FREEZONE BIBLE ASSOCIATION TECH POST

LEVEL 3 ACADEMY LECTURES 07/10

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

LEVEL 3 TAPES

01 SHSBC-170 renumbered 189 17 Jul 62 E-Meter Reads and ARC Breaks
02 SHSBC-183 renumbered 201 9 Aug 62 Goals Listing
03 SHSBC-269 renumbered 297 28 May 63 Handling ARC Breaks
04 SHSBC-283 renumbered 313 11 Jul 63 ARC Breaks
05 SHSBC-286 renumbered 315 17 Jul 63 Dating
06 SHSBC-289 renumbered 318 24 Jul 63 ARC Breaks and the Comm Cycle
07 SHSBC-292 renumbered 321 7 Aug 63 R2H Fundamentals
08 SHSBC-293 renumbered 322 8 Aug 63 R2H ASSESSMENT
09 SHSBC-294 renumbered 323 14 Aug 63 Auditing Tips
10 SHSBC-298 renumbered 327 22 Aug 63 Project 80



R2H FUNDAMENTALS

A lecture given on 7 August 1963

6308C07 SHSBC-292

SHSBC-292 renumbered 321 7 Aug 63 R2H Fundamentals

[Clearsound. Checked against the old reels.]

[80 min.]

========BEGIN LECTURE========

> Poor little waifs, never get a demonstration. Nobody ever
> demonstrates. How can you expect to learn how to audit when
> you don't see it done. No papa, no momma, no chow. Nothing
> to sleep in but a feather bed. Nothing to eat but chicken
> and ice cream. Nobody to take care of me but a mother and a 
> father. [audience laughter]

What's the date?

Audience: August 7th.

August the 7th, A.D. 13, Saint Hill Special Briefing Course.

I'm going to give you a talk today which isn't the official final 
rundown of R2H but which lays down the fundamentals of the process 
itself.

> [to technician?] On track there?

All right. R2H is one of the most satisfying processes that you ever 
cared to run. It is ARC breaks taken apart by assessment. It has a 
tendency to succumb to inexpert handling, and as long as you give a 
good thought to the fundamentals of the process, you won't run a 
cropper. But here is one of the more interesting processes. This 
process is different than any process we've ever had in Dianetics 
and Scientology. Don't think that you understand this process, 
because it's quite different.

This process will run engrams and secondaries. It has tremendous 
power. And therefore it very well may be senior to R3R, in spite of 
the fact that it's an R2. It very well may be senior. It may run 
more bank than these.

And the only thing it won't run is a GPM. And to run a GPM you have 
R3M and R3N.

Oh, you'd forgotten R3M, huh? You wait till one day you run into a 
wildcat GPM, man! And you'll thank your stars for R3M, if you know 
how to do it. Because that's how you got the patterns in the first 
place, was R3M. That's how you got 3N. That's the Papa process.

Out of R3M can be borne patterns. 3N presupposes that you've got the 
pattern. You sit there and let the pc pattycake around and yap 
around and bark around and give you random items and you don't see 
them rocket read, and you don't know which end you're going - 
standing on, and you let him hunt and punch, and keep sitting there 
at the E-Meter ... I think the fashion is to sit there at the E-
Meter as the auditor and just keep shaking your head, "No, it didn't 
rocket read. No, it didn't rocket read," until the pc blows his 
brain out. Of course, he doesn't need a brain. That's ... It's a 
good thing. [laughter]

But R3M will do a wildcat GPM, by which we mean GPM for which you 
have no pattern. And they exist all over the track, and you'll 
eventually run into one, inevitably. Don't think you can just go on 
running the pattern GPMs, because that'd mean your pc was never 
caught in a bind that was an oddball bind, see? He never got out to 
Arcturus and fell in that particular area that nobody else fell 
into, see? I mean, be very fortunate if he was normal and had only 
the normal implants, but that is never true. He's always got an 
oddball one.

So you've got R3M, and that takes care of your offbeat implants. And 
the only change that I would make in it today - I wouldn't ask the 
cross-question on oppose the way it's asked. I wouldn't ask "Who or 
what would oppose...?" to get your next pair. I would say "What does 
the next pair consist of? Give me the oppterm of the third pair." 
That's the one I would use. I would use something like that. And 
then "Who or what would oppose it?" Yeah. And I'd use that as 
phraseology.

Now 3N, that's a lead-pipe cinch. But 3N has this liability: On some 
pcs if you don't random list - I don't care if they had the item or 
not and if it rocket-read or not - you don't get tone arm action. 
And if your tone arm action ceases, just up and random list. Just as 
easy as that. That gets all of your locks off. The RI with all of 
its locks - nothing has changed that, don't you see? Even though 
you've got the item "absolutably cantankerous," why, make him random 
list. "Who or what would oppose it?" And he gives you all kinds of 
things, and that blows the lock and your TA action may restore.

But the big thing that keeps 3N TA action down, of course, is having 
the wrong date and the wrong pattern. There's nothing like having 
the wrong date for the GPM and the wrong pattern from the GPM to 
freeze the tone arm. That's almost certain.

Now, if you add to that session a wrong or out itsa line - return 
line from the pc to the auditor - you of course have got it made. 
The TA simply goes up to the moon and sticks and won't go anyplace 
else. You understand that, don't you?

You'd be surprised how often you find a wrong date. And you're 
running the Helatrobus implants - so you think - and you go right 
into the next goal for which you've listed. And then you try to get 
"absolutably" and you can't get a rocket read, and you say, "What's 
happened? TA's up and stuck. I've got this next goal 'to be a goof.' 
It's obviously the next goal in line, only it isn't here." Shucks, 
man, you're probably running a Bear implant. It's probably shot back 
on the track Lord knows where, because the one thing a GPM won't do 
is properly time. You can duration a GPM and you can time a GPM and 
you can get the date of a GPM almost endlessly.

Why? Because its primary basis is lousing up time. Those two 
opposing items fire against each other - sound like time to the pc, 
produces a no-change situation. So the GPM floats on the track and 
so it's very difficult to time a GPM. So it's just nothing to get 
the "next GPM in line" to run, and find out that it isn't at forty-
three trillion but at fifteen trillion trillion trillion trillion 
trillion trillion trillion. Embarrassing. Eventually you go back and 
start looking for wrong dates on the case, and you finally locate 
that "to be a goof " is not the next Helatrobus GPM but a GPM which 
exists in the early limbos of nowhere.

Now, what's very interesting is an exactly-the-same-looking hill 
with exactly-the-same-looking parking meters with exactly the same 
railroad track existed about trillions-four ago, which laid in an 
entirely different pattern which was far more aberrative than the 
Helatrobus implants, and which is basic on the Helatrobus implants. 
And I told you one day the Helatrobus implants are on the screens 
they show you in the between-lives. No, that isn't. I've been making 
that mistake for about ten thousand years. Every time I put this 
thing up on the screen, why, it's the wrong implant. They're an 
early implant, and they had a hill there, unfortunately located in 
the same geographical area as the Helatrobus implants. And it looks 
to the pc just like the Helatrobus implants, only it isn't. You've 
got a date error, then, consisting of trillions-four - almost 
trillions-four, you see: trillion trillion trillion trillion. Your 
date error. Of course, your TA action will cease.

So there's a lot of tricks in running GPMs. And GPMs are what 
require special techniques. They require special techniques.

Now, nothing else that I know of requires a special technique, and 
you might even do away with R3R (this is a very adventurous 
statement) if you had a perfect R2H. R2H has the potentiality of 
running engrams and secondaries on the whole track with greater 
avidity and speed than R3R because it takes apart the restimulated 
and bypassed charges which exist in the secondaries and engrams. It 
doesn't run the engram so much as it takes out of it all the 
bypassed charges and causes, of course, that particular segment to 
snap back on to track.

You probably have not looked at it this way, but you're actually not 
trying to erase somebody's time track. In the between-lives area 
they apparently are trying to wipe out your time track so you don't 
know who you are. Well, we're actually not doing that. You're not in 
actual fact working with the time track to knock out all the 
pictures everybody has. That is really not what you're doing. You're 
trying to take out of the time track the things which prevent a 
person from having his pictures. And after that, you can restore to 
him the right to have pictures or not to have pictures, as the case 
may be. You're trying to pull his knowingness high enough up to a 
point where the individual does not have to have pictures to tell 
him who he is. Now, you got that?

Your first target is not to erase somebody's time track. You're 
liable to think that, because that is what a between-lives screen 
specializes in. It allegedly is trying to invalidate a person's time 
track to a point where he doesn't have any, and therefore can't 
remember who he is because he has no picture reference. I spoke to 
you this way about it yesterday.

Well, you're really not, then, trying to erase the whole time track, 
but there are certain unwanted pictures that he couldn't handle and 
which he became the effect of. If you take the charge off of those 
pictures, then pictures become available to the person and he can 
have them or not have them as the case may be.

Now, the pictures which mostly louse up things are the GPMs. That's 
the real mess-up. 

> But because the between-lives implants which have thier direct
> targets ...
>
> [aside] Thank you Reg.

Because a between-lives implant has a target of invalidating all 
of your pictures and therefore wiping out your identity and memory. 
Because of this you might think - and I'm sure many people who are 
upset about auditing might think - that you're trying to do this. 
You realize a Scientologist may be looked at with askance by certain 
areas and interests and so forth as though they were between-lives 
implanters, because they get some whiff of the idea that you're 
going to erase the whole time track. And they might think we're 
between-lives implanters.

I don't know what would happen if we ... I was toying with this this 
morning. (Let me give you a little bit of a laugh out of the side of 
this.) I was thinking of outer-space tactics and strategy. This is 
an interesting and vast subject, and I have come to the conclusion 
that the missing factor in it is communication, and that lack of 
communication is what causes all the trouble. All right, beside the 
point - that makes, then, very intricate and complicated tactics and 
strategy, you see? I wondered if, impishly, you couldn't rise above 
this factor with a few curves of one kind or another by entering 
societies from within where you did have communication, you see? 
Well, how would you go about it then?

I was sitting there idly speculating about it over my scrambled 
eggs, and I suddenly realized - still eating, I mean, I'm decadent - 
I suddenly realized that these between-lives blokes, the Marcabians, 
wouldn't know what to do if they came down here and saw that they 
had a Marcab headquarters here. We set up their headquarters for 
them, and you put up their flag, you see, and so forth.

And look at the news story. I must have brought this news story on 
us, or had telepathically realized that somebody was going to call 
on us. The Mirror group was calling on us today: "So many advances 
have happened in Dianetics and Scientology in the last three or four 
years that they had better be covered." We agree with them 
perfectly, but how they will cover them, God knows. That's one of 
the biggest newspaper chains in England, but they also are the 
author of the death-lesson stories, and so we regard them with some 
suspicion.

But there is this pressure all the time of ... We are, you see; 
we're putting out fantastic ... The stories involved here would make 
what's turned out in university labs and the psychiatric blokes and 
this sort of thing - would stagger them, man. You see? I mean, 
there's more story in any given week in Dianetics and Scientology, 
you see, than these birds ... And the pressure - the pressure of 
this much data inevitably will produce some sort of a reaction on 
the surroundings, you see? And you'd find these guys sooner or later 
are going to realize they missed the boat. Instead of writing about 
"that cult," they might write about "those people," and you'll see 
them swinging around to this sooner or later.

But look at the Marcabian press: "Here in this prison, in spite of 
all that has been done to them, they're still loyal to their mother 
country." God, you know, that's touching, you know? That's a tear-
jerker. And I sort of sat back and I said, "Well, Ronnie, you're a 
dangerous man."

But the reaction of earth population, all of which has come down 
through that channel, to these symbols might be something 
approaching the most fabulous thing you ever saw. It might be utter 
frothing, see? Might produce widespread riot and chaos. I don't 
know. But it was an interesting thought, anyway, as I think you will 
agree. Not that we're going to do anything desperate like that - at 
least this afternoon.

The point I'm making here - the point I'm making here - is that if 
you tell the pc that you're going to erase his whole time track, 
why, he's liable to go into a sort of an anaten propitiate, because 
this happens to him every sixty or seventy years to such a degree, 
you see, that he doesn't quite know whether he's coming or going. 
But you tell him you're going to give him back his pictures and you 
might entirely change your identity, as far as he's concerned, as an 
auditor.

See, he's got certain pictures that make it impossible for him to 
get back his pictures. That's the condition he's in. And you're in 
actual fact trying to return him to Case Level 2. And oddly enough 
you have to move him to Case Level 2 before you can move him to Case 
Level 1. That's what's very interesting about it. And your pc, in 
spite of all your erasure of pictures, is going to wind up with 
pictures. Man, he's going to have pictures! He takes them all the 
time, they just aren't available. Some of these pictures aren't too 
pleasant, some of them aren't too unpleasant, but the point is there 
is no dearth of pictures. What's the matter with him is that he 
obsessively makes pictures of everything without discrimination. 
He's something like a garbage collector, see? Any old picture is 
good enough, you see?

But he gets some of these pictures, like GPMs and jails and things 
like this from between-lives implants, and they then hit him every 
time he tries to see his own pictures, you see? And he sees these, 
and of course they're his pictures, too, but he never realizes this. 
They're so hostile to his future and his mental health that he 
disowns them.

I've just gone through a phase of disowning my whole track - out of 
disgust, you know? Had a beautiful case resurgence for about - oh, I 
don't know, must have lasted for an hour or two. Then of course it 
collapsed. But what I did was go through the consideration of track, 
and track became artificially, you see - the artificiality of it 
became less and less real until the track itself disappeared. And 
now the track is appearing with total reality, you see, and good 
knowingness. It's an interesting, through-the-knothole experience. 
You know, "I wasn't. I don't know who the hell I am. I... " You at 
least got up to the point of where you didn't need a picture to tell 
you who you are; you got brave enough to say "Well, I just don't 
know." And from that point on you start getting your own track back.

That's an interesting point, that this occurs. And perhaps, perhaps, 
you haven't given enough attention to this, as nobody's trying to 
wipe out your pictures; we're just trying to pick out those pictures 
which bar all other pictures and which the individual considers 
hostile. And when you've done that, why, the individual gets back 
all of his pictures. It's very simple. The hostile ones can no 
longer bite.

Now you've got a Case Level 2. Now you go after the mechanism which 
makes it automatic for him to make pictures, and you put this back 
on power of choice, and of course you've got an OT. And that's the 
whole scope of processing where it has to do with pictures and bank 
and knowingness and so forth; they're all wrapped up in that.

Well now, you see, instead of erasing pictures, you could go at this 
another way. You could bring up the individual's confront with 
regard to pictures to such an extent that he could even face the 
hostile ones. Ah, that's an interesting approach, too, isn't it?

Now, this is comparable to the old exteriorization approach. Instead 
of erasing the guy's bank, pull him out of it. That's the old 
exteriorization approach.

Well, this is a similar approach, but it's different than either of 
those approaches, you see, of erasing the pictures or pulling the 
guy out of the pictures. We're pushing the guy up so that he can 
disentangle and confront his pictures. In other words, we're getting 
him so he can understand his pictures. And this one works, too, 
which actually gives you a third route to processing.

So R2H is not just a method of erasing pictures or getting the pc 
away from his pictures, it actually raises the individual's 
potential in recognizing and owning his pictures and making the 
pictures better.

Now, well-run R2H can make the pictures much better, much prettier, 
much solider, without them being obsessively solid so that they 
intimidate the pc with their tremendous solidity. Now, that's the 
important point of it.

So, with R2H, you actually are embarked on another philosophy. If 
you understand this grip on it, it is its own philosophy. Doesn't 
make the other philosophies invalid, but it embarks on its own 
private, personal railroad car and says this is a whole philosophy 
in itself. Of course, it uses the elements and mechanics and other 
things, but the individualism of R2H is based on this. There have 
been some new discoveries about this, and they've been put to work 
in R2H And let me show you what these things look like. [See Lecture 
Chart in the tech volume for 1963.]

Here is a thetan. Now, your first level of life and beingness, your 
first look at life and beingness, what life and beingness are, exist 
as potentials or abilities, not as things. And those potentials and 
abilities consist of A, R and C.

You know all about A, R and C: Affinity, Reality and Communication. 
But think of those things as potentials. Not affinity for anything 
special but the potential of having affinity. In other words, you 
could say, "What is the potential of the A, R and C of an 
individual? What is his potential?" You'd be asking the same thing 
as "How alive is he?" The more alive he is, the more ARC he's 
capable of; the less alive he is the less ARC he's capable of. 
That's interesting, isn't it?

What do you think of a philosophy that thinks that man is mud? Well, 
let's take a look at this. ARC. ARC - and probably this could be 
drawn in different ways. ARC goes out to... And remember that 
communication with other beings is through matter, energy, space, 
time and so forth, see? This ARC potential, or ARC with what? What 
is this ARC with? Communication with, reality about, affinity for, 
see? What are these things connected up with? Well, if there were 
just other beings, it'd be a telepathic ball and that would be that. 
But when you talk to Joe, you're actually talking through MEST to 
Joe, no matter how you're communicating with Joe, unless your ARC is 
so much on the ball that you can telepathically communicate.

And by the way, your ARC doesn't have to be very high to 
telepathically communicate. That is quite interesting, that man is, 
at large, below this level of telepathy, but it is paid attention to 
in some civilizations to the degree that - oh, they set up - you've 
got a three-way communication. You got a conference with other 
departments or ship commanders or something - it wouldn't matter 
whether it's a business or a unit of some kind or other - and you 
set up a box. You set up a box. And the thetan briefing them briefs 
them through a box which telepathically retranslates his thought 
onto an endless banner, and puts it out with sound also. In other 
words, telepathy sufficiently strong that it can be mechanically 
reconverted. A device no more difficult than the vocotyper that the 
IBM keeps trying to make. You talk to the typewriter and it types, 
you know?

Well, this is telepathic vocotyper. I'm not talking to you out of 
Popular Mechanics. In other words, the telepathy factor is strong. 
It is something you have to deal with.

They have antinoise campaigns in New York City. Well, I imagine in 
a boardinghouse, a bunch of thetans would have an antitelepathic 
campaign, you know? Can you stop shouting telepathically all night, 
you know? Telepathy is a very heavy, hard-hitting force.

Some of you will be going through an implant, or something like 
that, and you'll pick up off the track what you think is your 
postulate and then suddenly realize it isn't your postulate, that 
somebody thought it in your vicinity. You sometimes can pick up the 
thoughts or fear of some thetan down the line who is also being 
implanted. This stuff will sometimes kick back into an implant. It's 
quite valid. There's nothing to worry about with that.

Now, this isn't any lecture about telepathy; it gives you an idea of 
how low ARC can go without disappearing and how high it can also go, 
because the birds I'm talking about that use telepathy for 
communication aren't even, by your chart estimates, in very good 
shape. See, they've had the Helatrobus implants, too, but they just 
aren't getting their lives wiped out every sixty or seventy years, 
see? That factor is missing - the only factor of difference between 
your case and theirs. See, that's the sole difference.

Every once in a while, why, their empire gets wiped out, and 
somebody implants the lot, but that's life.

So here's your ARC. And your ARC can go up, then, to pretty high 
levels. And it depends below a certain level on matter, energy, 
space and time as its communication media.

ARC gets very important after you start dropping away from 
telepathic communication. Becomes very important because, you see, 
it's so much present before then that nobody ever thinks of it. 
Nobody ever thinks of it at all. You're just not mad at people, and 
reality is terrific and you know all about it, and communication is 
good, and your understanding and knowingness are pretty well up, so 
it wouldn't be something that you worried about at all.

But the second you start introducing MEST into communication lines, 
living with great dependence upon this universe in this universe, 
then ARC become very important and become the measure of life.

Of course, they're there all the way up. But you don't measure them 
as going out. In fact, I believe nobody would believe they could. 
Livingness: degree of livingness is measured by ARC. How alive is 
somebody? It's how much ARC is he capable of. That is the test.

Now when you get over here ... Let's just rule out telepathy. I'm 
saying it exists, but it isn't necessary to our proposition at all, 
and it's a highly individual and odd bit of business, see, that 
transcends matter, energy, space and time and goes straight to other 
beings.

So, we would have thetans as a thing to be in ARC with, and then we 
would have matter, energy, space, time, form, location. Now, you 
could add to this, you could break these down further, but they are 
the principal things beyond which there is no breakdown. Possibly in 
importance it ought to be L and then F.

Now, the ARC that this individual has expresses the degree that he 
can be cause over these. The potential of ARC of the individual 
gives you the degree that he can be at cause over thetans, matter, 
energy, space, time, form and location. The less life he has, the 
less he is.

Now, as a thetan gets more and more solid, he is less and less 
capable of ARC. That's fairly obvious, isn't it? Why? It isn't that 
his solidity prevents him from communicating or feeling affinity or 
that sort of thing, but it's simply an indicator that he must have 
broken ARC with matter, energy, space, time, form and location, or 
it wouldn't be piled on him without his choice. That's an 
interesting point, isn't it? He must have had ARC breaks, then, with 
matter, energy, space, time, form and location. Ah, but how could he 
have ARC breaks with matter, energy, space, time, form and location 
without having ARC breaks with other thetans? Well, I think it's 
probable, and very possible, that he could have. But the truth of 
the matter is, it was having ARC breaks with other thetans that 
caused him to start to ARC break with matter, energy, space, time, 
form and location. Doesn't necessarily follow that way, but normally 
that would be it.

So, as an individual rises up the line - as he rises up the line - 
he then rises back toward direct communication, direct affinity, 
direct reality on other beings. The less ARC he has, the more 
matter, energy, space, time, form and location he has to go through 
in order to communicate to other beings.

See you look a little bit dense on that one. Let me give you an 
idiot's line. Here you have Bill, and here you have space, and here 
you have Joe. Now, Joe, in order to hear Bill, has to register an 
air wave which is generated by Bill. So Bill generates an air wave - 
vibrations - that are received by Joe and are reinterpreted into 
ARC. So ARC here are converted, and then are converted from matter, 
energy, space, time to ARC. And you in actual fact have done this 
cycle. This thetan here communicates to those thetans there by going 
up here, here, see? And actually, they communicate back similarly. 
See? Get the idea?

Once you drop away from telepathy, you enter MEST into the line, and 
ARC, then, becomes subordinate to MEST. And you eventually get a 
bunch of knuckleheads implanted up to their ears. Did you ever 
realize Einstein went through the between-lives area when he kicked 
the bucket? (Served him right. I wonder if he traveled faster than 
constant? These brutal, gruesome thoughts I have every once in a 
while.)

Now, look at this: Man is not mud, but a fellow who isn't alive at 
all would think only "mudly." He'd have very muddy thinking. He'd 
come to mud-like conclusions. Therefore, his mental sciences are 
very mud-like.

There are no mental studies which admit - today, that are currently 
being taught - that admit of the existence of a being. They only 
admit of the existence of biological combinations of mud resulting 
in a very muddy result. Psychology textbooks today begin by very 
carefully defining the fact they do not know what a psyche is, and 
they do not even know if one exists - and they're pretty sure it 
doesn't - "but we will now give you the parts of the brain." See?

What are you dealing with there? You're dealing with somebody who is 
so far away from other beings that he is no longer talking through 
MEST, he's talking to MEST. Ding, ding, ding, here comes the wagon!

Every once in a while you see some poor little kid that's been 
knocked in the dome too much, and he'll be out there beating his red 
wagon. And you yourself in your dippier moments will start talking 
to something on the mantelpiece. And when you're particularly foggy 
in the morning and haven't been awakened, you're very often prone to 
curse your shoes.

Well, you may be doing it on another harmonic, because a thetan is 
always capable of investing things with life. And you're probably 
doing it because you've "alived" the shoe. You see, you're perfectly 
capable of mocking up a living being and making it talk and walk 
totally independent of you. Perfectly, perfectly capable of doing 
that. Used to do it as OTs all the time. So you're capable of 
investing matter, energy, space and time, and so forth, with life. 
And then other-determining it, saying it is no longer I, and having 
it walk around and talk.

Now, that's a potential that's talked about in Dianetics: Evolution 
of a Science, that speaks of "Throgmagog." You can always invest 
something with life, such as a shoe. And you can always pretend that 
a shoe is alive. But how would you like to be in the kind of a 
condition where you thought another living being was no more capable 
of life than a shoe? Let's reverse that, see? Let's get a total 
reverse on the situation. Let's look at a living being and say that 
this living being has no life in it.

Now, you got some kind of an estimate of how far downscale you can 
go, and somebody can still sit there and eat breakfast. Got the 
idea? It's pretty far south.

Matter, energy, space, time, form and location - ARC breaks with, 
cause the dwindling spiral of. ARC breaks with other beings, matter, 
energy, space, time, form and location bring about a deterioration 
of one's ARC.

It never really deteriorates; one just believes it is deteriorated, 
you see? In other words, you can have an ARC break with MEST, you 
can have an ARC break with form, you can have an ARC break with 
locations. It's very common for an animal to have ARC break with 
locations. A place where an animal has been hurt will be avoided by 
that animal, very carefully.

Now, what in essence does this forecast? That is the basic theory 
behind R2H. It forecasts that by clearing up a person's ARC breaks, 
one then returns to him his ARC potential. Clean up his ARC breaks 
with matter, he feels better about matter. Clean up his ARC breaks 
with energy, he'll feel better about energy. Clean up his ARC breaks 
with space, he feels better about space. Clean up his ARC breaks 
with time and he will feel better about time. Clean up his ARC 
breaks with form and he will feel better about form. Clean up his 
ARC breaks with location, he feels better about location. Clean up 
his ARC breaks with other beings and he feels better about other 
beings. And all the way up the line, of course, his bank - that 
reservoir of ARC breaks - is getting plainer and plainer to him and 
more and more confrontable to him. Because all of his ARC breaks in 
terms of pictures have responded as the reactive-mind ARC breaks. 
Because reactive mind is made, after all, out of images of other 
beings, matter, energy, space, time, form and location. It's as easy 
as that. And that consists of the reactive mind.

So by cleaning up his ARC breaks with these things, you tend to 
clean up his ARC breaks with the things he's got pictures of in the 
reactive mind that he can't confront, and his reactive mind opens up 
and he can tolerate it and confront it.

So R2H considers and conceives that the reactive mind is a reservoir 
of ARC breaks. That is the basic assumption on which that process 
hops off. We know that the reactive mind contains images or beliefs 
in other beings, and certainly their images in terms of thought, 
don't you see? We might, by the way, have put a T under other beings 
for "thought," you see, because thought or significance could be 
included in that; but by just putting up other beings you also have 
the reflections of other beings, so that you could omit that.

But you know that the reactive mind consists of images of other 
beings, thoughts of other beings, thoughts of oneself and so forth, 
plus matter (if you don't believe it's composed of matter, someday 
run into a ridge); energy (you hear and see the energy flitter-
flattering around in the reactive mind all the time and that's what 
registers on the tone arm); space - every once in a while a guy 
can't see a thing, and then he suddenly realizes he's looking across 
too much space to see it. In a picture, it always has space, and 
lack of space is the main thing that's upsetting in the reactive 
bank - you can't get away from the lousy thing, see? You can't put 
space between it and you. Space is the cure for no-confront, see? 
And time: good heavens! The thing is not time. If there's any time 
in the bank, that is remarkable. What you have in the bank is an 
absence of time - an apparent absence in time in the presence of a 
totality of time. You've got a nothing where a something is and a 
something where a nothing is. And that's what makes it reactive.

Reactive - remember, that's what the thing is called. That means 
instantaneous response regardless of what time the response is laid 
in. A=A=A also equals twenty-nine years ago equals a billion years 
ago equals eight trillion years ago. Before you start inspecting it, 
they're all the same time. So you got this terrific time 
identification; you also have space, energy and matter 
identifications.

Now, as far as form is concerned, that's not a terribly upgraded 
thing. It comes into the field of aesthetics and arts more than 
anything else. Some people like Picasso, some people don't. Some 
people like blondes, some people like brunettes. Form: aesthetics, 
tastes, that sort of thing. And the reactive bank - the things least 
confronted in the reactive bank are those forms which one has 
disliked most. And so, of course, he's got a wonderful close-up 
stockpile of forms he detests. We're not talking now about income-
tax forms; we're talking about pleasanter things, like girls and 
things.

Anyhow, as far as location is concerned, if there's anything that is 
A = A = A in the reactive mind, it's location. When I first collided 
with this early Helatrobus, I was absolutely sure that it was in 
exactly the same location that here, trillions of trillions of 
trillions of years before, some knucklehead had begun this thing and 
then somebody had walked back in the vicinity and said, "Well, this 
is what you do when you are here," and proceeded to give the 
Helatrobus implants. I was sure that was the case. In fact, I only 
know now intellectually that it is not the same place, because it's 
the same type of scenery. Given a little similarity of form, and 
boy, those locations were identical. But what you doing right now, 
packing around in your bank and your head and your ridges planets 
which are light-years away? Looks to me like that's a very 
interesting identification of location.

In an auditing session this comes off all the time. It happens so 
often that you don't even think about it. This guy is sitting there, 
let us say he's running something, and it's something that happened 
in Australia. Doesn't seem either peculiar to the auditor or the pc 
that it is being run out in England. There's a 12,500-mile error in 
location. And you very often see this kind of an odd thing happen: 
You get the thing all run, and it goes spang! and stays there. It 
goes to its proper location. It seems to disappear or something.

Of course, by moving in time you can make the thing disappear too. 
But I've had this odd experience of not being able to run certain 
engrams because they were too well fixed in their proper location. 
You practically have to go to Arizona to run it - that's where it 
happened! You can spot the facsimile, but it's over in Arizona. 
Well, it couldn't be very aberrative if it fixes its location that 
smartly, see, because that's the right location.

Well now, if everything was on its proper time span, you'd have to 
move all over time in order to connect with anything, wouldn't you? 
So the thing must be in its improper time span if you can reach it 
in present time without yourself moving back trillions of years in 
time. Well, there's something wrong in the reactive mind with other 
beingness and other thoughts, with matter, with energy, with space, 
with time, with form and location, and everything that is the matter 
is they're identified one with another. Two times are identified, 
two forms are identified, two locations are identified, two spaces 
are identified, two energies identifed, two masses identified.

Can also go the other way into what you call a disassociate. And you 
as Scientologists run less into this thing of disassociation. 
Someday you may read some Sigmund Freud, and you'll hear all about 
disassociation because he specialized in this thing, disassociation. 
It's not anything we've ever talked about to amount to anything, but 
two things which are the same thing, approximately, look entirely 
different. In other words, two pictures of the same person at two 
different locations look like two different people, see? That is an 
inverse of identification. Things that should be seen to be similar 
are seen to be madly different.

You don't pay much attention to this because after a person's done 
that he's more or less flipped his lid. But you're now going to run 
into disassociation, and that's why I'm making a little side comment 
on it here as we go, because you're going to run into it if you 
really put in the itsa line. And you're going to wonder what's 
happening. Because the pc doesn't at first answer the auditing 
question. You say, "Have you had any gains in this session?"

And he says, "The ... well, so on ... The floor dropped out, and 
then I had a couple of drinks. And three or four years ago, why, I 
knew a girl named Mabel."

And now, in putting in your itsa line, by the rules of the game you 
shouldn't interrupt him. He may sit there, but he's not finished 
with that communication. And he'll keep on going and going and 
going, and you'll see all these disassociates come up. And then all 
of a sudden, if you let him go on, he will eventually come up and 
tell you a gain he has made for the session.

But you're running such violent stuff, you see, on the whole track, 
that as he passes through the stuff, he's actually going through the 
session trying to answer your question, and these things are getting 
in his road, so he says them to you, they tend to as-is, and after 
that he can finally reach the material necessary to answer your 
question. Got the idea?

But now, if you've put in an itsa line all the way across the line 
you're going to see disassociation, so you better know what it is. 
It's simply that two things which should be seen to be similar are 
seen to be madly different. It's the inverse of identification. It's 
you ought to see a similarity between the question and the answer.

"Have you had a gain for the session?"

"Yes, I've had a gain for the session. I can see better."

You get that? Now, that's a similarity, you see? There's the same 
communication line, and the answer compares to the question that was 
asked. You get a disassociation this way:

"Have you had a gain in the session?"

"I had a beer three years ago."

That's a disassociate. Well, it isn't that the pc isn't answering 
your question, he's getting around to it. And if you're very good at 
your itsa line, he will eventually wander torturously through and 
eventually will come up and say, "Yes, I don't feel like I'll be so 
thirsty all the time." Of course, that is almost a sequitur 
statement. He will have uttered other statements less sequitur. But 
as you search the thing out, you would see that he was coming closer 
and closer to answering your question as he talked.

Try that sometime on a full itsa line, and you will be very, very, 
very pleased with the result. The guy was answering your auditing 
question. If you let him go on talking he eventually would have 
answered your auditing question. He only didn't answer your auditing 
question if you cut him off at the point he was disassociating. Then 
he didn't seem to answer your auditing question.

You'll notice his eye is no longer on you again, you'll notice he's 
still groping, you'll notice he's still fumbling with the bank, as 
he tells you these things. You'll see this. Well, that's a 
disassociate.

All right. Guy comes up and slugs his mother, thinking that she is 
about to rob him. Well, he's associated his mother with a burglar. 
Well, you'd say he's nuts. Well, yeah, true enough. But there are 
people who are nuts. But that is what that is.

So identification isn't the only crime. There's one beyond 
identification. That's, two things that you ought to recognize the 
similarity between, you see as vastly different.

So this whole thing here goes on to an inversion. What you get is a 
restimulator factor. We knew a girl who had pink hair, see? We knew 
a girl who had pink hair, so therefore girls who have pink hair 
aren't to be trusted; therefore nothing pink must be trusted. And we 
know a fellow named "Pink," who brushes his teeth, so we'd better 
not brush our teeth anymore. Do you follow that torturous line of 
logic?

Well, that is ARC as it goes downscale doesn't just stay as ARC, it 
goes into an inverse, because it gets too many things identified, 
and then it gets things disassociated in some kind of an effort to 
see some separateness in existence, and eventually starts going into 
a twisteroo. So that you will have people who consider good 
communication shooting people. High level of communication.

I had a husky one time that knew what communication was: chewing 
people up and being bitten. There he was. He was quite a dog. It was 
very funny, I'll never forget that dog; he was the toughest dog I 
think I ever saw. I'd walk into the yard after being gone for a long 
time - you know, a year or two or something like that - and this dog 
would suddenly see this "stranger," and he would bare his teeth - he 
was one of these fantastic malamutes - and he'd bare his teeth, come 
tearing across the yard, fangs just shooting out of his face in all 
directions. And I'd pick him up on either side of his jowl and, 
using his lunge, throw him twenty-five feet. You practice up a 
little bit with police dogs and things, you can get so you do - it's 
like dog judo, you know? And he'd go through the air and he'd land. 
And he'd get up: "Oh, Ron!" He knew what communication was!

So, there's all kinds of wild levels of communication. You get 
people who tell you what pleasure is - they describe agony. It's 
very funny. So you get these various inversions. ARC, then, doesn't 
just decline, it goes and inverts and inverts again and inverts 
again. And you get a hodgepodge down at the end that nobody can make 
anything out of. Go down and listen to them in the spinbins and 
you'll see how far ARC can go, because those people are still alive. 
They're still alive.

How far can ARC go south? All the way - there is no bottom at which 
one dies, but there's some mighty peculiar things happen on the way 
down.

Beingnesses can die, but the individual - no. Forms can die, but the 
person actually - no. Memory can die, but not the person who is 
capable of remembering, you see? Not the person who - who is, you 
see? He can forget everything. And he's still in that kind of a 
state.

Now, ARC never ceases, so you have no bottom to the process. There 
are no bottom limits to the process. There is some method of 
communicating all the way down. It gets down into weird versions of 
reach and withdraw, as I just described one to you - with the dog. 
That's a kind of a reach and withdraw. Want to make him happy all 
day Sunday? Why, chew him up all Saturday night, you know? Big case 
gain.

This is your Tone Scale. As people go upscale, they go up through 
anger and so forth. It's very funny.

I remember one poor psycho in New York: Auditors would process her, 
get her up to anger, and she'd scold her family, and they'd promptly 
put her in restraints and put her back in the hospital. And then 
she'd get out, and then the auditors would process her, and she'd 
get back up to a point where she'd scold her family, and they put 
her back. And this nonsense just kept going, see? They'd never let 
her get up through anger. Of course, they'd been knocking her in for 
a long time, and she just never was able to say that she was mad 
about it. She was never able to do that, so she never recovered.

Now, here's a case, then, of a process which if you can get any C in 
at all and get an improvement of the C or an improvement of the R or 
an improvement of the A, you get an improvement of the C, an 
improvement of the R, an improvement of the A, an improvement of the 
C, an improvement of the R, an improvement of the A - you get the 
idea? And you just keep raising this triangle - all three corners of 
this triangle - up, up, up, by the process of running ARC breaks. 
Now, the basic limit of the process is the communication of the 
auditing command itself. And you'll be surprised how many 
interpretations there are of an ARC break. And one might make a 
criticism of the process by saying, "Well, look, it has such a 
specialized command: 'Recall an ARC break.' Only a Scientologist 
would know what that meant."

Well, actually, you're really not asking for an upset, you're not 
asking for a worry, you're not asking for a time he was concerned, 
you're not asking for this, you're not asking for that; you're 
asking for an ARC break. Now, I don't think it'd take you any time 
to describe to the pc what an ARC break was, and he'd eventually 
settle in his own head what an ARC break was. He'd be better off if 
he could understand the communication of this phrase ARC break. But 
this is one of the weak spots of the process. But it's not a very 
weak spot.

It's very funny how fast this communicates. You say, "Life is 
composed of affinity, reality and communication. When one of these 
breaks down, a person doesn't feel so good about something. Now, an 
ARC break is a time when affinity, reality or communication have 
been cut down on a person, have been reduced. That's what an ARC 
break is."

It may take the individual three or four days to digest the 
definition. But the funny part of it is, having digested the 
definition, he will have made a case gain. I don't really consider 
it a liability.

Now, that process isn't going to be used very broadly, and 
shotgunnish. You can't use it in a co-audit; it's too 
particularized.

So there's the anatomy, however, of what you are trying to do with 
the process. You are trying to increase the individual's affinity 
and reality and communication with other thetans and thought, 
matter, energy, space, time, form and location by picking up those 
points in time when the individual has suffered a cut or reduction 
of communication, has suffered from a lowering of reality, or from a 
reduction of affinity level - period. You don't care what he had an 
ARC break with, because he has to come up quite a ways to recognize 
ARC breaks with MEST. This is a long way north - good, clean-cut ARC 
breaks with MEST.

In that earlier GPM, about the only thing that was causing a great 
deal of difficulty in running it was a supreme ARC break with MEST, 
that it would obey people who would do things like this GPM implant 
- big ARC break with the fact that MEST obeyed that sort of thing - 
and an ARC break with the people for debasing and degrading MEST to 
such a usage and end. The items - to hell with it. See, that wasn't 
the important thing. The important thing was that anybody who would 
attempt something like this using MEST, that MEST would obey them, 
so on. Big ARC break. So there's one even wrapped up in a GPM.

The thought that you're trying to get across with your auditing 
command is you want a time when affinity, reality and communication 
have been reduced with other beings, matter, energy, space, time, 
form and locations. And you don't direct what you're going to get 
the ARC break about or with; that'll all work out more or less 
automatically. You simply ask for an ARC break. You don't ask "in 
this lifetime"; you don't limit him in time; you hope he'll give you 
something to at least let you get your teeth into the process and 
get the process grooved in before you're handling a God-'elp-us 
engram, but you want from the pc a time of that reduction. That is 
what you want. And that's all you want. And then you want to find 
out from the pc what it was.

This goes into your form, which is still being worked out, but which 
is more or less grooved in now. The formal steps of R2H done for 
good gain on the case are What, Where, When, and then an assessment, 
and then cleaning up every line of the assessment when it reads - 
not going by it. That is a difference. And working the ARC break 
over until it no longer reads on the meter and the pc feels all 
right about it, and so forth.

Now, the exact way the assessment is done, I'll go over that again 
.. I'd better go a little bit earlier. The exact way What is done, 
is you take what the pc is willing to tell you without probing. 
"What's this ARC break about?" and he'll give you a resume of it, 
very brief, usually. Where? Where: that's to help him get the time. 
See, these are all development of the ARC breaks so that he can more 
ably identify them. And then When. Now, this When gets very 
important. He'll have trouble with the Where, but nothing compared 
to the trouble he may get into with the When.

Now, the rule is, you use your meter on these three steps only when 
the last dog has been hanged. And you don't date nothing with the 
meter unless the pc is in despair and on the verge of tears about 
the actual time. And then you chip in, at the last moment, and you 
say - so on.

Something like this: This meter dating is terribly easy. You know, 
there's a training version; that's to train you to date on a meter. 
I'm giving you the therapeutic version; this is the way she really 
rolls. You've been sitting there with the meter in front of you, and 
the pc's been saying, "It's 1937 - no, it's 1936 - no, 1937; no, 
1936; no, 1937; no, nineteen-thirty ... '37, I think it was; '38, 
'38, maybe it was '38, '39. No, it could have been nineteen thir- I 
(sigh) just don't know, I just don't know, I just don't know where. 
I don't know when it was. 1937, 19..."

He's already admitted he doesn't know and your TA action has slowed 
down to nothing, and so forth. And you've watched 1937 bang every 
time he said it. You say, "It's 1937, according to the meter." 
That's your dating step. Got that?

Pc may get into a specialized case sometimes, when if it was in 1937 
it would be a terrible ARC break, whereas if it was in 1938 it 
wouldn't have been a terrible ARC break because something else had 
happened. So they keep saying it's 1938 when it was 1937.

Here's the only other way you go about this: When your tone arm is 
hung up you've got a wrong date, and you damn well better find it. 
Tone arm is hung up, you can't get it moving, everything is going to 
the devil, and so forth, well, you just better do a scout for wrong 
dates. "Do we have a wrong date?"

There is a number two that you scout for when the tone arm has 
stuck. (This is repairing it.) Number two is you get in your BMRs on 
the session or the process, because the pc has recalled ARC breaks 
which he has then suppressed and has not given the auditor. That 
causes a tone arm hang-up. These are the three things that hang up a 
tone arm. And the pc ARC breaks in session because of an ARC break 
in the past. It isn't because you've bypassed charge in the session; 
he's recalled an ARC break in the past, which has given him an ARC 
break in the session. And when you find that - any one of those 
three (wrong date, suppressed ARC breaks or an ARC break in the 
session because of an ARC break in the past) - you've got to remedy 
the situation. Your tone arm will stick and the process becomes 
unworkable. But one of those three things exists if your tone arm 
ceases to move on this.

The other one that can stop your tone arm from moving is just too 
corny. You've missed an assessment, you've missed a meter read, and 
you haven't got the reason of the bypassed charge. That's just 
pretty corny. That's under the heading of meter reading, and so 
forth.

The ARC break is always cleaned up to the tremendous satisfaction of 
the pc, and you're looking on this as something whereby you do an 
assessment, you say, "Well, that was the bypassed charge. That's it, 
thank you. Recall another ARC break." That isn't the way it's done.

Now, let's go into the last end of this thing. You're doing an 
assessment: You clear it line by line, just like you used to do old 
rudiments. If you get a read, you say, "That read." You've got your 
pat assessment sheet. "That read." You got a new one; there'll 
probably even be newer ones developed from time to time. I haven't 
issued this latest sheet yet, but it's very comparable to the L1 
which you've got, it's just a little better.

You see that "an attitude refused" does so. That ticks. You didn't 
go down the whole thing, see? You just said - right off the bat, you 
said, "All right. In that ARC break was an attitude refused?" Tick. 
You say, "All right. What attitude was refused?" And that's the end 
of your job. It's now up to the itsa. That's your whatsa. And the pc 
is going to stem and fuss and stew and try to figure out what 
attitude was refused where. And the only time it won't come off is 
when those three things I gave you are out: you've had a wrong date 
in the session; the pc has recalled some ARC breaks and suppressed 
them; or the pc has had an ARC break in the present time in the session. 
See? And this system doesn't work if those three are present. And if 
this system doesn't work, those three are present.

So you clean this line up, and it's all up to the pc. "An attitude 
refused? I don't think any attitude was refused ... attitude was 
refused ..." and so forth and so on. Says, "Well, I don't ... I 
don't think there was one."

What do you know! At this point do you shove it down his throat? You 
say, "No? All right, thank you," and go to the next line. Well, he 
can't remember it, so obviously the thing needs shaking up some 
more.

But you leave that mark alongside of that thing, because you're 
going to come back to it. It was hot once; it's going to be hot 
again. In other words, that just wasn't ready to be answered; that's 
the only thing you communicate on that. If he can't find it, and he 
says he can't, that's it. Leave it marked. Don't even say "We'll 
come back to it later." Say "All right" and go on to the next line. 
Otherwise your needle's going to get so dirty you can't assess. It's 
a highly practical consideration.

And you say, "All right. Was that ARC break caused by a 
communication ignored?" - you get down to that line, see? - and it 
goes ping! And you say, "All right. I have here that a communication 
was ignored. What communication was ignored?"

"Oh, well, let's see. It was Bill and me and Pete, and there were 
three dogs. And a spaceship landed. And the dog barked, and we said 
to hell with it, but if we'd listened to the dog bark ... Yeah. 
Yeah. We ignored the dog barking. Heh-heh! Yeah." Down comes your 
tone arm.

You run by blowdowns. Your whole meter action is by blowdowns; your 
whole determination is by blowdowns. You find an ARC break for which 
you get no blowdowns, then you haven't got the cause of the ARC 
break and the pc hasn't remembered anything about the ARC break. But 
just because you get one blowdown doesn't mean that the ARC break is 
gone. At this point you say to the pc, "How do you feel about that 
ARC break?" and watch it on the meter.

The question is asked of the pc and watched on the meter. If you get 
a rough-up of a needle - the slightest reaction of a needle - that 
ARC break isn't gone. But usually the pc will tell you, "Well, I 
don't feel as good about it as I want." Then keep on with your 
assessments. Do you understand? But every time you find one, and you 
clear one up, then you ask the pc how he feels about it. Pc feels 
all right and it doesn't bang on the meter - to hell with it, get 
off of it, man. That's it, that's it.

Don't get into a situation where the pc feels perfectly all right 
about it and you haven't done three quarters of your assessment 
sheet, so you just go on doggedly doing the remaining three quarters 
of your assessment sheet. You're now trying to find the bypassed 
charge for an ARC break that doesn't exist. And I can guarantee that 
you've got the withhold of nothing. The pc hasn't got anything to 
tell you, so he's going to ARC break.

So the other frailty of R2H, much more important than the 
communication of its auditing command, is that an inexpert handling 
of R2H can bring about an ARC break. Very interesting.

Every time you find a line, you go through the same song and dance. 
You find a line, you ask him the question, he answers the question, 
he's got it all to his satisfaction no matter how long the itsa line 
is. Don't expect to do many of these a session, man. You probably 
won't do more than three, four, five a session. But boy, the tone 
arm action you can milk out of that thing - wham, wham, wham, wham, 
wham. You can get lots of tone arm action.

Why recall ten and get the same tone arm action as you get recalling 
four, and still leave the pc with some missed withholds? You get the 
idea? So you just want tone arm action out of it, not the number of 
ARC breaks handled. See, you're not interested in the number of ARC 
breaks handled; just handle those you get well. Every time you find 
a reason for it, you'll find a tick, and the pc will give you the 
answer, and you've now got that.

Now, you don't even necessarily test that line again. You can drive 
a pc berserk. He's now satisfied. He's found it, and so forth.

Now, you may suspect, from the doubtful nature and the fact you 
haven't got a blowdown, that there is another tick on the same line. 
Just say, "Well, I'll check this line now. In that ARC break was a 
communication ignored? You know, that still reads. Do you suppose 
you had - know any reason why that should still be reading?"

"Well ... no, I don't see why it should be reading. Maybe I 
protested."

"All right. You protested it, that's all. That's all I wanted to 
know." Down to the next line. Leave it. You're not going to get 
anyplace shoving it down the pc's throat.

But every now and then you say, "That line still reads."

"Oh, it does? Oh, well, wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute, 
wait a minute. The - ha-ha! - it wasn't really the dog 
communication, I ignored their communication. They told me not to go 
anywhere near that place and I did and I ignored their c-. Yeah, 
well, that caused the ARC break with them, because they should have 
told me more loudly." And you'll see your tone arm blow down.

You see how it's done? Treat them like end rudiments that you don't 
care whether they clean up or not, and don't leave an ARC break 
unless the thing is reading smooth as glass. An ARC break is going 
to give you blowdowns. Just regard it as a source of getting some 
blowdowns. And if an ARC break doesn't blow down, you're now going 
to run into trouble with later ARC breaks. That is the way to 
forecast trouble. We had ARC break, and then we had another ARC 
break, and we didn't get any blowdown on either of these ARC breaks. 
Ohhh! Now, our third ARC break - our chances of our getting a 
blowdown on that ... The next thing you know, you're getting in the 
mid ruds and the pc's going into an automaticity of suppressing ARC 
breaks, and we've got a sort of a mess on our hands. Why? Because we 
excited some bypassed charge by asking for the ARC break and then 
didn't clean the bypassed charge.

Now, the whole basic mechanism on which you are operating here is 
that incidents will blow if the misaligned or bypassed charge is 
knocked out, and that an ARC break is caused by bypassed charge. 
There is no ARC break without bypassed charge. So therefore you must 
find the bypassed charge, and if you do, there won't be any ARC 
break. And it straightens the bank out, and the guy gets oriented in 
the middle of his bank, and there you are.

It's a terribly permissive process. It depends on the itsa line and 
that accurate assessment, and then, having found what the thing 
assesses, let the guy run on.

And it also depends on not to keep slugging him with assessments for 
ARC breaks that have cleaned up. It has a frailty. You can get the 
whole ARC break cleaned up, it doesn't seem hardly worthwhile. And 
there was a reality rejected, and you got a ping on that (it wasn't 
a very big ping), and he answered this thing, and we asked for the 
ARC break, and he didn't have much of an ARC break, but now we went 
on and did the rest of the assessment. Oh, you've got an ARC break 
now. Why? You've invalidated the reason which he gave for the ARC 
break.

Takes rather delicate, slippy auditing. But with those reservations, 
it's absolutely terrific. It's a fabulous process. Terribly mild, 
terribly permissive.

I see I've left you hanging on the ropes a little bit; there's 
probably something you don't understand about the process. But if 
you just did it like end mid ruds, which you didn't bother to finish 
if your pc got bright, then you've got it made. You've got it made. 
And if you monitor its success by the number of blowdowns which you 
get, you've also got it made. And when it doesn't blow down, start 
worrying. And if it is blowing down and the TA is moving and so 
forth, don't worry. Just sit back and ride your luck. Look for 
trouble when it comes, not before it gets there, because it'll carry 
you through all the way.

Pc wants to talk to you the whole session about one ARC break which 
is giving you tone arm action from 2.0 to 6.5, you are an absolute 
nut not to let him. See? It's the amount of tone arm action you can 
get in the session, up and down, not the number of ARC breaks you 
cover. Because the pc you are auditing is in, after all, present 
time. He is here, all there is of him is here. He isn't barred out 
of existence by his bank. And if you discharge all of these crossed 
bypassed charges off of present time, theoretically you could run 
him all the way to OT without him ever going backtrack to amount to 
anyone [anything]. He just picks up this item and that item and that 
incident and that incident and this one and straightens them out, 
and his pictures are getting better and the track is straightening 
out.

And the next thing you know, he's eight feet back of his head 
saying, "What do you want done with these between-lives guys?"

Thank you very much.

========END OF LECTURE========

_


