LEVEL 5C OVERTS

MP3 DOWNLOAD

PREREQUISITE STUDY RECOMMENDATION: "TROM 2023" read in it's entirety.

This is the 23rd of March in 1994 and today I want to take up this subject of Level 5C-Overts at
the level of therapy of Level 5C, which is very late in therapy. At this level of therapy the only
thing that can prevent a junior universe from going through to erasure is that the person is
continuing to compulsively commit overt acts against that junior universe in their present day
life. 

Now note that statement very carefully, it's a very precise statement. I'm not saying that the
only thing that can prevent a junior universe from erasing is overt acts against that junior
universe. No, I'm not saying that at all. There are many things that can prevent a junior universe
from erasing in therapy, but we've covered all of them by the time we get to the end of Level 5C. 

So if we get to the bottom of 5C and we still have junior universes that are un-erased, and will
not erase in therapy, then the only reason for this state of affairs is that the person is continuing
to commit, probably, almost certainly unknowingly, they're committing overt acts against that
junior universe in present time games play, or potentially they will commit overt acts against that
junior universe if they come across it in life. 

Now this is an important datum and a very important subject too, this is important to us simply
because if these junior universes hang fire at Level 5C then the 'To Know' goals package at Level
5A is prevented from going through to erasure. You understand that? 

So therefore Level 5 cannot be completed. Level 5 will not complete if Level 5C won't complete
and in the final stages the only thing that's going to prevent completion of Level 5C is overt acts
against the junior universes, against those junior universes that hang fire at Level 5C. Everything
else has been covered. We've taken the purpose of the junior universes apart, we've erased the
junior goals packages that contain these purposes, we've done everything. We've got the junior
universe apart. 

So as far as the junior universe is concerned we've dismembered it. So why won't it erase? Well
the only thing that will hold it is that the person is overting against the junior universe. It's not
the fault of the junior universe. It's the person is holding this thing in suspension in his mind so 

that he can overt against it. Now that's the thing you have to understand. It's a conscious
decision by the individual, though unknowing admittedly. It's a constant unknowing decision on
the part of the being, to hold this thing in suspension in their mind in order to play this rather
silly game of committing overt acts against it in life. 

And because they're doing this the terminal, the junior universe at Level 5C will not erase and
therefore Level 5A will not erase and the 'To Know' goals package won't erase and we cannot
complete Level 5. So we have to do something about it. Now you might say, "But surely we have
a very good technique at Level 4 for handling overt acts?" 

Well remember we take up at Level 4 the 8 classes of overts and motivators on the 'To Know'
goals package. Yes indeed we do. It's a very good technique but, and get this very clearly, it is not
proof against the person who does not regard his action as an overt act. You see that? You see,
picking these things up at Level 4 depends upon the person regarding his action as an overt act. 

If he regards them as an overt act he can pick them up at Level 4, and they will come apart at
Level 4 routinely. But supposing he's committing some overt acts against junior universes which
aren't picked up at Level 4 simply because he does not consider them to be overt acts. In other
words, he's justifying his behaviour. He's justifying his overt act. 

He's like the SS guard, you know, as he's herding another flock of Jews into the gas chamber he's
saying, "Well I'm an honourable man, I'm not committing any overt act, I'm just doing my duty.
I'm not doing anything wrong here." He says as he herds another flock of Jews into the gas
chamber. 

Now here you see a person who's justifying his overt acts. He's calling it something else than
what it is. It's an overt act but he's calling it something else. Well we don't know what he's calling
it but he's justifying it, and while he continues to justify his overt act it will slip through the filter
at Level 4. See that? It simply won't pick it up. 

If it crosses his mind he'll say, "Oh no that's not an overt act. That's nothing, that's nothing, that's
alright... it's ahh... I'm just doing that. It's just a part of life, you know." He won't see that as a
discreditable thing. 

So it slips through the filter at Level 4. He gets onto Level 5, runs the 'To Know' goals package,
takes a lot more charge off his case. Flattens off Level 5B, gets onto 5C and gets stuck there...
gets stuck right at the end with one or more junior universes that won't erase. See it? 

Now I didn't have this problem in therapy. I didn't have this problem. I cleaned them all up at
Level 4. I got the lot. I'm too old a hand on this subject of overt acts and motivators but this
material is going out to people who haven't got my profound understanding of the subject of
overt acts and motivators compounded of 30 years experience as a practising therapist. 

In that period of time you do learn a bit about the subject of overt acts and motivators and
justifications and so forth. So I can confidently predict that on the write up of TROM as it stands
today people are going to go through the Levels 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and get right to the end 5A, 5B, 5C
and then get stuck at 5C cause they can't erase these little junior universes at Level 5C, and
they're going to get worried about it and won't know what's going on and they won't realise that
they're overting because they're justifying their overts. You see? 

And the whole of their therapy will grind to a shuddering halt at that point. All right now what
are we going to do about that? I know it's going to happen, it will happen for sure. Well we can
do something about it, very easily. 

The Innocuous Question 

Well now, first off, it's no good asking this person or assuming or saying to the person, backing
up some technique to them which implies they're committing overts against these terminals.
Because they're justifying their overts so we can't use an overt act technology that is overtly
designed to handle overts, you see that, because it's an invalidation. 

An invalidation. If this material was obviously overts it would show up at Level 4. You see that?
And if the person realised during the running of Level 5 that these were overts, it would have
handled at Level 5A. 

See, Level 5A will handle overts too. So when you're running the general 'To Know' goals package
that will handle overts and motivators of the goals package. That will handle overts at Level 5A
too. But it skipped through 4 and it skipped through Level 5A. Get it? So it's no good saying,
"Well what the person’s going to have to run is something like: ‘What have you done?’ and ‘What
have you withheld?’" 

No, flunk that won't work, it won't work. It invalidates the person. You see? They're sitting with
one or more junior universes which will not erase and they don't know why they won't erase
because they're not aware that they’re running overts on these things. 

So we need a technology, which isn't going to invalidate them but at the same time it's going to
run out these overts. And that's a problem, running overts out at Level 5C, and we have such a
technology. 

There is such a technology that will do this. We can actually run out overts. There's a set of
commands we can use that will run out overts most elegantly and most efficiently without ever
mentioning that they are overts. Without even implying that they are overts and to do this we
use the justification mechanism of the human mind. 

Now what is the biggest justification for an overt? What's the biggest justification? Let's go back
to the SS guard who's herding Jews into the gas chamber. If you were to ask him, you say "Now
look you're herding these Jews in there, now what are you doing?" he says, "Well this is Hitler's
final solution to handling the Jews." 

You see that, that's what he'd say. That would be his answer. He'd say, "We're simply handling
the Jewish problem." Note the verb there, 'To Handle', see it. He's justifying his overt act under a
mantle of "handling" and there is the euphemism. 

It's a euphemism. It's a pure euphemism. It's an overt act but he doesn't call it an overt act he's
saying he's "handling". You know the mafia boss turns round to his lieutenant and he says, "Go
out and handle so and so and so and so." 

He means go out and blow them up with a bomb or go out and mow them down with a machine
gun but he calls it euphemistically "handle." An army commander might say the same thing when
talking to his lieutenant. He'll say "Well we need to handle Hill 4 don't we gentlemen. Well you
take your troops out and we'll mop up that pocket of enemy units on Hill 4. We'll get that
situation handled." 

Again the euphemism "handled". Now the verb 'To Handle' is a very interesting. The goal 'To
Handle' is a very interesting goal, a very interesting goal indeed. Now the first thing we need to
know about this goal 'To Handle' is, is it erasable? Yes it is erasable. 

The goal 'To Handle' means, if you look it up in the dictionary, 'To Handle' means to manage. The
word handle comes from an Anglo Saxon root of hand from which we get the word hand, the
word handle comes from the word hand and both of them come from the Anglo Saxon root, but
the word manage comes from the Latin, it comes from the Latin word for hand, manus. 

We get the word manage comes from the Latin for hand and handle comes from the Anglo Saxon
for hand, but both mean the same thing. So 'To Handle' means 'To Manage' and if you define it as
that it's erasable, it's erasable. If you define 'To Handle' as 'To Manage' it's erasable, but if you
define it in a destructive sense then it's an un-erasable goals package. 

Actually the goal 'To Handle' is within the goal 'To Control' it's a subdivision of the goal 'To
Control' and in the write up of TROM I mention that the goal 'To Control' will not erase unless
you define it as "to direct the disposition of," which is the definition of the word control. 

So again we find that the goal 'To Handle' which is within the goal 'To Control' is only erasable
providing you define it exactly as per the dictionary definition 'To Manage'. So it's an erasable
goal. 

Running the Process 

First Address the Goal 'To Handle' 

So the first thing we have to do at Level 5C is to address and erase or collapse the goal 'To
Handle' and that's the first thing the person has to do. He has to go back to Level 5B, in other
words, pick up this goal 'To Handle' and either erase it or collapse it as a junior goals package. 

The legs of the goal 'To Handle' are 'To Handle', 'To Not Handle', 'To be Handled', 'To Not be
Handled' and it's an erasable goal provided you define the goal as 'To Manage'. Follow so far? It's
an easy one. 

By the time you get to 5C, I mean, by the time a person might need to do this technology the
goal 'To Handle' might have already erased. So I mean it wouldn't be any surprise to discover
when you go to erase it or collapse it, it's already erased or collapsed, it might have already been
done. It certainly would have been erased or collapsed if you've addressed the goal 'To Control'
in therapy. Cause if you've erased or collapsed the goal 'To Control' the goal 'To Handle' will have
also gone. That would have gone too because the goal 'To Handle' is within the goal 'To Control'. 

Right, well so far so good, that is the first step of Level 5C-Overts is to erase or collapse the goal
'To Handle'. 

Second, Formulate the Therapy for Overts 

We then formulate our process. You see we can now work with this goal 'To Handle' because
we've erased it. It's an erased package. So we're now confident there's no residual charge of
conflict in the package itself. In other words, we can use the legs of the package with full
confidence that there's no charge on the bank on these legs of the goal 'To Handle'. 

It's an erased goal or collapsed goal and they're quite null. So we have to do that step. We must
do that step of erasing or collapsing the goal 'To Handle'. Having done that we can then
formulate our therapy commands to run out the overts that are on these junior universes. 

Now the easiest way I can explain this is to give you an example and work through the example
and we'll create the commands as we go. Let's assume that the junior universe that won't erase
is a dress, a dress, D R E double S. A dress. 

Let's assume that is the junior universe that will not erase at Level 5C. 

First Pair of Commands 

Now the first command that we back up on the subject of the dress is: 

"How have you handled a dress?" 

Repeat "How have you handled a dress?" Now there are two comments I'd like to make on the
command. 

First off that you'll note that there's no suggestion that there is an overt act. The command
you're using does not suggest that there are any overts, yet I can assure you that if the person
has ever committed any overts on a dress that auditing command will find them. 

It will peel them off. It will locate them. I can assure you of that. With the reasons I've already
given on the tape that the goal 'To Handle' can either be defined constructively or destructively. 

Now note the use of the word "you". "How have YOU handled a dress?" you might say, "That as
the person is running solo he could run, "How have I handled a dress?" Well I tested both of these
and the first one seems to run best, seems to be more incisive and so forth, but it doesn't really
matter. 

You could ask, "How have I handled the dress?" as you're running solo, but my advice is to use the
third person, "How have YOU handled a dress?" and realise that the question is being addressed
to you. You are addressing it to yourself. 

In other words that you're the therapist addressing the subject in the session and the question
you the therapist are addressing to the subject is "How have you handled a dress?" get it? And
having received the question you then proceed to answer it. You don't have to acknowledge it to
yourself. You can dispense with that formality but I think that you will find that to use the third
person "How have YOU". That is more incisive and I think you will find that that runs best,
although to say "How have I handled it?" is not an error. That will run too. 

I think that you will find that "How have YOU handled a dress?" will run better than saying "How
have I handled a dress?" All right now how long do we run that command for? How long do we
run that command for? 

Well we run that command until there are no more answers. Note that! We run it until there are
no more answers. Now that's something new. You'll find that when you run it to no more
answers you're also running it to no change. It's quite safe. It's safe to use this in this instance. To
run to no more answers because we're going to run another command which is the reverse of it
so it's quite safe to run this. It's not safe to run all commands in therapy to no more answers but
in this instance it's quite safe to do so because we're running its reverse as well. 

So it's quite safe. You run this to no more answers and you'll find that when there's no more
answers that this is the point of no change in the session. So we run it to no more answers. All
right that's command number one. 

Now our next command, command number two is the exact reverse of command number one,
it's: 

"How has a dress handled you?" 

Repeat "How has a dress handled you?" 

Now I'll give some comments on that command. Now of course this command won't run overts,
this command runs motivators but this is the other side of the flow. We have to run this flow, we
can't just keep running overt, overt, overt all the time. 

We have to reverse the flow. So we’re going to reverse by saying, "How has a dress handled you?"
It's a flow reversal here and again you run that to no more answers. Now it might seem a very
peculiar command. It will certainly be a peculiar command for somebody very early on in therapy,
but I can assure you very late in therapy a person will be able to answer it quite readily. 

It's not a difficult command for a person very late in therapy. They would easily see how the
dress has handled them, how a dress made them do certain things, and so forth. They would
easily be able to answer the question, where a person early on therapy would have difficulty with
it. 

But we're not running this procedure early on in therapy. It's the last thing being run so the
person has the whole command of their creativity at their disposal. All right so we run that to no
more answers which will be a point of no more change. Then when there are no more answers to
that one we go back to one. 

And again run, "How have you handled a dress?" And we run that to no more answers then we go
over to two and run "How has a dress handled you?" and run that to no more answers. 

Backwards and forwards until neither of them have any more answers. Then we're finished with
that. We're finished with that pair of commands.  

Second Pair of Commands 

And we now move into our second pair of commands. There are only four commands in the
procedure; we've now covered two of them. And we'll go into the second pair. We've now used
up the 'To Handle' leg of the 'To Handle' goals package, haven't we? So now we swing over to the
other side of the goals package 'To be Handled'. 

So the person asks themselves now: 

"How has a dress been handled?" 

"How has a dress been handled?" That is command number three. We don't specify handled by
whom. It can be handled by self or it can be handled by not-self, we don't specify by whom. It's
very general, a general command, "How has a dress been handled?", and again it's run to no more
answers. 

Ok, an easy enough command to run. 

Then we go to command number four. This is the final command of this set, is: 

"How have you been handled?" 

"How have you been handled?" and that again is run till no more answers. 

And when number four has gone to no more answers you go back to three and you alternate
three and four until neither three nor four have any more answers. Now number four seems a
peculiar command. It seems an almost irrelevant command, "How have you been handled?" 

Well the purpose of the command is flow balancing. It's simply a comparison; it's a flow balancing
comparison there. It allows the person to see, to compare the way a dress has been handled in
the universe, he can now compare that to the way he has been handled in the universe. 

So he can now get a comparison, there. See it's simply a comparison; you're completing your flow
pattern and making sure you're not leaving any unbalanced flows here. 

Now if those four commands are run exactly as I've given them to you, and they are run to no
more answers, both pairs are run to no more answers. The terminal, the junior universe will erase
at that point in therapy. You may not know it's erased but it will have erased. 

End of tape 

Return to Lectures Main Page