Well, here we are at what day?

Okay. Here we are. This is the second lecture, Saint Hill Special Briefing Course, 23 October AD 12.

Audience: Twenty - third.

And continuing 3GA Criss Cross, as she is cooked, and the recipe, and the subtitle of this lecture is: "Following the Rock Slam."

Twenty - third of October. . .

The tips which were put out on rock slams earlier apply in 3GA Criss Cross and you will find that the preclear interest follows the rock slam. If you can keep the rock slam you can keep the pc's interest. When you lose the rock slam you've lost the pc's interest.

Audience: AD 12.

Now, the cognitions follow the rock slam. We've often wondered, back through the antediluvian periods of Dianetics and Scientology, how come Mr. A cognited and Mr. B didn't cognite? And how come Mr. B sat there through 275 hours of auditing without a single cognition? Well, that's because you never came near any rock slams on him.

... AD 12. Hoped I hadn't lost a year here since the last time I lectured to you.

We used to try to get rid of rock slams, now we try to preserve them. In photography, if you will look at the modern manuals of photography put out as the great pictures of the year, you know, like the German annuals, and all that sort of thing, you will see in it that all of the bad features of the photography of ten years ago and the things that were condemned in the best photographic salons have now become - become the artistic thing to do today. In other words, they used to think grain was terrible and now grain is wonderful. And they used to think that out - of - focusness was awful and now they think it is just the cake.

Well, if you're afraid of getting restimulated, you can leave now. Now, I'm going to talk about the 3GA Criss Cross.

Now, that is a process of being overwhelmed by that which you can't whip. Now, you might say it's almost the same thing today with rock slams. Just a year ago, occasionally you would hear a half - angry, authoritative auditing voice in a session saying, "Floor! floor! floor! floor!" trying to turn off the condemned rock slam so he could get on with the game, you see? Not any more. If I hear anybody using "floor, floor, floor" to turn off a dirty needle or a rock slam during an assessment and so forth, why, I will conclude that he doesn't know how to get in mid ruds and is trying to get the pc a loss. Because that's all that's going to happen.

Now, I want you to carefully notice I haven't any notes and this is not a - this is just off the cuff, because in the past many, many weeks I've been auditing like mad myself on research auditing trying to pick up all of the data necessary to make it easy for you to crack cases.

Now, a rock slam, when it turns on suddenly and inexplicably in the middle of doing something else, is still a great embarrassment. But you had better find out what turned it on and why.

You should realize, at first glance and at - immediately, that 3GA in its original form will find goals and has made first - goal Clears. You should recognize that, that we are going beyond a point of success.

A pc on the rock slam channel, while he's following the rock slam very nicely and you're doing everything to get him to follow the rock slam, has a tiny withhold. The tiny withhold, if it's in the direction of the rock slam object, of course is just the rock slam reactivated by the withhold. And this makes life more complicated because it gives us this interesting fact, that while you're doing a list and finding the last items on the list, the pc can have a withhold on a certain item which will make it look like it is in when it is not. The rock slam is occurring on the pc's withhold or invalidation or protest, and not on the item. Oh, isn't that grim!

The problem which reaches us, however, is that some eases do not respond easily to the original 3GA. It goes up into the thousands of goals on these cases. And if you had unlimited time, you could probably, undoubtedlyusing no more than these techniques contained in the original 3GA - find the pc’s goal.

Well, that's just - makes life more interesting, doesn't it? That's a hurdle.

But in view of the fact that we are few and the preclears are many and because of the peculiar position of the Saint Hill graduate today - in that he is looked upon to find a great many goals and do a great deal for a great many people in the field of Clearing - an endless procedure is therefore inadequate to our needs. Hence you get 3GA Dynamie Assessment by Rock Slam. That was the first upgrade and improvement of this.

This can actually occur, particularly on a pc who incipiently slams on auditors. He just has this one little slight withhold: you're going down this list, everything is fine, and maybe the list is a total blank. Maybe there's nothing on this list. Nothing. Nothing to be found anywhere. It's not going anyplace.

Now, this saved time and this swept in the bulk of those cases that were very difficult. That is, it swept in the bulk of them. We were marching up now, higher in our percentage that could be done rapidly. And the technique, 3GA, with the Goals Assessment done by Dynamic Assessment by Rock Slam (that particular technology and those bulletins) is still valid and is still workable and there's a lot of people sitting right in front of me whose goals were found with that particular technology.

And you get down to the last three items and one of them is "a cadaver." And while you read "cadaver" the last time through, the pc invalidated your auditing. Now, you read "cadaver" again and it rock slams beautifully. Makes life more interesting, doesn't it?

But this again failed, on some cases, to attain - the goal rapidly. Once more, a slowdown came about on some cases.

Well, it merely gives us some of the reasons why you do what you do.

Having established all of this, we found then that the goals on some eases went out hard. It was all right; we could find the goal and all of that sort of thing, but goals went out hard. Now, what do I mean by "went out hard"? I mean, as long as nine hours to tiger drill out one goal which wasn't it. You see, goals were going out hard.

And the answer to that, of course, is you get a list down to the last three or four items and then you take the remaining items out, not by elimination, but by Tiger Drill. You got that? You don't eliminate the last three simply by calling them off with "commit overts" and that sort of thing. You take the last three and you tiger drill them. And then you test them with "would it commit overts againstor some such thing. And then you will see whether or not it is actually rock slamming, not because the pc has a withhold on that item. Do you understand that?

Now, you understand as you upgrade procedure, that you also sweep in the easy ease and make it easier to do the easy ease. You understand that? That is not an incidental benefit, but was not the primary target in the research which I've been engaged upon. Don't you see? So the easy case always benefits from a resolution of the more difficult case. You’ll find this is very consistent in Scientology, that once you are able to do a very, very difficult ease, then you can do more easily an easy ease.

Now, because there are so many liabilities in this business, there are certain textbook formulas. Now, these textbook formulas will prevent you from making 98 percent of your mistakes. That's not choosing whether you oppterm or represent, they won't totally eliminate that, but they'll eliminate 98 percent of your mistakes. Now, I said 98 percent. lf you followed them perfectly, they would eliminate 98 percent, and then the other 2 percent will just come swinging in from Mars on an unpredicted wavelength. So you've still got to audit alertly.

So, once more, we are not confronted with "You do 3GA ordinary - the old 3G - A - on some cases and 3GA Dynamic Assessment by Rock Slam on some other eases and then 3GA Criss Cross on just a few difficult cases."

In doing 3GA Criss Cross then, the byword and password is "be alert and be lucky." You’re going to see some odd things happen to a pc and if you don't catch the brass ring when you see them and do something about it you're going to be out of luck. So it's a very nervy experience. And there's no substitute for experience. It's nerve - racking.

No, you would find your goal by the highest, most sweeping procedure, which at this stage of development is 3GA Criss Cross. And you would find your easy case more rapidly with 3GA Criss Cross than you would be: "List me 850 goals and I'll tiger drill them." Don't you see?

Therefore, there are certain textbook activities go on in this particular procedure, such as - I got caught with this one the other night and ceased to be cocky about it 100 percent. Took all the wind out of my sails. After all I’ve argued with people about not completing 3D Criss Cross lists, after all of the enamel chipping and jaw chomping that I have done on the subject, so help me, I didn’t get a list complete. Isn't that - ooowww. That should happen. And I didn’t get a list complete. And at the end of the session picked up the fact as a missed withhold. And having worked all that session to undo all of the mess which was constantly occurring, see - dirty needle and everything else occurring on this thing - I finally find out where it comes from: list wasn't complete.

But this requires facility and understanding on the part of the auditor.

Well, I hadn't even really been careful to complete that list. So I actually earned exactly what I got. It looked complete, it was apparently complete by test, but I didn't test it very hard. So I sighed and I said, "The next time I do this I will be guided by 3D Criss Cross rules of complete list."

And as we march forward into these more difficult cases, I have to tell you that I myself at the moment am slightly appalled by the fact that the technology is quite complex at this particular moment. And I - it was more complex

Now, we can actually increase and improve those rules today. So the rules of listing actually go as follows: You list everything the pc can give you easily and when he tells you that's it on a list, you don't keep chanting the auditing command at him because some pcs will go on an automatic, you know, of answering the auditing command every time it's asked. Did you realize that? You see, you're not doing Prepchecking.

Friday last than it was Monday. It was more complex the Wednesday before that Friday, don't you see, and so on. But it has now gotten to a point where I can give you answers which again speed up the time involved in finding somebody's goal.

Now, that's the first habit you’ve got to get out of in listing. You’re not prepchecking. You're not sitting there waiting for the pc to say, "No, that's the last one." You understand? And if you ask the question every time, every time, every time, some pcs just go on an automaticity of answering the question. They haven't got any more items, but they just keep answering it because it's being asked. Do you see that?

Now, this is all in the direction of speedup. So when you go in the direction of speedup, you demand more accurate auditing that contains the element of luck less. That's swift auditing.

So you will find yourself occasionally shutting the pc off, just letting him run down rather than get some overbearingly long and meaningless list. Some pcs want the list 495 items every time you ask them one question. Well, that is unbearably embarrassing. I consider a complete list in this business of somewhere around eighty, ninety items. But that - that won't hold good for all pcs. But I can tell when a pc is endlessly and arduously listing, and they're going to list it all and so forth. Well, in such a pc I would tend to repeat the command less often. I'd sort of start omitting the command. And the pc would eventually say, "What was the command?"

Now, as you understand by its title, 3GA Criss Cross is a direct grandchild of 3D Criss Cross. Old 3D Criss Cross was itself and had it been done by rock slam, well, people probably would have gone on running out items happily and gone to Clear on it. The only ingredient that old 3D Criss Cross needed was just those three words, "by rock slam," to make it a totally successful procedure.

And I would say, "Well, all right. Good. Good. That's fine, that's fine. Now, let's make a test out of this." Just ignore the whole invitation to go on with this automaticity, don't you see?

Now, this doesn't mean that all of the rules of 3D Criss Cross apply to 3GA Criss Cross. So we might as well just start out with a brand - new set of rules and scrub those and IM show you the old ones and I'll just show you, and you can recognize where these things fit in. Those of you who have been trained in 3D Criss Cross, you’ll find this very much to your benefit.

But you’ve got to have a complete list. So there is a rule that you can underscore: You've got to complete the list. But that doesn't mean an endless list done by the pc, it simply means a list that has discharged the charge.

Now when we were doing 3D Criss Cross, I was giving you a constant - the students who were here at that time - incidentally, there are - there are three students here right this minute, who have been beaten over the head on this and it must sound like old times. They've just rejoined the class on a retread basis and it just must sound like just old times to them, you know, like the wheels haven't turned at all since they've been away.

There's a phenomenon occurring here, that if you list anything, the pc will have less charge on it. Now, there is also a danger here: you cannot go ahead and just list at random. You can list on the rock slam or near the rock slam with complete impunity, because you're listing on the goals channel. You understand that? But just taking off from nowhere, or from an arbitrary point that has nothing to do with anything, and permitting the pc to list a long time on it, is exactly the same as wrong goal. And every phenomenon that occurs in listing a wrong goal is liable to occur in listing four or five hundred items with no rock slam from a no rock slam item, and then four or five hundred items from another rock slam item, you know, no - no rock slam, this - no rock slam item has occurred, you know? And the next thing you know, your pc star - going to start going sen and wog and that sort of thing.

But if they remember, the stress was on speed - speed. There are two things, speed and accuracy, which is involved here. And some auditor who takes one week of sessions, three hours each, to find an item on his pc isn't batting in any league that will give him any success with 3GA Criss Cross. In the first, place, the pc's attention wears out by that time.

So you have to keep some control of this listing. The whole operation consists of taking something on which the pc is likely to have overts against and making a list of it. And out of this developing a rock slam. And then taking that list by assessment and finding the one item on it which really contained the rock slam.

This is a rapid activity. lf I find the item and it's totally successful, it's taking me one hour and ten minutes to adjudicate what is to be listed, list it and null it to a successful reliable item - one hour and ten minutes.

Now, the oddities are that you can make a list of things the pc is likely to have overts against. You can null that list and pick out the item and will find that the rock slam has settled on one thing, if it's complete. But if it's incomplete, of course the thing that's least likely to be on an incomplete list is the item. You understand? Because a list completes rapidly after the item is put on it. So an incomplete list is less likely to have the item. You understand that - why?

When I goof - and it's very possible for an auditor to goof on this; you take the wrong side of something or something goes wrong one way or the other - when I goof it's about two hours and a half. It takes longer to goof than to find a right one; takes longer to lay an egg than it does to come up with a reliable item. But two hours and a half, we are still talking in the framework of a three - hour session.

Now, finding this item we have something against which the pc has overts. Similarly, we could have something which was a terminal with which the pc has committed overts. Now, why overts? Well, the whole phenomena of rock slam and meter behavior is based on the overt - withhold sequence. And a rock slam is the result of - as a meter representation - is the result of innumerable committed overts in a certain direction. And when you've got that certain direction isolated, that is to say, the items against which the overts are committed isolated, you then have, of course, a rock slam. And there’ll be one thing that he has more overts on than others.

Now, I'm not holding one hour and ten minutes up to you as how good I am and how terrible you are. It's very far from this case. Because let me assure you that my research auditing during the past three or four - or worse than that - during the past two months have made a citizen out of me with exclamation points. You know? I'm batting right there in your league. I found out I can make mistakes, man. And it has been very annoying to me to discover that, for once in my life, I'm grappling with something where judgment is not infallible.

Now, if he gave you a list of eighty, which is pretty close to right, if he gave you a list of eighty, he will actually have committed overts on all eighty. But the reason he's committed overts on all eighty is A=A=A. He's identified them with one thing that he really commits overts on. And these are all of its cousins and sisters and brothers and aunts, you see? The odd part of it is, is getting a list of that character at all. But he of course isn't inventing these things, he's just dealing them off the bank.

I look at this ease and I say, "Well, that's what's to do," and I go ahead and do it and I'm finding that 50 percent of the time I am wrong. All right, if that's the way it's going with me, well, stop beating your brains out trying to be 100 percent right.

Now, this whole thing is an interesting activity of doing clearing - you should look at it as to what it is - it is clearing without having found the goal. Now, it’ll take you an awful long time to do it, and it is not - it is not well located or well centered or anything else. But in theory you could go on finding these and finding these and finding these and finding these, and at the end of a few hundred hours you would have found all of them and your pc would have been sitting there Clear. And then he tells you what his goal is. You see?

Now, those of you who have a goal "to be 100 percent right" - this is no - this is no way to achieve that goal because a lot of the time you're going to be wrong. Now, even following all the rules, you're going to be wrong every now and then - even following all the rules. Because the nature of the beast that you're auditing contains several little excursions this way and that. And when you're following the rock slam, you have to follow the rock slam. And if the rule gets in the road of your following the rock slam, why then you follow the rock slam. You understand? The road is the road of the rock slam, not the road of the rule.

So what you're doing is kind of a swindle here, you see. You’re actually finding the items before you find the goal. See, now, in Routine 3, you're supposed to find the goal and then find the items. Well, why does this make such a difference to the pc? Actually, why doesn't he find his goal in the first place? That's because he's got so many overts and so many withholds that he himself doesn't know what it is, doesn’t dare confront what it is, has lessened the overt so thoroughly, and has then withheld it even from himself to such an extent that he can't even tell you what his goal is.

I can tell you how to find rock slams, how to trace them down and how to preserve them carefully, how to nurture them and derive items from them, left and right. But I am very sure at this stage of the game that I cannot tell you how to do it 100 percent of the time, always.

So this is the basic mechanism of how the pc's goal gets obscured in the first place. It gets overlaid with heavily charged items that the pc has used to commit overts with and things on which the pc has committed overts. The symbol of the rock slam is overt.

Now on any given pc, yes, you can find a rock slam, you can find the items. That's a forsworn, foregone conclusion. That part of it's licked. Yes, you can find a rock slam on a pc.

Now of course, as every overt or confusion is followed by stills, so the overt is followed by the withhold. So you could actually do this by withholds. You could do a Dynamic Assessment by withholds. You understand? But stills don't run well out of the bank. This would be much less reliable. But it still furnishes you a test. After you've found the overt you can ask the pc what he wouldn't give it and you´ll get the slam back. See, because the slam was held in place by the overt. See, the slam is still residual as the withhold even though you've gotten rid of the overt. Don't you see?

There are several ways of doing it. If you don't do it one way you can do it another way. What I'm talking about is on this one pc that you are auditing, if you expect to find an item every hour and ten minutes of auditing, you're going to be very badly disappointed, because you very often have a nerved - up pc and when you've missed the item you of course, then, have a missed withhold, don't you? So then you have to steady down the pc and you have to do a lot of other things which are all very interesting and all very complicated and they all consume auditing time.

So you can still pull this trick as a test trick, you understand? Let's say we've run all the slam off the bank against waterbucks, with overts, you know. "Consider committing overts a - against waterbucks." Slam - slam - slam - slam - slamslam - slam - proven, good reliable item. It all goes up in smoke, we don’t know anything more about it, it's disappeared and that's that. We could still get it to slam again by saying, "What wouldn't you give a waterbuck?" And of course that's what would you withhold from a waterbuck, you see. And it’ll go slamslam - slam - slam - slam. But if you ask it very much, of course, it all blows up in smoke because there's no powder under it now. See, that one will wear right out. But you can at least see that it did slam at some time or another on overts.

And then, after you've done it by the best traditions of auditing, after you have done it perfectly, you find yourself, all too often - but not more than 50 percent of the time, unless your luck is always bad - sitting there looking at a complete skunk - no item. Everything goes out. See, you do it all perfectly and then everything goes out.

This will be useful to you some time when trying to recover from some HPA's attempt to do 3GA Criss Cross who has run off the slam. It gives you nightmares sometimes. It's very hard to recover the entrances to slams when they are discharged. All right - means someday we’ll have a central division - a central division of some kind or another of "what was my item?" you know, and all goals and items and everything else when found are registered there at the central division, don't you see? And in extremis, why, you can always cable it and get the pc’s reliable items. Anyway, such doesn't exist now, so you're left on your own.

Now I have been auditing very hard and very thoroughly, trying to whip the laws which underlie this and the laws which underlie it are quite interesting, extremely intelligible and very easily followed. And they will reduce, I am sure, the number of wrong turns that you make in following the rock slam - these various laws. But I know very well that they will not obviate them completely, because there are too many little lucky breaks and so forth, still contained in Dynamic Assessment by Rock Slam as it is done with 3GA Criss Cross.

Now, the mechanism here then, is the pc has lived, and being terminal A, has committed overts against oppterm B. The effort then merely consists of locating the cousins, sisters and aunts or character of oppterm B, then listing this thing down in order to recover a slam. Because of course, while being A, and committing overts on B, he will produce on the meter the rock slam. And oddly enough you can find A by just asking - that is, the terminal - by just asking if it would commit overts. And it will slam. You don't even really have to have "against" anything. See?

Now, with that preamble and prelude to the situation, you should understand this as a procedure which, guided by good textbook auditing - actually the kind which the better auditors here are doing at this moment - done with that type of auditing and not with something that the fellow read three books and then he read half of a bulletin and then he took his E - Meter in hand and he turned it on by twisting the needle and ... He's not going to make it, see. He's not going to make it.

Now, "Would you commit overts . . . " - let's say the terminal is waterbuck and the oppterm tiger - "Would you commit overts against a tiger?”' Slamslam - slam - slam - slam if the tiger's a reliable item, you see? "All right, that's fine, thank you. Now, would a waterbuck commit overts?" Slam - slam - slamslam. You see? So therefore a terminal will slam, as well as an oppterm. It's just how you word it. You must realize that the terminal commits the overt and the oppterm receives them. Therefore, that will always give you the proper direction for your wording.

This is definitely an expert's activity, but that is not all bad. That is very far from all bad. Goals finding and goals running is so fraught with disaster for a pc that it shouldn't be done by anybody but an expert. And if that expert's expertness becomes as fantastically evident as it does in 3GA Criss Cross, well, that just builds up your altitude. I mean, let's be crude about the thing: It puts it out of reach.

Now, this is an interesting action then. Because it goes down through some part of the GPM, actually, if carried on, to hundreds and hundreds of items. You recognize that, just speaking loosely, as far as items are concerned, that pcs list ten, fifteen thousand items to go Clear. You realize that. So supposing that every 100 of those 15,000 items contained a key item that was really built in, terminal or oppterm. See, that's 15,000 - that gives you 150 items to find on the pc to make him go Clear.

This fellow's going to do this 3GA Criss Cross and he's read a book and he went halfway through the Academy before he blew. And now he's going to find a goal on somebody with 3GA Criss Cross and he sits there and he looks at the meter and for a fifteenth of a second he sees a rock slam and then he doesn't see any more rock slams and he can't find any more rock slams. And no matter what he does he can't find any more rock slams and the road is blocked. Because only good auditing presence will keep a rock slam on.

And in view of the fact that you're going to be wrong at least 25 percent of the time no matter how lucky you are, that means you will actually be running up the bank at something on the order of about 200 items, a lot of them meaningless, you see, and let's suppose you're an old slowpoke, and it takes you two hours. Why, your whole clearing activity then boils down to something on the order of 400 hours. See, that's far too much. And it's only theoretical that you could go the whole way. You understand that? Because after the slam is gone you might not find yourself going anyplace at all. And then you'd have to shift gears and go by cognition and you'd have to go by needle manifestations and little tiny slams and you'd work your way through this thing most arduously.

So actually, the road is booby - trapped by bad auditing presence.

So therefore you make far more mistakes in the last half of the clearing than in the first half, so I'd say maybe you got about five hundred, six hundred hours to Clear, going at it in this way. But recognize it as a clearing procedure.

Now, if you’ll notice lately I've put several booby traps into clearing. I fixed it up so that it's very unlikely that a wrong goal would get listed. Why? Well, before, with all too much glee, people could list a wrong goal and practically spin somebody in. Well, how did we do this? Well, we say you tiger drill it the beginning of every session. Of course, that is necessary to get the items to blow but at the same time, recognize that as a prevention against auditing a wrong goal. After you've done just so many sessions on the thing, why, the goal's going to blow up. And then you’re going to have to do something to remedy the goal.

Now, a guy got all messed up because he had a goal. See, he wanted to do something. Somebody has already written in and said to me, "Well now look, if the pc's goal is this important, shouldn't you look just a little bit earlier, Ron, and find the assertion? Now, IM give you an idea of what I mean. 'To catch catfish.' Now, a little bit earlier he must have had to assume that there were catfish to be caught. And therefore you find the assertion that there are catfish, and therefore it would clear the pc much faster."

Now, even when a pc´s goal has been found, in many cases - this is uses of this procedure - even when a pcs goal has been found by some other method of assessment, it is all too likely - you know, no items have been found on this pc - that his bank will be too heavily charged to list easily.

Well, that's perfectly valid thinking - as long as you just think about it. That's perfectly valid and I'm very glad that somebody was thinking about it at all. But of course that's the second goal he's talking about.

So, with 3GA Criss Cross you don't have just a goal - finding procedure. You have a procedure which finds a goal, but also which unburdens the bank so a goal can be run. Also you have a procedure which, when the pc suddenly sticks on "cops . . ." You know, he said "cops," and that was the last you ever heard him say. Tone arm went up and he ducked and he babbled something or other, and so on. Well, you continue his item assessment and you will get him back in the running again.

So he's asking me, "Why don't you find the second goal before you find the first goal?" Well, if he knew how much sweat it was on most pcs just to find the first goal, he wouldn't be worried about finding the second goal before you found the first one because that's impossible. The second goal is totally detached from the third goal, and the third goal totally detached from the fourth goal. But the truth of the matter is, they tend to be solutions, one to a next. It's quite interesting.

You - all sorts of uses, don't you see, these variant uses. You heard him say "cops," and "cops" is something - or you see him sitting there - it just happened today - is somebody sitting there with a horrible ARC break and the auditor finally argues him out of an item and then the item is seen to rock slam, so the auditor, I think, opposed and represented it - did both to the thing, and it unburdened, the case started cogniting, and the fellow started running again. You see? There was an item which he hadn't even presented, but the auditor found it and did something with it, see. That was during listing.

Second goal set up problems which the first goal - you know, I mean, we're speaking now of the first goal we find - is a solution to. "To catch catfish," well, it's some kind of a solution. A second goal is, "to make too much of everything." See, and it happens that its terminal, its chief terminal, is a catfish. So he gets down the track a while and he all of a sudden has this brilliant inspiration: The way to remedy it all is to catch catfish. Heh - heh! That will solve the problem set up, you see, on his earlier goal.

So when do we use this procedure? Well, we use this procedure when clearing gets tough and when Prepchecking won't remedy it.

They aren’t actually connected and they will blow separately, which is the most marvelous thing about clearing that I know of. They will take separate stance and they do blow separately and so forth. But nevertheless I have noticed that the second goal is solved by the first goal you’ll find. And so on.

And when do we use Prepchecking. When tiger drilling won't do anything for us. See, that's when you use the procedure.

Now, this piece of bank started up by "to catch catfish," resulted in the fellow being something that would catch catfish, and having assumed that identity went about his business happily catching catfish until he ran into an oppterm which said, "Thou must not catch catfish." Of course you say, well, catfish is enough of an oppterm. No, that sort of generally runs through the whole thing. And catfish aren’t going to be solved totally by that goal. But he gets to a game warden and the game warden says you mustn't catch catfish. See? So we've got pc - fisherman; game warden, see, is the oppterm. All right. Now, that's all dandy, but he goes into some kind of a - an avoidance there of game warden, so county commissioner appoints a game warden, don’t you see, so he gets the idea that he had better be a politician, see, and that sort of gets him around this oppterm. And you’ll get by these devious things and so forth, and then he finds out that economics inhibit the catching of catfish because the tackle is very expensive. You know, I mean, all kinds of wild things happen.

So you can use the procedure to find the goal, you can use the procedure to prove a goal that has been found, you can use the procedure to unburden the bank so as to make it easy to run the goal and you can use this procedure, in addition to that, to get the pc unstuck from some item he's collided with in listing which he can’t or won't confront. So you see, it has many uses - becomes a skilled activity.

So he picks up additional oppterms and additional terminals, and he's still going on this goals line, but he's becoming different things, opposing different things, and different things are opposing him, see? And so you get this horrible muddle of little black balls which you call the GPM.

Now, completely aside from its uses in clearing, this quite incidentally adds up to the fastest gain process that we have ever developed. Now, that one sort of is likely to get overlooked. You find a couple of items on somebody - you find one item on somebody that is a real, honest - to - goodness rock slamming item and you've changed that case - and you've changed it observably. Now, nobody has been finding items against OCAs and IQ tests and that sort of thing, but I'm sure that you would see some rather startling changes occur in IQ and profile as a result of finding an item.

All right. Now, as this dance continues, you recognize that it's full of overts. He's getting motivators like crazy as a terminal, you see, and he's passing out overts like mad while being this terminal, against other specialized and selected terminals. And the meter manifestation of all this activity is a rock slam. So all you've got to do is follow the rock slam, and you wind up with the later day things that - you know, you won't wind up with the fundamentals, you’ll wind up with the later day things, you know, like "world conqueror," you see, that was the ultimate of politician. You know? And "nut house" is the oppterm, because every time he says he wants to conquer the world they tell him they're going to put him in the nut house, don't you see?

Now, look at what this puts in your hands. Supposing in a Problems Intensive, you could get twenty points of gain on an OCA or an APA. And that took twenty - five hours. Recognize that the same gain is probably obtainable - or a greater gain obtainable - in the finding of one item in a space of less than three hours, if you're lucky. Now, look at your ease resurgence. Look at that in time.

And it's very funny, you look back on the item track of the pc - after you have cleared him - and it all makes sense. Everything makes sense. It looks completely idiotic though, to you, perhaps, while you are finding items. But they all make sense and they are oppterms and they are terminals. Of course, the time we're doing this on most pcs we don't know what the pcs goal is. But these things are so stacked on it that we can't find the pc's goal easily.

Now, in view of the fact that we're using this to find goals and actually clear people, that little point is liable to be overlooked, because we're not using it to make a pc feel good. And yet they do; they do.

The saving of time amounts to this: The pc's goal, we find it. Well, some - body sits down and he says, "What’s your goal?" And he writes down five goals and one of them rocket reads and it goes bang, and he's got the pc's goal and it's all set, and so he gets a Prehav level and he's going to list the whole thing, and he gets down there and he says, "Now, who or what would want to catch catfish?"

Now, let's tackle this thing from the beginning. I've given you its various uses and applications. Let's tackle it from the beginning on the subject of nomenclature. We're going to get our nomenclature all mixed up.

And the pc says, "hrrmm" and it rock slams, "hrmm" and so on, I get a - so on," he says, "so - and - so and so - and - so and so - and - so," and rock slams pretty bad, tone arm starts up, and gets up, and gets up, and there it is - 5.0. It's just sitting at 5.0. You found his goal, but the tone arm is now sitting at 5.0.

Well, why do we say Criss Cross? And that's just because you go from one channel to the other channel and then you go back to the other channel.

What do you do about this? Just 3GA Criss Cross. You don't even have to find out, you see, what he's stuck on that made him go up to 5.0. You’ve just got to find an item that rock slams, don't you see? And then you will take the weight off the bank and then, because the weight is so great, his overts are so great in that direction, he dare not confront in that direction anymore. So he runs into this section of the bank and he says, "Oh, there's nothing there.

What do we mean by channels? Well, we mean what the pc´s been and what the pc has opposed. By saying Criss Cross, well, we get the idea of a channel from A over to B and from B back over to A; and we're going back and forth between the pc (what he has been) and the pc's enemies (what they have been).

Ha - ha - ha." Lessens the overt, see? "Aha, no game wardens. Ha - ha - ha - ha, oh, yeah. Game warden, well, they're pretty unreal to me. Actually game war - dens really aren't part of existence and I prefer not to associate with a game warden anyway. And there's no sense in putting that own on the list."

So we've got a game going here of the enemy and the pc.

So he starts dealing off old items. You know, it's a treadmill. He never deals you this item. And his tone arm responses go up to 4.5, 5.0, stick, everything looked very mucky and muddy. Well, he couldn't confront it.

Now, I refer you to the lectures on the GPM. It is vital to understand the composition of the GPM as contained in those lectures. I am not going to repeat them at this particular time. The composition of the GPM, then, has much greater scope and complexity than what I'm giving you right now. But essentially it's composed of them and us. That doesn't matter on what dynamics these occur; it's a game of them and us.

See, you found his goal. But you’ve got a - such a thoroughly burdened bank that the pc can't run it. And you´ll find that more than often is the case. So the safe way to do it is not to spend endless hours prepchecking goals, but find an item or two or three and then check the goal again. Find the goal any way you want to. Do you see how that would be? You can take enough weight off of this rock slam, you can take enough charge off of his overts so that he can confront what he has overts on, and then find out what he is while he's confronting overts against and therefore he can list. You see the track he's trying to list through, you see the game he's trying to list through? The complexities of it all?

Now, our nomenclature gives us the them as "opposition to the terminal," actually not "opposition terminals." Let me show you the packaging of this word. It was originally "opposition to the pc's terminal," and then became Opposition terminal" (just because people got tired of saying the other words) and then became "oppterm." And that's the word which you should know it by. That's them - an oppterm.

All right. Now, as we enter the case, on some cases we’ll find the goal more easily than we will find the item. When the goal isn't real, then neither are items. But that's beside the point. We arrive at the toughest end of 3GA Criss Cross, which is its beginning. Now, oddly enough the toughest end of every case is its beginning. And the toughest end of any procedure is its beginning. And this is very sad. Because at that end of the game we, of course, know the least about the pc. The toughest part of auditing should be down toward the end of the intensive, wouldn't you agree? It never is. It's right there in the first session. See, the pc has to be in the best possible condition to handle this, but we find him at this stage of the beginning, you see, in the worst possible condition, casewise, to handle it. And all this is very unfair because it makes the auditor's job much tougher. A ease, of course, should always be Clear before you start auditing him.

That is what the pc is agin. It's seldom either grammatical or delicate enough to be "against." He's agin it - brutally, violently and directly. It ain't him. That he knows. He may not know much, but he knows he ain't it - that's down deep and reactively.

Well, turning on the rock slam is the first difficulty that you will run into in 3GA Criss Cross.

But analytically, because he's supposed to be a reasonable being in a reasonable world, he very often collides with it and finds himself playing footsies with being it. And this is a sickening experience to him the whole way.

Now, in some eases this is dead - easy. You give them a See Check, a rock slamming See Check, and they just drop it in your laps. The thing is slamming like mad and one of the things you used on the See Check was it. Well, you've got your first item. And you just do what you do with it and carry on and there you are. That's easy. Some other ease, you sit there and you try this and you try that and you try something else and there's no rock slams.

Now, in view of the fact that he begins by - when you - when - in life, after occlusions of the GPM have set in and he can’t remember who he was and he thinks he's only lived one life and he thinks he's a - oh, I don't know - he thinks he's a Baptist, and a - he thinks he's a this and a that and he's some nationalist. He thinks he's essentially an Earthman. Oh, wow, you know. This guy's occluded.

Now, there is a method which will undoubtedly be espoused by the American Psychiatric Association - after it goes nuts and is dealing in one of its spinbins and trying to clear itself will of course - for the auditor to beat the pc often enough and long enough for the pc to develop a rock slam on the auditor. But this is not advised. Because all it's going to do is wind up as its basic-basic with the first session. And you were there anyway. So you might as well not take that excursion at all.

Anyhow, there he is and he walks around in life and he gets this feeling, you know - he's got enemies. You know? He knows this. And he has various ways of handling this. One is to be them, another way is to be interesting to them, another way is to make everything peaceful so they won't jump him. And the reason he has to have all of these rationales, of which they are just infinite numbers, is because he can't identify what the enemy is. He merely knows that something in the environment is hostile. He can’t say what it is. Well, IM give you an example. The fellow thinks that all publishers are against him - all publishers. That means newspaper publishers, book publishers - everything and you know, they're all against him and that's for sure. And he's got an uneasy feeling, so he goes through life solving problems as to how to get along with publishing companies, publishers, you see. He tries to be a writer; he does this, he does that and he - this - he worries about it all the time and one day you give him 3GA Criss Cross and the item turns up, "school copybook." That's all he's against: school copybooks, see. They're a deadly enemy. And immediately the identification between school copybooks and all books and all publications and all publishers ceases to exist. So he knows now, when you've found this item, that he's against school copybooks. That's what he's agin. He feels much more comfortable even though they still knock his head off. You understand?

The thing to do is to get the pc in - session. That is your first action. Because if this pc is suppressing like mad and throwing his rudiments out like mad, you're never going to see a rock slam. It's going to start to turn on, it's going to turn off. The pc is going to suppress before anything occurs, because a rock slam can suppress out of existence, Careful of can turn off a rock slam, and particularly Protest. Protest, I have found, is a very hot button on rock slams. You get off the Protest and then you get off the Careful of and then you get off the Suppress and you usually have your rock slam back. But Protest is very vital in turning off rock slams.

He no longer identifies in this particular subject. So the world looks like a friendlier place to him. Well, so you get A =====A===== A; you get a whole unknown existence, eight dynamics' worth, piled on this one thetan's head, until you start separating it out. Because at the same time he didn't know what he was being that had to oppose or was threatened by school copybooks. And then he finally finds out what he is being. He's being a student. See, it's not his military career that is giving him pains and aches, you see; it's not his life as a writer that is giving him pains and aches, you see; it's not his life as this and lat - as that and the sphere of influence here and there and all that sort of thing. No, it's just the fact that, as a student, he is agin copybooks.

Now, how do you turn it all on? Well, the first thing, get the pc in - session. The next thing, there could be many steps and are several different methods. The easiest pc would be one that you simply say, "List the dynamics or parts of existence," he does, you assess it and you've got your first rock slam.

Now 3GA Criss Cross would make it possible to sort out the oppterm: copybook and the terminal: student. So you’ve got these two things. These are terms. Terminal: that means the pc´s experiential track, what he has been, his beingnesses. And the oppterm: what his beingnesses have opposed or the oppositions that have made him assume his beingnesses.

Next type of pc, next grade up, "Who or what have you detested?" They give you a list, it rock slams, you've got one of the persons there, and you've simply got your first item and you go on and use it.

So we've got these two things. We've got the "them" and "us" reduced to "oppterm" and "terminal."

Another pc, not quite as easy as this, is - you sneak up on him by - get "What - what do you wish hadn’t been part of existence?" or some such phrase and then get what isn't part of existence. And he gives you a long dissertation on what isn’t part of existence, you get a long list, one of those items rock slams like crazy, you're in and you’ve got your first item.

Now, these are distinctly different things and life is made - is usually very simple on this. The auditor sails along and everything is fine and so forth, and he's been finding terminals and he's been finding oppterms and everything is going according to Hoyle. And he knows which they are, even when the pc is confused about it, because the terminal invariably turns on pain and the oppterm invariably turns on sensation.

Now, let's take a slightly upgraded pc from this and let's get "What would you prefer not to associate with?" or "What wouldn't you want to associate with?" That is another entrance point. And you make a list of these things the pc wouldn't care to associate with and you will find there your rock slam at the final end of this.

Sensation being motion, pressure, misemotion; and pain simply being the sharp impulse or dull impulse of heat, cold and electrical. Heat is pn, cold is pn and bzzzt is pn. That's all pain.

Now, there are undoubtedly other approaches to this. We do not know them at this particular time. There are undoubtedly gradients that carry us in further on this particular road. But those are the various approaches that you can use to turn on a rock slam on a pc straight from scratch.

But the pc is getting dizzy and he's getting sensations, and he is crying and feels griefy about it all and anything on the emotional scale. Or there's effort, pushing his chest in and he's got pressure against his eyeballs, and so forth - that's all sensation - commonly called sen: s - e - n.

Now, how do we write this list? That might take up a little bit of interest here. We sit down, we put the pc in - session, we’ve got the pc well in - session, well under the auditor's control. We take a piece of legal - length paper - that's 13 inch by 8, or something like this, 13 - inch - long paper, and we write the list in a single column, is usually best. Gives you lots of latitude. Some people who write very small can get two columns on the page with the greatest of ease. But if it gets too scrimpy and too small, why, the auditor starts having trouble and the next auditor that picks it up could shoot the last auditor that did it if he's having to renull something. So actually leave some space for things to happen.

All right. Those are very easily identifiable. Oppterm equals sen; term equals pn. And that's all there is to it. There are just those two things and that's the way they are and you got it all sorted out, you got it all straight, and the last three pcs you audited, you didn't have any trouble with. And when you get to the fourth pc: while he has sen, he talks about "us," and while he has pn he talks about "them." And he doesn't know which is him and which is them and everything you find has some pn and some sen on it. This should happen to you, see, as the auditor.

All right, so you write it like this: You write the pc’s name, you write the date and you write the question that you're asking the pc to get this list. Now, that is vital, because if anybody, including you, is ever going to make sense out of what's been going on with this pc, you're going to need those data. You're going to need the date, the pc's name. We don't care who the auditor is, we can't read it and we still know who you are. I mean, we're getting to be terrific deciphering calligraphers or something like that in Scientology. Man, you talk about cryptography! We’ll be getting orders in here any minute from the Royal Navy to decipher the Japanese codes. We're getting good, you know, I mean, good. You'd think so if you could look at some of these lists. It's all written in Arabic.

You’ll find his rock slam on "consider committing overts against copybooks." Slaaaaam! you know. "Ouch!" he says. Everything is fine. He's had pain, himself, while facing the copybook. But then, of course because you're dealing only with the copybook, you turn on sen. So you say, "Copybook, copybook, copybook," to him and he goes zzzzzz - he gets dizzy and so forth, you see. You say to him, "What would commit overts on a copybook?” and he gets "Ouch!" See? You're all sorted out, you're all straight as the auditor, you know which side it is. And oddly enough you will never really make a mistake on it because you can sooner or later sort it out as to which it is.

Anyway, you write those data. Now, when you turn the page over, of course, to write on the back side of it - and it's perfectly good and you should use the back side of that page, it's of course pure idiocy to repeat the question and the pc’s name and the date. But how about Page 3? So you don't write anything on the back of Page 1, but you do write the figure "3" and the question. That gives you a consecutive series for page 3, don't you see? And you - somebody can see that "3" and they know there's a missing first page. Then they can find all the brutal data from the first page, don't you see? Because in the speed of writing up things, you don't want to delay too much, but it's very easy to write "3" and the question, isn't it? Then you can add it up, because you know there's a page there.

But your fourth - every fourth pc or something like that is not going to be able to get this through his own thick skull - which is him and which is them. See, doubt remains in his mind. Because there's pain and there's sensation on a copybook, and there's pain and there's sensation on a student. And one day he starts talking about "us copybooks," and "those dirty students marking me all up."

Well, supposing it goes over to another list, of course you go on the back of this list. You don't write anything on the back of this list. Now, you go to 5, don't you? And on 5 you'd better write the question again. That makes all these lists join up beautifully. You don't number 2, you don't number 4, don't you see; you don't date those things and so on, because that just holds up the pc. You get how that system works? I think you’ll find that's very serviceable.

Now, if you’ve got the nomenclature and the rules straight, why, you're all set, because you yourself won't get mixed up on it. The auditor is actually never mixed up on it because he can make some simple tests. The pc is busy talking about "us copybooks" and all you have to do is say to him, "Well, what would commit overts on a copybook?"

Your lists actually seldom go beyond page 5 if you're doing any kind of a job of watching what the score is at all, and you keep repeating the question to some pcs and the pcs will keep on giving it to you. And then on some pcs you will get a two or three hundred list to make it a complete list and all that sort of thing. All that's allowed for.

And he says, "Ouch!"

Now, when you null this list, your administration should actually, to keep you from making mistakes as you're flying along the line, your administration should be multiple color. And the best way to handle this is, the first time you go down the column, just to use the pen that you wrote the thing with. I've been using various versions of this and how easy it is or is not to spot. And this is the one I have been using lately and find it's working very well. I also have to work out administration while I'm doing these various things. Because you see, other people read these lists besides you. And if we don't standardize, then the next auditor can’t make head nor tails out of what went on.

Well, you know "copybook" - you know at once that "copybook" is an oppterm, because committing overts against it can give him an ouch if he lists it. See? So the lists of things - committing overts against copybooks - gives him pain. But listing copybooks and what they represent gives him sen and he goes bzzz, bzzz. Sensation. Get the idea?

All right, now, you see, it's important that there be next auditors, particularly if you're finding goals and somebody else is listing the goal. This character will want to know what cooked here, because he may have to take off in the middle of something and do something about it, don't you see? Or some other goals finder may have to pick this thing up and he’ll want to know what went on, see? And you may have left it at a dead end or something and then listed the goals against your last reliable item, but that wasn’t good enough to carry the listing through. They want to find some more items. They've got the guys goal, but they've got to find some more items. Well, they'd certainly better know where it all ought to stop, don't you see?

And you say to him, forcefully, "Copybooks, copybooks, copybooks."

Well you put slant marks, just the plain slant mark for everything that is in, in the color pencil that you wrote the list with, and then everything that is out you put an X. Your next time through, grab a red ballpoint. You actually could carry it on through with a red ballpoint. The second time through, if it's out, you put a full X. That leaves you there with things that are still in, glaringly apparent, don’t you see? And it also, by the time - you’ll find out by the time you've got two or three slants or a cross, to - well, three slants and a cross after several items on a page - it gets very hard to pick out if there are any still there. And you know, we've had some cases bog down in the past with 3D Criss Cross just because the auditor didn't follow this very stupid point.

And he says, "Stop that, you're making me dizzy."

They - there - there's two items in on this sheet! That are still in! And the auditor never nulled them and the whole thing went blooey and he couldn't find the goal and it all went up in smoke and then Mary Sue'd go over the thing again and there's two in. It was one of those. See, he just missed it, completely. It was sitting in the middle of the page. So this color code system's pretty good. I haven’t ever bothered to carry it on into a greenflash system after it, but you could.

You see how this is sorted out? You say to him, "Student, student, student."

Now, how do you call a list? That's your most interesting thing. I’ve given you the headings of these lists - "Prefer not to associate with," all those these other headings of one kind or another. You ask the pc to list these things. Well you actually just ask the question and he gives you a flock of answers and you ask the question again. Or he wants you to ask the question again and you do, and he gives you some more answers, and then the needleyou're watching it all the time.

And he says, "Ouch! Stop that. You're giving me an awful pain in my head." See?

Now, the best way to handle this on a meter is to pull your sensitivity down. Pull your sensitivity down so that you don't have to be adjusting this tone arm all the time, you got the idea? You don't pull it down to one or anything crazy like that, but you just - you just bring it down. That'd be very important to you when you get to a Mark V It just flies around so doggone much that you have to put it on a lower sensitivity than you would use to null, don't you see? And remember then your rock slam won't be so big. So you sit there with one thumb on the thing and your other hand wrapped around the pencil writing this list, keeping that thing in center, and watching the moment before the pc says it. Watching the meter the moment before the pc says it. See if there was a slam. You understand?

At once, you're advised. Well, don't blame him if out of his confusion in the GPM and so forth, he can’t make it out. He doesn’t know whether he's a copybook or a student and he gets all mixed up about it.

And every time you write down an item, you put after it, if it slammed, "R/S." And if it's just a little dirty needle turned on with it - just went bzzbzz - you write "dn." And if the pc volunteers that he had some pain on ityou're not terribly interested in this, but if the pc volunteers he had some pain on an item or sensation on an item, why - you don't pester the pc for that data while he's listing, by the way. I see some of you have been. Just write it "pn" and "sen."

Why does he get so mixed up? Because when he says "copybook," he's liable to get pain. I remember that lecture I was telling you about it - he's in the wrong - terminal situation. And when he says "student," and so forth, he's liable to get sensation. Why? Because he has to be outside of the beingness of student to gaze at a student in his bank which of course puts him into the copybook. You understand?

You're much more interested in the aggregate pain and sen of the whole list, or a sudden pain or sensation that turned on.

So the pc trying to sort this out for himself gets all mixed up, because sometimes he doesn’t exteriorize from student while saying "student" and gets pain and sometimes he exteriorizes from student, you see, when he's saying "student," and gets sen; and sometimes when he is saying "student," he backs into "copybook," don't you see; and then when he says "copybook," he backs into "student" and gets pain. You see? And he just gets terribly confused about all of this.

The pc all of a sudden is going "Whhhh!" and you say, "What's the matter?"

So realize that the pc can get confused about what all these things are, quite often. He's usually straight about it, but don't expect him to be very reliable as to which is which. You're the person who knows, as the auditor. The auditor knows.

"Well, my legs, just from the waist down are - just went hot as fire."

The auditor can make a simple test. He can - he's got two or three items there and he wants to know which side these items are on - he just says them to the pc, and one will produce pain and one will produce sen. And then he knows which side of the fence he's on, because, of course, he's an exterior source of command, so he tends to push the student (pc) back into the valence that he is calling. So the student (pc) experiences that valence.

You say, "Well, when did they go hot as fire?" and try to trace it back up the list to what item turned it on and then mark it over here as a very likely item because the somatic is one of your indicators. Got it?

Well, this is not something that has to be overstressed too hard, but becomes very important to the auditor when he starts to list goals - this becomes extremely important to the auditor. Because if you’re trying to list goals against an oppterm, you use the lists 1 to 10 that were contained in the original Dynamic Assessment by Rock Slam bulletins. See? "If you were an (oppterm), what goal would be impossible to achieve?" You know, that kind of a thing. That's listing goals against an oppterm.

Pc tells you they're - they’re - they're uncomfortable - you ask the pc and they say they are - trace it back to where it turned on. That's good procedure.

Listing goals against a terminal is quite different. The basic rule there is this: "What would be the goals of a student?" You see, terminal - student. You say, "What would be the goals of a student? Give me twenty, thirty, forty, fifty goals of a student." Pc´s goal is likely to be in that list if you carried this far enough.

You don't go nulling back there, you just say, all right, when, and the pc will eventually tell you. And remember, the pc nearly always tells you one or two late.

So you see, you ask different ways to get a goal, but you could use either a terminal or an oppterm to get a goals list from. You see that? So you have to know which it is. And you don’t take the pc's say - so, because he's liable to say, "us copybooks." You follow that?

See, it's on - it's on item - it's on item 83 on your list - you don't number these items, by the way - and actually the pc says it turned on on item 83, that was when he noticed it. It might also have been 82 or 80, don't you see?

You've got to make a test. Well, the test is the pain or sensation. You say what it is or you write a list representing it; and the pc gets pain, you know you're handling a terminal; and you write what it is, and write a list concepbreaking it down, representing it; and the pc gets sen, you know you've got a list of oppterms and that that item, being part of that list, of course, is an oppterm. You understand that?

So you kind of watch that closely. He gives you an indicator.

Pcs will throw you a curve every once in a while by turning on fifty - fifty of each on everything. That's the original mixed - up kid from Suppressville. See?

Sometimes on a Dynamic Assessment, a somatic will turn on - or a sensation, more likely a sensation - will turn on so shatteringly when you hit the dynamic, that there isn't any thought of going on with the session. The pc is practically booted out of his chair, don't you see? And you’d just better take care of that right now. You'd better listen to the pc about it and you'd better hear about this and you'd better hear how it turned on and you'd better mark it down very adequately on your report and you persuade the pc: "Now, without invalidating this item or abandoning it or anything like that, of course - have to null the rest of the list - is that all right with you?" and you go on and null the rest of the list and then cope with it afterwards, do you understand? But every once in a while, when you've got an item, bang, you - he thinks the roof fell in. And that's a terrific indicator, it almost always is the item.

So there's your - those are the trials of an auditor.

You say "copybook," and the left side of his body gets under tremendous pressure while the right - hand side gets burning hot. And you say, "student," and they reverse. Which side of it is him?

Now, you’ve got a checkpoint, "Consider withholding things from and you're going to get the same responses on your assessment, but it's not going to discharge it as well. You understand? Once "Consider committing overts against is all worn out on this item, you can always say,

Well, oddly enough, you could say, "Well, you find more items, it will eventually work itself out." Well, that proved here not to be the ease about two or three days ago - proved not to be the ease at all. We had terminal rocket reading, and pc didn't know whether it was pain or sensation. He had both. We had something rocket reading. Some item was rocket reading and so we had to list goals. So we just did both. We treated it as a terminal and we treated it as an oppterm and went over the whole thing and of course, it worked out in the final analysis, because only the goal stayed in. Got the idea?

"Think of withholding things from ---,” and you’ll get the slam back.

In other words, we treated it as both. What goals would it have? We used it in a list of twenty goals all by itself - as the word - and then we did a list 1 I think, and a list 6. I don't even know if they got that far, but we were prepared to do it both as an oppterm and a terminal and sort the goals out of the total list remaining. Because, of course, you're only dealing with - well, you're dealing with less than a hundred goals. You see that?

See, they're both sides of the same coin. You see that?

In other words, you’ve got - even if you became totally unstuck and didn't know whether it was a terminal or an oppterm, you still have a remedy, which is just treat it as one and then treat it as the other. You’re not dealing with vast quantities of material.

All right. So an oppterm list is always called in this particular way. Now, a terminals list - a terminals list, can be called directly or very involvedly. It can simply - you just call it. You know, "Waterbuck, tiger, cat, dog, fire warden," see. And register the instant reads. That's a terminals list. You just go bark, bark, bark, bark, bark down the line. Because it gets very involved to say, "Would a - whatever your item is on the list - commit overts against a tiger?" because nearly every one of them turns on a slam. How do you pick a slam out of all those slams? Because one of the characteristics of slams is they are persistent. You understand?

Now, more terminology:

Now, one of the best ways to sort this thing out so it doesn't slam, is to put the terminal it's against, if you're repeating that terminal every time, before the sentence. "On tigers, would waterbucks commit overts? On tigers, would fire wardens commit overts?" See? That's if you're calling the whole sentence. You’ll find that's one of the most desirable phrasings. Because you get rid of the tiger's rock slam, and then you just pick up general rock slam that turns on either with the item itself or overts against. But overts itself occasionally slams, so picking your way through it is quite interesting.

A rocket read: A rocket read doesn’t have any definite size because of course, were dealing right now with two different Marks of E - Meters: the Mark IV and the Mark V. And you haven't seen a Mark V yet, but I think they'll be here in a couple of days. You've seen them on your TV demonstrations, so forth. And of course, it gives a liver, longer read. It gives the same kind of a read as the Mark IV, but it is a livelier, longer - looking read. But it looks otherwise exactly the same. You could say this: it's longer on a Mark V than on a Mark IV.

But fortunately, with your meter turned up to a very high sensitivity you can read them once and take any instant read on a terminal. You cannot do this for an oppterm. A terminal's list can just be bark, bark, bark, bark, bark - once each. You understand?

To tell you how long a rocket read is would be adventurous, because rocket reads have been half a dial. And I've never seen a rocket read that was valid, an eighth of an inch. You see some goal will dwindle down to about an eighth of an inch and it will kind of look it, but you can't tell if it's a rocket read or not. So I'll give you the two limits: The biggest one I've ever seen was half a dial and the smallest I have ever seen was greater than an eighth of an inch.

Now, "Consider committing overts against," you see, any such phrasing as this can also be read just once if you're an old sharpie on the meter. Now, if you're not sure, for God's sakes, don't fake it, just read it again.

Now, what's a rocket read? If you take three coins - a big coin and two small coins - and put them on a roughed - up surface, in a row (small coin: 1, big coin: 2, small coin: 3) - all in a row - their rims are all touching - and you take small coin 1 and rap big coin 2 a sharp rap, you will see coin 3 do a rocket read.

Now, do you tell the pc if it's in or out? No, you don't. The more words you can get the hell out of auditing, kick them out! Now, "Would a waterbuck commit overts against a tiger? Thank you. Would a waterbuck commit overts against a tiger? Thank you. Would a waterbuck commit overts against a tiger? Thank you. That is out." How long did it take me to say that? A shocking length of time. Multiply it by 80 and you’ll see why it takes you a week and a half to find an item, see?

In musical note, it would be a fast decay. Called a rocket read because it takes off like a rocket and slows down. It goes off the pad with a burst. Probably more like a catapult. It goes pssswww! And no other read looks like it. There isn't any other read like a rocket read.

All right, we've got an oppterm list. See? Its got "tiger" on it. And right after "tiger," why it's got "carnivore." We say "Consider committing overts against a tiger. Consider committing overts against a carnivore." Where's the "that's in"? Where's the "thank you"? Well, the hell with it. Pc's got all the thank - yous he needs. How does he know if it's in or out? Won't that develop you a dirty needle? Well, after a while he’ll get bright enough to find out that your pencil goes flick - flick, when it's out, and flick when it's in. They smarten up quick.

I predicted that this thing would exist. We were fooling around with oscilloscopes. It was quite remarkable, because Tiger Drilling had not then been released. And we had only seen goals up to that time, tick and fall, you see. But when any goal was tiger drilled out, why, sure enough this predict ... I said a goal, being the basis of a bank, would probably read differently, electronically, than any other read. I couldn't see how it could do otherwise. And we dreamed this up and saw it on an oscilloscope, and it looks very funny on an oscilloscope. It apparently goes way up and way up above the center line and then way down above the center line and then back to the center line again. It makes a very peculiar pattern: sort of a shortlegged Z stood on end. And this very peculiar thing was seen first on an oscilloscope.

In other words you can read them once. There's no "thank you." There's no "that's in, that's out." We're talking about this peculiar type of nulling. This doesn't alter nulling and doing other things in other departments of the game, see. This is talking about 3GA Criss Cross. The auditor says bark, bark, bark, bark, new one every time, you know? Then all of a sudden why, "Consider committing overts against a fire warden." Didn't miss that, you know? You don't say, well, "I'm awfully sorry, pc, I - hey - I - I'm awfully sorry - come out of your boil - off - I’m awfully sorry that I missed that. I - I - I think I should have - have - have watched the meter more closely. And if it's all right with you . . ." I'd better run some Havingness first, all right, IM run some Havingness on him. See, that's not the way you do it at all, see.

Now, on a meter - it turned up on a meter and as soon as any goal was well - drilled, well tiger drilled and very smooth, and so forth, it would consistently and continuously rocket read. You'd say it and it'd give an instant rocket read. It looks quite different. It's an amazing phenomenon that it would read that way.

You say, "Consider committing overts against a fire warden." Didn’t read it, see, you didn't read it, but you don't say anything at all, you just say, "Consider committing overts against a fire warden. Consider committing overts against a fire warden." That's all. You didn't get it the first time so you read it twice. Pc knows you're reading it twice and going to read it again, because he - his mind very rapidly gets educated to the fact that you don’t go slant - slant, see. He hears your ballpoint go scrape - scrape. Slash. You got the idea?

Now, it isn't a fall and the only time you can make a mistake with it is on the first leg of a rock slam. Now, once in a blue moon an unfinished rock slam will be at just at that triggered position, that when you say something, the first part of the rock slam will fire. Now that really isn't a rocket read because it doesn't go off with a spurt and do a fast decay, but it does such an energetic flash that you can be taken by surprise by the thing. That's the first leg of a rock slam. The next time you say it, it probably does it in reverse.

Well that's how you pick it up to an hour and ten minutes to list and find the item, see? Now, that requires very, very reliable meter reading, because you miss the key one and you've had it. You shouldn't have gotten out of bed that all - at all that morning, because the pc now has a missed withhold and the pc has this and the pc has that, and everything has gone to hell in a balloon. Now, the upshot of all this auditing culminates in a reliable item. A reliable item. That can be an oppterm or a terminal. And that meant one that slams when you found it. It slams in the same session that you found it. It doesn't have to slam the next day. It reliably slams and that means found. You completed the whole nulling and that one slams. You completed the whole nulling and that one now slams and that is the proven item, that is your last reliable item. Next day doesn't have to slam, never has to slam again to the end of time. Because of course you discharge the slam off and it’ll be rapidly transferred onto something else just the moment you start listing.

Now, a rock slam very often looks like a reverse rocket read when it first starts out. But once more, that isn't really a rocket read because it doesn't give you the very rapid beginning and the very slow end. I know I every once in a while have been startled - or was before I got used to it - was startled occasionally; I´d see a rock slam start and think I was looking at a rocket read, you see? And then say the item again and then see the rock slam finish itself and say, "Ah, b - E - Meter."

You've got to - it's got to find it that day, though. See, and it had to slam very nicely and then you mark it down there on the report in letters of fire that that item slammed, and how wide it slammed, and how long it slammed. Now, one that slams just twice is something that the pc - and then passed out, you can’t tiger drill it back on again, that's not good enough, in the session, see. Because you should be able to get that slam on and off You should be able to regulate that slam with a Tiger Drill, you understand? You understand that?

Now, rocket read: You think, well, that's just - just some more slanguage to learn and so forth. Well, it isn't covered in E - Meter Essentials, because it was discovered after E - Meter Essentials was written and it is itself It is itself, definitely.

It's not enough to have it go slam - slam while you're listing, and then never slammed again and didn't slam at the end and you call that an item. You’ll be up in soup. All the way down the list you've got an item slamming, slamming, clear to the end, you've got items slamming. You go over it again, you don’t have a slam in the whole lot. And it's - huhhh! You say, "What happened?" Nothing happened except the pc’s rudiments may be out, but the fact of the game is because the pc was saying them while you were listing them put the pc on the other side of the fence, and now when you're nulling them you don't get slams back on. So don't let it worry you when something doesn't slam again while you're listing; only start worrying if it doesn't slam at the end of the activity. Then you should start worrying. No slam on the list. You understand that?

Now, rock slam: That's very interesting because the word dirty needle, here, gives you a curve. We have unfortunately developed, in our midst, a homonymic word. (Love that, don’t you? Homonymic.) One explanatory double - word phrase that means two things and that's why you may have trouble with this thing called a dirty needle.

You don't have to get slams back. What do you expect this list to do? Just stay preserved in wax till the end of time? What do you think was happening while you were listing? You were listing a slam off. It very often puzzles you because you go by a rock slam. You know, it listed it and you marked it "R/S" and you go by nulling it and it doesn't R/S. There's many an auditor here then spends the next half an hour fooling around trying to get that to R/S. Aw, to hell with it. Don't bother with it. So it didn't R/S, so what? Make fairly sure your middle rudiments are in and carry on. That doesn't mean you get your middle rudiments in just because it didn't R/S, either. You just go sailing down the list.

You’ll find auditors trying to get over the heading of this saying, "Well, it was an instant dirty needle." Well, in actual fact, this is what a dirty needle really is, although I don't expect to stamp out its use with just a few words here because I've already defined it and had everybody fall from grace and I hear them using it and using it and I'm afraid it's gone too deep into the language now.

You're only interested in a rock slam on the last item. It's the only rock slam you're interested in. You want that thing to slam. Oddly enough you can instant read it all the way through on a Terminals Assessment just calling the item. No "Consider overts." Get down to the last three, tiger drill the last three, you know, "On this item so - and - so has anything been suppressed?" you know. And add "Protest" to your Tiger Drill. And get that all tiger drilled off, and then I´ll say, "All right. Would a waterbuck commit overts on a tiger?" Slam - slamslam - slam - slam - slam - slam - slam - slam - slam - slam - slams, great! Do the next two. See? There's no slam in those, they just clean up and disappear. You got - you've got your item. Slam - slam - slam - slam. Now, it stops slamming. Don't say to the pc, "What the hell did you do? What kind of a pc are you anyway? What are you doing?. " you know? I found out that doesn't pay.

The original dirty needle was a buzz, bzzz, bzz, bzz, bzzz, bzzz, bzzz, that was happening with the needle sufficiently consistently that you couldn't pick that was happening a read out of the middle of this guys needle. In other words, it was a bad, small, sudden, continuous needle pattern that made it impossible to read the meter. And that was dirty needle. If I remember rightly, it had another name at that time, but I've forgotten what it was. It perished; nobody used it very Much.

Pc begins to self - audit if you do it too much. The thing for you to do is tiger drill it again. And then use Big Tiger. Start using Big Tiger when the pc's pulling tricks on you, see. "Not suppress" is one of the things. "Not careful." You know, "Careful." All of a sudden, you suddenly wake up and realize you aren't saying, "Committing overts." That's the thing that produces the slam, you know, you have to say, "Committing overts." "Ah, yes! Well, would a waterbuck commit overts against a tiger?" Slam - slam - slamslam - slam - slam - slam - slam - slam - slam - slam - slam, that's fine. Slams went off, and came on, and go out, and you mark it down in your auditor's report, and you say, "reliable item." In your red pencil in the middle of your blue report, you say, "reliable item, tiger." There it is. Underscored. Never has to slam again to the end of your days or anybody else's and probably won't. You understand? But you've got the last reliable item.

Audience member: Scratchy needle.

Now, why do you want the last reliable item? Very simple. There's the law of the last reliable item. What do you do when you've followed the rock slam to a dirty needle and went off the deep end of the cliff and you are now nowhere and the pc is ARC broken and disinterested and all life has turned green and gorgeously bilious? What do you do? You return to the last reliable item and do something else with it.

Hmm?

Second rule is: there are two things you can do with an item - you can oppose one or represent one. If you have opposed one the other thing you can do is to represent. If you oppose one and don't get a slam, then you can represent and down to a slam. In other words, if you've done one, you now do the other. If you've done one with no result you now do the other. And you’ll probably get your result.

Audience member: Scratchy needle.

Now, items that are listed on oppose are always reversed. You say, "Would a waterbuck - ," you know, "Who or what would oppose a tiger?" you know and "Who or what would a tiger oppose?" You always call them both ways. You make two lists, treat it as one list when you null it, but reverse your "Consider committing overts" command, if you're doing it that way or if it is a terminals list, just call it one - shot, you know, one item at a time on the way down, mark any instant read as in. In other words you get two lists out of an oppose. "Would a waterbuck op - " in other words, "Would - Who or what would oppose a tiger?" and "Who or what would a tiger oppose?" And you’ll always catch the brass ring in that particular fashion.

Oh, yeah, "scratchy needle" was being used at that time. Well, for some reason or other - for some reason or other, scratchy needle didn't survive, but dirty needle did.

Now, inert - this is the law on this: Inert items are represented most of the time, and active emanating items are opposed. And you won't go very far wrong by doing that. If you ask the pc is it - pc sometimes doesn’t know. Well, do one or the other and you’ll only be 50 percent of the time wrong. You see how this is?

And that really means a consistent pattern of little tiny bzzz and bzzzz and bzz and bzzz - and up and down, up and down the needle face, you know, up and down the face of the dial. And just about the time your - you - well, it's laid off for a minute, you see. It's not doing that now, and you're going to say '76 catch ca - bzz, bzzz, bzzzz, bzz." You say, "All right, now, have I missed a with - " (Watch it carefully, watch it carefully. Yeah, well, I see what its pattern is and now if I say anything that is meaningful, you say to yourself, it’ll disturb the pattern I see in front of me.) "All right. Have I missed a with - " (Oh well, that's doing something else now.) "Have I missed a withhold on you?" (Oh, I´d say it read. I don't know.)

In other words, you represent an inert item, something that is not active. "Dumb bunny." There is a good inert item. So you represent "dumb bunny." Supposing you come to the end "an ox head." All right, now, you represent “an ox head," don’t you see, because it's still inert, and all of a sudden you’ll find yourself sitting there with an active item. So you oppose it. Got the idea? "A spitting cat," oppose. Get the idea? "Shotgun," oppose. See? And you most of the time you’ll be right. And part of the time you’ll be wrong.

Well, that is the bane of 3GA, all through the line, has been the dirty needle. Because the confounded thing gives us everything but a read.

What do you do when you go off the deep edge? You use the rule of the last reliable item. That's a very reliable rule. The last one that you could really count on, you represented and it wound you up nowhere, ha - ha! Go back and oppose it. Supposing you neither get a represent nor oppose off of it and it all goes to hell? Then you go back to the last reliable item before that. Got it?

Now, it is actually a tiny rock slam and it is caused by - just as a rock slam is - by O/W. Only we call it "invalidate - failed to reveal." You see these little bzzzs and bzzs and bzzzzs and bzzzzs on the fellow's meter, he's invalidated something or he has failed to reveal something - one or the other. But the odd part of it is, he very often has invalidated something, he has failed to reveal it and he's now protesting your asking him about it. So very often Protest is the better entering button than either Fail to reveal or Invalidate, even though it is.

An item may rock slam and not be accompanied by cognition. Very doubtful, very doubtful. You’ll get sensation on oppterms, pain on terms. You will get a rock slam and a cognition. In other words the pain or sensation, depending on whether it's a terminal or oppterminal, and in addition to that, the rock slam, and in addition to that, pc's interest and cognitions, and that's what it takes to make an item. If you follow that on down and you either oppose or represent against the rule of whether it's inert or emanating, you’ll find yourself following the rock slam. And you will do a very lot for the pc, and eventually, you will find that an item you get to, rocket reads, unless the pc has something against going Clear. But I will take that up in another lecture.

Now an auditor with lots of experience can take a look at this thing, knowing the pcs operating on it, of course and he can say, "Oh, this guy has just picked up a missed withhold." See, 'I´ve just missed a withhold on this pc, because now here goes a - this needle was clean and everything was fine and now it's a dirty needle." Well, that's its usual use.

Thank you very much.

Now, he can say, "Well, have I missed a withhold on you?" or something like that and the pc gives it to him after some argument and after that, the needle's clean. Or it's an accumulation of these things, but you’ll find out it's more often - when you can’t clean it up at once - it's more often just protest, just common old garden - variety protest.

Good night.

It also, by the way - if you missed and failed to complete a list and you've left a list all unfinished and you went on and you missed the item, and so forth; after that you get bzzz, bzz, bzzz, bzzz, bzz.

Also wonderfully enough, you can sweat your head off trying to turn off one of these things on a pc. All during a Prepcheck it was always like this; you could never get the rudiments straight on this pc; it's always like this and, you know, it's sort of like, out in - out amongst Homo sapiens it's halitosis that loses you friends, see, and in Scientology it's having a dirty needle. You know, after a while nobody will audit you, you know? "He's got a dirty needle. To hell with him."

And oddly enough, on two occasions on chronically dirty needles, I have seen them turn off with the first item found by Dynamic Assessment by Rock Slam and they just vanished and I see them only now when the pc really does have a withhold of magnitude or something like that. That's interesting, isn't it?

In other words, 3GA Criss Cross will blow up this dirty needle phenomena and you can expect the pc who has a dirty needle and is giving you a hard time, to keep on having it until you find the first reliable item.

All right, let's continue here with this rock slam.

Now, when you get an instant dirty needle - that means your instant read is bzzt! See, it's a bzzzz. Now, how big is that bzzz? And people are always coming up to me and expecting me to translate thought into mensuration, English type. And I will confess to you that every once in a while I get tired of being badgered and I will toss something off like "a half an inch" or “ quarter of an inch," you know. But the truth of the matter is, it varies by the meter and it varies by the meter setting.

Now, a Mark V meter at 128 sensitivity - a dirty needle looks like the first cousin to a real rock slam, because it's pretty broad. And now you take it down to sensitivity 16 and it's this little eighth - of - an - inch bzzz, see, that you're used to on a Mark IV. But it's a tiny needle disturbance of great rapidity. Actually what it is, is a small rock slam.

Auditors are always saying to me, hopefully, "Well, I found a lot of little dirty needles on the list and can't I take those? Aren't they really a rock slam?" you know, "Please Ron? Please Ron? Say I've found an item." Well, I can't tell you you've found an item if you haven't. The answer is no! You see?

Well, how big is the smallest dirty needle? Well, how long is a short piece of string? This is one of those things. This is something that comes by experience and frankly, I have never taken a ruler and sat there over an E - Meter trying to measure the width of one. But I will tell you this: I have never seen one narrower than about an inch or an inch and a quarter, by my guess - see, I've never seen one smaller than that - that meant anything to a pc. Pc didn't cognite if your rock slams were smaller than that and did cognite if they were bigger than that.

But what meter is this? Oh, I don't know, pick a meter!

Actually, it's not reducible to that degree. Don't you see? A rock slam then becomes a dirty needle when it ceases to carry with it a cognition on a found item. But it is a matter of size.

I´d say, if I finally assessed everything out to an eighth - of - an - inch rock slam, I think I would just tear the list - I would - even after I tiger drilled it and did everything I could do with it, and I´d polished it all up and I worked like mad; and working my brain to the bone trying to make this thing rock slam and it wouldn't do any more than an eighth - of - an - inch - I think I wouldn't have spent that much time on it. I think I would take the list and you - what you do is take the list and you fold it over once, you see and you tear it across the middle and then you put the two pieces together again and you tear them again.

Leave it in the guy's record to show that it didn’t go anyplace is the proper professional thing to do, but my impulses are more savage than this sometimes. I seldom throw them in the pc's face now. I mean, I've gotten myself under good control that way. Dump E - Meter tables on the pc sometimes but not often.

But it's got to be accompanied by the cognition, see? But a rock slam is a rock slam and I would say that the graduating point on a Mark IV is probably sensitivity 16, maybe plus or minus half an inch or something like that, as the smallest possible rock slam. But I've never seen one that small that meant anything. It's always been up there around an inch and a quarter.

Now, a rock slam is a nervous, agitated, flinging - to - and - fro of the needle and now I have been compounded with the felony of a slow rock slam. Well you could say a stage four needle is a very slow rock slam.

But, a slow rock slam - well, there are rock slams inside of rock slams That I've seen. I've seen a needle slamming while it was slamming. That’s,' very interesting, because as it sweeps up the dial, it does three or four bzz slams of incredible speed and frequency as it's traveling an inch and a half very rapidly. That thing really looks savage. It looks like a thetan on a electric chair that he doesn't know whether to lean back or sit down. You can just see this guy bouncing out of his head and all over the universe.

This thing is a very frantic action. To say that some rock slams are slower than others is true, but that brings us up "how slow is a slow rock slam?" I don't know. That's something you’ll have to answer by experience.

But a rock slam of the speed of a grandfather clock ticking from left to right would, in my opinion, be suspect. That's a too - slow. There can't be such a thing as a too - fast rock slam, however, because it just simply develops rock slams inside of rock slams. And it looks more and more frantic. But it is a frantic needle and sometimes thetans are more slowly frantic than other times. And once more the index is: Is it accompanied by cognition?

Now, those basically are your fundamental terms that you're using and doing business with with 3GA Criss Cross. There really are no fancier terms of one kind or another than those things. Because all other terms are very, very explanatory; such as, "oppose" is simply you oppose it and "represent" is you simply represent it and so forth. And to go into that and call that a lot of terminology is practically a waste of time.

So, as all intents and purposes, I've given you the lexicon of 3GA Criss Cross and its various terms except one: item. Now, you've got "detested person" in 3GA - by Dynamic Assessment by Rock Slam. You have "detested person," you have "dynamic," and you have "item." And that's fine. And that belonged to that procedure. And I’m very happy to have it belong to that procedure, because in 3GA Criss Cross, they're all items.

If you wrote it on the list, it was an item. And if you found it, it was an item. It's still an item. And when it's obviously a provable item capable of delivering up further items, you call it a reliable item. See, you don't have to worry about detested persons and dynamics and items and all that sort of thing. You just call them items; just call anything an item.

Also in listing goals out, the pc is giving you items, don’t you see? So it's just all items.

What do we mean by an item? We mean it's a terminal, whether a species or ally of oppterms or a species or ally of terminals. See, they're all items. And we needn't - we’ve got to have a word that embraces both. So a reliable item, then, is an item which the pc got after the list was nulled and that's - it's reliable and can be used to obtain further items. Well, that is a reliable item. It's also called - and you will call it, I am sure - the pcs item, even when it is an oppterm. Go ahead and call it what you please but just recognize that there is a sloppy use of this word item and there's no reason for too many terms on top of item. You've passed into 3GA Criss Cross, call them all items. People know what you're talking about. You say, I found an item." Obviously, you have proven an item out on a pc, you see? You’d also say, "I wrote four hundred items on one list." See? It sort of differentiates itself.

There is no other terms to be defined in this except auditor.

And an auditor in 3GA Criss Cross is somebody who can find reliable items on the pc. Of course, that's a joke, but I make my point. It really takes an auditor to run this one.

Well, I will cover in the next lecture, now, the more amusing vagaries and departures from grace that we can have as we follow the rock slam.

Thank you.