From anon@squirrel.owl.de Mon Aug 31 13:23:12 1998 Path: newscene.newscene.com!novia!sunqbc.risq.qc.ca!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!news.alt.net!anon.lcs.mit.edu!nym.alias.net!mail2news Date: 31 Aug 1998 20:23:12 -0000 From: Secret Squirrel Comments: Please report problems with this automated remailing service to . The message sender's identity is unknown, unlogged, and not replyable. Subject: FZ BIBLE 1/3 SHSBC-344 ITSA MAKER LINE Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,alt.clearing.technology Message-ID: Mail-To-News-Contact: postmaster@nym.alias.net Organization: mail2news@nym.alias.net Lines: 527 Xref: newscene.newscene.com alt.religion.scientology:519355 alt.clearing.technology:63217 FREEZONE BIBLE ASSOCIATION TECH POST TAPE LECTURE SHSBC-344 16 OCT 63 THE ITSA MAKER LINE 1/3 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. 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 the Christians are not good and obedient Jews and yet are allowed 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 ************************************************** THE ITSA MAKER LINE Tape lecture of 16 Oct 1963, SHSBC-313 renumbered 344 (continued from part 2) The pc is sort of saying, "Well, I don't know ... Well, you kept looking at the meter. And so on and so on. I don't really know whether this item was less yeaow-nya- wha-wha-wha-whaf ..." And you start to see some of this kind of stuff and you all of a sudden - not be unnecessarily cautious - but you suddenly recognize it for what it is. You've chopped up this auditing comm cycle somehow or another. Somewhere it is missing. Somewhere something has gone wrong. Something has goofed somewhere, and right then - spot it and pick it up right now, without nulling fifteen more new additional lists, you see, and holding up the pc for the next five sessions, you know. Get that quick. Recognize an ARC broken pc. And recognize how slightly an ARC break registers when it is actually beginning to form and pick it up then - don't ARC break the pc in order to find out. Well, there are several wavs to do that. One of them is not ARC break pcs. As I've just told you, that is next to impossible. Your own auditing enthusiasms will cause you to ARC break pcs. My God! I pulled one the other day you would have gotten an infraction sheet for and so on. I saw very clearly that on a list an item had rocket read and blown down which was not the right item. It was the very exact item which the pc was madly listing for, and the pc was actually tending to go into a strain on an overlist of trying to get this item on the list - and I said, "You just put this item down on the list just before this. Could it be it?" And the pc said, "Why yes, I guess so. Put it on the list," and immediately was a little bit nattery about the pen scratching. And I took the item right back off the list and put it back on the other list and continued the pc and we got another one - and the item that was on that list, if accepted, would have missed two RIs. It came up two lists later as the right item. And the one which was the right item was very resistant. It was one of these - well, I'11 say - tell you what the item was - torture. Very resistant item. You'd call the thing and it wouldn't - wouldn't fire. It'd start to fire. It - every once in a while you find some kind of a goofball situation like this. And you call it and it - blhblhblh - it doesn't quite fire. And it won't let go. And it goes, ssshhhk! It looks like it's up against springs. And ordinarily you say that's - that's not the right item - it's slightly misworded or something. In this particular case, after we'd listed enough charge off, the pc continued to assert that was the item and suddenly I called it, and it fired like mad and blew down. In other words, it had to be unburdened a bit by listing before the thing fired. This is a very peculiar thing. Happens the tops of GPMs are very hard to run. They don't fire well and so on - the tone arm tends to stay high. You get four pairs deep into a GPM and it's running just like a river of hot butter, see - there's nothing to it. Those first few sometimes are quite resistant. So, what's the auditor trying to do? The auditor's trying to be too confounded helpful, and it was helpful to a point of actually evaluating and putting an item on the pc's list for him. Well, that's absolutely forbidden, see - absolutely forbidden. And yet there I sat with my big, blue eyes wide open and wanted to help the pc so bad that I just called attention to the fact that we'd had a firing, blowing down item on the previous list k-k-k-k-k-k. Now, that ARC break could have gone into considerable proportions. But recognizing that the ARC break had succeeded after an auditing action, see immediately after the auditing action - picked the item up and put it right back where it came from. The ARC break went pheeeeu, - that was that. It didn't even get a chance to form, see. See, there was just that beginning of the critical cycle, beginning of attention on the auditor. Now, this is not important, and I'm not talking to you about ARC breaks or beefs. I'm allowed a good, big, juicy mistake every thousand hours of auditing. That's - I insist on being allowed that. But the point I'm making is here - is apparently it was a wrong item that was causing the ARC break. Actually, that really wasn't the beginning of the ARC break. That pc was very introverted inspecting the bank. Now, let's look at this inspection line. Exactly what happened to the pc's line from pc to bank, see? Just look at that line. Lets see how mucked up things got from the standpoint of that line. This line being invisible to the auditor, don't you see, you've got to synthesize what's going on and you'll rapidly learn how to do that if you realize that it's simply a line scanning over things in the bank. It isn't just a unit area, by the way - think, think, thinking. You know that. It's an actual line. It's between this bright spot called a thetan, the real beingness of the being - whether its parked in his head or he's extravagantly detached on a reverse flow exteriorization - we don't care where he is. He is looking from that bright spot. He is that bright spot - and he is looking at a thing! He is looking at a thing! It's as - it's as real as a pencil, don't you see. And the bank is all laid out geographically, and it has numbers - a finite number of things in it as far as types of things in it - a finite number. And that line is stretched from where he is to one of those things. Well, what happened when I said, "This item appeared on two lists back"? What happened to the itsa maker line? The line from the pc to his own bank. What did I do with that line? Apparently, I picked up the line and put it on the auditor - took it off the bank suddenly and put it on the auditor. Now that was a sudden change or shift of attention, wasn't it? Well, we call it a shift of attention - actually, it was a sudden shift of the target of this line. Here's the line deeply engrossed in inspecting the bank, see. All of a sudden, auditor picks that line up and puts it over on the auditor and then moves it back two lists ago in the GPM just done two lists ago. Here's two shifts of attention - sudden shifts of attention - and then puts it over here someplace to recognize that an item has been missed because, of course, this other item was being suggested as a substitute for the right item. So there must have been a realization of that - but by this time the pc must have been pretty confused. So the pc, then, in defense of this confusion, picks up the inspection line - puts it on the auditor and says, "Your pen is making too much noise." See that? What can be itsaed around here with certainty? Something about the auditor can be itsaed with certainty because the auditor has inhibited anything that should have been itsaed, being itsaed. You got it? Now, there's probably a dozen different ways that an auditor can accomplish these things. There are probably thousands of different ways - we probably haven't dreamed them all up. If you don't learn this well, we give you the assignment of finding out how many ways each one of the communication auditing cycle lines can be cut by a new Academy student. I think you will find out they run probably thousands per line - they're probably fantastic numbers. It's easy to find out how to handle them right. That's the easier part of it. How many ways can they be cut? Enormous numbers. You can refute, you can invalidate the itsa - the thing being itsaed - you can refute the communication line on which it is traveling. Like, "Don't talk to me now because I am busy writing your auditor's report." This is done in various ways. "Don't talk to me now because I'm busy trying to keep track of the auditor's reports." It's a - it can come about as a very studious action: a sort of a little tiny frown at the pc and then an enormously industrious writing, you see, of one character or another and reading over the meter and the pc's going on talking. Don't look at the pc and keep on doing this and so forth. Eventually, the pc begins to realize that you're not really writing anything that has anything to do with him and accommodatingly follows the auditor's order. And the pc nearly always follows the auditor's orders one way or the other. You would be surprised how obedient pcs are. The bank is 100 percent under the control of any auditor at any time. And the pc - the greatest percentage of the time - is doing exactly what the auditor apparently wants. But get that "apparently." Now the auditor can say "Put your attention on the ceiling and point to the floor." Now, the pc will do what the au - what he thinks the auditor apparently wants. Now, if the gesture is more forecful than the voice, the pc will look at the floor. You say, "Look at the ceiling." And the pc - the A greater than B, B greater than A, don't you see - will have a tendency to, "Well, he's saying look at the ceiling but he wants me to look at the floor," see. He gets confused doing this, but he obeys - he obeys, you might say, the most forceful apparent order. Auditors' main goofs are made up in giving apparent orders that he doesn't intend to give. He doesn't intend to give these orders at all. For instance, you would never tell a pc, "Now stop inspecting your bank and put it on the E-Meter." That would be idiotic because there'd be no itsa and there'd be no TA if you asked this thing. And yet what is this apparent order? What's the apparent order there? "Take your attention off your bank and put it on the E-Meter," see - that's the apparent order. The pc will nearly always follow an apparent order. Now, the bank is very idiotic and is always under the auditor's orders and will do what the auditor says. Therefore,'it takes the auditor's whatsit and guidance of the pc's inspection line of the bank, you see - the itsa maker line - it takes both of those activities in order to get a bank inspected, see. So the auditor and the pc have got to be working very close together, and if the auditor cuts this line - this is going back to The Original Thesis, explaining some of the things in there, see - now, if the auditor cuts this line from the pc to his bank, of course, he's now apparently brought the bank in on top of the pc and done other things which are undesirable. But he usually is giving orders he doesn't intend to give. Nobody is going to argue with the goodwill or the good heart of an auditor. The only thing I ever find any fault with is occasional knuckleheadedness. That knuckleheadedness can be pretty gorgeous. I just gave you an example of it. And yet any auditor is suddenly liable to this sort of thing. Well, I'11 give you another example. I'11 have to run out all of this invalidation of my auditing after this lecture. But I did this inadvertently the other day in a session - don't think you won't. This wouldn't happen to you once in a blue, blue, blue moon that the pc can hear the pencil squeaking. That's why you use a special type of pencil that doesn't squeak. So I'm busy writing the list, and the ballpoint ran out of ink. This wouldn't happen to you again in a long time, see. Ballpoints do run out of ink, and you always have a spare ballpoint around, don't you? So I hastily reached over to where the other ballpoint was handy and picked it up, and at this moment there wouldn't have been any slightest squawk, you see, there wasn't a tremble in the session, see. And I picked up the other ballpoint, brought it over here, and it had just enough ink in it to write one more item. We still didn't have too much randomity going in the session, you see. Auditor beginning to sweat just a little bit about this time. I laid aside this ballpoint, but the other ballpoint was over on another table barely within the auditor's reach - a different color ballpoint, see. Barely within - but there was a ballpoint over there - over the top of a pile of paper. So as not to disturb the pc's attention, very carefully reached over to pick up this ballpoint and I said, "Well, I'm going to win after all on this," you see. And had to stretch just a little bit out of the auditing chair, and went out of the auditing chair. Happen to you once in a blue moon. I don't think I've done a goof like that for ages and ages. Concatenation of silly circumstances, one on top of the other. And what do you think happened to the pc's itsa line? Well, the pc's whole motion was not to ARC break, but to keep the auditor from falling out of the chair. And got a motion and locked up a bunch of effort in the middle of the session, you know, of trying to pick the auditor up when the auditor went down. It took a couple of minutes to undo all this and we went on going at a - at a rate because I recognized that something had happened there that had to be undone. All right. That's a very unsmooth but unlooked-for happenstance. Well, if I can do them, man, so can you. So the thing to know how to do is pick it up at once, straighten it out at once, and get the show on the road again without any more nonsense. Because, frankly, anything is liable to happen to you in an auditing session. An auditor who feels absolutely serene and secure that all is going to go well from here on out - or if an auditor has allergies to anxieties or unpredictable circumstances occurring in a session - he ought to go to an old ladies' home or something and retire, because it's going to happen. The things that have happened to auditors - some guy's halfway through a screaming grief charge of one kind or another and somebody hears him down the block and the relatives come up screaming up to the door, pounding on the door, trying to get in to find out how Bill is being murdered or Joe is being shot or something, see. This has happened, happened, happened. Now, how does an auditor keep his aplomb, handle the situation, repair the shift of attention of the pc - what does he do? How many things can he do to straighten it out? Well, actually, there's a lot of things he can do to straighten it out. In the first place, he audits smoothly so that when he does audit, he gets lots of TA. Got that? That's a marvelous cushion on which to operate, see. When something does happen - when it bothers the pc, but not otherwise - you know, occasionally a water tank can fall off the roof and come right down through the shingles, and the pc says, "Oh," and goes on and saying, "and then I - then I - then I said to Agnes ..." See? You'll learn this - this goes all the way up to Level IV. Don't you ever fool with a case that is running nicely, see. Case is running like a well-oiled dream, you've got the PT going - you're going down the line. The only trouble that's going to occur from there on is actually goofs you make. Case is running fine - don't patch up a case. Don't patch up a case that's running well. Case you want to patch up is a case that isn't running well, and you only patch it up when it isn't running well. So if the roof has fallen in or the auditor has reached out of his chair for a pencil that was out of reach and fallen on the floor, the first thing you must learn to observe is: Did it move the itsa maker line all that much? Did it affect or influence the pc? That's the first thing you learn, because if it didn't you're not going to repair it. Because, look, your effort to repair something that did not upset the pc can itself disturb the itsa maker line and all other communication lines to such a degree that you can cause an ARC break. Because what are you doing? You're cleaning a clean. You're handling an ARC break that didn't occur. "How did you feel about the water tank falling off of the roof and coming down through the shingles and so forth?" "Oh, did it?" Do you realize it might be a considerable mistake to ask the pc how he felt about the water tank falling through the roof? Many auditors are so conscience-stricken - there is nothing like having no conscience to be an auditor, see. Because an auditor gets so conscience stricken sometimes, he gets so worried - well, I've gotten worried, you've gotten worried about cases you were running - but gets so worried, it causes the pc in - to go into just a spin of worry. Gets so worried about the case that he's putting in a whatsit - a whatsit all the time on the pc. He's ask - the pc's saying, "Well, what's wrong? What's wrong? What's wrong? What's wrong? What's wrong? What's wrong?" The pc isn't doing an itsa. The pc doesn't have his communication line into his own bank, everything. He's got a communication line from where he is to where the auditor is, wondering, "What does the auditor think is wrong? What does the auditor think is wrong?" He's trying to itsa the auditor's confusions or banks. Well, that isn't what the pc's for. That isn't what the pc's supposed be doing, don't you see? So it goes this nonsensically. If the pc's itsa maker line from the thetan to the bank is there and is functioning and your TA is moving, if a fire engine comes through the front window and it didn't seem to interrupt the session as far as you could tell - not by asking the pc but just by casual observation - you simply ask the next auditing question, because case repair also interrupts various sections and portions of the auditing cycle. In other words, there's no substitute for auditing but auditing. And you only repair auditing when it isn't occuring. If you haven't got any auditing occurring, you better find out how you're going to get some auditing occurring. You can't get any auditing occurring, well, repair the case and get some auditing occurring. But it's in more or less that order, not the order of "there sits a case, let's repair it." "Now let's see. I know this case - this case had Georgie Burns for, you see, an auditor in 1958, and I've been audited by Georgie, and uh-huh-huhhuh-huh. And Georgie has this horrible habit of saying, 'Yip' all the time in the session. Every time she acknowledges she also says,'Yip.' And I know that was very annoying to my pc, so the first thing to do is to repair Georgie Burns's auditing in 1958." All this without any investigation of the case at all. Well, that's repairing the case before you've got - before you find anything is wrong with the case, you see. And you only repair cases when something's wrong with them. The case is running well with good TA, why move the case around? That's the way to stop TA. Why? Because you pick up this itsa maker line, move it out of the area it's in and move it into some other area, and you suddenly bog the pc down. You get him into areas he can't itsa or he isn't able to itsa or there's nothing there to itsa or they're all cleaned up or - you get the idea? So this pc's sitting there - I can see it now, you see - the pc's sitting there happily inspecting his bank and he's running a service facsimile. You're getting about forty, fifty TA divisions per two and a half hours of session, TA flying beautifully. This explains the pc's fantastic penchant for burning dinners, see. And it's got - it's all going along fine, and all of a sudden, why, some auditing supervisor says - in the HGC or something, says, "Oh, have you taken care of that pc's lumbosis? Well, you know she came in here originally to get her lumbosis fixed up?" And the auditor, being very nice and sweet and obedient about the whole thing, turns around and starts working on the lumbosis at eight TA divisions per session. Lumbosis isn't going to resolve. That's a shift of the whole program of the case. Well, get that as a broad shift - it would be tremendous error, wouldn't it? Now let's move it down to a very short error. Auditor is sitting there, the pc is looking in an introverted fashion at a field of cows, you know. And he says, "Cows. I've seen a cow in this lifetime - cows, cows, yes, cows and so forth and cows and so on. Cows. I wonder what this countryside is like here. Cows - cows..." TA moving, TA starting to move. The last whatsit the auditor got in on the case, you see - the last whatsit the auditor got on the case was "How would baking bread make others wrong?" And finds out that the pc is inspecting all these cows. He says, "Now, let's get back to what we were talking about there." Getting TA action, see, inspecting cows. "Let's get it back to what we were talking about there, and we were talking about baking bread making others wrong. Baking bread making others wrong. You've got the auditing question now." TA - clank! Dead still. What happened? Well, actually, the auditor thought the pc was probably being non sequitur. Trying to push the pc's attention, see - this line, this itsa maker line - over to baking bread. But he's got TA action, and it was just around the corner that the pc was going to cognite that bread and milk, you see, go hand in-glove together. Big cognitions about to occur, and he'd been a ranch cook, see. He'd been a ranch cook but never, never, never had they ever had any milk to make bread with! This is right around the corner. If that attention line is just let go, just that - TA moving, everything's fine. The auditor all of a sudden - one way or the other, by a thousand different mechanisms - suddenly picks up that attention line, puts it on something else, you see? TA - no motion. Why? There's nothing there to make any motion, you see. This is something like a guy's sweeping a street, see. And you walk up to him and you say, "Give me that broom. All right. Sweep the street." "Well, you got my broom. You got my broom." "Well, you don't want that broom down on the pavement. Just - broom's suppose to be over here - be over here on the curb. Now, all right, we've got it here on the curb. Now sweep the street." "Yeah, but - I got to have my broom. I mean, you know, how can I give you any - huh-huh-huh. How can I sweep the street with you - with the broom - ?" so forth. "Now, look. Now, look. I know what's best with this broom. I know what's best with this broom. After all, this is street cleaning department property and it must be preserved, and we're supposed to keep it over here on the curb and so forth. Now, sweep the street!" You can see the nervous wreck that becomes the street cleaner. That's what you're actually doing to a pc. Pick up the pc's attention line one way or the other - grab it, hold on to it and then tell him, "Look at the bank now. Yeah, here, give me that line. Yeah, yeah - let's - let's - let's give me some itsa. Where's your itsa now?" "Well, I uh - I uh - so forth, and I think it has something to do with this facsimile..." "Oh, oh, bbbzzz - the facsimile - oh ho-ho-ho-ho-no, no, no, we got to look at something else. Now, give me some itsa. Whatsit? Whatsit? Whatsit? Uh - uh - give - give me that line. Give me that - give me that communication line. Now, but don't-don't-don't-don't start moving any attention lines inside your bank now. And give me some itsa, see. Whatsit? Whatsit? Whatsit? Don't look. Whatsit?" Well, you can figure many ridiculous examples on how an auditor can do this. As soon as you get these things taped, all of a sudden auditing just is - just - it's just very relaxing. And on Level TV, it is very, very industrious, but you're doing an excellent job the whole way of directing the pc's attention. You're getting that line directed because the materials of IV permit that direction. It's a very precise direction. If it's not precisely directed, God help you. It's something like shooting sixteen-inch guns, you see, without any pointers. Everything gets blown up if you don't point them in the right direction. But this is the essence of the auditing you were doing, and any real trouble you're having with auditing, there's some misconception of these various communication lines or what you're doing with the pc's itsa maker line or something like this. Tell the guy to itsa something, then not let him look at anything to itsa, he'd go berserk. He itsas something - don't accept it. Say it must be something else. Something like this. Keep this rattledy-bang going up somehow or another - you get no TA and you get no auditing done and everybody goes around the bend. All right. But I know you're not doing any of the things which I have been remarking. I know we're all agreed that I'm the only one that's making any auditing mistakes lately. So you go ahead and do a good job, huh? All right. Thank you very much. (end of lecture) **********************