Русская версия

Search document title:
Content search 2 (exact):
ENGLISH DOCS FOR THIS DATE- Phantom Rock Slam (SHSBC-250) - L621211 | Сравнить
- R2-12 Data (SHSBC-249) - L621211 | Сравнить

CONTENTS PHANTOM R/S Cохранить документ себе Скачать

R2-12 DATA

PHANTOM R/S

A lecture given on 11 December 1962A lecture given on 11 December 1962

Okay. And this is the second lecture, Saint Hill Special Briefing Course, 11 December, AD 12. And the-this lecture concerns 2-12. The first lecture here was-this had to do with the basics of approaches to 2-12, some data on OT. This lecture concerns a special manifestation and some other odds and ends on 2-12. This special manifestation is called a phantom rock slam. Sounds like something out of the Lone Ranger or something. But that’s so you won’t forget it.

Thank you.

Phantom slam. It’s going to cause you more trouble than anything else. You’re going to get somebody all grooved in, and they can go through all the notions of 2-12, and then they’re going to run into a phantom slam. And now they’re going to have trouble.

Okay. This is the what?

Now, I mentioned this phantom slam, many, many, many lectures ago, many, many weeks ago. And I said I was studying it. There’s more to it. Now, I now have studied it. I know what a phantom slam is-given a great deal of lime to it and a lot of auditing on it and a lot of work with it.

Audience: 11 December.

Now, this is not a rare manifestation. To give you some sort of an idea, Staff Staff Auditor Number One in one of the Central Organizations, on the first three staff pcs, found each one of them with a phantom slam; didn’t now what it was, and started burning the teletypes. Didn’t know what this thing was. The teletypes got burned for another reason, and that was requesting permission to grab what was slamming in the rudiments and oppose it.

The 10th Dec.?

Now, this permission is about the same as asking permission to step off Empire State Building without a parachute. Now, this is first and the foremost-the first thing you must know about a phantom slam is just this: that you mustn’t grab slams out of rudiments and mid ruds because you now know what the pc is slamming on. You just mustn’t do that. You must get your rock slamming items off the record.

Audience: 11th.

In other words, get those things either by straight 2-12 or old Security Checks or something of the sort-case data that is fairly consistent and fairly straight. Because peculiarly enough, the phantom slam will attach itself to anything and everything in the rudiments. And today the pc is slamming on ‘Joe,“ „Bill“ and „Pete,“ and tomorrow is slamming on „mistletoe.“ Only the pc never slammed on „Joe,“ „Bill“ and „Pete,“ and never slammed on mistletoe.“ And you can wind yourself up with a peculiar phenomenon. The only touchy point in auditing of 2-12 is opposing something which isn’t a rock slamming item. And when you do this, you may get a rock slam in your opposition list but it’ll be a cyclic sort of a proposition. You will get a rock slam and it’ll go out to a dirty needle and then it will go clean, and then you will get a rock slam and a dirty needle and it’ll go clean, and you get a rock slam and a dirty needle and go clean.

The 11th? How did you get up into the 11th? The things you’ve been doing!

Sometimes the rock slam will even dwindle. And then you get a rock slam and a dirty needle and then it goes clean. And this I’m talking about is every two pages or every three pages worth of items you go through this cycle. And you just keep going through this cycle. And you go on and on and on through this cycle. And this cycle never ends. And you start after you’ve got three hundred items, you say, „Well, that’s pretty good, I’d better try to null this and…“-not nullable. You can’t get the ruds in, you can’t do anything and so on. Pc perfectly willing to give you more items. And pc perfectly willing, you see, to put things down. You’ve got rock slams, everything is fine-apparently, you see. But you can’t null the darn thing. And you get three items, four items null, and then bang-bang, and everything is in, and bang-bang, and the needle goes dirty and so forth and you add to the list and you try to null and you can’t do it.

First lecture, Saint Hill Special Briefing Course, December the 11th, AD 12.

This is peculiar to the opposition list, by the way. You got this confounded cycle going. I’ll tell you how to get a list like this, is let’s carefully take an assessment of items the pc does not react to. Let’s very carefully sort this out. One of the ways of doing it would be to say, „What objects are in this room?“ and make a little list and then ignore all those that react on the needle and take one that doesn’t. Pick one that you’re sure doesn’t react on the needle. Now insist the pc oppose it. And oddly enough, the pc very often will be very glib and oppose it and feel much better and you’ll get this confounded cycling thing, and it may even rock slam. But you will just about go daffy with this list because it never becomes a nullable list. That phenomenon does exist.

Okay. Well, if it hadn’t been for the work done in the V Unit, I wouldn’t be able to give you this lecture. There was a little bit of an odd bit. I wanted to know if these oppose lists that have been laying eggs on Routine 2-12 — and you just didn’t get anything-if those things, extended, would give you an item. And on case after case, both on the oppose and represent lists, when you think you are skunked, all you have to do is continue the list. Very simple. Very simple.

You have to know about that phenomenon because very often it is necessary to take a List One that somebody said rock slammed last August, during a Sec Check, run in upper lower Bulawayo-that they rock slammed on „PABs“.

Now, a lot of you think 2-12 is very complicated. You think it’s a very complicated activity. Frankly, you can get experience with great rapidity on 2-12; I’d say within 150 hours of auditing on it. If you’re doing it right, you ought to become quite an expert. I said 150 hours of auditing because that’s how long it took me. But of course, remember I was piloting it from scratch and didn’t know anything about it at the beginning. So I think you ought to make it in a hundred and fifty hours knowing all about it before you start. Isn’t that terrible?

Now, you wouldn’t pay any attention to that until you’d laid three dead horses on represents-dead horses, no rock slams, no rock slams, no rock slams. You can’t seem to turn on a rock slam during listing on this case.

That’s not a snide professorial comment-that’s just fact. Now, your troubles aren’t with 2-12. That’s what we’re learning. You’re not having any trouble with 2-12-you’re just having trouble with auditing. I think that’s quite interesting.

Well, now you must assume that this case rock slammed at sometime o-t another on List One. One of the things that’s going to be upsetting about 2-12 is people are going to go around-rock slammers are going to go around,’ they’re going to say, „You see, the reason we use List One is just because Ron is fixated on this idea of security, see? And he’s-of course, you can understand how he wants to protect Scientology and its organizations and Scientologists and so forth-but he’s just got this bug, don’t you see? And actually you don’t need to do List One at all. You never have to have anything to do with that. It doesn’t matter, Scientology benefits anyway and you don’t pay any attention to that because that’s just nonsense and we will only use the auxiliary lists.“

Mary Sue pulled one tonight at the supper table that really had me laughing. She said offhandedly, she says, „Well, they’re still using mid ruds for style.“ That’s marvelous, you know. Gives you this gorgeous picture, you see, of the auditor sitting there busily getting in mid ruds for style, see. And it’s little things like: pc’s got 1,825 missed withholds, and 16 overts on the auditor, and the list is incomplete, and-there you’re getting into 2-12; the list doesn’t even have to be incomplete-and the auditor gets in the mid ruds and the needle is still good and dirty.

And then you’re going to have somebody laying dead horses and being very unhappy and the longer they audit the more miserable they’re going to get and the case is not going to make any real progress, and they’ve just been let in for it, man.

Oh, we had a remark on a report the other day-actually we’re having a ball with this stuff-we had a remark on a report the other day that is an indicator of using the mid rud for style. The auditor said, „Well, I got in the mid ruds for the session and got in the mid ruds for the list, but I still had a dirty needle, so I determined…“ and he went off in some other wild direction. He’s already handed you a complete imponderable: How in the name of God could you get in the mid ruds, see, for the session and get it in for the list and still have a dirty needle? See, it wouldn’t even matter if your list was incomplete. You’re not talking about a list, you’re just talking about mid ruds to this pc, and so there it is.

Well, the phenomenon is this, and this is also very much-very pertinent with the phantom slam. That which is helping the person is the enemy of the person and so he never will accept the help. He’s got an enemy mixed up with the auditing session. There it is, right there in the session-it’s right here, right now, in present time. It isn’t some esoteric thing like an auditor gypped him out of some money back in lower Chicago, see? That had nothing to do with it. It’s right here, it’s right now. And that’s what you have to know about the phantom slam-it’s right here, it’s right now. It isn’t yesterday and it isn’t the wife and it isn’t this and it isn’t that and it isn’t a pr-PT problem he has out of session that he came into session with-it’s right here! It’s right in this session.

Might take the random rudiment or something like that on some cases to pull the missed withholds, but you sure couldn’t wind up with anything less than a clean needle.

Now, List One is where? It’s right here. It’s right in this session. See, it’s Scientology that is being used on the person, don’t you see? It’s the rules of various specific personnel that are being used on the pc, don’t you see? They’re being run on an E-Meter. They’re in a session. Got that? And if those things are neglected, it just goes on-that slam is just-they’re never located. Never, never, never, never located.

So what I picked up about the middle of the week-what I picked up about the middle of the week was the fact that people were trying to start nulling lists that had dirty needles, see. There was a dirty needle, and they take the thing, and the needle’s going zzz-zzz-zzzz-zz-zzzz, and they start the first one, „Tiger, waterbuck.“ I don’t know what they’re doing. I don’t know what they could be doing, because they couldn’t tell if it was reading or not reading.

Now, the most crude manifestation of this is the phantom slam. And ,here it is, you see it, and now you don’t see it. And you see it and now don’t see it. So here’s-let me go into this a little bit further. Somebody’s going ,o-just to finish off this other thought-somebody’s going to say, „Well, ;hat’s just security, and that’s just so those damn Scientologists come out and us psychiatrists can really make something out of this, you see?“ All of a sudden they start auditing themselves into a hole. It doesn’t work, nothing works for them. It all goes by the boards! plaghh! Understand?

Now, the only time you have to be able to learn to read through a dirty needle is when the needle is so dirty that you can’t tell what mid rud is out. Now, you can do that. That does pose a problem. It’s going tick, tick, tickety-tick, tickety-tick, and you say, „Has anything been suppressed?“ and it just keeps up the same tickety-tick, and you say has it been invalidated and it keeps up the same tickety-tick; and then you get to Suggest, and it’s doing the same tickety-tick, and you say, well, it’s probably Fail to reveal, and you get Fail to reveal and it’s still the same tickety-tick, and actually it was the Suppress and the Invalidate, but he had answers but didn’t…

It really is true that a person cannot have-I don’t care if he analytically and intellectually can have the help-he can’t have the help if he’s rock slamming on it. See, if it’s a mortal enemy of his, he just can’t have it. Because his attention on the help is what he gets fed back into the bank from an enemy. And he just can’t stand this. And if you ignore this, he’ll just go on-dead horses, dead horses. He’ll feel a little tiny bit better and he’ll feel a little tiny bit better.

This is wild, see. Trying to read through one of these needles to get the mid ruds in-that I’ll grant you takes some doing as an auditor. That is sometimes a little bit hard. But I will tell you how to do that. There is nothing much to it. You just put the E-Meter aside and put in the mid ruds. Then come back and see if your needle’s clean. You understand? And very often you will have caught it. The needle still won’t be going tickety-tick.

This is so much the case that sooner or later on just a dead-horsing case. You just have to assume that at some time or another he rock slammed on List One; he does not now rock slam on List One; we cannot now find the rock slam on List One; it is submerged in some way, and we don’t know how, to we’re just going to take three or four or five or six key points of List One and we’re going to tiger drill the things and get any one of them to tick, and then we’re going to oppose it just for the hell of it. And then all of a sudden it’ll turn on a rock slam and so forth.

Now, a Variation of this is „Have you thought of anything?“ But have you ever realized that this puts an awful lot of responsibility on the pc? If you, overuse that or try to make that substitute for the mid ruds, you get this kind of a situation: „Will you please self-audit for a moment to straighten things out so that I can go on auditing you?“

Yeah, but it doesn’t turn on a cyclic slam, it turns on a slam that goes on out and produces a reliable item, see, and bang! gives you a nullable list. All of a sudden these two things go together; the case starts to fly at once. You understand that phenomena?

Pc has no guidance or anything like that. You just say, „Well, I’m having a rough time here. Let’s see if you can help me out,“ something like that… „Anything been suppressed?“ and he tells you something. „Anything being invalidated?“ and he tells you something. „Anything been suggested?“ and he says no. And you say, „Well, anything you failed to reveal?“ and he says, I „Well, yes, as a matter of fact there was…“ and so forth. Well, he’s giving you some answers, isn’t he? Well, it certainly is going to change the characteristics of that needle.

All right. Now, the most flagrant and the most baffling case of this, is he phantom slam. Now, you see the case I was just talking about, it doesn’t slam at all. Now, there’s quite the reverse. There’s the case that just slams slams and slams and slams. The auditor sneezes and the case slams.

Now, you come back and look at the needle, and it’s in-it’s sufficiently clean so that you can read the remainders. Now, you can run a cross-check — something like that.

I can tell you an awful lot about this phantom slam. It is really goofy. It makes lists look like they’re slamming when they aren’t. And eventually, the auditor won’t be able to tell whether he’s got a phantom slam or a real slam. he’s just done a list, but every time the pc had the tiniest little withhold in he session-moved his foot and didn’t tell the auditor-he’s got a rock slam. At that moment the auditor is saying, „Pigs.“ So he marks down on the list, „R/S, pigs. R/S.“ See? And then the withhold continues to have force till the pc changes his mind or something, for the next few items, so he’s got R/S, R/S, R/S. This is nice. You know, R/S, and then it’s gone.

You say, „Let’s just-now, let me make sure that all the suppressions are off of this.“ This is the one most commonly neglected by the pc, because suppress equals forget. And you saw me on a demonstration one night, and the pc did wonderfully. I actually cleaned up every question I asked except the Suppress. Remember that TV demonstration? I had a-about a quarter-of-a-dial drop on Suppress and the pc said that’s clean. Now, why is that? That’s because suppress equals forget.

Now he goes over the list again, and although it is not always true, that-it’s seldom true that something that R/Sed while being written down, R/Ses during nulling. As a matter of fact, it doesn’t mean a thing if something that R/Sed when it was written down doesn’t R/S when you’re nulling. ,Just forget it. Don’t even expect it to. Your test is whether or not you’ve got it-one R/Sing item while you’re nulling. That’s the one thing you’ve got to have, see?.

You realize, some pc says to you, „I had an item a moment ago, but I sure don’t know what it was.“ He’s told you that he’s suppressed something.

But in this particular ease you just never get-you got these R/Ses and as you’re nulling, the ones that had R/S all marked with R/S, they no longer R/S. But this one-this one, „willow wand“ which didn’t R/S while it was being listed, R/Ses. Only you now say, „willow wand“ and it doesn’t R/S. Man, this is stuff for the nut house. You know? And you just get kind of baffled after a while. You say, „What the hell is going on here?“

Now, that’s no time for you to jump in there with all four feet and try to do this and that. You make awful mistakes when the pc said, „I had an item but now I’ve forgotten it,“ and you say, „What was it?“ Oh, brother. That’s the time to wish that you hadn’t gotten up that morning because your rudiments are going to go out from there on in, see, because the pc will earnestly try to remember this thing, see. Actually, it’s just an origin-so you just acknowledge it, see. Later on he’ll think of it. You’ve listed a few more items and all of a sudden the pc will probably startle you out of your stance as an auditor, say, „Hey! Hey, wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute! That was a pig. Pig!“

And if you keep on auditing this pc you will eventually realize that the R/S has nothing to do with what you’re doing with R2-12. The R/S turns on incidentally. And it’s likely to turn on more powerfully on a charged list. If the list is a heavily charged list, natively, that has its own R/S on, now you’ll get far more R/Ses because of the phantom slam, see? See, you’re busy listing something that does have some rock slams on it. Well, the presence of the phantom slam makes practically everything on the list rock slam. There’s real enthusiasm.

What pig? You see, you’ve forgotten about the whole thing. That was fifteen minutes ago, you know. It eventually percolates on up to the surface.

And then you get right on down to the end of it and you say, „Well, there’s my item, pigs.“ You know? „There’s my item, pigs.“ And you get right on down there, bang! pigs. „It rock slammed the first time I went by it. ‘On pigs has anything been suppressed? On pigs has anything been invalidated?“’ Man, they’re the deadest pigs you ever had anything to do with. You were betting your bottom dollar on „pigs“ because you saw it rock slam the first time through and you come back and it never rock slams again. You just chased an R/S all over the place. It chases all over the list, it chases over Tiger Drills. It chases here and it chases there. And that’s the phantom rock slam. And it can really louse up 2-12.

But oddly enough, if-I’ve made a direct test of this for your benefit. The pc says, „I had an item a moment ago, but I’ve forgotten it.“

Now, you see this is not very rare. This is not very rare. If I tell you the first three cases run by Staff Auditor-Staff Staff Auditor Number One in a Central Organization on staff were all phantom rock slam eases. So, by George, we had better know a great deal about this.

And you say, „Okay.“ It doesn’t now show up as a missed withhold or it doesn’t show up as a withhold, which is very peculiar.

So I have practically audited me eyeballs out trying to find out everythingI could find out about this confounded manifestation. And the test is this: Does the pc R/S in rudiments or mid ruds? Particularly in this new form of Goal Finder’s Model Session, where you’re putting in „Since mid ruds…“ „Since big mid ruds…“ to start the session with-“Since the last time I audited you…“ in other words, put your big mid ruds in. And you’ll find out that needle will be awful smooth an awful lot of the time.

All right, the pc says, „I had an item a moment ago, but now I’ve forgotten it.“

Particularly-I don’t care whether they’re put in that way for a listing session, but for a nulling session they must have been put in that way. „Since the last time I audited you…“ or „Since the last time you were audited…“ (if it’s a new pc), „… has anything been „ you see? And then you just move in your big mid ruds right straight across the boards.

And you say, „Well, what was it? Does anything suppress it? Did you suppress it,“ or something?

All right, that type of operation will get more rudiments in than you can shake a stick at. It’s actually more powerful rudimenting than old Model Session. This is really, really gunned up. And if such rudiments are put in at the end of the session, you’re putting in more end ruds than you’ve ever put in before, too. Particularly if you’re careful with the room and havingness. But that’s beside the point. Because, that’s details that are coming up and it’s simply a smooth-out of Model Session. You see these various changes of one kind or another. But they have bearing, and I mention that just in passing here only for this reason: If you’re using any type of mid rud which gets from the last session, or covers any type or period of livingness at the beginning of session or during the session or something like this, and you see R/Ses turn on, an R/S turn on, or if you’re using old-type Model Session, you saw an R/S turn on-watch it, man, because you’re auditing a phantom slam.

„Well, I must have suppressed it. Let me see what it was.“ And now it Registers as a missed withhold. In other words, you can key it in with your question of „What was it?“

Now, sometimes the pc graduates upstairs to having one. And you feel you’re perfectly safe and everything is fine and so forth. Actually your pc was below rock slamming. And you unburden the case and the ease is making good advances and one day you sit down and find yourself facing a phantom slam. In other words, the pc can move upstairs into one.

You get too busy. That’s the trouble with you in handling your mid ruds and that sort of thing. You’re using them for style-a wonderful gag. „He looked awfully good using the mid ruds,“ you know. Didn’t have any effect on the pc’s needle, but it looked awfully good.

Now, a slam on a case will go through a cycle. As you unburden a case it can come into rock slamming. See, it didn’t rock slam on a certain subject or area before but it moves into rock slamming, then the rock slam becomes very frantic and very intense-this is plotted against quantities of hours of auditing, don’t you see, numbers of sessions. I’d say-let’s say over a period of a couple of weeks of auditing you’re liable to see one of these things which was a very tame R/S turn into a very frantic one. And then start to cool. Now we’re talking about a phantom slam, you see? And then it gets cooler and cooler, and finally is almost a lazy rock slam. It’s hardly a rock slam at all. You keep unburdening it.

Your most flagrant fault then is just failing to get a clean needle, which is an element of auditing, before you start in. You fail to get a clean needle, that’s all, and you’re trying to take off and null a list with the needle dirtied up with things that have nothing to do with the list. And then you wonder if the list is complete or not and try to use the dirtiness of the needle to test whether or not the list is complete. Well, it all-a great many faults and errors can stem from just this one fact: that you haven’t got a clean needle. What are the mid ruds for? Clean needle. That’s what they’re for. They clean it up.

And then one day you hit the actual item right on the button, and all the characteristics of the slam come back for that item. Crash-crash-crash-crash-crash-crash-crash-crash-crash. Because you hit it right straight on the button. So, it can appear to go away. It can appear to get more frequent. It can appear to get less frequent. It can all of a sudden develop on a pc who is moving up scale by reason of finding packages. It can tend to disappear because you’re finding packages.

Now, Goal Finder’s Model Session is actually better than old Model Session providing you always put in big mid ruds.

In other words, the characteristics of this thing can change, and there’s no particular way that you can spot and say, „That is the pc’s phantom slam.“ See? That-it will be more or less the same width but different speeds. And it can simply materialize out of the blue. You know, he never had a phantom slam before in his life and you’ve found three consecutive sets of packages on him and one day you sit down and you say, „Since the last time I audited you, has anything been suppressed? Guess I left him stuck in the last item.“

Now, in R2-12 there is no substitute for an auditor who knows his basic mechanics. And we’re talking now about the basic mechanics of auditing. Auditor knows TR 0, 1, 2, 3, 4. Auditor doesn’t Q-and-A. Auditor knows an E-Meter. Auditor can smooth out a needle. Used to say „put in the rudiments.“ Well, actually, don’t care whether you put the rudiments in or not-smooth out the needle. And then that makes sense, see. Putting in the rudiments is not something that can be plumbed, measured and weighed. But you can sure take a look at this needle and know that the rudiments have been put in-or not. If that needle has any kind of a pattern of any kind whatsoever, the rudiments are not in on that pc, period. That’s all.

All right, and it… finally gets the suppressions off and it goes off, you know. ‘M right, since the last time I audited you, has anything been invalidated?“-Crash-crash-crash-crash-crash-crash-crash-crash-crash-aash-crash-crash-crash-crash-crash. And he gives you an answer, and that’s all.

Well, that makes it pretty tough, because most of the pcs that show up have got some kind of a tick and a tock and a plish and a plock. Well, that’s all caused by missed withholds. So we’re back into the basics of auditing — pulling missed withholds and so forth, that sort of thing. These are just fundamentals of auditing-has nothing to do with 2-12.

Here’s the-here’s a horrible mistake. „Oh.“ he says.

Now, we utterly neglect the fundamentals of auditing and let some guy fumble all over the place with the fundamentals, and then we add 2-12 on top of it as a complication, and of course, we’ve got a cow’s breakfast, man. It is a mess. Well, your needle is dirty from the fundamentals of auditing, and it’s being dirtied up by an incomplete list and the last list you didn’t complete. Now, how the hell are you going to make any sense out of this?

„Since the last time I audited you has anything been invalidated?“

Well, you’ve got to start in at the beginning and get in the fundamentals of auditing, that’s all.

He says, „I invalidated what Joe said about his pc.“ And the slam turns on.

Now, posing the problem of how to clean up a needle: How do you clean up a needle? You of course are just posing the problem of fundamental auditing. And don’t ever make a mistake about this, see. You’re just saying, „This is fundamental auditing.“ You pull the missed withholds, you straighten out auditing on this person, you do this and you do that. You actually could do it this way: You could take an old-time Prepcheck, take some period, or no period. You just say, „In auditing, has anything been suppressed?“ or something like this. You run an eighteen-button Prepcheck; something like this, and you’re going to clean up the needle. Of course, that’s the long way to do it, but it sure can be done.

And you say, „Joe“ and you’ll get the slam back because you haven’t got all of the rudiments in. So you say, „Joe. Joe.“ And because you’ve changed it and he objects to it, his withhold turns the slam back on, and you say, „Joe. Joe. Hey, what do you know! I’ve got a slamming item, here, ‘Joe’! Ho-ho-ho-ho.“ God help you! You have no slamming item named Joe.

It’s-you could-you could do it meterless except for the Suppress button which would get you in trouble because it means forget, and you’d wind up at the other end of this… Well, if you just did Suppress and Invalidate on this guy, you know, gave him a „Prepcheck assist“-this is getting very popular in New York right now. People turning up after a lot of auditing and the CCHs and that sort of thing, and their needle is just filthy and one of the boys in! New York got the idea of a „Prepcheck assist.“ He straightened out one or two of these needles, and he noticed that they were straightening out in just, you know, just four or five hours, and he’d had them straight-you know, it was all smooth and fine. So he’s got a-they’re given a Prepcheck assist, whereby they merely clean up Suppress and Invalidate. And that’s quite interesting.

Now look, I’ve kept records of these things. I’ve taken goals lists and have spotted every type of goal the pc slammed on and they all bear a relationship. It’s all understandable, it can be measured up. You can figure it out within two or three dynamics. I mean, you can get close, see? It’s either the 2nd dynamic or the 3rd dynamic or mankind or God.

I don’t know how far they’d get with that sort of thing because out of the eighteen buttons there’s always one of them that’s hotter than the remainder, and it’s not always Suppress and it’s not always Invalidate. But if you were to take an assessment of the eighteen buttons and get the couple that fell the most, or get one that fell the most, and then ran that for a couple of hours, and then assess it again, and get the other one and ran that for an hour or two, or whenever the pc said it was flat, why, you’d clean up a needle.

You can drive yourself halfway around the bend trying to figure one of these things out. I’m not kidding you, man. I really had the old wits tuned up to a high whine on this one-wheels skidding all the way, too. Now, I’ve seen these things turn on. They are just not related to one case here. Inexplicable. How the devil? How come? How are we missing on this ease? How’s this going’? Well, it’s just this phantom slam. Makes everything look like it rock slams if the pc happens to have a withhold and you’re saying the item at the same time, then you get a w — you see? But the more heavily charged the item is, the more likely you’re to get a rock slam on the item. So that item is charged today. „Joe“ is charged today. So all today we’ve got a rock slam on „Joe.“ Soon as we clean up „Joe“ we haven’t got a rock slam on „Joe,“ we now have a rock slam on „peanuts.“ Not even the same dynamic area.

Now, this idea of a needle pattern, then, is not something that you should I be blowing your brains out over. Similarly, a very, very high tone arm is not something to go on worrying about because the exact activity, which I just gave you, will knock a tone arm down. This has nothing to do with 2-12, the data I’m giving you here. It just has to do with basic stuff. I mean, we got a lot of this stuff around. I don’t know, maybe you can straighten out a dirty, needle with a Touch Assist. Well, we’ve had a lot of stuff here for a long time. Now, just add this up and benefit from it and here’s riches for you, you see.

And you can hunt one of these things down and my whole message to you is — don’t! What is a phantom slam? A phantom slam is a rock slam that turns on in the rudiments. Any rock slam that turns on in the rudiments, any pc who consistently has rock slams turn on in the rudiments or running general O/W, that’s a marvelous one to get phantom slams in. Oh, you can just drive yourself round the bend, you see. „What have you done?“

So this pc, it goes tick-tock, bzz, brrr, bzzz, tick-tock, and he’s sitting down there, and you try to put „in this session,“ see. Oh, man, that isn’t going to go anyplace because it was dirty when he came into session, see. And you say, well, let’s pull some missed withholds and this sort of straightens it out a little bit and it’s still going tick and it’s still going tock and that sort of thing. Well, you could sit down and pull missed withholds until it got clean, but you also could run a couple-the first two buttons, just Suppress, and you know, just „In auditing has anything been suppressed?“ you know. We don’t care if he’s been audited for twelve years or one year, see. You’re going to get someplace with this thing. And then pull some missed withholds, you see. This is all basic, fundamental stuff. You put it all together and you don’t get a dog’s breakfast, you get a very nice looking clean needle.

„Well, I’ve uh… been mean to Joe today.“ Rock slam.

In other words, don’t try to run something fancy on a case before the case is ready to run. Well, how many hours should be invested in straightening out a case before you start auditing them on something, and so forth. Well damn few, let me tell you, very, very few. Very few indeed! If you’re very good at pulling missed missed withholds-“missed square“ withholds-you’re very, very good at that, you could probably straighten up the whole needle on that.

„Joe. Joe. Joe. Ha-ha! Joe. Hey, what do you know!“ „What have you withheld?“ You see, you eventually get back to that, you know.

But I’ll tell you something else, I’ve straightened out a needle with 2-12. And that’s a weird one. Well, how do you assess it? Well, just genius!

„Uh-well, I didn’t tell Joe something or other and so on.“

You know, you can read down a list of stuff and if you’re not stone blind and a rock slammer, you can see that something ticks more than something else. You know, that dead-easy.

And you say, „Joe. J — Where the hell? It’s gone. What happened?“

So let’s just be sensible about the thing, you see. Let’s take the old-time rock slam test, and let’s hope we’ve got a rock slammer sitting in front of us. That’s the easiest one to straighten out. Anybody can straighten out a rock slammer. That’s dead-easy, because you just simply find out whatever slams, and oppose it, see. And crash, crash! The only time a rock slammer gives you any trouble is when some other rock slammer has been trying to give him a clean bill of health and hasn’t reported that he slammed on „Scientology,“ „Ron,“ „Auditing,“ and „Sessions,“ see. He hasn’t reported this fact, but he says he’s clean.

As long as he had a slight withhold from Joe, „Joe“ rock slammed. Oh, how cruel! But it’s during the rudiments, one that turns on during the rudiments. Now, you’re safe as long as you never get rock slams when running general O/W and during the rudiments. You’re perfectly safe. But you get any occasional-even an occasional-rock slam while doing rudiments, you’ve got a case that’ll phantom slam. And that case will make a liar and an idiot out of you in listing. You’ll be listing away…

Well, by this time the guy has got this all suppressed and you don’t catch it right off the bat and then the case lays dead horses, and then after a while in desperation you just suddenly pull it out of the hat; decide to give him the old test-tiger drilling the buttons and see if one dirty-needles.

Don’t think you can’t make any progress at all, because you will. Every now and then you accidentally find a real rock slam. The rest of the time it’s just the fluke of whether or not the pc has a tiny withhold from you or the remainder of the dynamics. And that creates a rock slam. Pc feels a little bit chilly at the time you’re going down the last part of the last five items. Oh, man, you’ve had it. Because you go-every one of them’s in. They’re all slamming beautifully. And then you say-you decide to put in the session mid ruds, you see. This is you’ve already said, „Well, four items are slamming on the list. This was marvelous, you know! Oh, we had a wonderful session, you know.“ And the pc looks like hell, but, „You know, I had a wonderful session,“ and so forth. And you’re putting in the end rudiments, you know, I mean, you’re putting in mid ruds for the end of the session, you know. Pc says, „I was cold.“ Slam. Slam. Slam. Slam. „I was quite cold earlier in the session.“

Well, if he’s had a lot of dead horses and so forth, do you know you’d practically be justified, even though it laid another egg, just in picking the biggest read on the fundamental items and just opposing it.

And you go back and you say, „Tiger. Tiger. Waterbuck. Fireman.“ There’ isn’t a slam in the lot. Disheartening! Every so often you’ll be patching up somebody’s line plot that’s been done in a co-audit and you’ll be taking this line plot and you’ll find out that there are twenty-four listed items that have been found over a period of eight and a half years of auditing or something. And you’ll find out that only one of them slams. Twenty-three don’t. And you say, „Well, the charge all dissipated.“ No. The poor auditor was bucking a phantom slam the whole way-was making a liar out of him. So you see how important it is to know about this particular thing. It is important.

Just supposing the guy has been a rock slammer. See, he didn’t make progress so let’s-well, let’s just treat him like a rock slammer. See if we make any fun there, see?

Now, this would all be pretty desperate if I hadn’t figured out the solution to the thing and got the thing taped. But I wouldn’t tell you of the ghastliness of the whole thing unless I had some resolution to the thing. And the resolution is very, very simple. You get the rest of what a phantom slam is: A phantom slam is turned on by something in immediate, instant present time of the session by something immediately in, or in the vicinity of the session. You needn’t memorize all that, just remember, I’m just trying to tell you, it’s right here! See? It isn’t the fact that they just had an argument with the D of P, see. The D of P is down the hall. How the hell can they rock slam… ? See? The D of P isn’t in the room. No, it’s got to be right here, man.

I’ve been working on it-this isn’t a rule that I can forecast, but it very well may become one-that if a case makes no progress on 2-12, you treat him like a rock slammer and oppose Scientology-if you can’t get the first three, four key buttons, you know. See, „Ron,“ „Auditing,“ „Scientology,“ „Scientology organizations,“ something like that-if you can’t even pick out a dirty needle, see, a read-a dirty read or something on one of those things, well, hell, just at least oppose Scientology. That looks like it might, one of these days become a rule, because we’ve wasted quite a bit of time on just this factor of somebody says we’ll save this bird’s bacon.

And the way you smoke one of these things out… Now I’ve altered your List One so it will contain practically anything, but if you don’t find a sl — if you’ve got a phantom slam, and the pc doesn’t slam in anything you find in List One, do something. And this is what you do: You get, with the pc’s help, very possible element of which a session consisted. You would make a special list. And on that list you would make damn sure that you included every part of the pc such as „me“, „Joe“, „you yourself,“ „my mind,“ „George Riloysius Doakes“-full name, see. You lay all this down here, see, and you ,et a list of this thing. You’ve got the meter. You notice on the back of a meter you’ve got „HCO,“ so for God’s sakes, get HCO down on it. Don’t you-you see what I mean? You get „badges symbols tables,“ „chairs,“ you know, auditor,“ „men“-with the pc’s help, you know. The auditor can list as many ,f these things as he wants to. This is one of these peculiar lists. Then he has o get the pc to complete it.

Well now, today nobody gives a damn whether anybody was a rock slammer or not. Particularly after you see that after a person’s been audited for a little while he starts rock slamming on List One.

We get everything in this session and you’re going to find the phantom lam. That’s everything in this session that is right here, right now. And you’ll find the phantom slam.

I don’t know. I’m going to get checked out on me myself So there’s no disgrace in this. This is a cute trick some people have been pulling on this. They say-because they don’t want to seem socially declassed, they say it turns on pain, and then you list it as though it’s a terminal and it’s actually an oppterm, and you just get loused up like fire drill.

Oh, yes, he has overts on what it will be. If it turns out to be the „‘-Meter, yes. Now, for the first time you begin to get enough realization. You see, because he slams on it, he can’t recognize it, he can’t perceive it, he doesn’t even know it’s there. There’s-there’s been-always been a hole in the session called an E-Meter. See? And he won’t give you any of the-he won’t give you any, any help on this, really. You have to say, you know, is it this, and how about putting-putting „a table cloth.“ See? How about that? „Wood,“ roofs,“ „rooms,“ „air“-got the idea? That’s the phantom slam.

So I have a little rule that I will do on that sort of thing. After somebody tells me pain or sen on List One… See, if they tell me pain then I’m going to give them a lie test. You know, „Is there anything here that you disagree with now?“ „Have you told me anything in session that you thought I’d like to hear?“ you know?

Now, my bet is that the greatest number of these will turn out to be me,“ „myself“-first dynamic. My bet is that you’ll have a majority of first dynamic things. Could be, for instance, „me“ but translated over into „my mind“ don’t you see, or something. It’s something right in the vicinity of the first dynamic, it’s that close to home. Pc fighting himself, that kind of thing, see. I think your greatest majority of them will be that.

We’ve laid two or three eggs on this lately. Two cases right in this room, opposed wrong way to, see. Opposed as though they were terminals, and actually it just gave the pc hell, see. Because you oppose them-you’ve opposed an oppterm as though it’s a terminal. And of course, you’re writing a backwards list. You’re putting the pc at effect. And if you don’t think that doesn’t tear up their ears! You get what I mean?

But this one-now, you’re saved by the bell with this, because you can fumble through and you’ll find out the phantom slam will get more-and you do find some items. Your items-you’ve got to be awful careful in auditing a case like this, but you do find some packages. You do make some progress with the case. See, you gra-really can’t help it with 2-12. You push it ahead ne way or the other.

This thing actually is an oppterm, and the pc says it’s a terminal for some reason or other, and then you treat it as a terminal. „Who or what would that terminal oppose?“ And it just puts — of course, it’s an oppterm, so in actual fact you’re putting the pc at effect; you’re not putting the pc at cause and it messes them up.

Case isn’t going to make as much progress because he’s got a PTP that’s right present in the session all the time, but you couldn’t find it. Don’t blow your brains out. Because just the process-don’t worry the pc about it either-just the process of going on and finding some packages and finding some packages will show you that this slam is changing in characteristic, as you find it in the rudiments. And it changes and it gets more and more to PT and it gets more and more sudden and it gets more and more constant and you theoretically could find packages till one day the pc blurted it out. Pc says, „It’s’ neckties.“’ There it is. Slams.

Well, those are just some little things in passing on 2-12.

Now, the only test of whether or not you’ve gotten the phantom slam — this is the only test-is it doesn’t reoccur. That’s the only test. So you really don’t know for several sessions whether or not you’ve got the phantom slam. But you’ll see one of these things, and the only thing I could hope wont happen to you is, halfway through auditing somebody, he makes sufficient improvement one way or the other for the thing to turn on, then you don’t recognize that a phantom slam has occurred and now you just find all kinds of rock slams and you find all kinds of slamming items, but nothing ever stays in. Except now and then, one slams consistently. And you say, „Isn’t that nice!“

But this needle is dirty. I can’t seem to make any headway out of the thing. I’m not going to spend the next twenty-five hours straightening out a needle, because with one list with 2-12 it’ll get all dirty again anyhow. See, it’ll go through a cycle of being clean and then getting dirty and then going clean again. So you certainly don’t want to waste the rest of your natural life poking around just trying to straighten out this needle. So you need some method of straightening out the needle.

But when you oppose it, it’s still there. There’s no way you can sort of wash this one out. Because everything you’re finding is a phantom slam. See, you’re actually not finding its opposition at all. Hideous to contemplate, isn’t it? The only thing that could be bad luck about this is you didn’t notice that you were getting a phantom slam in the rudiments. That’s the point that you could miss.

So you pull enough missed withholds off the pc so that you can do some kind of an assessment on List One and get into 2-12 as fast as you can-if you take my advice on the thing-and the first reliable item you find would deliver into your hands one of the cleanest looking needles you’ve seen in many a day. It’s as simple as that, see. I’ve seen a needle, now-I’ve Seen a needle that was just bzz-bzzz-bzz-bzz-bzzz-bzz-bzzzzzzzz. Everything’s stuck up, couldn’t get old Model Session rudiments in. You know, everything sort of hung up and messed up and so forth and I couldn’t do any assessment and I couldn’t even go over the dynamics, and so forth. One list that rock slammed and at the end of that list I had a clean needle. I hadn’t even nulled the thing out yet. You get what I’m talking about now?

It’s liable to start on a pc that it has not been happening on before. So that is very, very pertinent, and that’s the only place you should really look for one. And don’t plunge. Please don’t plunge. Don’t go diving overboard and grabbing these things which come up in the rudiments so that we can use them and oppose them. Uh-uh. Hideous to contemplate that some poor auditor, some poor auditor up in upper Podunk, he doesn’t know anything about this and he’s doing marvelous 2-12, and he’s just getting packages and packages and packages and packages and packages and packages. He just gets packages and packages. And you look at his folders one day and he’s got ten items compose a list. And he’s just taking what slammed.

I just listed it out till it was clean. And there it was, clean. Well, what happened to all this pc’s withholds and everything else? Well, I was sitting de ‘ad center in the case, and I actually found an item — took some charge off the bank-and there went a clean needle, see. There went your dirty needle — disappeared.

In other words, every time he had a withhold from the auditor, the auditor had a (quote) reliable item (unquote). Dzz! And every time he had a withhold on anything that was opposing it he had another reliable item, didn’t he? So that gives him a package.

So, here are two ways of approaching this thing. There’s not knowing any 2-12, not being able to enter the case, not being able to assess, being balked, not having anything that-way to turn, something like that. And not having an auditor around who can pull missed withholds or something-they haven’t got the word yet, you know, something like this.

Yeah, this is a real goofball proposition here. A real goofball thing to have. But where you’ve got one of these things right in the session-right here, right now and so forth-it would be a very good thing to try to round it up. Without driving the pc matty and-into a nattery heap. Just try to rind — wind up the case that way, because, listen, that’s so close to present time and it’s so close to the environment of the session that the pc has such a screaming PTP about it that he’s always being audited in the presence of a PTP and so therefore he’s making no real gain at all. That is also the secret of List One. Because List One items are so close in to the session, the pc is always being audited over the top of a PTP And we know darn well that nobody makes any progress-PTP.

There’s still something you could tell this auditor to do. Well, just spend a couple of hours on, „In auditing has anything been suppressed?“ and „In auditing has anything been invalidated?“ when that’s flat. A couple more hours of that and you’ll probably see the needle straighten up. Then coach the auditor in to say, „Is there anything we nearly found out about you?“ and „How did you know the person thought that?“ or „Why did you think so?“ and get the rest of it up and you can straighten up a needle. So this is not a twenty-five-hour proposition or the next seventy-five hours or something like that.

The way to test that datum, by the way is-nobody will make any progress in the presence of a PTP-on a research basis, wait till somebody had a real, good, honest, authentic present time problem. Then don’t let him tell you about the problem. Don’t really go into this problem at all. And then insist on running a Touch Assist on him. Or run an old Communication to the Parts of the Body Process. Honest, you just won’t make any progress at all, see. He won’t be able to ans-he’ll answer the auditing commands and he’ll grind, and he’ll grind and he’ll grind and he’ll grind and he’ll grind, and it’ll go on and on and on and it’s all the same thing and maybe he’ll even get a little benefit out of it, something will stop hurting for a while.

Because listen: There’s a point at which the pc’s anxiety is rekindled on a no-auditing basis that dirties the needle up again. In other words, there’s a point here where your efforts to clean up the needle dirty the needle up.

And then take the present time problem that he’s come in with and run Problems of Comparable Magnitude or some old process of some kind or another. Dispense with this problem, get it cleaned up real good and go back and audit the same process you were auditing before and you’ll See all of a sudden he’ll make very nice gains-this is one of the silliest phenomena associated with auditing-that pcs don’t make gains in the presence of present time problems.

Now, you can always count on no-auditing to dirty up a needle. Always count on it to do so.

Now, I’ve seen, oh, scores, scores and scores and scores of graphs on this. I-the data on this is very sound. And these graphs all demonstrate that where the auditor didn’t handle the pc’s present time problem, you didn’t get any gain in the graph. And then this kind of an action was taken, you see, that the auditor was then made to handle the pc’s present time problem, got hold of that problem-it’d be some nominal problem with the wife or something like that-get rid of that thing and then you might get a graph change. You didn’t necessarily get a graph change, because the present time problem night have been more fundamental than the one you handled, don’t you see? But where you handled the present time problem of the pc and the pc’s told you that it had been handled and that sort of thing, you’d thereafter get a graph change.

Have you ever noticed this fact? You’re sitting there, getting ready to null a list. You’re sitting there getting ready to null a list. Everything was very fine. When you finished up that list you just had a clean, flowing needle-everything was fine. But you stop at that point to make a note on your auditor’s report to the effect that the tone arm is now at 3.5, and that this is this and that is that and the time is so-and-so, and then you glance up and you look at the needle, and it’s going tickety-tock, tickety-tick, tickety-tick, tick, tickety-tick tick tick.

So, I had to isolate what was keeping cases from advancing. This was back n 1955, 56. And I finally worked it down to the present time problem. And therefore for-over the years have studied present time problems pretty closely and then was eventually able to smoke out the whole of the GPM, just on that data that comes up from that zone of research, and the anatomy of the problem.

Well, you could sit there then and get in your session mid ruds; and you can clean up the needle-don’t think you can’t. You can clean it up and then you turn back to your auditor’s report, you see, and next time you look at it, it’s going tickety-tock again.

Now, the closer to present time and the closer to auditing the present time problem is, the less gain can be expected from auditing. It’s a direct Proportion. And that’s why List One is a killer. Now, List One has been made now to include all the dynamics. Now, it’s-it’s rather stretching one, but if we realize that matter, energy, space and time are all part of the auditing room and are all part of the session and that the word „auditing room“ is also part of the sixth dynamic, realize that there are a couple of thetans )resent in an auditing session. (Some pcs think there are more, but… ) And when you realize that some pcs are totally sold on the omnipresence of Godie’s everywhere, you know-also, you see, if he’s real mad at mankind he can have an oblique ax out for Scientology. See, it’s liable to help mankind and he hates mankind and you’re a member of mankind and he’s sitting in a mankind body, don’t you see? So, that becomes part of the session. You’re both living things, and in some sessions, even the second dynamic has been known ;o raise its head.

That’s anxiety. The button Anxiety is keying in there, and the pc is in a no-auditing bind, and so on. Actually, the way I’ve been handling that particular phenomenon lately, of the clean needle turns into a dirty needle just because there’s-I’m taking a breath to say the first word, you know, that’s too long, you know? And I’m saying-like this and the dirty needle turns on, see. Well, it’s just the pc’s anxiety that’s doing that kind of thing. And I’ll just sail into the first one, and then say it two or three times, and say the next one two or three times, and so forth.

Now, this situation, then, makes part of List One the dynamics. But that ordinarily should take care of the phantom rock slam. Ordinarily, just an assessment of List One and a careful attention to „did it turn on a rock slam?“-that ordinarily would take care of your phantom rock slam. You’d I-et it-do List One, you get the phantom slam with your present amended list and you’d sail right from there. Everything would be fine.

Now, by crossing everything out as you go down through a list, you can also sometimes turn on a dirty needle. The pc gets anxious. Nothing is in. You just keep making those Ks, you know, making those Ks, making those Ks, making those Ks, making those Ks. Well, sooner or later, you’re going to decide that it has to be tested for Suppress. You test it for Suppress and you promptly have a dirty needle. Where did that dirty needle come from? Well, it comes from the fact that the pc probably did suppress something, but your asking for it keyed it in so it now registers and it wasn’t active before, but it is now.

You might not have even noticed you had a phantom rock slam, you’d have it off so soon. Well, that’s-that’s all well, but after you’ve done this and after you’ve cleaned up all the slamming items on List One, you then have a phantom rock slam-what are you going to do? You see, you have to have the total security of an answer. Well, you certainly better go over it with the pc and take up every single bit that the session consists of And just get a long list of them, we don’t care how much of List One he repeats, we don’t care about any of these things. Because it might be something a little bit off base. He might call himself „Joey“ and it might be „Joey“ that he rock slams against, but not „Mr. Jones.“ See? „Mr. Jones“-pc’s name, you see-„you“ — all that sort of thing. No, it’s „Joey.“

But the main thing is the pc is scared you’re going into mid ruds. Scared you’re going into mid ruds. So, because they’re scared you’re going into mid ruds they pull off, and you now have a dirty needle. So this tends to discipline you not to put in the mid ruds so you do the whole list with a heavy suppress on it.

Quite weirdly enough, this is the character he most despises in the whole world-Joey-himself. But „me,“ pointing at him… By the way, this is an interesting thing. The way you assess those things is, you really shouldn’t point at things in sessions on lists and that sort of thing, but you can point at the pc when you say „me.“ You can point at the pc and say, „Me.“ And point at yourself and say, „Me.“ And you can get this across.

Well now, those are the-those actions actually aren’t related to 2-12. They’re the actions of auditing. You see, they’re the actions of the pc being controlled and handled by the auditor, don’t you see? This is the pc’s anxieties about auditing, the pc’s confidence in the auditor, the pc is in-session or isn’t in-session, and so forth.

Now, there, aside from not being able to audit, is the greatest trip rope that you will find in R2-12. That one can really throw you because it could throw a veteran, if you didn’t know about it. I mean, a fellow could know all about R2-12, making marvelous success with R2-12, tearing right down the track with R2-12, getting packages on pcs, straightening out everything, everything is going gorgeously, and all of a sudden he finds himself across the auditing table from a phantom rock slam. Doesn’t recognize it for what it is, all of a sudden picks off, out of thin air, „Ha! Joe! Ha-ha! Guy rock slams on ‘Joe,’ I guess we’d better oppose ‘Joe.’ „ Oh, this list is going no place.

The only thing I really get very alert for and really go to the mat and slow the whole session down to nothing is the pc, in putting in mid ruds, gives me a „critical.“ I get a dirty needle and when I pick it up, I find out it was the pc said that I had shuffled the paper loudly. I know I won’t have any luck, now. I know I wont be going anyplace now, because that pc has got something I nearly found out. I don’t care if it was in the last three days or the last two days or in the session, that pc has a withhold from me because that pc has given me a critical utterance. And critical utterances are always underlain by an overt/withhold.

Odd part of it is, he could oppose Joe and he could oppose Pete and he could oppose the fellow’s wife and he could oppose this and he could oppose that and he could oppose something else and about… He could do forty or fifty lists, actually, trying to trace this slam and oppose it. He would lay an egg on that preclear, that’s for sure.

And that’s the only thing I go alert for. Why do I go alert for that? Because that one critical utterance or that one attitude on the part of the pc will multiply and multiply and multiply and all of a sudden I’m going to have a screaming ARC break.

If you can’t find it and if you can’t turn it off, well, just to the best of your ability… You see, I’ve given you now three solutions to it. Your first solution is your expanded List One, that normally should catch it. If you notice after you’ve done List One and you think List One is pretty clean, that you still have a rock slam turning up in the fellow’s rudiments, you know you’ve got a phantom slam, you know that guy’s got a PTP right in that session. Right here. It’s a PTP with the E-Meter, the auditor, with wearing clothes, with having to breathe air. It’s a PTP with something.

That is the same situation that you run into an hour later-with the pc trying to blow the session. You see that? I’m not being sarcastic, but most auditors don’t catch the missed withhold; don’t catch that ARC break for an hour or an hour and a half It’s long after they’ve happened.

Then your next action is just sort it out-sort it out. Get a new sort of a List One. But actually, it’s the session list. And it’s just everything that this session might possibly consist of. And while you’re listing this thing, keep your eye like mad on that meter. Because he might think of something that turns on a rock slam when he’s concentrating on this session, you might be able to steer him into telling you exactly what it is. And it’s finally, „your hair.“ Got the idea? See, you could steer him into it if you saw the slam turn on. So it’s listing against the meter, as you always do, but very pertinently.

And you’ve got to become alert for that. These are the fundamentals of auditing I’m talking about, you see. You’ got to become very alert for that.

All right, that’s your second remedy. And your third remedy for this if all else fails, is just go on finding items to the best of your belief and L, buy items that just go flash-flash and then disappear. Go on and find some item that tends to stay in. Because this above all else will tend to make you do incomplete lists.

You’re putting in your mid ruds, and you say, „Well, in this session has anything been suggested?“ See. And you get a tick, you say, „All right, what was that?“

You’ll say, „Well, it flashed, you know, I’ve got these last four items at the end of the list and they all rock slammed and then the rock slam turned off. So naturally, they packaged.“ Naturally. And you don’t put those extra twenty items on the list that gets the real item, see? It leads you to incomplete lists and so forth. But do the best you can. Get your packages and so on, and all of a sudden you-that’s climbing uphill, very hard-but you’ll notice that this slam will get more frequent, turns on easier, gets less frantic at the same time, and then one day the pc, you’re doing some kind of a list and the pc says, „Heads! A head. A head!“ See? „Yeah! Yeah! It’s this head!“ See, it slams like mad and you’ve got the phantom slam. Got the idea?

And the pc said, „Well, yes, you actually were saying some word a little louder than the others, and I thought you were suggesting that that was it.“

That would take care of it all. But I would make a special effort to do something about this as early as you noticed it. Now, I’m sure that some of you right now are auditing pcs who have phantom slams. And that you are just a little bit puzzled as to what happens to this occasionally and how come you got down to the end of the list and then you had to say, „Well, actually, there were two packages on the same list and they both blew up, and there was no item, really, which came out of it because everything packaged and they were all bonus packages.“

That’s enough, man. My next rudiment is nearly found out. I don’t-I don’t play the motordrome game of riding the motorcycle on the vertical wall just for the cheers of the audience like some of you do, if you will pardon my French. Because that’s the one thing you can’t monkey with, is a missed withhold. See, that’s a critical; that’s a direct indicator! Great big black arrows immediately drop up in the sky and point directly to the pc’s bank and they have engraved on them in gold letters which flame, you see: „You’ve nearly found out something about this pc.“

That’s for the birds, you know. That’s just for the birds. You should go back and take any list that… Well, actually, if you have a phantom slam, is you go ahead and find out what the devil it’s slamming on-whether from this new issue of List One, or the second method of making up a list of the session-and find it, get it out of the road, and then go back, and then go back and pick up all those lists that resulted in no item, really, that all sort of went out suddenly and mysteriously, that it was nullable, but it all disappeared and you didn’t really have anything, and you-the last one in, you guessed. You know, that kind of thing. Complete those lists. Null-you don’t have to null the whole list, you just null the stuff that you’ve added to it. You’re going to find yourself some nice RIs. Maybe at the expense of only listing a few hundred items on a half a dozen lists, maybe you’ll find yourself about six reliable items. Splang! Splang! Wouldn’t that be nice! Bonus package.

Any indication of a missed withhold causes me to go after missed withholds. Pc a little critical; pc upset. I go on the basis: Doesn’t matter what I do as an auditor, as long as I’m trying to audit the pc, I don’t merit criticism. I’m not trying to punish the pc because the pc’s criticizing me and I’m not doing this because I don’t like criticism. I’m doing this because the session is going to blow up if I don’t. That is your first symptom of a session blowing up. Pc’s feeling a little critical.

That’d be a good way to show up some HPA someplace, by the way. Take this folder, take the folder he’s been working on on this pc for the last 195 hours, you see, and then you only audit the pc for something like three and a half hours or something like this and you find twelve new items, you see, or something like this, and you say, „You see, it’s very easy. What you do in 195, do in… „ Dirty. Dirty trick.

Now let’s move over into 2-12. You do a couple of things wrong and you’re going to be in a mess. And one of those things is you find a slamming item and it’s slamming like crazy, and you don’t know what a rock slam looks like so you don’t… I know that sounds incredible, but there are two people here who didn’t know what a rock slam looked like.

But now, 2-12 should result in a positive result. You should have something to show for it. Don’t think that everything goes up in smoke. It doesn’t. You should have something to show for it.

Now, that sounds incredible, but it’s true. And don’t you ever make that mistake in a co-audit or teaching a bunch of HPAs, HCAs or something like that, that you know that they know what a rock slam looks like. Because you I say nobody could miss a rock slam. Well, let me tell you, people can miss a rock slam. They can miss them, and just learn by that.

Now, there’s one little other phenomenon I want to talk about, which is really not part of phantom slams, but something I ought to mention-is indeterminate things. Opposing indeterminate things. Now, you’ll find out that you can represent indeterminate things. Definition: No mass. Massless. It’s ,n idea or a condition. And now, you can represent these. Oh, by all means, represent them, you see, and you’re going to get rock slamming items and you’re going to get nice, massy things, you know, and they’ve got mass, meaning and fixidity. And everything is getting along fine and you’re getting these ,rings and then one fine day… You know, that’s from this indeterminate-I mean, it’s just a doingness, it’s a significance. Let me call it a significance. hat communicates to you better. We already got a word for it: Significance.

So this item is rock slamming like mad, and for some reason or other the auditor doesn’t want to embarrass the pc by pointing it out that he slams on „auditor“ or something. I don’t know for what reason-or he doesn’t know what a rock slam is, or something like that-but he knows the thing was active so he represents it.

You represented significances and that was fine. But when you start to oppose significances, you’re going to get in trouble.

Now, listen, it isn’t always catastrophic. You can get away with it often enough to make a fool out of yourself.

Now, it isn’t that you don’t oppose significances-you do. If you find a rock slamming significance, why, you oppose it. We don’t care what we oppose. The only thing we have to know about-if it rock slams, oppose it, See. That’s all we have to know. But this peculiar thing, this significance that is rock slamming will occasionally throw you.

All right, Ill give you the exact example: You’re standing in a room, a burglar comes in the door with a drawn gun, and the Telephone rings. Now, you’d feel a little distracted, wouldn’t you? And I think that if you picked up the telephone and found out it was unimportant, that you would have a tendency to swear as you slammed it down to take care of the other situation or something there-you’d be in an agitated state. You get the idea? Split attention.

Now, you do the Zero A list. You assess the Zero A list, and you get-you get something about „attack.“ You know, and you’ve assessed out „attack“ and you’re going to do a represent. You’re looking for something to do a represent list on, to find something to get a first list, see. And you hit „attack“ and it says „attack“ and it rock slams. And you say „attack“ and it rock slams. You say „attack“ and it rock slams. Well, now, the Zero A lists, of course, are made for representations to get first lists out of, aren’t they? But even that is junior to the law: If it rock slams, oppose it. If it’s a reliable item, oppose it. Don’t ever represent it. Oppose it.

The command value of Mr. Burglar with a gun in his hand is terrific, and somebody’s saying, „Look away from this thing.“ All right, the command value of a rock slamming item is terrific, and the person’s attention isn’t on the item that is slamming, it’s on the reverse item. It’s on the hidden item. That’s where their attention is mostly absorbed. They’re slamming on „gooney birds,“ and the opposition terminal to „gooney birds“ is „hunters.“ And you ask him „Who or what would a gooney bird represent to you,“ you’ve told them to take their attention off this hidden item „hunters.“ You don’t even know what it is, see. And that’s like the Telephone ringing and they have to take their attention off the burglar, see. And it drives them around the bend. They practically go out the bottom.

But this significance produces an oddity, because you’re actually opposing nothing. See, you’re opposing an idea. And you find yourself sometime opposing „attack.“ „Who or what would oppose ‘attack’?“ Oh, wait a minute, that’s a doingness. There’s no mass at the other end of this thing. Well, you can actually come up with an item. But you have to oppose it right back to get a package. Because „attack“ versus „a defender“ is not a package. You understand? It’s got no mass. So you don’t have „attack!’ versus „defender“ equals a package. You have to swing back on the trolley and oppose what you’ve just found.

And when you get a List One item and you don’t oppose it; if you’re really mad at some rock slammer; if he’s really cost the organization thirty-five thousand rand or something like this-I won’t mention any areas-and you really want to drive him potty, and just have him so he’ll be out in the street waving guns in his hands ready to shoot somebody down or something like that, find „Scientology“ rock slamming and then represent it. All you’ve got to do is put a represent list on „Scientology,“ a rock slamming item, and he’ll go right around the bend. He practically goes out through the bottom.

Now, the easiest thing in the world is to oppose a significance and wind up with a vzzz, where the significance doesn’t read, and you didn’t find any item opposing it. That is the easiest flub to make anybody ever made. You just list a hundred more opposition items to it, and you’re going to come up with a great, big juicy reliable item that you missed the first time.

See, there’s a hidden item there, he’s got his attention on this item, and you tell him to put his attention on Scientology and represent it and he can’t do it. It’s just nyahh! see. He doesn’t know what he’s got his attention on, he just knows there’s something dangerous there. And you’re telling him to take his attention off this dangerous thing and then to do a represent on something he’s only got his attention from or at, don’t you See. You’ve messed up his attention.

In other words, you could null that list down to nothing, and it apparently took the charge out of „attack“ but you didn’t come up with an item to oppose „attack.“ Now, you’ve got to swing back and get the item that opposed „attack“ by opposing what opposes „attack.“ Do you see that? Otherwise you’re just going to have a-you’re going to have a significance opposing an identity. And that isn’t a package. A package is-are opposed identities.

See, here’s these two items smashed against each other. His attention is totally fixated on the interrelationship between these two items, this package, these two reliable items against each other, see. That’s what his attention is on, and you take one of these and you start representing it, you’re telling him to take his attention off the other item and take it… Ahuuu-zzzzzz-zzz. And he practically goes gibbering.

Now you, of course, can have an idea opposing an idea and call it a package because they both rock slammed. Now, that’s four items, perfectly all right with me. But actually it isn’t very much of the GPM. It’s darn little. But you get „a bricklayer“ opposing „working hard“ and try to call that a package. It’s not a package.

We’ve had two eases here, slamming on List One that have been represented, and boy, they both almost went out the bottom. And their antagonism on List One went up by the square. Zoooom! Don’t you see. They couldn’t take this.

Now, you can get the bricklayer by opposing „working hard,“ but you’ve now got to oppose the „bricklayer“ to find out what the package consisted o£ Got to get the zig-zag of this. This is old, original 3D Criss Cross. But this particularly applies to the significances. Significances very easily go blank, so that it doesn’t rock slam, you don’t find an item to rock slam against it and you say it evaporated. Couldn’t evaporate. You found an item with mass opposing a doingness and of course that was no package, and it didn’t evaporate anyhow; it’s just submerged.

Now, if somebody had sat down and opposed the rock slamming item — just like it says in 2-12; did it right, in other words-why, it just would have been as right as rain. Everything would have been fine and sweet and everything. But a case practically goes out the bottom.

All you’ve got to do is keep on opposing it. Just get your list. Complete your list. And you’re going to find a nice, big slamming item, and it’s going to stay there this time. And boy, when you find that item, man, it’ll really stay there, it won’t evaporate, you couldn’t hit it in the head with a sledgehammer and do anything to it. It just goes on slamming. See?

Now, you got somebody who’s slamming on three or four points of List One and you do nothing but represent lists on them-oh, brother! That’s happened here a couple of times. Hardly anybody knew they were slamming on List One, you, see-this hadn’t been isolated. Agh! And they didn’t know whether they were going or coming. They just started out the bottom.

Now, to do anything with that and get your package you’ve got to come around backwards, and you’ve got to find out whether or not, using your same opposition rules, whether that produced pain or sen. Now, if it produced pain or sen, why, you oppose it accordingly and you’re going to come over here and you’re going to get the nicest package you ever saw. When you get those two packages, they’re going to sit there right together and the pc knows all about it and then they might have a chance of blowing.

So it’s a good way to get even with somebody. If you find an item slamming nicely, why, represent it.

Now, you see how items could get submerged in 2-12 and appear not to have anything there and-and so forth? And the only rule you have to follow is, if the list is nullable, you can find an item on it that will be a good, strong, beefy item-if a list is nullable. It has to be a rock slamming list in order to find an item on it, of course, and it has to be nullable. It need only have one rock slam on it. We’ve just had some lists start to rock slam after a thousand items. Isn’t that horrible? It’s not giving this cyclic manifestation though, that I’ve discussed and you have no reason to suspect the source is wrong and it did rock slam. Now, that list won’t go down to nothing if it was nullable. It won’t go to nothing. It will go to an item. If it looks like it’s going to nothing and there’s just four dirty needles left in-four dirty reads, you know-man, that list isn’t complete. Just because you could null it is no reason it’s complete.

Now, if you really want a case to fold up sooner or later, if you find an item slamming nicely and you oppose it, why, stop listing just at the moment when you can barely null it to nothing and not find an item. Because now the item you took it from, will not slam, all the other slam seems to be gone and you don’t see anything there, and the case feels fine-feels much better-but you’ve got a sleeper now; you’ve got a hidden pair in present time. That’s about the only big mistakes you can make. Of course, you realize I’m just taking up 2-12 mistakes with you here.

Now, there’s another goofball one about invalidating the list. Invalidating items. You’re too prone to use invalidated items to dig up this and to dig up that and to dig up something else. Why don’t you just forget it? The pc’s invalidating the items he’s giving you and that sort of thing-yes, that’s a perfectly valid test. But now, why, some students have begun to use that for other reasons. And we have already found two pcs who already knew the rule, who didn’t want to complete the list who simply invalidated two or three items and then got out of it. But when the list was completed, produced an item.

If you-after you null the thing out, if you continue to list the opposition items against the thing-it’s not now slamming, see. You listed it out, everything disappeared, there’s hardly even a dirty needle left, everything’s gone now. It all looks fine, but you didn’t come up with a reliable item. That’s the only thing that’s spooky about it all. It just-you didn’t have an item after you opposed it, see. You start listing again on that opposition list and all of a sudden the nicest, biggest rock slam will turn on the original that you ever saw, and you’ll get a rock slamming item, and all of a sudden you’ll wind up with-you’ll have a very nice big rock slamming item and you’ll have a package.

Ah, my faith in pcs is deteriorating here.

In other words, you can quit just short of getting a package. That, probably, would be the most puzzling mistake that you could make in 2-12. That would puzzle you.

The list we’re talking about-that is the freak list, that’ll give you trouble-is the list you can’t null. So your basic rule, you see, is, „Is the list nullable?“ If the list is nullable, it’ll have an item on it. If it hasn’t got an item on it by the time you’ve finished nulling it, then complete the list.

This also happens with a represent list. You’ve got some dirty needle or something and you’re representing it like mad, and it represents into a slamming list and-nice, long list, and it nulls-everything is out, you have a little bit of a hard time keeping your mid ruds in, but you get it, you get it all nulled and you get clear on down to the bottom of it, and you’re there-got no item. And there’s nothing there now, and it’s all gone and everything’s gone. And you thought it was „shoe trees,“ or-but that was sort of the last one in. You don’t know… „Well, it all must have… I know what it was. They were all bonus packages.“

How much should you pressure the pc into listing when he doesn’t want to? This all comes under basic auditing. What are you doing as an auditor sitting there with the pc out of your control? The usual phenomenon is something like this: Pc says, „I haven’t got any more. But I tell you the list is complete. I-I’ve said it’s complete. I’ve said it’s complete four times, and now you want to go on and on and on and on and on. I’ve said the list is complete.“

You see, you’ll always get an odd number of items; one, three, five-I don’t care what it is, it’s always an odd number of items. You get an even number of items that exactly match up on a represent list-that’s very suspicious, and probably has never happened, and probably never will happen.

And you say, „Well, all right. Well, all right. Okay,“ you say. Surrender, you know. „Okay. On this list, has anything been suppressed?“

You get two items on a represent list that go against each other, and the whole thing folds up. I think that would be almost too rare for you to include in your calculations. The basic thing is, the pc doesn’t know about it. In other-if you got a bonus package you can practically count on the fact that there were three items slamming and that one of them is not yet on the list.

And he says, „So-and-so and so-and-so, another two items I didn’t tell you and so forth and oh, yes! There’s „iceberg“, „reindeer“, „Santa Claus,“’ so forth.

In other words, if you do one of these washouts that you’ve been calling skunks; if you think you’ve been skunked-it rock slammed and it all disappeared and now you haven’t got anything to show for it and u cant put anything on the line plot… Well, you can put something on the line plot but it doesn’t now slam. You’ll be amazed. All you’ve got to do is continue that list. You’ve nulled it all, don’t you see, and maybe you couldn’t have continued it before you nulled it, but the nulling of it helps you to continue it. Even though the pc has a little bit of a loss and so forth, he can continue it much more easily now that it’s been nulled. And hell give you a stream of items and you’ll come up, and there’ll be one going bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, nice R/S, everything’s fine. Got a reliable item, you’ve got something to oppose.

And the other day we had a very disgraceful scene. A very disgraceful scene. The pc kept on listing and the auditor couldn’t stop him to get in the mid ruds to finish him, you know? It’s just basics of auditing.

But let’s say you were opposing this item on, on, on, on, on, on, on, on, on, on, and it comes to the end of the list, and you can null the list, so on-the danger point in 2-12 is at that point where the list is nullable but the item isn’t on it. And oddly enough, that point can exist-so powerful and good are mid ruds. See, your auditing can be good enough, actually, to null a list that isn’t complete.

Oddly enough, after a list is completely nulled, completely finished and completely dead, a pc very often will be able to complete it. And very often the pc is not really able to give you more items until you’ve finished nulling the list. Well, that’s one for you to know, isn’t it? The pc says there are no more items, he actually can’t think of any more items-null the lot, tiger drill the last two and all of a sudden the pc’s got twenty more items. You haven’t got an item yet. So just go on listing, listing, listing, listing, listing, and list your needle out clean and just take that new section and just-just as though it’s a brand-new list. Null it down, this time you’ve got an item. Sometimes you haven’t. Sometimes it happens again. If you can null a list, there’s an item on it.

There’s a point where you couldn’t null it, don’t you see-that’s just before this point. But then you finally complete it up to a point. It’s got enough charge off of it so that it can be nulled, and you have a little hard time keeping the mid ruds in and you get it on out, and then all of a sudden, everything goes flat. Everything goes flat. Everything disappears.

Main trouble you’re going to get into-the main trouble you’re going to get into, however, comes under the heading of the basics of auditing, not under the basics of 2-12. You’ll think there are endless rules to 2-12, you’ll think there are endless things to know about 2-12. In actual fact there aren’t. These rules are pretty hard and fast about 2-12. The basics of auditing cover most of the difficulty that a person will have. He knows 2-12 pretty well, basics of auditing is what he’s probably light on. The danger of 2-12 is that an auditor can get a result on 2-12 that he is satisfied with and that the pc is satisfied with and the auditor has not yet completed his 2-12, has not yet got proper items on 2-12 and has not done it right at all. And the residual gain there is about a thousand percent worth. That’s the main danger.

Now, this is contrary to an earlier lecture I gave you. I want to give you a point at this. Because I said if you exactly matched the things up, this would-pardon me, it may sound contrary to an earlier lecture I gave you. I said if you’d match the thing up exactly, it would go pssww-pssww-pssww-pssww, and you wouldn’t have much left of the package.

People-you’re going to find-someday you go down to Oklahoma here, twenty, thirty years from now, and there’ll be somebody down there in Oklahoma, and they’ll be busy auditing on the original 2-12 and that sort of thing, and in all those years they have never found an item on a pc, never found a reliable item except by accident and their pcs are all happy and they’re all happy and they think 2-12 is wonderful. That’s the main danger with 2-12.

But let me tell you something. That can be interpreted as: Just by listing the thing out and nulling it, it all disappears. And you ask the pc what confronted what, and the pc says, „Well, he guesses…“ and so forth, and that just isn’t good enough. The pc’s got to know. He’s got to know for sure. „Waterbucks-tigers. Yeah, those two went together.“ Bang! You get the positiveness of the pc. It’s very positive. Pc’s never asking himself questions about this. ‘Man, that’s it!“ you know. „Oh yes, all my life I’ve just been terrified of water…“ and so forth, and this sort of thing, „…and of course those things go together, because I used to have a bearing go down every once in a while in my car and it’d sort of make a snarling sound and it would upset me a great deal.“ On and on and on, see. He knows those two fit together. „Oh, yes. That ‘waterbuck,’ that goes just up against ‘tiger,’ nothing else,“ see. Well, if you don’t get that kind of phenomenon you haven’t vanished it down at the end.

All right. You know, actually, we’re very, very happy with the way you’re doing. You get a lot of-you get a lot of knocking about, you know, and you get a lot of snarling, but in actual fact, why, we’re very, very proud of the way you’re doing. I’m very proud of the way the Instructors are handling this. We’ve gotten this thing off the launching pad at a-at a fantastic rate. We’ve got people in here very new to the course who are doing very, very nicely. They’re doing fine.

Now, you just continue that list, whether it was an oppose list or a represent list, and you all of a sudden will see a rock slam. Where the hell did that come from? See, you’ll see another rock slam turn on. And now your list will null down to an item and the rock slam will come back on what you were opposing or come back on what you were representing-it won’t come back on what you were representing, but it’ll come back on and make an RI. And if you’re opposing, it will come back on the thing that you’re opposing. That is the correct statement.

Somebody came from another organization, from an organization, one of these-other day-to ask about the trouble we were having with 2-12. And they were getting ready to get it trained and they were getting ready to get out checksheets and they were getting ready to get auditors to study it so that someday somebody could do it. And they were quite surprised that we weren’t having any trouble getting 2-12 into action. They were quite amazed, as a matter of fact, rather insulted. We should have been having more trouble than we’ve been having.

Now, here’s another mistake that is made. People are abandoning lists which rock slam. They had rock slams on them, and so forth and they’re just abandoning them. Why?.

So, I think you’re doing fine with it and you’re looking much better. The number of items found are fantastic. And you’ve got a whole bunch of residual gains coming up now, and the gains are right there, because you go back and look at those unfinished lists where you didn’t find the item-finish the list and find the item, and all of a sudden the pc will take off.

Well, you’ll get disabused of this and you’ll get confused about what the score is-and life in general-if you’ve taken a rock slamming item and represented it rather than oppose it. Now, if you’ve done that one, you will now get a rock slamming list-this is very baffling-which will go to nothing. Or it’ll just dirty-needle forever, and you can’t seem to complete it. And then you never go back and check the original item. The item you’re taking the represent from is slamming like crazy. Has been all this time. The more you unburden it the more it slams.

Okay?

In other words, you had the item in the first place. What the hell are you doing representing it? In other words, a rock slamming item does not find another item by representing. The only thing you’re going to come up with on a represent list-you may get a bonus package or something-but the only thing you’re going to come up with in actual fact is the item you started with. You’ve got the rock slamming item, why the hell are you doing 2-12, see. Why are you doing 2 — ? You see, what are you trying to find? You’ve got it!

Thank you very much.

It’s sort of like a bunch of firemen come up, you know, in their firetrucks, and here’s this whole apartment building on fire, you know, and the guys run around asking everybody in the neighborhood and phoning city hall and so forth, trying to find out where the fire is, you know-paint’s blistering on the truck.

Good night.

So they start a Fire Prevention Week in the area and start putting up fire prevention posters and that sort of thing, and never take out a single hose or do anything with the fire.

The pc gets very upset when you do things like this, see. How can you find an item that you’ve already got? That’s the question.

Now, here’s a sneak that happens, which is not a criticism of the auditor. You’ve got an item, it’s doing just a little bit of a bzz, and you list, and you go dirty needle, and you get messy, and you’ve got rock slams, and it’s quite a list, and you go on, and it doesn’t seem to complete or something or other’s happening with it, and so forth. And you fail to test the item you got it from. That item has been rock slamming for some little time now. Because you represented it, it rock slams. So although actually it does contain the modifier of „When you get a dirty needle and can’t finish the list, you do this,“ in actual fact, if you’re a very clever auditor, you would always check what you’re representing, because it might be the item, suppressed, and the representing of the item cleans it up and lets it slam.

You see, representing is very powerful auditing. When you represent something, you as good as prepcheck it and everything else. You could probably take a wrong goal and represent it and have it vanish. See, you get the idea? I mean, you could do a lot of funny tricks with this thing called represent. You do a lot of odd tricks with this thing.

Well, don’t then be surprised that you start out with something that is giving a dirty needle, and you do 280 items, and you just don’t seem to be getting anyplace, and you go on to 500 items and you just don’t seem to be getting anyplace, and you go on to 750 items and you don’t seem to be getting anyplace, and so forth. And all the time from about 50 items onward. you have had the item. It’s the one you’re representing.

Now, sooner or later the pc is going to get kind of bug-eyed as you go down that list; it’s going to dirty needle; and it’s going to be upsetting to the pc, and so forth, because now you’ve got his attention in a bind. See, you’re asking him to represent a package. It’s: the burglar has walked in the door and the Telephone rings and it’s his girlfriend telling him that she will be five minutes late because she didn’t get a lipstick from the store and could you remember to get some ginger ale as… Burglar says he’s going to shoot in the next five minutes, you see, if you don’t immediately write him out a Check for eight million quid or something.

Fellow’s liable to bark at the girl, under those circumstances, and the pc’s liable to bark at the auditor. So you’ve strained, actually, the pc’s attention, because the pc’s attention is what causes that rock slam.

Now, the earliest lecture on attention units was given back in Elizabeth, New Jersey, in 1950, in very early June. All about attention units.

Let’s say that a pc has a certain number of attention units available, total-you know, theoretical availability-and he’s got 90 percent of these tied up in the bank. Therefore, he’s got 10 percent of his attention units around in present time or available. Actually, it’s not like that at all. It’s something on the order of about one one-hundred-millionth of his attention in present time and the remainder in the bank.

But that was the earliest lecture on this particular subject. Of course, that’s just an illustration. That’s just an illustration, a graphic sort of a picture, of what happens to the pc. In other words, his attention is trapped, residually, in certain portions of the bank, and therefore he hasn’t got much attention to spare elsewise.

A nervous or anxious or frantic individual simply hasn’t enough attention units to put on present time, or what’s come up. And they’re all trapped elsewhere and you’re making him take his attention off various places and things are collapsing in on him in these other places in order to handle this, and he gets very frantic. It’s simply a symptom of-or he goes into apathy. It’s a symptom of not having enough attention in present time, see. And the less attention one has in present time, the more one is likely to go down Tone Scale. This exactly matches the old Tone Scale. The less attention in present time, the less-the lower the tone of the individual is going to be, and his concept of reality, and all this sort of thing.

Actually, you can add up all of Dianetics and early Scientology and so forth, just under the few words I’m just giving you here. Just giving you a picture. Of course, you know you’ve covered that ground.

But apply this now to the fact that we have found those things which have, without any doubt whatsoever, ensnared the greatest part of the pc’s attention. And those are attention traps to end all attention traps. And when you’ve got a rock slam you have spotted one of these attention traps. And the rock slam is caused by the fury and franticness of his attention and opposed attentions. And that-zzz! That’s what causes it.

Now, that amount of attention then is absorbed in the bank. Now, you stir that up, you put his attention on one of these items, and then you go off to find another pair. And you only find one of those, so-you haven’t found a pair yet, see, you only find one-and then you go off and you find another item. Get the idea now. You couldn’t find a pair that time either for some reason or other. And you finally-you list that out, you see, and you haven’t opposed it, you see, you’ve had to go in with other lines, like „What would you rather not think about?“ and „Who or what has been shot lately?“ or something like this, you see. And you kept going in, and you’d find a rock slam each time and then you only find one of the items, you see.

How many of these single-sided items or half packages do you think you’re going to find before the pc will get no R/S? See, that’s the burning question. What can the pc tolerate? Oddly enough, the tolerance is sometimes very good and sometimes very bad. It isn’t constant.

If the thing is directly in present time-and the second lecture is about the phantom slam-but strangely enough, if the pc has a thing right in present time that you haven’t found the package with, but have ticked it, and it’s right in present time, and particularly if the thing he expects to help him, and then you neglect this thing, it’s a lead-pipe cinch that his attention has been all gathered up now. He won’t have any attention left to put on anything else. And you just lay dead horses from there on. I’m going to give you more lecture about that.

But right now I’m talking about the auditor who finds an item, then doesn’t find an opposition for it; finds another item, doesn’t find an opposition for that; finds another item; almost finds another item; gets a list that’s rock slamming, abandons that and then all of a sudden says, „I wonder why this pc doesn’t rock slam anymore? I wonder why this-pc’s getting better, and so forth, says he feels better, and so on.“ What’s happened here? See.

Pinned his attention here, pinned his attention there. You know, these, this, that, uh, vu, vu. He’s got no place to look now. You know, he’s just sort of-there he is.

You say, „Why don’t you rock slam, bud?“ In other words, you can tie up a case so that it won’t rock slam by just making too many bypasses. Now, this isn’t really terribly serious.

Now, we now know what-you see, you can take the case’s folder-that’s why, my God, always save all the pieces of paper. And always put the date and the pc’s name on it, and what you did on that piece of paper, for heaven’s sakes. And this is why. In my auditing over the past couple of months I finally have left three things which have got to be completed. There are three, back along the track. There are an awful lot of packages, but I know now that those three packages are not complete.

Now, that isn’t enough to catch up with it and stop everything over the number of items that have been found, the amount of attention that has been freed. But brother, I thank my stars that the records were complete. All I’ve got to do right now is write a few more things on the list and null them and I’ve got the item, do you understand? I didn’t understand it earlier, I was studying this. But they’re-I still had three of them.

Now, the number of these that you miss add up to the amount of stuck attention the pc has got on the track near present time. And you can add that up to a point where the pc won’t go Clear. But if you’ve kept all the records, it can very easily be straightened out. That’s what’s important.

Actually, some auditor comes along and gets all the residual gain-bang! All the poor, first auditor had to do was list five more on the oppose list, you see, and he would have had the rock slamming item and it would have gone together as a package and the pc would have flown, see-2-12 is a sneaker.

It produces better results done wrong than old techniques done right. So auditors become too easily satisfied with its gains. The pc is very happy about! it. And my God, he’s got the-he’s got this thing, he just had to list five more and get the item, and really package it up, see, and the pc would have taken off like a Cape Canaveral-not a Cape Canaveral rocket-like a Russian rocket. And everything would have been gorgeous. See, that’s all he had to, do, but he didn’t do it.

Now we know, now we know what a Class II Auditor is that knows 2i very well and is well trained and classified. We know what he is. He takes the folders and guides through the auditing of cases that have been done by Class I Auditors and straightens them out.

So this tells us at once what a Class III Auditor is, you see. He straightens out the incomplete lines and the failure to package of the Class II, YOU see.

Now we know what a Class IV Auditor is, see. And he takes the eases that have not been completely packaged and straightened out by Class IIIS, you see, and he straightens those out.

And we finally find out what my class is. I straighten out the Class IVs.

In actual fact, it is not dangerous to put this technique in clumsy hands-not at all dangerous to put it in clumsy hands, because it has residual gain. With this one proviso: providing all the records are kept, and providing the guy does say what he did do-so above all else, insist on that. That’s the first thing you insist on.

And the next thing you insist on, that common, ordinary, good auditing gets done, you know. That’s the next thing. That hasn’t anything to do with 2-12, don’t you see.

Now, the next thing after that is that 2-12 is done right and effectively, and that’s about the order of importance. And if that order of importance is followed, why, anybody will be able to pick up some case and put it back together again. He can see-he’s got-looks in there and he sees these — they’ve got a list of five items, as opposing the rock slamming item, and there’s thirty-eight strikes after each one of the five, you see, and right away he has some idea of what happened. All he’s got to do is complete that list and he’s got it squared up. Those are your orders of importance.

If a case can’t do the basics of auditing, then the auditing the case must be permitted to do is the simplest auditing that can be done. In other words, you just omit the mid ruds, you just omit all of these odd balls, and you get 2-10. That’s a heavily supervised co-audit sort of a process. You just omit everything that the auditor is goofing with and carry on from there.

But this is the way-this is the way 2-12 stacks up at the present time. It itself is not complicated. But somebody who is still learning to audit while doing 2-12 can find it very harassing and very complicated, particularly when they’ve missed rock slams. And particularly when… Well, they had all of List One slamming, so they represent a think item. „What would you rather not think about?“ Pc goes halfway around the bend. They say, „There, you see, 2-12…“ But they actually never can quite say that it doesn’t work, because even if they did that, that badly, the pc still Registers some gain.

So 2-12 is actually the first technique that falls into all these categories. And it’s quite new. It opens up new doors to auditing. It opens up new doors to results.

Supposing an auditor almost did it right and got lots of lists, and he almost had items and so on-but he never checked anything out. You took the pc’s folder, you studied it from the beginning, found exactly where it is, and’-the case-with four or five hours of auditing you find twenty-four items. You’d suddenly get a gain that’d make the pc just practically thetan exterior right there, don’t you see? Residual gain would all take place in a very short period of time.

But the auditor that did it, if you ask him, would have been very satisfied with his own auditing. Saw the pc gain all the way.

The only thing that gives you trouble sometimes is you cannot quite make up your mind whether the item that you’re going to oppose is actually a slamming item or not. And that’s the only list you will ever lay an egg on, because it gives you a cyclic rock slam, dirty needle, clean, rock slam, dirty needle, clean, rock slam, dirty needle, clean, and will probably go on doing it for the next fifteen thousand items. That’s the only bug there is where it really takes a little bit of judgment, because sometimes you say, „It isn’t rock slamming anymore,“ and you should have opposed it. And sometimes you say, „Well, it was rock slamming so therefore I’m going to oppose it,“ and you shouldn’t. So in that particular case you just learn-one of these cyclic, dirty needle sort of lists that go on and on and on, on an opposition-you learn what one of those things look like, and after that you’ll know what you’re listing.

Okay. Thank you.