TRACK AND BANK ANATOMY SHSBC-392 (confidential)

[auditor]

Online auditing in any place on the planet http://timecops.net/english.html

TRACK AND BANK ANATOMY
(confidential)
This tape is omitted from the SHSBC cassettes.
Transcript of Taped Lecture by L. Ron Hubbard
ShSpec 29 - 6407 C 14 (Renumbered SHSBC - 392)
July 14, 1964
(applause)
Thank you! Very sorry to keep you waiting. It's not my fault. It's Reg's clock (laugh). That's correct. It said... it's wrong, so.... I'll have to turn on the clock in me head. What's the date? (Audience: 14 July.) 14 July, the 14th - We have a new stu-dent, stand up and take a bow - Tom Morgan And somebody we have seen be-fore, retreading - Jean Jacques Scalance.
Alright! I'll have to make up for it by being very interesting having bored you to death sitting there ten or fifteen minutes with nothing to do. Well, I think I'm just going to give you right off the cuff, all of you right now, a rundown on exactly what the track and bank looks like and here at the lower levels particularly restimu-lated and particularly the newcomer on the thing, why the best thing to do is to turn it off is to just run on through Class VI. That's the best way to turn all that restimulation off. And.. (laughing) and, when you're Class VI, go right on through to OT. That turns all the restimulation off (laugh).
Now, let's just give you a very rapid fire lecture, and Reg will be cursing in his beard because he'd want a camera on this particularly, but I will do it all again with Fillips and Furbelows. Very interesting doing things with Furbelows (laugh), and here's the way it sits.
There's a thing called the reactive mind. The total composition of the reactive mind consists of the following factors: Are we away? (laugh) Alright, it has locks, it has secondaries, it has engrams. Got that? Alright, in addition to those locks, sec-ondaries, and engrams, one of the most notable facts that it has, which comes to view once you start, is implants, implant GPMs and then various forms and varie-ties and that sort of thing, and they make little black masses that are quite interest-ing to collide with, and they can be run on almost anybody, and actually comprise, the implant GPM comprises Class V. Old Dianetics dealt with the locks, secondar-ies, and engrams and Class V deals with these implants and their various ramifica-tions.
Implants are interesting in that they very often have engrams in the midst of them. You run half an implant and somebody slips off the post and something like that, he's got an engram and somebody getting him back on the post. You know, that kind of thing. In other words, there's all of that still exists in the mind and that ... those, those implants go along with dating, you can date implants very easily, go along with other whole track phenomena. And, there's two branches then to the whole track phenomena which belongs at Class V, and one of those is implants and the other one is engrams. And, various types of engrams go back all the way along the track and there's some rather unbelievable time spans involved in all this.
It goes very, very long. It ... You can get dates of trillions to the one thousand three hundred power. That is a date which you would spend the rest of your life writing. That ... It's just, cyphers that go on and on and on. I'm exaggerating when I say the rest of your life, but it would just go on and on and on and on.
Now, because people have been implanted, and because implants exist, and so forth, then it is very easy for someone to get confused about what is called an ac-tual GPM and the actual reactive bank because he immediately conceives that it has been done to him, and is all mixed up on the situation, and he is very likely to believe that a.. an implant and a GPM are the same thing.
Now, if you want to become very ill, several methods of becoming ill will be cov-ered in today's lecture, if you want to become very ill, indeed, why just start going around and saying that actual GPMs are, are implants. If that's... if you want to get sick, that is the best way I know of to go about it, and if you want your pc to get good and sick, why have your pc start arguing around about this without you sud-denly chipping in and saying, „now, when was the first time you considered this?“ You know, and just run it out as a series of considerations right now, and he'll come off of this wild kick because he's going to make himself terribly ill if he says that actual GPMs are simply implants. Now, we are not interested in whether they were im-planted or not implanted, I'm just telling you one marvelous method of getting sick. You understand? I'm not saying even what they are. I'm just saying that's a nice way of getting sick.
Now, therefore, we get down to Class VI, and we've covered everything else now except, of course, the fact that what you're auditing up to Class IV is the destimula-tion of the things you erase at Class V and VI. You want to know what these Clas-ses are all about. What Classes I to IV are devoted to: auditing which destimulates those things which are erased at Classes V and VI. You understand? Therefore, there are only two erasure Classes and those are V and VI, and there are four des-timulation Classes. So, that you never try to erase anything, actually it's quite inci-dental but you really do get erasures accidentally of little odd bits on Classes I to IV. There is a small amount of erasure that does take place, but the moment the that the auditor tries to erase something, while auditing in those Classes with their processes, he is in immediate trouble. I'll give you an of idea how this is. I'll show you the difference of Classes.
You say to somebody, you say, „You say you don't feel well, alright, what's the matter?“ „Oh, you got a headache, alright, well now, recall the first time you ever tried to get this headache cared for“ „Recall an earlier time you tried to get the headache cared for“ is a more exact command, because he won't give you the first time, the first time. And, he gives you something, and gives you something, and gives you something, and all of a sudden his headache disappears. Well now, you've, you've destimulated. You've destimulated.
Where's the headache? Well it actually isn't out there lurking, waiting to pounce again, but if it comes back slightly nobody should be very surprised, because having done this exercise, of asking him for his considerations about headaches, or what he's done for headaches, or how headaches have been handled by him, and so forth, or what he's done to a headache. We don't care what we ask him or how we asked him for these considerations.
Don't get this mixed up with OW. I just heard crosswise in your head that you had. No, it's any recall process, see, which would lead to a banishment of a head-ache no matter what you did, and then you found out that he had banged his head on the corner of a kitchen sink at the age of five. He got rid of his headache slight-ly, see, so then you decided to really find out where this headache came from and you found out that he was banging his head on the corner of the kitchen sink and then you said, „Well now alright, about banging your head on the corner of the kitchen sink when you were five, how did the room look at that time?“ „What was said at that time?“, and boy, he's got that headache back with exclamation points. You understand?
Now, you've destimulated that same incident when you simply asked him for some considerations. You destimulated in general, the whole subject of headaches, but then you have come back and try to erase this. You see? Now you're gonna go through and scrub out what you have assigned the cause of the headache to be. You're going to erase that thing and he's going to get a nice headache back. Now the funny part of it is, you could go on through and erase it only to find out that it really wasn't when he banged head on the kitchen sink at the age of five. It was when he fell out of the perambulator at the age of three. So, you have now erased that and this would all be better, and then you could find out that it wasn't that at all, but in his last life time he was really shot in the head when he kicked the buck-et. So, that puts you back into the last immediate past death. Now we're gonna run all this out from one end to the other. I see some of you have been over this road ... and there would be an astonishing return of, of perception and he would feel pretty good about this, and so forth.
But, either you did a terribly even nice smooth job of auditing the whole way, and you could keep running this back... Now, let me point out to you, that the second you went into that past death you moved into Class V. It was at that precise in-stant. It was perfectly alright to handle banging his head on the corner of the sink in this life time, you're, you're a perfectly good auditor, but you moved out of Clas-ses I to IV even on what little you can erase in those Classes. See, you've moved out of that. You've gone on to whole track. One more life time than this one and you're on whole track and you're in Class V. That's the way we classify it these days. Don't you see?
You got no business being there these days because of this interesting fact. It is absolutely factual that an auditor, smoothly auditing, can go back and erase enough of those engrams, we did it in Dianetics, enough of those engrams to make that headache go away and be good and the fellow not bothered with it at all further more. This is perfectly true but the number of incidents, I'm putting you all into focus with regard to the reactive mind, the number of those incidents which added up to a headache, may well be in the billions, which is why we departed from Dia-netic into Scientology technology. And that's the exact reason why there is a bridge between Dianetics into Scientology.
Whatever else anybody wants to assign to it, whether historical reasons, or any-thing else, that is the great big milestone on the road. The discovery that there could have been billions of engrams on the track, each one of them capable of causing a headache. And to get rid of all of those engrams in times and terms of auditing, in view of the fact that man is only here for seventy years at a crack, to get rid of all those in a pc was not feasible. It wasn't that the technology was not do-able, as a matter of fact, we recently improved the technology. You could run an engram now by plotting it's time, and spotting it's duration, and boy, if you got those two right, pictures turn up all in 3-D. This poor guy he's never had a picture before in his life, see. You do that engram technique that we developed here a year or so ago, I got, I finally got whipped out, and so on, and boy, he's got visio and he's got the lot, see. All you have to do is do an accurate spotting of the time of the engram, find it's exact duration, and move him up some place toward the be-ginning of the thing and on go the lights, see, and you're away.
So, the big problem of erasing engrams, the pc had no visio or sonic, that was dealt with and there is such a technology, but it still doesn't solve this other audit-ing factor. The auditing factor is, is billions of incidents exist on the person's track which could cause a headache, see. Let's say you've got a chronic headache, well also in running this you find out he also has a chronic foot ache and it has more billions, you see, so all of this becomes infeasible. It is not do-able simply because the auditor hasn't got enough time to handle that many incidents. It is not, now, that they could not be handled, you understand. But he hasn't got enough time to do it. You could take this technology of erasing engrams and take ninety-eight per-cent of your pcs and go ahead and run engrams on those pcs with this technology and they would very soon begin to fly.
But that is an erasure technique, and to achieve any finite end within the lifetime of the pc and yourself, due to the quantity involved, becomes impractical. That's why! And, that's why the shift in Dianetics and Scientology and that's why these other approaches. That's erasure! So, erasure from I to IV, it is not that it couldn't be done, it's that you haven't got time to do it, and you can do more for the pc by destimulation that you're simply keying these things out. In other words, park them over in their proper area without paying too much attention to them. In other words, the indirect approach to these billions of engrams was simply to destimulate the pc on the subject of keying them in, in this lifetime, and you find, quite remark-ably, that this is highly workable. Destimulation as opposed to erasure.
Now, there is then the dividing line, between I to IV and V to VI ... V and VI, is those early ones are, simply because you can turn off somebody's headache and then if you don't try to erase anything, that's what I've been trying to teach you here, if you don't try to erase anything, if you don't push him back into the bank and you don't crowd him back into it with some nonsense or gobbledegook of some kind or another. „Well, I didn't get that, would you go over it again. That was a what? Well, I didn't quite understand this, oh, it's a... well, it's alright.“ But the auditor is just be-ing too something or other.
He's concentrating the pc's attention on the backtrack, see, and he says, „Oh well, that happened when you were five, alright. What did you say you put your head up against? Oh, your head hit, hit, hit a sink, alright. What sink? Where were you living at that time?“. Well, you've done the exact approach that has long since been designed on how to get somebody into an engram. And if... of course, he'd go into the engram at that time, and your job is actually to destimulate, not erase. You see that? Now, oddly enough, you can still destimulate after you've done all this.
You just pick this session. Now, you've obviously made locks on the incident and this session. Don't you see? So, you just ask him, „When was the first time we started to talk about it in this session?“, „What considerations have you had about it in this session?“ You go all over it again, and magically, if you audited that very smoothly and des-timulated this session, why all of that would fly back into the background again, and once more, he would be rid of it.
So, we have two distinct classes of auditing and we have two distinct things which are handled, and therefore all auditing between I and IV is the handling of locks, especially the lock known as a key-in. I won't bother to go into nomenclature in this lecture. If you don't know those words, look them up.
So, it's handling locks. So, I to IV isn't handling the raw meat of life, and we have omitted number V because it now isn't necessary, and this brings us vis-à-vis star-ing into the lion's feted breath. That's VI. So, what you're doing now is a transition from sweetness and light of one I to IV.
The spring sunlight pattering on the freshly born leaves, pan pipes trilling in the distance. The full volume Ride of the Valkyries, with no transition, done in a dark cave with red bloods and spots.
And if this is something of a shock to your steady factors, well, fine. I would be very happy if it were possible to put you through the two or three years of training necessary to come up the whole gradient.
So, it's not necessary to come up to those whole years, so the thing to do is just brace yourself for a shock, take it on the chin, and plow on. You understand? So, actually all of your auditing up to IV is destimulation, handling the little key-ins and locks, „My momma spanked me and I considered at that time, that I hated women“, you know. „Ah gee, somehow I feel suddenly better about, about....“. That's not what it's about, see. Do a military drum doing muffled rums, and he's going off to the executioner's block.
The somatics with confront required - pretty tall, pretty tall. Big jump, big jump for a pc. Big jump for an auditor. I just want to show you there's a section missing in the training and tech, but it is possible for you to make that jump and it is possible for the pc to make that jump, without an awful lot of stuff, providing you do I to IV well, and that's the area that you got to do well. Now, what have you got to do in I to IV? In I to IV you just got to raise his cause level so when he eventually be-gins to confront the real raw meat of the reactive mind, he can as-is it. If he can't confront it, he can't as-is it. If his willingness factor is too low, his cause factor is too low. If his cause factor is too low, he can't look out enough from where he is to as-is anything in front of him. We've had other lectures on this particular sub-ject. That is not new ground.
So, your thing to do there is just raise up his cause level - then throw him to the lions. Alright! It's something like the Russians trained their troops for World War II. They took this fellow and they showed him how to handle a sub-machine gun, heel strip it, put it back together again, fire it, and then sent him to the front lines. That was his total military training, see. And then his survive became soldiers. (laughing) So, this is heroic, see. No effort being made at all to do anything very gradient about this, and this brings us right down, with no more gradient than that, to the reactive bank basic.
The basic raw meat of a reactive bank is the GPM. And the GPM is caused of masses and significances, as you will find in other materials, and has certain forms and sizes, and my lecture mainly concerns it's patterns, here today.
Now, there are people around that tell you, „Naw, Ron must be wrong, I've never seen any mass in GPMs - oops, well.....mass...GPM ...(muttering) ... so I wonder why I'm so hot“. Well if you're running straight down instead of the center of a GPM and you're running dead on, which you can do now, of course you never see anything. The second you begin to see anything, you must realize something has been skipped. The only time anybody ever sees anything, there's something wrong. You jumped a GPM. Well all of a sudden you're gonna have visio. You jumped an item. Well, you're gonna have nice visio on the item you jumped because it's not going to be behind you, or ahead of you, or to the left, or the right, or someplace. Do you see this?
Now, in the final analysis, a GPM is composed of mass and significance, and it's located, and so forth, but you don't have to worry about it being, too thoroughly, about it being timed because it really doesn't matter what time it's timed because it is timed. And one of the reasons why it's very difficult to find the top of the bank or the bottom of the bank and so forth, and that sort of thing, is because it is time itself. So you try to find the top of the bank and well, that would be the part which was made last. Yes, how can there be a last when this is the thing which has made it first and the last.
In other words, the characteristics which you normally assign to objects in their position, location, and age, these characteristics are gone when you get into GPMs. Now, you can say, yes it runs in this order. Oh yes, it does and you'd better run it in that order and you can say, well it starts here and it goes there, and so forth. Well that's simply, sort of on the basis, it's easiest to start here and go there. Don't you see? Because there was no start and there was no stop. But, there is a signifi-cance of starting and stopping in it, and if it weren't for any GPMs, there wouldn't be any significance of starting and stopping. How do you like that? See?
The thing exists in space, but the GPM is what makes the space for itself to exist in, see. It has age, but it, itself, makes it's own age (chuckle). So, therefore we say, this is the first end-Word. Well, we have said that this is the first thing about the thing that makes a first, you see. It wouldn't necessarily be a first engram. See, there couldn't be a first End-Word, really. This is why the wits are ... is very difficult to grasp at first glance because you see everybody trying to grasp it is tremendously influenced by it, and the considerations people have of things are caused by these considerations and significances which are in the GPMs. You see? It's a snake eat-ing up his own tail. It's that kind of a problem. The snake ate himself up and dis-appeared. Well, that's really what happens when you run a GPM.
Now if ... the consideration then, the consideration of time, the consideration of space, energy, all the various things of which a GPM is composed are contained as significances in a GPM. Very, very puzzling. So, somebody trying to understand life sitting down on a mountain top some place in lower Jesus or some place, .. Jerusa-lem, excuse me, and he's contemplating his navel or something, and trying to get the hot dope, he gives you all sorts of things. If he starts to get close to the truth, then the things he utters appear to be idiocies, see. If he gets close to the truth. Like, there really is no universe - Mary Baker Eddy. There is no universe. All is infi-nite mind. Isn't it true? It's very, very, very true but that doesn't prevent Christian Science from being the leading religious faith you find on the rosters of insane asy-lums. See, it's a truth which isn't quite true enough to save the bacon of the per-son's faith.
Truth must be truth. It must be all the way truth. Now, anybody who is studying slowly, and so forth, gets caught up in this factor: That you can't go part way to truth. The most suicidal activity that you can engage upon, is to go part way to the truth. You've got to go all the way to the truth. There are no half truths. About the most dangerous thing you can have anything to do with is a half truth. There are.. people have understood this, that a little knowledge is dangerous. Well, that's actu-ally not very well applied, that's not even very well stated, and it certainly isn't the same sense of what I'm saying here. No truth can be half way approached. If you got that far and didn't go any further, you would fall flat on your face and be in quite a mess. If you set out to shoot the moon, there is nothing sillier than going into perihelion around it for the rest of your life (chuckle). You've got to land on the moon. There is no substitute for totality with regard to truth. In other words, you've got to know all of it.
And this is ... this I'm trying to field a philosophy. The Bugdeammerbum.. the fa-mous witch doctor from lower Scrambula, he puts his foot on this line and he says, „There really is no time“ and he doesn't go any further than that. He teaches every-body, there really is no time. He's put himself and everybody around him with one foot on the banana peel and the other in the grave, see. He hasn't told them why there is no time, see. He hasn't told them anything, and all he'll do is ... everybody goes around saying, well there is no time, so it doesn't matter, but yet, echoing in around in their skull is the fact that it's true, there is no time. That is a truth, but it is so little of the truth. Without somebody going the whole way, it actually be-comes quite dangerous. The whole race would then simply go in apathy and that would be the end of it.
And that is what has happened in almost all philosophies that I have ever heard of. See, they get some corner of some truth and then they don't walk down that road and they go no further than this. You see? And they sit around on mountain tops regarding their navels and they do weird odd ball things, and they wonder why they're not getting any better if they know so much. Well, the reason they're not getting any better, even though they know so much, is because they started on the road to truth and they never made the passage and they're something like a ship-wrecked ship. They're high and dry on that reef and they're never gonna go any further. But having gone that distance, it wrecked them. Now this in itself is soul chilling.
This pronounces something quite interesting to you. You can say, well we started into Scientology. Yeah, you started on a road toward truth, didn't you? The only fatal thing you can do, if you know this about your pcs, and you know it about those around you, and you know it about some of them fallen by the wayside, you instinctively feel it.
Having started, ceasing to go is one of the most fatal things they could do. Now you look at this with some sadness because it's actually a very fatal action. But let me call to your attention something else. It isn't that Scientology got you started on the road to truth. You started on the road long time before. You've been on that road ... When you sat down in the amphitheater, when you sat down in the amphitheater in Greece and listened to somebody saying philosophically, yippity yappishly, that something is the end of the road and Kronos actually devours his own children and therefore the whole universe is circular and whatever else is being said. You started on the road to truth and you can speculate along this particular direction: what is the truth in this matter? What is the true composition of this universe? What is my true identity? Who am I? What do I consist of? Where do I come from? Of course, nearly everybody has asked that question of himself since he's a little child. You started on the road to truth. That's dangerous, unless you walk the whole road.
That road's got to be walked because the character of the GPMs themselves admit of no halfway measures. You key in of one of these GPMs, and you key in a series of GPMs, you get them all roiled up and then you don't do anything about them, you're in the soup. They contain the end all of all explanations. Contained in the GPMs are the explanation of the universe in which we live. Their identity, every-thing everything is composed of. The impetus. All of these very things.
In other words, the philosopher busy philosophizing and having himself a ball on the subject and coming up to some conclusion. Let's take Einstein. Einstein was walking on this road. He had finally gotten up to a point where he was trying to integrate life into his other equations and he was groping, groping, groping and he left one of the most remarkable, he left one of the most thoroughly remarkable messes for ages forward to figure out that you ever cared to have anything to do with. When he died he had a bunch of consultations. In other words, he was going towards the everything of everything. In other words, he was going towards some-thing that explains everything, and he hadn't arrived any closer than a bunch of symbols. Having figured out his various equivalents of constants, and speeds of light, matter, energy, space, and time, having figured these out, he was trying to squeeze life into this somehow or other, and he left an awful hodge podge of fig-ures which everybody worships back where he was, Princeton I think it was... And they're busy trying to do something with this now and it's all very complex and it's all very something or other. In fact, everybody around there is half way spinning, what the devil were these last equations that Einstein wrote. He was just trying to integrate life with the universe. That's, everybody would say, an over simplification. No, it isn't, that's a more truthful statement. That's closer to the truth than they are. He was just trying to integrate life and the universe and that and that. That's all.
The old Encyclopedia Britannica says in order to understand space and time, you had better understand the mind because it's very often, very possible, that space and time are simply generated by the mind, how do we know. Interesting. That's in the 1890 edition of Encyclopedia Britannica. Marvelous insight. Very well put. I noticed it hasn't been followed by anybody else. You notice that science today says the mind is so in error, it is so inaccurate, is so this, that it is just nothing in me-chanics at all, but mass is all and the mind is nothing, see. The universe is every-thing, and the material things in existence are this and then he is just a spontane-ous combustion from mud, and this is all he is, and he's just a lousy bum, and you talk to one of these boys and their whole orientation is in this direction. He will say, „Oh a computer, oh well a computer never makes a mistake. This is the run, it puts out all these marvelous things, look at these marvelous things. Human mind, agh, human being agh .... (muttering)”. Yeah, listen to these boys. I've tried once in a while, timidly for me, to say, „Who feeds the data to this computer?“, „What feeds the data to this computer, and get an answer out of it and who inspects that answer after it has been printed but the mind, the being, the person, the individual.“ Yagh-yagh-yagh, they can't get this point at all, see. In oth-er words they've got now, the cake is more important than the baker, see. You've got an end-all cake that's self-generated and sprang spontaneously from the cook pot, but no baker. The cake is greater than the baker. Don't you see?
So, in studying R-6, the first thing we have to recognize with vividness, is that we're dealing with the baker, not the cake. We're dealing with the thing that makes it, not the thing that is made. We've got to recognize that, and that'll explain a great many failures auditors have when they begin to approach R-6 and it's audit-ing techniques. They pay all their attention to the mass, the GPM, the significance, and to hell with the pc. Well in actual fact, if you don't pay attention to the pc and his reaction by keeping in a good auditing comm cycle, by doing good ARC break assessments when you got by-passed charge, by first and foremost taking care of the pc, by making absolutely certain the pc doesn't have any PTPs at the time he's being audited, making sure of all these little points, keeping that pc in good com-munication, handling that very nicely, making sure that all the items read, the pc is satisfied that they have read, that the pc is cheerful and happy about this, then you've just got an end-all cake, and you got no baker. And it's the baker you're try-ing to handle and it's the baker you'll be left with after the cake has been et. So, you take good care of the baker. So a few pieces of cake get chipped up. Well that's not very important as long as you take care of the baker.
An individual is an individual and now you find this inherent in early Scientology teachings where it was taught more instinctively than factually, you see. It was taught more on a basis of general knowingness. I knew how these things were. You'll find that the being, the individual, had generated the universe and part of that universe is the GPM, and the GPM in it's generation then restrained him and compelled him to covertly go on making the rest of the universe unbeknownst to himself, and compelled him by his own generation to go on making it, the GPM, see. So you're not quite sure when you first look at this thing which way is which. Is the cart drawing the horse or the horse drawing the cart, you know. When you first look at it you will say, „Wow - science, modern science has said, well, it's all cake, and there's no baker“, see.
Well let's take it up a little bit further. The first trouble you're going to have and that is, is the course ... is, is, is the cart being drawn by the horse or is the horse be-ing drawn by the cart, or who is running what, and as the pc begins to look at this he actually can accept intellectually, he's making this thing that is smacking his face in but he can't put any part of it into actual subjective reality. So it's a point you don't force down his throat. It will eventually begin to dawn on him. He gets to be further and further on a gradient of cause over the GPM in spite of the fact that cause itself is an end-Word.
The point is here, he gets to be, actually, more and more cause over this GPM. See, everytime you're falling across a real significant significance or something that is absolutely necessary to do anything about anything with you're also colliding, mad-ly, with GPMs. You understand? You're colliding with the meaningness of a GPM in some way, shape, or form, in any human action, and in any part of or action about this universe. It really doesn't matter much what corner you approach of liv-ingness or life in view of the fact that livingness and life is created by the individual through the GPM.
He creates the GPM and it creates it, but he's long since forgotten he created the GPM. „It looks to me like“..., you see, he would say, „it looks to me like the cake, you know, is creatin' the rest of the kitchen.“ (chuckle) Why, he will then not be able to very intelligently grasp the fact that every time he tries to address any corner of exist-ence, he starts to feel strange or peculiar. Well naturally, any corner of existence is already capped with a GPM because if it wasn't, it wouldn't be there.
So, all of a sudden a guy is just thinking a thought, see, thinking a thought at ran-dom. Alright, that is either a lock on a Root-Word or a lock on an End-Word, see. One or the other. It's a lock on a Root-Word or a lock on an End-Word. That's it. I don't care what thought you just thought, if you thought any at all, So you must-n't get into some weird, you mustn't get into some weird odd-ball contest of trying not to think in some way, in such a way as not to restimulate a GPM. That doesn't happen to be possible.
There's no particular reason for you ... I already went over this rolley-coaster here a few weeks ago, it was a relatively short time ago, I had to decide what this was all about and I had to get down and work it all out very carefully, and I did, you see, and that's the conclusion I came to: That he built a universe through the formation of a GPM and he couldn't think any thought to amount to anything. But didn't amount to anything, he couldn't think any thought that could impinge on one, one way or the other. I made an actual test. It wasn't intentional. It's with causation. I was telling you about cause level and I had this struggle about trying to form a communication about cause level, and I said, „Well I don't ...” I knew that cause and so on, was an End-Word in a GPM. We'll get on to what End Words are, and so forth, in just a moment.
Well, I knew that it was an End Word and therefore I tried to get around it by say-ing causation. Erase the causation of a pc. And I tried to get around it also by us-ing causativeness, to increase the causativeness of a being. And by the time I'd carefully written the bulletin, which you have, carefully scouting this on causation and causativeness, I was sick as a pup. It wasn't that I was restraining anything, or anything, I was simply mis-wording an End-Word. So I went back, I went back and scrubbed all that and simply put cause down there well knowing that it was an End-Word.
You don't want to keep repeating an End-Word at somebody when you're giving them auditing commands. You can get out to an outer perimeter lock. And that's what you want to keep repeating, like „done“. Well, that's very nice - done, done, that's good. „What have you done?“. That's good. Withhold - no, that's a Root-Word because every time you say withhold you're going to key-in directly and immediate-ly some other portion. You're gonna key-in somebody faster than you're easing him up. Don't you see? So, it's best in an auditing command to use an indirect ac-tion. But in the discussion of communication of anything, if you try to escape the significance of an End-Word or the significance of a Root-Word, if you try to es-cape these things and not mention them, all you do is suppress them and the final result is, is you're practically around the bend. So, the best answer is, the hell with it. Say 'em. Do them. Not with a repetitive auditing command. Not in a constant hammer pound of an auditing command.
But a careful review shows that you can't escape this particular thing and it shows, that when you're trying to be technical, that a departure from the exact statement is liable to make you sicker than an approach to the exact statement. Then that says where you sit and where you think. Now the number of Root-Words and End-Words which you hear battered about every day, laid end to end, would be longer than the Queen Elizabeth's passage from New York to London. Every cocktail party on there, all they do is bat about large numbers of Root-Words and End-Words.
Now, the worse off a person is, in actual fact, the more he will talk in Root-Words and End-Words. Sanity, if it is anything at all, would be the gradient scale of des-timulated Root-Words and End-Words, and insanity, would be the command val-ue of the Root-Words and End-Words over the individual. Not their restimulation, but their command value - that would be insanity. If Root-Words and End-Words have a disproportionate command value over the individual, you can say he's in-sane. Now that's ... That's interesting too because insane, of course, is an End-Word. But you have to step outside the basic considerations.
But quite in addition to adding both the universe and personalities and reactions and so forth, the individual is still quite capable of independent thought. And the reason you have Dianetics and Scientology is totally attributable to the fact that I've been walking, to a very marked degree, outside the perimeter of reactive thought while considering these various things. Now that's very interesting. We got some place, you see, and didn't get detoured into it even though we were dealing with and very often using it.
Now take the very step with which you work - ARC. Affinity is an End-Word - Reality is an End-Word - Communication is an End-Word. There are three End-Words in a row, all the way down early on the track and, theoretically, it should make everybody sick as pups because it's so early. You know, you destimulate the charge of them. Now, you're living right in the middle of the fourth lightning if you live in this universe and you're actually further from it in Scientology than you are if you were out digging a ditch somewhere because, believe me, that foreman when he comes down the line is going to speak nothing but Root-Words and End-Words. He's going to be pretty batty on the subject.
This little jazz musician, „Is that something!“ „Boy that's nowhere!“ All in expletives. But they're ... you get the idea? There's a vast difference here. They're dead on drama-tizing. They're completely unwitting. It would be quite another thing for you, a Sci-entologist, to be dead on wittingly. I know when I'm using Root Words and when I'm using End Words to a very, very marked degree. If I hadn't been aware of one before, if I ponder one too hard, I'll get warm. When I notice that I'm getting ra-ther warm, I say, „Well what do you know, I wonder if that's a Root Word, I wonder if that's an End-Word?“ „Alright, it's a Root Word. What do you know, must be a Root-Word because it wouldn't add up any other way.“
I found out that the resistance to and the flinch from these things is what does the damage, not the use. That's a very subtle point for you to know in Class VI. Very subtle, so get that point down very well. It's the flinch from, you see. It's the sup-pression of; it causes you to feel dizzy and woggy and sick at your stomach. And invalidation of, is what causes pain. Invalidation, of course too, is an End-Word, but that causes pain. If you want to make somebody hurt like crazy just get him to get down, and say that it isn't true that there is a goal of something or other, some-thing or other, which is a real goal, you see; or say it isn't true there is such an End Word, and he's getting real excited about it, and the next confounded thing you know, he'll feel like he's being sawed up by a butcher's powered beef saw. What happened? Well, the liabilities then are the liabilities of contest with and dramatiza-tion of.
Contest with, is your greatest liability as a student. Even though you're afraid of something you're still in contest with it. It is that, and you are you. Afraid to do these things. Walking the chalk line about them. Being careful in consideration of them and those sort of things. Well that's, that's where the damage comes. Then you say, „Oh brother that's nowhere, that's really nowhere“, you know. „That's no..... I won-der what the hell I'm thinking nowhere for, you know, what's all this nowhere. Tah, must be an End Word. Ah, it's nowhere“. You know, get the, get the delicate shift here, see.
Alright, so you're gonna keep saying nowhere and make yourself sick at the stom-ach and so forth and restimulate the End-word „nowhere“. Alright, that isn't going to worry you until you suddenly realize you are saying „nowhere“ and to that degree dramatizing the thing, and then say you mustn't because it is an End-Word. Now, you get that subtle one? Because that's where you go over Niagara Falls in a barrel. It's right at that point, see. You say, „Well, I shouldn't be saying that because ...“. Don't you see?
Now, I've taken a new look at all this. So, you find out after a conversation with somebody or other that you're absolutely reeling. You've been talking about these things and the room goes out of plumb, and so forth. So it does. So what? Now, you really want to make it go out of plumb? „Well I mustn't really discuss this anymore“. Well, you've knocked it all out of plumb with your locks. You see that?
Now, you find yourself dramatizing these things every once in a while but it's only a sin not to eventually catch yourself. I don't expect you not to dramatize them. They're only still here, so you're dramatizing something about space and matter, that's for sure, and time is passing, so you must be dramatizing collectively, some-thing about time.
Alright! Well, let's figure this little other tiny nuance. You all of a sudden find that you're sitting there saying, „Tsk, problems, problems, problems, problems, now wait a mi-nute, I must have an End Word or something in restimulation“, see. Even though it's next week before you find that out, see, and then not make the mistake of saying, „Well, I mustn't say problems any more to myself“, see. Because the recognition of it is enough. You don't have to prevent the future, because that's an End-Word too. (laugh) So the gist of the situation is that you're surrounded with these things and all you've done to date, until you collide with them in study, is simply dramatize them.
Now what's happening to you is you're finding out what you've been dramatizing. Your face, every once in a while, will be rather red on this subject. I, myself, pushed myself away from an auditing session. Just very mildly pushed myself from an au-diting session and walked around the room for a little while once, and I came back and I sat down and I went over ... there wasn't anything wrong. I was getting reads, everything was just fine. And I went over everything under the sun, moon, and stars that I could go over, and tried to compare everything that I had done and everything I hadn't done and I was looking for this and that and all of a sud-den it occurred to me, I wonder what I'm trying to do here. Why am I reviewing everything that has happened here, you see. And then it suddenly struck me that the next goal up that I was about to run was „To create problems“. I had simply been sitting there fearing problems. I laughed at myself and ran the next pair. That was the next one coming up. And I was - I was creating problems - LIKE MAD. (laughing) You know what I mean? You can't actually expect not to do it. If you didn't do it, you wouldn't be part of the universe. Don't you see?
Your advance, is to some degree measured by your recognition of what you, your-self, are doing. And a real recognition comes about when you realize that you're making these things up and of course about that time they will cease to. Now there's a trap in all this of the tremendous quantitativeness of them. There appear to be so many that you become exhausted. The figures on this are variable. There's a slight variation in these figures but the best figures I have is 268 Roots and 268 End-Words. That makes it square. There are 18 RIs in a GPM - proper line plot - 268 Root-Words in one series and 268 End-Words, or 268 serieses. Now if you multiply this one times the other, you'll find then, there are in excess of 23,000 GPMs.
Now that, of course, is so staggering, there's such an astonishing number that it makes you feel rather quivery on a subject of, „I've got to audit all these out and it's tak-ing us a session, or in some cases it's taking us two sessions to run out a GPM, and we're doing turn about type auditing and I actually am only getting three sessions a week and I'm running one and one half GPMs a week and there are 23,000 of them to run out. So I can expect to be OT, of course, at the end of, something on the order of 33,000 weeks, or something like this. And 33,000 weeks divided by 52 gives you the nu.... Oh my God!“
Well, of course, it's not the way it goes. This would be good pedantic mathematics but it doesn't happen to be an accurate situation. Once you've got your plot well oiled in, you're spending less and less time in trying to find your way down the bank. Don't you see? Once you've got .. ninety percent of this work, by the way .. well I'm not quite ... yes, I'd say ninety percent of the work has been done on the organization of this. The consecutive adjacent Goals and the consecutive adjacent End-Words are, are still in a state of polish. They're mostly known, don't you see, but they could be wiggled or wobbled to be here or be there, or be something of the sort, don't you see, but the trick was to get the pattern. Of course, the biggest trick was to find out it was there at all. But to get the pattern of this thing took me over a year and a half of some of the wildest most troublesome stuff I have ever been through. Very gruesome.
I look now on an auditor who can't find a few synonyms. He's got one, he's got one to spit, you know. He can't find the next goal which is to expectorate. I rather look at this as being rather poor because the next goal to spit is to, of course, - this is not a proper Root-Word - the next goal to spit would of course be to expec-torate, see. It's to spit cats, the next goal is to expectorate cats, you see, and the next goal to it would be to spitee cats. Very imaginative. You've got „to run“ is next to „to gallop“, you see. To travel fast, to speed. They're just all tied together, the same word. Same word, and it's got to be checked out and the best thing to do this with is one of these New Rodell Word Finders. They're only available in the United States and they're very, very fancy. They've had a lot of college professors working on the thing and they were nicely keyed-in and they practically laid the bank out in this thing unwittingly and unknowingly and you look up a list of syno-nyms, brother it will find the next door cousin in most of the cases.
What gives you trouble is you sometimes have prepositions and conjunctions in the goal. Usually just prepositions and you have to bend your wits around a little bit. You get a goal like - this is not a proper one but I'll just give you a form - „to run away from cats“, see.
So what is the basic, the basic rundown here is the pattern. The pattern has been found and that is the most important part of any of this, is the pattern, because, you see, there could have been trillions of patterns possible. The bank is so charged. It is so full of locks that almost anything runs, almost anything reads. It's the woof and warp of life. You can walk your way through to what is the central pattern of all this, - forms auditing research papers which if stacked up here on this platform, would reach from the very far end of that platform to a height of about two feet, or three feet, all the way over to the other end of the platform. Just single sheets of paper, notes and records of running possible combinations. And it is ac-tually quite agonizing to run these things backwards and upside down and wreck yourself like a fire drill. So, it's very difficult to find this pattern. You're being pun-ished all the time for trying to find the right pattern. Don't you see?
There is no half way road to truth. Don't you see? A GPM, of which you have all of the items, which is properly worded, and so forth, runs like hot butter, providing you haven't skipped too many, or something. That's, that's that easy. But the GPM of which you have one word missing, or one preposition missing, runs with pure agony, see. This is no good. You have to be dead on. We're getting us to a point where we could be dead on, but it's very difficult, and that bridge has been very well crossed and we're very glad to be back. The listing the auditors are being asked to do at the present moment is just sign the adjacent consecutive GPM wording, see, that he's got there.
Now, they don't vary. Everybody has the same pattern. They all start in the same place and they all end in the same place and they all have the same wording. Some people have some holes in the track, however, where ages past they have tried to chew up a GPM and get free. And there'll be little holes, where just half of a GPM here and there is badly chewed up, and your most greatest liability there is running into an ARC break that occurred maybe thirteen trillion years ago. The greatest liability is the ARC break with the bank thirteen thousand years ago.
You all of a sudden are running down the track - this is rather rare but I'm just tell-ing you what the score is - You get half way through this thing, the GPM, every-thing's running fine and all of a sudden it's all running bad and you wonder what's going on and you trace it up and the guy is looking at this or that and he can see things and he's upset about something or other and you find out that thirteen tril-lion years ago in an enthusiastic ambitious moment he decided to ... he found this one, to bite this one in half, and tried to do something about it and chew it up and of course, he had the wrong goal and the wrong items.
Sometimes you get a read on an ARC break assessment - wrong goal, wrong item and you find out it was in yesteryear they were a wrong goal, wrong item. It had nothing to do with your auditing. It was some little self auditing this boy had done thirteen trillion years ago or more. You got the idea? You occasionally run into this. So, you've been trying to buck these things for a long time. Of course, in several thousand of them there's maybe one half of one GPM chewed up, so this doesn't compose much of a problem but you can run into them.
So people have been at it and trying to do things about these things for a long time. They haven't gotten any place, they've gotten themselves stuck in trying to list something without a meter and without auditing discipline and without know-ing the pattern, and so forth. They just pull in a lot of End-Words on themselves and they've been unhappy ever since. The most recent incident I know of was about 139 years ago, sitting on the side of Mount Pernasus, cussin' these dam things. Messed them all up, pulled them all out of sequence, just cussin' them. Fi-nally saw that there were these masses so I couldn't see the escape from the mass-es, so I couldn't properly exteriorize. I started cussin' them.
You'll find out this sort of thing has occurred. A person, of course, gets into this state. He doesn't know what these are, he doesn't know what they're all about. He doesn't know what they're composed of and he's already been bit two or three times when he's collided with these things so he doesn't want to know too much about them. Well, he has to know them dead right before they are completely painless and safe to live with. You have to go the whole road to truth.
Now, they are very, very simple in essence, the whole pattern is extremely simple. I can tell you in a very brief space of time. I'll write it down here. A Root word .. let's, let's, let's be happy about the thing, the End-Word, although it sometimes doesn't sound very normal, is always a noun and a Root-Word is always a verb of some kind or another. So, we've got something like this. We've got a complete GPM and this is what you know as own Goal and that sort of thing. Let's go over this. And, it's To Eat Cats. Let's, let's get this now. To Eat Cats. We notice here that we are on the end of this thing - Cats - and that is an End-Word, and because that is an End-Word, there are going to be 268, or there abouts, GPMs all ending in Cats in a row. You may not be at the beginning of it, you may not be at the end of it but you know that they're all in a row. There's 268 Root Words which end in Cats and they're all consecutive and in sequence, see. We got, to eat Cats - to dine on Cats, you see - to consume Cats - to digest Cats, it'll probably be your next type of thing. Just a tiny bit of shift, you see, goes from eat to digest, and there's gonna be three like to digest Cats, you see.
But they're all gonna be Cats, Cats, Cats, Cats and it's gonna be out there for 268 GPMs. Now a GPM consists of 18 RIs. Those RIs in 2 rows of 9 in each row and they begin with the Goal as an RI at the bottom and they run on to the top. And I'm not gonna bother to tell you the line plot right now, but the line plot is posted in the theory room. 18 RIs in this line plot and one of the main difficulties you get into, is the line plot is itself and the End-Words are themselves and the Root-Words are themselves and they don't much cross. So, if you had in the line plot Edible Cats, which we don't have, you see, but if you had in the basic line plot Ed-ible blanks, see, you would then get, To Eat Cats would read as a Goal, because it reads off the line plot as a lock.
But it would check out as a lock if you're smart and clever and work hard and ask several times. Most of the reasons you fail to check is you ... you fail on checking, you don't ask the second time, you don't ask what it is and you don't ask where it is. Ask if you've missed anything - you don't add that to your checkouts and that's when you miss on a checkout and then you find out there's four hundred and six-ty-five dozen reasons why you shouldn't have run that GPM that you were busy running, but you, you just didn't ask the question. So, of course, now the pc's in trouble and so forth. It wasn't consecutive, it was improperly worded.
„Is this an actual Goal?“, you ask; you get a read. Well if you get a read once, the pc might have just breathed, you see, hard or he might have had a heat wave hitting at that particular moment, or something like that. So, one read, oh puff. One read, phooey. You don't buy anything on one read. The question is, can you make it read again. Then you say, „Is this a correctly worded actual GPM?“ Sometimes you got some knuckle-headed pc that insists, well you found out once, why should you be asking again. You find out that all of your repeat questions, and so forth, are being suppressed. So, you just have to handle that as an auditing problem. He's got du-plication, or something like that, stuck as an End-Word. Don't you see? He doesn't want any duplication in his vicinity.
So, what's this, what's this Cats? That's a ... an End-Word, that's an End-Word. There are approximately, apparently, 268 of these things and they go plus - minus. And it would be something like - Cats and Catlessnesses - or something like that, see, or it would be something opposite to Cats. We don't much care what's oppo-site to Cats. It's what is opposite to Cats that would appear on the end plot. But it's something that's definitely opposed - not, not dogs, you understand. Dogs as a beingness is opposed to Cats. No, this is, this is the End-Word. But it would be an absence of Cats. Don't you see? The End-Word isn't an absence of Cats, but that's what the End-Word would mean and you would express something like - Catless-ness - or something, you see. It's the opposite and .. but what makes it difficult, is that it's only the End-Words which go positive - negative and that gets very con-fusing and that's very upsetting, but they go plus - minus in groups.
Now if you have something to do with positions or locations, and so forth, this just runs on endlessly. You've got all kinds of pluses and minuses with regard to, to positions and locations. And since the most assessable, accessible End-Words that you will collide with on a pc, the most ... the best End-Words you collide with on a pc, are according to what I've seen anyway, is HERE. H-E-R-E - not plural, but H-E-R-E - and that, of course, has just above it - THERE - which is the opposite to HERE. Don't you see? And those are your pair of actuals, and go this way.
Now, there's these 268 of these End-Words and they go to the middle of track and then the sequence of plus and minus reverses on the word - NOW - which is in the middle of track. Here's the beginning of track, up this end, if you wanna have this end. It's at this end, and NOW is in the middle of the track and the PRESENT is at the furthest end of the track. Now the present just beyond it has the ABSENT. That makes life more interesting. You'd never find anything. HERE has several more toward PT but they all have to do with this kind of thing, you see. Most of them do ... have to do with this kind of thing, they're plus and minus. But, what I'm trying to show you is, that the middle of track of NOW has got an earlier on one side and a later on the other side of it, so it's actually used twice as a positive, which switches the order, which switches the order of positive - negative. So that BEFORE pair to this NOW, the earlier half of the End-Word series. Just don't consider anything but this End-Word, see.
The earlier half of this End-Word series has the negative further away from the top of the bank. The negative is further away from the top of the bank, and the posi-tive is nearer the top of the bank, by one, you see. But the NOW, up here to here, the negative ... this causes tremendous grief, that's why I didn't find it at first ... the negative is closer to the top of the bank than the positive. The positive is further away from the top of the bank. You understand? In other words, they do a switch because the center End-Word uses a double. It's double used positive. NOW, you see, has two negatives. So, if you work that out, you'll see that's very simple, that's very simple if you just write down plus as the middle of the track and then minus closer to PT and then a minus further from PT and then alternate pluses and mi-nuses both directions. Then you'll find out that, of course, the first half of the track is opposite the other half of the track as far as the plus - minuses are concerned. You got that? Alright!
That is the way the End-Words lie and what's difficult about it, particularly difficult about it, is the fact that the track is really basically circular. But, you'll find out that there is a thing which answers up to being the top of the bank and you can get the pc into a lot of trouble if you run the „quote“ beginning of the bank before you run this end of the bank. You understand me now? But there really isn't any. You got it? For some particular reason when time was finally plowed into it, and so forth, why HERE operates as top, or first thing to run. NOW, of course, operates as the middle of the bank. Something you won't get to until you're half done, and the PRESENT is the last thing you will run out. And, of course, those three things tend to lock up on each other which keep the bank with you all the time. Adroit, isn't it? And, of course, you don't find these negatives because of the obvious. See, you found HERE so, of course, you don't have THERE, see. Then you get things like EVERYWHERE and ELSEWHERE, see. That's another pair. So, it's pretty hard to navigate through these End-Words if you don't know the pattern.
But that is the pattern of these End-Words and it's, it's pretty easy to do. It's a positive - negative proposition. There is no numerical repeats. It doesn't go twenty-one earlier as the negative, or so forth, that trick isn't there. It's just ... it's common just as I've given it to you. It's rather ordinary. You could sketch it out on a piece of paper. There's just middle of the track and the negative on each side of that plus word, comes on out to the ends and, of course, there's half of 268 End-Words this way from NOW and half of them the other way from NOW. So, it's elementary. Then they they tend to curve around and lock up and it makes the track look trun-cated at Goals because Goals, that's the big obsessive one, see. And it makes the track look truncated at that point, and the track will answer up as truncated and is runnable at that point but it isn't necessary to run it that way, see.
It doesn't really matter a cotton pickin', confounded, doggone where you run any of this as long as you don't run it blind. In other words you say, „We're running the fifteenth End-Word in sequence from the top of the bank“ and telling the pc that it IS the top of the bank will turn on a somatic because you've misplaced it. Don't you see? Because that restimulates placement and you get the somatic from placement. Don't you see? But if you just sawed into it and then you found out how many End-Words there were above it, and you said, „Well, we're running the fifteenth End-Word“, the pc would say, „Alright“ and you go on and run it and you do run it. You got the idea? It's nice to run it all in order but if you can't run it all in order, don't run it blind. Know what you're missing, see. Know what you're missing in order to run it.
So anyway, the net gain of that is, that is the pattern of the End-Words and then these are the Root-Words - TO EAT - EAT here we call the second word, just for lack of something because it's needed in the line plot as the second word, and the TO is just gratuitous, but TO EAT, you see, TO EAT is the Root, what we call the Root. And we did say Root-Word. Who cares whether we use Word or not, see. That's the Root and there's 268 of these Roots and you get one End-Word, it's got 268 Roots. Pocketa-pocketa-pocketa-pocketa, 268 Roots. And they all go in the same order and they have the same sequence of Roots and they're in the same consecutive order for every End-Word. So if you've got CATS, you got these same 268 words for CATS. If you've got DOGS it's the same 268 words in that same exact order for dogs, don't you see.
This makes all kinds of interesting mathematical computations and so forth. You can take any random End-Word almost and add these Root-Words to it and it sounds very, very significant indeed. You see that? So, there's always this same se-quence of Roots. Always the same, and that is the same 268, see. The only thing that changes then in essence ... a series is this 268 Roots with one End-Word, and the only thing that really changes in GPMs then, since the line plot is the same for every GPM, all 23,000 plus, or whatever the figure is, well, the only thing that ever changes in the GPM is the End-Word, and that only changes every 268 Roots. So, it's a sort of slow freight, see, slow shift.
Now, the line plot is the independent items which fit TO EAT CATS. Now we've gotten it down to TO EAT CATS and that itself is a little bunch of mass and sig-nificance which is composed of 18 separate items, two columns of 9 each which are in opposition to each other and bring each other about. And those 18 items, each one ALWAYS has the same form and it changes just with the Goal you are using. So if you had .. just as a ... an incorrect example but nevertheless an example of it, you have EDIBLE BLANKS, see, why in the line plot, why this simply transposes into EDIBLE CATS. If you had an End-Word, ELSEWHERE, it would be EDIBLE ELSEWHERES. It would become plural if it's not already plu-ral as an End-Word. The plurals are all taken care of in this. It's not difficult. So you have EDIBLE ELSEWHERES, see. And this line plot simply repeats in every one of the 23,000 GPMs.
It's just a substitution, you know, of what Goal it does have itself and it's always the same, and it's always in the same sequence, and it always comes together that way, and it brings each other about, and locks each other in. And that line plot is so composed as to lock together GPM A and GPM B. In other words, GPM B is expressed in GPM A's bottom pair and in GPM B the bottom items of GPM A are expressed in it's top pair. In other words, these are nicely intermingling.
So we have an item at the top and an item at the bottom which directly refer to the adjacent GPM, see. So that's what keeps it, keeps it gripped together, see. And then those End-Words in sequence, they don't really grip together beyond shutting off from one and getting the idea, the next one and approaching it, and that's where they grip together. It's a sort of travel thing, see. A guy decides for GPM after GPM, „well we're gonna leave here now, we're gonna shove off, we're gonna skip it, we're gonna get out of here, we're gonna depart; yeah, I better, I better, I better scram“, and so forth and then eventually, magnitudinously thinks of the next one and it's first GPMs are just getting the idea there might be another one and considering this for a while and pondering and looking at it for a while, and deciding he would do something toward it and then approaching it and then getting near it and then eventually walking around, and arriving at it. You get the idea? And eventually he's there and there might be some trick interlocked between them, but ... I wouldn't rule it out totally, but I haven't found one. I've just found these two adjacent GPMs go smoothly together. That is entirely, the total pattern of the bank. There is nothing more in the reactive bank than that.
These things run by the discipline of Scientology and you have to take very good care of the baker because the baker's making all this, and you never have to run out 23,000 GPMs for the excellent reason, sooner or later he's going to cognite he's doing it, and that's the end of it.
He can give you a false cognition that he's doing it and still have his head knocked off by the masses. He can sit back and decide to decide he's doing it, you see, so therefore, it'll all go away. Won't do him any good. It happens when it happens, not before. And actually it's a pretty long, gruesome, arduous run and it's run today by platens. It can be run easily by platens. Nothing to it. Just cut pieces of card-board with the pattern of the GPM written on the tops of the cardboard and just fill in one word. Cut 'em out with a razor blade. And a platen is an L-shaped hole. Nine L-shaped holes in series, with the ... your bottom part of the hole is what you write your data in. You just put 'em on an 8 x 13 sheet of paper and you don't even have to write all items. You go pocketa-pocketa-pocketa. When you first start in, you better write out the items.
But there's the, there's the whole composition of the track, there's the GPM, the auditing technology which runs it. It's very, very smooth auditing and draws it to an exact drain of charge of each one of these things in turn and the charge goes away very fast. Usually in one or two big reads and you position it one way or the other and eventually, why, you get in your X step. It's very rapid and frankly, run-ning with a platen and so forth, you can dispense with one of these things about one a minute. If you got up to one a minute, and so forth, that's 23,000 minutes to OT, at the absolute outside because you never get to the 23,000 minutes. Sooner or later the guy's gonna say, well the hell with that, I'm making it all up. At that point he's gotta fly out of his body and straighten up the auditing room chairs by taking him out of his state.
But don't let anybody get away with the idea, „Well I realize I'm causing all these ..caugh, caugh.. things and... you'll see that, by the way, that'll be very frequent. I know, I know people.” So any how. Know 'em and love 'em, live with them, and straighten them out for the various reasons, but they do have their foibles, and they will crowd it (garbled). They will push it, they will get anxious.
Alright! And that is the total composition of the bank. And there isn't anything else in the bank that you need to worry about because there isn't anything else in the bank because all engrams, locks, secondaries, and this is why we don't run them, implants and all other such bric-a-bracs, theta traps, all the rest of these things. Of course, they're all sitting as locks on the GPMs. Now you say, well we can expect to go on and find the GPMs, they're sitting on locks someplace. Yes, they're sitting ... they're all locks, on a thing called a Thetan.
Thank you very much.
(end of lecture)