper. And now we sort these engrams out very carefully, and we find out which one falls the most, and now we run it all as "you." Does that seem odd to you? Now that you look at it, does it seem odd to you? He—you found it by running a looper. You were running a looper, "faith in a looper." "How could you have faith in a looper?" you know, and so on. And now you've got fifteen engrams sorted out. Well, of course, they are the engrams of what? They're not the engrams of the pc, except secondarily. They're the engrams, primarily, of a looper.
So we would have to remember this if we wanted an engram to free up. And although we can of course use "you" copiously, in running the engram, "What don't you know?" or "What wasn't known to you? What wasn't known to others?" and so forth. For heaven's sakes, let's mention a looper. "What wasn't known to a looper in that engram?" See? Saying that was the terminal—just so I won't restimulate you, because I'm sure none of your terminals are a looper.
So you get the idea? Now, this also applies to running one of these groupers. Not "How would you get such a grouper?" but "How would a looper get into one?" Got the idea? "Now, just how would a looper go about getting himself in that kind of a fix? All right. What wouldn't a looper know about it?" See? "How would a looper get somebody into that kind of a fix?" "What would a looper make unknown about such a thing?" Got the idea? So use that terminal when you is running engrams and you will get a faster run and you won't have quite so much trouble.
Now, I'll give you a much more serious situation with regard to a grouper. Somebody is run into a grouper that you do not have the goal or terminal of. Aah! Or you pick up a pc off the street and he is in one and you don't know his goal or terminal. Now, what are you going to do about that? That's pretty grim. Isn't that terrible? He's obviously in a grouper. It's all black and the pictures are plastered all over, and you don't know his goal and you don't know his terminal, and what can you do about that? Come on, tell me.
Huh?
Female voice: ARC Straightwire?
Huh?
Male voice: You find his goal and terminal first?
Yeah, that's right, you find his goal and terminal, of course. You're not in the business of running groupers. And a grouper has nothing whatsoever to do with finding a pc's goal and terminal. You can find them in people with groupers and snoopers. It doesn't matter.
Almost on a dare, I'd—if insane asylums were open to human beings and other—and people and so forth, if I could—I used to have a collar that was on backwards. Used to put a collar on backwards and had a card printed, "Reverend Witherspoon," and used to go in to console the dear, dead benighted, and so on. I should exhume this celluloid collar. I suppose it's still in good condition. Because I think you could probably find the goal and terminal on every person in that institution, just whimity-bam. I imagine they'd just audit like a well-oiled dream. Because you can run engrams on them, why couldn't you find a goal and terminal? Ought to be very easy.
No, if you find somebody whose case is all jammed up and has been jammed up this way in former auditing, they tell you—in other words, they've run into a grouper on the track—what should you do? Q-and-A with a pc, or go about your job of auditing? That's right, always. Always.
So, it works out similarly. Similarly, if you've got somebody's goal and terminal, don't neglect the fact that you have the person's terminal in trying to undo a grouper, see. And you would say, "Where would a looper go to get warm?" Be almost a lead-pipe question on a grouper, because of course its basis is cold. And he gets cold, all over. He has this—chilled!
You in England are very lucky. You don't have restimulative weather. All the same, all the same. We have very nice, mild weather. No snowstorms in the summer, none in the winter to amount to anything. No sunshine in the winter, none in the summer to amount to anything.
Actually, we did very well this last past summer, I was very proud of the climate. We did very, very well. Only gone through a couple of hurricanes lately, and Carla is still to come. Carla will be here about the 2nd of October, I think. I was calculating her speed. But I—that was many days ago, and she may have changed course since then. And it wouldn't be so bad if it was still carrying some of the furniture, and so forth, from the gulf coast, but uh . . .
All right. Now, I've given you a very long and arduous dissertation on this, and actually there's quite a great deal to know about it. I hope you don't treat this information lightly because a grouper is an interesting phenomenon. It is one of the many phenomena of the track, and it is an interesting thing. But it is cold! It's cold in there! And you say to somebody, "Now, how cold have you ever been? Recall another time you've been cold. Good, good." If you ran that long enough, they'd almost certainly wind up in a grouper.
Okay. Time for one more question. I guess I've overwhumped you. People are looking rather sick. People are looking rather sick and ill and pale. one more question.
Female voice: How would you go about cleaning up every session a guy's ever had ?
How would you go about cleaning up every session a person has ever had? Well, in view of the fact the auditing track is not a very long track, that's a very easy thing to do. If you simply ran the ARC break process which you now have in the present rudiments, you'd clean the lot. Okay?
It's interesting sometime to take off the auditing by whatever means or process. We had a student one time, in Washington, in the Academy, that was auditing somebody, and came down with measles. And he was promptly and immediately rushed to the nearest sawbones, and the sawbones couldn't find any measles. He looked around but the pc was not teasing" very much. And it finally came down to my desk, and I said, "Hey, hey, hey, hey!" I just said "Let's see, what was he doing two or three days ago?" And they said, "So and so," and I said, "Well, run the session off." And so they got hold of him, and ran him running the session, I think, or something like that, and the measles disappeared within the hour.
Measles seem to be something that goes into very easy restim. I notice in old Dianetics—I've had a letter from somebody that picked up the book, read, I think, half of the first chapter and then audited his wife. Ran her into measles, and she was instantly taken to the hospital with measles. Only the doctor couldn't find any measles. And she was all broken out, and three to ten days later why it all ceased and she didn't have measles anymore.
It's of interest to get off an auditing session where something like that has occurred. Now it sounds like auditing is dangerous, doesn't it? Well, actually, it usually passes out. If—what's restimulated by auditing is much more easily restimulated by life. And let me point this out, that there isn't any auditor presence as he's walking through life. That's the only reason that you should be good auditors is because it's very easy to do things that life will restimulate.
Okay? Anybody particularly worried about these groupers? Well, I'll tell you, you should be worried about these groupers. The idea of going on down there. . . In the first place the whole war started in fun. There was nothing much to it. They were just blasting a few cities and—you know, it—as fellows will—and there was no sense in getting serious like this about it. And then picking those poor prisoners of war and sticking them in that room.
Female voice: Well, what happened to them after that? That's what I want to know.
Well, they just kind of threw them out on the trash heap. I had an instance of that character. Not a fellow who was given an implant, but a fascinating instance. It's the funniest engram I think I'd ever run into.
Fellow was in a spaceship, and it had hit something or other. He'd gotten shot up and the cold air had gotten in or something of the sort, or the cold lack of air. The air had been let out and the cold had come in. And anyway he'd been orbiting around as commonly happens in a space wagon. And he'd been orbiting around, not minding his own business but with nothing to think of, nothing to do, and plastered up against the side of the spaceship.
So finally a rescue team—you know, like one of these Air Rescue Squadrons they have up in Alaska or something—spotted this ship orbiting around before it ran into a sun and warmed him up for good. And they picked him up, and he was still in his body, you see—doll body. And, of course, the rescue team didn't pay any attention to this and didn't test for this or anything else, but salvaged his shoes, you see, which were these magnetic, walk-on-the-hull-and-don't-drift-off, put-out-by-the-Little-Bide-a-Wee Space Jockey Society authority stamp. A good spacing seal of approval, you know. And they took off his shoes, and they took away his belt, and the rest of it was just so much scrap tin can, and threw it over the side. He was still in it. And this pc just went on and on and on about his shoes. And by George, we just couldn't get him unfixed from those shoes. And it seems like ever since he'd had trouble with shoes, you see. He had trouble buying shoes; he had trouble in getting shoes fitted, he had—shoes, shoes, shoes, shoes. That's how serious it all was. Left a terrible trauma about shoes.
You say what happens to them afterwards. Well, they throw them on the garbage dump, or they do something like this, and don't very often suspect the guy is exteriorized.
Very often when a guy's been hit like this, if the intentions were right, he wanders away from his basic team. Or he doesn't go back to his base. He feels very degraded, so he shoves off and gets on another planet someplace and becomes a juvenile delinquent.
You'll find after a severe battle you'll find people in space activities feeling very degraded and so forth. And they can't explain why, and they'll tell you that space is very degrading, and so forth. Well, yeah, they just blew up a planet or fortifications and cities and fields, and they've just chewed up Lord knows how many people, and then they wonder why they feel degraded, you know? Silly things.
But you should cheer up about a grouper of that character. You should cheer up on it. Because if anything is calculated to release a lot of memory, it's one of these things taken apart.
Now, that's no invitation to get into one; that's no invitation to run one or otherwise, but they just are what they are.
You'll also find out that all the other phenomena mentioned in Dianetics are present in engrams. There are bouncers, there are call-backs. You get a guy to the end of the incident, and he's at the beginning of the incident, and you say how the hell did he get there? Well, he's got a call-back at the beginning of the incident. Usually, however, serious engrams have these things symbolically, not verbally. And when you run engrams in Scientology you'll run them symbolically. There's a symbol of some kind or another.
There'll be somebody at the beginning of the engram who's making this sort of a motion, see. And he gets to the end of the track, and all of a sudden he remembers that, and he goes back to the beginning of the thing. And he gets to the end, and he goes back to the beginning. Finally you see this guy waving, you know, tell him to come on. Or he thinks he ought to leave, and it's nothing more than an open door in front of him. You're running him on down the line, all of a sudden he isn't in the incident. And you say, "What happened?" and, "What happened?"
And he'd say, "Well, nothing."
"Well, what happened just a moment ago?"
"Well, I was running down this thing, and—oh, there's that door!" You see?
It's an invitation to leave. So he bounces. Bouncers, groupers, call-back, denyers. This idea of "there's nothing here" can be expressed in various ways. And the guy will run through something, and part of it's blank. And he'll go on through to the end of the thing. And then he'll finally recover a piece of it. And it's some symbol to the effect "there is nothing here," you know. Or somebody has disappeared at that point and he Qs-and-As with it. And so that part of the engram is, of course, missing.
There's all kinds of oddities in running these things—phenomena, phenomena. You can get phenomena-happy about the whole thing. You follow the rules, you'll get out of it.
I am happy to be able to say a word or two about groupers. I have very intimate acquaintance with groupers. And they're a little bit hard to run, occasionally, but the main reason they are, is just those reasons: The person thinks it turned on in the session. It didn't. He thinks it's some other kind of engram. It isn't. It's just an engram. But pictures accumulate to it, so it's in a confusion as to what picture do you run. See, if there's five thousand pictures flying around in the air, well, which picture do you run to run it? Well, instead of worrying about it, why, go find another picture.
And the basis of them are cold. The only thing that can hold anything together like that is motionlessness with an exclamation point.
You know the trick, don't you, of directing the pc's attention to the motion beyond something he is stuck at. Now, I heard a remark here the other day by an auditor that demonstrated they didn't know this, that this was not known. Said all we could find there was a picture of somebody standing still. And I don't think they ran it, because that wasn't adequate. Well, there was a picture of somebody standing still. Well, all the auditor would have had to have done when he found this still picture is just say, "What motion is going on behind the picture?" and all hell would have broken loose. Because the only reason you get a severe "still" is because there is a tremendous motion. And the pc will always look at the "still" and ignore the motion. So if you just put the pc's attention on the motion in that zone or area, the "still" will disintegrate.
People who have still pictures are not "stuck on the track" but withdrawing from motion. And the "still" is a remedy for the motion. So the pc will always take refuge in something that is motionless when the pc believes that the motion is too much for them. And remember, all pain is motion.
All pain is motion. So in painful incidents, you find the plethora of motionless pictures. And you'll find them stuck, stuck, stuck, stuck, stuck. You run him two feet and he's got another stuck picture, and so forth—some holdup. Well, what's the holdup? Well, you've got to direct the pc's attention to the zones and areas of motion. That's all. Just direct his attention to it.
I'll give you a subjective example of this. The Egyptian area is one of the worst for anybody to get anywhere near because it's confusing and violates their beliefs. Why? Because Egypt was space opera from one end to the other. And you'll have somebody standing there on a pyramid, and he's very worried about his cloak blowing open because it exposes—might expose the butt of his ray gun. And he says, "Well, uh—cloak—ray—ray gun. Well, that has nothing to do—I must have a collapsed series of pictures here, or I must be in some kind of a state, because this doesn't agree with any reality that I've been taught in the history books."
Actually, Egypt was a battleground between two space groups, and they set up all this nonsense one way or the other, and all the supermagic, and all that kind of thing. So every once in a while you even find a—you'll even find a science fiction writer trying to run back the coming of Christ to space opera or something. He's just talking straight out of his bank, you see? Marvelous what these fellows will actually pick up.
But the sum and total of this is, it's such a disagreement. It disagrees with the history books. It disagrees with everything and it's sort of got the guy—every—he's—reality is being violated, violated, violated, violated.
So it's these areas of violated reality which give you all kinds of trouble, because the pc doesn't feel that this is very good. And he doesn't feel that he's playing it straight. And he feels the pictures must be dub-in, and he invalidates himself, and all kinds of wild things go on. Where, as a matter of fact, if he just sat there and ran the picture that's turned up, and so on, that would be that. He would come through it on the other end, and then you'd know what the whole thing was all about.
Well, anyway, with that little preamble, I was being run one day on books. And all of a sudden encountered the fact that the Greeks had books. Well, this is not generally known, of course, they've disintegrated these many years, and nobody has anything to do with a Greek book. They don't exist anymore. But actually they were books. They had little wooden covers, and a wooden spine, and they had a printing system. And the printing system consisted of having a bunch of slaves with the alphabets, and the fellow would read these things out, and they'd hand another guy the letter and he'd stamp it, and they'd read out another word and they'd stamp it, and finally they'd get a block print set up. It'd be a block in a frame, and they'd crowd the thing together, and then they would take a piece of papyrus, and so on, which was quite available to them at the time, and they'd spread it over the top of this, inked, and they'd roll it down with a roller and that was a page of the book, and they would then put it in the book. They're kind of hand-made books. They're making a thousand copies of this thing, "Manual for How to Get Along with Alexander," or something.
They would put them one after the other, make them up, and then they'd break this form apart, you see, because these were carved letters. Well, they were all out of wood, the books were out of papyrus, nobody ever preserved one, they've never come forward to present time.
So it's quite startling to find yourself sitting in a Greek garden reading a book, don't you see? This must be dead wrong, you know?
So anyhow, that—I got that all cleared up, and said now, "What do you know, there are books in Egypt. Only the Egyptian system of printing went this way." And you know, the Egyptian system of printing suddenly turned up, and I remembered what that was.
And, of course, that was all pictograph, and so it was a very complicated printing system. Fantastic printing system. You had to have a whole bunch of slaves. And they all stood around great trays of various kinds, so classes of pictographs were arranged according to tray. And a reader would sit up on a platform and he would read a word, and the slave—you see there were thousands of these pictographs—and a slave that had that type of pictograph in charge, see, he would pick it up, and he'd join the circle. And he'd just stand in line, and actually your words were all in line in a number of slaves. But they'd bring them in and they'd put them in the form. And as the slaves would come by they'd keep putting them in the form. And then when you had the frame, you made it up just the way the Greeks did. And you'd ink the face of these pictographs, and you'd run it off on a piece of—so on, and so on.
And I got looking this over and I said, "This is very funny, because you'd think they'd have more light." And what started worrying me, the picture wasn't moving. I'd got into a stuck picture, which was quite unusual for me. And I'd go on, about the printing. Yeah, but printing what? And for this thing to be this stuck, must have been a lot of not-knowingness there. Well, they were printing the orders of the day. For who? Well, for the invader force. The orders of the day. And this was a printing shop that was publishing space orders for issue to space agents operating in Egypt.
Of course, the second that I started realizing something like that, I said, "Space opera. Well, hell, back of this picture there must be the wildest motions that anybody ever heard of." So I just put my attention on the other side of the picture and, of course, that was the end of the print shop, that was the end of everything else, and here we were out there in a good, solid, lovely battle.
The pharaoh had just died, you see, so the boys from the other side wanted to get their candidate in quick, you know. And we wanted to get our candidate in quick, and everything was going off in the usual bombastic fashion, and right there out in the Valley of the Dead, why, you had some boys in khaki uniforms blowing the living pants off of everybody else they could see and anything that moved. And then the funeral procession was coming, so everybody in the battle by common agreement had to pack it up and get the hell out of there, because you didn't dare let the public in on it. you talk about secrecy, man, that was secrecy!
Well, there's a nice, calm subject—books. Pc feels very scholarly about it all, you see. And there is a stuck picture. And then, of course, somewhere in the vicinity of that stuck picture there must be action. And the second he spots the action, all is explained. And, of course, this type of action is a very deep level of don't-know. Nobody must know about it, and as a matter of fact, except Scientology, I don't think anybody ever does, right up to present time.
But they're now flooding the palace of Thebes.
Female voice: Yeah.
And the location of this particular print shop was on the—in back of the lowest dungeons of the print shop. And anybody coming in would, of course, go through all of the prisoners, all of the cells, they'd pass through the lot (and a smelly lot it was), and then they'd get to the back end of the thing and they would run into the telecommunication system to the space command— and the print shop. And I'm sure it is still there. I'm sure it's still there.
But they're flooding it, and I don't know whether that's bad or good. Because think of the horrible shock historians would get. Think of the histories that would have to be rewritten if historians started to tell the truth.
So you see, the picture is held in place by an avoidance of motion or a not-knowness on the subject of motion, and that is what holds a picture in place, and that is all that holds a picture in place. And if you want to look for stickers, or somebody says, "Stay there," in a picture, that isn't really good enough. You don't audit that. you audit the motion which made the picture stick. You got the idea?
You always audit the motion, never audit the "still," and that is one of the basic rules of auditing today: Always audit the motion, never audit the "still." As an auditor then, always call for the motion. Always call for the heat. Never call for the "still" and never call for the cold. And your pc will be kept very nicely out of groupers.
Okay? Well, I said I'd give you a short one today, and almost kept my word. That's it.
Thank you.