& Well, have you got a congress yet?
& Audience: Yes!
& No kidding. Really got a congress?
& Audience: Yes!
& Are you here?
& Audience: Yes!
& Well, I could start auditing you at this time, but I won't.
& Okay. Right now, we're again at that impasse that I haven't a clue what I should be talking to you about now. I just - one of these things, you know? And I just sit up night after night after night, you know, preparing notes, preparing notes, preparing notes.
& However, a thought does occur to me; a thought does occur to me that you might like to hear about the clearing technique of 1947 Would you like to hear about that?
& Now, I can assure you that somebody is going to go and try to do this, but if that happens, why - and you're the pc - why, you send him down to the HASI and we will have replayed the first and second lectures of this congress which will be there and available on tape, you see?
& But send that auditor down to listen to the first two lectures concerning the skill required of the auditor, because to run this one I'm just talking to you about - I don't know how I ran it myself. How I got this good, I don't know. I look back with considerable awe and say, „Boy, how my auditing has deteriorated.“
& By the way, about a year or so ago, I ran several sessions exactly using the TRs, not varying one hair on the TRs, you know. Doing each part of the auditing session perfectly, you know, right down the groove. Total TRs, see. Pc got twice as well. Well, anyhow...
What it required - what it required to use this technique was undoubtedly an understanding which engulfed even me. So, let's go on with this and take a look at what it was. Today we will call it by a name, and you will hear more of this today. It's called confrontingness. You'll hear a great deal of this subject of confrontingness. As a matter of fact, the whole theory of auditing can be derived from and based on this thing called confrontingness. Very interesting - very interesting subject. It's TR 0. That's the first thing you ask a student who is learning to be an auditor to do. First thing you ask him to do is actually almost the answer to everything. It weaves in as every - is part of every single TR. If you don't have TR 0 running - which is confrontingness, confronting the pc - running at the same time you have TR 2, which is acknowledgment, you don't get any TR 2. It's as easy as this, you see. TR 0 is part of each other thing.
And so it becomes part of everything there is in the mind. It becomes a datum really of comparable magnitude to survival. It's a great big important datum, confrontingness. Now, you can think at this moment of two or three things which you wouldn't want to have to confront in the next couple seconds. Think of some. Think of something that you really hate to confront in the next couple or seconds. You got some?
You thought of some?
Aw, there's a couple of you dogging off here. I don't permit that. All right. Now, you have got a couple of things, hm?
Why? Come on, let's think this thing over again. Why? Why would you hate to confront these things?
Now look, I'm talking about you, not your ornaments. All thetans walk around carrying an ornament known as a body, and they put ornaments on it known as clothes. Now that they've put clothes on it, Freudian psychoanalysis works sometimes. They collect odds and ends and bits and pieces They use hire purchase and keep collecting things, you know? They collect cuff links and earrings and gold teeth. Girl up in the Klondike one time collected totally diamond teeth all the way across the front. She wanted a flashing smile and she got one.
Now, think of those things now that you thought that you wouldn't like to confront. Now, why wouldn't you like to confront them? Now, is it true that you - that you couldn't confront them? Or would it be that if you, as a body, confronted them with your diamond teeth and your clothes and your ornaments and that sort of thing, you'd go poof or something would happen to you. Isn't that correct?
It's the ornament that would get hurt, right? And because you're busily protecting the ornament, you, by various considerations, would hurt like hell, probably. Isn't that right?
Huh? So, this hurting like the dickens would keep you immediately informed of the fact that you weren't protecting the diamond bracelet, see? You get the idea?
It's a warning mechanism. You'd say, „This robot which I carry around is so valuable that I will have an advance warning system which when anything taps it which would destroy it, if it kept on, I will hurt.“ Do you know that a body never hurts? It's just you that hurts. Next time you have a tooth-ache, don't make the mistake of saying the tooth is aching. If you knew the truth of the matter, a tooth can't hurt. How do you know the tooth is hurting? You hurt! And until you realize that you hurt so you'll be warned about losing one of your diamond teeth.. I don't know why you had diamond teeth put in, as a matter of fact! But this - it's mystifying.
Anyway, it's not that tooth that is hurting at all. See, it's your idea of that tooth that is hurting. And you've got it all rigged up gorgeously. Boy, vias, machinery, zig-zag circuits, lights, flashing lights, you know! Bells, small sirens. Gets a little hole in it, your automaticity says, „We're about to lose a tooth.“ So you accommodatingly hurt. I think that's nice or you.
You wonder how people can get psychosomatic illnesses simply by looking at somebody who is ill. You know, Grandpa or Grandma or somebody or other had the lumbosis (it's a famous Scientology disease - lumbosis); they had lumbosis and you all of a sudden come up with a tremendous case of lumbosis in a session. You know, somebody's running through and saying, „What part of your grandfather wouldn't you mind being?“ That's not a good process, but it'd serve to louse up most any pc. And Grandpa's got lumbosis and all of a sudden, why, you turn up with this same case of lumbosis complete with all somatics. Well, there shouldn't be anything mysterious about it, because you're the only one there to hurt in the first place. And it you can manufacture pain that you extend to a body, obviously pain can go all the way up the dynamics. How about the little girl that bleeds every year at the exact places where the thorns pierced Christ, huh? How about that - those many cases that do that, hm? How about the pcs you've had that all of a sudden stretch out... hm? How about those people?
In other words, you maybe - someday you're looking at a town that's being bombed or something like that and you know men and women and children are blowing up, you know? And you say, „That must hurt like hell,“ and accommodatingly, sympathetically, you hurt like the dickens. Get the idea, hm? You have some penchant for feeling pain. As a matter of fact, if you run „Waste pain“ on a thetan, he finds out all of a sudden that he doesn't mind it at all, that it's just another sensation. According to his mottos, „Any pain is better than no pain.“ „Any feeling is better than no feeling.“ And „Any adventure is better than anything.“
So, here's this - here's this thing called confrontingness I just ask you, what would happen? I ask you now again. What would happen if you actually confronted what you just thought of a few minutes ago? What would happen to you? I didn't say confront it with something. I didn't say put an ornament up there. I didn't say hold a body up in front of whatever this thing was, see? But you just confront it. Now, think it over again. What would happen if you confronted it? Would anything happen?
Wouldn't that be boring! Nevertheless, that's the truth of the case, isn't it? Do you recognize some truth in this?
Hm? Anybody still feel that he'd blow up?
& Well, if there's anybody around that still feels that it'd be very painful, the address of the HGC is 87 Fitzroy and in Washington it's 1812 19th Street. Commercial.
Run, don't walk, to your nearest auditor. If he's a good auditor, you'll even walk away.
Anyway, do you see something now about confrontingness? Do you realize that you do have the ability to confront something? Hm? Well, where do you get the notion that you can't confront something above and beyond this idea of bodies and ornaments? Hm? Well, where do you get the idea that you can't confront something? Think it over. Where do you get the idea? Isn't it because things disappear? Hm? Things vanish, don't they? Can you think of something you had when you were a child? Hm?
Can you think of something you had when you were a child?
Well, where is the actual object now? Don't blow a grief charge; we haven't any floor auditors. Where is the actual object? Well, you don't know. Boy, you sure were a destructive kid, weren't you. But he truth of the matter is, isn't it, that you are not confronting it. It isn't that you can't confront it; it isn't that you've lost - you have lost the ability to confront it. It's simply that it isn't there! Isn't that right?
Well, you know you can get so upside down about this that you believe that you can't confront anything. If you can't confront a boss, it's usually simply because you - sometime up and down the track, you've been missing bosses. How do you like that? You know, although it's traditional in the Anglo-American forces to hate officers, it's probably because there aren't many of them. In fact, I've looked around and found almost none, particularly since the last war. They died out two or three generations ago, I think. Oh, that was gentlemen. Excuse me.
Here's this fact, however, that somebody says he cannot confront authority. Well, there isn't very much authority around, to tell you the truth. Somebody snaps and snarls at you, you think you have to hang your head. Why do you think you have to hang your head? Why do you have to go „Nannah“? Why don't you just answer up with a cheery „aye, aye“? Hm? It sounds like an interesting thing to do.
Boss comes in and he says, „Hoo-doo ho, ho, ho,“ and other things that bosses are reputed to say, you know? Ah, now you're just being a victim of „now-I'm-supposed-to“; you're supposed to go like this, see? You're supposed to duck. Now, you're supposed to not quite look him between the eye.
Every once in a while, somebody gets absolutely flabbergasted in the HASI, you know? They crank their nerve up, see? There's something going wrong; there's a particle moving incorrectly in the comm lines. Happens every now and then, let me assure you. Sometimes you're the particle. And this particle's moving incorrectly and this poor staff member has just stood it, see, you know? Stood it, stood it. He keeps holding on to himself and saying, “Why? Why does the Director of Administration permit this sort of thing?“ and goes on handling misrouted particles, you know. And he says - says, „Well, I'll tell him. I'll tell him.“ And gets worked right up to it, opens the office door, goes in, and says, „Why do you permit these particles to move this way on this line!“
Director of Administration says, „What particles?“
Fellow says, „These invoices for ruddy rods.“
„What about them?“
„Well, I have to handle them with four separate motions when it only needs one!“
„How? Well, let's see. Yeah, well, you only have to handle that with one motion. We'll change it up the line here, and we square it up here,“ and he'll handle it with one motion. So, what the hell? Boy, you certainly lost a good opportunity to confront there, didn't you? Hm?
In other words, they get the idea that they mustn't ever even talk up, and when they do talk up, why, they find out nobody barks them down. It's just an idea of not being able to confront. Do you get the idea?
And once in a while they do this to me - although most staff feels - can talk to me about most anything, and often does. They go at it at a high scream sometimes, you know, just come in and practically beating the desk and so forth. They seldom go this high, you know. Then they walk out and said, „Well, I'll be fired. I'm finished. Scientology, done; I'm through. Certificates will be cancelled, thrown away Probably throw the body in the nearest garbage can. I wonder where the arrows are that point to the nearest between-lives area. And he'll probably zap me, you know,“ and so forth.
And then they say, „What'd he say? And what was he doing saying 'Good'? And what was he doing saying 'I'll look into it'? What was that all about?“ Practically spins them sometimes, you know? And all of a sudden they find out they can say anything they please and it doesn't cost them anything and after that they start communicating and doing a job. It's an interesting thing to discover.
First sergeants and other people, petty officers, very often cultivate quite the opposite idea. They say, „If you ever open your mouth in my direction, I know I must cure you of confronting in order to have an efficient crew member or efficient soldier,“ see? „Unless people have been cured totally of confronting, why, they are no good.“ Stable datum for the society. „If people are permitted to confront authority, why, they'll bash the whole thing in the head, you know? No telling what would happen if all the troops could confront the general.“
I tell you what'd happen: they'd just win all of the victories that were in sight, that's all. That's what they'd do. They're only some good to you when they can confront something. Why don't you let them start in with you? It's a good idea.
People come in with complaints; they've buttoned these up, they've managed to get their nerve up, they've actually - went out and took a couple of quick shots of scotch, and they come in and they lay this complaint knowing they're going to be blasted out of the chair, and there's no blast. Well, that too, is a letdown. It gives - it gives less blast to confront.
But the truth of the matter is that the belief that one cannot confront does not rest on his own ability to confront. His own ability to confront is obviously infinite, isn't it? Now I want you to think of something that you couldn't possibly ever confront. Come on, think of it. Never in this world, ever in any other world, not even if you could go back up and down the time track could you confront it. Come on, think of something. We could spend the rest of the congress here, by the way, asking the same question. This is one of those trick questions.
You ask somebody - I'll tell you a trick auditing question. This is good coffee shop auditing. There is good coffee shop auditing, by the way. We just never let students in on it so they use regular processes to audit in the coffee shops, you know? And They go in for fish and chips and sit there at the table and audit real processes, and they shouldn't do that because there's perfectly good coffee shop processes. And you can leave a person hung up in them and everything.
But here's one of them, is „Look around here and find something that is unknown.“ That's the most gorgeous process. Here's another one: „Look around here and find something which is uninteresting.“ That's the most wonderful process you ever saw. I mean, it's one of These processes that never gets answered. See, he looks around and he says, „Well, that's a - well, I don't know, you know...” One of these fabulous things.
Well, confrontingness comes under this heading something you could not possibly confront, see. You'd fish for it in vain. If you don't believe it. and I don't ask you to believe it; if it's true for you it's true and if it's not true for you it isn't true. Try and find something that it is impossible to confront, and after you get mired down totally, find an auditor. It'll wind you up in the soup if you pursue this thing infinitely without an auditor. Why? Because there were times when you must have believed that you couldn't confront something, otherwise you would never have joined the army or done other foolish things. Not that there's anything wrong with joining the army. The only thing wrong with joining the army is that you're in it.
It's not that you should be all out for peace; you shouldn't be. I can't consider anything more boring than to have totally peaceful existence. The only thing wrong with war is wait, as far as I'm concerned. That's just personal opinion. When there's something happening, there's something to confront, and when there's nothing happening it's just handfuls of nowhere. You say, „Well, way over there someplace there's something to confront, you know? And if they just let me go here then I would go like a hot rocket in that direction and I'd be able to stand there and confront it.“ Of course, when you get there, you find out what you're being asked to confront is a bullet or something like this. You're not able to go in and tell the enemy what you think of him. Next war I go to I'm going to get one of these megaphones. Anyway...
The idea behind it is that man makes a game out of having possessions which go to pieces if they confront certain things. Now, let's go work out on the body side of it and talk about possessions for a moment. This might be more real to you. We start to confront the mains, see, and so we take - you better - better do this careful experiment. If you do this, you'll find out something about the body. You take and wrap a piece of copper wire around each of two fingers, see, and then shove them into the light plug, you see, and don't draw them out for a while. And then look at your fingers, and you'll find out they've been damaged. And if you're proud of this possession called hands and if you're very artistic in handling things and so forth, why, you'll no longer be able to excite the envy of your friends or sit down at the piano or something of that sort, you see? And that teaches you not to what? Not to confront things or not to let your body confront things? Which does it teach you? Not to let your body confront things.
Now, of course, a lot of people go around and say, „Well, that is the - a good excuse not to have a body. And that's why I'm trying to make nothing out of this body, so that this won't happen. So therefore, if I chop this body to pieces and mess it all up, then it won't ever get messed up or chopped to pieces.“ You work this out; I can't. It doesn't equate.
So here's this thing called confrontingness. What is this thing called confrontingness, then? It comes down to defense and protection, problems of defense and protection. But that even - doesn't even have to enter into auditing to any great degree, if you don't want it to.
You get the first clearing process, 1947, which I phrase this way: I gave the person confidence in looking at pictures. I showed him he could look at pictures. I would have him go out of the room and walk in and look at the room and then sit down, close his eyes and get the picture momentarily that he saw as he walked in the. room. And then we would go over the picture several times, and what do you know? It would disappear. This we call erasure, very improperly, I assure you. This is not erasure. So there's an improper phrase in Dianetics. It's an ability to confront up to a point where there is no necessity to have it. And all anybody evidently is trying to do is prove that he can confront something by having a picture of it, and that's about all there is to it.
So, I used to take somebody and I'd have him, by various mechanisms, get a lock, you know, a little, light mental image picture, maybe a lock, you know, on some experience that he had had, and get him to confront it. Only I'd get him to have confidence in being able to get the picture. And then I would cultivate sonic in the picture. I would cultivate perceptics of other types, tactile, so forth. And I'd get him to be able to confront this whole thing in picture form.
Now I'd have him get another picture. Oh, this'd take hours and hours and hours and hours. I'd coax him into confronting another picture and another picture and another picture, and pretty soon we'd pick up some sad moment in his lifetime when he'd just left and we'd get a picture of that. Usually this one would be black as ink, see, all messed up, so forth. And I'd find out what part of that he could look at, you see. And we'd gradually develop bits and pieces of this bit of ink, and it would turn out at first with a kind of a foggy two-dimensional black and white, you know? And then we would develop the emotional context of it, and the next thing you know, he'd spill tears like Niagara Fal1s. I wouldn't pay any attention to spilling tears. I'd just say, „now, let's find the grief in this thing until we can see the grief in it.“ The next thing you know, why; he could observe the grief and feel it or not, as the case may be, and he would be able to confront that grief. And he almost invariably found it was somebody else's grief in the picture. He was crying somebody else's tears, which is quite, quite remarkable. And he would never realize it until he'd run this what we call a secondary, see?
And then we'd get the knife nicely sharp and we'd stick its point into the most obvious engram that contained pain and unconsciousness we could find and we would bring it up into view and get him to have confidence in looking at it. I never used the word confront. This makes this whole thing translatable. We can talk about it now; we've got this word confront. That means things. It never occurred to me. So, he could have confidence in looking at the picture, you see, and we'd take bits and pieces of this painful experience and one moment, why, he'd be feeling the whole injury again and then we'd get him to look this over. Now, I wasn't ever restraining him from feeling the injury. All I was trying to do was get him to look at the incident, totally. And we would again develop sonic and visio, and boy that took auditing. You practically had to stay in there with one knee on his chest right about that minute. And it was probably - I got away with it because I was just bigger than my preclears. One answer to smooth auditing. Anyway, didn't occur to them to get out of the chair.
Because you start developing sonic, hearing the sound again of an incident of the past in an area where a fellow has had his silly head caved in and he will of course start picking up the full somatic of having had his head kicked in. And you just have to keep that knee on his chest and let him get a head kicked in. that's all. That's it. And you'd eventually get him to a point where he could confront various parts of getting his head fractured. And then confront being unconscious, and he'd finally come up with some big cognition like „You know the reason I went unconscious?“
„Well, I just couldn't look at it anymore. I just quit; I just backed out on the whole thing.“ And of course I would accommodatingly say, „No?“ you know.
Truth of the matter was that the more he could confront, the more he was able to confront. But something happened in 1947 that I couldn't explain for ten years: what happened to the rest of the bank? Once I'd done this, fixed him up so he could confront a lock, fixed him up so that he could confront charges of grief and misemotion and anger and things like this; after he was in a state where he could confront a painful picture with full sonic and visio and tactile and effort and everything else that was in the picture, bank disappeared. I had a Clear! Perfectly stable Clears. But I thought that was all there was to the bank. Hence, my later discoveries of the birth engram, of prenatals, of all sorts of incomprehensible things, of past lives. I was perfectly willing to discover these things. I was very interested in them. But where did it go, where did it end, how many pictures were there? And I got totally befuddled by the whole thing, because it was just so much. I got trapped into the idea of quantity.
But about that time I said, „Well, no matter how long it takes, I just better settle down and map the whole track from one end to the other and find everything there is in the mind - circuits and machinery and valences and anything else that might be in the mind”. Get the definitions of the physical universe, work this thing out. Get an actual working definition of life and, you know, went on and on and on. If we'd quit right there, actually, we wouldn't have been - ever been able to have understood it. And we would've been in the position of the fellow, the mystic he was a great master, who was teaching a neophyte, and the position of the neophyte is the one we're interested in. And he used to - the master used to teach this neophyte all about mysticism and demons and devils and everything. But when he would come in the room to teach his class, why, he would tie a cat to the bedpost. He'd tie the cat to the bedpost and he'd sit down and he'd teach this neophyte about mysticism, demons, devils and so forth.
So, the years went along and the neophyte decided that he was now a master and he decided to teach a new neophyte mysticism and demons and devils and everything. So, he says, „Now, the first thing we do is tie a cat to the bedpost.“ But we would've been in that position. In other words, any deviation from this would've brought about a flop. Why? Because we didn't have a total understanding. I didn't have a total understanding of what was happening. I thought that was all the bank there was! I made Clears, but I didn't understand why people got Clear.
& They didn't, they had proven to me and to them that they were able, we can say today, to confront mental image pictures, so they didn't have to have any more unless they put them there, you see? And they had no more reactive pictures because they could confront them all. And they didn't any longer have any need to confront them. There was no necessity to confront them. And if they felt like confronting them they could still put them back there again, you get the idea?
& You only had to get them able to confront the worst varieties, the worst things that they could imagine in the current lifetime, and they said, „Well what the dickens. We could put these back, or have them or not have them as the case may be, we don't have to worry about it anymore.“ So they were clear. Get the idea?
All right, I tried to teach somebody else about this and I don't know the mainspring, see? I don't know exactly what the combination is. If that spotlight were to turn red at this moment, it could show that my face got red at that time. I was rather red-faced last year to find out that I hadn't known exactly what I was doing in 1947 when I made Clears. The remarkable thing about it is, in some unknowing, blundering way, I did know, but I couldn't phrase it. I couldn't describe it. And the more auditors I tried to teach in those earlier days - the more auditors I tried to teach, well, the more I fumbled it because I'd Q-and-A with them. See, they'd say, „Well, I did just what you said and nothing happened.“
I wasn't smart in those days. Boy, I got - they smartened me up. Some of them are here right now that helped smarten me up, too, And this was the case, however. I would say, „You do so-and-so and so-and-so and so-and-so,“ and they would come back and they say, „I did so-and-so and so-and-so and so-and-so, but nothing happened.“ And I'd groan, and I'd say, „Well, we have to figure something else out.“
So I would give them a newer and a better one, got it? A newer and better one. Well, within the last year I've gotten smarter. I don't give them a newer and better one these days. They come back and they say after I gave them this, and they say, „Well, I did it. It doesn't work.“
I say, „What didn't work?“
„Oh, what you told me.“
„What did I tell you?“
„Well... well, you said, you said - um - you said you'd got the person to get a lock and then you'd fit it in a keyhole, see, and then - I don't know. What did you say?“
And that's what I should’ve said eleven years ago. „What did I tell you?“ See? Because when it didn't work, they didn't hear. And we've got an awful case of deafness that's been going on.
Well, you cure a case of deafness in various ways, and the first way is to find out yourself what you're doing. It took me a very long to time to find that out.
You know, it's one thing to feel something is true and quite another thing to phrase it, to express it. Have you ever had that? Well, when you move out of feelingness into articulateness, you make a big gain. And it - really - if somebody had been doing this job other than myself who was much smarter than I was, it'd been more desirable because it wouldn't have taken him ten years to find out what to say in order to make people understand, see? And if I was a little brighter, why, we could've done it a lot faster, but you're hung with the fact that I'm just stupid. Get the idea? That's about what it amounts to.
Now, the funny part of it is that in the process of cooking up these new things all the time, oh, we just found out about all kinds of things. We found out about lots of things, you see? And we got what appears to be almost the total scope of beingness, at least for this universe and beings in it. Boy, what we don't know about the mind and its anatomy and that so - it isn't worth writing down. There's a big chest down to the HASI - there's a big chest, there used to be, anyway. Hardly anybody ever opened it, but it was a sort of a magic chest. Actually it contained nothing but lecture tapes by me that had been made to this class or the other class and so forth. And actually, that chest contains the best, most reliable research record of Dianetics and Scientology that is in Great Britain. Hardly anybody pays any attention to it. Some of the recordings are bad and that sort of thing. They get scattered around from time to time and recollected. But that's actually what they are.
Boy, if there are any phenomena about the mind that you can't find in that chest, I would certainly like to know about it. And I really would like to know about it. You get the idea? We have just covered this universe. Now, this is me and thee, too, see? We have covered this universe. It's just some fantastic amount of bric-a-brac when you add it all up. Wow! Boy, what a thetan can't dream up isn't worth imagining. But actually, there are only five basic things that form this thing we call the mind. And those five basic things are simply these:
These locks, which are analytically aware mental pictures, and the thoughts associated with them - this is a mind.
Secondaries, which are moments of misemotion: grief, apathy, so forth, and the thoughts connected with them. Mental image pictures containing misemotion and the thoughts connected therewith.
Engrams, which is moments of pain and unconsciousness, and the thoughts connected therewith.
Circuits, which are really old valences of one kind or another, which inform and talk and which apparently put out thought. They're really parasitic circuits. You're talking into one phone booth and phoning it down to - up to Birmingham - let's say down to Birmingham and be different, shall we? And then you're getting them back in the next phone booth and you think they're brand new, only you just said them, you see. But this is a circuit. And there's these circuits and they apparently - they go off into various things: valences and demons and devils and all kinds of things, see that?
And then this additional thing incredibly enough, called machinery. Every once in awhile a student of Scientology will say; „Well, when you mean machinery, you know, you just got the idea of the bric-a-brac of the mind,“ you know. And one day he's sitting down in the chair and he's being audited, and all is going along very well, and all of a sudden he looks up and there's a big steam engine, you know; with wheels. And it's doing something, and it puts out thoughts this way and it shuttles pictures that way and it - you know? And he says, „When Ron says 'machinery,' he means 'machinery'.“ - It's a big shock to him that I mean what I say.
Well, anyhow, that's right, though. Anybody here ever seen one of these things suddenly, you know? Look up and find things going? Once in a while, you find something that'll look like a clam bucket. It's going clomp, clomp, clomp, clomp, clomp, clomp. Every time you make up a picture, why, the clam bucket disposes of the picture, because the picture's liable to be harmful, and if - the way - best way to get the picture out of the road is to have a clam bucket arrangement which eats up and devours all the pictures. But then, of course, that makes a scarcity of pictures so you put another machine up over here which makes a lot of pictures, which feeds the clam bucket, which makes a lot of pictures. The mind's a wonderful thing.
And that's all there is in a mind. Well, if you call it a mind. A mind is a thing, you see. Now, to this you have to add the thing we call - which you call a thetan - which you call a „thetan“ and I call a „thetan.“ That's because we speak different brands of Greek.
Now, here's this source-point; this source-point. And we found out eventually that was the person and that was all there was to him. He was a source-point for various things, thoughts, and he could generate things and he could consume things, so on. We thought - we found out that this was to whom we were speaking when we spoke to him. You get the idea? And we found that out and then we dissected and bisected this thing called life and found out that form carries on with the uniting of life and the physical universe. These two things unite in a certain form, and we get living objects. We get living, oh, insects and politicians and all kinds of things. Anyway...
And then we had this thing called the physical universe, and that's simply composed of matter, energy, space and time. And there, evidently, there - beyond the various combinations of this, there isn't anything else in it than that. And we got this thing knocked apart into these four broad categories for this universe and there're only five things in the mind - no wonder you have trouble finding things to confront! See? Now, the truth of the matter is it's very easy to confront these things.
But it isn't easy to confront something that you don't know whether you're confronting it or it's not confronting or it might not be there to confront, but you don't know what it is, and how you confront it you're not sure about and huhh! And that's the state of mind most aberrated people are in. In the first place, they don't know the anatomy of existence. They don't know the anatomy of people and minds, so how they - can they confront them? They don't even know they exist.
You stop a fellow out in the street, and you say, „Have you got a mind?“ and he'll say, „Huh?“ We don't even get that far, you see? He'll say, „Well. what about a mind? What's this, a mind? I used to mind my father.“
„No, no. We mean a mind, you know?“
„Well,“ he says, „sure I've got brains. What's the matter with you?“
Most people begin to think of their minds as brains. I've been trying and trying and trying to find a use for two things: my brain and my eyeballs. I could see so much better through the back of my head if I just didn't have eyeballs blocking these two holes. And it would be so much easier to sit in the middle of this skull here if there wasn't something around to confuse me about which was the middle of it. We're going to have to put together a Society for Empty Skulls and Eye Sockets, but then we'll have sculptors and aestheticists and - forming other societies, Societies for the Suppression of People who Suppress Eyeballs, you know, that sort of thing. It'd get pretty confusing. So I put up with it - I put up with it. People expect you to have eyeballs and brains, so that's that.
But I have yet to find out what they're for, you know, except something to prevent you from confronting skulls. I should have brought along one of our skulls. We have lots of skulls down in the HASI. We used to use them for a change of space. We used to exteriorize somebody and we'd have him appear in skull A and then appear in skull B and then appear in skull A and skull B, and after a while he gets so used to being in skulls, why, he really exteriorized in a hurry. And once in a while he found himself on the stage playing „Alas, poor Yorick.“
But anyway, it wasn't enough to know this clearing process of 1947 that I have just given you if you still didn't know what to confront, and if you still couldn't say; „All you have to do is get the preclear to have confidence that he can confront things.“ See, you could've told an auditor that and he'd say, „Oh fine. Cheery, cheery; aye, aye.“ And then he would've found preclears whose clam buckets were inverted, you see, and actually, after they had chewed up the pictures, turned out another type of picture. And he would've said, „This is something new,“ and we would have had all this tremendous randomness, you know, and various types. And I can imagine now an auditor today, if we'd pursued this course, having to memorize one thousand, six hundred and seventy-two various objects that occur in the mind, see? All different and no common denominator amongst them, you see? And all we would have been classifying is just machinery, types of. Then somebody would come along and make a tremendous discovery of another type of machine. Duh, we would've had it.
The truth of the matter is, it took ten years to find out what there was to confront. Is there more than this to confront? Well, you're at liberty to find out, but we at least know that you're not going to get any - any difficulty confronting any of this. And one of the reasons a thetan gets stuck in a theta trap is very, very simple: he just can't confront a theta trap. Why can't he confront one? Well, it's so bad. You see, it's very evil. It traps thetans and therefore it is very evil and you shouldn't have anything to do with it. And if you see a theta trap, you should go like that, you see, and look the other way. Well, the second that he won't confront it, he goes snap! Because what is space but confrontingness? Space is simply the dimension which occurs when you view something. So if there's no space, he's in it! Do you see that? So if he looks at something but is unwilling to make space, he's it! Simple. I'm afraid it's so idiotically simple you've been falling for it for 76 trillion years. And if you think that's awfully stupid of you, let me reassure you by saying you've got lots of company.
Now, there's the long and short of this thing called confrontingness. There's actually all it is, all it amounts to. If you can't look at something, there's no space between you and it and you've had it! Get the idea?
Now, there are nonconfront merchants running around the world. They sell as their one product „You must not confront.“ And all of a sudden, we know what some of these merciful societies do to people.
& See, they say, „Tea. Do not drink tea. It rots the brain. The downfall of the Empire is totally based upon the fact that people began to drink tea.“ You know, there is such a society here in London. Oh, you didn't think there was. Well, I know more about this town than you do.
& All right. Anyhow-more than a student at Oxford, anyway.
Anyway, here is the main thing about confrontingness. This outfit says, „No more tea. You mustn't confront tea. You can't have tea.“ And the next thing you know; their president starts going gulp, gulp, gulp, gulp, gulp, gulp. See, he can't leave tea alone now. He's told everybody, „You mustn't confront tea,“ so all he does is see tea and he's tea! Boom What do you think alcoholism is?
Did you ever try to look at a fume? Well, I ask you, did you ever try to look at a fume?
Well, that fellow down at the bar who can't see a fume has no space between himself and the alcohol. And he's been carefully taught that he mustn't drink, that drinking is very harmful, that he mustn't look at drink, that he mustn't have anything to do with drink, that drinking is very evil, that it degrades him, that he had better lay off the drink or it'll finish him. You get the idea? And the more he's taught, the more he goes splash every time he sees a pint. And he becomes an alcohol diver.
The one thing a person who is suffering from alcoholism cannot do is have a full glass in front of him. But because he can't come out of his head and drown himself in it properly, he puts it in - around him. So you fill his glass, he empties it; fill his glass, he empties it; fill his glass, he empties - he can't confront the fumes so he goes doggo in the process. I don't even think alcohol would make you drunk. I don't know how it makes anybody drunk. I was looking - I was looking at some alcohol the other day, and I was amazed - amazed at the fact that it could do anything to anybody. It didn't seem possible that it could cause a sensation. I experimented and found out I had to postulate the sensation that I was drunk, and in view of the fact that I was on a ship, I could then use the motion of the ship to postulate the idea that I was drunk. And before I caught myself; I was saying, „Oh, give me a little drink, huh?“ So I just unpostulated and that was that.
You get the idea how far this confrontingness goes? If you can't confront broken legs, you're liable to get one someday, that's all. Get an opportunity to break a leg, you will. So it even goes further than just confronting with a body, as bad. It might be that because you know it is bad to confront with a body, it is bad to confront with a body, don't you see? Could go that far.
Well, we knew all about clearing somebody in 1947. We could do it in 1947, clear back then, except we couldn't explain it, couldn't train anybody in it, didn't know how it happened and thought that there wasn't very much in the mind beyond maybe a few engrams. And all of a sudden when former beheadings and being put down here in the Tower and being drowned up there and being in space opera and - other things began to show up. I think there's a person or two here who has run into a picture of space opera or something of the sort in the past.
And these various incomprehensibles started to happen, we didn't know what the devil we were confronting and it took us years to find out. Well, now that we've found out again, we can go back to battery and start clearing people again. So I wish to express my thanks to those of you who have walked along this track with me of finding out what was there to be confronted. And how you audit a preclear with confrontingness, which I haven't told you at all.