6409C03 SHSpec-38 Clearing -- What It Is

"Clear" means what it meant in Dianetics: The Evolution of a Science,
which is the same as what it means on adding machines. Computers have complex
circuits. Sometimes a drop of solder gets dropped in, which short-circuits
the circuits and adds some wrong constant factor to the computer. In
mechanical adding machines, if you never pushed the "clear" button after the
previous operation, you would get the old total added in. That is the
uncleared answer, where old data modifies PT data. The mind, likewise, will
add old answers into current computations and get wrong answers. A person's
memory will be bad in the area where the old answer is stuck. Amnesia is all
the "held-down fives", adding up to a total blank. Memory is not a broad
condition. It is spotty as a leopard. A person has bad memory in an area of
aberration. A traumatic experience is surrounded by locks, so sometimes it is
hard to find. There is no such thing, however, as a uniformly good or bad
memory. The worse off someone is, the more areas of no-memory there are.
[Insanity becomes a way of obfuscating overts, as well as a motivator and a
justifier for them. If we could get a person to see the overt, all that
insanity would become unnecessary.]

If you want to improve someone's memory, you must ask, "Memory on what?"
A person is aberrated in the area where his memory is poor. There is a fairly
good-sized piece of nuttiness occluding some area of his experience and
memory. All you have to do is to monkey with it a little, and it will start
to clear. Psychiatry errs by trying to make sense out of the
incomprehensible. It can't be done, by definition. You should not try to
figure that "square shapes make people nervous", because some patients were
nervous around doors. Instead, you should find out how come the patients got
nuts on the subject of doors. You don't try to make sense out of the
incomprehensible. All you have to do is to understand that he [the person who
has presented you with the incomprehensible] doesn't understand it, and to
start looking for where it came from.

People are far more normal than they are crazy. [Cf. H.S. Sullivan]
Nobody is totally crazy. Other "mental sciences" go crazy on this fact,
because of Man's thirst for "allness", which is just the craving to identify A
with A. Psychiatrists, going A=A=A, think that there is such a thing as a
total insanity, and that therefore there is such a thing as the state of being
insane. Even in his legal systems, Man has to have something called
"insanity". This is not correct: A person is insane in one or more areas or
subjects. There is no such thing as total insanity. A gibbering idiot who
asks for a glass of water when he is thirsty is sane in that area. The
sentence, "This man is insane," requires three dots at its end to show that it
is incomplete: Psychiatrists have never completed the sentence so that it
reads properly and accurately as, "This man is insane on the subject of
_______ ." But if psychiatrists knew that much about the subject of insanity,
they could cure it. It is the missing link.

Actually, they have never defined their terms. If you ask a
psychiatrist, "What subject is this guy insane on?", he would say, maybe,
"Exhibitionism!" Bull pucky!! That's a condition, not a subject. You can't
classify insanities, because no insanity is the same, on the same subject, as
any other.

To finish the sentence, "This man is insane on the subject of _______ ,"
psychiatrists would have to observe the patient. Then they would see that
there was no similarity to others' insanity.

Find the subject on which a person is insane, find the source of the
subject, and he will have cognitions and the aberration will blow. "If you
are in an area where the PC is cogniting, you must therefore be in an area
where the PC was aberrated." You are tracking down and "clearing" a
"held-down five". A cognition is a returned memory. When the PC is
cogniting, it is an indicator that he is getting rid of held-down fives. And
he will be remembering better in that area. If a person never cognites, you
aren't tracking down any held-down fives.

"Clear" means "on any given subject, not nuts anymore", especially where
the person has been pretty nuts. You could say, for example, "On the subject
of children, this person is clear." You would have to put it into the
framework of a relationship of some kind. When you have hit enough stuck
fives, you can call the guy a clear, which means "a cleared being, with a
cleared ability to think". A guy who has been cleared in a given area of
aberration can't go nuts in that area again. It took a fantastically
off-the-wall set of circumstances to aberrate the person in the first place.
To aberrate him again, you would have to get the same weird circumstances all
together again, and then some, because now he is educated, too. He knows how
it happened. A cleared person, or clear, would be a person with no obvious
aberrations and with a majority of areas cleared, who has a cleared ability to
think.

The basic business of an auditor is to use scientology tech to locate
areas of aberration in the being, and then to follow those areas down until
the person recognized an earlier causation for the condition. He would then
be unable to reconstruct his nuttiness in that area, because the thing that
had him aberrated in the first place is gone, and he also knows that he has
been nuts in that area, so when he sees something approaching that could be a
recurrence of the condition, he pre-understands what might happen again, and
it won't happen. Having had the experience [and being aware of it] is like
being inoculated. He couldn't go nuts again in that area if he tried.
Therefore clearing is stable.

The state of total causation is not the same as the state of clear. The
state of total causation is OT, which is different from being unaberrated.
Clearing is something that applies to the mind. It is related to a finite
state of existence -- the ability to survive well in everyday existence, in
the universe, across time. When we try to make clear an absolute, we go
beyond that into another area that has the side-effects of clear, although you
are not trying to fix the guy up. The final result is total resumption of
beingness at total causation, which isn't necessarily in the physical
universe, in finite time.

Clearing is an assist to finite existence, not some supernatural thing.
Man doesn't leap from a state of total aberration to a state of total
divinity. It is a long walk, which starts with the guy's present
environment. The gradient scale only breaks down when the PC gets into
running the things that make up the mind: GPM's. Now you are handling
uncommon, unnatural problems, like, "Why did the being make a time track? What
is he doing in the physical universe?", etc. An individual who had no time at
all would not be normal! It takes a different framework to explain this.

Now you have an individual who, through his understandings of what is
around him and his exact handling of the masses and significances in his
immediate vicinity, has a gradual emergence and cognition of what is going
on. We are knocking out his concept of existence and replacing it with total
knowingness of existence. That individual is emerging towards causation, not
towards being cleared. He is going towards a point where he causes the past,
not where he is cleared of the past. The aberrations you are taking away from
him on R6 are not timed aberrations. That is what makes them build up, and
that is why they are rough. They can't be blown by meter dating; they date
"now". However, you can date and blow an implant. A GPM isn't something that
happened in the year 2681 B.C. That is quite different from something that
happened within the universe, that you can fit in on the time track. If you
find an engram, all you have to do it date it, and it goes, "Bzzt!" The PC
wouldn't have a prayer of getting it back. After the guy is clear, you begin
to ask, "Where is the time coming from, that you are dating the clearing in?"
Now you are into R6 and OT. The guy is "more causative over the universe;
less worried about what the universe is doing to him." You are going from the
finite to the infinite. The field of re-creation of the individual, or the
individual's rising up towards total cause, is a long and arduous road. You
don't run out of GPM's very fast.

The point is, that there is a separation point between the finite
universe and the world of total beingness. People going towards clearing are
interested in physical well-being and their relationships with other human
beings. They are interested in accomplishing finite goals in the physical
universe, like keeping a job, etc. If a person going up the other track
hasn't totally followed the clearing track, he is still interested in those
things, too, although perhaps not so aberratedly. But only people who are
interested in clearing are interested in finite physical universe goals.

If someone is "insane", you remove the individual areas of aberration as
they become accessible and leave a growing core of sanity that was always
there. "Somewhere along the line, he ceases to be interested in becoming
clear of his past ... and he begins to be very sincerely ... interested in
causation: personal, individual causation." What is the individual's
relationship to and responsibility with regard to the physical universe? The
individual is also capable of going nuts in this direction and thinking that
he is God, but only if he isn't really past the gates on the road. Clearing
ceases when the individual can recognize his basic GPM's and knows where they
came from, etc. Ordinary clearing procedures won't touch GPM's, so clearing
ceases. Now you go into running GPM's. The person soon gets over being
interested in blowing out the electric light or wondering if he could do this,
etc. He gets more serious-minded about the situation as it becomes more real
to him and more natural to him. He stops worrying about other people getting
to be OT. The end of the road is in view, and it is a finite road.

So the two roads are different. One has to do with processing somebody
within the limits of time and experience, deleting things that keep the
individual from getting right answers in existence. The other is different.
Auditing changes; the individual's responses to auditing change. You can
still shift the pre-OT back a little onto the other road. If you do this too
much, he collides with the next GPM and it jams the meter. The locks are now
all on top of GPM's, not on traumatic life experiences. [Charge on a subject
could lead to misunderstanding a word on the subject. Clarification of the
word would cause dropping away of some locks on the subject. This could apply
to GPM words also.]

It isn't how big or how little a person's aberrations are that counts.
It is how many aberrations he has. The closer the aberrations are in subject
to each other, the more there are. These aberrations are not necessarily
[based on] dramatic or interesting experiences, either, although the PC may
try to make more out of them than is actually there.