Okay. This is lecture two, Saint Hill Special Briefing Course, 30 Oct. AD 12 and we are going to take up the subject of listing: its theory and practice and when we say listing, we mean listing of goals. No other type of listing - just goals.

Well, this is the what of what?

How do you list a goal out? This is a specialized action. How far do you list a goal out? Why do you list a goal out? What happens? What's your target.? What words do you use? Why.? These are questions which might plague you.

Audience: 30th October AD 12.

Now, a goal consists of a bunch of black marbles around a nothing, as you see it, as in the form of the GPM.

Not even Halloween yet! Thirty Oct. AD 12 and first lecture, Saint Hill Special Briefing Course.

Actually a goal (quote) seen (unquote), naked and alone, standing by itself, would be totally invisible and totally nothing and totally nowhere and totally no - charge and totally no. It'd be as evanescent as a thetan.

Now, it's a very fortunate thing that you are here tonight. Very glad to see you tonight, you knuckleheads! I'm glad to see you in such a happy frame of mind.

In other words, a goal does not have mass, but a goal in place in the pc's reactive bank is surrounded by mass and the way it looks is a tremendous number of black marbles impinged on black marbles, each influenced by a single postulate.

Well, what this is about, actually, is we're turning the Z Unit loose on itself. And you've seen the policy letter by which the Z Unit is being turned loose on itself. And I just want to make an announcement; that is more than meets the eye. The auditing style, skill, boo - boos and that sort of thing of the Z Unit will be very, very closely supervised - very, very closely supervised.

This is very interesting - very interesting because it has an anatomy. And the discovery that it had an anatomy is of great importance, because it is the anatomy of the reactive bank.

And when you get out of here, Z Unit, you won't have Phil or Herbie or Fred or Reg and Mary Sue and myself to say, "Well, have you been sitting down across the table from the pc?" You know? You’ll be on your own. And you’ll have to make decisions regarding eases and what to do with those cases, across a lot of miles. And the time for you to fall on your heads is here, not in lower north South Amboy. See? That's a mythical place. That's where we sent the chosen few from Johannesburg - they'll never be heard from again.

The reactive bank also contains pictures, but these pictures also depend to a marked degree for their force - if not totally - on the GPM itself.

Now, that opens up a new chapter in training. Your training, you should realize, is quite different than any training done on Earth to date. There are some parallels of one kind or another and here and there it's the same. Sometimes they'd let an engineer see a transit before they graduated him as a skilled engineer. That's about as far as practical application of engineering ever went. Sometimes in polytechnic schools, they let somebody build a small stool or something.

Now, you could take off on a basic - basic of a chain and erase the basic-basic of the chain and get the rest of the chain to fold up. You see this in Prepchecking. Now, that's getting the earliest on the chain.

But were doing different than that. We've divided education into theory, practical and actual application of what is learned in theory and practical. And I'd like to bring it very severely to your attention that practical is not extended into the Auditing Section. You can't perform in the Auditing Section - well, you've had it. That's it.

Now, we see this with a goal. It is the earliest postulate on the chain. And because it is a goal and because it is the earliest postulate on a chain, it then erases - in other words, evaporates. But until it is contacted as the earliest idea - postulate on that chain, it is resistive - resistive in the extreme.

Auditing is something that is performed. It is performed on a pc and it is performed with benefit to the pc. Now, these are very severe restrictions. It is something that is done, it's done on a pc and it's done to the benefit of the pc. The Auditing Session is not someplace where one practices what one learned in Theory and Practical.

Now, as we look over a bank, we see this phenomena repeated phenomenon is repeated over and over again. If you take an engram, any engram, you can trace the postulate which occurred before the engram was had. Now, this would be wonderful therapy, except for this thing: that decision or postulate is not the basic on the chain - and the engram itself is not the basic on its chain, so by finding the idea or decision which preceded the engram, you do not achieve an erasure of the engram always, but you sometimes do.

Now, the faster we upgrade that, the better off we're going to be. This isn't a lecture on training. This is just a prior announcement here.

It happens to be an isolated idea and it happens to be an isolated incident. And if the idea is isolated and the incident is isolated, why, then it'll go up in smoke. So we're on the free track basis. The individual has never before thought the interesting thought of, "I'm going to raise hell!" And he proceeds to do so and he never did before and after that he doesn't. Let's say something like this occurred.

We've just found out something that's very, very, very, very interesting. There could be other reasons for this that you could explore, but the only booboos of magnitude being made in the Z Unit were being made by people who had been put in it without their checksheets complete. That's a sweeping statement. It's more sweeping than it looks because it tells you that any staff training program that you conduct in any organization or District Office has got to be as tough as this course or the boo - boos are going to show up in the HGC! They're going to show up there right upfront on the public. You understand?

All right. That's then a free, relatively free, idea or postulate followed by a relatively independent mass and the two together make a solidity. You have the solidity as far as engrams are solid and you have it preceded by the idea.

There's apparently a direct coordination between the completeness of a checksheet, the thoroughness of its examination and the skill of the auditor. These things are direct in their relationship.

Now, you can take any engram or any lifetime or any period of existence and find it preceded by a decision.

You see, there's a lot of feeling that somehow or another you get around a course and it sort of leaks in the pores. You hear a lot here and you hear a lot there and - You know, and you can kind of pick it up and you get it off on the fly. You know, there's a feeling that this can go on. And that is true, some of that does go on. You can get the inter - correct interpretation of this and that more easily on a course than anyplace else, that's for sure.

You can find the decision, you can ordinarily do something about it. Now, oddly enough, the more independent the decision is from the remainder of the track, the more the thing will read on its own merits, until you walk up to rocket read, which is the total independent postulate at the beginning of an enormous number of actions and ideas and then, of course, you're dealing with clearing and the GPM.

But if that were the only method of education, we would be turning out Oxfordians. Did you know people in Oxford get educated just to pick up the atmosphere? So they can look like an Oxford man? And they never have to pass an examination, they never attend any lectures, they just spend four years there and it sort of leaks in and they become an Oxford man. As an old Cambridge graduate I'm licensed to make libelous remarks about Oxford.

In other words, in vignette in the bank, this can be found and studied. But because you'll never find ... Well I - pardon me, I shouldn't say "never.9' Because you'll so rarely find a free idea preceding an action and you so rarely find the action free of earlier - similar actions, you wouldn't run into much luck in erasing it. It won't evaporate because it's too dependent on earlier incidents of the same kind.

But the point that I'm trying to make here is although that takes place, it is not any substitute of any kind for thorough and severe theory and practical study and examination. If you want to know why some HGC is doing very badly, you can go round and round and round. You can try to audit all the Pcs in the place yourself and you're going to get noplace. Where it was, was right there, originally in the Academy, somebody wasn't tough enough. And then later on, on the staff training course, they weren't tough enough and then that culminates in no results in the HGC. And I just wanted to tell you this because I fitted it together and sniffed it out and I knew darn well you could benefit from it.

Nevertheless, the phenomenon does exist and I have seen this phenomenon and I have seen a whole engram and whole series of incidents blow up, just by having found the basic decision that lies before them. And it tends to make an auditor rather weird. You say, "Well now, if I could just do this on every engram, why, I'd be all set." And you keep on trying to do it in every engram and of course the next one is 2,000,765,962 from the first time he had the idea "I'm going to raise hell." That's the number you picked up. Well, it hasn't got a prayer - it hasn't got a prayer of erasing.

So sometime in the future, when you're tearing your hair out - and you will be! - over the total no results, you say, "Well, all I did was tell Joe to sit down there and run 'Since January the 3rd, 1938, has anything been suppressed?' and that's what I told him to run and here's his pc all spun in. There must be something wrong with Problems Intensives." No, there was something wrong with the staff training program. See? That's where it was wrong. You got to correct it before it gets to the session.

And then the incident which consisted of getting shot, see, happens to be the seven hundred thousandth time that he's been shot in that exact place, under those exact circumstances. And, of course, you try to pick this off that late on the chain, it just doesn't erase. So the idea won't go out and the incident, if anything, merely becomes very painful and hangs - hangs up. You can turn on the somatic and it stays turned on. You turn on the idea and the idea remains obsessive with the pc for some days.

Now, those are just preludes. I have an actual lecture to give you this evening. But I just thought you would be interested in that fact. That goes contrary to some of your - some of your feelings on the thing. It goes contrary to maybe some of your instincts on the thing and it certainly would go contrary to mine!

Now, look on that as a false goal. Look on that original decision there that decision I was just mentioning there, before he decided to raise hell and then he got shot, you see - take that sequence of events. Well, if you were to run this you'd get, in vignette, the same phenomena as running a wrong goal. It's too late on the track. The incident has been repeated too many times. It won't erase.

Why, the other day I sat down and took a tape examination and flunked it! I missed the last question. Why'd I miss the last question? Because on that particular tape of October the 2nd, I think, or something like that, I had since put out new gen and suppressed the older. So, if I can flunk them, so can you.

The bank, in other words, won't grow less, but efforts to do something to it cause it to increase. Now, in the matter of the GPM, this is a singularity - an oddity - that the basic idea, although it may be influenced by other ideas, is a basic idea. It's a basic idea, postulate, decision - whatever you want to call this thing. Because it is basic on a chain, has a peculiar read which we call a rocket read, therefore, is identifiable. It also tends to stay in consistently and continually without considerable address.

Now, don't ever go feeling sorry for anybody on the subject of harsh, rigorous, positive training. Don't ever feel sorry for anybody. Just feel sorry for the pcs who have to experience auditing that wasn't so trained. If you're willing to take examination and you're willing to pass them, you’ll make it, of course. But are you also willing to make somebody else take examinations and pass them? Make somebody else take drills and pass them? Are you willing to do that? Because you have to be pretty willing, otherwise you've got to take responsibility for every flub that auditor is going to make from here on out and for every pc that auditor is going to mess up. So that's something to think about. And that's something I very, very definitely do take responsibility for and I try to take the responsibility right here.

And the incidents which pursue or follow that have little or nothing to do with the previous life of the individual. Now we're dealing, not with an engram, we're dealing with some whacking big piece of track. We're dealing with the trillennia. See, we're dealing with enormous time span.

This course is getting better and better and better. And I'm very proud of this course. I'm very happy with the way it's going. So therefore, I'm making it tougher and tougher and tougher. I know now what all the people who have left here - I know what all these people have flubbed on. I know how they flub and I've known why they flub - not so much in the field of technology, but other little things, just like the theory, the practical that weren't passed.

And the thetan got this idea, made this decision at a time when he could make an independent decision that would stick with that magnitude. And this is pursued by a series of adventures consisting of identities and their oppositions and consists of a whole series of complicated games and goes on off down the line into innumerable side goals, side ambitions, side ideas, side valences. You know, there's terminals and there's more oppterms. And there's more oppterms and there's more terminals and many of them seem terribly disrelated from this original idea.

Too soft on their TR 0. Fellow sat there tipped halfway out of his chair, you know? Nobody was quite tough enough. And when they came into actual auditing, why, they softened up quick and their TR 0 really went to pieces. You always an - see an auditor, he’ll always look a bit worse off the course than he looks on it. Count on that, because there's just not quite that much discipline. See?

Original idea: "to catch catfish." And you'll find in there something like "to be the Lord Mayor." What's that got to do with anything? Well, you eventually could connect it up, if you cared to. But it actually is connected to this basic postulate or idea.

So that's where it's going and that's why it is and I'm very proud of what we're doing. I'm very proud of what we're doing with auditors and I think we're being very successful and I'm very proud of you. And therefore, I'm not going to let down one single tiny bit of it. Okay? All right.

In other words, we can find in the bank a small picture, in the decision before the engram, of the GPM as a whole.

Now were going to have a lecture. The subject of this lecture: Prehav

Now, the individual has lived these lives and in living those lives has alter-ised this goal. The keynote of a goal is alter - is - why it hangs up in mass. If it were purely and completely observed and suffered no opposition and nobody did anything different to execute it than just execute it, why, it'd still be floating free. But because the thing was altered, it developed mass.

Scales and Lists - how to do them.

And you will find out the first factor of listing is: that listing a wrong goal adds mass. Listing a wrong goal adds mass. That is very important.

There may or may not have been lectures in the past on this, but any former data that exists on the subject of doing scales and assessing scales was prior to a tremendous amount of experience on the subject of nulling goals.

And alter-ising the right goal during auditing adds mass.

Tiger Drill has been born since that day - a lot of data as to why things stay in and why things go out. All this data now tells us that things can mysteriously disappear off a list without being out and things can mysteriously appear on a list without being in and all of that data now must be integrated into every type of nulling that is done. And out of this we will get a very set procedure.

If you know those two data as the two dominating data of all the listing of goals, you'll be able to bring off free needles on your meter. But if you neglect either one of those two, you're not only not going to bring off a free needle, you're going to bring more mass to the pc, more discomfort, more upset than he's ever before experienced. We're at that crossroads where auditing must be done with complete accuracy and understanding.

And that procedure is more or less as follows.

Now, you could probably do Problems Intensives on somebody and never damage him any. You could probably run engrams on somebody and not hang him up with a cold for more than ten days. You could probably do all sorts of things to a pc without messing him up, but for the first time in auditing history we are at a point of data and procedure where the utmost accuracy and excellence is demanded of the auditor or the pc will take a turn for the worse.

We have a scale - list, call it - scale or list. Now, it doesn't matter how we got it - if it was put in our hands from a bulletin or was taken from the pc or any other way that we get this - and we have a whole lot of terms or words or terminals or actions or verbs or something, and they're all in a column of some kind or another, they're lined up in this column.

Now, auditing the right goal is repairable. If we also alter the goal a bit and make the pc protest and that sort of thing - we can always repair this. Auditing a wrong goal can also be repaired. But therefore, we should know the processes of repair as the first step of listing a goal.

Now, the Assessment by Elimination which we used to do is being super - seded, here and now. You’ll have a bulletin on this in a few days, but it won't be to the extent that I'm giving it to you in this lecture.

If one is listing a wrong goal, various phenomena, which I won't go into at the moment, will turn on (I've already mentioned them in an earlier lecture). If we list a right goal badly - get a lot of protest and the sessions are rough and all this sort of thing is - everything's going awry, one way or the other - we get a similarity of behavior on the part of a pc. In other words, rough auditing on the right goal - and any kind, no matter how good, auditing on the wrong goal - give us a similarity of behavior on the part of the pc.

Now, Assessment by Elimination is infinitely faster than tiger drilling every level. You can do this much quicker - Assessment by Elimination - and that consists of taking this list or scale or whatever it is and reading it against the meter, with one or another wording. We don't care if we just read it, each one once, or "Consider committing overts against it," or "Would you - - (whatever the level is)" or whatever it is we're saying, whatever that wording is, it's all actually the same action. And that is to read it one item at a time and those that produce a disturbance of the needle - get that; that's used advisedly: disturbance of the needle. I'm not talking about instant reads. Because some of your rock slammers, the rock slam has already begun as part of the rise and you don’t notice that it has begun to rock slam, so you get apparency of a latent read. You leave that out and you've had it, because you've got your rock slamming item.

So an exclamation point rule is: that you never monkey with the idea of a wrong goal. You never approach this idea; you never run in the direction where this thing - wrong goal - will occur.

So anyhow, it's any disturbance of the needle in the vicinity of mentioning the word. You got that? That's about as broad as I can make» it. Now, disturbances of the needle that become before you mention the word are suspect. You don't think that's funny, but I do! The funny part of it is, a pc can go over a list two or three times and he knows what's in or he can go over a scale two or three times and he knows what's the next level.

You understand, wrong goal: man, that is as wrong as you can get.

Something very remarkable happened on this on goals. You know, I checked out a goal in Washington that wasn’t it. After it was unburdened, it was it. Pc had to be checked - prepchecked like mad before this goal stayed in. I may not have the story entirely straight, because nobody gave me a blow - by - blow account of it. It just occurred in another list. And I saw that the old goal that I had checked out in Washington as not it, was now it.

That's very, very wrong, because it will beef up the bank, it'll distort the pc's ideas, it'll upset him no end. This is brutal stuff - running a wrong goal.

Well, how’d that happen? Well, a goal has to instant read. That goal wasn't instant reading. I was that person's oppterm. Me, personally, see? So every time I would draw in my breath to say the goal, I would - you know, the PC would already get it running through her head and the goal was about a five - word goal, see? And I would say, "To be a rocket read! "To be a quee - rocket read! Got the idea? And the goal was "to be the queen of the universe." And it should have rocket read after "universe." But because the PC was very disturbed and very out of session and I was the Pcs oppterm and a lot of other reasons, that read was occurring anyplace. Any time the pc thought of it, the read occurred. So my starting to say it caused the pc to think of it, which caused the read to occur. Do you understand?

Now, in that you can audit a - not necessarily you, but somebody - can audit a right goal roughly, poorly enough to give it an alter - is in the process of auditing it, to a casual observation - you could probably study this out and there's more data connected with it - but to casual observation, badly auditing a right goal and auditing a wrong goal are alike. So therefore, we never take any chances on it being a wrong goal; we always treat it as though it were.

Now, that is terribly unusual, particularly in a goal, for a goal to be this far out. Goals almost always do an instant read. Of all things that instant read, you can count on a goal. You see? But in this particular case, you couldn't even count on a goal. You see how far out this thing is?

You can just mark that down without invalidating the pc's goal for him - which you've seen rocket read and you're very sure of - the thing isn't going right, the thing isn't going right. That's all, man. Nothing is going right. Pc looks worse and so on. You can't get the goal to read well and have a hard time putting it in at the session beginning and a whole lot of sweat and travail on the thing - we just immediately treat the thing as a wrong goal. See, that's your response as an auditor - not by saying to the pc, "Well, this isn't your goal."

So when you're doing a scale, the time to adjudicate whether or not it is a fair read or a proper read or an instant read or whether it is one twenty-seventh of a second after breath has ceased in the auditor - see, the time to discover that is when you've got it still in at the end of the list. See, that - I mean, after you've eliminated everything and it's one of the few remaining, now is the time to eliminate those factors. Now you start getting nice. See, now get nice about whether or not it's reading on the button, and so on. Now get critical. But up to that time it's just slop, man! It's just sloppy.

But finding out if it is the right goal or finding the right goal are both the same action. Do you follow that?

Now, what do you do? This term, list or scale, is any series of words. You go over that once: line by line, level by level and you take those that are in and you mark them in. You mean "in" - "in" means they disturbed the needle. I don't care whether they gave you a rocket read, a rock slam, a dirty needle, an instant tick, any - any valid disturbance of the needle. The needle was playing "Dixie" and it all of a sudden started playing "rally round the flag, boys," you see? All right, there it is. It did something else, so therefore it's in. You got the idea?

They're both the same action. In other words, we're repairing a wrong goal and we're straightening out a right goal more or less in the same way.

There's no adjudication necessary, except the ability of the auditor to see that the needle is disturbed. And of course, you disturb me the number of times you miss disturbances of needle - it's too often missed.

One of the ways to go about this is to just head the pc in the same direction as though you're going to find a goal. Now, what I'm getting down to here - what I'm getting down to, is a minimal number of techniques. In other words, if you go in the direction of unburdening the goal, you'll find yourself very often in the same channel as though you were finding a goal. Do you see? By unburdening the right goal, which you are already auditing, it will read. And if unburdened, a wrong goal won't.

All right. So here's our criteria: That means read, and "in" means disturbance of the needle and "read" means disturbance of the needle. Got it? Needle disturbed - in. Now, when you're dealing with the rock slam and the channel of the slam, down toward the goal, man, that pc is like a bear on ice skates, you know? Just all over the darn pond. You get anywhere around a rocket read, why, the PC will read pretty consistently. But you get anywhere around a rock slam, it's anyplace. It can be early, late, not. It can be all kinds of wild things because he doesn’t read well - this pc doesn't read well on the auditor. Why? Because the item that is going to slam has far more authority than the auditor has.

Now, a wrong goal never rocket reads, but right goals very often die out and don't rocket read either for quite a while and then come back in with stuff that looks like Cape Canaveral during a Russian inspection. You understand that to sit there and ask you as the auditor, on this pc, to adjudicate whether you're running a right goal or a wrong goal is asking too much of you. See, that's asking too much because the risk of running a wrong goal is terrible.

You watch these items just tear this pc right out of session, you know.

So therefore, your technology of unburdening parallels the technology of finding a right goal. They're just all the same technique - do the same things.

They - whooo! Man, they introvert. And that's fine, but remember they can get so introverted they're out of your control. They might not be leaving the auditing room by the door, but they've left it by going in. Now, I've seen a pc not bother to tell me anything for minutes. See, pc cogniting, silently. Totally forgotten me. "Oh, that's a so - and - so mmm, hmmmm, hmmm so - and - so hmm, mmm, hmm - off they go mmm, mmm." Of course, you're used to a pc cogniting verbally. That's only some pc who's still aware of you. You're almost hit him over the head with a Chinese gong and they wouldn't come out of it.

So, you have a right goal which can't be run because it's - in listing-because it's running into too much hot water and it won't go in and the pc is having too much trouble. In other words, he can't confront the items that are coming up on it. See, the goal is unreal to him; it won't fire well. I mean, it gets lost - all these kinds of things. I could give you - I could give you just dozens and dozens of clinical studies of whether it is the wrong goal or whether it is the right goal or how to tell this and you look at the left hand corner of the pc's tongue and you find out this. And you could memorize all these things. You become quite expert on the thing. But why do all that if you can say, well, quite normally, "Well, I can't get this pc's goal to fire. They say it rocket read once, but I've never seen it rocket read. What do I do?"

You understand, in the vicinity of one of these items, the power of the item then, has more command authority, very often, than the auditor sitting in front of the pc. So you say the item and anything happens. Got that? That's that - that much prediction. You say the item, anything happens or nothing happens. You get what you're dealing with, now?

Well, you always take the viewpoint that it is a wrong goal until proven otherwise and then you'll always be safe. You don't tell the pc. You don't have to, because you yourself don't have to decide. You don't have to decide that it's a wrong goal; you don't have to decide it's the right goal. All you do is unburden what you've got - which is a pc.

Now, if all of this were reducible to a very, very neat situation - if we were just auditing robots and you could set the robot's chest, you see, and it says, "rocket read," you see. And then you'd say, "To be a robot" and you'd get a rocket read, you see. And then you turn another dial over here and it says, "rock slam." "Who or what would want to be a robot?" and it gives you a wi - large slam. And then you have another button over here which you push on the robot's chest and that says, "dwindling," you see. You sit there . . .

You see, you never run out of the pc. You run - might run out of goal and you might run out of bank, but these things are invisible to some degree, but the pc is still there. So you got a pc, so the best thing to do with a pc to make a right goal read or to make a wrong goal stop reading, is to unburden the goal.

But, I assure you there is some reason why nobody ever found the trail to clearing. Well, you need all the tools of auditing to do it. Well, what you should realize, first and foremost (although I was going to talk to you about this in a second lecture), is you're not doing anything ordinary. And that we can provide - and I can fix up and guide you in ordinary procedures to do this extraordinary, fantastic thing that hasn't existed on the track for two hundred trillion. It's utterly fabulous! Yeah, that's a shocker - except you're used to it, you don't look at it and so forth. Well, think of the command value of one of these levels that is the pc's item - has terrific command value over the pc. And it's guided his life and kicked him around for many an eon now. It's dictated his every action. It's made it so he couldn't eat cereal in the morning. It's fixed him up so if he went to sleep, he had to have a hyacinth on the bedstead or - so that only girls who wore Chanel No. 5 were acceptable. See, it's guided his life, man. And you're sitting in a session and you say offhandedly, you see, "Cat whiskers," see, and the pc says, "Llwaaagh - ch - gggg!" you know. Next time you say, "Cat whisker," where's the pc? Well, he might be up in that corner of the room, you see, he might be totally introverted now. He might be way down in the bowels of the Earth! We have no guarantee where he would be at this particular moment, because he gets a sort of a - of a funny look in his eye, if you've ever noticed, when you hit these things and he starts cogniting.

So actually, when you get right down to fundamentals, you can be as stupid as you want to and you'll never make a mistake if you just follow that one rule.

You do a list of dynamics, for instance. Well, you're foolish, on a good - on an easy - working pc with a good dynamic list, to go down the list at a terrific rush and not pay any attention to the somatics the poor pc is getting. Because on one of those levels he's liable to feel like he's just been slammed into a brick wall at about 225 miles an hour. See? And you’re going to read the next level? Huuuh! What next level?

Can't get the thing to fire. You've never seen it rocket read, and - well, it did rocket read. You saw it rocket read last month, but it hasn't rocket read since. You yourself are getting very doubtful of what you're looking at. It fades out. No Prepcheck that you do on it seems to do it any good. Nothing seems to happen here. Well, just treat it as a wrong goal and go on as though you were going to find a goal.

See, pc's going to stop right there with that, you know? You’ll very often find the full valence sitting right there when you're doing this kind of stuff. He's just sitting in it! And it's never appeared to him before and you read the item and he's all of a sudden - you know, there's the - cased in concrete.

Now, that would exclude tiger drilling long lists of goals because that's not very beneficial. So the repair method for the wrong goal is the only thing that would contain an address to a wrong goal on the basis of a Tiger Drill.

"Huh? What's that!" He's liable to try to tell you, "What - wait a minute, what the hell? I mean, I - I'm missing my head. I mean, wh - what happened to my, you know, my arms? Uh - khmm. " You're going on down to the next level. And you get the next level and the next level and let's get him tangled up, protesting the next level and protesting the next level and trying to communicate to you that he can't talk. And you're just sweeping grandly on down the avenue.

You can tiger drill a wrong goal and you can bring some relief to the pc. You can clean up a wrong goal and you can bring some relief to the pc, but the best way to clean it up is by Prepcheck - not by Tiger Drill - but by Prepcheck.

Well, it's little things like this that give you wrong assessments. So, theoretically - theoretically, you just read each level off or each item off or anything on the thing - list that you’re reading off, one after the other. Theoretically, theoretically, it goes like this. This is theoretical perfection. You've got a list and it goes off. - Item one, item two, item three, item four, item five, item six, item seven. And needle's nice and clean and it's going ping! and it's going ping! And then it doesn't go ping and it doesn't go ping, and it doesn't do anything. And then it goes into a little dirty needle, bing! And a little one there, and that one's in and that one's in, dang, bang, bang, bang, down to the end of the list. And you go back and you take each level that is now in.

So, your first action when you're worrying over somebody's goal - "Is it his goal? Isn't it his goal?" - what - something like this; "And it stays in, and it never goes out. And Joe says he saw it rocket read and it was checked out in HCO Berkeley. I've never seen it rocket read or that one time I saw it rocket read maybe he was thinking of something else." You know, you get all confused on something - like that. First action: Prepcheck. All that serves is an unburdening action. Prepcheck it.

And you go over each level that is now - that was in the first time, you see - there's a little mark there, said it was in - and you go down that, and you take only those that are in now, and you read those. And theoretically you go down there, pang, pang, pang, pang, the remaining levels that are in, pong, pong, pong, pong. Now, those levels are in twice, some of those dropped out. You go over it the next time and you take the levels that are now in and you go over those, pong, pong, pong, pong, pong, pong, pong. And you go down to the end and you finally have one. You go - repeat that each time - you probably wind up with two. You go to the item and then the other item. And then one of them drops out and that thing remaining that produces an action on the meter is the found item or the found level or something.

Don't tiger drill it. You're going to waste hours. I've already put this to the acid test. You're getting stuff from somebody who has done one God-awful amount of auditing along this line, you know. I'm not talking theoretical now. This is hard won data, sweated out in the auditing room.

Now, that's theoretical Assessment by Elimination - theoretical. That is the exact theoretical way it is done and that is the way previously it has been taught. But it won't work. If your pc is perfectly in - session, the chances of your getting correct levels on this pc are very good if you're a very good auditor. But remember very good auditing required to stay in two - way communication with the pc, without Qing - and - Aing and so forth. So a good auditor always got good assessments and a bad auditor got bad assessments.

Basically, it's a waste of time to tiger drill it. If you can't get it to fire in a reasonable length of time by Tiger Drilling - such as twenty minutes, half an hour, something like that - if you can't get that goal to fire, it's a waste of time to go any further. What you want is a Prepcheck.

And the bad auditor would say something to the pc and it wasn’t two-way comm, it was an evaluation. "What do you mean, this level Tailed to withhold'is inT' you know?

Oddly enough, on a goal like that, even though you use the most buttons there are, see, actually the Tiger Drill is going to take you longer than the Prepcheck. Because the Tiger Drill is never going to get there and the Prepcheck is going to get there, if it's the right goal. Follow me?

Pc says, "I - I - I didn’t put it in. I - is it in?"

Do you see this?

"Yeah, well, it's in, and - heh - heh! - we know that isn't alive. Why is it in? Why - why do you have this level 'Failed to withhold' in?"

Audience: Mm - hm.

Pc doesn't even know it's in, see. This kind of corniness going on, of course, would louse up anything, because it’ll make "Failed to withhold" now read or something like this, don't you see?

So it's better to prepcheck than tiger drill. That's your first unburdening step then, is take this thing and prepcheck it. Well this doesn't necessarily take sessions. This might - very well might all get wound up in one session.

So any rough auditing throws this thing out. Any roughness, any failure of two - way comm with the pc; any out - rudiments; any of these things would have thrown that assessment out. So it was almost accidental. A very good auditor, in good two - way comm with his pc, always got a reliable level.

All right. Your next action, if it didn't result in a good firing, rocket reading - and don't let anybody come around and say it rocket read a sixty-fourth of an inch, because that in my book - in my lexicon that is not a rocket read. I like to see that rocket take off and strew red flames out behind it for a little while. You know? I like to see a little smoke come out of the meter once in a while, you know.

But factors change the moment that you start dealing with items on the rock slam chains. See, it wasn't as important before, if you sometimes got an offbeat level or an item; it wasn't very important. It's important now. It's very important.

I like that - you get the goal going along awhile, why, you find it won't rocket read more than about a quarter of an inch or something and it's almost gone and free needles are occurring; trying to get it to rocket read gets pretty desperate. It's almost impossible at that stage of the game, but you've got a free needle now and a down tone arm. You got other indicators. You don't need all this, see. You knew it was the right goal or it wouldn't have wound up there, because a wrong goal produces more mass, which produces a higher tone arm. See. And a right goal, alter-ised, produces more mass and more tone arm height. You see this similarity?

Therefore, although theoretically that is the way you do Assessment by Elimination, your pc can be sufficiently disturbed by the types of lists you're doing or the targets of the Prehav levels or other things of this character - he can go so blasted out of session - that you're liable to find yourself winding up with a wrong assessment unless this procedure is revised.

So, all right, we tear along here, we give it a Prepcheck, and at the end of our Prepcheck it's still going thwp - thwp - phsss! thwp! Nothing, nothing, nothing - pip! Nothing - stick! Nothing, nothing - kkkk! Tone arm's sitting up here at 4.75. Well, I tell you, you're a mighty foolish auditor to go on and monkey with that. It could be the right goal. Could be the right goal - could be! Nobody's saying it isn't. Don't get into any big argument with the pc. Just tell him you. not invalidating your goal and you're not abandoning the goal and you're not this and not that and put in the hope factor, which is the true factor.

Now, this is all of the revision. It becomes very simple. It is very easy to do. It first requires that you notice when the needle of the meter does something else. That is necessary. I wish to call that to some auditors' attention--that the motions of the needle have something to do with the auditing session. I know this will come as a surprise. But some of those reads, if not noticed, will cost the pc the level. Some of those reads not noticed will cost the pc his item. Some of those reads not noticed will end up the whole goals - finding operation in the well known cul - de - sac.

They get spinny, man, when you don't make this awful clear to them why you're doing this. You depart from the Prepcheck into a further unburdening action and your next unburdening action is to find items. Find rock slamming items - just as though you're going to find a goal.

Miss one; you've - maybe, maybe that's all right. Maybe you're lucky; maybe it wasn't the one. Because after all, there are hundreds of reads. Miss two, miss three, miss four - no, I'm afraid we're way out! We're way out. We go down that list and we miss four reads on the Prehav Scale. Well, that's pretty sour. So it does require very accurate, very precise meter reading. That's the first thing that this requires.

Well now, I'm not going to give you a long dissertation on how to find goals at this stage, because this lecture isn't on it. I'm just talking about listing a goal to Clear. That's what you do when you absolutely run into it and you just can't make up your mind and you don't know what you're listing and it isn't behaving right, and so forth.

The next thing it requires, of course, is your R - factor and your H - factor. Pc has to know what's going on, has to know what you're looking for, has to know what you're doing. Otherwise the whole list is a protest, so everything will read. Get your R - factor in, tell him what you're trying to do, what you're trying to find. R - factor and H - factor, if not put in, can cause the whole list to go hot or go cold or do something, because the pc doesn't know what you're trying to do.

Now, you've got a special goals preparation - cleanup little intensive that goes along with that. And when you're going to haul off and find a bunch of new items and that sort of thing, don't leave all this stuff lying around. Do that October 29th little action as the first action of unburdening and finding items. That gets all the listing that's been done on it and that gets other things, gets it out of the road and it smoothes things up.

The next thing is make sure that you can read the list that you are trying to assess. You get some other auditor's lists some time. Man, this’ll throw it out like crazy, because if he couldn't write very well and you can’t read it, why, you’ll stammer every now and then - you’ll say - you’ll say - you're going down the line, and you say, "Waterbuck. Tiger. C - ca - uhm - cuh - ca - catchup? Catchup." Pc gets a strange look in their eye.

So your Prepcheck is your first action. Your next action is an unburdening action. Well, one of the fastest ways to unburden it is that October 29th, 1962 Goals Preparation Intensive. It's a little assessment you do, you know-it's real cute. It's a little assessment and you do this assessment and find out what you've got to run on this pc and that cleans up some segment of his auditing that probably is the most burdensome and it brings the TA down and some other things will happen. And the pc will find this quite pleasant. They get good gains on this, whereas you saw a pc into just an ordinary Problems Intensive and you're going to have some kickbacks. Pcs don't like this. It isn't going to hurt them any, but they don't like it.

Actually it's all on record, it's supposed to be "catfish" see? Pc knows it's supposed to be "catfish." And you hang him up right there. See, a mistake.

Why? Well, doesn't address their goal. Well, you'll find out that after a pc's goal has been listed for a little while and you're trying to put the thing together, you'll find out that your best bet is to clean up the section of auditing that shows up on that little scale.

He’ll say, "What was that supposed to be? What was that supposed to be? What was that supposed to be?"

You do this little Assessment by Elimination of this little scale on the October 29th bulletin and you'll find you're sitting pretty, because the pc is now really getting audited on the goal's channel. Because, of course, that'll hit the highest mass on the case. See. And, therefore, it'll bring the tone arm down. And you get some interesting results and he still has a sensation of being audited on the - on a goal's channel and he'll feel better.

You go on down the list, see. You're going pocketa - pocketa - pocketa-pocketa, "Polar bears. Wolverines," you know, we're going down the list, down the list, down the list.

All right. Now, this action is a preparatory action that permits you to take off - either to find a right goal or to re - prove the goal that has passed. Now, you can go ahead from there and clean it up and find the right goal and so forth. Now, all that knowledge is necessary to the listing auditor before he starts fooling around too much with listing. Because he should know what he's looking at and he ought to know how to repair what he's listed into a hole.

The pc's saying, "Catchup? Catfish? Catfish? Must have been catfish. Catfish - catchup. Couldn’t have been catchup. Must have been catfish."

See, so he roughly audited it and it resulted in a high, stuck TA and so forth. Well, he messed it up one way or the other and he can't get this thing to read anymore. Alter - is on a right goal results in a high TA; running, even smoothly, a wrong goal results in a high TA so these are your steps of takeoff and that's the direction you go - and you don't keep on listing.

Hour later, you're still charging on, you know. The mails must get through! You know?

Now, this is a funny lecture when I'm telling you what not to do before I tell you what to do. Don't keep on listing. You do these other things. Got that?

"Couldn't have been catchup."

Well, you'll have a lot of happy pcs if you handle it this way because you eventually ... Remember that old goal, remember all those old goals and that sort of thing. Call them out of mothballs every once in a while and read them. Say, "Well, I'm going to check some of these goals, you know," and so on. And you got a new list of goals or something like that. Well, let's check the old goal first. Let's not go and sweat ourselves to death. We may find it's sitting there, rocket, rocket', rocket! See? Three cheers!

You get back to it again. You get back to it again. Maybe you have the bad luck to have a sleeper - a rock slammer who hasn't been detected as a real slammer on the subject of an auditor or a session or Scientology, but can develop a rock slam. And you go past this point and you say - next time through, you say, "Catchup," and, why the thing rock slams like crazy! Beautiful rock slam! "Catchup! Ha! Boy, you know? I'm - " the auditor that ought to be shot will sit there and he’ll say, "Oh! Oh! Look at that! A rock slam! Well, we finally found an item on you! It's 'catchup!

All right. Now you're set for listing.

Pc says, "Catchup?"

So, your first action before you list some pc is to establish the rightness of the goal and if the goal isn't right and the goal isn't rocket reading, to then take appropriate actions either to make the goal rocket read or to find a goal that will rocket read. Got that? That's vital to an auditor's know - how. There is no sense in doing anything else.

Finally found an item - pc had never even put it on his list! Wasn't-wasn't even anything the pc ever had in the bank! See, you get a false slam on it. It will - it11 look just like a slam. Somebody else comes through, doesn't clean it up, for a little while it will slam. So, that sort of thing - that can happen!

Don't sit there grinding away on a goal that won't rocket read.

Now, let's take it on a much minor scale. Going down the list, pocketa this happened to me the other night - pocketa - pocketa - pocketa - pocketa-pocketa, down the list, you know, down the list, whaaaa. Everything's going fine. Getting the mid ruds in about every three levels, you know. Everything going smoothly, you know - dirty needle and, you know and tone arm keeps going up to 6.0 and 7.0. You know, smooth session and so forth. I'm going along the line, pocketa - pocketa - pocketa - pocketa - pocketa - pocketa - pocketapocketa. Pc, of course - we were doing it against an oppterm that was very restimulative. So of course this was going mad. And the pc already pretty introverted, you know?

Now, I'm going to tell you why. If'n da goal, she don't rocket read, she too much for de pc.

All of a sudden I hit this level on the Prehav Scale, Pull. It had absolutely nothing to do with the pc, had nothing to do with the case. And the pc's first reaction was that it had nothing to do with the case. I saw that it could have nothing to do with the case, so I just left it in to find out what the hell's going to happen.

Once upon a time, he could play marbles with planets. And now a child's marble falls on his big toe and it takes him to the hospital. He's not up to regarding as much force as there is on that backtrack. And you start listing ... This goal temporarily and momentarily rocket read, and oh, you're just fine and you've got this goal and it's all rocket reading, and now you're going to list. Anyway you put lines together you're now going to list this thing, and so forth.

It stayed with us, man! I even let the pc get off of it a little bit. You know, get off a little bit about it. Still with us! We'd of - would have wound up a Prehav assessment with the level Pull, which had nothing to do with anything!

Now, no matter how you put lines together, you have only one purpose in view and that is to undo the alter - is which has occurred on the original goal. That is the purpose of listing.

You see why? Because as I went back, the pc says, "You know, that hasn’t got," to self, see, says, "that hasn't got anything to do with anything! Nothing to do with anything in the session. This one is totally extraneous." Makes a big comment on it, protests it. Auditor, by reading it the next time, asserts it. Pc protests it - we get a lovely read. Do you see that? And that, amongst other things, was why the tone arm now really started to go up to 6.0 and 7.0 and get dirty needles and everything else. See that? So it became very difficult. Everything became very difficult.

The purpose of listing is not to read lines to the pc. It's to undo the alter - is on the original postulate on that channel. That is what you're trying to do.

All right. That's just one phenomena. That's the wrong item in. There's another phenomenon - much more gruesome. You're going down this list and it's "Tiger. Waterbuck. Catfish." See? And you get "Tiger" and it's in; "Waterbuck," it's in; "Catfish," it's in; "Wolverine," it's in; "Polar bear," it's in; "Deer," it's in; "Stag," it's in; "Mouse," it's in. You say, "Dog," it's in; "Cat" it's in. Everything's in.

Whatever else you're trying to do, that one you're sure trying to do. Now, all listing methods are more or less adapted to that action - more or less. Some of them are better, some of them are worse. But your listing methods are just based on the undoing of alter - is.

Or we're - go down the list - we go down the list - we know very well this pc is allergic to - cats. Every time a eat walks in the room, pc gets a black eye. We happen to know this out of the case history, see.

Now, he had the postulate and he wanted to carry it out. This was his goal, his basic purpose. He had the postulate and he assumed an identity and then he was going to carry it out, but his purpose was alter-ised because he ran into a "wumph." And he couldn't go any further because there was the "wumph." So he had to have now a purpose to overcome the "wumph" before the "wumph" could overcome him and now, therefore, in order to overcome the "wumph," why then he's got to have an ally called a "bimph" and he's got to also have the "bimph." And then the "bimph" get - he can't be "bimph," because the "bimph" has got something that confronts a "bimph" and opposes it. So therefore he's got to be an enemy of the "yip" and so there he is ... (I don't care what you call these things.) And there is his life, and he sounds like a bluebottle fly in a milk bottle on a hot summer day. You know? Bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang.

That, by the way, is old L. Sprague de Camp - one of my archenemies as a writer. I always thought that was very amusing, always offering to give him kittens. Even occasionally take one to a party and give it to him. He'd get two black eyes, just like that - bang! - the second he saw a cat. Most satisfactory result, you know, I’ve seen. And the only reason I got any satisfaction out of it is he used to criticize my stories to my editors - mostly because they wouldn't buy his. Yeah, he had a couple of weak points. That was one of them. Anyhow ...

He's had nothing ever since but an alteration of that basic intention. And the alteration of the basic intention resulted in mass and every time he picked up a terminal that was going to do it, it didn't do it, so therefore, it developed mass.

So, go down this list and you say, "Tiger," out. "Waterbuck," out. "Cat," out. "Polar bear," out. "Wolverine," out. "Dog," out. What's happened? Those are the two problems of the auditor. They're both mid ruds problems. Mid ruds of the session: too many staying in, too many going out. Either way, mid ruds of the session are out, not mid ruds of that list - mid ruds of the session.

So we have mass terminals. And these things, as I mentioned earlier, are actual mass and then they're bumped up against alter-ised opposition terminals in his own thinkingness and these confront these, and then those have others that confront those and so on, and they're all in pairs. There are pairs and pairs and pairs and pairs.

So this becomes very amusing. You, then, are asked to decide how many is the right number in? And I now look at you platitudinously and I say, "Well, my child, experience will bring you answers to these things." How long is a piece of string? How many should be in? Well, the proper number.

Now, there are four basic forces, four basic forces. There's the force out, the force which restrains the force out, the force in and the force which restrains the force in. You can draw these four basic flows. These are the basic forces.

I don't know what the ratio is, but I know a page looks right - I know a page looks right for a pc. The reason you can't say is, it varies on pcs. But it looks right. There's one in every now and then. And there's little runs of one or two in at a time. It looks right. There aren't columns of Xs and columns of reads and all that kind of thing, see.

There is the effort to carry out the intention. There is the effort or anything else, to oppose the effort to carry out the intention. There is the effort to retard the effort to oppose the intention and there is the effort to retard the intention itself. There are just four and they can be drawn by four arrows, which are in opposition to - two in opposition to each other and the other two are going away from each other and you've got the vectors that you're trying to list.

Now, that's a problem in mid ruds. So, you have in doing a list - listing this isn't true - until a pc stops listing you don't have to get mid ruds in, if you're getting the list. But that isn’t the subject of this lecture. We're talking about assessment of the list. So you get in the mid ruds and the pc runs out and then test it.

Now, the anatomy of this is called a Goals Problem Mass and it's called a Goals Problem Mass because it follows the same anatomy as a problem. You must have postulate - counter - postulate, you must have force - counter - force; you’ve got to have mass - counter - mass and all of these things hung up.

No, we're talking about something else. We've got this list. Now, we. - going down the list - bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, level by level by level by level. And if the mid ruds of the session go out, then the pc is hauling an invalidation, a suggestion, a failed to reveal or a mistake on down the column. And everything, as we go down the line, reads because it stays in. You see, because we're still dragging this error. For some reason or other, because he's got an error - see, one of these items I mentioned; he's got - one of these items is out - then the auditor's voice and the item creates a greater impression on the pc. Like in bridge, the pc is now vulnerable. He's got a withhold, so he's vulnerable. Don't you see? And this reflects on the meter.

Now, a problem which goes on with the pc for years and years and years and years and years is actually a mass facing a mass of the pc. If you don't believe this, sometime get a pc who isn't too stone - blind as a thetan and say, "Did you ever have a problem?"

See, if he - if he's got this invalidation that's floating along in the session - it's a session invalidation. He's invalidated some item or he's invalidated the auditor - he's invalidated something. We don’t care what. Something's been suggested, he's suggested something, he withheld it, you get the kind of combinations of things - and then the auditor's voice, reading anything to the pc produces a reaction in the pc so that everything reads.

Person says, "Yeah, I really did. I've had a problem."

It is very disturbing to the pc if you suddenly start to say ... You're reading a perfectly valid list and you suddenly start to say, "Hot dogs. Cat fur. Horns. Automobiles. Austins," just to see whether or not the thing is reading on your voice. That's quite disturbing because you throw the mid rudiments out further by being unpredictable to the pc. So this is not any kind of advice.

You say, "All right, what was the problem?" And he gives you the problem. And you say, "Tell me a problem of comparable magnitude to that problem. Thank you. Tell me a problem of comparable magnitude to that problem. Good."

But if you were to just - if you were to - I'm just giving you the experimental action, see - if you were to just move over and just read a totally false list (you know, pick up some other pc's list and put it down there and start reading that against this pc who has this heavy invalidation, so forth), you get instant reads on everything. It's not even the pc's list. You get everything reading. That's the vulnerability of the pc because the pc has really got a missed withhold, you see? So the auditor's voice registers.

Well, oddly enough, he will see a black mass go floating away from him he never knew existed. It'll go way out there. Now, we've got him all cured of this, see; he's all cured of this problem. Now, we say to him, "All right, tell me a solution to that problem you just told me," see. "Tell me a solution to it. Tell me a solution to it. Tell me a solution to it." He keeps telling you solutions to it. It gets closer, closer and closer - and splat!

Now, if we increase that just a little bit further, we wipe out all reads. Let's say he's really got a missed withhold and it amounts to an ARC break and we cease to get meter reading at all. So we get nothing reading. Or if the pc suppressed something heavily or was very careful of something heavily, we also get a wipe out. See? So we get a whole column, a dozen at a time, go out; nothing's reading. You see those as liabilities?

You say, "All right. Give me a problem of comparable magnitude to that problem. Problem of comparable magnitude to that problem. Comparable comparable - problem of comparable magnitude to that problem," It'll go way out there again. In other words, you can bring it out - you can push it out, you can get it in - with those two commands.

Now, there's the liability of the session in one of these assessments. That's a session liability - that columns of them will read and columns of them will go blank, and the ones that reading are not it and the blank ones are not blank. You see? So that's going to throw your assessment out.

Although, of course, this problem is just a little old thing, doesn't have anything to do with the price of fish, it's normally a valence of some kind that is parked on the track and the pc is in its opposing valence and he doesn't see its opposing valence and you actually have the two black balls-got these two things impinged on each other.

Now, there's one other factor you should know about this: You can get the mid ruds in for the session too often and drive the pc out of session. So you have some delicate balance here of getting them in when they have to be gotten in.

With the problem of comparable magnitude, you see one of them float off. With solutions, you'll see it float back. It's very mysterious. This was the first basic experiment of demonstration of the Goals Problems Mass. That's why it is called a "problems mass."

Now, actually, if you've gone down a whole long column without noticing that your rudiments were out and everything is in or everything is out ' the only real danger - if it's all out and you don't recover it. So they're all in. The next time you're going to go over them all, why you're going to select those out. The danger - see, you’ll select the ones that are really in. The danger is going down a whole long column of X's and not redoing them. See, you run into danger there.

Now, a problem, anatomy of, is postulate - counter - postulate. All the reasons you must solve it, plus all the reasons you can't solve it and all the reasons from elsewhere why it mustn't be solved and all the reasons why they mustn't oppose its being solved.

You should actually just block out the Ks as though those things have never been done and continue your assessment and catch them the next time around. Just draw an oblong square around them - rudiments were out during this period. Because it's very disturbing to the pc to go back over the same levels you just went over. You get the idea? So just sketch a square around it and the next time through catch those levels. That invalidates all of your own X's.

Now, that's the totality of intentions, if you want to get right down to it, that is connected with this GPM. And you've got two valences, basically: the Rock and opprock and then you've got other confronting valences and. . . Ah, this pc will have had a game going on for oh, I don't know, several billion years, where he was being a farmer and he was being a soldier. And this soldier was against farmers. And you know, soldiers against farmers and farmers against soldiers and he'd lead very unhappy lives as soldiers and then he'd lead very unhappy lives as farmers and there was just this big game that was going on, and he didn't know what he was, and - except in those lives when he was being a soldier he was very dizzy, and in those lives when he was being a farmer he hurt like hell.

That's harder to do in doing some kind of a Prehav assessment where you're using the same scale over and over and over and where you're not marking them all out and that sort of thing. It's much harder to catch in that particular way, but IM talk about that a little bit more later.

See, we could establish which his terminal and oppterm was, but while he was living them, he never really could make it out, see.

Your system then, consists of, basically, preventing reads from being wiped out by out mid ruds - that's the most dangerous action that can occur. See, you’re not so disturbed about all these staying in because the mid ruds were out, because you’re going to get a second crack at it with the mid ruds in - and then your selection of the right datum or the right level or the right item off of that list and that selection is done by Tiger Drilling.

And hell have this game going on for billennia. He'll just have gone on and on and on with this silly game. See, as a farmer he's agin all soldiers, and so on. Well, this of course is always a problem to him. And then of course, subsidiary to it are all the problems that a farmer would have. It makes plenty.

Now, what you should actually do on an Assessment by Elimination is - let's say this pc - you're not in really good ARC with this pc or something like that and you're afraid of something happening and you feel nervy about it or something like that, then you'd tend to leave more in - you’d tend to leave more in at the end of the elimination than some pc you were quite confident of

All of this is representative in black. Why black?

And I don't think in any case I'd leave more than eight in. And in no ease would I leave fewer than three in. Now, I can give you an arbitrary figure, just so that we would agree on this and everybody does it the same. But we're being a bit arduous, because sometimes the auditor doesn't quite catch the moment when only three are in. He thinks there are a couple on the reverse page. And he happily turns the page over and by George, those went out the last time through and he's sitting there having nulled all of his items down to nothing. See? He can make a mistake this particular way.

Well, I can't give you a real good reason of why black, except for this: It is drained - out energy which no longer emanates - this black masses - and it has a timeless characteristic because it is - it's got no more change in it-apparently no more change.

So it is better to err on the numerous side and if you try to leave five in, you will catch it more often and more regularly than trying to leave only three in. See, you can tell when there are five in more easily than you can tell there are only three in, oddly enough.

Now, if you were to attack one of these black masses and do something with it - well, old Black and White works - but if you were to do something with it, like try to confront it out of existence - that's a good one - just try to confront it out of existence. All right. "What part of the black mass can you confront? What part of the black mass can you not confront?"

Now, during your last pass - through, you normally have four or five in, whereas you’d have to null half of the list or something to catch thme in. You understand?

You're just going to wear your voice out as an auditor because absolutely nothing is going to happen to the black mass.

Audience: Yes.

I tore one of them up one time as a thetan, after a great - melted it down and tore it up and I never did so much work in my life, and so forth. And I was horrified to find it was still floating around in fragments. Well, it's non - as - isable in its current state and that's because it's an alter - is of the basic postulate.

The introduction of the exact number to be left in could be done only for the benefit of agreement that this is what we're going to do. Don't you see? Actually it serves no other purpose than that.

See, the basic postulate is part and parcel to every piece of that black mass - no matter what alterations there were to mass, why, there it is. It's going to wind up as a black, drained - out, squeezed - down, crunched - up mass. It's very amusing to take one of these balls and as they're resolving, you will suddenly start seeing things in them - and all kinds of weird things. Thirty-five - millimeter picture slides and all this kind of thing. But actually a whole lifetime of track is all crunched, see.

But to cut the whole list down on a freaky pc - PE’s freaky, you know, got a false slam and a got a this and got a that and huh - huh, mid ruds go out and doesn't like to do the rudiments, and all this kind of thing. To cut that down to three, that's risky. That's risky. Because there are more items than that are likely to have been in because of invalidations.

Got a nice straight time track and when you finish up and you pass in your checks, why, it all collapses and you've got it. And one day, why, you're being audited on listing and all of a sudden you say, "What the hell is this, a picture folder - card of Niagara Falls or where to spend your honeymoon or ... What is this?" you know.

Now, even though you got the mid ruds of the session in, you are left with the proposition that on that exact level it may still be out. In other words, the mid ruds are not out sufficient to now mess up the session. They're only out enough to mess up that particular level or item that they occurred on. Do you see that?

And like a pc up in London: He really sold the auditor one day. He was a brand - new pc, raw meat - never had anything to do with auditing before. And I've forgotten exactly where this was, maybe it was here. It wasn't here amongst you pcs, but I remember it was a raw meat pc and really gave the auditor a sales talk because a black mass had opened up in front of him. He'd seen through it and he'd seen a city - space - opera city. And he sat there giving the auditor one God - awful sales talk about the fact that it was real and that he had seen it and that it wasn't this lifetime and he'd never seen a picture of it before and he wasn't making it up. You know, that kind of thing. See?

So, what do we - what's the best procedure? And that's to do Assessment by Elimination, keeping your mid ruds in, down to the point where you have a few left in - never less than three. And I'd be darned if I’d leave more in than eight, in any list. And somewhere in that zone start tiger drilling. And all you does, is you just takes it and you treats each level as a goal and that is all there is to it. You just tiger drill it.

He was trying to sell a Scientologist on past lives or something, you know? Very funny. Anyway, these things shred out into that sort of thing. They unfold and mysterious things appear. When you first see them, why, they're just wound - up masses. In Book One we call them circuits, valences, identities, items - they're all - all those things mean the same thing, see. They'll also talk; they'll also do things; they'll also look like they're God or something. All kinds of wild things occur with regard to these masses.

Now, what Tiger Drill? Big Tiger? Little Tiger? Well, it's just the ordinary six on the left - three on the left and three on the right. In other words, the six button Tiger Drill. That's perfectly adequate for this activity - unless you've got a protesty pc, at which time you'd better add the Protest button, which gives you a seven - button drill. But you can swing these off awful fast.

In listing you run into the lot. If you're listing properly, you run into all sorts of wild phenomena or you run into hardly any phenomena at all. Things just keep melting away, down to the last few feet of filum.

Now, you just do all of those. Do all the buttons you have left - whether it was three or four or five or six, however many you had there and you just do those, each one Tiger Drill. And one is still reading - well, don't - don't be goofy enough to say that is it if you're looking for a slam and it's only got a little dirty needle on it. Draw a circle after it or something like that to indicate that it is still firing and go on to the next one and tiger drill that one up and polish that one up. See?

Now, all of a sudden, things really start turning up. Guy will go through an overt - motivator sequence: zzzzip! You know? Zzzzip, zzzzip! And he tried to tell the auditor about it, you know. He'll give the item, tried to tell the auditor about it, "Well, you see, let's see, I was a colonel in this regiment and I had stole this fellow's wife and so forth. And there was a battle the next day and I got killed. It was only poetic justice, because I'd left poison in his coffee pot the night before. That's one overt. Yeah, that's right. That, that. . ." And this is going by - bzzzzzzzzzz! Fantastic rate of speed! It's track unwinding. Don't you see?

You're not trying to polish these up like a goal. See, you're just polishing these things up so you know darn well they aren't reading because of. And you come out with your biggest strongest read and you don't knock this thing out. Actually, tiger drilling a proper level or item gives you an increased read and tiger drilling an improper item - this doesn't apply to goals - gives you a decreased read on items. It just - eventually just fades. Now it's just sticking the needle, so forth.

It isn't the fact that he's confronting it that is causing it to unwind. It's the fact that he's un - alter - ising the basic purpose. You get the un - alter - ises off the basic purpose and the track unwinds. You understand? And then you can confront it. Confronting is a subsidiary mechanism to identifying.

Well, you're - it's not with this precision that you're doing items or levels; that's the same precision as addressed to goals. You're getting right down there to that last point and you’re fixing it up so that you can tell which one it is. That's what YOU 9 re trying to do, see. You're not trying to polish everything up. See, on a goal you'd have to polish them all up, because you leave somebody stuck in a goal that's half out - that shouldn’t happen. It shouldn’t happen at all.

First identification of the rock slam channel results in a lot of items. And these items are very interesting to the pc and they give the pc a lot of cognitions and they blow off and they get him closer to his goal channel. All of these various things are quite important.

1 heard one time an old - time Dianeticist of about 1950 vintage had become a psychiatrist. It shouldn't even happen to him. God, I never thought he'd stoop so low. Moment of silent prayer.

But, why the emphasis on finding goals by rock slam? Well, it's what he can't confront. So in listing you must have some commands, that first and foremost, label or identify mass which resulted from the goal - what restrained that goal or that mass, and then what opposed that mass and then what restrained the opposition of that mass. Now, these factors are vitally necessary in order to get the ball of yarn to unwind.

Anyway, the - the situation which you face then, in taking the item out, is you tiger drill them enough to prove it up which one it is. That's which one it is. You're not trying to wipe each one totally out. You're just making sure that none of them are reading falsely. And you’ll find when you get the right one that it’ll fade - the rest of them will fade, usually. Do you understand that?

Now, what confuses the issue is, is there are enormous additional factors. They are just beyond count. The task is: is how many factors can you get away with and still win? That is the actual contest. How few factors do you actually have to handle? I've told you how few, but what do you have to do to handle them?

Audience: Yeah, Mm - hm.

Now, that's the contest of how you make up lines for listing. It's - you want as few as you need to handle it, that will handle it, see - not as many as you can possibly dream up to handle it.

You don't have the same thorough, half an hour per item. And, man, if I catch you taking more than three minutes, 111 - 111 swear! See, it's just a ... "On the item catfish, has anything been suppressed?" You know? "What was that? What's that? That, that, that. Oh, all right. Thank you. On the item catfish. Catfish. Catfish. On the item catfish, has anything been invalidated? Yeah, that. That. That. That. Anything been suggested?" Nothing. "Anything you failed to reveal?" Nothing. "Any mistake been made?" Nothing. "All right, anything been suppressed? Anything you've been careful of? Good. Good. Catfish. Catfish. Catfish. Catfish. Yeah, that reads a little bit. All right, that's fine. What do you think about this? Got any pain? Got any sensation?"

Now, there's your basic fundamental problem. Because if you don't have ways and means for the pc to identify all these masses as they peel up and come to his notice, if you don't have ways and means by which he can identify them and say what their relationship is to other masses in the goal, why, then of course nothing will happen because the alter - is won't come apart.

"Oh, I've got this terrible sensation that's come on. I’ve been meaning to tell you about the catfish all the way along the line! Ooooh! Terrible!"

That these masses are basically composed of thought is self - evident. That they are manifest is also self - evident. They aren't imaginary masses. But it's thought alone that takes them apart. How come they come apart at all, saying "waterbuck," you know, "Eskimo," "cannonball," "white man"? How come saying these things and recognizing these things takes them apart? Well, that's because they're basically thought derived out of the basic postulate.

"Oh yeah? Is that so?"

So it's the alter - is of the thought and the take - apart, of course, is the straightness with which they're now being labeled. There's always a small amount of lingual alter - is, because you probably conceived the - oh, separate parts of these were conceived in other languages and you're now naming them in English. And there's a slight alter - is of the nomenclature and so on. But that isn't going to do you any harm. But it's absolutely phenomenal that the thing comes apart.

Well, go on to the next three, because they might have even more than that! In other words, you just dust these things off, see. You dust them up very nicely and then you’re sure that they're not in because the pc got stuck on them while you were going through and didn't say for the remainder of the assessment, "Catchup? Couldn't have been catchup." See? You get this method of Assessment by Elimination?

If you think of the number of reasons why it doesn't come apart, why, you're immediately confronted by the fact that it's a miracle that it does.

Audience: Mm - hm. Yes.

Now, therefore you're not up against a simple trick. This is not a simple trick. If it were a simple trick, it could have been done many, many times in the last two hundred trillion, you see? And it hasn't been done. You're still here, aren't you? You've still got the GPM, haven't you?

Too many going out, too many staying in - you know, the pc is dragging a suppress or dragging a ... Too many going out, he's dragging some sort of a suppress or an ARC break on through the list, item to item. Too many staying in, he's dragging an invalidation on down the line or a suggestion or something of this sort. So that's a mid rud situation - mid ruds on the session.

Well, there's many a time that you've exteriorized out of the GPM and made a new GPM. And there's lots of conditions have occurred which made life seem different. There's all kinds of things been occurring. But if you'd been cleared on the track, why, you would go back to that point, you see, as your basic postulate and then that would be very easy from that point on because there wouldn't be anything before that. Well, I think if you'd ever been cleared you wouldn't have totally forgotten it anyhow.

Get on down to the last few in, give yourself a good dust - over with a Tiger Drill. Give each one of those things a dust - over. Then you can't make up your mind which of the last two it is. Well, just tiger drill both of them harder, then suddenly, all will emerge and you’ll have the right level. You’ll have the right item.

The upshot of this is, is that listing must permit the pc to easily confront and label the minimal number necessary to cure the alter - is of the basic postulate - minimal number of terminals, items.

Now, that's very sound auditing to do Assessment by Elimination. It could - can be rather rapid.

Now, thoughts and doingness and significances are not going to get your pc anyplace. He's got to label terminals and things. He's - these have got to be things - things, people, valences, bedsteads and bedspreads and blondes, and catfish and the Mississippi River - don't you see? These are the things you're trying to label. And that you must know, in putting lines together, that you mustn't have significances as possible answers. You're going to get them. Oh, you'll get significances and so forth. But by and large you must have a predominance of mass.

There's another condition for any such elimination list and this is a very difficult condition. It should be done on a clean needle. That's a very difficult condition, since you're saying something on the order of this: Let's say you’ve already found an oppterm and you're doing a Prehav level against the oppterm, so you say, "Would you Prehav level) fail to withhold from an airplane?" You've got the oppterm and you're trying to find the terminal level. "Would you fail to withhold from an airplane?"

Now, your pc is going to go so far in this mass and then he's going to find out that he can't confront something. This is what happens to a bad goal. Oh, we got this thing rocket reading and everything is going fine and everything - oh, boy, we're - here we go. - And all of a sudden, you tiger drill it the next session and it reads less and you tiger drill it the next session and it doesn't read at all. Then it sticks and then it kind of rrrr, rrrrhhh - rraaduuuh.

"You" sometimes clicks on pcs - quite often, as a matter of fact. "Airplane" was found because it rock slammed. Every time you say, "airplane" it upsets the whole needle characteristic of the pc. And you say, "Why am I ever - why'd I ever hear of this airplane?" Pc is very happy about this airplane, you understand. But it just keeps upsetting your meter and then your meter goes out and your needle gets rough and you have to get in your middle rudiments and that upsets the pc even further because they go into protest. Don't you see?

Now, if you consulted this pc carefully you'll find out he didn't have much reality on this goal or how this goal had influenced his life or anything else. It might be his goal, but he doesn't have - not too real to him. And also the items he's been naming have all been sort of vague. He said "an Indian princess" and "a Turk," but he just said them. And it didn't - and he didn't have any idea of Indian princesses or Turks. It isn't that he's supposed to get ideas concerning them, don't you see, but they all kind of - well, you know, sort of in a smoke and a dream and they really didn't exist and he didn't exist and he hasn't got anything to do with them. See, his reality factor on these things is very poor.

In other words, you got your work cut out for you and it's not an easy job and there's no reason for you to believe it's an easy job. And there's no reason for you to dust it off lightly to some poor suffering HPA and say, "Well, take this pc and find me the Prehav level and so forth. For this other, I haven't got much time here. And find me the Prehav level for this item oppterm 'airplane' that we found yesterday. I'm going to be busy," so forth. Don’t be surprised if you come back at 2:00 A.M. and he's still at it. He's trying to read around the needle and he's trying to do this and he's trying to do that.

In other words, he's not doing a very direct confront. His confront on them is bad. Because his confront on them is bad, you're all of a gonna sudden - get into an overwhump situation. And he's going to be sitting there saying, "A Turk. . ."

Now, the more you harass a pc about his dirty needle, the more dirty his needle is going to get. You start blaming the pc for his dirty needle and you're going to get a dirtier needle.

And you're going to say, "What's the matter?"

There's no sense in you sitting there saying, "What's the matter with you? Why are you doing this?" Because the pc isn't. You are! The pc does not have these items under control. You do! They're his items, but they're under the auditor's control and you're agitating them. So he or she isn't giving you the dirty needle. You are! So there's no sense in adding the untruth into the situation of "Why are you doing this? Why do you have such a dirty needle?"

"Nec ... Turk. . ."

Oh, jump a pc all over the place. He - you say - you're trying to run a Prepcheck on the pc for the last twenty - five years. Sheena was doing this the other day. I should have brought that dispatch along. I laughed, man! Some character that's been giving them all kinds of trouble over in the Washington area got onto their staff - their clearing co - audit. And she assigned some co - auditor, I think it was, to do a Prepcheck level and to flatten "done" on him and the period was the last twenty years. And the co - audit person, see, sits there - never audited before in his life, apparently - and flattens it in five minutes.

"What happened?"

Well, this was Mr. Natter from Yakville, see. And he's - the co - auditor said, "Well, the needle's clean." And Sheena put him on the needle and by George, it was clean. Everything was clean. "Done" was clean. "Done" was clean. First time he'd ever been run on "Done," but he's been yapping all over the place, but it's clean. So she knows more about the mind than this, so she rolls up her thetan sleeves and she let's him have it. Almost on the colloquial basis of "Just what the hell . . ." you know, "You're going to tell me that in the last twenty years you've only done five minutes worth? Well now, what have you done? Now, give! I'm tired of this, see." Off the meter and everything else.

PC says, "Oh, I don't..."

He hadn't done very much - he’d spun a few pcs in. But he had been going around with a clearing process which he didn't dare let Ron find out about because Ron's reactive bank would stop it. And he'd been secretly auditing pcs all over the place and spinning them in with this thing and that cracked the case - bong! It all went very nicely after that.

"What happened? You tell me," you know.

That was a missed withhold of such magnitude, you see. I thought that was very amusing. This Sheena is a very determined character. Said the pc was happy after this happened but she was a rag.

"Huh! I don't know."

But anyway, the point I'm trying to make is, is you've got to be able to keep the pc well enough under control and in - session and unblamed and hopeful enough and calm enough about it all to get an assessment done in the face of the fact that you're assessing the most disturbing, upsetting items which he has in his reactive mind and which have controlled him utterly for eons. Do you see the problem in assessment?

He hit something and he doesn't want nothing more to do with it. If you'd been watching the meter, it'd probably do a big rock slam and then that dies out. In other words, he moved in close to this thing and he doesn't want any more to do with it. And you tiger drill the goal the next time and it's firing less.

So don't you start worrying because you particularly, find assessment a little bit rough now and then. Assessment is very often rough - very often. But you must not do inaccurate assessments. You must not do inaccurate ones.

Then he hits another section of track that is going all blluuuh and he doesn't want anything to do with that either. He says, "An Indian princess, huh - huh - huh. Well, we don't want that item. Let's see, is something else here?" In other words, he chickens out on this stuff. He can't confront it. It's unreal to him. It's not there, don't you see?

The primary difficulties of assessment actually occur in listing. You do an incomplete list or you list on the wrong level or you list something you shouldn't ever have heard of and the pc wishes he hadn't, and you’ll wind up with a dirty needle messed - up thing or something. Your list isn't complete enough and it's dirty needle the whole distance. Or you haven't asked the pc the right question to get the first slamming item and the needle is all mucked up - and it will be mucked up until you get that first reliable item on him.

These are the liabilities of listing. Sometimes your goal read bright and clear. You got it to read beautifully. The first listing session, it all goes up in smoke. So having a goal and having a goal ready to run are two different things. You can have a goal that isn't even vaguely ready to be listed. But how can you tell? By listing it.

All these various conditions exist to upset this business of listing. So that makes it incumbent upon you to be a very smooth auditor in whom the pc has a great deal of confidence. And that will get you over the hump in listing better than any trick I could ever teach you.

Now, certainly I'd list any goal that was rocket reading. And I'd list to the final hanging dog. First choice: list - with the condition the goal must be made to rocket read at the beginning of the session. And the first choice is list. First choice, make sure you list.

Assessment by Elimination, old style, is quietly buried. And this one I've just given you is very much in. Make sure that you have a proper number in for the pc and make sure that after you've eliminated them all, you take the remaining few and tiger drill them to make sure they're not in on the 44 catchup" principle.

Now, I'd only start doing something about the PC, see, when I could no longer get anything to rocket read. And then I would do something about the PC on the rationale that I gave you in the first instance.

And you11 always wind up with your right levels and your right items and it's very easily done. It isn't necessarily slowly done. The slower you assess by elimination the more trouble you're going to have with it. -

I'd say, well, either it was the wrong goal - which we know it probably wasn't if we saw it rocket read well - or the PC is overwhumped. And the two different situations are gotten out of by the same channel. You've got to over - unburden the thing one way or the other.

It doesn't much matter whether you read them once or twice or three times or read one once - one level once and the next level twice and the next level three times. It doesn't much matter what your sequence is - just make sure that you have read what you have read and that what you have read is reading. You understand?

And I wouldn't give it an arduous Prepcheck, get it to read, run one listing session, have it fold up, do an arduous Prepcheck, get it to read, do one listing session, have it fold up. I wouldn't go like this, you know. I would think after that had been repeated as a cycle for two or three weeks, that a fellow would sort of get the idea that he ought to do something else.

There are various tricks about it, these - I mean, as far as that's concerned, the types of question you ask ... What I mean to say - various tricks, the types of questions that you ask to assess a list, the types of lists, the types of scales, all of these sort of things - they have absolutely nothing to do with the principles I have told you.

Well, you've fortunately got another something else to do. That something else happens to be unburdening, and unburdening probably will take many forms. There will probably be a great deal of rationale with regard to this idea of unburdening a goal. It's an old idea, as far as the track is concerned - goes clear back to 53, 54. And I'm not now going to tell you the exact way to always unburden the goal and so forth. I'm giving you the rationale with regard to listing. So don't list one that isn't rocket reading. Prepcheck it. Now it won't rocket read? Unburden it.

The principles I have told you apply to: Prehav Scales, listing and assessing to find the rock slam on the pc (that's Dynamic Assessment by Rock Slam), unburdening the goal, doing any type of finding something - any type of finding something. You could even do it with goals with some success, although I don't particularly advocate it. You know, null the goals list except for the last twenty - tiger drill those.

If you've been doubtful about it from the beginning, well, for heaven's sakes swamp it all up with the October 29th little intensive and sail on. Sail on. Unburden it as though to find a new goal.

All kinds of things can be done with this system of Assessment by Elimination which I’ve just given you. And those principles I'm sure you will remain - you’ll find remain very sound now and quite reliable, because I’ve been working on it very, very hard for the last week or two.

Now, there's - some intermediate step will undoubtedly arise where we get this goal, it rocket reads gorgeously, and then we apply step 79 to it which unburdens it by using the goal. And you'll probably find something like this being issued: that we list the first three hundred items of "Who or what - " by writing them down. And then we null them and present the first item to the pc on the silver platter. And then we get the opposition item either by listing who or what would oppose this goal, or by opposing this other goal. Always an unburdening step, see. And writing all that down, letting the pc examine this, don't you see, and handing him that item on a silver platter, and then going ahead and keep doing this.

And as far as I'm concerned, that's what you have to know to do an accurate Assessment by Elimination. You got it?

"Who or what would restrain your wanting this goal?" you know, or something like that. And then, you know, list about three hundred items, write them down, and then take and find the item in that mess that kicks the pin hard. Get all the charge centered on it. Keep this up for a little while, and then, taking off from that point, you'll find out that listing can just go pocketa - pocketa - pocketa according to the cards or the notebook, and there you go.

Audience: Yes.

You can undoubtedly - I can forecast that something like that will be moving amongst you very, very soon. But that would be another action. That would be the action of finding the goal - it rocket reads beautifully - and that is not doing anything with it but unburdening it for the first many items, don't you see. Which all would come under a listing operation.

Thank you.

But then this listing is done by writing the item down and nulling the list. So that's still just a listing operation, don't you see. It's a listing operation that unburdens, don't you see? And that makes it very easy for the pc then, and then he finally comes tearing down the line at a hell. of a rate of speed and he lists 18,765 items in one three - hour session by saying them all in Sanskrit, you know? It's brrrrrr! They're all real to him and everything is fine.

Now, some pcs will give you some items with terrific reality. Everything seems to be fine. Everything seems to be wonderful - the thing folds up.

But you understand that is a listing action? You got the goal reading and you list it so you can unburden and list at the same time. That is not the patch - up item - the patch - up procedure I've been telling you about such as: it fades out, prepcheck it, get it back in order, treat it as though it's a wrong goal and go find the right one.

So essentially, you're writing it all down, finding the item on that list. That is just listing a goal out toward Clear.

Now, anything that is listed, whether it is listed by writing it down and finding an item.. . I'm talking about a goal now. You found it; it's rocket reading; everything is happy with it. And we don't care whether we listed with check marks or we listed it by writing them down and nulling out the list and presenting the pc with the item. However you were listing this goal out, the end product is always the same.

You'll find probably the most difficult times of listing come toward the end of listing, not the beginning of listing. And the pc very often would rather be any place else than there. The last couple of days before the first goal goes out are peculiarly trying to the pc, very often. This has happened - I've observed it several times. They'd rather not have anything to do with it, thank you very much, because they conceive themselves as about to lose the only game in the world.

The goal is "to find pennies underneath the slot grates of gutters in Minneapolis," see. And this is the only game in the world. There's no other game in the world. These other games don't exist; there's only this one game of finding pennies underneath the grates in the gutters of Minneapolis. Don't you see? And they know now that if they get rid of that, they will have no other game. Games end at that point. Well, of course the reason they can't play any game ... They can't even play that game. They're at a point of no game at all. And until they get that - rid of that goal, they can't have a game.

But they never look at it this way and you could sit and argue with them for some time. And the best way to handle this situation is just make them sit in the chair in front of you and finish it up. But you can very often - will notice - now, this isn't invariable - but you quite often will notice that a pc will use various mechanisms to convince you that you shouldn't go on listing. They do a balk. And beneath it is, "going to lose all games."

That comes over them. And then they want to know where the goal came from and they get very introverted and speculative, and so forth, as to who gave it to them and why and all this sort of thing and then the thing goes up in smoke, pop, and it won't do anything anymore and that's it.

But you get down to that last period - if your tone arm tends to stay high and that sort of thing, the goal is best prepchecked out of existence, not finally listed out of existence. In other words, it should have - it went free needle and then it kind of froze up and while you were checking around the thing it all kind of got stuffy and stuck up. But you know that it's been listed for quite a while and you saw some free needles on the thing and all that sort of thing; your best procedure to finish off the case is a Prepcheck. A Prepcheck on the goal just as before. Because it blows up all the little residuals of auditing.

Now, auditing itself was slightly an alter - is of the goal and this left a certain amount of alter - is on the track. In other words, you didn't get rid of all of the alter - is on the thing. It was - some of it was overlooked and it tends to blow off in the last Prepcheck. So no goal should be considered a valid goal - a validly cleared up - no goal should be considered to be validly cleared up until it has been prepchecked.

And the best way to test one is to see whether or not you can find a Prehav level for it, not sit there chanting the goal endlessly. Let's see if we can find a Prehav level for that goal. We do a Prepcheck and then try to find a Prehav level and we can't, and we're - got nothing but free needles in all directions and so forth, well, that's good enough. That's the way you wind one up and that's your end product of listing.

And there are probably some cases here that a simple Prepcheck would knock the goal right out of existence.

Now, here: why are you trying to find this goal and get rid of this goal by lining and get rid of it, and so forth? That's because the pc has no game until that game is out of the road. Now he can have a game. And the next thing is, is so you can get the next goal.

Now, there is no such thing as trying to get the next goal before the first goal is reasonably out of the road. But there is such a thing as overrating a first - goal Clear. Don't try to make it all happen with one goal. I gave a lecture on this last year. Don't try to - make it all happen with one item. Don't think because you're going to get an assessment down the list on who or what have you detested, and find out that it's General Pilsudski, that the whole pc's life is going to change. It isn't. It isn't!

It's going to materially better, but it's not going to completely change. In other words, don't try to hang it all on one action. And similarly, don't try to hang the whole case on one goal. Don't try to solve this pc's whole case on one goal. That is idiocy. You won't be able to do it! Because there's a goal back of that goal. There's a whole new GPM sitting back of that. And it can't be touched or monkeyed with till you got the first one out of the road.

Now, you're going to get the second one. And that's going to run off all the alter - is and you're going to find a lot more bank. And that's going to blow and then you're going to find the third goal sitting back of that. And then when you've listed that one - of course, they do list out with great rapidity when you get back that early - and now you're looking at an official Clear.

Three goals listed out - we start hanging medallions around the neck and plumes on the ty - uv's cap. Up to that time, why bother?

There's lots of reasons for that. It's because finding the second and third goal are so much easier than finding the first goal, that you might as well do it.

There's the direction of case stability. First - goal Clear normally has a mighty vague notion of the third and fourth dynamic, let me assure you. It's pretty vague. But they have a darned good idea of the first dynamic. You get a first dynamic Clear.

All right, fine! That's wonderful! But why not push them on up the line? And why not, before you say, "Well, I cleared Bill" - just as he comes out having robbed the bank - why not spend just that little extra time there to find that second goal and find that third goal. Because they're actually quite easy to find. Second and third goals normally should be expected to be found just by tiger drilling a goals list. You make a fresh goals list, you tiger drill it out. You find the goal sitting there someplace. Easily the fastest way to do it.

Now, do you understand what listing is all about? That's what you're trying to do. I hope you're not trying to sit around waiting for Ron to give you the magic list of lines which clear your pc. Because the pc is going to get cleared on the lines that clear the pc, and pcs have gone first - goal Clears to find their second goal, and have found their second goal and cleared that on four lines. Interesting, isn't it?

You're sitting in an absolute cinch right now. You've got 3GA. You list 850 goals on the bulk of your pcs, you go down that list ... Actually, on any pc, you're going to go clear out to the end of 5,000 goals, you're going to find this pc's goal on that list someplace. And you're going to set it down with four lines and you're going to list it. If it's the right goal, you're going to have a Clear.

My whole interest is speeding it up, making it easier, smoothing it out. Remember, you're working from a cinch and a certainty which has happened. You haven't got time to clear everybody the wrong - long way. So I'm trying to find you some shortcuts. But because I'm trying to find you some shortcuts is no reason you shouldn't use your noggin and realize that it has happened rather well and rather easily on four lines. Okay?

Thank you very much.

Good night!