deja.com
Click here to download free software -- ZDNet Exclusives!
Click here to download free software -- ZDNet Exclusives!
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
 Home  »  People  »  Humanities
 >>  Theology 
fz bible 4/19
Explore More:

Earth's Biggest Selection
Shop at Amazon.com

The Ultimate Directory
Cool stuff from InfoSpace

Classifieds
Cool stuff from InfoSpace

Price Comparison
Cool stuff from InfoSpace

5¢ long distance!
Save $$$$$.

The Best of ZDNet
Delivered to you free!

Rate it!
Wise Women of the Web
or choose another to rate
(1=worst, 5=best)
Kid appeal
15
Design
15
Features
15
Parent appeal
15

  • Compare it to others
  • User Comments
     
  • top rated
    Kids and Family Web Sites
    1. Family.com
    2. Disney
    3. Parent Soup
    4. Wise Women of the Web
    5. Parentsplace.com
  • See the full list...
  • Deja Forums
    Atheism
    Atheism
    Atheism
    Satirical atheism
    Atheism
     
    Deja Communities
    Air and Space
    ANSID - Africa Network for
    candid wedding photography
    Recycling
    Weather Watchers Online

    Start your own community in Theology.  

    My Deja
    Get more out of Deja: Register to easily manage your discussions and communities, and improve your searches. Plus, get email alerts about new posts in your favorite discussions with Deja Tracker!
     
      discussions     ratings     communities  
      back to search results 
    Help | Feedback
    >> Community
    Next in Search
       >> Forum: alt.religion.scientology
          >> Thread: FZ Bible 4/19 CLASS 8 TAPES
            >> Message 1 of 15
     
    Subject:FZ Bible 4/19 CLASS 8 TAPES
    Date:1999/07/04
    Author:Secret Squirrel <squirrel@echelon.alias.net>
      Posting History Post Reply

    FREEZONE BIBLE ASSOCIATION TECH POST
     
    CLASS VIII TAPE TRANSCRIPTS 4/19
     
    **************************************************
     
    CLASS VIII TAPE TRANSCRIPTS - CONTENTS
     
    01  SEP 24, 1969 WELCOME TO THE CLASS VIII COURSE
    02  SEP 25, 1969 WHAT STANDARD TECH DOES
    03  SEP 26, 1969 THE LAWS OF CASE SUPERVISION
    04  SEP 27, 1969 STANDARD TECH DEFINED
    05  SEP 28, 1969 THE STANDARD GREEN FORM AND RUDIMENTS
    06  SEP 29, 1969 MECHANICS OF TECHNIQUES AND SUBJECT MATTER
    07  SEP 30, 1969 CASE SUPERVISOR DO'S AND DONT'S:
    08  OCT  1, 1969 CERTAINTY OF STANDARD TECH
    09  OCT  2, 1969 THE LAWS OF LISTING AND NULLING
    10  OCT  3, 1969 ASSISTS
    11  OCT  7, 1969 ASSESSMENT AND LISTING BASICS
    12  OCT  8, 1969 MORE ON BASICS
    13  OCT  9, 1969 ETHICS AND CASE SUPERVISION
    14  OCT 10, 1969 AUDITOR ATTITUDE AND THE BANK
    15  OCT 11, 1969 AUDITORS ADDITIVES, LISTS AND CASE SUPERVISION
    16  OCT 12, 1969 STANDARD TECH
    17  OCT 13, 1969 THE BASICS AND SIMPLICITY OF STANDARD TECH
    18  OCT 14, 1969 THE NEW AUDITOR'S CODE
    19  OCT 15, 1969 AN EVALUATION OF EXAMINATION ANSWERS
     
     
    **************************************************
     
    STATEMENT OF PURPOSE
     
    Our purpose is to promote religious freedom and the Scientology
    Religion by spreading the Scientology Tech across the internet.
     
    The Cof$ abusively suppresses the practice and use of
    Scientology Tech by FreeZone Scientologists.  It misuses the
    copyright laws as part of its suppression of religious freedom.
     
    They think that all freezoner's are "squirrels" who should be stamped out as heritics.  By their standards, all Christians,
    Moslems, Mormons, and even non-Hassidic Jews would be considered to be squirrels of the Jewish Religion.
     
    The writings of LRH form our Old Testament just as the writings
    of Judiasm form the Old Testament of Christianity.
     
    We might not be good and obedient Scientologists according
    to the definitions of the Cof$ whom we are in protest against.
     
    But even though the Christians are not good and obedient Jews,
    the rules of religious freedom allow them to have their old
    testament regardless of any Jewish opinion. 
     
    We ask for the same rights, namely to practice our religion
    as we see fit and to have access to our holy scriptures
    without fear of the Cof$ copyright terrorists.
     
    We ask for others to help in our fight.  Even if you do
    not believe in Scientology or the Scientology Tech, we hope
    that you do believe in religious freedom and will choose
    to aid us for that reason.
     
    Thank You,
     
    The FZ Bible Association
     
    **************************************************
     
    6809C27 Class VIII TAPE 4
     
    STANDARD TECH DEFINED
     
    And this, the last time I looked, was the twenty seventh...
    Thank you very much. Thank you.
     
    Very polite of you - The last time I looked this was the
    twenty seventh of September, AD eighteen, and this is
    lecture what number? (Four.) What do you know? Lecture four.
     
    The reason I'm numbering these is so that nobody can come
    along and cut them all out.
     
    Probably the; expect it some years from now, that somebody
    will have figured it all out. It would be much better if we
    had the lectures on case supervision taken out, because if
    auditors are allowed insufficient latitude for their own
    imagination it cramps self determinism, ruins cases, but it
    cramps self determinism. And you can expect sometime in the
    future that the thing is not, well it actually isn't a good
    thing. The case supervisor, he actually has to have
    latitude when we're getting, you see, and the auditor
    should have tremendous latitude, because it'll give him too
    many case gains, and stuff like that, you know? Qual income
    is down. Ever since we started this standard tech Qual
    income has gone out the bottom. So, the best thing to do is
    to subtract lecture three, seven and nine, don't you see,
    from the lectures. You know.
     
    Many ways of subtracting them, such as simply tearing them
    up. But somebody would at least know something was missing.
     
    Now we have something of that order coming up on your
    bulletins. The truth of the matter is, is I'm going over
    bulletins at this particular time, so that all bulletins as
    you see then, as of this moment, are in actual fact being
    edited down into a standard tech package. But that doesn't
    change anything. And if anything is in any way changed it
    will be to the basis of bringing it to an earlier
    standardization. And it will simply be a correction of some
    out line.
     
    We apparently have forty or fifty bulletins in the line up
    which have been written by other people than myself, and
    these occasionally contain errors. The bulletins which
    you've got are not in this category, I am sure.
     
    But to give you some sort of an idea of it, we in actual
    fact had...  There have been two changes in the standard
    processes, both changes to the original. I didn't... they'd
    been changed. One of those are the commands of ARC
    Straightwire, which are being issued to you directly and
    immediately, and the original commands of ARC Straightwire
    are those commands which crack neurotic cases. And
    somebody, with some enthusiasm, along the line someplace,
    cut off the last half of the command in each case. But
    that's a real case cracker the way it is originally.
     
    "Recall something that is really real to you" is the proper command, and it's never been otherwise. But people with
    enthusiasms edit this material, and every time it has been
    edited the material and workability has to a marked degree
    been lost. All of the listing tapes, although there were
    lots of tapes called listing tapes, on the Saint Hill
    Course all of the key listing tapes and the key listing
    bulletins were removed from the Saint Hill Course during
    the last two or three years. And that's why you guys don't
    know nothing about listing. You come to me here.
     
    I wouldn't give you a penny for what you know about
    listing. That's a fact. If you can't ratta tat tat, ratta
    tat tat off the laws of listing, popety popety pop, and
    know that those are the laws.
     
    Those are the laws. There aren't any other laws. There are
    no exception to these laws. These are the laws of listing.
    Those are the laws of listing. That is how it is done. It
    isn't done any other way. There are no exceptions of any
    kind whatsoever. Any list is listed that way. Do I make my
    point? So don't ask me any more questions about listing or
    I'll bite your heads off.
     
    Anyhow, asking me whether or not the lists of four are done
    in this way. Now. There is a thing which isn't a list,
    which is actually a repetitive process. It's what's been
    overrun. It doesn't go to an item. You're asking, in actual
    fact the PC, what has been overrun. And you rehab each read
    you get. It's a repetitive process. You write it down so
    you know what you're rehabbing.
     
    But as far as listing and nulling is concerned it's a
    non-nulled item. As far as listing and nulling is concerned
    there are no variables. And it's the one thing that the
    bulk of you who are studying this course don't know. You don't
    know that you're dealing with an invariable science. It has
    no variabilities. It is absolutely clank. You have to begin
    by finding this out. If you don't find this out you will never
    make a Class VIII auditor. It's a marvelous discovery.
     
    You are in the process of discovering Scientology. That's
    right. Now let's take it up from the beginning. What does
    the word Scientology mean? If there seems to be a little
    bitterness in that...  Scio is the word for truth. And scio
    turns in to scien, in that form, which means truth.
     
    And ology is the study of. Truth, study of. Now if you're
    studying truth how the hell can there be a variable?
     
    Truth, by definition, is what is. There is a direct
    relationship to the amount of variable in a persons' life,
    and complications which are untruths and his state of case.
     
    A wag lies by the words and music. Lying is a way of life.
    "How are you today?" "I feel fine." "You look great Mabel." "What a pretty hat you have, I've always liked it." You listen to some of these birds, they're so bad off because
    they've just been done in. But they aren't, haven't been
    done in, they have been doing something in. Don't you see,
    that is a level of truth. So that an OT comes up the line
    toward a truth. And the more truths there is in him the
    higher his case level. By direct proportion.
     
    So a fellow comes in, he's lying in his teeth. Lie, lie,
    lie, alters alter, alter, vary, vary, vary, quibble,
    quibble, quibble, nya nya nya, booboo dee dee, boo boo. You
    have a direct, immediate index of his case level. He's
    nuts. And this goes down and expresses itself as delusion.
    The delusion of insanity. The delusion of a hop head. The
    delusion of a Callagan. Or a Robinson. "Oh my god the
    Scientologists are all after me!" Pffft. My contempt.
     
    These characters, we weren't after them. They practically
    had to take taxi cabs, airbuses, helicopters, walk through
    mud, struggle through storm, anything else, to get on our
    track. We didn't even hear of them. We didn't even know
    anything about them. We couldn't have cared less if we had.
    We aren't in any line of country they have anything to do with.
     
    The guy who is stuck on the track someplace, the Martians
    are after him. Fighting shadows.
     
    Fighting things that haven't anything to do with him. Wars,
    world wars, whereby the Germans says the English are
    horrible, and the English say the Germans are horrible. And
    the Germans say the English are trying to conquer the
    world. And the English say the Germans are trying to
    conquer the world. And Germans say the English are
    slaughtering babies, and the English say the Germans are
    slaughtering babies. The amount of truth there is in
    connection with any war man has ever fought is
    undiscoverable with the worlds' most powerful microscope.
     
    So in the gravest insanities you get the greatest untruth.
    So the road is a road of truth. At seven there was a step
    known as the incredibles. As you go up the line you
    discover the incredibles.
     
    Things that happened to the individual which are true, but
    not believable. The incredibles. That is one of the points
    of auditing. Stripping out the incredibles off the time track.
     
    Now you know how much you'd be believed if you walked into
    the barber shop and says, "Well, I put ten cents down on
    Sky Rover in the third race, and he paid off two million to
    one, and I made a couple of hundred thousand dollars, and
    my wife thought of the idea in a dream, and so that's why I
    did it. You know? Only it happens to be true. But you can't
    believe it because the odds are too great against it, see?
     
    I had trouble with this when I was a kid. I was everyplace
    and anyplace and into anything, and all over the planet at
    the time, when people were not traveling all over the
    planet. And I eventually got to a point where I couldn't
    talk about my adventures. I actually hit a level of untruth
    of minimizing what I had done and been. That's the
    reduction of incredibles.
     
    There are various ways by which something can be, or seem,
    untrue. Various ways.
     
    So anyway, Scientology is well named. It is the road to
    truth. It is a study of the truth. And total truth is total
    power. And when the guy hasn't got any lies left in him
    he's OT. And all the mechanics of OT work out too. So the
    subject is very, very well named.
     
    And that's what Scientology means. It's the study of truth,
    to which could be added the technology of achieving truth.
    And I have a list here, whereby several students don't know
    what standard tech is. Don't know what the word standard
    means. Haven't any idea. Now if somebody doesn't know that
    there is a subject called Scientology, which is a main line
    subject which has a certain number of hair line processes
    which make up a direct route, he needs an academy course.
    He shouldn't be here. Those are brutal words.
     
    A science is a body of truths. A technology is a body of
    truths. Now somebody who can't confront action, or
    something like that, thinks a truth would be a datum of
    some kind or another. Well a truth can also be an action.
    And the road through all of the untruths of a person, from
    all the way south to all the way north has been mapped. It
    exists. It has been on a chart for years. There have been
    bulletins which announced its' processes. The doingness of
    those processes are exact, precise. There aren't two ways
    to do them. There is one way to do them.
     
    And that is what you are here learning. And if you can't
    learn that basic fundamental you might as well quit now.
     
    You are not learning this wide subject of philosophy.
    You're not learning every student's got a chance to think
    his own opinion right now. You're not learning that right
    now. You're learning the technical application of exactly
    how it is done, exactly to whom it is done, exactly and
    precisely the steps and actions taken to an exact, precise
    results And that's what you're learning. And you haven't
    anything to do with how many needles sit on the head of an
    angel.
     
    Now case supervision, you were given some folders to case
    supervise. Then doing a case supervision of them, you
    decided what was wrong with the PC. Which is a direct
    violation of the Auditors' Code. Evaluative case
    supervision will be your downfall. It comes to this: He
    couldn't or didn't make this grade. Your job is to make
    sure he made the grade.
     
    Now what's wrong with the PC is he hasn't made that grade.
    The major gains of the PC are always the next grade. You
    won't ever get any gains on a PC compared to making the grade.
     
    All your job is is to start the PC in at the beginning of
    the assembly line and make sure that he's correctly run to
    the end of the assembly line. And that's your whole job.
    And when you do a case supervision, don't ever let me hear
    you say again to the end of your career an evaluative
    statement about a PC. Because you don't know.
     
    You do certain, basic, standard actions. Basic action.
    Standard action. And the case falls apart.
     
    You have to know your stable data, boy, you have to know
    your stable data so you can mutter it in your sleep.
     
    You look into one of these folders. If you know your
    business you instantly will look at a list.
     
    The list was complete. The PC was given his item. The
    question read to begin with. Didn't dead horse. You have to
    know data like this. Dead horse question didn't read to
    begin with.
     
    Don't list a question unless it reads. Question didn't
    read, don't list it. Question read, no item found on the
    list. Pfff! It's either incomplete or it needs to be
    extended. It needs to be extended or the item's been
    suppressed. You find there's a little list, four things,
    which you do with a list. Very standard. Elementary.
    Elementary.
     
    Now let's go into the definition of the word standard. I
    want to put you in a good frame of mind now. I'm not mad at
    you at all. There's no animosity.
     
    Standard. The word standard as taken from Rodell's synonym
    finder. The word standard. And it says here it is
    "Universal, accepted, common, normal. Of recognized
    excellence or authority.
     
    Final, definitive, authoritative, conclusive, reliable,
    preferred, classic, timeless, accepted, orthodox, staple,
    official, cathedral, doctrinal, ultimate, canonical and
    authentic." That's the word, the synonyms of the word standard.
     
    And now we have the Oxford Illustrated dictionary. And we
    will read here the definition of the word standard. I want
    to call to your attention that my messenger looked these up
    for me. The word standard. Standard. It's a distinctive
    flag. It's a banner with royal arms. It's a flag of cavalry
    regiment. It's a rallying principle. One of the meanings of
    standard is carrying a banner forward.
     
    Now. It's a weight or measure to which others conform or by
    which the accuracy of others is judged. It's a legal
    proportion of weight, as in fine metal and alloy in gold
    and silver coin. It's a degree of excellence, which is the
    meaning which we have, required for a particular purpose.
     
    It's a thing recognized as model for imitation. Recognized
    as possessing the merit of authority.
     
    Degrees of proficiency. Class studying to reach this.
     
    Let's take another dictionary. And this is the universal
    English dictionary. We're getting up in weight here. My
    messenger had a hard time lifting these off to look them up
    for you. Actually, our Sea Org messengers are very proud of
    themselves. They're moving up toward a ten thousand word
    vocabulary, which is exactly twenty times that of the
    average college student.
     
    Do you know the average college student knows five hundred
    words? It's true.
     
    Once more, it's a banner, standard, a banner. Hearing a
    royal or national arms. Flown only by the sovereign. Flag
    of the cavalry regiment. Etcetera, etcetera of gold. Style,
    mode, type, accepted, recognized by convention, within a
    community, at a given time, as a criterion of what is best
    in speech, behavior, conduct, action, face, morality, to
    which we add technology. What is the best.
     
    And now we will pick up a bigger dictionary. This is
    Websters' Third International dictionary.
     
    It is a couple of volumes, because they couldn't get all
    the words into one. And it's in India paper in microscopic
    print. And my messenger has very good eyesight to find it
    at all.
     
    Standard. It's a rallying place, a flag to mark a rallying
    place, a pole or a spear bearing some conspicuous
    object,...  Man, we haven't even gotten down to anything
    else. A definite level or degree of quality that is proper
    and adequate for a specific purpose. The word standard. The
    word standard. It means a definite level or degree of
    quality that is proper and adequate for a specific purposes
    And that one you can star rate. Got it?
     
    And now we will look up the word technology. I don't want
    anybody with any misunderstoods here. I haven't looked
    these up, my messenger looked these up for me.
     
    Technology is a scientific study of practical arts. It's
    practical arts collectively, terminology of a particular
    art or subject. Technique is manner of execution or
    performance. Manner of execution or performance.
     
    I'm gonna get this big dictionary up here. And it says
    here, technique is a systematic and special method employed
    in carrying out some particular operation. Skill in
    practical acquaintance with the methods of some particular
    art, specialized procedure, operation and the like. That's
    a technique.
     
    Now. Technology: Science of the mechanical industrial arts
    contrasted with the fine arts.
     
    Technologist as student is one who is versed in technology.
     
    And, let's get this big one back here. I don't know whether
    I can find it on this page or not, it's so microscopic.
    There is technique, techno, technology. Is the terminology
    of a particular subject, it's the technical language. It's
    the science of application of knowledge to practical
    purpose. Applied science. The science of the application of
    knowledge to a practical purpose.
     
    Applied science. Have you got it?
     
    Now, there's no animosity connected with this at all. This
    is perfectly friendly. But Scientology has a very definite
    body of technical application, which is the only body of
    technical application in all of the data of Scientology.
    There are not two ways to do anything in Scientology.
     
    In 1966 this was totally summated. And it is time that
    auditors ceased to be airy-fairy about it.
     
    Going up the line right now we have the fact that
    Scientology, applied as you are being trained to apply it,
    produces 100% result. And applied with the airyfairy, "I
    don't know what we're doing. duh duh duh duh, I have lots
    of opinions on this subject. I think I'd better case
    supervise; I think this guy must have missed withholds."
    After they got five items reading on the list, and it was
    four pages long, he threw the cans at the auditor.
    Obviously he has missed withholds.
     
    Scientology, mis-applied, applied contrary to standard
    tech, produces back fires, that are not the pcs' fault.
    Standard tech is entirely under the control of the case
    supervisor and the auditor.
     
    The preclear, the pre-OT, is entirely under the control of
    the case supervisor and the auditor.
     
    Just so you know that well, the preclear doesn't "have
    missed withholds which is why the session failed." Be's
    entirely under the control of the case supervisor and the
    auditor. And if he didn't make it it is the fault of the
    case supervisor and the fault of the auditor. Nobody elses!
    There is no escape, safety valve. If he went out and got
    drunk and fell on his head between sessions, why the hell
    didn't you audit him fast enough so he didn't have a
    chance? It's time we took responsibility for the guy in the
    chair, because properly case supervised you get one zero
    zero per centium. One hundred cases out of one hundred
    cases. If you don't get it you're flubbing.
     
    The old timer, he got pretty good. Dianetic auditing and so
    forth, they got about 50%. They got about a 50%
    improvement. As technology advanced, and as it was expertly
    applied, the percentage advanced. 22 1 / 2 % of all cases
    will get well if you pat them on the head, if you show them
    a green door, if you put an ice cream cone in their hand,
    if you give them sugar pills, if you simply give them
    advice, 22 1 / 2 % of all the people that come in the line
    up will get well.
     
    So the zero percentage is 22 1 / 2 . You gonna get 22 1 / 2
    anyhow. Right, wrong, upside down or backwards, you're
    gonna get twenty two and a half. So, you get one of these
    22 1 / 2 , you run a squirrel process and he says he got
    well so you think that squirrel process must have been...
     
    Bah, Nonsense.
     
    Now. You can push this up the line. And you want to know
    where the psychiatrist is, and so forth, he doesn't even
    get one percent. He's doing 22 1 / 2 percent damage. That's
    how you measure it. And auditor's a very bad auditor you
    get less than 22 1 / 2 percent. He expect that in any event.
     
    Now. The skill and the excellence of the technology, and
    excellence of its' application, the standardness of it will
    push the percentage up. And through the years it went to
    higher percentages, and higher percentages, and higher
    percentages. And you, as a Class VIII, are looking at the
    per centium of one zero zero per centium. Any thing that
    falls below 100 percent is because somebody goofed, boy.
    The case supervisor or the auditor. Somebody goofed.
     
    Now it may take you two or three sessions. It may take you
    a repair before you can execute the final action. You may
    have been fed a bum datum by the auditor and then, as case
    supervisor, called for a wrong action. And then you'll find
    this out fast enough because the guy didn't come out of it,
    so then you've got to go back and find out what it is. You
    send the preclear to the examiner, you get him run on a
    seven button assessment, the seven different types of
    things. You can get him run on a general assessment form, a
    green form, an L4A, various things for various purposes.
    You find out, you put it to rights, and then you get your
    100. It isn't 100 percent one session. But if you go for
    two or three goofed up sessions followed by four or five
    repairs, which are goofed up repairs of goofed up sessions,
    and then you repair the repair of the repair, and so forth,
    you're not going to get your 100 percent.
     
    But out of the cases which pass beneath your nose you had
    better, you had better, better, better, get one zero zero.
    Because the technology is there with which to achieve it.
    And if you don't know it's there we'll put you in an
    academy someplace to learn some of your basics.
     
    Because the road is a very simple road. And the most
    difficulty you are having right at this moment is asking
    these marvelously complicated questions of yourselves. You
    see a table sitting in the middle of the room. I am telling
    you it is a table, it is sitting in the middle of the room.
    And you say, "Let's see. Should it go to the antique side?
    How far is it? How long has it been sitting there? What are
    the ramifications and complications in the material of the
    table? Is the table really substantial? If an elephant sat
    down on the table, would it stand up?" I'm just trying to
    tell you, for god sakes, there's a table sitting in the
    middle of the room. There is a table sitting in the middle
    of the room. And that is the total is-ness of it.
     
    I tell you that you do the Ruds to F/N. Therefore, you
    start in with an ARC break, you got a present time problem,
    you check for missed withhold, and so somewhere along there
    she's gonna F/N. If you know anything about your TRs at all
    you really can't miss. So it F/Ns. Your rudiments are now
    done, so the PC is set up to be audited. Now you audit what
    the main body of the session was supposed to be, which is
    some major action. You complete the major action to F/N,
    and maybe one, two, three major actions. You complete them
    all. And you end off the session on an F/N. And if your TRs
    are very good he'll come back into the next session still
    with an F/N. If you cannot get an F/N on your rudiments
    you, of course, do a G/F, a green form, and you get an F/N
    on that. And that is setting the case up.
     
    And looking at your folders you've been trying to get case
    gains out of green forms. Well sure, somebody feels better
    on a green form. You're trying to get case gains. Trying to
    solve cases. What the hell are you trying to solve cases for?
    They're no problem. They're a problem to C/S, they're not a
    problem to an auditor. You do the usual and the case solves
    itself. It's too easy. It is too simple. And your complex
    figure-figure-figure-figure-figure, oh my god,
    figure-figure-figure-figure-figure is just all over your
    god damned plate. And you're sitting there saying, "I
    wonder what the PCs thinking next, and so forth, and
    waff-waff-waff and doo doo doo thhthhhthh." Relax.
     
    You start in with, "Oh I wonder what's this? Look at this!
    Christ! Look what's happened! Oh my god! I'd better do
    something about this." You've got a C/S right in front of
    you, perhaps.
     
    Your C/S. And it says PC-pow, PC-pow,
    PC-pow-pow-pow-pow-pow. You do it. And if your C/S knows
    his business, or if you're the C/S you already knew the TA
    was at six and a half. And you simply took it down, that's
    all. Now what; why would the TA be at six and a half? You
    go back to the folder, you'll find out fast enough. The guy
    went through five blow downs on listing one of the 5A
    processes. And the auditor gave him the last blowing down
    item. Power's supposed to be listed to the first blow down.
    If you list it to more than one blow down you're gonna be
    in trouble there. And the PC after the session might feel
    great for an hour, he might feel great for two hours. But
    sometime between then and the next two or three days he is
    going to feel like hell. You violate the rules of standard
    tech and the PC feels like hell. You follow the rules of
    standard tech and the PC feels good. And that's all there
    is to it.
     
    Some day, if you get through this course alive, someday you
    will look back on your beginning think as completely
    ridiculous. You will be sitting there, knocking cases off
    left and right, pongety, pongety, pongety, pongety, bung,
    bang. Hundred percent, hundred percent, plongety-bing,
    plongety-bing, plongety-bing. "God damn that auditor. He
    slipped in that session.. I'll write your C/S, repair this
    wong, wong, bong bong." And there she goes.
     
    Hundred percent, hundred percent. Pocketa, pocketa,
    pocketa. And you look back at your earlier auditing
    career...  I draw a curtain over your thoughts.
     
    But, did you ever see somebody walk on a stage and play a
    pianer? Some fellow walks on a stage and he plays the
    piano. Mario Fenninger walks in, shoots his cuffs, sits
    down, bow-wow! You know that piano really goes, boy, that
    piano really goes. Now you can say it looks very simple to
    Mario Fenninger. That's right. He knows he's supposed to
    strike certain keys and he gets certain results. There
    isn't any other airy-fairy think about it. Only he knows
    where the keys are better'n any body else. And that's a
    Class VIII auditor. Same piano.
     
    And you see some academy auditor. He comes in and, wonder
    where C is, and where, where, where's the lid to this
    thing? You know? Lid. Well, I got the lid open. Now let's
    see. What are these black and white things? I'll look it up
    in the instruction book over here. Black and white
    things...  keys. Those are keys. Very good. Now you expect
    him to play Moonlight Sonata, huh?
     
    It's a piano. But it isn't any where near as difficult as a
    piano to learn how to play. The biggest hump is learning
    that it's a very simple action. It's not a careless action.
    Terribly simple.
     
    You go out and you see an expert marksman. And he throws
    the rifle up to his shoulder, booms Bulls' eye. Bulls' eye.
    You say, "Gee, that's easy." And you go out and you look for where the trigger is, and you look where the bolt is,
    where the magazine is, and you look down there to see if
    it's loaded, and you take it up and this damn strap's
    getting in your road somehow or another. My god, you're so
    damned introverted looking at the weapon you never get a
    chance to look at the target. And the reason most auditors
    never see what's going on in the PC is the auditor doesn't
    really even know how to handle an E-meter.
     
    He sits down. "I wonder if I've got the sensitivity right.
    I've got to...  I've got to write this down." Never mastered the art of handling the tone arm of the meter with his
    theme while he's writing down the auditors' report. "And,
    let's see, what do I say next?" Same thing. He just doesn't know his tools well enough.
     
    You take somebody walks in with a camera. Got a camera?
    Be's a ruddy amateur. If he's a ruddy amateur, if he looks
    at this camera, and he takes a good look at it, and he
    says, "Where's the lens? Where do I put the film in? What
    is this? What's this glass in front? Oh, that's the lens,
    yes." And, "I wonder what all these rings are? Well, I'll look it up in the instruction book here. Oh, that is the
    lens. Now let's see, how do I get this camera open to get
    some film in it?", and so on. Finally opens it up, finally
    gets some film in it, loaded some how or another. Then he's
    going around, "Where's the trigger, where's the trigger,
    let's see, where's the trigger? Now I'm going to take a
    picture." And god damn, he's so involved in trying to
    handle this piece of stuff that he is completely unfamiliar
    with, that, honest to Pete, the pictures he takes are a
    complete, stinking disgrace. He thinks he's doing good to
    be able to point it horizontal.
     
    Now we take some guy, he's got a piece of camera, he's
    familiar with cameras. He can take this thing and he flips
    the back of it open, he throws the film in while talking to
    you about something or other. Sets it up and so forth. Now
    he looks around, and there's the picture. He hasn't got any
    attention on that camera, boy. There's the picture. So... ,
    so here, powie. He can see over there, because his
    attention isn't introverted here. Standard tech then
    requires that one know his tools, know the laws of the
    game, know the correct action so instinctively and so
    instantaneously that he never has to think a thing to do
    it. His attention's on the PC. PC gives indicator sixteen,
    the auditor does what he's supposed to do. Just think.
    Well, what do you know?
     
    Pc's talking about an ARC break but it isn't reading. Now,
    he knows his technology sufficiently well and he knows the
    PC talking about an ARC break that isn't reading, it's a
    missed withhold. ARC breaks that don't read are missed
    withhold. Standard datum. You don't say, "I think, you
    know, actually Ron said something about... when the thing
    didn't read." Nuts! See? It's bonkers. What, what's all
    this think and cross think, and wonder and so forth? If you
    hold up your hand and turn your hand over palm up, and then
    turn your hand over palm down, do you know what you'd had
    to do as a thetan? If you could think of the number of
    channels and muscles and nerve centers and things, and
    this, and so on which it took to turn your hand right side
    up and upside down, you would go practically bonkers. And I
    assure you you wouldn't be able to do it.
     
    You ask somebody who is a ballerina. You can actually throw
    off a ballerina who is not quite on the ball, not quite.
    She puts a good show on, and so on, but she's not quite
    there. If you say, "How do you balance on your toe?" How do you balance on your toe? Now if she's on the ball she'd
    look at you and say, "Why, you balance on your toe of
    course, you idiot."
     
    The great dancer is totally simple. You ask some artist,
    "How should you paint this picture? What should you do?" Well if he's sort of only painting reactively and he
    doesn't know his business he's knocked into a cocked hat
    instantly. He's knocked right off of it. But if he really
    knows his business he just says, "Ho hum," and goes on with his work. "Why, why do you put green like that? Why do you put a stripe of green like that?", and so forth. And he'd
    look at you and say, "What? Looks better."
     
    Now you ask some flooky mug, maybe an art teacher some
    place. And you say, "Now why do you put green across the
    picture?" "Well, this gives the collateral effect to
    extensive distance, and balances the color combination,
    because in actual fact the color wheel, if you see it over
    here, has complimentary color. You see it's green. And if
    you don't put green there then you'll get concavity of the
    lumbosis."
     
    The maddest thing I ever saw in my life. I gave a lecture
    to a short story class one time. Been giving a lot of
    lectures to writers classes and things like this in
    universities and places. And, I walked up on the rostrum,
    and there were all the assembled students, and lying on the
    rostrum was one of my current magazine stories, lying open
    to my story, which was the lead story of the magazine. And
    the instructor had taken every single one of the sentences
    of the opening of the story and deep into the body of the
    story, and had marked each one of them for shadowing,
    suspense element, you know? And all according to a
    technology which I knew, but I hadn't thought of for years.
    And I was fascinated. I looked at this, and just for a
    moment wondered how it would be to be all thumbs, so you'd
    have to, while you were writing a story say, "We had better foreshadow some action."
     
    Now. If Scientology's definition is the road to truth, then
    what are the progressive grade processes? They are those
    barriers in that order which keep a person from going
    forward to an ultimate truth. So if you looked at a normal
    PC you might see something on the order of where he is
    parked in diddy-wa-diddy. You ever hear of diddy-wa-diddy?
    That's actually ten miles on the other side of hell. And
    that's where the people in hell go on their night out. But
    anyway, he's over here in diddy-wa-diddy. Now he's going to
    walk all the way, the whole route. See? Now these grades
    are the gates across the road.
     
    One, nobody knew the road. They didn't know he was down
    there. They didn't know any of the gates across the road.
    And standard tech simply takes this fellow, and it walks
    him right straight up the lines through these exact gates.
    And if you walk him through any other gates you're just
    detouring. There aren't any other barriers on the track.
    These are the shut gates on his road up the line. And they
    are the grade pro-ces-ses, and it isn't just an illusion.
    It is the fact. And because it is a fact, if you know your
    job expertly, you simply go along and open these gates for
    him, shove him through, go to the next gate, open it and
    shove him through, and open the next gate and shove him
    through.
     
    Now there's eight thousand, seven hundred and fifty billion
    other things you could do with the case, none of which
    would put him any further along the road he's supposed to
    travel. But boy, would they be interesting. And any time
    else in man's history all they've done is they did find out
    there might be somebody in diddy-wa-diddy, and they just
    sent him a little closer to hell. Didn't even have the
    dream that there might be a road out. So how far up the
    line do you have to come to grasp this thing called
    standard tech? There is a guy, there's a dream of a road
    out. There is a road, there's a complete ocean of
    wrongnesses, but what has been isolated are the exact
    barriers to the exact road that takes him out. And he goes
    right up the line.
     
    Brrrrrrrmm!
     
    Now along with that is the communication of the technology
    and the training technology of the person to teach him to
    do that. These are fantastic wins. They are so airy-fairy
    and so starryeyed, and so far beyond anything man ever
    envisioned. There all by itself it's a little bit hard to
    grasp. But you just accept it. It's a road out. There's a
    dream to get out, there's a road out, there're just exactly
    so many gates across the road, standard tech, one right
    after the other opens the gate, and standard tech, when the
    guy has gone over in the left field, right field, off the
    road, into the telegraph pole, something like that, also
    gives you the technology of taking him out and putting him
    back on the road. And there aren't eight ways to do it. And
    it doesn't require any opinions.
     
    Let's say we've got a concrete path that goes from A to B.
    And we start walking down this concrete path. And all of a
    sudden somebody rushes up and says, "Actually you're
    supposed to walk over there in the gravel along the side of
    the edge of the mole, you know, and you swim for a little
    bit, and that's really how you get up to B." What kind of a jackass is it that would walk over to the mole and jump in?
    Well he'd have to be somebody who didn't have any idea
    there was any, any concrete walk there. Well the first
    thing you learn about standard tech is, one, there is a
    walk there.
     
    Now one of the ways you learn this is subjectively. Now I
    don't want to invalidate anybody's case. I don't want to
    invalidate anybody's reviews. But this pile of crap I've
    got sitting here is how not to do it. Now also, there's an
    infinity of ways not to do it. You can always have an
    infinity of wrongnesses around one rightness. And the
    rightnesses are very few. So if you learn the rightnesses
    well then the wrongnesses, to hell with it. Do you follow?
    You can get an infinity of ways to do something wrong. Well
    work it out for yourself. Start counting up the number of
    ways to sink a rowboat. Those are all wrongnesses. Now the
    ways to row a rowboat, if it is a rowboat, not a sculling
    boat, you can stand up and row it, you can sit down and row
    it. You can row it with two men, you can row it with one
    man. But the right way to row a rowboat is to put the oars
    into the water and apply some energy to the handles, pick
    the oars out of the water and replace them into the
    position where they can be reinserted into the water to
    apply some energy.
     
    Now somebody comes along and he says to you, "Yes, well how do you row a rowboat?" "Well, there's several ways you can row a rowboat, that's for sure. You can stand up and face
    the bow, you can sit down and face the stern, you can stand
    up and face the stern, you can put a man on the right oar
    and a man on the left oar, you can have two sets of oars."
    Sounds like a lot of variables. But let me point out that
    the oars on the right side and the oars on the left side of
    the boat are doing exactly the same thing, no matter what
    arrangement is made. If you've got a trireme, a bireme, it
    doesn't matter. If you've got a life boat, if you've got a
    little fishing dory, you're doing the same thing in each
    particular case.
     
    Now if you lose sight of the fact that the oar is supposed
    to go into the water, and push the water back, if you lose
    sight of that, you may have a great deal of theory, and a
    great many questions, but the boat won't go anywhere.
     
    That's normally what happens to science. Somebody finds out
    about rowing a boat. And then for years and years and years
    guys add to it, and eventually the rowing of the boat no
    longer functions. And the boats don't row any more, and
    they have to invent an entirely new technology of getting
    through water.
     
    You think I'm kidding. The movies, the movies show us in
    biremes, old men-o-war with double oar banks of Greek
    times, shows us, shows us all of these oars going, while
    somebody is going bong, bong on drums, or something at the
    back of the boat, in order to keep all the oars in turn. If
    you take a life boat out and every rower on the starboard
    side fails to exactly follow the motions of the aftermost
    starboard rower, who's called the stroke oar, and if the
    port aftermost rower, who is the port stroke, does not
    follow exactly the motions of the other stroke, the boat
    looks like a centipede with busted legs. Man has actually
    pretty well forgotten how to row boats. Mass rowing of
    boats. Big boats. Because they let the coxswain count. And
    you hear all your demonstration when your coxswain count
    the stroke. The coxswain can't count the stroke. Strokes
    are counted by the stroke oar. There wouldn't be any reason
    to hammer a drum because nobody's following a drum, they're
    following a stroke oar. So why, why would anybody pound the
    drum just for one oarsman? You could sit down along side of
    this oarsman and say, "OK. Stroke. Stroke." There's no reason to waste your lungs. As a matter of fact the entire
    rowing of the boat is going to be completely ruined. It
    looks like some wildly galloping centipede going along.
     
    Now I know very well that they did it properly in Greek and
    Roman times, because they speak of the white wings out of
    the galleys. The white wings of the galleys. Now you'd
    immediately, in a sail period and so on, you'd think they
    meant, think they meant canvas, or sails, or something.
    They didn't. They meant those double banks of oars. Because
    it looks just like, it just looks like a big bird flying at
    you. The oars are flapping, see, on both sides. You see them
    go up and down. Looks like a flying bird that is sitting down
    in the water. They never rowed that evenly by calling a stroke
    or with drums.
     
    And the other day I was looking through a book as to how
    you rowed a life boat. And it said the coxswain called the
    stroke. He doesn't. If he does, nobody can row the boat.
     
    So look, if this fundamental piece of technology can be
    wrecked by the simple action of making the wrong person
    count cadence, or rhythm, do you see that a workable piece
    of technology is very easily unsettled and upset?
     
    So the thing that keeps standard tech standard is
    following standard tech, not anybody else's advice. So
    somebody comes along and he says, "We got a brand new
    process which is riddlediddle-de-poggle-dings, and so on,
    and we've got this brand new meter which we attach to the
    toes of the PC and it makes him wiggle his ears." Well,
    I'll probably still be around.
     
    You'd better send it to me for a check up to make sure this
    case...  I'll tell you something absolutely ghastly. In
    eighteen solid years of research I kept the door wide open
    to any research suggestion of any kind whatsoever. And from
    the moment I wrote the last sentence of Dianetics the
    Modern Science Of Mental Health, right on up the line I
    would have been only too glad to have accepted a workable
    action. But every time I did it got us in trouble. It might
    have stayed with it a short period of time, it might have
    appeared workable a short period of time. But in the final
    analysis it got us in trouble.
     
    I know how little things can change. And what you haven't
    watched is that Scientology and Dianetics were developed
    grade by grade. 1950, running of engrams. Running of engrams.
     
    Fascinating. Just before the running of engrams there was
    Straightwire. Then engram running developed heavily.
    Secondaries, secondaries were developed in their proper
    position and place.
     
    The whole subject evolved along this particular line. And
    do you know why, and what was the clue? And why these
    became the grades? And why these are run in that sequence?
    It's because they're the collection of those things which,
    if violated, prevent any advance of the case. If one of
    those things are out, then the case never goes OT. Simple.
    And it's in that sequence. And the width of the road is
    about one onethousandth of one micrometer. The variability
    is zero. The wins are one zero zero. There's a brand new
    approach. You're looking at a new world.
     
    Now, somewhere up the line you get to start auditing this.
    And when you start auditing this you're gonna get so damned
    dizzy and power-happy somebody'll probably have to shoot
    you down with a shot gun, because a guy just goes
    completely wild. Normally speaking he goes wild on this.
    He, he does exactly right, he does exactly what he's
    supposed to do, the PC all of a sudden goes zzzooooooommmm,
    just like he's supposed to do, and he all of a sudden
    realizes he can do it. And you can't speak to him for days.
    And then the mistake he makes is he now thinks he can case
    supervise also. This is another field. It's based on the
    same principles, but you have to know. If you have to know
    it well to audit it you have to know it ten times as well
    to case supervise it.
     
    Now, I, I know, I caught that, that there'd been one or two
    people in this class who were case supervisors at Saint
    Hill, and so forth, and you can put it down to my charity
    that you haven't been ground up for hamburger. Because what
    I see here, wow. I taught you better than this.
     
    There was a thing called standard tech. There has been a
    thing called standard tech since 1966, but nobody's caught
    the brass ring. So I'm putting that brass ring firmly in
    your paw. I'm not trying to make you guilty, I'm merely
    trying to give you one hundred percent win. One hundred
    percent. If you get less than hundred percent, you goofed!
    If you get less than one hundred percent as a case
    supervisor, you goofed! Less than a hundred percent as an
    auditor, you goofed. Some of the goofs are beyond your
    control. And sometimes you hit a real goof that you can't
    do anything about at all. And those are the goofs which you
    shouldn't goof on.
     
    You told the auditor to do so and so and so and so, and the
    auditor did something else! He just got a letter from yongo-bongo, and yongo-bongo, he said, "When I was studying yogi, I found out that if the preclear sat in an ibis position... " He really decided he'd try that, see, and he didn't follow your C/S exactly, and
    you've got a loused up case. And then, because it's going
    to be a day or two between sessions, he goes and walks
    under a street car. And that cuts your percentage, doesn't it.
     
    Cases that are well audited don't go to ethics. Cases that
    are badly audited wind up in ethics.
     
    All too often.
     
    Now, when you're dealing a purity, when you're dealing with
    a purity of technology, the weapon in your hands has such
    velocity, that it isn't the airy-fairy days where you
    couldn't cut below the reality of the PC and louse him up.
    There were years past where the technology as it went along
    did not plow under and overthrow the reality level of the
    PC. Well you're not dealing with it now. You're dealing
    with the pure dynamite.
     
    Now an explosives expert has often been known to carry
    nitro glycerin in a flask in his hip pocket. All he had to
    do was back up suddenly into something and he would have
    fragmented all over the landscape. I've seen dynamite men
    sit on boxes of fuses, smoking. And yet here's this guy who
    is the nitro glycerin soup expert, the soup expert, and
    somebody else even looks like he's going to touch a bottle
    of soup and he practically throttles him. You walk in
    toward the dynamite powder house with a cigarette in your
    hands, and the guy who is smoking his pipe on the box gets
    up and kicks you the hell out of the yard. In other words,
    he knows enough about it, so he can ride it close to the
    edge. And he's also smart enough to know you'd better not
    let anybody else. Do you see? You're dealing, actually,
    with terrifically powerful technology. Used right, it just
    shoots a guy to the moon. Goofed up, pooey. And goofed up
    cases are too many.
     
    Now it takes a supervisor who knows his business. You can
    run engrams on somebody, you can do this with somebody, you
    can do that with somebody, you can run various processes,
    you can run...  If you can get an idea of a, of a highway
    running through the middle of a lot of blackness and a lot
    of little pathways, and all that sort of thing, you can run
    any of those little pathways. You can run any of those open
    fields. You can do anything out there that you want to. You
    can goof around, and flubble-dubble, and bobble-fobble,
    and, and so forth. PC isn't getting anyplace, you can't do
    him any damage to amount to anything. But you get on the
    main highway. It is such a straight highway. The actions in
    opening the gates are so positive, that when you goof that
    up the PC will goof up. Do you follow?
     
    Now if there's a big question in your mind as to whether or
    not Scientology works you shouldn't be studying Class VIII.
    Because, one is expected to be a sufficiently expert
    auditor to produce some result, such as a touch assist. He
    should be able to do that, and achieve some result. But if
    one has got big questions about this and that, please
    recognize them for what they are. They're just confusion
    blowing off. There is just about as much question in
    running a rehab, or the mechanisms of rehab, there isn't
    any questions concerning it. There are no questions with
    regard to listing. There aren't any. You list. And you list
    it as long as it contains an item on it, and two on the
    list you extend the list and give the PC the item, and what
    the hell.
     
    I mean, this is something like saying a box of matches on
    the table is either full of matches or it's not full of
    matches. If it is not full of matches and the matches are
    dumped along side of it, and if the object is to restore
    it, you pick up the matches, put them in the box, and put
    the box together again. And you have a box of matches. I
    mean, it's open and shut data like that, I mean it isn't
    any wibble-wobble-wooble, it, it's just truth. See? So you
    start watching for these simplicities. But what does it
    take to be totally simple? It takes a total knowledge of
    the lot.
     
    Save such familiarity that you never even have to think to
    do it. Now how often would you have to field strip a rifle
    so that you could pick it up, put the cartridge into it and
    fire it, without even thinking? Well, there's a
    rifle... Clank, boom. Poom! How often would you have had to
    have field stripped that rifle? Probably dozens of times.
     
    Back in the days when medicine was medicine, and not Parke
    and Davis and other drug companies pushing their stock up,
    a medical doctor used to have to identify all of the bones of
    the human skeleton, blindfolded, by touch alone.
    Interesting exercise. Well what would be the point of such
    an exercise? Well, it's kind of pointless, you very seldom
    operate in the dark. But it sure as the devil gives you
    familiarity. You know what bone is where when you've done
    something like that.
     
    Now, there're various actions and exercises which you can
    do, and you can action them and exercise them. But if you
    have any comm lag, if there is any comm lag between your
    think and the datum you're trying to get, you don't know
    standard tech well enough to do it. If there' s any comm
    lag in you instantly thinking of the law of listing that
    you need to apply at that instant, if you had to think of
    it as a law of listing, as something that came off of a
    bulletin, you haven't got it yet. You understand? You have
    to...  It's a total. It's a total. You own it, you do it,
    and so forth. You look at the list, and it isn't, "I wonder where all of it... ?" You look at this list, you say, "That list isn't correct." You just look at it, as I would with
    any of these, oh, I could do this at random. List just
    incorrect. Yes. Good. Yes. Yes. Didn't find any correct list.
     
    Well anyhow.
     
    Imagine a case supervisor now who would have to have his
    whole bulletin file along side of him to have reference to
    go over and find any of the errors which had been made in
    the session, in order to order them corrected, in case...
    The trouble I have in case supervision is trying to read
    the auditors' writing. It's that degree of simplicity. I
    know my data. But you say, "Well of course you know the
    data. You wrote the data. Naturally you know the data. You
    developed the data." Well listen, god damn it, I've
    developed more data than you ever heard of. You know? I've
    just developed data by the wow! The total notes of
    Dianetics and Scientology, the total tapes of Dianetics and
    Scientology, are an ocean of data. Tremendous, fantastic scope.
     
    How is it that I know these central data so well? When I
    started doing CCHs, when I started doing model session, I
    set myself up just like you. And I drilled it 'till I knew
    it cold. I could write down the laws of listing again after
    a lapse of several years, even though the bulletin that
    recorded them originally had been removed from the lines,
    and I wrote them from memory, and I think it took me
    something on the order of about fifteen, twenty minutes.
    The slowdown was Alex Sabirsky's ability to keep up with my
    writing.
     
    Now I know more phenomena than you can count, which are
    contrary to those laws of listing, which seem to be this,
    which off woff phenomena than that or is it the other way?,
    and so forth. How is it that I would know those laws of
    listing? Well, I had to keep check on things that didn't
    have variables. I eventually isolated those things and
    they're the things with no variables. So I had to write all
    those things down. I had to know those. I had to read them
    back. I had to remember these things. I had to know 'em.
    You think you're studying this subject, why hell. I've
    studied ninety five times the subject you ever studied.
    Alright, then how is it that out of this whole body of
    stuff I can pick so neatly this and that, and so as to do a
    case supervision about as fast as I can read it? It is
    knowing my data. Knowing which datum is the datum which
    applies at this particular point, and what datum has been
    violated and otherwise.
     
    And you've got the same data I've got in your study packs.
    Simple as that.
     
    I don't do these folders from crystal balls, boy. I do
    these just, these folders against the most concise series
    of data you ever heard of. Srrrrrp-boom! We cracked a case
    today down the middle. Down the middle, cross-wise and
    diagonally. It was just about, he'd given us a bad time. We
    keep cracking 'em. Knowing the data. Knowing the exact,
    basic rules and laws.
     
    Now there's something funny about all this. I know a lot of
    other subjects in which such data occurs. I can give you
    the datum of Freudian analysis. I'm a very good swami. I
    can read minds so as to tear your skull off. Good at it.
    Don't ever do these things. Still know the data in
    connection with it.
     
    Why? Then out of this tremendous body of information are we
    stressing just these data? I've got us the widest possible
    selection. It's the evaluation of importance, knowing which
    point is valuable and what is trash. It is knowing where
    the main line lies and where it doesn't. I wouldn't give
    you spit for any datum in Freudian analysis. I wouldn't
    give you dog spit for it.
     
    In fact Freud and Broyer probably should have been stood up
    against the nearest brick wall and shot unpleasantly, with
    dull bullets.
     
    You've always heard me be polite on that subject. I'm
    taking down my hair. I'm talking to a Class VIII student.
    What a lot of crap. You know who they really were? They
    were some guys who had found out how you could take the
    work of Charcot and Mesmer and persuade people to do things
    against their will under pain-drug hypnotism. And there
    isn't an analyst on the planet who ever does anything else
    in the...  It's a method of shaking people down and bending
    their will. Brayer and Freud, in 1891, were agents of Kaiser
    Wilhelm Hogensoloven. And they were dedicated to making
    politically-minded changes for him. A bunch of crap. A
    complete swindle. Just a hypnotist. So he invents the
    libido-dibido theory, and he goes poogly-poods and ids, and
    Greek mythology, and bah! There're certain principles
    involved in any savage and primitive think that you can
    use. Certain principles involved. There's certain magical
    principles.
     
    There's opening up somebody's memory, making him, forcing
    him or persuading him to remember something painful, and so
    forth. These are known to every medicine man, every swami
    there is. How is it they knew it and never used it, huh?
     
    Right now, right now the beautiful technology, heh, of
    these characters is turned against Scientology, because the
    politicians you hear crying out against them have wives who
    have been violated by psychoanalysis. They are under the
    influence. There are thousands of zones where data could
    lie. There're billions of zones where, that you could
    consider truth. There's a whole universe out here full of
    crap and bucks And I show you one little, narrow line that
    goes straight through it, like a shock, and a few gates,
    which if you open them exactly correctly, somebody goes out
    like he is on a rocket ride. So if you ever mention to me
    again a question about something over in left field I'll
    have you spanked. This is a lousiest thing - what the hell
    is anybody doing wandering around over here in left field?
    Here's the main road. Let's get on it, let's find out what
    the principles on it are. I didn't mean to curse you that
    mildly. Here's the main highway. Now knock off the mucking
    about and get on it.
     
    There aren't any questions about it, it just is. And it's a
    certain series of actions that you do.
     
    And they wind up at the other end in a total result. So do
    it. Boom! That's all there is to it, and as far as case
    supervision, your main trouble will be trying to convince
    the auditors auditing for you that they'd better damn well
    do what you say on a case supervision folder, and not some
    other crappy thing. And then you will have to convince them
    because of your ferocity on this whole subject, you will
    have to convince them that they'd better damn well speak
    the truth by making a false report far worse than just a goof.
     
    These problems are ahead of you. The first thing you must
    learn is that there is a road. You can learn it
    subjectively easy enough, or I could turn lose division
    five on you, left, right and center. Clean up all the flubs
    and bubs and so forth, and send you flying with the
    greatest of ease. If anything wrong with your case or
    bogged down, you'd wonder where the hell you; what, what
    you ever thought was gain before this? Well I'm not going
    to do that. I'm going to let you get win on each other in
    the org student course. We could make, make your cases
    zongobingo so fast it'd make your head swim. But then,
    we've got all the wins we want. You can have it too. And
    you can also be the effect end of the goofs.
     
    So anyway, that is everything I have to say to you this
    evening. And I hope something I have said will assist you
    on your road to truth. Thank you.
     
    **************************************************
     
     
    

    Track this thread for me

    Subscribe to alt.religion.scientology
    Mail this message to a friend
    View original Usenet format
    Post Reply

    << Previous in search   ·   Next in search >>

    Search Discussions
      For a more detailed search go to Power Search
    Search only in: People >> Humanities >> Theology
    All Deja.com
    Search for:
    Search  messages

     Arts & Entertainment   Automotive   Computing & Tech   Health   Money 
     News   People   Recreation   Sports   Travel 
    SHOPPING - Yellow Pages - Long Distance Deals - Free Stuff - Trade with Datek - Go to Gigabuys! - GET IT NOW @ NECX - FREE downloads! - Get FREE Health Info@drkoop.com - Apartments.com - eBay Auctions

    Copyright © 1999 Deja.com, Inc. All rights reserved.
    Trademarks · Terms & Conditions of Use · Site Privacy Statement.

    Advertise with Us!  |  About Deja.com