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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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, 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.

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.“

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.

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.

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.

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?

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 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.

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?

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.

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.

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?.

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?“

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.“

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.

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

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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?“

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

„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.

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

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

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…

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.“

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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, 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.“

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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’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?

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 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.

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.

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, 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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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, 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.

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, 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.

Ah, my faith in pcs is deteriorating here.

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.

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.“

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Okay?

Thank you very much.

Good night.