Male voice: I’ve heard a lot of fabulous stories about the book “Excalibur.” Could you tell us a little about that?
It still – it still exists. I got a carbon copy of it. The original’s been stolen.
Male voice: Will you ever put it in print, Ron?
The original… No. The original was stolen by the Russians a long time ago. They offered me a hundred thousand dollars to go to Russia and work exclusively in Russia – all laboratory facilities – and actually offered me any facility and pay and equipment that Pavlov had ever had and they almost had me on the boat, you know? That was back with Amtorg [Amerikanskaya Torgovlya – A Russian – American trading company]. And a few years later, why, my apartment was raided, doors smashed in and so forth, and the only thing missing in the whole place – papers were all thrown about and so forth – and the only thing missing (there were very many valuables there) and the only thing missing was the original copy of the book “Excalibur.” Still gone. I do have a carbon of it, however. I didn’t know I had the carbon. The carbon is the first writing. The book that was stolen had been rewritten somewhat. That answer it?
Male voice: Well, I was wondering if it would be something that you might ever put in print or…
Male voice: Was it dangerous to read, I mean, the subject.
Male voice: How about Scientology?
No. Scientology offers some hope. “Excalibur” simply was nothing on worlds, Earth – without any understanding at all on the subject of why. Or it simply said exactly what he was looking at and it evidently produced the mechanism, making him confront immediately and intimately all of the brain mechanisms. And, “Excalibur” is actually devoted to brain mechanisms as well as many of the principles which led to the research line. But it described brain mechanisms, and so forth, and guys read those things and they actually were sitting there just looking at them and they go up the spout.
Now, in Scientology you ask a man to confront why, you ask him to confront thinkingness, you ask him to confront reason and supposition. You don’t give him the hard rock-bound object, you know? And he gets along all right. You can write too brutally on the subject evidently.
Scientology – I’ve never known anybody to do anything with Dianetics and Scientology or any book thereof, but after reading in one, to feel better, even though they were sometimes worried, or something of the sort. And I have had instances of people just reading the first article and stepping out of a hospital bed, and so forth.
So this is not true of “Excalibur” and “Excalibur” comes under the heading of a dangerous weapon.
Male voice: Would it still be dangerous for a Scientologist to read it?
Oh no, no. Matter of fact from that aspect I wouldn’t publish it for another reason and that is that a modern Scientologist would laugh at it. It’s the only book, too, by the way, that contains any nomenclature straight off my case. Many of the descriptive words in it are straight out of my own engrams. I’d had no auditing at the time; I’d had no broad look at the track, or anything of the sort; and I just picked up the handiest stuck phrase on the bank. Right. 1
- Hubbard, L. R. (1958, 4 August). Case Analysis – Rock Hunting – Q & A Period. Twentieth American Advanced Clinical Course, (20ACC-28). Lecture conducted from Washington, DC. ↩