Thank you.

Lecture two, 20 Sept., AD 12. Geriatrics. That’s the title of the lecture. Geriatrics. Now, you don’t even know how to spell it. G-e-r-i-a-t-r-i-c-s. Got it?

Well, here we are on the what?

Audience: Yeah. Got it.

Audience: Twentieth.

It’s a trick way of saying gerontology. But actually, gerontology never solved geriatrics. But we have.

Where did the 19th go? Oh, I was auditing that night. That’s right. So this is the 20th of September, AD 12.

Geriatrics is of some interest to you and has been floating around you all the time, and you yourself have noticed it, and you’ve kept your eye peeled on it, and you’ve been curious about it, and you’ve actually used it as a method of measuring whether a case was progressing or not, but never really given it any further significance. Well, it does have further significance.

I’m going to talk to you right now about lines and listing.

You should understand that one of the longest searches man has ever indulged in has been that of longevity itself. And the study of living longer is geriatrics. I, by the way, was one time a leading light in the American Society of Gerontology. What do you feed men to make them live longer? Well, there are many such preparations. Women: there’s equinprivine, stilbestrol – the female hormones. Somebody gets beyond forty or something like that, why, they ought to start shooting them with a bit of equinprivine, something like that, that makes them look younger and feel friskier and make passes at the iceman.

It’s only four days deep into this week and six goals have been found. We’re running at a rate of one and a half goals per day. Those of you who have had the half-goal found… Six goals-just like that. They’re rolling off now at a highly rapid rate.

Anyway, I had a very astonishing experience one time. I saw a lady and… This was right after the war. I had just studied quite a bit of endocrinology and found it a very fascinating study, but I was only studying it for one particular peculiar reason. I wanted to find out if the mind monitored the body or the body monitored the mind. And obviously the switchboard system between the body and the mind is the endocrine system or the glands. All right. Could you feed somebody these marvelous preparations which had been biochemically developed and effect a better frame of mind? And I found out that you could do so, occasionally, on lots of people. That’s not good enough, is it? What was introducing the variable?

All you’ve got to do is learn how to do it so that it happens with everybody you address in under twenty-five hours. That’s what I want to have you do. And that way you can run a co-audit and that way you can do a terrific amount of this and that. Okay?

Traumatic second dynamic occlusions and one thing or another prevented the hormones and other shots from operating. I did this work at Oak Knoll Naval Hospital in Oakland, California. All right. A line officer wears his badges of rank on both collars and a staff officer wears them only on one collar, see. So I first got into their medical library simply by taking off one of my rank badges off one collar and hired a Marine to come by and say, “Good afternoon, Doctor.” And that was very simple.

Audience: Mm-hm.

So anyway, we entered the field of endocrinology for only that reason and I ruined a great many cases. I ruined them abundantly. I – there was a doctor there by the name of – I think his name – one of the doctors on the thing was named Yankewitz, improbably. And this guy was keeping records on this sort of thing. And they – the government at vast expense was importing carload lots of pills and shots and monkey glands, and they had the problem of all the fellows who had been incarcerated in the Japanese prison camps. And these fellows were in a very bad state. They were too fat, and they were too thin, and they were too this, and they were too that, and they were trying to put them back to rights with hormones.

All right. Now, I want to talk to you about goals and listing. Listing is a problem you have not yet wrapped your wits about. None of you were listing on the right lines. I doubt there’s anybody listing on the right lines. Your lines are probably wrong. I have tried to develop a formula for lines without much success, which could be rattled off boppity-boppity-bop.

And this is a very valid proposition. You can do far more for somebody’s ulcers by giving him shots of testosterone than any other known method. The doctors, of course, are unable to operate, so they don’t favor it. It’s out of favor entirely.

The formula is probably: create, curious, desire, enforce, inhibit, you know? The CDEI Scale with a create on top of it. That’s probably the formula. And that goes positive and negative and oppose and not-oppose. And then it goes cause and effect on the goal line. Well that, if added up, give you forty lines. Look it over; that’s a forty line listing rig.

Anyway, they were bringing these pills in and capsules in carload lots and they were administering them to people. And having a bit of access to their records, I knew what cases were being successfully affected and which weren’t. And so I have done a little bit of work in trying to ascertain whether or not the people who were being successfully affected were or were not aberrated. And decided they were not very badly aberrated. And the people on whom they were not being effective, I found to have psychic traumas by the bucketload; and à la Freud, with a few frills from Ron, flipped a few psychic traumas out of the road and made these endocrines operate on them very successfully, and came to the conclusion that an endocrine…

Now, I haven’t listed one out totally on those lines because I’ve just-you’re as usual, trodding upon my heels very tightly. And I have to fix-I have to get the backs of my shoes fixed more often than any other person, anyplace.

The United States Navy should be given a rising vote of thanks for this, because I’m sure the program cost them millions and millions and millions of dollars. And they derived absolutely no benefit from it of any kind whatsoever. But we did. I didn’t ruin their whole program, but I sure sent their figures a little bit awry occasionally, you see. It’s how many – what the dosage should be. And on a case or two it became “none.” Now, this simply monitored this – this was not very conclusive, it was not very definite, and I could have done far more along this line of course, but I was only trying to establish one thing: By using physical substances, could you change a person’s mind? You understand? Or, by changing a person’s mind, could you change the character of physical substances? I found the latter to be the case and thereafter have spent no time monkeying with physical substances. Do you follow this line of reasoning?

But the essence of this is that if you had: one, create, do you see, causative, then of course, there is a create effect. You’ll understand more about that in a minute, see. So that’s a group of four. Create causative immediately becomes a group of four. I’ll give you an idea:

In other words, the mind can change the body, but the body only slightly alters the mind. In other words, function monitors structure, structure does not monitor function, see. Now, of course, structure can monitor function sufficiently and observably enough that somebody’s liable to take this as a keynote. The obvious broad fact that you cut off somebody’s legs – he can’t walk. Now, structure certainly monitored function. And a medico, being somewhat of this crude reasoning level of course, takes that as the fait accompli and says, “That’s it. That’s it. Therefore – therefore, no function monitors structure.” I don’t know how he ever got there, you know? It’s something like departing for the moon and finding yourself on Wrigley Field and saying, “Well, that proves it. But we’re not quite sure what,” you know?

„Who or what would make catfish?“ See? Now, that’s fine. Who or what would make catfish? All right. Now, that, of course, goes into „not make catfish,“ „would oppose making catfish“ and „not oppose making catfish.“ Instantly and immediately we have a group of four. It’s always on a group of four.

Now, here’s – here’s the point. They are wrong. They are wrong. Because if – the uniformity is that you can always get function or thought to monitor structure. You can get thought to monitor structure, but you can’t always get structure to monitor thought.

You always have the plus and the minus and the plus-oppose and the minus-oppose-always. There will be some version of that and it must be in a multiple of four.

And that’s how I came to that basic conclusion. Why you never find me paying any real attention to structure. Because if you don’t flip out the psychic traumas, you’re not going to monitor anybody’s thinking. And if you do flip out the psychic traumas, why, you’re going to monitor structure. You follow that? See?

Now, if you have a causative end of the line-you know, „Who or what would make catfish,“ then you’ve got… This is a very crude example and I should tell you right here that the problem is not as critical as you’re making it out. With four lines it was terribly critical. You had to get these things to fire; you had to get everything all set and whooo!, it was really sharp and so forth. Well, we’re handling it quantitatively now. Who cares? See? You don’t have to get these lines-you don’t have to prepcheck these lines, you don’t have to get these lines to fire, you don’t have to do anything. You just take the goal, put it to it and list and the weird part of it is you’re operating on a plus margin. You’re way over what it takes to make him Clear. You understand? And I’ll go into that more.

This guy can’t perform in some direction. Well, you could feed him all the hormones and give him all the Turkish baths and all the exercise, and all the dumbbells in the world and he still wouldn’t be able to do this, don’t you see? But you change the psychic condition and he’ll make some progress in that direction.

But let’s take a look at this now. You’ve got the effect end, which gives you another four. Now, if you’ve got a cause four, you must have an effect four. You got the idea?

Now, his structure might be inadequate to performing what he wants to perform, but that again, by extrapolation, is an error in not enough thought, do you see – on it.

„Who or what would make catfish?“ See? You’ve got to have „What would catfish make?“ Do you see that? And „What would catfish not make?“ and „What would catfish oppose making?“ and „What would they not oppose making?“ You understand that?

Now, these conclusions – these conclusions are very valid in the field of geriatrics. Some girl, when she gets to be forty or so, and so forth, would do very well – I say so, would do very well, since I’ve seen a lot of evidence in this line – to go down and get herself a fist full of stilbestrol or equinprivine, or something… You don’t get a fistful of equinprivine; you get the gluteus maximus full of it. That – it’s a shot. Anyway – anyway, a man hitting around that age – that’d be a very good thing for him to do, get ahold of some methyltestosterone and throw it down his gullet.

Just because you’ve got an object in the goal is no reason that the effect end is settled. You got the idea?

Frankly though, if either one has any slightest second dynamic aberration, it’ll do a minimal amount of good. And if their second dynamic aberration is terrific, it won’t do any good whatsoever. You might as well pour it down the drain. Do you see that? All right. This has a lot to do with geriatrics. Not the second dynamic.

We had somebody once who had a goal that had the word „empire“ in it. Well, this saddled everybody. An empire was an empire and that was all there was to it. You know, the object end of the goal; the effect end of the goal is all taken care of in the goal. That’s obvious, isn’t it? It’s got an empire on the end of the goal, so therefore, „Who’d want to run an empire?“ You see? Ah! We’ll have to get over to the other side of this thing, „What empire would want to be run?“ Don’t you see that?

Metchnikoff, I think his name was – I’ve forgotten my books on this to a large degree, and didn’t bother to look them up because it wouldn’t do you any good. Once – I just remembered this as an anecdote. He said sour milk would make somebody have a greater longevity. Make them live forever and that was fine. And he, by the way, was quite a boy. He added quite some number of medical substances to man’s category – amongst them compound calomel in the prevention of syphilis and other things of this character. This guy was quite a sharpie. And he was getting on in years, so he studied geriatrics. They all come to studying geriatrics sooner or later. And they feel those years creeping up on them, you know, and they start cracking the textbook on gerontology.

Don’t take it for granted that because the goal has an object in the sentence that that is a fait accompli and that is never alterable or anything or you’ll leave your pc there with stacks of extra answers.

So, he collected sour cream and more sour cream and sour milk and sour skimmed milk and sour watered milk, and – I almost said sour British milk – and he collected all varieties. All varieties. And he had his basement full of them, and his neighbors’ basement’s full of them, you know, and so forth. And he’d led his experiments and he had it made. He just had it made. He and his partner both had it made, as a matter of fact. And they could extend life with these magic compounds based on sour milk indefinitely. And they both died on the sunny side of seventy. Just like any other man.

Now, how did all this come about?

Usually, this is the fate of gerontological hopes. In the Middle Ages, why, people were always slipping a bag of gold across to the aged witch to receive in return the amulet which would cause them to live forever, don’t you see? And those fellows, they’d still die in bed at the age of seventy. And the soldiers were always getting amulets for not being shot in battle, you know, and that sort of thing. And occasionally these things worked. The bullet hits them and can’t penetrate, you know, something like that. There’s all kinds of amulets and potions to save life, continue life, to make life longer and that sort of thing. All of which is very odd because you can’t kill a thetan. That’s very peculiar when you come down to think about it, that there’d be all this tremendous interest in geriatrics.

It came about this way having to alter-is the command to squeeze the answers in sideways. You got it?

What they’re interested in, actually, is the preservation of a body. And they are not interested actually in the prolongation of individual life, because that does not need prolonging. It may need better remembering, but it prolongs itself. You don’t drop out of the race. But the point is, here, that a body, being a possession, starts aging and caving in, and limiting a thetan’s activities and he or she gets upset about this. And they want to look younger, and they want to feel younger, they want to act younger. And so they would rather go in the direction of gerontology. And almost anybody who comes along with a magic amulet or a potion or a shot of pills of some kind or another, is going to get a considerable amount of interest on this exact line.

Audience: Mm-hm.

Now you, as an auditor, have very often seen a pc doing well and looking younger, and doing badly and looking older. Have you ever noticed this? Do you have a good reality on this? Have you ever seen people look younger and look older through processing? Have you ever seen this? Now, some people look very much older and some people look very much younger. And it’s quite mad how this thing will go.

And they were always left with extra items and these sometimes would pile up to a point where the tone arm would start rising and would go up and stick. And those were just piled-up suppressed items that there was no line for them to go on, alterations of line, alterations of the auditing command. You see these are all disobediences of the basics of auditing: must be a clear auditing question and it must be a clean auditing answer to that question. Don’t you see?

Now, in the process of finding a goal in a Dynamic Assessment, you see this roller coaster rather rapidly. This person is all exhausted over lots of goals they’ve been over, and lots of this and that, and they feel bad about it, and they’ve had a bad goal found or something, and you give them a Dynamic – they look terrible, you know, they look like they’re about 180, and they’re just all caved in. And then you do a Dynamic Assessment on them, and you get the dynamic. And right away, they look a bit younger, you know. They look nice and younger. And then you find an item, you know, and they look lots younger, and you find a goal, and boy do they look young and spry! Everything is getting along fine. They haven’t hit any ultimate yet, but that’s dandy. And then the auditor ARC breaks them, and they look much older. And then they will look younger, and they’ll look older. And as the lines are listed out you can normally tell if the pc is having good progress by just this one point alone. Do they look younger?

All right. Now, the answer to that is, of course, give them more lines than they ever heard of They always got someplace to put the extra item.

For instance, I’m looking at somebody that last June had a line listed off to Clear, and I came in and thought we had a new teenage student. And a couple of weeks later, the goal had flubbed, there weren’t enough lines, nothing had been tiger drilled on the thing and so forth and she looked about ninety-five. You get – this is this wild. But you’ve seen this. You’ve seen this with your own eyesight. So I’m not telling you anything you haven’t observed. You’ve seen this.

Now, furthermore, even though you have somebody’s goals already all fixed up, see, and it’s already grooved in and you’ve got this all taped and everything, and he all of a sudden comes up with a rabbit. And he tells you after you’ve gone through sixteen consecutive lines of listing-which is all you had for his goal-that he’s still got a rabbit. Well, you don’t throw this rabbit away. But let me tell you, the rabbit-the rabbit is what he would make. Do you see? And there just is no place to put this rabbit. And here’s this poor old bunny sitting out there on the side and it drives your pc halfway around the bend.

This is definitely allied to the science of aging. You say, “Well, Ron, why are you mentioning this? We’ve all seen this. We know this.” Well, one thing is we don’t know all there is to know about this, see. We don’t know how long a body will live in a five-goal Clear. You know, a five-goal Clear, how long can that person make the body live? We don’t know.

Well, you can’t put in an extra line which accommodates the rabbit. If you put in an extra line to accommodate the rabbit you of course, have to put in eight lines. So, actually, the minimal number of lines that you can add to anybody’s list is eight. Not four, but eight. It must be subject and it must be object. You see? The cause and the effect. You see that?

We haven’t any data on what the longevity could be stacked up to, but we can hazard a few good, solid guesses. That – let’s say, somebody who was about thirty-five, or something like this, as raw meat, would look what would be average thirty-five, and if cleared would undoubtedly drop a few years in appearance. This we’ve got some reality on. Somebody who was about forty-five or fifty, something like this – well, you’d probably get a much steeper drop. Don’t you see, they’d probably drop back to a much younger appearance proportionately.

So anyway, if your pc can’t accommodate a rabbit then you’d better give this thing a good study. Not evaluate for him and tell him where it belongs but tell him what he thinks this rabbit would have to do with what he is doing.

Somebody who’s around seventy, of course, is kicking the point of no return or has already passed it, but you’d still expect them to look younger. Now, also, how much longer would you expect this person to live? Well, that’s almost in the lap of the gods, you know. But you could make some ragged guess at this thing that maybe you’d put five, ten, fifteen, twenty years onto their life.

And he says, „Well,“ he says, „the rabbit of course-the rabbit would - would-well-the rabbit-I guess the rabbit would-well, he’d be impossible to make.“

Now naturally, if you clear somebody at the age of thirty, you’re probably going to stack thirty or forty years onto the end of their line, you see, at least. And if you clear somebody at seventy-five, why, maybe you’d stack another five or six, don’t you see? So the older they are, probably the less years you stack on, or there’s some rule of that character might apply.

And maybe the goal was „to make things.“ A rabbit would just be impossible to make. Well, you’re off to the races. Just put the word „impossible“ into eight lines. You see how you’d do that? And you’ll accommodate the rabbit and you’ll find out there’s a whole bunch more that will come in on top of it and I don’t care how many sets of lines you use.

Now, studying geriatrics, you’re in a very, very interesting field. You’re in a field of no data because none can happen for the next seventy years, you see. So, never do you get geriatrics being studied in any one lifetime. And nobody, of course, is ever able to keep any records on this, because they get bored. And there’s no series, you see. The guy who was interested in keeping records has kicked the bucket and nobody else has picked it up and so on. So you’re always challenged along this line in the field of gerontology on just this one fact: “Well, nobody has lived long enough to prove it.”

But if you do that, don’t try to catch the lines up to the other lines, just add them in the normal course of events. You understand? You’ll always find extra items.

Well, that is your usual blunt argument that is offered. But that is not what you’re trying to prove. You’re not trying to prove by the actual livingness. But age is normally determinable – relative physiological age is determinable – by the condition and character of certain parts of the body, certain functions of the body, and cellular structures.

Now, there’s an oddity here as any pc that has been run on it and is jostling around can tell you. „Who or what would want the goal to catch catfish? Who or what would not want the goal to catch catfish? Who or what would oppose the goal to catch catfish? And who or what would not oppose the goal to catch catfish?“ All of those get different answers than anything else. „Who or what would catch catfish?“ and all of that bracket, actually you get different answers when you say the goal. That’s an interesting ramification, see. If you say, „Who or what would want the goal to catch catfish?“ Don’t you see? Well, that gives you four lines that sort of stand out.

You see, we are the first that could do this, see. There’s been nobody else before us that could do anything about this, you see. But you would take and make a physiological examination of the person, their cellular structure, you see, and this and that and the other thing about them – the springiness of their joints or something – and you’d take this person and then clear this person, and then get an independent examination of the springiness of the joints and the cellular structure and that sort of thing. All of these various things.

Now, what would be the object of this? Is what catfish? You got the idea? You’d have to add the other four in some haphazard fashion to make it a balanced eight. Do you understand? But it’d all be the goal-the goal, the goal, the goal. That would be eight lines all devoted to the goal. You understand? If you were going to run it that way.

Now, that’s going at it rather painfully. But you would determine, then, that the person was physiologically younger, which of course predetermines the fact that they will live longer. You see how that works out? In other words, this is susceptible to proof now, in Scientology, in a period of less than six months, whether you have added to longevity or not, don’t you see.

Actually, you’re now riding in clover. You’re way out on the wide-open sands and you’ve got such abundance of places to put things that you’re riding on a quantitative cushion, you might say. The pc can put anything - anything he’s got anyplace without that one, the goal. But I’m just giving you an idea, see?

Now, that’s the first time anybody’s ever been able to do any conclusions on the subject of geriatrics, and we probably should go ahead and do something with this. Because this is – this is something that people are interested in. People are interested in care of the body, care of the body, preservation of the body, all that sort of thing, and they would find that this is very, very much to the good. Before a person can carry out any of his personal ambitions, he should have enough physical energy, and enough resilience of body to be able to accomplish this. And therefore, it is important to people.

This, by the way, I’ve seen boggle a pc. I’m not advocating that you use this one. See? The pc would be saying, „Who wants this goal?“ and, „Who wants this goal?“ and so forth. Well, just gratuitously add eight more lines. Got the idea? Each one with the goal in front of the thing. And you’ll get a whole bunch more answers. You understand? You’re always at liberty to do this.

Now, you try to tell people about the mind, the mind, the mind, the mind, the mind, and they very often don’t know what you’re talking about. Or they think you’re apologizing or something, and they say, “Well, I had a brother once who was crazy,” you see. I mean, this sort of thing – this sort of thing is completely beyond them. But you start talking to them about geriatrics and longevity and this fellow says, “What is this thing, Scientology?”

Now, I don’t care how many lines you list. You can list 128 lines if you want to. But they’re all listed in the same way; they must be answerable and each line is put down at the top of a sheet of paper and you add 4 items to that list and put a check mark and go to the next page. Not five, not three: four. That is what you want, just exactly four.

“Well,” you’d say – you’d say, “Well, what do you suppose your life expectancy is?” This puts it where he lives, see. He might even collect some of these insurance tables. They’re the lyingest things you ever had anything to do with. But insurance men believe in them implicitly, and people who do actuarial work – that’s the phony mathematics that determine how much you pay for your policy – this kind of stuff gives you all kinds of tables.

And what if he gets an extra item?

And there’s one over in “Rockefeller” Center that’s the most alarming thing I ever had anything to do with. And you go up to it and you set on a dial – and – how old you are. And then you go around the corner and look at this other thing, and that tells you when you’re going to die. Sort of blunt. And not at all accurate.

He says, „But-but-but-but I’ve got this item here. I got this rabbit. I-Here’s this rabbit. I-I-I got this rabbit. I got this rabbit.“

But they figure it out this way: A baby who lives to the age of six months has got a chance of living to one year. Because most babies who are going to kick the bucket, of course, do so within the first six months, don’t you see? But the baby who lives to the age of one year has a life expectancy, you see, of maybe two-and-a-half years or something like that. But if somebody has lived to the good old age of fifteen, then he’s got a good chance of living, according to the averages, to the age of thirty-eight. And somebody who has lived to the age of thirty-eight has a good chance of living until he’s eighty-nine or something, you know. This is a totally mad series of scales, but everybody believes in them. It’s sort of “the magic charm.” “What’s your life expectancy?” It’s quite a game.

You say, „Good. I’ll write the rabbit down in the margin. You can have him the next time around.“ Got the idea?

And one time I went up there – many years ago – ”Rockefeller” Center. It was before the war. It didn’t say any war was coming up on the thing, so it was not a very good swami, it didn’t predict that. And I remember, I think I was something like twenty-seven or I was twenty-six. And I turned up twenty-six on the dial, you see. Went around the corner and took a look. And my God, you know, I’d been dead for years, according to what it said.

And this disciplines and puts the pc at cause over these wild automaticities that you so far have been accommodating-too accommodating about. Got the idea? Four. Not three, not five: four. And that leaves the auditor at cause over the session. See? Because listing sessions tend to become too uncaused. They go wild. The guy writes three sessions on, „Who or what would not want to have made catfish?“ See? And it goes on and on and on and on and on. Actually jams himself up by doing this too.

So anyway, regardless of what these expectancies are, the insurance policy situation is very easily overridden by changing somebody’s life expectancy. Now, you’d think insurance companies were interested in this, but actually they’re not. You can’t sell these things to an insurance company for the good reason that they don’t deal in anything but figures. And their figures are based upon expectancies of claim payments. And it’s all mathematics.

Now, why do I say „four“?

Actually, an automobile insurance company doesn’t care how many wrecks you have – doesn’t care for a minute how many wrecks you have, because it’s all going to be figured out actuarially and averaged, don’t you see. It’s – some of the fellows up at Lloyd’s worry because one or two of the syndicates may have the Queen Elizabeth or something, you see, under total insurance. Huh-huh! You know, and that’s just one ship, you know. And it’s worth skillions. And if it ever went thud, why, that would be the end of that syndicate. Don’t you see, all their – all their eggs are in one funnel, you know?

Well, four appears to be a fairly optimum number. But I would not be surprised to have you come down sometime or another with a real jammed-up case to one.

And anyway, where we have a spread out risk, though, like in life insurance, and that sort of thing, or automobile accidents or something, it’s just a matter of “who cares?” They just charge as much for the policy as they’re going to pay out in claims. I mean, that’s the blunt thing. They’re not in the business of making people live longer. As a matter of fact, most insurance companies would scream with terror if you proposed to them that you could make every one of their retirement policy holders live an additional hundred years.

Now, why would you drop?

Also, a socialist state is liable to get rather queasy on this subject. You finally break it down to the fact that there’s one three-months old baby left in the entire place who is able to work and isn’t on a pension, don’t you see? It’s just too ghastly to contemplate.

You wouldn’t drop on the case after you’d started. If you started with four, you’d continue with four. If you started with one, you’d continue with one. But one, that isn’t very quantitative. But you might get it so jammed up that the guy can’t do anything about it.

So you get a reverse philosophy going, that you will occasionally run into in geriatrics, which goes as follows: “If people weren’t kicking the bucket all the time, we would be in a terrible state. And it’s a very good thing everybody is dying off the way they are,” see.

Now, what happens exactly if you overlist?

And you get all kinds of reasons why death is a marvelous thing and so forth. And they’re actually thinking about their Aunt Tilde, who, if she lived forever, would never let them come into their inheritance or something of the sort. But now with inheritance tax they don’t even think that anymore.

First you get a comm lag. And then you get a „fishing for the right item.“ These occupy a lot of session time of which-there’s no value in occupying that session time, see? Has no value at all. And then the next phenomenon is, „Oh, that isn’t it!“ You got it?

The upshot of this condition in geriatrics is you’ve got people who want people to live longer, and you’ve got people who hope to hell they don’t, see, and would do anything they could to shorten it down just a little bit. But insurance companies have an open mind, and others don’t care. I’m just telling you this so that you won’t bother to approach these people with this subject. And – but I’m also telling you what arguments you will get into in this, and they’re quite funny.

All right. It’s first comm lags. „There’s-there’s a waterbuck and a tiger and a uhh-uhhm-uhh-uhh-uhh…“ At twenty-five dollars an hour. That’s crazy. You don’t want that. You get the idea? See, he’s listed sixteen items and then he goes on to uhh-uhh-uhh, and the next thing you give him, you say, „All right, give me another one on that line.“ If you did that - you ought to make this as an experiment some day just to see how it works because it always works out this way.

But when you say to somebody that you could increase his longevity, he’s liable to be much more interested than if you said you could make him healthy. He – well, I’m only talking about a small section of people – would be far more interested… Guy’s gimping along on crutches, you know, and he’s all caved in, both ears are bent, and he says – you say, “Well, I could make you healthy. I could cure you.” Well, he’s not sure. He’s not sure about that. He’s got his service facsimile right there in his pocket and he knows its various uses. And if you cured him up he wouldn’t get his pension anymore from the railroad. And you’ve threatened his survival.

He’ll say, „Well, it’s a big-no a small, a large-an enormous, a huge - uh-uh-a big-mm-mm-it’s a certain type of waterbuck. It’s a large-who, a who - big, small, no, no - it isn’t big, small - no, no - couldn’t be - so on and so on, so on. Oh, I finally got it! The item is a certain type of waterbuck. Yeah, that’s great.“

But if you told him you could make him live longer – Oh, now we have another entrance point on the same Joe, see. Ho-ho. You’re not only taking his pension – not taking his pension away from him, see, you are actually…

Now, if you said, „Give me some more items,“ he would be saying, „A waterbuck-no that isn’t it. A tiger-no that isn’t it. A giraffe-no that isn’t it. No, don’t put that down. Uh, that wouldn’t be it. A tiger. No, that isn’t it“ and so on.

So therefore, in actual fact, a Scientologist needs this other string to his bow, in the case of an argument along these lines. And you see somebody gimping on crutches, you say, “I could take you off the crutches,” and you’ve made an enemy. And you say, “I could make you live longer,” and you’ve made a friend.

You’ve got to run them all out in invalidations on a Prepcheck. To hell with that racket. See, that’s no good.

People, of course, really don’t believe that they can live longer, they just wish they could. And you have Greek plays, for instance, which convince you utterly of the folly of immortality. There’s one of them there who at the end of a thousand years of age, why, he’s just begging the gods to kill him off, because he’s lost all his friends and everything else like that. I think he was a dope. But anyhow, that’s beside the point.

What’s happening? What’s happening?

If he had that much influence with the gods in the first place, why didn’t he get his friends living longer, too? The guy was merely selfish.

On the ahh-ahh-ahh-ahh-ahh, what you’ve got is the line has flowed in one direction. You see, these flows-you’re listing flows-and you’ve run one of these flows to a point where it’s idling at the end, you see. It’s idling and it isn’t reaching anything and it’s kind of trying to come back. So he’s kind of saying, „Uhh-uhh-uhh.“ It can’t strike anything because he can’t reach in that direction anymore. The flow is now stuck.

So the point here is that you have a reverse argument, and there is use for this argument and this action. Now, how much longer you can make the person live, by the process of just doing a Problems Intensive, I don’t know, but it must be considerable. You can make a haphazard guess at it, and your guess would be as good as anybody else’s.

And the next phenomenon is: he does manage to reach something but he knows kind of that it’s undescribable. You’re asking him to reach too far.

This person is, let us say, thirty-five years old, and they feel like they’re going to die any minute, and you give them a Problems Intensive; well, you’ve increased their life expectancy – that is, how long they expect to live – regardless of how long you have increased their actual livingness. Do you see? And most people are fighting living any longer.

Don’t you see? And it’s too far in that direction. It’s undescribable and therefore the right thing and all of that and so forth. Now, if you-if he goes past that and manages to describe it, he’s already overreached himself considerably.

Now, let’s go into this a little more searchingly. What exactly leads one off into any conclusions on this subject, at all, that have any validity?

The next phenomenon is that the backflow on that same line Starts to hit. And so he no more than announces something than he is invalidated. You see? The backflow has started. You’re trying to reach out and it’s trying to come in. Or you’re trying to reach in and he’s trying to flow out. You get the idea? It’s self-invalidative. And if you run a line too long in one direction, you will get this, „Isn’t it, isn’t it, isn’t it? Catfish, isn’t it? Waterbuck, isn’t it? Tiger, isn’t it?“ You get the idea? And all you’re running into there is bank phenomena.

Well, right there in that pavilion you’re using these days, I conducted a bunch of plant experiments. Just vegetable matter, true, but it had something binging in it, and theta-bopping. And I conducted a series of experiments. And in the far end of that, that’s furthest from the chapel here, there were a bunch of tomato plants which were championship tomato plants. Nobody has ever heard their like. I’ve got photographs of them and records of them to this day. But they were growing as far – as many as forty-seven tomatoes to the truss. This is unheard of it’s absolutely impossible, see. And they were growing up in height, higher than sixteen feet. And nothing was killing them off. They hadn’t heard of seasons. Their temperature was being held constant, their moisture was being held constant, and I developed quite a little bit of stuff in order to get something to do this. Everybody thought I was interested in horticulture. I really wasn’t. I was interested in several other things – namely disease and things of that character. But very carefully, none of these tomato plants were given any injuries.

The comm lag, the indescribable, the invalidated; and that is the cycle that those listings go.

Now, the normal way of raising tomatoes is you punish them until they yield tomatoes. You snip them. Every time they try to put out a new little branch or something like that, that you don’t want, you snip them. And you top them and you do this to them and you do that to them. You do other things to them. And you’re always at them, you know. Always at them, at them, at them, at them, you know. And they finally will grow a lot of tomatoes for you. Yeah, they’ll grow some big tomatoes and so forth. But oddly enough they are very fragile.

So, you want to stop short of that and keep the pc fluid. Now, the way you can keep him running properly in these lines is to get a large number of lines and let him put a definite number on each line. The-a good average number is four. But if you start in with four then he damn well gives you four. And that’s all there is to it. And you’ll find very shortly he gets totally educated on the thing. He’ll give you four-one, two, three, four. Next line, one, two, three, four. Next line, one, two, three, four. Next line, one, two, three, four.

And hothouse tomatoes, growing, is an adventurous activity. You have the banker on one hand and on the other side, why, you have every disease known to tomatoes – all manner of blights and fungus and this and that and the other thing. You never saw anything as sick as a tomato plant when it’s been got at, at, at, at, at, more, snip, snip, snip, snip. See, it all comes under the heading of, “Care for it, care for it, you know. Look after your tomatoes, care for it. Torture them. And when you finally get this going real good, why, they’ll bear you a few tomatoes,” but it actually establishes a short cycle of life.

And then he’ll say, „Ahh-ahh-ahh,“ on the next line. And then, one, two, three, four. And one, two, three, four. And one, two, three, four. And one, two, three, four. And, man, you’re getting items, man. And that guy’s going Clear in a hurry. Savvy?

In other words, the life term of a tomato and the amount of punishment that a tomato plant is given have something in common. That’s something to remember there. They’re both the same – a similar curve.

None of this ahh-ahh-ahh-ahh-ahh, you know? Auditing is not an exercise in gargling.

Now, a tomato plant which is abused will become ill. A tomato plant standing right next to it, wide open for infection, that hasn’t become abused – hasn’t been abused, doesn’t become ill readily. Or if it does, it can be cured. In other words, abuse has something to do with incidence of illness and has a great deal to do with longevity. How long’s this plant going to live?

Now, that’s how to get fast listing done.

So I raised half of that pavilion over there full of tomato plants that you had – we finally had to shoot them down, that’s all – I don’t know where they would have gone. But they were filling up the whole house, and they were the most cheerful tomatoes that anybody ever had anything to do with. And they were just getting bigger and producing more tomatoes. And they’d already gone through two seasons. And they were preparing happily to go into a third season. I said, “The devil with it. We have concluded all. I want to conclude. Cut them down.” And we did. And that’s the only reason that house isn’t well, that’s the only reason the whole pleasure garden out there isn’t full of tomatoes to this day.

Now, the funny part of it is, the more lines you’ve got the shorter your listing will be. The more lines you list, the less listing you’re going to do. Let me give you an idea. This is-this is suppositional. That on four lines you would have had to have listed twenty thousand items to free needle. So we list eight items and you would only have to list on all-that is-this is a total number of items-maybe eighteen thousand. See? We list sixteen lines and we only list twelve thousand items. You get the idea? You see, it isn’t per line. That’s just the gross number.

Now, stationed around these tomatoes, and amongst this, under exactly the same climatic conditions, were tomatoes which were abused, and which did not follow this curve of action. They were the same tomatoes, under the same environmental action, and they became (quote) sick (unquote), and their longevity was very short. Now, they were not badly abused, they were simply brushed against rather regularly, and they were snipped the way tomatoes are supposed to be snipped, you know, and so forth. But they never even managed to pass their diseases over onto these other tomatoes.

Now, perhaps you could go too far out on this. And the only way you could go too far out on this is by failing to sandwich the causative and the effective properly. Now, you can have eight causative and eight effective without getting into trouble. But if you start up from that number you had better have four causative, four effect. You understand? Four cause, four effect.

Now, I’m telling you as much as one could observe within the crude limits of experimentation which can be accomplished on this planet in any case. These were as well done as you can do such experiments. But no experiment is perfectly done, ever. The fellow who perfectly does an experiment – he hasn’t been found yet.

Now, you understand what I mean by cause and effect. „Who would want to be a goddess?“ and „Who the hell would want a goddess?“ You get the idea? See? Get that as cause and effect, see? Who’d want to be one? Who’d want to have one? That’s your four lines in sequence, one to the next. You savvy?

So, within those limits, these facts are very factual. But certainly, I can show you the photographs of these tomatoes, and my God, you never saw tomatoes grow and grow and grow. And trusses would come out, and tomatoes would grow on the trusses, and so on. I think the record one for England is something rather low like thirty-four tomatoes to the truss, something like that. And these were going – we didn’t even bother to count all of them, because you couldn’t reach them all, you know. But many of these were forty-seven tomatoes to the truss, see.

Now, oddly enough, you can do this rather badly and still win. Lucky - lucky that it’s that way. On the four lines you had to be very precise, you had to keep your mid rudiments in, you had to do this, you had to do that, you had to check-prepcheck everything, you had to prepcheck it every time you turned around, you had to do this.

Here you had longevity; you also had reproductiveness and creativity. You had these various things. So some of the fondest theories were upset in handling those tomatoes. All of which has to do – had a lot to do with the human being, if you consider a human being mainly body. Because a body follows apparently these same physiological lines. And I’ve seen nothing to disprove this fact: that a body and plant life and so forth, these things are all cousins. What laws apply to one tend to apply to another.

Why?

And I learned enough out of this to learn that abuse determines longevity. And that was the datum that came out of that. And once I had stared this in the face, I looked around in amongst human beings to see if this continued, and to a marked degree it did. And all of our experience in Dianetics and so forth, tended to conclude that anyway, even long before these experiments.

Well, in looking into this to find out why, I found out that the items were being stacked up in alter-is. So if the items are being stacked in alter-is, why then of course, you had to prepcheck often.

Now, the other thing was that abuse determined incidence of illness. A thing was as sick as it was abused and its life was as short as it was abused. See, these two things emerged as parallel conclusions as a result of these plant experiments. Now, that means that there are two levels or two lines of approach here, as far as dissemination of Scientology is concerned. You can talk about incidence of illness, or illness, or you can talk about longevity.

Now, why did the items themselves have to fire?

Now, these of course are quite inferior to talking about a thetan and clearing and beingness of a person, his individuality and that sort of thing. But remember, when you’re talking about individuality or an individual or an individual being, you’re not talking about a body. See? And so therefore, these things are true when you mean a body.

Well, they had to fire because you did-you didn’t have any abundance of lines: you were running on an economy of lines, which gave you, of course you had to get those lines which fired most and then you had a chance. But by listing a large number of lines, why, you’re all set.

And on a planet which is terribly fixated on bodies and so forth, these two things are very strong and powerful dissemination media. If everybody’s interested in the body and their minds are all busy being interested in the body, you can give them a couple of data about the body which is quite interesting. And one of those is that the longevity of a body can be increased or decreased in livingness, and the other, that incidence to illness and being well can also be monitored, you see. These two things can occur. A person can be made “weller,” or a person can be made sicker, or a person can be made to live longer, or look less old, or can be made to live less long and look older, you see. These things can all be concluded from these things. And they are not such foreign statements that people – people can misunderstand them. And they’re all quite factual and so forth.

Now, I don’t know what the proper number of lines is. I know very easily that sixteen you could undoubtedly get by with. You could get by with sixteen lines. Twenty-four lines-that’s your next number up. That’s dandy ; they’re fine; that’s fine. Thirty-two-okay; okay. Forty-fine. See, it’s almost a matter of, who cares?

Now, the abuse of the tomato plant, and the deletion of abuse from the life of a human being have a parallel. In other words, if you delete the abuse, you have done something like not abuse. And that was how I cross-translated the experiment, rightly or wrongly. In other words, if you could pick up the abuses out of a person’s lifetime or pick up those factors which made the person believe he was abused, you then picked up, of course, the characteristics of not having been abused. Do you follow that? And sure enough, that’s how longevity follows.

But you get those together and you determine the number of lines you’re going to have unless the pc had-starts having leftover rabbits, a case of leftover rabbits, why you wouldn’t have to form up any more lines.

So these tomato experiments were important to that degree, but you couldn’t very easily process a tomato, at least I haven’t been able to yet. Turn on theta bops on them, and rock slams and things like that, but I never got into good communication with them. I’m sure they were ready to go into session, but I didn’t know the language.

But now here’s the precise way in which you list one of these things. I’m going to go worse, then I’m going to go over this again with you-formation of lines-because this is a headache. But let me tell you-let me get it in so I won’t forget it. Here is an exact, proper listing session. I want to tell you what an exact listing session is. Exactly what it is.

Anyway, the point I’m talking about here is, when you’re talking to a world that is terribly fixated on bodies, that world will listen on the subject of bodies.

You sit yourself down. You sits the pc down. You adjust his chair and you get the can squeeze and you put him into Model Session. You got that now? All right.

And there are two things which utterly bypass the laws against healing and the laws against helping people, and so forth. And those things are longevity – geriatrics. I mean, that’s wide open, man. Make them live longer. It’s wide open. It has no medical connotations connected with it whatsoever. You’re not giving them drugs to live longer. And the other one, on the other side of the fence, of course, is, “Maybe you’re not sick, maybe you’re just suppressed,” see.

And then the firstest thing you do is you super-tiger drill the goal till it reads. See? You get that goal reading.

Now, let’s look at this other one for a moment, which is aside from geriatrics. This dissemination mechanism is of great interest to us. Because you can say this – particularly in England you can say this, “If you’ve been depressed…” We use that word instead of suppressed, and it’s not too good to continue to use this button “suppress,” because you have to tiger drill it hard because people have kidded about it, you know, and done other things with it. But “If you’ve been depressed, you can develop symptoms which look exactly like illness.”

Now, the magic phrase, „In auditing on the goal,“ or „Since blank“ (whenever the goal was found or since the last time he was prepchecked up to) are also usable in that Tiger Drill. „In auditing on the goal to catch catfish has anything been suppressed? In auditing on the goal to catch catfish is there anything you’ve been careful of?“ You understand? And you drill that thing back into a read before you start a thing in that session. And after that you don’t do a darn thing with it. You don’t do anything with lines. You don’t do anything with anything. You just list. You got it to read, that’s it.

Then you go up to somebody and you say to them like this, you say, “Hello Joe. Joe, have you ever – you ever been sick?”

Now, of course, if your session goes to hell you get your mid rudiments in. But you don’t do anything else with the goal. If your session goes to pieces, why, you get your middle rudiments in. That’s when you use middle rudiments.

And he says, “You kidding?”

Now, middle rudiments are best put in with this line, not „In this session“ but „Since the last time I audited you.“ Got that? They’re always put in best that way. „Since the last time I audited you.“ I know it’s right in the middle of the session and the guy’s all out of session and everything else and so forth, well you figure this must have gone wrong between sessions.

And you say, “Well, you ever go to the doctor?”

Why? Why is this?

And he says, “Sure.”

Well, I discovered a new phenomenon. There’s a new phenomenon. You miss a withhold on the pc in a session, it’ll key in a withhold that happened before the session. Now, that’s a hell of a thing. This had to happen to us, see. I’ll give you an idea. You say-the pc says to you, one of his items is a buttercake, see, and he says to you, „Buttercake.“

“Oh, did he cure you?”

And you say, „A blossom.“ You’re muttering to yourself

And he says, “No, of course not.”

And he says, „No, no, no. No, no. A-a buttercake.“

Well, you follow your line in, “Well, maybe you weren’t sick. Maybe you’re just depressed.”

And you say, „A splutterbath.“

And he says, “Huh?” His interest will be caught at that point.

And, he says, „No, no, no, no, a buttercake. A buttercake. A buttercake. That-that’s what I want on there, a buttercake.“

“Maybe you weren’t sick, maybe you’re just depressed.”

And you say, „All right. Waterbuck.“

“What do you mean?”

Now, then you finally wake up, see-this was a warm day-and you say, „Oh, a buttercake.“ And you put down a buttercake.

“Well, a lot of people – you know, they feel depressed and they are depressed for a long time and life depresses them. You know, it, pushes in on them, depresses them one way or the other. And they will eventually develop a feeling or a belief that they are sick. And they’ll actually develop symptoms of sickness when they’re not sick.”

And you say everything is all right but now the middle rudiments are a little bit out. So you say, „In this session yip-yap, yup-yup, whoop-whop…“ And you straighten it all out and the pc is still out of session.

And this guy’ll say, “Maybe I’m not sick! Hm! Hm! What are you talking about? Yeah, maybe I’m not sick. All right, what do I do about it?”

Well, what’s taken place here?

Well, you say, “Get processed.”

Something very interesting has taken place. Because you missed, see, that’s a withhold-you made him have a withhold called a buttercake-you will key in a missed withhold that wasn’t registering in the beginning rudiments. Heehhh! This would happen to us! Now, the liability of it-you must understand this-because the liability of it is this: that it didn’t happen between sessions but is a missed withhold from eighteen years ago. Ooooh!

And that’s all, see. You give that person a Problems Intensive. And let me guarantee, the data which has come rolling in on me here in the last, I don’t know how many – well, I guess the last two or three months – have been demonstrating some of the wildest recoveries you ever wanted to hear. Perfectly illegal diseases, they must not be treated. I think there are twenty-five diseases that you better not have in California, because it’s illegal to treat them. By law, it’s illegal to treat them. Cancer, arthritis – there’s a whole bunch of them. You mustn’t treat them; you can go to jail for it. I think that even applies to medical doctors. But of course it safely applies to them.

Well, if you just know that one can happen, you can also get it from eighteen years ago. But that’s why a pc appears to stay ARC broke, even though you get in the middle ruds. You got it?

Anyhow – oh, and you talk about – you talk about fancy treatments – I don’t know how much a treatment for arthritis costs, on gold shots. They’re called gold shots with reason. Man, you’d have to be one of the biggest directors in the Bank of England able to sign those five pound notes in your own fair hand in order to get enough gold shots to make you well. And furthermore, cortisone and other such things are only relief as long as they’re administered. They cure nothing, they just relieve. So you’ve got tremendous numbers of relieving medicines for this vast number of diseases.

In other words, when you missed a withhold in the session it keyed in a missed withhold. Weird business, you see. You hadn’t missed it up to then; you had missed no part of it because it had never come up. Well, because you missed one in the session you key in one and miss it. You got that?

Now, if you came up and said – correctly, it so happens – ”Well, I don’t care whether the fellow has cancer or arthritis or hangnails! Nothing to do with me. He’s depressed. He’s not sick. I’m not practicing medicine. Sure I’ve cured him – of being depressed! And very often when people are depressed they exhibit symptoms of illness. All right, he’s well. So he recovered from his hangnails. Who cares? I haven’t told him I’d…” And you must do this, you, “I’ve never treated him for hangnails. I never had anything to do with hangnails. I never recommended it. Never even diagnosed he had them. He said he had them, but that’s nothing to do with me! All I did was treat his depressed or suppressed condition,” whichever word you want to use. “I treated his suppression. Life had suppressed him very badly, and he’d answered by telling people he was sick.”

Audience: Mm-hm. Yes.

“Oh, you’re treating hypochondria.”

So a good prevention of this-but not the perfect prevention of this-is of course, „Since the last time I audited you.“ Now, that will catch most of them. But sometimes you just got up and drunk the wrong brand of coffee; it must be, because it’s just unlucky. You keyed in one when he was five years old and it doesn’t even get included into the Problems Intensive run on him, you know? And there’s a missed withhold sitting there staring everybody in the face and the pc’s all ARC broke and nobody can make anything out of it.

“No, no, no, no. He didn’t even believe he was sick. He just felt sick.”

Now also, you could have gone past something or other about his goal or missed an item or he’s suppressed one. And that will operate as a missed withhold and key in an earlier missed withhold. You get the idea? In other words, he gets in a snarl, but it’s still under the heading of missed withholds.

This is the peculiarity that you can drive home. You could get into one of the most circuitous – and people could run it out on you in sessions on the half-truth rudiment – get into one of the most circuitous arguments you ever wanted to get into in your life. Either one of these – geriatrics or “not sick, suppressed,” see. Either one of those things gives you an absolute wealth of material that you can embroider back and forth, and work one way or the other and talk about. You can generate tons of ideas. It just starts an automaticity of generating ideas.

The only thing you’ve got to solve when a pc continues to be ARC breaky is the whenness of the missed withhold. See? It’s the whenness of the missed withhold that will louse you up in a listing session or a goals finding session.

You’re talking to some bird and he says, “Well, I don’t know. I’ll never be the same again. I know that. Ever since my first marriage, I’ve been pretty well caved in, and I’ll never be the same again. I know I’ll just go on being ill like this,” and so forth. And you say – well, you know you’re on the wrong button. You see, that’s the wrong button to play on that case. So you just go into geriatrics, see. And you say, “Well, actually – actually I realize that some people are practically incurable. I realize that. There are some things that are practically incurable.” And somebody can run it out of you in a session, you see. Because what you mean of course is his fixed idea on the subject of he has to be sick. He thinks it’s a sickness you’re talking about and you just simply tell him, “Well, there’s another thing Scientology can make you do, and that’s live longer.” That has an apparency. “There are some indications that processing makes one live longer.” Well, you’re not being dishonest there! You’re not being dishonest there at all.

You missed something so you keyed in an earlier one that you hadn’t missed. You know? He stole a piece of cake off of you two months ago and it’s never come up. You’ve been auditing right across this thing; you’ve been just doing fine in the session and everything’s been going along dandy and session after session, never come up, never disturbed him, he’s in good ARC with you, never been critical. And then one fine day he says, „Buttercup.“

You can certainly tell him, “It makes you look younger.” You can tell him that with some truth. They’ll go consulting the mirror every time they turn around to see if they live younger. This is in a world, of course, which is totally fixated on a body and you’re trying to disseminate to people who haven’t heard of anything, who don’t know anything about clearing, don’t know anything about releasing, don’t know anything about anything. And there you go. It opens up a door.

And you say, „All right. Waterbuck.“

Now, the reason why I’m addressing this has nothing to do with whether or not I want to sell people an idea. We’ve got to have a bridge. We’ve got to have a bridge from raw meat to clearing. Well, that bridge has got to contain reality for the person it’s happening to. And unless we have a bridge, we’ll simply clear up all those people who are already interested in Scientology and that’ll be the end of the line. There’s got to be some bridge that brings the person into contact with a reality on the mind and life. I know nothing better than a Problems Intensive or a series of Problems Intensives.

And here we go. You’ve missed a withhold in session, he keys it in-all of a sudden the pc’s all chopped up, very ARC breaky and you finally get very, very clever and finally find the stolen cake two months ago.

Now, let us suppose you are running a clinic. It was – you were talking about making people live longer or you were talking about making people feel better. We don’t care what you’re doing, as long as it’s either one of another or these particular activities. You have a – well, let’s say it’s a clinical type co-audit. You’re using interns or anything you can lay your hands on, you know, and you’re giving people Problems Intensives. And they’re walking in and the Problems Intensives are given at two hours a week or nine hours a week or thirty-eight hours a week. We don’t care how these things are given. And they’re getting processed and they’re walking in and all you’re doing is running just a straight Problems Intensive, that’s all. And you’re just getting the buttons repetitively, and it’s all right, because you’re running a Prepcheck repetitive style. Doesn’t matter whether the button is clean or not. If the fellow can’t think of any more answers, why, you just say, “Well, all right,” and shift to another button.

And you say, „How in the name of common sense could I have been auditing this character for two months?“ Well, it wasn’t keyed in. It just stayed there. You know? There it was.

All of this is perfectly fine. And that fellow’s going to come out the other end, if any kind of a job of auditing was done at all, looking and feeling younger – geriatrics – and well of something he has been sick of both are going to happen to him, if anything was run at all. I’m getting some amazing reports on what a Problems Intensive is doing.

You know an engram never becomes anything unless it’s keyed in. Well, that’s the same thing with a missed withhold. See? A withhold-a potential withhold does not do anything to anybody until he withholds it and you or somebody else misses it. You got the idea? It takes the action, then the pc’s withholdingness and then somebody missing the withhold for this thing to really go up in a cloud of blue smoke. You see that?

You know, it’s sort of like you climb this arduous mountain to find a nugget, you see, and you get up to the top of this mountain and somebody down in the valley, down below – there you are mopping the sweat off your brow, and he says, “Hey!” he says, “There’s one here that’s two feet in diameter.” He says, “Would that do?” Well, we just bypassed it because the whole top of the mountain is gold, don’t you see?

It’s sort of the way you fire a depth charge: you can put a 16-inch shell through a depth charge without exploding the thing. But a tack hammer hammered against one end of it, igniting a primer, igniting ground-up TNT then ignites solid TNT and you get an explosion. And you’d never get an explosion unless it went exactly on that route. And that’s the way a missed withhold goes together. It’s been sitting there ready to be withheld and ready to be missed. See?

There still is that nugget in the valley. We’ve evidently bypassed the Problems Intensive. We’ve bypassed the potentialities of “suppressed, not sick,” see. We’ve bypassed geriatrics completely. Haven’t paid any attention to it until tonight; you probably haven’t even heard the name. All of these things, you see, we’ve just thrown them away. We aren’t paying any attention to them at all.

So getting in your middle rudiments on a pc in a listing session, particularly, or a goals finding session, it’s very important that when you’ve had an ARC break or it’s a big chop-up or you don’t understand what’s going on with the pc and he’s still ARC broke, that you get your middle rudiments in in such a fashion as to get any withhold which might have been keyed in outside the area of the session. See? Because the boob probably keyed in something earlier. Got that? That’s quite important.

Now, I dare say we have people right here – their hidden standard is whether they look younger. You know, they go to the mirror every morning, and see if they look – and some of them, who want to look older. You see, it’s – they’re using age, or appearance of age, as a hidden standard to find out how they’re doing. Are they looking younger? Are they looking older? You know? Well, this is a very, very standard, hidden standard. This runs all through the human race. And if it’s that general, well, you’d certainly better have a use for the generality of the button. And the generality of the button is this.

So all right. You just go right on to the end of the session. You list, list, list, list, list-just carrying on with what I was telling you how to run a listing session. You go right on to the end of the session right up to the-to the clock and give him the business with the end rudiments and bring him right on out of session. In other words, you check nothing else, you prepcheck nothing else, you do nothing, nothing, nothing, except list. Got it?

I’m not trying to teach you how to be con men or something like that. I’m just trying to teach you how to talk to people within their sphere of interest. Now, in Book Three of Book One – that is the third book of that first volume, Book One, Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health – it says that if you can parallel – that’s right at the beginning of it, if you can parallel what the mind is doing, you see, you can reach it and do something for it. Well, I’m trying to teach you a trick here to take raw meat and get their – to parallel, and for you to be able to parallel what their mind is doing. You see? That starts a session before the session happens. And I’ve all been – always been looking for these little buttons one way or the other and have accumulated a lot of information about it – information which I’m sure you can use.

All right. Now, that’s all listing sessions consist of

So, you’ve got these two buttons, and with a superfixation on the body, the fellow is thinking, “How well am I?” and “How young or old am I?” See? “How well or sick am I?” “How young or old am I?” He’s asking these questions all the time.

Now, what happens if you go to free needle on a line? You go to free needle on a line?

And on a superfixation on the body you can always get him into a communication on this subject, because his attention is fixed on it. How do people greet each other on this planet? They say, “How are you?” meaning “How sick are you today?” And the other fellow brags up and says, “Well, I’ve had a cold lately, but uh…” so forth. Just read a letter that emanates from one farm district to another farm district, just catch the mail on censorship, and it all has to do with health and Aunt Lizzie’s kidney stones, you know. These are the milestones of time, you see, and this sort of thing. Well, those minds are definitely stuck on state of the body. And of course, state of the body is young or old, sick or well.

Well, you ask him the question and it doesn’t disturb it. Well, now this is why four: four are never going to jam nothing. See, just four items. It isn’t going to jam anything. But you might be careful toward the end of the thing and only get one item if you were starting to run into lots of free needles. Got the idea? You could do your four straight on through without ruining the pc.

Now, the reason I’ve called this lecture “Geriatrics” is because it’s a brand-new – brand-new sphere. It’s a brand-new look. It’s a brand-new communication line, and it’s a very old hidden standard. I imagine, trillions of years ago, when you wanted to know if you were getting along all right, you stuck your doll body up in front of a mirror to see how its dents were, you know? And you’d say, “Well, I’m getting on now, I’m getting pretty dented.” You know, “Paint’s getting kind of worn off. Face is no longer shiny.”

See, you would just go-the way-a listing session has very little to do with the meter. See, you can watch your meter and watch your TA action. Make sure your TA action is continuing because your TA action isn’t continuing, your pc’s out of session. Middle rudiments are out, see. And-or you didn’t tiger drill the goal to read, see. It’s mostly tiger drilling the goal to read-that’s the important thing in beginning the session. You get TA action if you get to keep that goal tiger drilled.

Now, you’ve come on down the track trillennia, you have a meat body, and you go up to the mirror and you say, “Well, I’m doing very badly because my nose is shiny,” you know. There’s all kinds of changed considerations on this thing. But thetans have always been going on these two views. “How young or old do I look? How sick or well am I?”

All right. Now, it has got that-you’ve got the goal to read and then you list it. And you’ve got written across the top of the sheet of paper (you can usually double column these), you write the title of the line, you see-the whole line wording across the top of the sheet-and then you come down here over on the left and you write four items and then you put a tick and that tick goes just below and to the left of the fourth word.’ It’s just a little strike of the pencil. Why?. That’s because you then never have to add up the lines to find out if you’ve got four or not, see? It’s always apparent that the unit is four. And that’s counting the next four because you can very easily see if you have four without doing any numbering.

Therefore, these are very, very good dissemination media. They’re a good media for conversation. And I give them to you simply because you have a pat solution in the Problems Intensive.

And then you write those four and then you flip the sheet, see, to the next page and you write the four and you flip the sheet to the next page and you write the four and so forth. And you can have a whole mass of things and you can put-if you can make it-two columns to the sheet. And then, of course, each sheet has a back with two columns on it. And you have as many sheets as you have lines. And this makes very neat listing and the pc gets monotonously used to having a piece of paper flipped over in front of his face. You got it?

Now, what clearing does for this is fantastic. We haven’t even talked about what clearing would do for this, to any degree at all. I haven’t a clue, because it is just too much. It’s beyond a ready embrace of the mind. Age is hooked on to the body, normally, by the thetan himself as self-expression. And it is held in place in terms of engrams and secondaries. It’s held right there, man. Anything that is wrong with a body is held into it and on it by the thetan who has that body. That’s it. As long as he believes he can’t grow a new leg, he won’t have one, either. And this is very observably the place. There is frankly no limitation on what thought can do to structure. There is no limitation on that. There is a fantastic short look on what structure can do for function or thought.

All right. Now, it becomes embarrassing when you start running out of captioned things in the middle. And nobody’s had a solution to this yet. I’ve-we might have a mirror clip or something that reads the line on the back of the sheet while you’re writing on the front of it or something. You get what I mean? I mean, you haven’t got any lines prepared and you’ve got no sheets prepared, and where are we going now? You see. Well, you solve that the best you can. Right now the technology concerned with that is summatable in a four letter word: cope.

But nevertheless, this is a ready tool. This is something that you need. You’re sitting there, somebody says to you, “What is Scientology?” You look them over. You can tell them it’s something that makes you well, or something that makes you younger. You can tell them, not in a dictionary definition of this or that which they won’t understand anyhow because they won’t have any comparable datum. The reason you have trouble defining Scientology to people is because there is no datum of comparable magnitude in this universe.

Now, you’ll find out that one listing session isn’t going to knock the goal badly out of read, and in fact will improve its read. And ordinarily, unless you’ve run a very lousy session, indeed, why-you know, run it with the rudiments all out and you never got them in in the first place and you missed all the reads and all this sort of thing-you’ll find out ordinarily that if you read your goal at the end (and you ought to do this a time or two just to see the facts of the case) „To catch catfish,“ pow! „To catch catfish,“ pow! you know? I mean that thing is really reading then. And you’ll find out at the beginning of the next session it isn’t reading at all.

So they always put up a datum of comparable magnitude and hang you right away into a suppression and disagreement. So you have a hard time. Because they say, “Oh, it’s like Christian Science.”

Well, what happened?

“No,” you say. You’re hung right away with a suppression. You say, “No, it is not like Christian Science.” And that puts you into a disagreement, and you haven’t got the thing in-session, don’t you see. There it isn’t flying now.

Well, pcs think. It’s unfortunate, but they do. Some pcs are awful busy. I almost say this to pcs sometimes and I think I’ve been known to, is: „My God, you’ve been busy,“ you know? „What a busy, busy pc.“

But they say, “Well, what is Scientology?”

You know: „Think, think, think, think, figure, figure, figure, figure - invalidate, invalidate-suggest, suggest, suggest, suggest-fail to reveal, fail to reveal, fail to reveal, fail to reveal-mistake, mistake. Could it be a mistake? Mistake, mistake, mistake-mistake, mistake. Well, I’d better suppress the whole thing! Now, if I’m very careful until the next session, nothing will happen to the goal.“ You see? Pretty wild. Busy.

And you say, “Well, Scientology is a study of livingness. A study of livingness. Now, do you often wish you were younger?”

Anyhow, it’s very strange what listing a goal will do for a goal. But, remember this about goals; remember this about goals: that listing-this is by actual test-listing will not polish up a goal all by itself

The fellow says, “Oh, yeah, yeah, I do that.”

In other words, you can’t take a goal which is totally out of read and then list on it for a while and make it read. Now, I’ve already seen that tested and I have finally come to that conclusion. That conclusion might be based on firmer evidence, I might have examined it longer but I’ve just examined three pcs whose goal had been found a long time ago, who’d had the goal listed but nobody had ever polished up the goal for a period of months and months-in one case, a whole year-nobody had ever polished up that goal, it had only been listed, it was totally submerged, the pc’s tone arm was way up and stuck, the pc looked like hell and nobody could make the goal read. You understand?

And you say, “Well, good. Scientology processing and so forth would possibly permit you to achieve that desire.”

So that was good enough evidence for me. Because when I went in and rolled up my sleeves and tiger drilled the thing I got it to a total flat. Then I did a Dynamic Assessment and came right back to the same goal and got it firing like crazy. But it took that much to get that goal firing again, see? It took that much. And it also took a whole lot of, „In auditing, on the goal blankety-blank, has anything been suppressed?“ You know, a whole lot of that type of Tiger Drill and I finally got that goal firing again. But remember that goal had been listed in the interim. That’s interesting, isn’t it?

Now, they’ve got a datum of comparable magnitude – themselves. So never let them find a datum of comparable magnitude; you give them one. Now, your datum of comparable magnitude may be, to a baseball manager, his baseball team. You see, but always give them the datum of comparable magnitude. It’s themselves or it’s what they own or it’s their family or it’s their aging or sick mother or their ailing wife. It is something like that, don’t you see? It’s a datum of comparable magnitude. And you can say – it’s almost a short circuit on the thing. They say, “What is Scientology?”

So listing in absence of Tiger Drilling at the beginning of every session is liable to find your pc getting lumpy. In other words, they’re liable not to go Clear unless you do this. That’s the secret back of it: you’ve got to keep the goal firing and keep the listing constant and regular and routine.

Take a look at them: “Do you feel – do you often wish you were younger? Have you been sick lately?”

Now, let’s get into self-auditing on listing. Can it be done? Yes, if somebody’s around to tiger drill the goal. And if somebody holds the club over the pc and says, „You list these lines and that is it. You don’t list any other lines but these.“

The fellow says, “Well no, I’ve never been sick a day in my life.”

You could do this. This is not necessarily optimum. It’s probably a long way from optimum, but I can tell you already it can be done.

“Well, do you wish you felt younger?”

Now, how far this can be done is determinable by somebody sitting down and tiger drilling the goal into action at routine and regular intervals, see? But that’s sort of on the emergency basis. You understand? That’s getting out there to an emergency. It can be done. It isn’t done well. And one of the reasons it isn’t done well-one of the reasons it isn’t done well is because the pain and sen will appear on the wrong lines. You got that?

“Uh – No, I – i never did. I – i don’t – don’t ever wish I felt any younger.”

Sounds funny, but the guy auditing himself is going into different valences and there’s no auditor to give him the commands so he skips over into other valences to give himself the command and he gives the command to another valence. You got the idea? And therefore you louse up where the pain and sen belong. You got that figured out? You know, he goes into the oppose line to list the want. You understand? He goes into the want line to list the oppose. So he gets the sen and the pain in the wrong places. And this gets him awfully confused. You see, there’s a liability to that. So self-auditing is different than being listed on it. But there’s a possibility of doing so. Okay? Emergency situation.

“Do you have any ailing members of your family?”

All right. Now, there’s a great deal to know about goals and goals listing and so forth. And I’d better give you what I can think of right here in an awful hurry because it isn’t down anyplace else.

“Oh, yes, there’s my dear old mother.”

Now, when you are proving out a goal, you will find that sen occurs, sensation, by which we mean motion-sensation is a pressure-and misemotion and by the way, sexual sensation, all of those things occur on the Suppress, Careful of and Fail to reveal buttons. And on Invalidate, Suggest and Mistake you get pain.

“Well good. Scientology would be something that would make her well.”

Now, you’re somewhere close to the guy’s right goal or somewhere close to his goals channel when it behaves that way. But on a checkout of an actual goal you get pain. The only place you’ll get sen is when you’re hitting Suppress, Careful of and Fail to reveal. You’re liable to get some sen when you’re running those, but otherwise you’re going to get pain, and pain is dominant in a checkout. If you’re checking out the right goal, the pc’s got pain; that’s dominant. There’s more pain there than there is sen and when you finally got it all the way checked out there is no sen-no sen at all and only pain. Got that? Because just to some degree you haven’t tiger drilled it enough if he’s still got sen. You got-you see how this is?

“Oh, uh – it’s medicine?”

Now, don’t worry about this too much if your imperfections of auditing and pc’s out-of-sessionness and another thing leaves some sen on his right ear while his throat is being cut with a very sharp knife repeatedly. See? Don’t worry about this. Just make sure, for the rule of thumb, that it’s lots of pn, see? He’s got to have pn. The pc who has no pain while the goal is being checked out is not being checked out on his goal. That’s one very fast way of knowing about it. But that, by the way, isn’t enough to stop checking out a goal. You are honor-bound to check a goal until it neither has pain nor sen. And that will keep you from erring anyway.

“No. No,” it’s – you’re off on the wrong line, so you’d better amplify completely your statement. You’d say, “Well, Scientology is a system of processing which does certain things for the individual and straightens them out. And some people are not sick; they’re just suppressed,” and so forth, now.

As long as he’s got pain or sensation that began at the time you started checking the goal-that began during the course of your checking-you’ve got to continue until there ain’t none. In other words, that doesn’t mean you’ve got to continue the session till there isn’t any, but you’ve got to keep on that course of events, session after session, until there isn’t any. You understand? Because some goals might possibly go as long as six and a half hours to a fade. That’s horrible, isn’t it?

And he says, “Your mother – uh – my mother,” he says, “My mother, she always was kind of suppressed by my father. Oh God, I hated him! You know, he was no good at all!”

I did a goal in Washington-was marvelous, made a horrible liar out of me. I checked it for about an hour. It wasn’t firing beautifully, but it sure looked like a goal. Man, it sure looked like a goal. It was „to be totally aware.“ Man, did that look like a goal! Well, I said, „That’s good enough for me! Ha! Nothing to it.“ Turns out that it was the principal ending on the pc’s old goal. It was a modifier. The pc’s old goal went just before it. It sounded just like a goal, you understand. So, of course, it checked out hard. And it moved back into the pc’s old goal and of course, it dropped out and the old goal stayed in. But that was only because it was a consecutive goal. You got the idea? It followed all the rules-my God, it had rocket reads and everything else.

And you say, “Well, there you are. She’s pretty suppressed. Huh? Well, you could take something like Scientology to pick up that suppression and straighten her out.”

That-don’t make that shiver you to death on this because it only took another-about another half an hour or so. Took about an hour and a half of fooling before that thing did a fade. And then this was all being done in the face of a found goal. See? This wasn’t very-would never be true of new goals. This is patching it up. You’re running across all sorts of oddities in patching things up.

And he says, “Well, now, that’s a good thing.”

But you could hammer and pound away at a goal and pound away and hammer at a goal and have the thing fade; have it go. Oh dear, and you’re about ready to pass in the checks and hand in your thetan and so forth, when you all of a sudden remember I told you in a lecture, „In auditing on the goal ‘to catch catfish’…“ And you brighten up and start tiger drilling it on that and it comes back and reads again and it is the goal after all. And goals are heartbreakers to this degree: they go in and they go out.

See, that’s his immediate conclusion. See how you’d do it?

Now. Pain. This is the absolute rule, if we can get as close to an absolute, but it is an absolute to that degree just within this framework: must be present. Pain must be present during a checkout. Whatever else is happening, some pain’s got to be there.

But he’s going to reach for a datum of comparable magnitude. You’re not going to be able to stop him from doing that. Because understanding comes by comparison, don’t you see? And he’s going to reach for a datum of comparable magnitude, so you better reach for him first.

And in listing, pain must be present. When the goal has not been adequately tiger drilled, listing occurs without pain even on the right goal and isn’t running out anything. You understand that? You just set off and you don’t tiger drill this goal and you just go on and list-mm-mm. Pc gets sen, sen, sen, sen, sen, sen, sen. There’s no pain anyplace.

Now, naturally, we take this society lady, and she has powder on her face a quarter of an inch thick. We’re left in no illusions about it, but we also have to be very tactful. We’re going to use geriatrics on this case, but we have to be very tactful about it. Like, “Some people, even when they look young, can be made to look even younger.”

Now, that’s also true of a wrong goal, don’t you see? A right goal, with the goal made to read at the beginning of the session on listing will give the pc pain. There will be some pain and there will be some sensation. But it must have pain. Whatever else happens, there must be pain during the listing. You understand? You got to be alert to this. So that’s something else you have to look for while you’re listing. Is the pc occasionally letting out feeble little yips? If he isn’t, he’s not all right, oddly enough. Sounds-sounds funny, you know. But it’s true.

You’ll find many people cannot confront illness, have nothing to do with illness and illness is a very forbidden field to them, illness is a zone and area for specialists, illness is a place where you must not tread. This prejudice and superstition is fantastic, and yet to get an entrance in the case you’ve got to talk about something about the body. Because they’ll never envision the mind.

You say, „Always before in this universe we have carefully avoided pain. Now, we carefully avoid those things which don’t give people pain.“ Probably you’ll have a hard time raveling… I think it’s about time, though, for the whole flow to reverse, so you’ll probably do this very comfortably.

All right, then you have geriatrics. You can get into the most endless discussions on people about whether people are older or younger, or as old as they feel or younger than they feel. And what if you just kept processing somebody and processing them, and they went down and became a baby and… ? You know? And could you process a person the wrong way and make them look older and older? And all kinds of things like this, but you’d find interest would quicken. You see?

Now, there’s-there are some musts. There are some musts. You start worrying during a listing session when the pc is getting no pain. Now, understand we don’t care what line the pain occurs on. You understand? Just wipe out the old rule that it’s got to occur on one and three. We don’t care what line it occurs on as long as it occurs. Pain can occur on one and three. Pain can clear-can occur on two and four of any series.

Well, you’ve got, “Maybe you’re not sick, maybe you’re just suppressed,” as a dissemination medium. I thought I’d better tell you about geriatrics, because there’s a large section of the society that can’t confront illness and won’t even talk about it. Now, you’ve got geriatrics. An interesting, very interesting field. And one which we have incidentally wrapped up en passant and haven’t even noticed. So I thought I’d better call it to our attention before we passed by it utterly. But you would be amazed how many billions of dollars are spent every year trying to discover the route to eternal youth. We are the only ones who have that map at the present time and naturally we’ve got maps to so many more worthwhile goals and actions that we’ve paid no attention to it at all.

Why? Because pcs get in wrong valences. They can be totally switched around on this and have pain gorgeously occurring on two and four and sensation roaring on one and three. That is not meaningful; it’s just the pc is stuck in another part of the bank at the moment and probably feeding the auditing command through to an old friendly valence that he had, you know, some old witch. There’s some circuitry going on; some other things are occurring.

So I thought I’d better call it to your attention.

But these are the things to know about listing. Tiger drill it in. Run a good, smooth session. Rat-a-tat-tat, pocketa-pocketa-pocketa-pocketa-pocketa. And you’ll find out it’s very easy to do.

Thank you very much.

But the four per line-four items per line-and sixteen or more lines solve any problem you’re having with listing. It just goes off dead easy. There’s no fumble; there’s no sitting there waiting for the pc to think of another answer and ARC breaking him because he went to sleep and you woke him up-there isn’t any of this nonsense occurs in the session. And of going on and on and on and running out of paper on one line and then having to go back and find some paper on another line and how many did you list where and-pooey. See? This is all for the birds. You’ll find listing is as easy as you keep it pocketa-pocketa-pocketa at an even groove, see.

Female voice: Thank you.

You say, „Who or what ?“ And he gives you one and he doesn’t seem to be in the mood to give you anymore. You want to watch a pc. Don’t give him the command as he’s saying one or you’ll get him all suppressed. See? And, he gives you one and you give him the command and he gives you one, you give him the command and he gives you one, you give him the command and you give him one-that’s all. And of course, you acknowledge him each time he occurred.

And you’ll find the pc very rapidly gets up into this frame of mind: you give him the command once, he gives you four answers and you acknowledge. See?

Remember the answer doesn’t-the question never asks him for one, see? So it’s not a disobedience of the auditing. It doesn’t ask him for one. It says „who or what“ and both of those are plural.

So normally he gets into a groove like this: You say, „Who or what would want to catch catfish?“ He gives you four. „Who or what would not want to catch catfish?“ He gives you four. „Who or what would oppose catching catfish?“ He gives you four. „Who or what would not oppose catching catfish?“ He gives you four. You got it?

And you just acknowledge and write them down, your pencil flying, „Cheerio, cheerio, cheerio, cheerio.“

Now, some auditors won’t like this. They haven’t any-any boil-off periods in which to catch up their notes.

But you can really keep it flying. And that’s very fast clearing.

Now, what happens toward the end of this listing-whole series of sessions? What happens? What happens on the meter?

Well, it starts to go free.

What is a free needle? You’ll know it when you see it.

Is a free needle a quarter of an inch wide? No.

Is a free needle a half an inch wide? No.

Is a free needle a dial wide? No.

Does a free needle have a pattern to the left and right? No.

Does a free needle have a pattern to the right and left? No.

Well, then, what is a free needle?

Well, a free needle is a free needle. You’ve never seen anything like it till you’ve seen a free needle. There’s no describing it. It looks like it’s floating on air or something. It’s disconnected.

The auditor’s-one of the auditor’s first responses when he first Sees a free needle is to get a hold of the cable, see, and check the cable and plug it in and out.

And then his worst mistake is to say, „Hey, hey, hey look, I got a free needle on you!“ When he turns it back again, it isn’t free. It just floats, that’s all. It doesn’t float in any pattern. That is what is peculiar about it, see, it doesn’t have any pattern.

Once in a blue moon a free needle appears to hit heart beats or it appears to hit breathing or it appears to hit something else. But a tight needle can also hit these things. We don’t care what it hits; it’s free.

You-this would not happen, but you could say the pc has just murdered his grandmother. You ask him the question, „have you murdered your grandmother?“ And the needle won’t register, see. It’s a non-registering needle. That’s all it is and it floats.

Now, should the pc always be at his Clear read as you come toward the end of listing sessions?

Nope. The thing will fly around as much as one and a half divisions on the tone arm dial just before he goes Clear totally.

The last two days-now, let’s take up the grimness of listing sessions - the last two days or three days of listing sessions are the worst. The pc gets better and better and better and then stays along and is doing all right and is doing all right and is doing all right and then gets better and better and then is doing all right and is doing all right and then gets a bit worse and then gets a little more worse and then is doing better and he’s doing fine and he’s getting along all right and he’s doing better and he’s doing better and then he gets a little bit worse and then he gets a little bit worse and then he gets a little bit worse and then he gets a little bit worse-and then he gets very worried and he gets very invalidated and he’s not sure that you’re the right auditor or those are the right lines or this is the right universe.

You’ve brought him down to a point of stand and deliver. You’re within just probably dozens of items of the goal springing. And he’s thinking of this goal as really something. This goal is real valuable. All kinds of wild ideas are going through his head.

Why did he ever start this clearing in the first place? Because, look, he obviously will never be able to catch catfish again if he gives this thing up. And it’s a terrible situation that he’s run into.

And, furthermore, he won’t have any game. That’s what’s worrying him. If he gives this goal up now then he won’t have any game anymore. And there’s no game to play except catching catfish and if he gives up the goal - this is his logic, if you want to call it such, idiot’s logic, see-if you stopped cat-if you gave up the goal „to catch catfish“ then you would stop catching catfish, then you’d no longer be interested in catching catfish so, therefore, there’s only one game in the world which is catching catfish. So this means therefore, that you would only have one game and that would be gone, which would leave you as gameless. And this is not tolerable and this is something that’s too horrible to contemplate. And the pc giving up just the last, last struggling line-a few lines, see, a few items, so forth, get-really gets in a terrible state. And you really have to persuade him through this. Then all of a sudden, why, he says, „Oh, well, there it goes. There’s-there’s the-there’s-za-za-za-za-za-there’s nothing there.“

I guess he expected to meet somebody, George Washington. Because it’s just nothing and it just all went pfiff, see, there’s nothing left. And he says, „Well, gee-whiz, you know, I feel good, I feel wonderful; this is terrific.“

If you’d ask him at that time, „Would you like to go out and catch some catfish?“ he’d say, „Sure, I’ll go out and catch catfish; it’s as good as doing anything else. However, I want to try whistling at blondes.“ Because he’s already thinking about putting in the next postulate.

But there-it’d take him a long time to get it stacked up like that again. And he’s really not in good enough shape to put it in the way he did the first time.

Anyway-fortunately-the situation is-this, I want to impress this on you-is the listing out of a goal is not a smooth snore. It has its rough spots. The pc will start to get somatics-sharp, impersistent, that feel exactly like the original accident. You know, being stabbed in the back with a knife feels like being stabbed in the back with a knife. And they get flinchy sometimes on somatics. And then this passes away and then they don’t care about it. And they have to run out. But they get flinch-they get so they flinch on these things and so forth. And they do various things.

Now, the course of action of a somatic is, early on, they tend to be rather dull and persistent; dull and persistent. Fellow’s got a head somatic and he’ll tell you day after day after day after day, week after week after week after week about-this all depends on how long he’s being audited or whether he is being audited at the time-about how this pain in his head or this pain in his foot or this pain in his stomach is pretty bad. You know, it’s persistent.

And then you get to about the middle part of listing and they come on and they go off. You know, it’s they come on like turning up a light by rheostat, you know? And they go off by shutting it down by rheostat. You know, it just gets dimmer and dimmer and there it goes. All right.

Now, you get down to the end of the thing and, man, they’re on and they’re off with a click of the switch. See? Bang! You know? It’s gone; it was here and it left. That is a symptom of winding up. You’re getting on down toward the end of listing when this is occurring. And they’re getting sharper and they’re getting swifter. And the pc’s actually much more able to brace up to them and, you know, he doesn’t care about them as much in spite of the fact it hurts like hell. They occasionally will say, „Yipe!“ You know? And this, of course, is why they resist getting Clear: it’s those last residual somatics.

Now they actually are not resisting going Clear at all. They just don’t quite like to face up to that. That’s why it’s a good idea to have an auditor on listing. Somebody’s going to list by himself off in northern Saskatchewan or someplace, and all that’s very fine. But he’ll hit one of these bogs or he’ll hit a wonderful spot, you know, „I feel wonderful.“

There’s no-the guy isn’t Clear yet but he feels wonderful. Be suspicious, because it’s probably like inhaling the air and throwing out the arms on the upper edge of the Grand Canyon without watching where you’re going. That expansive outfling of the arms and that gorgeous inhalation of the ozone is very often accompanied by a pale scream as he goes southward. He hits the manic and he hits the depressive. Don’t you see? And he’ll be up feeling good again.

But halfway through with the lines not even vaguely listed out, a pc who begins to feel wonderful, he just feels wonderful, watch it, man. He’s going to drag himself into session in the next day or so saying, „I feel terrible!“

He’s gone over these manic ridges and that sort of thing. But he goes all the way through those things.

Now, of course, when it’s all-out clear you know when it’s clear because it’s blown.

He’ll tell you it’s blown many times too. I-I forgot to tell you that one. „It’s blown! Yeah.“ Comes in in the morning, „Well, we needn’t list on that anymore; I haven’t any more items for these lines because it’s blown.“ You know?

You put him on the needle, you know and there he is with a good old stuck, sticky needle, you know. You say, „Well, good; just list enough to get - let me check this out.“ You see?

And about the first two items he’ll give you, it’ll be, „Yipe, ouch, yaah!“ and he won’t mention anymore its having blown. Yeah.

Anyway, anyway, the beauty of it is, it all comes to pass. And when he-when he’s through that-when he’s through that series of jumps, he’s through it.

When the goal is actually clear the needle will stay free and continue to be free if you’ve listed all the lines all the way out, it will continue to be free up till the time you find the next goal.

Now, in view of the fact that he knows you’re going to find the next goal, don’t be too upset if he starts to look for it before you start to look for it and find the needle all going gummy. It’s not going gummy on what you did; it’s going gummy on what you’re going to do. And that’s-that’s the way that goes.

How many goals it takes to go to OT, I don’t know-can’t tell you at this time but it’s probably some finite number.

Anyway, there is the whole course of listing. There’s items. There’s the lot. And that’s a listing session. And that’s how you do it.

Listing can be done by HCAs. Listing is not necessarily a Class IV Auditor activity. But it takes smooth auditing. It takes very nice auditing. It takes very good TR 2 to carry it through. And, of course, the guy has to be kind of a sharpie to keep the thing tiger drilled.

Now, if listing is being done on an HCA level, why, there must be somewhere around a supervising auditor that can occasionally take a look at it because, God knows, what stream they will go aground on or how-what shape those lines will get into. And with bursts of enthusiasm they’ve all of a sudden added two extra lines onto the end of it.

And the goal „to catch-catfish-“ the pc also had an idea that he might have a goal, „to be soulful,“ see? And, they’ve got Dover sole and other things written down on this other line. They’re liable to go astray. You understand? So you have to keep your eye on it and just keep them on the groove I gave you and the fellow will go Clear.

And of course, you know that free needles to date have been going Clear on the four lines. And just give you one idea of this they also have stacked up a bit. Those people who have been four-line listed to free needle be-on being given an indifferently patched up sixteen-line list, whistled a sigh of relief and were very happy because parked someplace over on the northeast sector of the bank, they had all these rabbits they hadn’t been able to dispose of. And they were very, very happy to write those rabbits down on the list. So that tells you that we were right in going in this particular way.

Okay?

Thank you.