Thank you.

Okay, here we are, second lecture November 27th, AD 12, Saint Hill Special Briefing Course. And this is a talk about R2 - 12.

Thank you. Nov. 27, AD 12. 1 read my notes before the lecture! I have notes tonight. That’s nice! Hasn't anything to do with the lecture, but I have notes.

There have been an awful lot of queries about R2 - 12. I have actually audited this procedure and audited it and audited it and audited it and reviewed it and given out pieces of it to be audited, actually for about eighteen months. A long time to audit a procedure. And I've made every mistake that you're going to make. I made them all and followed them over the hills and far away and finally found out why they're mistakes. And the only thing that I have mapped here is an invariable procedure. I have mapped an invariable procedure. I have not mapped all the mistakes. There isn't enough paper in Christendom; there just isn't enough to map all the mistakes that you could make with this.

All right, this is lecture one, Saint Hill Special Briefing Course, and I have an announcement here, very interesting. Maybe you ought to go get audited at the HGC DC. Maybe you ought to go get audited there. I mean maybe you're just wasting your time here. Maybe you are. This is a letter from Voight. The fellow - whose goal was found at the congress. And he'd been listed on the 40 lines, the 114 lines, and it had gone clear, and everybody ... Well, let me put it this way; go get audited at the HGC in Washington, DC, as long as I'm consulting on the cases there, see - have to add that, because it wouldn't be a true statement otherwise.

People can always dream up more mistakes than you can circumvent. And the only thing you can do is to try to get it down to a terrifically invariable action.

Anyway, he wrote me, and it looked like it was all clean lines as far as I was concerned. He was free needle everyplace. And instead of overrunning it, and instead of checking it out for four or five months, and instead of trying to find out if you couldn't key him in again on the goal, I said, "Well, go on and find his next goal, and get going."

Now, as training becomes advanced you of course expect people to be able to exercise judgment. You give them more judgment factors to handle and so on. Remember that this one is designed for the HPA/HCA level of action and it is very, very close to a totally muzzled, totally invariable procedure. And if you just stay on it as a line, why, you will arrive at the other end. Now, that it is an invariable procedure does not mean that it occasionally won't lay an egg. You're going to get an occasional egg laid with it even though it's done perfectly.

So he says, "Dear Ron, thank you for the wonderful news that I can proceed with my second goal. I had cognited on my second goal on 24 October and didn't know what to do with it. It was checked out today at the HGC. We all agree, I have my second goal. I start listing in the morning. I'll take you up on that first OT in industry." There you are. Pretty good, huh?

Now, why is this? Well, put it this way: You've picked up an item on your first list by some sort of an assessment which was not part of the GPM. You could almost classify it as a mistake, but a mistake that you would make. You tiger drilled it, and it had some withholds on it, and it stayed in. See, it wasn't well cleaned up.

Audience: Yeah.

Now, it actually - it isn't worthwhile to well clean up these items. You don't have to sit there and polish up one of these items with a Tiger Drill for three hours and a half, you understand? You're mainly interested in the session withholds and suppressions, you understand?

Now, we get down to business. Ohhh! Poor R2 - 12! This is a lecture on Routine 2 - 12. Now, for you cats that have been clawing around with 3GA Criss Cross, the first and fundamental error of R2 - 12 showed up. Now, I can take credit for making the first mistake, so you needn't feel so bad about it, see. I could admit that I made a mistake. I myself gave you a little length and breadth on List One. I shouldn't have done that. I should have put a - not a snaffle bit - but I should have put a curb bit in your teeth. Because what do you do? You right away find ways and means to add motivatorish items to the list and of course they are an additional damage, so of course that will wind you up with no item.

Now, in view of the fact that you're not going to tiger drill these things forever with Big Tiger and run a Prepcheck on the first list assessment item, you're occasionally going to get one that is simply held down by a couple of withholds or a misdemeanor that's not connected to the GPM, at which time you will lay an egg. That's all right, if you know that you can lay an egg with it, why, fine. And that is the phenomenon which we have been calling in 3GA Criss Cross "currying a dead horse."

So I've just done List One, Issue Two. And I can tell you the ramifications of the first list. It must contain only nouns. It must not contain any verbs, adjectives or adverbs - only nouns. And you can take the one which you've got and strike out everything on it that isn't a noun and strike out its adjectives and adverbs and strike out all of the lines you're supposed to fill in. Just strike those out at the back and you have List One, Issue Two of Routine 2 - 12.

You can go on and curry this dead horse, and polish up and gild his hoofs and polish his harness and do all sorts of things with him and buy him wreathes and so forth. But it doesn't make him any less dead. And you're not - also - you're not going anyplace while you are currying the dead horse.

It had escaped my notice when I expanded that, that a lot of 3GA Criss Cross practice would of course invite a lot of things to be entered in on the list by the pc, even though it says in R2 - 12 itself that it is not the pc's list, that it is the auditor's list. So a lot of items were entered in from the pc and of course a lot of people wound up skunked; or endless dirty needles or something of the sort, and didn't wind up nice and clean and clear the way it is.

So you have to learn to recognize a dead horse. Now, the source of the dead horse is just what I have just given you. There was something in on the list because it wasn't well cleaned up on the Tiger Drill and therefore the thing continued to read as the only thing in. So you started busily and methodically to list this thing, and so on. It'll happen sometimes that somebody will miss a read or something like that on it or imagine he saw a read or something or the meter will need new batteries or something goofy will occur, you see, that doesn't have anything to do with the technology. And it gets something like this.

Now, there's your List One, Issue Two. It must only contain Scientology nouns. Scientology, Dianetic organization nouns and no adjectives, verbs, adverbs on it. The big reason for that - I'll tell you more about it in a minute.

So you have to know this one. It doesn't matter how come you've got a dead horse, you have to recognize what is a dead horse. And it's an integral part of 2 - 12 - dead horses. It is a list, whether a represent or an oppose list, which contains no wide slams. And that is a dead horse.

Now, the next mix - up on it brings us right straight to where we should be. When you're used to doing 3GA Criss Cross you get the illusion that you know something about R2 - 12. And you might as well just part company with that, because the actions are similar, in fact they're the same as far as Listing and Nulling is concerned. But R2 - 12 is a rote procedure, and is not susceptible to variation or auditor guesses.

You've gotten this thing - you see, you don't have a slam on your List One. It's rare that you would have a slam on your List One, but three cheers, you do have a slam on One and you just omit 4, 5 and 6. But that's the only thing that happens. So you have a big slam going along on List One. All right, well, you just omit 4, 5 and 6 and directly oppose what you had on List One. But that slam, of course, only occurs after assessment. Because that slam can shift around, as you will rapidly learn.

This procedure was put together for HPA and HCA. Now, that's a big difference. And it's been my experience that if you could drill a HPA or an HCA in on a procedure, that he would do it. That's been my experience. Now, you can drill them and correct them and correct them and correct them, and all you have to pay attention to is the fact that: Is there a factual channel of action? Is there a factual series of actions to be performed?

What I mean by a dead horse is a represent or oppose list that does not slam after you've given it a chance in listing. If no slam occurs anywhere on a listing list, with the mid ruds in for the session, that's a dead horse.

Now, R2 - 12 is this kind of an activity. And listen, it's a beautiful, concrete causeway through the deepest muck that anybody ever tried to never come out of And just about a sixteenth of an inch off the edge of that causeway brings you to nowhere. It is a rote procedure. The rationale back of 2 - 12 is quite different than that back of 3GA Criss Cross.

Well, how far do you have to go on a list to find out if something is going to slam? Well frankly, you can go as far as fifty. If you haven't got any - if nothing has slammed by the time you get to fifty items, (that's by the way about twice as long as I go) but if you haven't slammed - if you haven't read a slam on this thing by the time that you get up to fifty items or something like that, there's just little dirty needles, dirty needles, dirty needle and dirty read, dirty read, dirty read, I should be saying, you're going to lay an egg. That list is going exactly no place. And the best thing to do with it is carry it to fifty; if there's no rock slam has appeared and the meter is hooked in, abandon it.

3GA Criss Cross is an activity engaged upon by the auditor to unburden the case and locate goals. That's 3GA Criss Cross, which is step 4A of Routine 3 - 2 1.

Now, how do you read - if that's the case - then, how do you read a slam while you're listing? Well, it's very simple. On a Mark IV meter you turn it back to sensitivity 8 and carry your tone arm so that it is somewhere around the middle of the dial. So you've got a sensitivity 8 is your best action on a Mark IV meter. That doesn't mean then that the needle is going to wander so far off that while you're listing you're in a continuous and continual nervous prostration about catching up with this meter.

And Routine 2 - 12 is to put the case in condition so that it can show progress toward clearing, specifically toward clearing, and does actually progress the case toward clearing, and is a clearing procedure, oddly enough.

Now, what can throw you off? A pc who does calisthenics in the auditing chair can throw this off. The best way to handle the pc is to say, "Put the cans in your lap and sit still." These pcs that scratch their head with cans and scratch their knees with cans and do this with cans and that with cans are actually in a kind of a rock slam all the time. But you can cope with this and there's no particular reason why you should permit this to be loused up. Just - you can put it in your R - factor and it won't surprise the pc, you see. "You start throwing these cans around while I'm listing on a list and I won't be able to see whether or not it's a valid list or not, so I'm going to have to tell you to sit still, put the cans in your lap." And it won't break your pc's heart. But don't go along with a superpermissiveness that permits this all the time so that you never get a rock slam visible.

But without 2 - 12 you will find a great many cases will make very slow progress. And that is what we are fighting today in clearing. We're fighting slow progress.

Now, on a Mark V, you set it at sensitivity 8 with the knob furthest to the left. In other words, you set that knob furthest to the left and sensitivity 8. Actually the sensitivity could be a little bit lower than 8. It could actually be down to about 6 and you would still be all right. You would still see your rock slam.

This slow progress combined, on the one hand, by auditors not getting in and pitching - to be critical - and on the other hand, by the mechanics which 2 - 12 is arranged to perform. Sooner or later you would get the item which was holding up the case with 3 - 21. Sooner or later you would get this item - sooner or later, sooner or later. And you're mostly getting it later.

That keeps your - that's to keep your needle from drifting around so madly and so wildly that you can't keep it on the dial and you're always having to adjust it and so forth. Well, you can very visibly see a rock slam if your sensitivities are as I have mentioned.

And it's much better to get a clean fire off the launching pad and get the item straight away, because it's a very peculiar set of items that you are looking for. It's a very peculiar thing. And they are not items which necessarily lead to goals. They are items which unpin the pc's bank from present time so that he can be audited.

It's necessary that you list with the T)c on the meter. Otherwise you will never notice this. And the meter should ~e turned on. There are lots of - lots of ways that you can get a dead horse list. You can get them a lot of ways and the most popular of these ways is not the way I mentioned, but to get a wrong assessment. You get yourself a wrong assessment and you're liable to get all manner of dead horse lists.

And the action of Routine 2 - 12 is not the key - out of the pc's bank, as in Prepchecking, but the actual eradication of those items which have been keyed in by present time, which then and thereafter keep the pc in the grip of a present time problem. We'll go into that further.

A fellow can't go down and just sit there comfortably and read these things off, bark - bark - bark - bark, and mark those that are in and winds up - misses a read, misses two reads, misses three reads, as he's going down the list. Doesn't repeat, find out if they did read or not, just made up his mind that they didn't read. And of course the item that he missed is the item which would have stayed in and he gets down to the end of the line and he becomes very wroth with the pc because he can't quite get anything to tiger drill in. So he ARC breaks the pc enough to get one of them to read. Now, that is a successful action in getting an item to read but it's not going to be successful in listing that item. And you're liable to have some item that shouldn't be reading anyway.

But this is a different thing you are doing. And although it looks the same, and the actions are the same, it isn't the same. Routine 2 - 12 is not Routine 3 - 21, step 4A, 3GA Criss Cross. It is not. They are not the same actions. You can even use similar lines.

An E - Meter has the peculiar characteristic of spotting for you what a pc can have reality on. It's actually a reality indicator, and if the thing reads well on an E - Meter or reads at all on an E - Meter, you can get somewhere into the pc's zone of reality. But supposing you have an ARC broke item, which is simply because the pc's never heard of it. Let's say MEST. We're auditing a raw meat pc and "MEST" were on List One. And he's never heard of MEST. And he doesn't know what it is.

Now, where they merge is in line of 2 - 12, 1B, C, D, E, F, see. Those additional lines merge and go over to 3GA Criss Cross. But you can't get to those lines and unpin the case from present time unless you do a very thorough over and over and over of List One and List 1A.

Well, it's been a long time since we've stressed clearing the auditing command and somebody was writing me as an emergency from an Academy that all around him he saw pcs trying to answer questions in the Academy that they didn't understand. Well, I don't know anything about that. I do know that somebody had neglected this old factor of clear the auditing command. If the pc can't answer it, why, you have to word it up so that the pc can answer it. And you're going to get something like this sooner or later. You're going to get something like MEST. Let's say that was on the list - it isn't. And the pc doesn't know what it is. So every time you say it he wonders what it is. And then he withholds asking you and of course at the end of the assessment it stays in.

Now, this is all very esoteric to say they are this different, but what makes them this different? And I'd have to go into the mechanics - which I will do later this evening - of 2 - 12 to show you why they are this different, and the exact thing you're trying to do. Let it suffice, at this moment, that they are different, and that your approach is a terribly rote approach.

Now you say, "Who or what represents MIEST to you?" And this is going to be a wonderful mishmash, believe me. That will breed more dead horses that can be easily buried. That is going to be a tough one, is the misassessment, the misassessment. Now, a misassessment will be caused because the pc didn't understand something. It can also be caused because when the pc gave the word, the auditor mistook the word and wrote down something else and of course when the auditor's nulling the list he calls down the something else. The pc doesn't recognize that as being in proper sequence and so tends to protest it, which will therefore make it read.

Now, we have a Security Check on Maisy Q., over in HCO, and she is found to rock slam madly on the subject of HCO Secretaries. So now she is sent to the HGC or staff clearing, or something like that, and in staff clearing we would get goof one.

There's another way of getting a dead horse. If you don't understand what the pc says, even though the pc ARC breaks every time you ask the pc what he said - you understand - if the pc ARC breaks every time, the way to really ruin his case is to put down something he said that you didn't understand. That really ruins the lot, you understand? It's much better to ARC break him every word that he says than to write a bad one on the list. You'll at least get a list of sorts that has some possibility of having an item on it.

Now, you almost universally made it today. Goof one is they don't do 2 - 12. They take "HCO Secretary," see that it rock slams, and oppose it. And then they think they're doing 2 - 12. 2 - 12 is upsetting just to this degree: an almost - done 2 - 12 will produce some results, and that's what'll fool you. If it's almost done it'll produce - it'll still produce some results. See, that's why it's a perfectly safe technique to release, to - as long as they're not fooling around with goals on it - to release broadly to HPAs and HCAs and let it be taught in Academies, you see. -

But you get one of them with an improper item on it, the pc said "cats" and you wrote down "scratch." You're in a mess. I don't care if he says "rrrh" and that was supposed to be "cats." Now, the way you ask a pc to repeat something is of interest to any auditor. The way you ask him to repeat something is, don't say, "You didn't say that clearly. Say it again," see? The pc's in - session; is very susceptible to comments of this particular kind. You always say, "I didn't understand that, what was it?"

Because you can just list something, and you can get some results, you see. That however, that aspect of it tends to whip you. Because you say, well, "That's a nice process. That's a nice process. It's nice. Case looked brighter at the end of session."

Now, a pc very often believes that you have challenged him on the properness of the item on that list. See, he said, "bwwrr" and that was supposed to be "cats." Then you say, "I didn't understand that, what did you say?" He very often thinks that you are telling him that cats don't belong on the list and that he shouldn't put it on the list. So if a pc is getting of this frame of mind, you say, "I didn't understand - I didn't understand that. Would you please spell it for me?" You're going to be a lot better off. Got it? Then you do want it on the list, we want him to spell it. If he can't spell, you've had it!

Well, look, the case wasn't sitting in it - a foot off the chair at the end of session. Well, that's what we expect out of the process.

Now, you mustn't say, "You didn't say it clearly," and put the burden of responsibility for its incorrectness on the pc. That is very improper. And another thing that you mustn't do is repeat the item after the pc. You just mustn't repeat the item after the pc. He says, "Cats," you say, "Cats, thank you." He says, "Game warden," you say, "Game warden, thank you." He says, "Tiger," you say, "Tiger, thank you." Man, it'll drive him round the bend.

No. The auditor grabs the item that he has heard the pc rock slams on, sees that it rock slams and then oppose it. Well, he must be doing 3GA Criss Cross or something. He's not doing 2 - 12.

The highest point of psychology, the tremendous zenith that they reached in all of their researches was a machine that drove people crazy. You said a word into it and it said the word back. And after that they had achieved the zenith and they stopped their researches. But they did achieve something. It's wicked of you to continue to insist that the psychologist never, never accomplished anything. He did do this. There's a monument I think, somewhere in the Middle West - been covered up during these last centuries - but it says, "On this spot they invented the machine that drove people mad." We put it there back in 2052 - anyhow, space opera.

No. The auditor has to start from scratch. We don't care what who found or anything of the sort. He just starts from scratch. And the first thing you want to learn about 2 - 12: you always start from scratch.

No, I just - all jokes aside, the idea of repeating something back - particularly a little bit out of phase with the pc - can make him feel like he's spinning, particularly in a susceptible condition in - session. So you mustn't repeat items to the pc. It's all right to null them, but repeating them back to the pc every time he says them has a tendency to shut him up.

Now, this person sails in from lower Chicago, and says that he's had 2 - 12 run on him, and they found the items "Ron," and "pie," and a couple of other things, and it's all set, and he feels wonderful now, ha - ha, and everything's fine.

I know you can play this game with little kids and they get a big gag out of it. Remember you're playing it in the spirit of a big gag. It's a quite different proposition when you're just in there and you're writing down solemnly: he says "Cats," you say "Cats," so forth, see?

As a matter of fact he looks good and his TA is down and that sort of thing. And you are going to find goals on this pc and you're going to do this and that. All right, go ahead. Go ahead, go ahead - run 3 - 21 on it. We don't care anything about that. But, if you're going to do 2 - 12 on him you don't say he had List One run on him in lower Chicago and therefore we're going to start with List IA. You just never do 2 - 12 that way. You take List One on this pc.

Now, the wrong way, really, to get an item straightened out is to say, "Did you say 'interim'?" He says "anteroom," see, and you say, "Did you say 'interim'?" Now he immediately has to protest that, doesn't he? And it will leave a mark on the list that will show up during its nulling. He'll sometimes forget that he did it and it'll still register. You'll get it off eventually, but it takes a lot of time.

Now, there's several reasons for this. We don't care if he ran the whole gamut and found a pair of items on each one of the subsidiary lists. Well, he probably would just be ready to have List 1 run on him again. So you just never pick up anybody else's auditing on it, that's all. Just don't ever do that, and you'll all be always riding high. You'll be feeling wonderful about it.

So the saying words back to him which you didn't underst - saying words back to him always carries the liability of your not having understood them and saying them differently - aside from its factor of making him feel spinny - why, it looks like you're correcting him. And hell take vast unction to it.

Now, there's another difference. A 3GA Criss Cross item - you understand, just because he slammed against the HCO Secretary, means that you do List One assessment, see. Doesn't matter, see. You always do that. Why? Because the Security Check was probably done on an abbreviated set of items, and the rock slam would probably settle down somewhere else on the list, if you did a full list.

Now, that goes so far as never point to an item on a list. Not: "Did you mean this one?" Just never do that. In the first place you should never make motions toward the pc anyway. His anchor points are peculiarly liable to being driven in by you, the auditor, to whom he has granted a great deal of responsibility and power. And you start pointing up the list in his direction he gets feeling - his whole theta beams will be pressed down against the end of your finger trying to bring your finger down to the point on the list where your finger should have stopped. And you get the effort of that will read on the item you're discussing.

See, your rock slam probably will settle more securely on something else. There's that possibility, don't you see. And maybe she just rock slammed on the person being - that was security checking her, and doesn't have a rock slam on HCO Area Secretary. See, there's all kinds of wild little possibilities that could enter into it that would upset your 2 - 12 progress.

That's a marvelous way to get a wrong goal. I myself have had a wrong goal found on me that way one day. The auditor pointed to the wrong goal and said, "You mean that one?" I made a remark - I made a remark and the remark was misinterpreted as to applying to another goal and the auditor pointed to the other goal and it stayed in by protest. And it took the devil's own time to find that protest when it was finally cleaned up. It was just dug in but deep. And you'll find a lot of items can be pushed in on a list by the auditor pointing to items.

So what do you do? You just start from scratch. And you do exactly what it says. Now frankly, there is nothing more canned or rote than 2 - 12. It's just absolutely canned. If you find a rock slam on the first list - by the way, you call it the first list no matter what List One you use. But List One is the Scientology list.. The others are List 1A, List 1B, and so on.

Now, the pc can put anything he likes on a list but he must never take anything off of a list. He can put anything he likes on one; he must never be able to take anything off of one. He wants a word changed. You write the whole thing down with the changed word in it as a brand - new item. That's an invariable action.

So you start in on the first list and you find a rock slam, and it slams like mad. All right, you oppose it, and you get rock slamming items and so forth. Well, that's just a bonus. You didn't have to do four, five and six. That's just a bonus; just three steps you didn't have to do.

He says, "To dance the hornpipe." And then he says, "To be able to dance the hornpipe is what I meant." And you're nulling "To dance the hornpipe."

But the main discovery here is that any time that you can get a whisper on a list, you can represent it and turn a rock slam on with it. Very interesting. Because then you don't have to be a supergenius at getting your first list.

You say, "Thank you very much," and you write, "To be able to dance the hornpipe" down underneath the one you're clearing, and go on and finish clearing "To dance the hornpipe." And then take up the next one. If it's completely disrelated you put it at the end of the list. He's got a new one, so you put it at the end of the list.

Let's say you had some long, drawn - out list of, "Who's upsetting you these days?" you see, and so on. And you didn't get a key person on it at all. There wasn't a key person on it anyplace. No rock slams. There was hardly even a dirty needle.

Now, that's - he wants a "the" changed to an "a." Well now, if you're sitting from the high pinnacle of always having put it down right first, then this is a change of the list. And you won't run into any ARC breaks to amount to anything if the pc tells you, "Well, that's 'to be able to dance the hornpipe'."

Now, I'm trying to cure you of your skunks, see. This takes your skunks out. You won't get skunked as often with 2 - 12 as you do with 3GA Criss Cross.

And you say, "All right, you want that on the list? Thank you very. much." And you put it on the list, see.

All right, you go down this list, this first list, and you assess it - you've gotten it from the pc, now you're assessing it. And if you can find on it, after tiger drilling the last three or four items, a sporadic ghost of a speeded rise which is almost undetectable at the highest sensitivity of a Mark V, you can represent it and you'll find a rock slamming item. It's marvelous.

Pc says he doesn't want it on the list, don't put it on the list. "No," he says, "Just change that one."

Now, that's the discovery that I suddenly broke through with, and therefore could put it together. The number of times which you will miss on this thing are far less.

And you say, "I'm awfully sorry, the rules of the game, I can't do that. I've got to put it on the list down below here, and I will, I'll write it down 'To be able to dance the hornpipe.' We'll see if that isn't it, or not, okay?" It's usually okay with the pc.

Now, the rationale of 2 - 12 is based on the interesting proposition that so long as the GPM is keyed in, in present time, the pc is left with a full present time problem and will show no case gain. We're no longer interested in the rock slammer. We're just not interested. So Joe, or Pete or Bill or ... So they're rock slammers. That means somebody won't have to do four, five and six with them. That's all that means.

These are the little - the little points of listing that get overlooked that hang pcs with wrong items and that give you dead horses and other things like that. So you just do the thing, do a good clean job on listing it and then do a good clean job on nulling it and with right assessments it just runs like a ball.

Behaviorists will be very interested in rock slammers. But it becomes an ethnic study. It's very peculiar. If a person rock slams, why, they will do all sorts of very interesting things in their vicinity and all that sort of thing. But the fact of the case is, is you could straighten them out too fast to worry about it.

We haven't made allowances for all of the ways that you can go reverse-wise. See, we haven't - we haven't said, "Now, these. . . " It so happens that if you null a list which has given you a consistently dirty needle and you take a dirty needle final angle on the thing and then you oppose that, that you won't wind up with very much and so forth and all of that has more or less been cut out of this thing. We say, "You get a clean assessment, you take what stays in, and you represent it, you get a rock slamming item and you oppose it." In other words, you've got an invariable action there.

Now ... Actually, basically, it means their goal lies in some other direction, a lot of other things. But you don't have to find their goal to set them up straight.

If you can't carry out that invariable action don't try to carry out something else. Scrub your dead horse, in other words. You've been listing on this thing, and man, it's just going no place. There's no slam on it. Get your mid ruds in. Get your mid ruds in. "On this list has anything been suppressed?" and so forth. Get your mid ruds in, make sure they're nice and clean, everything is fine. And by the way, never put mid ruds in when the pc originates. That is absolutely against the law. Pc originates, say, "You know, I had an interesting thought then, I thought that I must have suppressed that item. I thought that - I thought that cats never got that big, actually."

So we're not interested in this aspect of it. We're even more interested in the tiniest dirty needles. See, we're - that's - we're very interested in that.

And the auditor, "All right, on this list has anything been suppressed?"

Now, this is all based on an observation I made in 1949. We're really we're really inheriting now the benefit of tremendous quantities of research. In 1949 1 made this interesting observation. There was always a little flag showing up. The key engram to be run on the case was always waving a little taximeter flag. There was a still picture of an empty chair. And the pc would often run across it. And one fine day we get him to run this as an engram. We'd just start into the beginning of this thing.

Man, if you want to drive a pc out of session, just try that. He's keeping his own ruds in, so what? So what? He'll eventually get so he won't. It's not you - up to you to use mid ruds for punishment. But at the same time don't shy off getting mid ruds in. You know, the reverse can happen. "Every time I open my mouth. . . " If you operate from the armor - plated turret of always doing a good helpful job and doing everything you can do for the pc and doing everything you're supposed to be doing right and using very reliable processes, believe me, you don't have any qualms about heading the pc's attention this way or that or straightening out something or other or going on and doing something.

Oh, my God, what we'd find lying underneath that still chair in that little picture - it was just fascinating. You know? God! Tonsillectomies and murder and rape and arson, and all kinds of wild things. But always the reactive bank leaves out a little tag.

If you're auditing with a guilty conscience of not knowing quite whether you're doing right or not, you are very vulnerable as an auditor, because you think you might be committing overts. And therefore you tend to withdraw from them. And even an auditor who's auditing almost letter - perfectly can sometimes be shaken up by a pc who says, "Oh, there goes those damn mid ruds again! All I'm doing is sitting here getting in mid ruds and mo - raooww!" See, mid ruds.

You've got this little tab there. It's like a little index card. The file may be a thousand feet thick down underneath it, and here's this little, tiny quarter - of - an - inch by quarter - of - an - inch blue tab, see. And you say, "What's this?"

Well, all right, so you had to get in your mid ruds too often. Tell your pc, "I'm awful sorry. I'm sorry." Treat it as an origin, don't ask him - don't punish him now with the random missed withhold question. See, that's the other - that's the other mark of a tyro. Say, "I'm awfully sorry. But just exactly what are you doing there?"

Now look, there are thousands of these little blue tabs lying around in the bank, but if you went around pulling each one of these, pulling each one, the most of them would throw away, see. Just, you know, locks, little things, mannerisms, dislikes, upsets, so forth - most of them just throw away. And all of a sudden you'd get ahold of one, and you'd look like a very young robin trying to get ahold of his first worm, you know. And it just isn't going to come out of the ground, that's all. That's tied to something.

"Well, I just. . . and so on and so on."

Now, that worked with engrams, but I didn't see any reason why it wouldn't work with a GPM. Because this horrendous calculation occurred: A case change won't occur in the presence of an unhandled present time problem.

"All right. What haven't I found out about that?" see?

And if you don't believe that, go ahead and get somebody who's having a lot of trouble with his wife, or her husband or something; get this person. And every time you see this person clang! on a present time problem, on that rudiment, why, just ignore it. Just say, "Well, we'll take that up later. That's - after all, we're processing the things that will handle your problems, and we're not interested in hearing about that. Now let's get down to business here." And then get your graph done at the end of that intensive. And if you haven't also ARC broken the pc, you will have gotten no graph change of any kind. This is an experiment that you could make with the greatest of ease.

"Well, so - and - so and so - and - so and so - and - so - and that's what I'm trying to tell you."

Well, what would be the biggest present time problem a person could possibly have? The GPM is composed of mass - counter - mass. Actually it's in a bundle of four, but you can regard it as mass - - counter - mass, a pair. So you have A versus B, and B versus A. And they're items, identities, circuits, whatever you want to call them. And here's one of them opposing the other one. And that is the GPM. And man, that's in there with concrete. To get Clear this fellow's got to pass all the way through the GPM.

You say, "All right. I'm trying to get these in so I can get this needle straightened out, and we can go on, you know? And I've got to put them in. I'm sorry." And go right on in and put them in.

So, why not have at it? Certainly it looks like a present time problem. Also we have the idea people who have overts against Scientology or against the auditor and so forth won't go Clear. Why is this?

Well, that's good auditing, see? But I've actually had pcs try to scold me out of getting my rudiments in and yap at it. And I don't care whether it was one reason or another, I found out the way to handle the pc was to go ahead and put them in. And the way to mess it all up was to try not to, you know, try to Q - and - A with the pc's objection.

Well, actually, it sets up a kind of a present time problem. There's the pc versus the auditor or something in the pc versus the auditor, and it sets up the idea of the personality versus the personality, the mass versus the mass and so forth. It looks like a present time problem.

Nope, if you're operating from the certainty of being right - you're doing your best for the pc, and so forth, and your pc starts to ream you out and you know very well you haven't been using mid ruds to punish his withholds, you see. You know, to punish him every time he originated - excuse me. And you know you haven't been misusing this and you've been handling him all right and the pc's going straight through the roof. Well, don't Q - and - A by going straight through the roof yourself. Go on and do what you're supposed to do. He'll simmer down. Sometimes has a legitimate beef; most of the time not. Get in your mid ruds.

Because this is so neatly and nicely balanced, the person can't slide out of it. Nothing unbalances it unless you actually locate it and identify it. The only way you get rid of the GPM is to get it very well identified in its various parts. Now, as soon as you get it identified in its various parts - particularly the goal and so forth - why, it tends to lose its bite.

Now, the next big source of dead horses is this incomplete list. And I don't know how to tell you emphatically enough what an incomplete list is, because actually I've been bleating and nattering and beating my gums and splintering bits of enamel out here for a long time on the subject of incomplete lists and really nobody hears me. But I finally caught up with one thing that I mean to be very emphatic about. I have caught out the auditor who says: "The pc said he put it on the list and therefore I stopped the list." I've caught up with it. If the pc says the last one he put on the list was it, I will guarantee you that the list is not complete. It's that reversed. Pc says the list is complete, just volunteers it, I will absolutely guarantee you that the list is not complete.

But let's look at this, now. We know quite a bit about the GPM and ist various formations and fundamentals and so forth, but let's look at something here that may not have met the eye. Supposing one piece of the GPM is walking around in present time. Supposing one of these masses is walking around in present time, and the other one is hidden in the bank.

I will guarantee you also that this has happened, that coming right over the horizon is a nice big rock slamming item and the pc has just chickened. The pc hits the silk, Man. He unloads right there. And part of the sensation is, is that he has put it on the list. He's fooled himself. What he really has said is he's put the last safe item on the list. And I've tested this out some times now, and I finally got the number. Because I've heard this for a long time. And I finally got this thing straight, and made some tests on it. And it's ARC broken the pc I made the test on, "Well, it does no good for me to tell you the list is complete, because then I put that on the list, because you just keep on going on," and that sort of thing. Yeah, but here's the test of the pudding: are we getting the package? And that's always the test of the auditing. Have we got the package that made the pc well?

One of them is visible. He knows that's part of the GPM. Maybe it's his auditor. He knows that's part of the GPM. So he says, "That's why I'm not getting Clear. There! There! Over there! There! There! Over there! Over there!" No pc alive ever turns around and looks over his shoulder to find out what's opposing over there.

This pc could have screamed, bawled, howled, shouted through the entire session, and if at the end of the session you have got an item to show for it, I guarantee you that if it was the good item, that everything is fine - the pc will just - it'll all evaporate. All the bad, everything evaporates. The one thing you can do wrong is not to get a package. Not to get items, reliable items that's what you can do wrong. You knock off doing that and the pc will never forgive you.

And now hear me: that item actually will remain so undisclosed that the person could go all the way Clear and still have it - if you could imagine going Clear while having a PT problem of that magnitude.

"What do you mean," he's liable to say to you. "You mean just because I yelled and screamed and so forth, you knocked off and didn't get the item? What are you trying to do, get even with me?"

But by some fluke he might actually key out the rest of the GPM and still have this thing sitting in present time. And you'd get the créme de la créme of the bypassed item. This would be a bypassed item with exclamation points.

Unreasonable beast, see? You're handling a very unreasonable breed of cat. The pc is not forgiving you for getting the item and will never forgive you for not having gotten one. So you take your choice.

Of course the probabilities of this person keying out anything or going Clear of course are remote, amounting practically to zero. But in theory, allow it, you see.

Now, this is particularly true on a Scientology list where somebody is slamming a bit on the list. Maybe they're not slamming enough to make it really interesting or have a rock slamming item, but there's just quivers, you know, and "zzz" and quarter - inch "zzz" and you go down, bang - bang, dirty reads, big dirty reads, you know, that sort of thing, and you're going on down the line.

He isn't actually going to go anyplace. He's got a present time problem. And he knows what's wrong with him. See, it's all these buildings or something, you know. There it is, all these buildings, and he knows it's the buildings, and he knows it's the buildings. But his blindness never tells him what he is or what is opposing the buildings. And of course he isn't opposing the buildings, some item is opposing the buildings and it's on automatic. He never sees the item, he just goes on blaming the buildings.

Man, when you start representing that, you're liable to run yourself into more tears and protests and upsets than you've seen in a long time. Pc just digs their heels into the auditing room floor and just isn't going to go forward from there. Won't list, and so forth.

You don't know somebody for two or three years and then have a rock slam on them. Let me assure you of that! The person could have hit you over the head every morning for breakfast, and you still wouldn't have a rock slam on them. See, that takes a while to build up.

Well, anything short of mayhem, make them list. That's the answer to it. The answer to it is to get the list because that's the only road out, unless the pc has a legitimate beef. Pc might have a legitimate beef, say, "Well, I - you-you just keep doing that, you - you just keep reading that particular item, and I tell you that's in because I'm just protesting it. I don't believe that is it."

So obviously the pc has confused something in present time with the opposition mass in the bank and hasn't even seen the terminal in the bank which faces the opposition mass. Have you got the idea?

Get the protest off the item and then test it again. Pc may be right, see. Don't throw it down his throat. But you're listing something and it seems to be quite a legitimate list, the pc all of a sudden sets his heels, he isn't going to go on. Well, I don't know what you have to do to make some pcs go on. But let me tell you that whatever you have to do to make them go on, the only thing you'll never be forgiven for is not having made them 90 on. That's what you'll never be forgiven for. That will really shock them and upset them.

He's made a mistake. Let's put it that way. He's just made a mistake. He's mistaken something in the environment for something in the bank and then he never looks over his shoulder to find out what he is that is opposing something in the bank, and of course that is the perfect present time problem.

I don't care. So a pc cries. So the pc emotes. So the pc gets mad. So the pc does this. So pcs are pcs. Get the list. Pc says, "I'm not going to list any more and that's it, that's it. That's the last item. That's the last item you're going to get out of me."

And with that present time problem in existence he will not go Clear and he will not show case gains. If he does, they will be very slow gains and you have your finger on the slow gain - actually, also the slow student case. That is it.

You say, "All right, I understand how you feel. Let's see, what are we listing from, now? Turnip seeds. All right, listing from turnip seeds. Okay. What do you think about them?"

I knew it was the bypassed item. I found the mechanism of the bypassed item, knew that people weren't listing themselves to Clear every time they bypassed an item. They would put some item over here on "Who or what would want to catch catfish?" They'd put that item down there, and then the opposition of that item would go begging, see, and it'd never be located, and they'd never confront it. And it's very hard to get a pc to confront a slamming item, by the way. And would never confront it. And they can be right in the middle of the slamming item. They can join up with the slamming item. The guy hates the United States Army, so he goes and joins it. But he never perceives it. You see, being in it and perceiving it are two entirely different things.

"Well, I think it's silly! The whole thing is preposterous."

So you see, he's in this oppterm, and he never puts it on the list. He's got half of it. He's got "Who or what would oppose..." or, "Who or what wants to catch catfish?" He's got half of that. He hasn’t got the other half, so it never blows.

"All right. All right."

You get a recurring item. You see this in verbal listing. The guy'll go a few hundred lines and then he'll say, "game warden." And then he goes a few hundred more items, he'll say, "game warden" again. And a few hundred more items and he'll say, "game warden," and "game warden," and "game warden," and "game warden." It's not quite the same thing as the rabbit; it's the recurrent item.

Don't turn their cases around, just keep them talking, see, keep them talking. And more times you'll be startled out of your wits. They'll suddenly say, "Well, there's field hands, there's feed stores, there's this, and. . ." You're back there listing again, see. Don't try to take words out of what they are saying to you and list them. They consider that a terrible betrayal, because they didn't give you the item. Therefore you have robbed them.

Well, why the recurrent item? Well, that's because there is something missing. The other half of the package is gone and he hasn't confronted it, and he hangs right there in midair. He keeps saying "game warden," "game warden," "game warden." And it just never occurs to him to turn around and look and see "fisherman." He just never sees "fisherman." "Fisherman" never occurs to him. Doesn't matter how often you ask him the question, "Well, who or what would oppose catching catfish?" He just never thinks of "fisherman." You see, he is a fisherman.

But you get yourself a good - a good list, that list is going to look in a certain way. As you are listing a list - now here's the way a list looks - as you're listing a list, and you go down the line, you're liable to run into a dwindling rock slam. Or you're liable to run into a sporadic, occasional rock slam. We don't care which you run into. But if you don't get an item that slams when the list is being written down by you, you've got no list. There's got to be some on it that slam, man.

I don't know how many of you lately have inspected your own forehead without a mirror. But it's something like doing that trick. Things that a person is stuck in he doesn't look at. In fact that's how the bank stop - starts to accumulate, and is the basic cumulative factor of a bank, is the person is too close to it to as - is it. He never looks at it. Somebody's walking around being a body, and they never as - is that body, don't you see. They can as - is other bodies, but they never as - is their own body.

Now, how many is some? Well, three or four in a row, one or two occasionally on the thing that aren't attributable to the pc's moving his hands, and you'll find out that very often you run into the textbook dwindling rock slam. Every one rock slams a little bit less. Every item he gives you, you get a little smaller rock slam on. Starts from a dial wide or something like that, goes to three - quarters of a dial and goes to half a dial, goes to a quarter of a dial, goes to dirty reads. Dirty reads dwindle on down and go absolutely clean and slick as a whistle. And you say, "Boy, we've really done it now." And you close your book and you start nulling and you are horrified to behold that you get a dirty needle. Not dirty reads, but you get a dirty needle. What the hell's this dirty needle all about?

So the mass the person is in, whether it's a term or oppterm . . . You see, a pc can be in his own oppterm. It doesn't matter much whether it's a terminal or oppterm, or any other kind of a mass, if he's in it he doesn't perceive it so he never announces it and never lists it.

Well, it's the list isn't complete, that's what it's all about. Lists go in through phases of looking flat. Now, there are various tests. You can get the mid ruds in and ask the question that you're listing from to see if it produces a read. That is really not an absolute guarantee that that list is listed out. That is a good indicator. That's a good indicator. The absolute guarantee that it is an incomplete list occurs on this test: When you go down the list nulling items you can clean up a dirty needle - not a dirty read, but a dirty needle - by simply asking the pc if he thought of something.

And we call that a bypassed item. It's bypassed in the process, and so of course leaves a big chunk of the GPM sitting there non - as - ised. And actually, he now has a present time problem. It's the recurring item. He can't find the other half to the item, so he can't make a package out of it. This gets to be a present time problem, if it isn't at once, and that present time problem keeps him from going Clear.

You say to the pc, "Did you think of something?" Pc fishes around, finally digs it up and says yes and your needle goes clean again. If you have to use more mid rud than that, that list is incomplete. You see, it's not even mid ruds. It's just the off - hand two - way comm question. You just say, "Well, did you think of something?"

All right, well, that's just in the process of just ordinary listing. Supposing the pc weren't even pinned to present time. He'd still have some of this trouble, and you'll run into some of this trouble in any listing that you do on a pc.

Pc said, "Yes, so - and - so and so - and - so," and your needle cleans again.

Now, let's look at this thing more fundamentally. Let's say that a rock slammer is somebody who slams on any item in present time that is part of the GPM. In other words, just - instead of calling it a dirty word - just say he slams on a present time item.

Now, even that one, if you have to pull it two or three times for ten items or twelve items, no, man, that list is not complete. So you want to go at it this way, is "Did you think of something?" This is also - this is an invitation, you see, it's a two - edged sword. It's an invitation to give you his withhold or what he just thought or what he invalidated or something like that. It's an invitation to do that. Also an invitation to give you more items. See? "Did you think of something?" And then you can write this new item down at the end of the list.

Well, at first we can't tell what the present time item is and neither can he. That's it. You say to somebody, "What don't you really. . . " This person is nervous, see, person walking down the street, and nervous. And we say, "What's going on? What's going on here? And what are you nervous about?" And God, they'll say it's the cops. They'll say it's the store windows. They'll say it's shopkeepers. They say it's a wide - open space. They'd say this and they'd say that. And they never really will be able to tell you exactly what's making them nervous.

But let me tell you that a pc's ARC breaks about not completing the list do not stem from the auditing or auditing flubs. They come entirely from the pc's unwillingness to confront, because when a list is complete the pc will list forever. So when he ends listing is not a test of complete list. If a list were complete he would go on listing. But when a list isn't complete, he blows his stack. He balks.

And the funny part of it is, one fine day, one fine day, you make a list of something and a part of that list doesn't immediately go out with the Tiger Drill, and so forth. The Tiger Drill is what saves our bacon. Because it tells us whether or not the worm is still half in the ground. This little tab is stuck.

So any balk by the pc is an indication of an incomplete list. Simple. Just over the hill - you watch it. You'll see this manifestation from time to time. You'll be going down the line, pocketa - pocketa - pocketa - pocketa, and all of a sudden the pc will say, "Well, that's strawberries. That's it."

If the Tiger Drill won't immediately knock it out, then the thing is stuck in something. And the only thing for it to be stuck in is the GPM. So of course, then it is very safe. This would not be safe to do by Assessment by Elimination - show you how rote this procedure is.

You say, "Huh?" You know, your pencil screams to a rubbery stop.

If you did Assessment by Elimination and had something that stayed in, the pc might have had a little ARC break on it, or something like that, and you hadn't given it the test of: Does the other half of this worm stay in the ground? See? We haven't given it that test. Tiger Drill gives it that test. The thing doesn't blow up at once on Tiger Drill, it must be part of the GPM. That's how you tell if it's a tab.

He says, "Yeah, that's the item. That - that - that's - that is the one. That - that is the one."

And one fine day, why, we get a list off this pc, and the pc accidentally puts on the list - it's marvelous, but he does it consistently; he does this accident consistently - but he usually comes along afterwards and says: "You must have put that on the list, I didn't." And there's all kinds of arguments ensue after you found the item.

Well, just for fun sometimes, null the list you've just done. You want to get skunked? Just null what you've just done. You aren't going to get anything. It's going to be one of these horrible things. I'm going to put this in some bulletins so it can be spread more broadly. I'm going to put some actual patterns of incomplete list nullings and some actual patterns of some actual complete list nullings. Boy, they sure look different.

Well, that's an attestation of the fact that he couldn't have faced it. And he's rattling off the thing, and then he accidently says "fireplugs," you see. And he goes on down the line and "fireplug" is on this list, and you go down this list, and "fireplug" is one of the last four, and you tiger drill the other three, and he says, "Fireplugs, fireplug.? Hey, what do you know! It's fireplugs." And right away he's no longer afraid to walk up and down the street. He knows what he's afraid of. It's fireplugs.

I did a list the other night that was a real complete list, man. I think on the whole list there were five items in and some fifteen pages on the first pass. And boy, the one that showed up at the end of that was the nicest juiciest matched - up item you ever saw. Yum - yum, you know. Was just out, out, out, out, out, out, out, out, out. "Did you think of something." you know.

Well, that's so good, but he doesn't know why he's afraid of fireplugs. See, so far, so good with Routine 2 - 12. Now, you see, you just asked him for everything in his - environment, and he gave you this long list and accidentally put in fireplugs. All right, well, when you assess it down the line, you've found fireplugs - it slammed. And so you opposed it, and now you find out what opposes fireplugs, you see. And what opposes fireplugs is "People who want to park." And you've got a package. And now the odd thing about it is he doesn't even avoid fireplugs. He says, "To hell with them," see. You've discharged the mass.

"Oh, no, no. So and so on. Suppressed something, I thought that was funny."

Now, here again is where Routine 2 - 12 varies from 3GA Criss Cross, is Routine 2 - 12 blows up. It just goes pfff! And you're accustomed to 3GA Criss Cross, to items staying in there in concrete and brass. That's because you're reaching for deeper items. That's because the pc is more concerned about his bank. He's not concerned about present time. And you're picking up deep items in the bank, and you're picking them up for goals and all that sort of thing, and so actually you get items that will deliver goals, but not present time.

"All right." - Out, out, out, out, out, out - "All right, did you think of something?"

When these packages are picked up, part of which is present time, it's the most squizzely - squib firecracker you ever ignited. You go down this list, and let's say it's List One. Pocketa - pocketa - pocketa, down the list, and you find this ghost - ghost of a needle disturbance. When you read this item "fireplugs," well, the needle doesn't act the same as it does when you read other items. It's going slightly slower. And you just pick up the trace. It can be that faint. It isn't always, see.

"Yeah, it was this brrt ...

You say, "Fine." So you list this item out. And you'll pick up a slamming item. You see, if it was accurately assessed it must have been stuck into the GPM or it would have blown out on the Tiger Drill. And if it stayed in even that slightly you can represent it. And now, in representing it, if your list is complete, you should have picked up slams on it. If you didn't pick up a slam on it, there was a goof in the assessment.

"Good. All right." Third, fourth page, all of a sudden one's in. That's all right, mark it in. Next one, in. Uh - uh, uh - uh - uh.

Now, the two goofs of an assessment are, of course (1) wrong question the list is proceeding from the wrong question - or (2) the list isn't complete.

"Well, what have you been up to here? What do you think about it?" and so on. "Here's the list. Have you invalidated any of these things or anything like that?"

Now, there it is, and in 3D Criss Cross we'd expect that thing to hang around, but not in 2 - 12. We don't expect it to hang around at all. When we find it, we tiger drill it and it BAM, BAM, BAM, BAM, BAM, BAM, BAM, BAM, BAM, BAM, BA - BA - BA - BA bam, bam, bam, bam, bam - bam. And we say, "All right, now, consider committing overts about " - bam! "Consider committing overts against " - bam!

"I don't know. Oh, that one! That one. Ha - ha - ha! Yeah, ha - ha! Thought that one was awful funny. Ha - ha - ha!"

And you say, "Well, consider not giving things to this item." And it goes BAM - BAM BAM BAM, BAM. Bam. Bam. And we say, "All right, now, let's really get in there and sweat now and let's clean this up and let's clean this up good. On this item has anything been invalidated? On this item has anything been suppressed? On this item..." - Bam! "On this item is there anything you failed to reveal? On this item 'fireplugs, fireplugs,' " or whatever it is, see. You haven't even found the other side of it yet, see?

An auditor gets an awful lot of "you clowns" and that sort of thing, suppressed in doing this sort of thing.

You clean it up some more - "Anything been suppressed?" - and it goes dirty needle. Where the hell's the slam? Well, you idiot, you got rid of it. What are you auditing the fellow for if you don't want his bank to discharge?

Anyway, they just go right on down the line, pocketa - pocketa - pocketa - pocketa - pocketa - pocketa - pocketa. One read out, one read out, one read out, one read out, one read out, one read out, see? Just nothing, nothing, nothing. Two in consecutively, mid ruds went out.

And you start finding these things that are cozily up into present time and they go like that. So you oppose this thing industriously, see. I know, it went to a little dirty needle, but you saw a slam on it, didn't you? It slammed when you found it. When you tiger drilled it, it went blam, blam. All right, that's enough. Don't knock yourself to pieces on it.

Imagine my embarrassment on one sector of it, though, I had two in consecutively. Two were actually in, one after the other. I'd gotten so cocky by that time I was pestering the pc because the second one was in, of course. You know. Then you say, "Pardon me!" you see, and really - really apologize, and keep on going. But that's - that is a very ideal situation to get into.

Now you get the opposition to it. That opposition list slams like crazy while you're listing it. Slam, slam! And you go down over the list again and you don't find any slams on the list. And you find one final item, and you're tiger drilling this one item, and it goes SLAM SLAM, Slam, slip.

And Mary Sue dragged out, the other day, some of the old 3D Criss Cross lists, and I really am going to have to post them for you because you'll scream, man! Twelve items long, this list is, up to the point where the pc said didactically, "Well that is it. I have now put it on the list." And then we have as many as twenty - four to twenty - eight slant marks after each item.

Now, this is one thing that is not given in the bulletins on R2 - 12 in detail. You must package the item with the pc. Now, you can get into an embarrassing situation on R2 - 12, where the opposition list which you have just been nulling has four items left in it. And you can't - and they're all worn out and you can't get anything to do anything and so forth.

Oh, you thought I was going to say, "The one that was in." Oh, no, no, it went around to the back of the page. And no items resulted. And we could never understand why the case wasn't getting anywhere. That was why the case wasn't getting anywhere. Every time the pc'd say, "Well it's on the list," the auditor would stop and that was it. And then start this arduous nulling, you see. Three sessions later still trying to null twelve. Wild business, man!

Actually, what you do is ask the pc, one after the other, if they would oppose the item which you've listed them from. Which makes the package. And the pc says, "Well, that doesn't, and that doesn't, and that does. And that doesn't."

So anyway, the pc - the pc actually slows down, sees that just over the horizon there is the smell of danger. One shouldn't go over that rise and so instantly gets up the one that's it, presents it to the auditor and says they aren't going to go any further than that. They'll say it in various ways. When you try to persuade the pc to go further than that they say it in various ways. They just don't want to go any further.

And you say, "All right, well, that's good. Now, it's this, is it? 'A man who wants to park at a fireplug.' That's right. Is that the package?"

Now, you shove them - well, this is the other test you should make - you shove them just a few inches further and they start listing again - slam! You won't go four or five items beyond where they put it on the list, before you are looking at the first rock slam you saw in the session, in many cases. That's quite amazing, see? Marvelous. And now here's another one for you. You can have as many as about three groups of slams and a slam will dwindle two or three times on a list. That's not common but it can be expected. So that you have had a dwindling slam is no test at all, except that's a valid thing to list from. You just keep going.

"Yeah, that's the package."

Well, how far do you keep going? Well, until you don't have to get the mid ruds in to null it. Well, how far is that? Well, that's as far as it is. How long is a piece of string? Some pcs seem specialized in terribly long lists. They just love these 589 lists, you know? Let me tell you, no pc has short lists.

Now, you look at the fireplug and you can't get a whisper out of it. And you look at the man who wants to park and you can't get a whisper out of it. You've lost it, man. You can't get a whisper out of anything. The whole list went. The last dirty needles on the opposition list are also gone now, if you wanted to care and give it a look - mysterious. But you'll see an evaporating rock slam.

There aren't no such things as lists of ten, twelve, fifteen or twenty, twenty - five. There are no such lists. You don't get short lists like that. The person would be almost to OT before they'd give you lists like that. You understand? And then their confront would be up so high that you wouldn't have anything to know. They would have blown them all anyhow.

Now, trying to do something with it is where you'll get into the most trouble. Because it's gone. You've blown it. It's something like trying to run last year's engram. You're just not going to make it.

So you just don't get short lists. You get these longer lists. And a pc that works somewhere in the neighborhood of eighty to a hundred and fifty on a list is just dandy. You can have a list complete as short as sixty or seventy, but not very often. It's eighty up.

And that's where a 3GA Criss Cross artist would get into his most trouble. Because he's used to seeing the item there, he's used to seeing it hang around for a while, at least till the end of session, and R2 - 12 items off at the first couple of lists, for the first list, you know. List 1 and List 1A, the final combinations of those things are quite unlikely to do this. They're much more likely to go bzz - zzzz - pfffft! Hhh! Pc's cognited and feels happy about everything.

Some of these pcs go five hundred - I think there are some who have gone as long as a thousand - are actually habitual. They're habitual. I mean, you ask for their next list and they give you five hundred, you know? Well, I'm sorry for it and I'm sorry that they do this. They happen to be rare. It's much commoner to have a pc that will run around a hundred, see. But you've had it, I'd up their auditing rates at once.

Now, here's your other thing, is your case gain is disproportionate. I mean it's almost inverse to that. Because the whole slam evaporated, the amount of your case gain is sometimes absolutely fantastic. This individual's been worried sick. And now it's just evaporated, see.

But anything that restrains a pc or tries to keep the pc from doing a proper length list will wreck your R2 - 12, just as it will wreck 3D - 3GA Criss Cross. You say, "Well, your lists are too long. I don't want to audit you." They'll give you short lists with no items on them. Then you're really wasting your auditing time, see. You find out they'll suppress items, and put them out of sight. Then you never can get the needle cleaned up.

My God, he's been walking down streets, and he's - all of his life he's been walking down streets, and they've made him very, very nervous, these streets have. And now, rather rapidly, in the course of four, five, six, eight hours of auditing or something like that, you've found the fireplugs. That took care of streets. And then, quite by accident, you also got maybe a bonus package. Maybe there were two items on that list that slammed against each other which had nothing to do with the final item. Because that happens very often in handling these near present time lists. In other words, you've got another pair out - a bonus pair.

And you finally say, "Well how come you suppressed all those items? I mean, you know, they seem perfectly good items and we've now got them on the list. But how come you suppressed them?" If you asked them something like that, that's too jabbery and talky to for an auditing session. But if you were to say something like that they'd say, "Well, we'd get through so much faster if the list weren't so long."

There was "people who got angry at traffic," and "people who stopped traffic." And you saw both of these slam when you went down against them. You care to go back and ask the pc - and this is the other point about packaging it. You saw these two other items and they slammed wildly, and then they seemed to evaporate and so forth, remember which ones slammed that way.

See, if they'd given you their normal list you would have gotten through it and nulled it and found their item in two hours and a half, you see. Everything would have been dandy, you see, so on. This is the second session which you've still been battling with this. You've now burned up five auditing hours. And the pc is trying to save you time!

Actually your nulling ought to be done with a different colored pencil, and what you do is take the wild R/Ses that you'll find that are marked "R/S" in the same color as your nulling slashes, and ask the pc if these fit together in any way. And you'll very often find a bonus package you wouldn't have suspected. And the pc didn't quite suspect it either.

I'm afraid as an auditor I never have quite measured up to the ideal auditor. The ideal auditor would never say anything about it. He would never say anything about it. And I'm afraid, after a pc has done this to me a few times, and so forth, I'm liable to say to the pc, "Thank you so much for your help." I'm afraid I'm not completely - not completely proof against doing that.

And it'll go slam, slam, slam! And all of a sudden, why, his anger at police evaporates. And there he is. You've really blown something, you see. You've blown some - thing well within his own reality. You haven't gotten "a knight in shining armor," and "a damsel in distress," you see, or something like this that he hasn't met for centuries.

That's the one that really gets me, though. The pc is trying to help you out so that you can't even vaguely do your job. Oh! What can you say, you know? And you sit there and you sweat it out and that's as far as I'd go there, is just to thank them a little too loudly. They sometimes get the point. And they say, "Oh well, you didn't want me to do that. You mean it would have got done faster if I'd just - just gone ahead and let you do it?"

See, you've got something nice like a fireplug. And boy, he can recognize that fireplug. So his gradient scale of confront comes in here, and he gets rather a terrific case gain.

"Yeah, that's what I mean."

Therefore, if you do it right and go right down the groove, you can expect a very rapid case gain if it's done just exactly right. And you can expect the pc to say, "Hey! What do you know, you know. Hey, whoa! This Scientology's really something. What's that? Uhh!" It's fast. Because you get this evaporating slam.

"Ah, well. I'll help you out next time."

But you'll sometimes make a misassessment and you'll get deeper than you intended to. That's more likely on a list that the pc gives you in great detail. Let's supposing you were doing List 1A, and he lists "dragons." And man, he's got no present time problem about dragons. He hasn't seen a dragon for ages and ages and ages, you know. But just somehow or another he put an associative item on the list, see, you're spattering along. "In present time, is there anything you're upset about?" see, and he put "dragons."

"No thank you. Just - just sit there and answer the auditing question, will you please?"

Well now look, he didn't answer the auditing question. And to that degree you're going to get in trouble. In 3GA Criss Cross you never interfere with the pc's listing. You just never do. And you've been taught that very thoroughly, and now, we get to 2 - 12, and we do.

But actually, the more you beat up a pc, the less you're going to get done. The more you harass a pc, the more you worry a pc, the more you yap at a pc about a dirty needle, and so forth, the less you're going to get done. You should never yap at a pc about a dirty needle. Now, you'll rapidly come off of that and it won't be one of your sins. As soon as you learn to complete a list, you'll stop chopping up pcs for having a dirty needle.

On the first list he wants to put on it: "Auditors who are trying to ruin me." And you say, "Thank you very much." Write it on a piece of scrap paper and throw it away after the session. On that second one, List 1A, why, he's giving you something - or - other, something - or - other, something - or - other, and "dragons."

Now, although the ideal auditor, the perfect auditor, would never cause any ARC break at all, a good auditor inevitably causes a little bit - inevitably. It's just part of the business. You're going down the line and there you sit there and you're going down the line and you're checking this and that and you're saying, "Catfish, tigers, waterbucks," so forth. And you're going down the line, and all of a sudden this thing is going bzzz, bzzz, bzzz, bzzz, bzzz, bzzzzz. Your list is already 320, see.

"In present time what have you been upset about?"

Now, the ideal auditor would have completed the list in the first place.

"Dragons."

But an actual auditor very often finds it out in mid-flight. In other words, there's a difference between perfect ideal form and the form that you can achieve. You can come awful close to perfect form but this one will always throw you. The thing was clean, everything was clean, there was no indicator, no clouds on the horizon, everything was beautiful, the sun was shining, you're going down the list like mad and all of a sudden, clank! You got a dirty needle.

Well, the smart auditor of course can just scratch his fingernail on the paper for a moment or two, you see, and say, "Good." But don't put it on the list! Because that list has got to be accurate and it'll lay you an egg. It'll mess you up.

Now, if you say to the pc, "All right, let's list some more items," you're not going to get too much cooperation. But frankly, the more monkeying around you do, why, the less cooperation you're going to get. So it's almost that abrupt. You say, "All right, now I see here you've probably got some more items that you thought of in progress and we're going to turn it over to the next page and now, all right, just give me some more items."

You're going down the list, "Yes! Dragons." And it's got a much bigger reaction than anything you've got in present time, and these present time list reactions and the List One reactions are very faint, ordinarily.

And the pc says, "But we've done that twice!"

It's actually quite rare for you to get rock slams and fireworks and so forth off those first two lists, there - first list - your Scientology list, and your 1A list - very rare. You won't see that very often. You just get a little ghost of some kind or another. And that thing will really open up.

And you say, "Yeah, I'm awful sorry, but we have..." and so forth. We'll just go back and, you know, kind of pick up one item there that you - that you thought of when I was going along."

And so he's given you "dragons." And there are no dragons in present time, so you're not doing R2 - 21 for present time items. And you get way back on the track in Marchipides or something, and you find yourself sitting there with "dragons." "Who or what would oppose dragons?"

"Well, 'gophers'."

And you get "blast pistols," and you get "knights in shining armor," and 66 women's screams," and so forth. And now, you've got two items that stay in and they go slam, and they'll slam, and they'll slam. You can use them to find goals with, but they're not going to do the pc as much good, you see, as if you'd found present time items. See how you can be led astray?

And you say, "'Gophers,' yeah, give me some more."

You have to have the rationale of 2 - 12 down pretty good or you could go astray with it. It is simply an effort to locate one of the GPM items as it seems to be in present time to the pc. It's an effort to locate that item in present time, and find its opposition. And if you succeed in doing that, you've taken away the present time problem.

And the pc's all of a sudden going a - a - a - a - a - a, you know, straight down the line. Marvelous to behold. Sometimes they overlist. Five would have cleaned it up, see, and they give you twenty. But never stop a pc from listing. You'll - because it's too hard to get them started in the first place. You never stop a pc from listing. Never. They go on and on and on and on and on, well, just sit there and take the items down.

Now, I suppose it's getting home to you that if you get a backtrack item, you're not solving a present time problem and therefore don't speed the case. You're actually - you got better materials to find a goal with. You've got all kinds of - it has uses, you understand?

Now, you can have as many as three dwindling rock slams from the same item. That is a little discovery that is quite interesting. You thought there it was and it disappeared and it went to a perfectly clean needle and you say, "I've got it made in the shade." Don't be too smug. You keep on listing as long as the pc wants to list. And you get your mid ruds in, make a test of the thing and so forth, and watch that carefully because any slightest disturbance of that needle on that test means more items on that list.

But as far as solving this problem you're trying to solve with Routine 2 - 12, you don't solve it. You're trying to get rid of the present time problem for the pc. And if you don't get rid of all of those present time problems, why, the case isn't going to make a gain.

The test simply consists of getting your mid ruds in and asking the question from which you were getting the items. And you just ask that question, and man, watch that meter. Because if there's any rough - up . . . That needle was flowing and you asked the question and it stopped flowing, and just sort of souped. Didn't read. There's more items on the list.

Now, this is below the surface of the pc's recognition of what problem he's worried about. And we've taken the hidden standard and all those other things that we've worked with in the past and we've gone right down below the surface.

And you say, "Well, all right." Try to sound happy about it. Say, "All right, good. Well, all right. All right. Well, I see you've got some more here. And here we go." And let's just write them up, see. Get your mid ruds in and test the thing again. It's always an invariable action. You get your mid ruds in and you test.

Pc would never under God's green earth put the problem, if it was his problem and it was attached to the GPM, he just would never put the problem down if you were running present time problems. He just never would put the problem itself down.

Now, on List One there is an accidental that you must know about. On 3GA Criss Cross, on all other steps of Routine 2 - 12, you probably won't notice that before you start to null you have put in your mid ruds. You see, because you wrote the list and then you put in your mid ruds and tested the list, so your mid ruds are in, aren't they? And on List One, the Scientology List, before you do it, you haven't completed any list so you haven't put in the mid ruds. So it becomes absolutely vital to get your mid ruds in on the Scientology List.

He wouldn't put down any part of its elements. "Trying to park in town." See, he just would never put down anything like that problem. It would be something on the order of "to destroy all cities," or "get away into the country," or "to have an airplane that would fly high in the sky forever," "how to acquire enough money never to have to go for my own groceries," see.

Now, one of the reasons why you can't add anything to the Scientology List turns up that if you ask the pc to add as much as one, two or three items, you have started the pc listing and will have to continue the pc listing it to get rid of your dirty needle. But if it never occurred to the pc to list, you won't have a dirty needle. But you get your mid ruds in, not on the list, you just get your mid ruds in for the session, so forth. But that becomes a little extra piece of stuff that has to go on ahead of it, just because in all other lists it occurs inevitably that you accidentally have gotten your mid ruds in at the beginning of the list, see, before you started nulling.

You could trace it afterwards that he had thousands of problems associated with this problem, the elements of which were the fireplug and the guy trying to park. He would never see it. He just never perceives it.

Now, if you add nothing to the Scientology List you won't have a dirty needle to worry about unless it's just the dirty needle of missed withholds or the dirty needle of out mid ruds. Otherwise than that, there's nothing different on h the first list than h any subsequent or successive lists.

You can list these things into being and it's rather easily and gently done. But never just talk the thing into being, which is a quite interesting thing. Even if he said it he wouldn't believe it was a problem of his. So all of a sudden there it is, clank.

Now, the thing to do in doing Routine 2 - 12 is just keep your eye on what you're trying to do. You're trying to find a trace first in Scientology because areas, because that's closest to the session and then in the present time environment of the pc. You're trying to find a trace of the GPM and where it might be keyed in because the individual will then have a chronic and consistent present time problem. Now, having found this trace in present time, you recognize that the other side of the package - the second sphere, the second valence - that is opposing that thing in present time is keyed in all the time.

You see, this is a whole subject of charge. And you've got charge on these things. It's heavy charge. It's remarkable the amount of stand offness, a rock slam actually contains in it. There's stand offishness connected with it.

But also recognize, please, as an auditor, that it is a complete lie that it is in present time. It is only keyed into present time. So the moment you start listing a represent list, your pc is going to fly out of present time. But of course the thing isn't in present time; where else could he go but out of present time.

Well it's - I don't know, did you ever try to look at - ever try to look at some guy who was throwing a flashlight in your face? That's a good example. Dark night and this guy's got a flashlight in your face and you're trying to see the guy. And you would very annoyedly tell him to "Take that thing out of my eyes!" you know. And so forth. But you don't see him. And you keep trying not to look toward the light. But notice that you always try to see who has got the light.

He only thinks it's in present time. It only appears to be into present time to him, and as soon as you represent, why, you'll carry him out of present time. But don't get too disturbed if for all his understanding of present time somebody starts to list backtrack like crazy. Well, what else is there to list?

That's idiocy. What are you looking at it for? Well, the pc actually can't look away from one of these slams and can't look at it. And he's in a tremendous confusion of perception. And that perception has to be cared for very, very smoothly. If you don't care for the perception smoothly, why, your pc isn't ever able to confront the thing.

You don't think this life had enough duress in it, even with the Democrats in power, you see, and the Republicans about to succeed them. You see, I mean even with combinations like that, you still don't get masses of the GPM in this lifetime. Let me assure you of that. There couldn't be anyplace but the backtrack.

So you rapidly see what the pc is up against in the business of trying to live in present time. He's got two or three items around him which have flashlights, very bright ones, shining in his face all the time.

Probably the thing he thinks is keyed - in in present time actually was a million years old, at the very youngest. So, of course, you're going to go backtrack. That you're going backtrack doesn't invalidate it as wiping out the present time problem.

And he's always trying to see who's holding these lights, except he doesn't know if anybody is, and he's not even aware of the fact there are any lights in present time. But he's sort of nervous and he goes around, you know. And he walks into buildings, and so forth. There's always somebody got the light in his eyes. And he's not sure what.

Now, one other thing you should realize is in 1938 there was this matter of identities, similarities and differences. And you saw it first in Dianetics: Modern Science of Mental Health: A =====A = A. See, A = A===== A. In other words, everything is identical to everything, see. Everything is identified with everything. Well, of course, this is the reason the present time problem is in present time. He has got the GPM mass identified with the present time item. Nothing is wilder than this one that occurs in Scientology organizations. You're trying to help this guy out, you see, and he keeps shoving a dirk in your back.

Unless you get that out of present time, he can't put enough concentration on the bank to lift his - list his bank out. Because it's pinned in present time. He has the - he just hasn't got enough attention units available to blow the rest of it.

Why? Well, because you're the king of the "Glu - Klocks" or something. Of course, he's been dead several million years, but somehow or another you restimulated him, minds being minds.

I've been studying this for a long time. I couldn't conceive that some of the people who just went Clear on listing - mysteriously and marvelously - that some of these people were just less aberrated than others, more able to do this than others, able to do that ... No, there was no vast difference except they just happened accidentally not to have a GPM PTR They didn't have one.

Now, the A=A=A factor is terribly interesting to you from the viewpoint of the represent step of 2 - 12. You can represent anything and you will peel identifications off of it. So the representing alone is auditing. Listing is auditing. And by taking anything somebody is worried about and just representing items - you see, oppose, no, no, no. See? You can't say, "What would oppose it?"

And how faint that can be is also going to escape your notice. How faint that trace is. How faint that little blue tab is. How unnoticeable that worm is, that tail of that worm. And you say, "Well, that couldn't possibly be aberrative."

This fellow says, "I'm awfully worried about ice cream cones." I'm showing you now a little shortcut, goofball assist use of this, just to teach you the principle, see?

Well, you'd have the wrong idea of it. Actually, that it tabs at all, that it stays there at all, means you've got a piece of the GPM on the other end of it, and you can get it with a represent. See, if it stays at all it's a piece of the GPM.

You can't say, "What would oppose ice cream cones?" and wind up anyplace. Because there is no such package as something versus ice cream cones. It doesn't exist. He'd have to invent it. But you can say, "What would represent ice cream cones to you," and he'll give you the scale of substitutes for ice cream cones. This helps him to differentiate so he sees they're only similarities, not identities.

Now, it might be too deep a piece of the GPM for the pc to have any reality on it. See, there's that possibility. But that would only happen in actuality if you were very crude.

Now, you can always use represent as an assist. The fellow's got a bellyache. You say, "All right, now, what's a bellyache represent to you?" See, you haven't got him on the meter, you haven't done anything with him, so "What's a bellyache represent to you?"

Supposing we took the natural land animals of planets, and just arbitrarily assessed these things - nothing to do with the pc, not even in restimulation. We assess these things, and we find one, boy, that sticks there with a beautiful dirty needle.

"Well, it represents this and that and the fact that I am dying, and - ha - ha! That's real funny, I'm not dying," and he feels better. You understand?

And boy, we list a represent list on that, and we list for pages, and we list for more pages, and it's still a dirty needle - it never slams. And we list for more pages, and we list for more pages, and we list for more and more and more pages, and it never has a slam. And it's always got a dirty needle, and we can't get the list complete, and there we go, there we go, there we go, and so on, and you finally say, "To hell with it."

But you're handling now one of the most fundamental fundamentals there are with that represent list and any time you say, "Who or what would (do something)," you're still writing a list and it's still got some represent in it. And you're actually using items to separate them out and get the pc to differentiate. And therefore he can see what is what and what is true and what is false. So you're handling all of these factors while you're handling R2 - 12. And the factors are in there and hidden, but they're quite startling. When you get a full parade of how many factors you're handling in R2 - 12, it's dizzying. So the best answer to it is just do it and you'll see those things peel off.

Later on in processing he comes up with it. You're trying to list a piece of the GPM that is completely beyond his sight, he can't even slam on it. You understand? Too tough for him. Too tough for him.

But it's very funny. Somebody will be absolutely sure his wife is an ogre. You've heard of this, you see. Well, actually he's just got an A =====A===== A. And you say, "Well, what does your wife represent to you?"

Well now, if the person can recognize that he has a present time problem in present time without recognizing it , then it is within the zone or realm of his cognition.

He'd say, "A thuh and a thuh and a thuh and a thuh and a thuh," well, he'd feel better just from doing that. And, of course, that's very short of what R2 - 12 could do and the wrong way to do it, actually. But you could use it that way and he'd differentiate.

In other words, a piece of his GPM floating in present time, that he is aware of enough to be nervous about it and react on it, why, therefore he will cognite on it, don't you see. So therefore you get very rapid, fast cognition, and the pc says, "Oh, yes, of course!" you know, "Fireplugs," and "Why didn't I think of that before?"

So remember now, while you - while you're cursing there at the length of a list, remember the more identification on an item, the more items are going to come off on the list. The more identified the person is with something, the more items you're going to get coming off of it. And all the time you're listing those items you're auditing him like crazy - whether it's represent or oppose - because the oppose, too, is stripping down a certain idea or concept.

But this other thing, "Komodo dragons," he reminds you of somebody that hasn't even got enough sense to be scared, see. There's no recognition of them at all.

And don't lose sight of the fact that all the time you're listing you're auditing him like mad. And now we'll take nulling and every time you go down this list he thinks there and he reintegrates this stuff and you're auditing him like mad. So it's all auditing, solid auditing, and about the soundest and most condensed auditing that you could do - gain per unit of time.

Later on, his confront's up - you find the item "Komodo dragon," and it goes wham! See, but his confront is way up, and the GPM has been very much tamed down. You understand? That's time for that.

Now, done right, and arriving with items, this is absolutely wonderful. I mean, you get someplace with this - it's fabulous. Now where - how many, how fast should something like this go? Well, I'd say, in an HGC, an auditor who was accustomed to it or something like that should be able to get two packages very easily in a twenty - five - hour intensive. Two packages. That's four items. You know, A versus B and C versus D, in a twenty - five - hour intensive. He would really be loafing, see. He would have run into a lot of hard luck. He would have had to have done this. He would have had to have done that. It was a tough pc. You understand, all these things.

Well, that's what makes 2 - 12 remarkable, is that it's run broadly on a great many pcs. It can be run broadly on any God's quantity of pcs, because if the pc is capable of finding a slightest trace on your first lists as you're assessing them, they're within his zone or realm of cognition. And if you do an accurate assessment, why, then he comes up with tremendous numbers of cognitions, and so forth.

But I notice, I notice that to get a complete package that I'm - with long items and 2 - 12 and that sort of thing and with not being too careful or meticulous or trying to make time, actually loafing a bit on the job, and so forth - I notice it's going about 7Y2 item - hours per pair for me. That would be for you 2 1/2 sessions of 3 - hour sessions for a pair. That's really loafing. You understand? And so I say, then, for 2 pairs, for a twenty - five - hour intensive, that is - should be pretty close to a minimal expectancy. Of course you can always go up from there.

I'd like to have a lot of these old cases that never cognited, never cognited, and run them on 2 - 12. Blow their silly heads off.

Of course you can gear in, and of course you can really get flying. I can do a list and get an item, if I want to really sit down and sweat at it, in one hour and ten minutes. But this is, of course, putting on the pressure of this, really, really knocking it out, man. Your voice is such a blur you can hardly hear it yourself, you know - but just to give you some kind of a level of expectancy.

The score that you put up today, just on that, two auditors out of twelve this morning attacked R2 - 12 - they were all under orders to do it - head - on, and it was evidently going very successfully and very nice. Ten didn't. They did something odd or offbeat. But the odd and offbeat things which they did can be all summed up in a few errors. And Mary Sue and I went to ground about this. She was looking over folders and picking up this data today.

And when you get two items you've got to make a package out of them, so when you say two packages you mean two pair. So you get two packages in a twenty - five - hour intensive, that would be very slow going indeed. Actually, you'll find your better leading auditors will get up to about six in twenty - five-hour intensive.

But the errors that were noted in doing R2 - 12 are very noteworthy: Is auditors grabbing an item which R/Ses without assessing List One or completing assessment of List One. In other words, so the item R/Sed and they just grabbed it, and they went on from there. That's an error.

But, actually, in terms of case gain, two packages of R2 - 12 well listed, perfect, they are the items that should have been gotten, and that sort of thing, do more for the pc than a thousand hours of anything we've ever had before. Because you've removed the present time problem out of his road and now he can get gains from auditing. Those are the reasons for fast results.

It's also, by the way, a tremendous error to take any item the pc simply gives you, I don't care how it performs on a meter or anything else. It just - so he gives you an item. So what? You take your items from assessment and you'll never lay an egg. But you just take these gratuitously handed up items, or heavily sold items.. . You see, you've only got it to slam for a minute, and now he's trying to sell you "popcorn," you see. And you - "popcorn" sort of dirty reads, because he's selling it to you, see. And you ignore the one - you say, "Well, it isn't slamming anymore - the one item I found isn't slamming anymore, so therefore I'm going to take 'popcorn.'" Kkk! See, never, just never take one the pc hands you gratuitously all by itself

Now do you understand this technique a little better?

Two: auditors allowing the pc to complete and add pc items to List One. Now, we've cared for that already by giving you a more canned, circumscribed List One. That is with exclamation points itself

Audience: Yes.

Three: auditors assessing out a motivator on List One. And page two additions and doing a represent on it which produces no R/S. Well, of course in view of the fact that R/Ses are - consist of - we don't care about people listing motivators or otherwise; it just happens that if you do list a motivator you never get an R/S. You're probably listing from the pc's oppterm, see.

Well, I wish you lots of luck with it.

That's what basically we find wrong with somebody getting rid of motivators all the time. In actual fact, a person who's getting rid of motivators is being an oppterm to himself. He's out of valence. He's not even in his own terminal line, see.

Thank you very much.

I had an interesting example of that. Last night I accidentally listed one in reverse - there was not really any accident about it, I'd already determined - an item that had pain and sen on it. And I listed it in reverse, after I had gotten it straightened out so that it was 99 percent pain.

See, it should have been listed the reverse way. So I went out and relisted it as though it were an oppterm. And man, let me tell you, the terminal is always at cause. I never saw a stucker stuck needle in my life than trying to list that thing in reverse.

You want a confirmation of this, take some time and say: "Who or what would the oppterm do something to?" see. "Who or what would the oppterm oppose?" you know. Instead of "Who or what would oppose the oppterm." Just "Who or what would the oppterm oppose?" And you'll have a ball. You sit there and look at a totally stuck needle and a totally stuck tone arm, and that's it.

If you ever wanted a confirmation of how the pc must be at cause, that's certainly an interesting little sidelight on it. So any time a pc's giving you motivators, he's giving it to you from the oppterm side, and if he gives you a motivator item on your List One - it doesn't matter so much on the others, because you haven't gotten motivator or overt items, you see, and you're liable to get either one - but on this one, if he puts a motivatorish thing on first list, why, of course he gives it from the oppterm side. And man, he'll turn on sen all over the place. We had somebody do it today. Sen, sen, sen, sen, misemotion, upset, misemotion, sen, see. Goes half around the bend.

So, and four, which is quite interesting, and this is the main crime - is auditors not doing it at all. And that was - that condensed any little flubs or upsets that went into here in R2 - 12.

I did broaden the door here a little bit, and I closed it back, because all experimental data on it contained nothing but nounal lists. And they never contained adjectives or verbs. Just didn't occur to me; it just got by me. I thought I'd give you a little more complete Scientology list, you see, and let you complete it a little bit.

Well, up went the balloon. R2 - 12 itself is very precisely worked out. And so I am the one who added the first additive. I let you put a few additives on the first list. We have now taken them off.

All right. Now, you recognize that if you get rid of some problem on which the pc has a great reality, that he will get a tremendous resurge as a case. That's pretty obvious, isn't it?

Let's say he's going around just sick - you know, just sick, about this thing. The cops are going to get him or something of the sort. He's just sick about it, all the time, all the time, all the time; he's just dying in his tracks, you know, just quivering, and so forth. And all of a sudden you handle that as a present time problem. So all of its elements disappear. He'd go, "Whew! Hu - hu - hu," you know.

And the funny part of it is when you do a very skilled R2 - 12, that's exactly what happens to the pc. He's very nervous, but it's about a problem he doesn't even know he's got. And he's so nervous on the subject of this problem that he's just about out through his skull. And you can take him and grab that and handle it.

Now, actually, he mustn't have a problem in order to get the problems in his own personal environment. He mustn't have a problem on Scientology. And because the session is closer than his environment while R2 - 12 is being done, therefore you have to take the Scientology problems away before you take the environmental problems away. Always has to be in that sequence. And you just get these problems that he's really panting and upset about and so forth, that are right there quivering in present time, and of course he says, "Whew! What a relief, man! Hu - hu." If you don't get that kind of a result, either you're doing assessments wrong, or something is awry, or you're not completing lists, or something of the sort.

I'll go into the mechanics of doing R2 - 12 a little more thoroughly in the next lecture. Right now, thank you.