Causative Instant 
Tape: 5312C03 "Time as a Barrier" 

Cause is your own  decision, command or postulate of action. As long as
this precedes action, a person is self determined. As soon as one's
postulate begins to succeed action, he is other determined, because his
postulate is being caused by other determinism than his own. He reaches out
here and shifts the ash tray and then he looks at it and wonders why he
shifted the ash tray and he says, "It's a good thing I moved the ash tray."
That's an automaticity. Automaticity is only strange and peculiar because
it interferes with the barriers of time. 

With ease, you can pass through any other kind of barrier. By pulling on
yourself the trick that we will all agree on the appearance and
disappearance of space. Then we will depend upon some symbol which we put
up which is spelled T-I-M-E to symbolize this appearance and disappearance
of new particle positions. 

Then we will agree that these particles do not move except in this pattern
of our agreement, according to certain laws and when we all hook into the
same regulator on the same subject and then depend utterly upon time, we
can't have the past again. Neither can we have the future again. Nor can we
have the future in advance. It becomes a horrible, hectic context on the
part of the individual where he pantingly is keeping himself somewhere in
the vicinity of these particles in present time. He is trying to coordinate
with their motion consistently and continually and that is the strain that
he's undergoing.

He's in advance of all his automaticity when he's in what we will call
causative instant. Causative instant is being just a split second ahead of
the actual change of the particle, because you're actually assisting their
change. Effect instant is being always, with postulates, a split second
after the shift. The stimulus response bank is a faction of an instant back
of a shift of these particles called MEST (matter-energy-space-time). The
observational, analytical mind is the causative instant, just a fraction of
a second before the change. 

I found this process rather uniformly effective if carried out long enough
on the person that he finds himself fighting time so much and so
impatiently that he’ll drop back into stimulus-response several times. 

Step 1:
Simply seat your client in the midst of a bunch of MEST objects (dolls, toy
cars, etc.). You give him the steer the first time or two and then deliver
it into his own hands what he's doing.

You say: "Now you decide to move that (object) to a position." And he does
so, and you say "Now do it."

His automaticity is being junior to your automaticity throughout, so you've
got to get this up to a point where he is doing the whole thing, and you
just leave him there doing it. 

Step 2:

We say, "Get the idea that you're going to move that (object) to a new
position." He gets the idea. And you say, "Do something else." His wheels
will kind of go screech, skid, and he will do something else. But he will
get wise to this after awhile; he'll realize that he did something else on
a stimulus-response.

Step 3:

You say, "Now you, yourself, decide to move this (object) to a new
position, you decide it and decide when to do it." And then he'll sit there
and do it.

About this time, he may start to protest. He's liable to have all kinds and
varieties of protest. Why? Because you are making him actually push up that
fraction of a second and he feels like he's been speeded up beyond the
point that he can tolerate it. 

That intolerance of pace will not actually take place. It's not upsetting.
There's nothing to that. You just get him to push on through it. 

Step 4:

"Decide to move that (object). Now move it to a new position."

"Now pick out the new position it's going to move into." He does so, and
you say, "Now decide to move the (object) again to a new position." And he
will and you say, "Now having decided, get the idea that you suddenly have
to move the ashtray over on your right." He will.

What you're working with there is interference and interruption of action
and what you're working with is basically automaticity and the interference
with the cycle of action. So that we can't finish cycles of action. What
we're working with is trying to return into his mind the idea that he makes
up his mind to do something and then does it. That will key out all of his

Step 5:

"Now make up your mind you're going to move the (object) to a new
position." He selects the new position, and you say, "Now don't do it." 

You are only trying to move him ahead maybe a billionth of a second. He'll
get the idea that he should think of all these things and do them
instantaneously. This is upsetting to him that he doesn't do all these
things instantaneously. He's just trying to make a postulate work. This is
his own laziness showing up with him. Now, instead of that, we force him to
take it carefully, maddeningly, and to make up his mind to do something and
put it to a new position and then not do it. Make up his mind to do
something and change it to a new position, and then have the idea that he's
got to change it and move something else instead, without moving the
object, and merely make up his mind to change it to a new position and do it.

End Point
Run the process until a realization occurs, or an ability is regained.