From squirrel@echelon.alias.net Tue Jun 15 19:36:17 1999
Path: newscene.newscene.com!newscene!novia!news-out.uswest.net!paloalto-snf1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!newsfeed.stanford.edu!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!news.he.net!news.lava.net!anon.lcs.mit.edu!nym.alias.net!mail2news-x2!mail2news
Date: 16 Jun 1999 02:36:17 -0000
Subject: FZ Bible 6/6 SOME GPM TAPES OF 1963
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,alt.clearing.technology
Message-ID: <2a15bb5824602b26bb3ef6425086fc15@anonymous.poster>
Sender: Secret Squirrel <squirrel@echelon.alias.net>
Comments: Please report problems with this automated remailing service to
	<squirrel-admin@echelon.alias.net>. The message sender's identity
	is unknown, unlogged, and not replyable.
From: Secret Squirrel <squirrel@echelon.alias.net>
Mail-To-News-Contact: postmaster@nym.alias.net
Organization: mail2news@nym.alias.net
Lines: 1740
Xref: newscene alt.religion.scientology:819944 alt.clearing.technology:85603

FREEZONE BIBLE ASSOCIATION TECH POST

SOME GPM TAPES OF 1963 - 6 of 6

**************************************************

We scanned a few GPM tapes that seemed appropriate as companion
pieces to the 1963 tech volume that one of our units posted
recently.

The SHSBC numbers below are both the original tape number and
as renumbered in the clearsound version (based on Pilot's
Master Tape List)

The transcripts posted here are based on the modern clearsound
version of the SHSBC cassettes and may have omissions due
to Cof$ editing of contents.  If anyone can check these against
the old reels, please post any omissions found.  

Note that most of these were at one time considered confidential 
although they are no longer.  Also note that many level 0 and
level 4 tapes are from the same time period and also discuss
the 1963 GPM tech.


1. SHSBC-253 ren 282, 28 Mar 63 The GPM
2. SHSBC-263 ren 291, 14 May 63 Implant GPMs
3. SHSBC-311 ren 342, 26 Sep 63 Summary III: About Level IV Auditing
4. SHSBC-314 ren 345, 17 Oct 63 Level IV Auditing
5. SHSBC-318 ren 349, 29 Oct 63 Routine 4
6. SHSBC-323 ren 354  26 Nov 63 R4 Auditing


The first of the above, "The GPM" was posted last week by
Zenon as part of the FPRD cassettes.  Since we had already
scanned it, and since we used a different source (these are
from the clearsound BC cassettes), and since it is one of the
better introductions to GPMs, we decided to include it anyway.

Note that level IV or R4 at this time consisted of running R4M2 
(a successor to R3M) on actual GPMs.


**************************************************

STATEMENT OF PURPOSE 

Our purpose is to promote religious freedom and the Scientology
Religion by spreading the Scientology Tech across the internet.

The Cof$ abusively suppresses the practice and use of
Scientology Tech by FreeZone Scientologists.  It misuses the
copyright laws as part of its suppression of religious freedom.

They think that all freezoner's are "squirrels" who should be
stamped out as heritics.  By their standards, all Christians, 
Moslems, Mormons, and even non-Hassidic Jews would be considered
to be squirrels of the Jewish Religion.

The writings of LRH form our Old Testament just as the writings
of Judiasm form the Old Testament of Christianity.

We might not be good and obedient Scientologists according
to the definitions of the Cof$ whom we are in protest against.

But even though the Christians are not good and obedient Jews,
the rules of religious freedom allow them to have their old 
testament regardless of any Jewish opinion.  

We ask for the same rights, namely to practice our religion
as we see fit and to have access to our holy scriptures
without fear of the Cof$ copyright terrorists.

We ask for others to help in our fight.  Even if you do
not believe in Scientology or the Scientology Tech, we hope
that you do believe in religious freedom and will choose
to aid us for that reason.

Thank You,

The FZ Bible Association

**************************************************

R4 AUDITING

SHSBC-323 ren 354  26 Nov 63  R4 Auditing

A lecture given on 26 November 1963

[From the modern clearsound BC cassettes - not checked
against the old reels]


Thank you. Well ... Thank you. Is that because I haven't
seen you in so long? All right. This is the what of what?

Audience: Twenty-sixth November.

Twenty-sixth of November. How did it get to be that? Well,
Saint Hill Special Briefing Course.

Well, we're very glad you're here. You're just in time to
be launched for Saturn. Some people are very clever. Some
people are very clever and arrive right on the spot at the
exact moment necessary to resolve the case. And the new
students have been.

Of course, they don't have the old-timers' 
claw-and-paw-through-it-all uncertainty. "Will we ever make
it? Will Ron make it? Is it possible? Well, I see we've
shifted again to... Well, I guess that wasn't so good, you
know." Scientology, Dianetics in the last thirteen years.

Now we got it pretty well taped these days. Too well. So
the romance has now gone out of it. We can take somebody
now by the nape of the neck off the street and bit by bit
and edge by edge and level by level, push him right
straight through out the top beyond any target man ever
dreamed of.

The techniques are all there. It doesn't mean that as you
hit the top level that it isn't a - we used to have a
tightwire walk across the Grand Canyon that we used to use
as an example, you know?

Well, actually, the tightwire is a little bit of an
overstatement in the matter. That's - that's putting it up
too high. Actually, it's a busted spider thread across the
top of the Grand Canyon. There are going to be some people,
even good auditors, who get up there ana walk around for
quite a while trying to get their big toe on the edge of
it, see?

The levels that you see as they come up the line all look
very confident and they're all very fine till you get to
the highest level. And there the best trained pc - the best
trained pc reaches with his ballet slipper for the near
edge of that spider thread, you see, and goes over and
grabs hold of the small cedar tree five hundred feet down
and climbs back up again laboriously, gets to the edge; at
that moment the auditor inadvertently steps on his fingers.
This sequence of dramatic events continue for some time
until he is safely out over the middle of the canyon with
nothing below him and the roaring water thousands of feet
down. And at that point - at that point, he gets a wrong
goal. The umbrella collapses on him, don't you see, and
he's lefted there in suspended animation.

The only way he can possibly make it is his case shape is
now sufficiently good that he can maintain suspended
animation in empty space.

It isn't that it - it isn't that it isn't frightening and it
isn't that it isn't spectacular. He just happens to be able
to do it at this particular point.

I know. I've seen them now until you get a bank "to spit,"
you see? And "to spit" has - this is an alleged GPM for "to
spit" - has thirty-two items in it, you see, without any of
them having reached up to the crossover, see? None of
these - all the items on the terminal side are still in
favor of the goal - this is quite remarkable - if they are in
favor of anything. And they have certain things like
"blacksmith's forges," you see, and so on. Well, you maybe
could tie that in to "spit" and that sort of thing. That's
fine. And they have "World War II" and "catastrophe," and
"my mother's handkerchief," and well, that's probably
connected with it in some particular fashion. And "barrel
organs." 

Well, "a steam calliope," you might be able to see it, 
you see, but "a barrel organ." After a while - after all
and so on. And the oppterms that these things solve are
such things as "the Constitution," "clouds." Clouds? That
might possibly make it, you see. "The ocean." That might
possibly make it, too, and so forth. "Library books," we
can't quite see how that connects. And we look at these
things and we'll say, "Well, there's something you can
conclude about this. That something has either been
overlisted or underlisted or it's an implant GPM or it's
only an actual goal, or, or, or, or, or." In other words,
there are about eight things you can conclude that would be
wrong, and you have to conclude that it's at least one of
those eight.

Or it's simply that the auditor is finding far too many
items for that bank. You know, a bank usually runs from
twenty to twenty-four items. And somewhere in the vicinity
of ten to twelve items from the bottom, you've reached the
crossover and the items - terminals above that point are no
longer for the goal. They are against it on a gradient.

So we see all kinds of wild things and if we don't know our
business, why, there it is.

Well, we got an impression from this that it is a long road
and that it is a complex road and that it's very difficult.
The most difficult end of it, however, is finding the
present time GPM. That's the most difficult end of it and
of course at that point we find the auditor the least
experienced, the pc the least experienced and the hardest
part of that to find is the existing, latest terminal of
the present time GPM, which of course is not the top
terminal. It's just how far up this bank has gotten, don't
you see.

And to find that terminal then becomes the touchiest,
trickiest piece of auditing ever done. And this is being
done by a wholly inexperienced pc and it is being done by
an auditor who is just getting his feet wet, particularly
with this pc.

The hardest part of it is practically the beginning of it,
and this operates as quite an effective bar-out. However,
it is resolvable. The funny part of it is that you can't
mess up a right item or a right sequence. Now, by that I
don't mean that you can't get items in wrong places or GPMs
in juxtapositions which you can.

But even though you list and list and cross list and
suppress and get wrong items and everything else, the funny
part of it is the actual bank is still there ready to be
run out when somebody hits the happy combination. You
cannot wreck a case. You can only kill a pc. That's
something for you to console yourself with.

After he gets back from the between lives area - they aren't
able to wreck the case either, don't you see - and he picks
up another body, why, somebody will be able to audit him just 
as before. They will find the bank a little scrambled, but they 
can go through it and get what it is. This is very remarkable.

The only thing that doesn't disappear is the incorrect
item, the improperly worded goal, the wrong goal. These
things - these things don't disappear. As a matter of fact,
they tend to appear, which is another thing that adds some
misery to the passage. They tend to appear.

If you find a goal on somebody "to have big ears," I swear
his ears would start growing, if it's a wrong goal. If you
see somebody dramatizing an item that was found yesterday,
that's a very sure proof that it was a wrong item.

The validation of a wrong item tends more than anything
else to throw it into the behavior pattern of the pc, which
is quite interesting. Somebody has an item "to be mean" or
a GPM, let us say, "to be mean." It happens to be a wrong
goal, but it's been validated like mad and he believes
implicitly and the auditor believes implicitly that this
happens to be a correct rendition. And by George, that pc
will get mean. That's a way of testing it out because, you
see, when you've found a right one, it ceases to have power
of making the pc dramatize and when you find a wrong one
and say it's right, it is now possessed of power to make
the pc dramatize. An unimportant point but a little side
commentary; it's just something that makes the way a little
more arduous.

We find a goal "to be tired," and it happens to be
just - just a goal. It's only a goal. It's not an actual GPM
at all. And we find this thing "to be tired." And it's
found just at the end of the pc's intensive. And he goes
for a week now before he gets audited again and during that
entire week he will be completely exhausted. And he'll know
what it is. It's that goal that is making him this way.

And this consoles him and so on. However, in the first few
minutes of play of the following intensive, the goal is
discovered not to list. The RR turns off, something
catastrophic occurs and somebody finds that this is not a
right goal. And they go ahead and continue the list and
null it down and find the right goal for the list, and "to
be tired" has nothing whatsoever to do with it. At that
point the pc tends to cease to be tired.

Now, if we had found the GPM - the correct GPM, "to be
tired," and it was the right GPM, then some of the pc's
feelings of tiredness would vanish. He wouldn't get more
tired. He'd get less tired. This is just side commentary
and chitchat that I'm giving you here. It's just, the way
is arduous.

You can believe the most horrible things about yourself for
a while, you know. You do this list and you get this goal,
and it's supposed to be the PT GPM, you see. "To be a
thief." And this is ladled out to you as the real McCoy,
you see. And you look at that and you say, "Well I know
it's degrading, but I should accept it and I shouldn't keep
insisting on high-tone GPM and it probably is my GPM and I
realize that and I - I did steal some sugar once and..."
Just explain it, you see, and go around feeling very
degraded and so forth and sort of restraining stealing
things, you know?

And then, all of a sudden, it turns out that that happens
to be a wrong GPM, you see? Actually, the right one was "to
be a saint." Something like this, you see? And maybe that
was wrong, too, but if that was wrong, then you'd go around
for the next week or two, you see, with growing a halo. But
if it was right, you would cease to be so saintly.

In other words, you get the reduction of aberration with
correctness and you get an additive aberration with
uncorrectness.

Now, that doesn't mean that this is very disturbing or
aberrative, but it does tend to upset somebody. And you'll
see this happening and that simply adds some more danger to
the line. The killing power of a GPM is not to be
questioned. You get a GPM wrapped too thoroughly around
somebody's neck and you can kill him deader than a
mackerel. I might as well tell that here between us girls
and boys it takes some real doing. It would be awful lousy
auditing. It would have to be absolutely incredible. You
would have had to audit the fellow with his RR off for a
whole intensive. You'd had to shove the items down his
throat with a thud and disarrange all the GPMs in the bank
practically and drop them in front of him when they should
have been behind him on the track. You'd have to make some
colossal blunders that one - one would really have to work
at to accomplish this, but the end product is you could
knock off a body with it.

That merely adds to the difficulties. I'm just cheering you
up. Long ago you got audited beautifully through your
lumbosis. Now, you haven't had lumbosis for just years
until you get into the second GPM and an item which is an
incorrect item - the auditor didn't take the first one on
the list that fell but made something else read and goes
five items beyond it, pain suddenly turns on. Boy, have you
got lumbosis. You got lumbosis you never heard of before.

This is more lumbosis than you ever dreamed of, because
anything you got rid of in early auditing is going to be
found again. Just to cheer you up.

Now, actually, it's only a wrong RI that gives you
somatics. Only a wrong GPM that gives you the somatics and
the creaks. This is quite interesting.

A right GPM, or a correct GPM - of course, with this one
proviso, that on a GPM you can get sufficient invalidation
of it, it will act like a wrong goal and give somebody the
creaks or somatics. You understand that? You could actually
make a right one act like a wrong one.

Well, with that slight proviso, no GPM which is a correct
GPM and no item ever turns on any pain of any kind
whatsoever if found in proper sequence. They only turn on
heat. They do not turn on sen. They do not turn on pain.
They only turn on heat. Great, swelling waves of heat.
Globular, radiant waves of heat. And that's a properly
found item in proper sequence. Nothing but heat. No pain.

This is so much true that if you find pain on an item, you
unload. You hit the silk gracefully and with a swan dive.
That is the end of that. You go back and find out where you
erred. You will normally find that the item two or three
back of you on the line plot - two or three items
back - still reads. If it still reads, the list it came off
of was improperly done. That is to say, there's a higher
item, usually, on that list that was the right item. The
auditor overshot the right item, found the wrong item.
Naturally, as you try to oppose that item, it will continue
to read. You will thereafter usually get nothing but wrong
items for the remainder of the bank. That's cheerful, isn't
it?

One of your awarenesses will turn up on the fact the pc
turns on pain. That means you've got a wrong item right
there, which is unlikely, or an item which you have had
just before was wrong. Probably it was an earlier item on
the list from which the wrong item came that was the right
item. It's already been listed. It's sitting right there.
Don't continue lists these days, for heaven's sakes. Try to
make the earlier item read.

If these rules don't follow, you are not auditing a right
GPM. That is all. You are just doing only a goal or you're
getting locks on an implant GPM. There's something wrong
with the GPM if these rules don't apply.

This is very precise material. There are only a few
elements to handle. These elements we are getting together
to show you in terms of actual model form. The new students 
are very, very lucky. They'll be trained from scratch in this 
particular technology.

There are only certain objects in the mind and they can
only get disarranged in certain ways and only certain
things can go wrong with the mind and actually those things
are not significances but masses.

Significance, poof, poof. Who cares? It's the mass. It's
the mass that counts. And these masses are in different
shapes, sizes, with different names, behaviors and
sequences. And it's all very simple. There's not very much
to it, but you'd be surprised how much complexity can come
out of four or five different kinds of items. I mean,
different kinds of objects in the mind. And you just get
variety, endless variety out of the thing. And every once
in a while why, you slip from grace as an auditor and omit
something from your patter. You forget to ask about implant
GPMs.

You know, you'll start saying, "Is this the - this the GPM?"
you know, and wraabow - and it reads, and you run it and
nothing works right, and ooooh my, and you get about ten
items later and you - suddenly it dawns on you that this
thing isn't following any sequence anybody ever heard of.
There's pains turning on in the pc. The thing is going all
wrong, your needle's kind of getting stuck up. It isn't too
bad, but it just seems to be sour. And nothing seems to be
able to get into proper sequence, and that sort of thing.
And you brightly do an examination of it again, and you
remember that you didn't ask if it was an implant GPM.
Uuuuuuh.

And you ask it now, and you get a beautiful blowdown, and
that is the end of that.

Then, of course, you can have an implant GPM and an actual
GPM which have the same name. Have the same goal. There are
several like this. Any pc is common enough to pick up one
of these because, of course, implant GPMs are designed on
the actual bank, except they - this might be of historical
interest to ou - they really didn't know what an actual
bank was composed of.

They knew it had goals and they knew it had RIs, but
that's all they knew about it. So obviously they never
cleared anybody because those items oppose, and actual GPM
items solve. Quite remarkable.

They knew the goals opposed and so they - then they
presupposed that the items opposed, and they don't. And so
they could just have messed everybody up like fire drill if
they had known that other little piece of technology. They
didn't know it, so now we have these beautiful implant GPMs
that student auditors can practice on. And I think it was
very, nice of them to provide us with practice material so
that people can see what rocket reads look like and see
what patterns look like and that sort of thing.

The difference is, of course, that in an implant GPM you
always have to use oppose. And in an actual GPM it is
solved. Only goals oppose each other in actual GPMs. Goals
always oppose. Items always solve.

So item lists always contain the word solve. Goals lists
always contain the word oppose. And never any other way. I
won't look at anybody just now so as to be accusative, but
I've seen this violated lately.

Items oppose - implant GPM. Distinguishes an implant GPM
from an actual GPM. I think it is quite amusing. They
didn't know.

No, in an actual GPM, the items always solve. Always solve.
"Who or what would solve a caterwump?" It's very seldom a
statement of a goal, but sometimes a "to" might occur in
the item wording, like well, of course, as silly as, 
"going too far," but you can actually have "wanting to
get out," see? And it might occur in a GPM, you see, that
has nothing about "to get out" in it, you know.

A GPM "to not be bothered," see. And it contains this item
"wanting to get out." Somewhere on your goals list this pc
is going to write down "to get out." Difficult, don't you
see?

He's going to put on this list and it's liable to get a read 
when the whole thing is all charged up because items read on
the burden of the whole charge of everything, don't you see? 
So you get "wanting to get out," which tends to give you 
something that looks like a goal "to get out."

Well, it's worse than that. Sometimes a lock item will have
a goal wording as part of it. I had one myself.
"Wanting - not wanting to find fault." And the goal read is
"to find fault." Three telegraph poles and what was left of
Ronnie later, we found out it was an RI, not a goal. "To
find fault." See, I was perfectly willing to say, "Well,
all I do is find fault and that's me. I mean, that fits my
personality." You know, trying to degrade, degrade to fit
myself into this thing. And I got more and more nattery and
more and more naggy, you see. And then we finally find out
it was just an RI and that was the end of that.
Interesting.

But - so there is the source of a goal and the source of
trouble. Sometimes you have the tag end of an item that
will give you a read like it's a goal. That's rare, but it
does occur. The most trouble you'll get into and the most
horrible thing that can occur to anybody is this implant
GPM and actual GPM which are the same goal, and you pick up
an RI out of the implant GPM and you use it to solve, don't
you see, and you get the pc running the implant on the
track of the implant GPM, thinking you are running the
actual GPM while you were doing it.

And you'll get items like somebody or something with a goal
"to spit," see? Well, of course, there are no such - you
don't have items like that in an actual GPM. You don't have
these "somebodys" and the goal "to..." and all of that.
That's just implant stuff, see?

They didn't know what they were doing, fortunately. Because
if they had really known what they were doing, they would
have put those banks together so they did exactly what
banks do. And brother, you couldn't have pried a pc apart
with a crowbar. That would have made it ten times as hard.

But it's rough enough. You sometimes will take an actual
GPM, RI or something like this, get over into the implant
GPM, and the RR shuts off. Oh, marvelous.

Now you've got no RR, so it couldn't have been an implant - 
actual GPM. The RR shuts off because that isn't the wording
of the implant GPM exactly, see. Something like that.

Let's say you have an actual GPM "to be a big man," see,
actual GPM. And you've got an implant GPM, well, "to be
mean" or something, but there's something about a couple of
these words, you see, that hang up on each other, don't you
know?

And you find the pc over here running on the implant track,
and the RR shuts off, so you say, "Well, there is no actual
GPM 'to be a big man' because the guy's implant - the guy's
RR shut off, so that proves there was no actual GPM here,
so we'll abandon it."

I don't know how many sessions later somebody gets bright
enough to realize the pc was simply misplaced on the track.
That leave you a little bit adrift? Well, it's very simple.
You're supposed to be running down this aisle, you see, with 
the pc, and actually you've gotten an item for which you don't 
have a goal accidentally from some implant.

So you then follow this item listing that. So you overlist,
go around a corner, jump out of the actual GPM, see, and go
over into this implant GPM. You're now running in the zone
and area of that implant GPM. Guy's RR shuts off, so you
say, "To be a big man" - there can't be an actual goal there
because the - the RR shut off. Sure test that there's no
goal, isn't it?

Well, it's a sure test up to that point. Then you throw it
all away, you see. That's the usual thing. Throw it all
away. Dump it all overboard. Get rid of it and start anew.
And eighty-nine-page goals list later, you still haven't
found the guy's goal. Naturally, it was the right goal. Pc
was just being run in the wrong place.

Oh, you got a lot of fun ahead of you. I'm just trying to
paint a bright, sunny, cheerful picture here.

This is rough stuff. I'm not kidding you. But there are
rules. There are rules. And those rules take you through.
And the thing is all figured out and the only thing that
wrecks you on these rules - well, it's like, it's the first
fall on the list. Almost invariably. Almost never otherwise
than the first fall on the list.

And this, if your pc is in session at all, is usually the
first and last item of the list. But it's certainly the
first nice fall on the list. The first fall on the list.
Actually and factually that. If the pc's running any kind
of shape at all, why, that's the way these things start to
fall into place. First fall on the list.

You call it back to the pc and it doesn't read, you maybe
list a little bit further, you get some charge off or
something like this. Go back and try to make that first
fall read again. Just because it didn't read is no reason
it won't.

Go back there and chew away at it. Unburden it a little
bit. Try and list a little bit further, and so forth, and
all of a sudden you're staring at this first - you got
another read. Oh, boy, something reads beautifully and you
try to give it to the pc, and there's something wrong about
this thing.

And you go backtracking and read that first fall again. And
work it over real good. Nine times out of ten, it all of a
sudden caves in. Great, big surge. Great, big,
disintegrating rocket read. Blow on down and so forth. And
you say brightly, "Is that your item?" "Yeah. Why didn't
you give it to me in the first place?" "On this item has
anything been suppressed? All right. Thank you. That's your
item." Crash! Another great, big read.

You know, you can't be convinced that it all doesn't run
off easily. You think the auditor shouldn't have to work
for a living, see.

You say, "All right, let's just list and list until we see
a great big blowdown and a big fall, and then let's take
that item and give it to the pc." And then he's in Illinois
and then he's in another bank and then he's doing an
implant GPM item, and then he's - he's - and so on. And he's
getting kind of weird looking and the creaks are turning on
in all directions and somebody gets hold of it and they see
this big beautiful item that you got, it went just like
that on him. Bang! You just had him put down one, two,
three items. Just like that. And that third item just went
booom! And you know, thorough, full loads, wonderful, you
know. Just gorgeous. Except you just got through missing
three RIs.

Of course, when you oppose that, because you've skipped
some RIs, instantly you will skip into another GPM. It's
just like sending somebody off with a rocket.

Miss an RI, the item that you get after that might be in
the bank you're listing in, but it goes phheeeeuuuu!

Your next list? Ha, Chicago. Get the idea? That's how you
jump from bank to bank. That's how pc's are made to jump
from bank to bank. Missing an RI.

Well, it was pretty hard at first to find out where this RR
really lived on this list. And that was difficult because
we were using "oppose," thinking it was on the same pattern
as an implant GPM, when it isn't. Soon as we got to using
"solve ..." The dangerous item is the first one on the list
because sometimes the pc is saying, "Oh ..." pc's saying,
"...well, I had - I had some good cognitions on that," and
so forth. And the auditor's sitting here and he's getting
his paper ready, don't you see, and the pc all of a sudden,
without any pause of breath or anything like this or any
word of warning, says, "guttersnipes." "Oh, guttersnipes.
Yes, Yes." "Here's your question,'Who or what...' " and so
on.

And you go ahead and list it. You didn't see guttersnipes
on the meter. When he said it you didn't see it.

So you go on down, you get a ten- or twelve-item list and
nothing's falling and you try to get it into shape and you
know... So you null the whole list. And you go down,
"Guttersnipe, fluh-uh-uh-uh-uh-huh"  -  go down to the end
of the thing and you get this big blowing item down here at
the end, you say, "That's obviously the pc's item. Ha, ha,
ha. First fall on the list. Number ten. First fall on the
list. Obvious. There it is. Fell easily and it read right
away and the pc apparently happy."

"All right. Who or what would ..." - and this thing is crab
apples, you see - all right, "Who or what would solve crab 
apples?" You see?

"Oh? Somebody or something with a goal 'to eat.' "
Sabah-bah-ba-bah-bah-ba-ba-uh-huh-bah-bah-bah-bah-bah  - and
oh, let's hit a couple of more actual GPMs, carom off a
couple of engrams, you see, and do a corner billiard, you
see, off the Helatrobus.

And we come up with the item "scavengers." Mm. Sounds good.
Pc says, "All right." So all right, let's oppose
"scavengers" now, see?

All right. "Who or what would scavengers solve?" would be
your next question. "Well, it's the absence of eating."
(Good implant item.) "The starvation, starving people.
Those who are starving." (Nice implant item.) That reads.
Good, see. Nice. Oh, that's - that's a honey, that's a honey.
That's good. Big, beautiful read. Blowdown. Oh, yeah. Yeah.
Show the Instructor, you know, it blew down. I mean, there
it is. We're all set, you see? We got this starvation,
starvation. All right. "Who or what would solve
starvation?"

"To run away. Running away. Beings who run away. Those who
run away. Somebody or something that runs away."

"Oh, that reads. That reads. No, it doesn't read. Somebody
or something that runs away. I'm sorry, it didn't read. The
upper one, the first fall, that read. It doesn't read.
Well, let's see now. Somebody or something that... Okay,
give me some more items. Now, who or what would solve
starvation?" "Oh, cooks, restaurants, somebody or something
with the goal to eat." "Somebody or something with a goal
to eat. Here, I'll null this." We got an item - we got an
item list here, you know. It's now got twenty items on it.
Now I got twenty-five items on it. When we go back nothing
reads. You're trying to get this thing to read, and it
won't read. Where are we? We're nowhere, man. What
happened? Who pulled the rug out?

Pc's starting to say, "Where did you learn how to audit?"
You know, starting to pull this line.

"Well, I told you a little while ago that the item was
actually 'eating well' and so forth and you didn't listen to
me and so forth" and oooooooh.

Well, of course, the actual action that you undertake is
traceable back to that list on which "guttersnipes"
occurred.

Now, you go back to that. You go back to that list and you
read the item that you took off of it. Ten down, see. You
read that item and it's got a read on it. It goes
cltsk-cltsk. You read it and it goes cltsk. What does that
mean?

That doesn't mean it hasn't been opposed. That is never
what it means. That "never" is underscored, as in implants.
Never means it is unopposed. I don't care if it rocket
reads and stands up on its tail and barks. See, it has
nothing to do with it hasn't been listed against, see.

You say, "Well, I found the right item. I found the right
item is ticking, but I haven't then properly opposed it. So
that's why it's still ticking." And that's wrong. Cut your
throat, because that's never right. Ha-ha - I - never. Don't
ever go daydreaming on this, man.

If after you've done down the list, what would now be on
the line plot, even though it's still on your list, I don't
care if it ticks, if it rocket reads or if it blows smoke
out of the meter, we don't care what is the quality of
read, it only means one thing. The item list it came off of
is incorrect in that you took the wrong item off the list.
You understand?

It's an incorrect action. And that item that ticks is
always improper for that location. It's not the next item
to it. It's not the item it came from that's improper. It's
it. It's a very simple one to remember. It sends up a
little red flag and waves it, and it ticks. Or it rocket
reads or it blows up the meter. We don't care what. That
item is wrong.

Now the proper thing to do, you see, would have been just
scrub all the rest of this stuff and get back there on that
line plot and read the items you found and you get back
here - you get back here to crab apples. And it goes clank!
Well, you took the list off - take the list off which you
got crab apples. The list off which you got crab apples.
Understand? Go earlier on that list and roll up your
sleeves and go to work. Because almost invariably there's
an earlier item on that list. It's almost invariable that
an earlier item on that list went undetected by you. And in
this particular example I'm giving you, it's guttersnipes
which was written down when the auditor wasn't watching,
and so forth, and there it is. And you read guttersnipes
and it doesn't say a thing. Now it's real good and stuck.

You see, you've put a wrong item in its place. So it's got
it good and scrunched. Now, it would have been tough enough
to make this thing read in the first place. But you've now
unloaded an item where it belongs. Now this could be true
of any of the ten it - any of the nine items which preceded
crab apples. It could be true of any one of those items.

How you going to make that read? It requires nothing but
genius, so wrap it up and just do it. You've got to make
one of them read.

Only after you have totally convinced that none of them can
be made to read in any way, shape or form do you ever
extend that list any at all. And that, man, extension of a
list is a last resort in modern OT auditing. That's the
last resort. That is just, I don't know, it's sort of like
throwing in the sponge. You'll usually find out that the
item was so burdened that it didn't read well, but now that
you've gotten the other item off of it and so forth, you go
back and read it and it now will read and blow down. Almost
always earlier than the wrong item was located on the list.

You've got ten items on the list, the wrong item was number
ten, it's almost invariably - so I never pay any attention
to any other circumstances - it's items one to nine on that
list. It's one of those items.

Of course, if you're a smart cookie, you never miss a fall. 
You've got a built-in periscope into your eyeball by which 
you can see the fall of the meter even while you're arranging 
the papers. And the pc said something and the meter falls.

I carry this to considerable extent. I'll hear the pc
talking about something and I will keep one eye slanted
slightly on the meter. And when I get that, and the pc says
things - why, I saw one the other day. "Walking fast," the
pc said. "I was walking fast." And I noticed that "walking
fast" gave an instant rocket read. And I used it as a
cross-verification of the bank we were walking into. That's
right. The goal was "to be fast."

The pc had offered it up as something else, so I was able
to correct the bank through my inspection of what the pc
was chattering about.

You can also go far astray on this. The pc suddenly
conceives something or other is his next goal or the next
oppterm or something of this character and he says
something with regard to it and it tends to rocket read and
if you bought it right there at that moment without further
inspection, you'd probably get yourself into a lot of
trouble. And some - because you'll get yourself in enough
trouble, you see, by when - sometimes you buy them after
inspection and they're still haywire.

See, you've got - you get it into enough trouble with the
ordinary methods without being extraordinary. You don't
have to work to get into trouble at auditing to OT at all.
It's just sitting there at every bend of the trail. It's
all over the place, see?

As you're crossing Grand Canyon, if it isn't meteors, why,
it's boiling water splashing from below, don't you see? And
if it isn't that, it's hurricane winds suddenly springing
up. And if the hurricane wind isn't bad enough, it happens
to be blowing anvils that day, you see.

You always look for these things. So actually you don't
have to be original to make trouble because you see,
there's plenty of trouble there with the most ordinary,
textbook methods.

All right. Well, there, you see - now you're four items
later, pc's got two more, three more banks chewed in, of
course, you're just going to go back and continue the list.
That's going to solve the whole thing. But the pc's sort of
nattery and ARC broke and you've had some session ARC
breaks and he's got some overts now on the session and he
isn't running so well and he isn't cogniting now nicely and
so forth. And he won't start cogniting again until you get
out of the little disturbed area that you had him in. Then
he starts cogniting again.

Heat is harder to get off and so forth. But these goofs
occur. I got halfway down a bank the other night in a pc.
Imagine it. Ten items deep. Gorgeous. Ten items running
like a startled gazelle and all of a sudden, guuh-here was
a list. And it was getting longer. I couldn't get anything
to read. And that list was getting longer.

Well, I don't exactly subscribe to the school that pcs are
better off for having suffered. I don't subscribe to that
school. That's an old school of opera, you know. You
couldn't sing unless you had suffered, you know, and I
don't think that's true of pcs. So as soon as I noticed
that list getting a bit overlong, I became cynical
concerning the line plot that we already had and went
chasing back up that line plot again, just reading each
item in sequence, not reading them backwards but reading
them in the sequence that they were found.

Always try to read items in the sequence they were found.
Always try to read goals in the sequence they were listed.
Do it in the sequence they were put down or found. And
you'll find out there was much less disturbance.

Sometimes you can make somebody's bank go creaky by reading
backwards or suddenly jumping back from a late item to an
early item, you know, and the pc - guy goes creak because
they still have location in space.

Anyway, so I went chasing back up the bank and I'll be a
son of a gun if it wasn't the third oppterm. I just
absolutely was willing to spit ballpoints. Yaaaaaaoow.
There it sat. The third oppterm. The third one. And here I
was at ten. I'll be a son of a monkey. It was sitting
there, I call it. Tick. It was saying very nicely. Tick.
"Oh, you drunk skunk," I said. Uuuh huuuuh.

So I fished the list out. Former session list. And I fished
the list out and went earlier on the list and sure enough
it was earlier on the list.

It was up at the top. The danger point of the list is
always the first item on, whether that's a goals list or an
items list. It's always the danger point.

It had been missed. I had read it, but it couldn't be made
to read. I think there was some other little conditions
concerning the thing. Been an upset or some - some little
minor, additional thing.

Oh, I remember what it was. It was - it had been left that
way between intensives and so the item had been sort of
gummed up with the period of waiting in between, so it
didn't list very nicely. It wasn't actually falling nicely
as the pc listed and it didn't start falling nicely until
it got down to about the fourth item.

Well, you're not very critical when you see that the fourth
item fell when called to the pc, blew down very nicely, pc
was happy with it, everything solved in all directions and
it listed very well and apparently stayed in the bank and
everything was happy and cheerful from there on out. You're
not very critical of it, you see? You go and buy the thing.
But it was ticking, and I found the earlier item was, I
think, number one on that list. Aaaah. I beg your pardon.
I beg your pardon. I've just given you a piece of
misinformation.

I just remembered it utterly. It was the item just above it
and the pc had added the item that I found. And that was
when I learned that items with pain on them - I had been
noticing this before - the item had a momentary pain on it
when given to the pc. It wasn't the third item. It was the
fourth. It was the list from the third item that was in
error.

All right. That's beside the point. It was simply earlier
on the list by one item. Heartbreaking. Of course, that
took the line plot and that was it.

He now only had three items on the line plot. I put the
fourth item on the line plot that I had gotten in and just
proceeded straight from there. I didn't try to sell the pc
any of these other items. You never give the pc anything.
Don't give the pc a thing that they've had before. Just
scrap it from there on, man. That's it. Finish.

You sit there, you think you've got ten items in the bank
and suddenly you have three items in the bank. The
fall - roof falls in just like that. Now you don't have ten
items in the bank. You don't have. Maybe some of those
items will come up later and the pc will put them on the
list and maybe they will all line up later, but only if the
pc put them back on the list again.

Sometimes an auditor probably will be seen kind of shoving
the line plot at the pc saying, "Don't you want some of
these items there? There's some nice items there. You have
nice items there?" and so forth. Mmmm-mm. You want to ARC
break a pc, try it, because they're probably all out
of - scramble in sequence and anything else. And usually
they're mostly locks. The pc just launches off at that
long - that wrong item. He just launches off into locks and
he gets nothing but locks and other bank items after that
and so forth.

And then he may freakily, through another double mistake,
double back into the bank and actually get an actual RI and
then for two or three items it runs straight, you see. But 
then it goes out of the bank again because you got the 
bypassed charge, and so you can't - you don't know which 
ones of those things are straight, so you can do nothing 
with any of them.

So you just take off where you corrected and proceed from
there. And if you're very, very lucky and if you said your
Sunday school lessons very well and stayed out of Dallas, 
you'll get - you'll get yourself a situation there where 
the pc will suddenly put a pair back on the list. Say, "Oh, 
yes. That's railroad locomotives and drunk engineers. They 
belong there. Oh, that's where they belong. Yeah oh, that's 
where they belong. Yeah, that's right."

But it's only in the course of listing, and you write them
down on the new list. There are - just - just go on writing
on your new list, just as though he never heard of them
before. That's what a mistake on an item means. And that's 
how you correct. And that's where you straighten them out. 
And that's how you hold it in line.

It is adroit. An item list of two items should be regarded 
as moving into the zone of overlisted. Items are usually 
overlisted. Goals lists are almost always underlisted. Goals 
lists are almost never complete - almost never.

They're so arduous. You take such pity on the pc. You break
it off one way or the other and they just never get a
complete list. And the pc will add a few goals and you null
those. And the pc adds a few goals and you null those. And
you just can't find the pc's goal. And you add a few goals
and you null those and you add a few goals and finally you
get down one for one. The pc will add a goal, you read the
goal back and you say, "That doesn't read." And the pc adds
a goal, you read the goal back, you say, "It doesn't read."
Echo metering. Whatever the pc says, you say it and look at
it on the meter.

Actually, that's about the grimmest thing that can happen. 
And you know why it's grim? Because the goal, with a complete 
list, may have been five or six. Number five or six on the list.
Way up at the beginning.

The moral of this story - the moral of this story is to do a
complete list before you null it. That is the moral. And in
view of the fact that's almost impossible to guarantee,
when you don't find it on your extended list, at once
renull the whole cotton-picking early list.

You should always be terribEy thorough on goals lists. A goals 
list is an arduous, mean, vicious, mechanical, clanking proposition.
It is done: What goal went up ha-ha-ha, oh that goal went
up ha-ha. Wawawawawa. Wawawawawa. Wawawawawa. That's with fall, 
with the RR, with the tick, with the fall, with the blowdown, 
watching the tone arm, watching the tone arm over here. Does 
the tone arm have motion left in it? Finaly, we get down to no 
tone arm motion.

Now we begin to watch for the last fall on the list. And we
finally find the last fall on the list. And then we go
fifty beyond it. We go, not forty-nine, not thirty-eight,
not fifty-seven. We go fifty. Five-O.

How big is a fall? A fall is a distinguishable read that
might be the fall of a goal.

You will find that if you continue a list beyond that fifty 
flat point with no TA, that you start roughing up the pc's 
needle. The pc starts listing himself off that section or 
area of the time track and starts listing himself into
other areas and you start crimping up the bank. And other 
evils set in.

So a goals list is complete when you have totally run out
of TA - no TA action and fifty beyond the last decent-looking
fall on the list.

A finished goals list has a very smooth, beautiful,
complete-looking needle. Nothing goes off on it. Nothing,
man. I mean that thing is just flowing, just dry, smooth as
a little river of butter.

And when you null it, a complete list just goes smooth as a
river of butter. There's nothing in at all but the pc's
goal. And that rocket reads like a startled gazelle. Pow!
And when you get to it, you just check a couple of more
falls on the list to make sure you haven't got two rocket
reads on that list and you give the pc the goal.

It is a bad policy to continue nulling the goals list for
the next three or four sessions after you have found the
pc's goal. That is not good policy. It puts a certain
amount of strain on things. Actually, it invalidates the
pc's goal.

You can always tell if the pc's goal is on the list. Not by
standing and chanting at the meter, "Is this goal on the
list? Is this a complete list? Is this an inc - " I
wouldn't give you two nickels - man, I wouldn't give you any
communist money for the value of a question like "Is this
list complete?" I've just never seen the question correct.

See, I don't care whether it reads or it doesn't read. I've
just gotten to a point now where I know what questions will
Ouija-board and what questions won't. And that one won't
Ouija-board. "Is the goal on the list? Is the goal not on
the list? Heh-bah-heh-beh-thaa?" I don't know.

Will the United States be here long? Will the United States
not be here long? Silly questions, see? Everybody knows
what's going to happen to it. It won't be here long.
Obviously.

TBD

Now, there is a way of telling. (Not unless they get some
cops.) There is a way of telling. There is a way of
telling. Is this pc in a relaxed, un-ARC broken frame of
mind? That's about the first test. Seem happy when you
finished the goals list? When a pc refuses to list, you
usually only have to put in Suppress and the pc goes on
listing. You don't even have to tell him to go on listing,
you see? His stopping listing and his nattering have
nothing to do with that. But when you finally finish this
list, the pc seem calm? Seem happy? Relaxed? Is that needle
flowing nicely? The last few goals that went on the list,
did they disturb the needle in the slightest? Or did they
just leave that needle completely smooth? When he said
them, nothing happened.

These are all tests. And a very, very important one: Has pc
got heat? Did some heat come off? Start coming off? Is this
list kind of blowy? Is the pc getting heat now? Somewhere
did heat turn on on this list? Not pain-heat. Some heat
turn on? Man, if some heat turned on, that goal is on that
list. That right there. You can go to it at once. Bark,
bark, bark. And there it'll be. Reading beautifully.

Now, that's what a complete goals list actually looks like.
Those questions were all answered one way or the other. But
if he didn't turn on heat, it still doesn't invalidate the
list.

Now, what you'll run into sometimes on nulling a goals
list, I should remark on. Because it's quite amazing and
mad.

Violate audit with a moving tone arm, you know. Saying
things to the pc while the tone arm is moving, you see. Do
things while the tone arm is moving, you see. That's a
violation of basic auditing. And of course, a lot of
violations of basic auditing gets you into trouble in doing
these upper-level processes. In fact, it all requires basic
auditing which is a long, smooth - you know, you don't even
notice it. The auditor and the pc don't even notice the
basic auditing that's in progress. That's the best kind of
basic auditing to occur.

And when you get this long, smooth list and the pc's had
heat, you've got another little hurdle that just makes life
just a little bit interesting. And I'd better tell you
about this because you're going to run into it sometime.
You're going to be totally baffled. It isn't seldom that you 
run into it. You run into it quite frequently as you start the
pc. The pc's getting more and more OT, don't you see? And
his meter's reading easier and easier and easier. And this
phenomenon turns on better and better and better.

You're auditing while the tone arm is moving. In other
words, you've started nulling the list, see. Bark, bark,
bark; and all of a sudden you see big surges start off of
this thing, you see. And surges go off of this thing. Tone
arm's blowing around here and so forth.

Well, I don't particularly stop and twiddle my thumbs just 
because this - I go on and null the list because you could 
waste an awful lot of time doing something like that, don't 
you see?

Nevertheless, it's a violation of basic auditing to be - for
the auditor to be acting while the tone arm is moving; and
this is the kind of silliness which now occurs if you
violate that, if you're not awfully slippery. And you're
for sure going to violate it because you're not going to
sit there when you get to this level of auditing for a half
an hour waiting for some tone arm action to disappear
before you give the pc his goal, see. He will finally ARC
break on you.

Any vocal impingement on the pc causes a rocket read. And,
man, if you don't know that, you're going to be in more 
trouble.

Now let me give you the exact statement. Any vocal
impingement on the pc may give you a rocket read. That's
very accurate. And most of them do.

So you say anything to the pc, like you read him the next 
goal, and of course it appears to rocket read. And you read 
him the next goal and it appears to rocket read; and you 
read him the next goal and it appears to rocket read. Or 
you've got a goal and it appears to rocket read and you go 
down the line five more and it appears to rocket read. So 
you say you've got two rocket reading items on this list, 
so therefore... This is only true, you know, when you're 
getting this blowdown. You've already seen this meter 
blowing around and the pc has had heat. Those things are 
vitally necessary before this other phenomena that I am 
telling you about takes place. This doesn't take place 
unless you've had heat, see, on the thing. And you say, 
"Well, there's two rocket reading goals on the list. Let's 
extend the list." Two rocket reading items on the list, the 
rules say extend the list. But you didn't have two rocket 
reading items on the list. You had two rocket reading vocal 
impingements on the pc. Actually his bank is simply sitting 
there right in front of you and you're not actually hitting 
the pc with anything, but your voice can actually impact a 
bit of the bank. And every time it impacts a bit of the bank, 
of course, it blows a huge surge into this meter. And you say, 
"cats," and you'd get a surge on the meter.

You get - your vocal impingement is what's kicking your
meter. And you can read this actually very directly after
heat is turned on in a goals list. This is something to know
because sooner or later, before you get to be an old
veteran at this, you're going to ARC break a pc by refusing
to give him his goal because everything on the list is
reading.

At this particular time the pc can unfortunately get upset
while this blowdown is going on, and a pc can get
sufficiently upset that you're going to get the Protest
rocket reading. So now anything you say rocket reads and any
protest the pc has rocket reads, and then there are
occasional surges going on anyhow.

Now, you try to walk yourself through that much rocket
reading and that much contradictory information. Now we try
to do a case analysis, see. Got a nice, blowing-down goal,
see. Going to do a case analysis, see?

"Is this an implant GPM?" Rocket read. "Is it an actual
GPM?" Rocket read. "Is this only a goal?" Rocket read. "Is
this just an item?" Rocket read.

Now, sometimes it isn't that consistent, so you don't
notice it. You say, "Is this only a goal?" Rocket read. "Is
this an implant GPM?" No read. "Is this an actual GPM?" No
read. Ah, well, it's only a goal. All right. Well, let's
check this out again. "Is this an implant GPM?" Rocket
read. "Is this an actual GPM?" Rocket read. "Is this only a
goal?" No read. What's going on here? What's going on here,
see?

Well, what you're actually doing, you're just bucking away
at a blowing down meter. And this - this pc is throwing off
charge and heat and everything else and you really shouldn't 
be doing anything, by the basic rules of auditing.

Your voice is then causing your own rocket read, you see.
Your voice hits his bank, and if it's this way and that
way, it either always or occasionally causes the meter to
go bang.

And you will notice this once in a while. I've seen an item
list - failure to give a pc an item on an item list - and
I've seen a pc - an item list with six items on it, with the
pc blowing down on the right item, but the right item not
spotted by the auditor. With six items then, reading, and a
blowdown in progress, no matter what was read to the pc;
the pc ARC broke at the same time and so not being
informative. Pc ARC broke, of course, because you haven't
given him the item. How can you give the pc the item?
You've got six items on the list. You've got six rocket
reads. Any one of them will rocket read. You can't tell
which one of them is and which one of them isn't. Well,
that whole trouble and upset causes from flying into the
teeth of a moving tone arm, trying to do case analysis,
locate items and that sort of thing.

Your proper action, of course, is to sit quietly back and
let the tone arm stop moving. Now you'll have to do that on
item finding. You can't possibly afford to do it on goals
lists. But you have to do it on item finding. You say to
the pc, you've got this thing reading, you see. Pow! You
say - all right, you say - and you've seen that the blowdown
starts, and so you say, "Is that your item?" Now you really
see it read. Big surge, see, and the pc's got more
confidence in it, you see. Big surge and you got more
confidence, and you'll see this thing blowing down. You're
just a fool if you say a thing. You're just being a fool.
You're just making trouble for yourself. I mean you just
must be silent at that point. Just be silent. Just keep
your big yap shut. Don't say a word. And let that thing
blow down.

Now, it frankly is only going to take it about thirty
seconds to blow down. Where you're going to take your big
error is waiting for ten minutes for it to finish off all
of its tone arm action and of course you're just going to
waste a lot of auditing time doing that.

No, you want to get the major read off of that. And it's
come down here now to let's say - this is not the - you just
don't pay any attention to this numeral - but let us say it
has come down to 3.2. See, this is just an example.

It's blown down to 3.2. It doesn't seem to be moving now.
You say, "All right. That's your item."

Now shut up. Because first you said, "Is that your item,"
don't you see? See? You say, "That reads. Is that your
item?"

Let me show you a sequence here.

"That reads," you're saying, "Grapevine, grapevine.
Anything on that been suppressed? Grapevine. That reads. Is
that your item?" You're going to see psssseeeeeeeur. More
confidence, because you're asking him if it's his item, you see.

"Oh, yeah," he says. "Oh, yeah, that's fine. I mean that's
my item. That's my item. That's my item. Zooooooo."

This thing comes down here about 3.2, see. You didn't say a
word while it was doing it. He's terribly introverted. He
won't notice that you're being silent. He isn't expecting
anything to happen. He's looking at this. What do you know,
you know? Now it's at 3.2, and it appears to be momentarily
stable at 3.2.

Don't sit there and wait for the next half-hour to see if
it's going to move again or you're going to get into a
mess. You now say to the pc - you now say to the pc, "That's
your item." "Good. Whoa. Good. I thought that was my item,
see." Bsssoooooooooosh - 2.8. Comes down to 2.8, apparently
stable.

Now the pc says, "Yeah, you know, all of a sudden, every
time I get in the car and I see a girl and so forth and so
on, I get this great - and she tells me a rumor or something
like that, I almost go mad, you know. And it's so on. But
I'm always wanting to find out what it is and I never want
to hear it. And this is a terrible situation I've been in,
and so forth." And this thing is going
pocketa-pocketa-pocketa-pocketa . And you're getting tone
arm motion, tone arm motion here and so on. And he finally
shuts up.

You'll find that by the time he shuts up, your meter's
probably recovered this - don't pay any attention to these
figures, they're just relative, you see maybe recovered to
3.5.

Now if you hang around that corner drugstore, and you wait
around leaning against that telegraph pole, you going to
wrap somebody around it. There's a nice piece of timing.
It's now regained the height it's going to regain. And
you'll see that meters do this. They regain this higher
level. The tone arm action's gone out of them. You've just
seen the new item move into place and the old item go
away - because the meter's regained it slightly.

And you say, "All right, see. Now we're all set here. That
was yackety-yackety-yackety-yackety-yacketa. Now let's blow
some more charge out of this thing, see. You don't - it
doesn't have to have regained anything for you to blow this
charge out, but I'm just giving you an example. You say,
"All right. Would caterwumps solve a grapevine?" Watch your
meter at this point, man. Watch your meter. Turn on those
big, beautiful eyes of yours and put them right straight on
that dial because you want about a two-inch peeeeeew when
those two items collide. I don't care if he's already said
it! You always say it.

He'll sometimes say, "Well, I already told you and so on.
Weren't you listening to me? You cut my itsa and so forth;
I already told you that caterwumps solve wra-wra-wra
wra-wra-wra." I don't c... - we care what he said. You 
always put it in. We don't care if he's said it. We don't 
care if he put in all the courtesy steps himself. There is 
still tone arm action left on those courtesy steps put in 
by the auditor. The auditor is still the auditor and auditing 
works still because of an auditor.

So we say, "All right." We found this new item. You say,
"Would grapevines be solved by caterwumps?" or "Would
caterwumps solve a grapevine?" Which is the better wording
when you've got an oppterm. Whichever it was. Or both. It
doesn't matter. And you watch. You watch and you will see
those two items come together and they go psssssst. And
you'll see about the nicest two-inch bang as they hit that
you ever wanted to see. Not because you say one or the
other of the items, but because you've spoken about them
coming together. Would it solve a blah? See? And you'll see
it go boom. And that's one of your basic proofs that you've
got the right item.

When it do not do it, get Suppress in. Do a little
something here. Monkey around a little bit. Test this over.
Get suspicious. When you've gotten Suppress in, ask him
again just as though you haven't asked him before.

Would a caterwump solve grapevines? Pc says, "Oh, yes." And
this time you see the two-inch bang. You say, "That's fine.
And get off of that, see?

"Now, how does grapevine" - your next step which follows
immediately afterwards. You don't have to worry much about
the tone arm action. You say - you say, in no uncertain
terms, you say, "How would grapevines...?" or "How does
grapevines relate to...?" Now, be careful now. Don't you
use that goal wording. Don't you use the goal as an RI. Get
off of that.

Don't say, "How would it (grapevines) relate to 'to eat.' "
Flunk, flunk, flunk. See. Because you're going to pull the
goal as an RI up the bank and keep it restimulated. He
knows what GPM he's running. Let him worry about that. So
you say, "How would it relate to this GPM?"

Now, he sometimes has to say to himself, "Now, let's see.
GPM, it was to eat." Something like that.

There seems to be a question in his mind it'll always come
true. Now that's not as reliable a test as saying the goal
that you're trying to relate it to. It's not as reliable,
but it is less kick-the-pc-in-the-head. See? It's much
easier on the pc and it restimulates the bank less.

And you will get another bang and another blowdown. And as
soon as you say, "How does grapevines relate to this
GPM?" - the proper wording, see - he says, "Oh, well, it's so
and so on and so on, and it's up in the bank and so forth.
I guess it's so on and so on, and so on. It's about - it's
about the third or fourth oppterm, I guess, and so forth.
Yeah, yeah, that's what it is." You all of a sudden see
another blowdown and you'll see your needle. And your
needle will go peeeewsst again. We blow it out with
relationship then to the actual GPM mass. That is your
proper step at that particular point.

Now, he may have something to say and he might not have
something to say. There might be a little more tone arm
action. If so, you could wait it out, but it would just be
a matter until it regained a certain level.

Soon as it regains a certain level, your tone arm - you see
your tone arm's coming back up and so forth. You might let
it come back up a bit. Or let it come back up. Have at him
again with the next question, see. Which of course is, "Who
or what would solve grapevines?" or something of the sort.
Just have him, with the next question, list it down and
you're away with the same repeat action.

In actual fact, it takes from four to twelve minutes to ask
the question, list the RI, get it to read back, get the
tone arm action off, get the courtesy steps in, get their
tone arm action off and be ready for the next question.
Between four and twelve minutes - somewhere in that
vicinity. Sometimes you're rolling hotter than a pistol,
the pc's working very, very good and you make up your
average in the session by getting one in two minutes or
something like that, you see?

But usually your average is a bit more than this. And
you'll find your - a session average of once every twelve
minutes is perfectly acceptable. A session average of one 
every hour, I don't know. What are you doing? You must be 
going on vacations between RIs. Something else going on 
here. It's not - not the - not what is expected.

Just give you an idea of the expectancy. If you can add up 
a hundred-and-twenty-minute session of actual auditing in 
the session, don't you see - a hundred and twenty minutes 
of actual auditing in the session - and find that you have
found ten RIs in that session, the pc is running well,
you're going very smoothly, everything is moving fine and
so forth.

Don't expect this to happen when you've run into trouble,
you've accidentally overshot an item, found a wrong item,
you're going back up and have to repatch the bank. You
found yourself running a wrong goal and now you've got to
have a right goal and the bank is all gummed up and that
sort of thing.

This sort of thing is not expected. Now, you're going to
have to hunt and punch and grope in the dark and fall over
old, odd bits that you've left in the middle of the room,
don't you see. So you won't come up to your average so good
and maybe you'll do very well to get one in fifteen or
twenty minutes. You're having a rougher time of it and so
forth.

But as soon as you get things straightened out and get out 
of the affected zone that had got kicked around and so forth, 
it should fall right back to about one every twelve minutes.
The thing to do is to get the tone arm action off of those 
things.

You don't want those things to read anymore. Tone arm
action is mainly caused by the discharge of energy in the
form of heat on the pc. Those surges, you don't want to get
a new item going before the old surges are off, don't you
see?

There's a limit at which this takes place. You could, of
course, stretch this and take a half an hour to let the
surges all come off of the item you found.

I'll tell you a joke. For the last twenty minutes of those,
they're coming slowly off the new item you haven't found.
You're not finding the surges off the old item.

The pc has moved into the new position in the bank and
without even knowing what the RI is, but having some
half-dim idea and so forth of it, he will continue to get
surges. So the surges off an item actually are those that
come off in the first part of the run and down to the last
courtesy step of it. Do you got the routine to take? Those
are exactly the way you find those things.

I suppose you understand such things as crude as this - that
after you've opposed you - "What would the goal  - what would
'to eat' oppose? What goal would'to eat' oppose?" and
you've got the new goal "to starve to death," you realize,
of course, that you've got to oppose the RI "to eat" - the
goal as an RI "to eat" - against the top oppterm of the new
GPM you just found.

Well, that is usually fairly easy and it follows the same
rules. It's a "solve" question. It is not an "oppose"
question. You've found the two goals on "oppose," see, but 
this is now "solve.

And you say, "Who or what would 'to eat' solve?" is your
right question to get that oppterm.

And you normally get them in exactly the same way. It 
actually doesn't take any more trouble and so forth.

But a wise auditor does a nice little piece of case analysis. 
He does a nice little dance around the top of that thing after 
he's got that all taped. He's got the next goal, he's checked 
it out and so forth, he's found the two top RIs. He's found 
the top oppterm and he has found the top terminal and so forth. 
He does not now go like a fast rabbit around the track. He 
holds hard because the top of the list is the dangerous item, 
the most likely to be overlooked and the one you're likely to 
make the most mistakes on are the four top items of which the 
most dangerous are the top two.

You'll find that most of your mistakes are made in the four
top items of the bank, but that the majority of those are
made in the first two items of the bank.

And you want to check those out. You want to run a case
analysis. After you've found the top oppterm, you found the
new GPM, you got that and you got its top oppterm, you now
got its top terminal and so forth and you're all square,
you want to run yourself a case analysis.

Is there anything above these things, see? Is there any
other item? Are these things correct, see? Are they
incorrect? And you're getting some kind of equivocal reads
and you can't make out what they are, you should proceed
cautiously. Because if you've got a wrong goal - you could
have just an actual goal or something like that, but if
you've got a wrong goal or something like this, you can get
the two top ones - the top oppterm and the top terminal - 
you can get those. Usually your RR doesn't start shutting
down - the length of the fall doesn't start shutting
down - until you get the third item.

Now, you don't mess up a pc very much by finding a wrong
top item and then having to find a right one. Or find a
wrong goal and find its top oppterm and then discard it,
and then find a right goal and find its top oppterm. This
is not going to mess up the pc to amount to anything.

But if you actually go so far as to find the two - the next
goal, the two top RIs and the third and fourth RIs in that
new bank - if it is a wrong goal, that's it. The RR is going
to go off. And that needle is going to freeze. That needle
is just going to freeze absolutely still. And nothing will
fall until you start listing for goals. It doesn't matter
what you list now, the pc's had it. He has no RR, he has no
fall, he has no tone arm action, he has nothing. It just
sits there with a frozen zzzzzo bzzzz and he gives you
something. Brrrr. You can get nothing to fall. You can't
get anything to move. That meter just freezes right up. And
believe me, this is hell on a pc.

It won't kill him. It won't do anything to him particularly. 
But it sure - it sure - something like taking several 
tablespoons full of sand, raw, without salt. No good.

So if you're going to find anything wrong with a GPM, why,
find it before you depart from the two top RIs. Now, that
you have found those is no - and that the RR has stayed
on - is not a guarantee. You can get sometimes as far
as four items or even five items deep into a GPM without
turning off the RR if it's a wrong goal. You can get that 
deep and the thing will still be reading.

But a real sharp auditor will have seen his falls getting
shorter. From three inches, they have become two inches.
From two inches, they have become one inch. From one inch,
they have become a quarter of an inch. And he would have to
be dead asleep not to have noticed something was wrong by
this time. The meter locks up.

He's in a wrong goal, the RIs he's finding are, of course,
wrong. They're being dragged from some other GPMs. You're
getting GPMs dragged all over the place, and all hell is
breaking loose in your auditing. And it is a big,
pluperfect mess.

Actually, the number of things you can do wrong are few.
The elements you are handling are few. The precision of the
technique is great. There are no - there are very few variables 
in this technique. I don't know of any, as a matter of fact. 
It's something like, if you have a white salt shaker on the 
table, why, that means there is a salt shaker on the table. 
And if there is none on the table, then there is none on the 
table. I mean it's that type of testing stuff.

Certain things occur. You could even audit this stuff by 
ARC breaks.

Every time you tried to do something, the pc ARC breaks.
You should - even you decide after a while that there's
something wrong with that direction. You know, you could
even - you could herd yourself down through this stuff with
pc ARC breaks. A little bit hard on the pc, but you can do
it.

You'll notice that when you undertake such and so an action
the pc is not ARC broken. But when you undertake any other
action than that, he is ARC broken. Then you can figure out
from that what is correct or incorrect about the bank.

Every time you tell him to list more goals, his ARC break
ceases. Every time - he's selling you all the time that you
have found his goal, don't you see? But he's selling you at
a high-pitched scream, see.

"What? You've already got this goal 'to eat.' You've
already got this goal. And there it is. And I don't want
you invalidating my goals all the time and everything. You 
know the horrible things that happen with regard to this 
sort of thing. You already got this goal and so forth." 

And you say, "Well, we're going to list a few more goals." 

And he sits there and he says, "Uh - to jump, to run, to 
ride a bicycle, to manicure my fingernails, and so forth, 
and so forth."

And you say, "Well, that's all right. We don't seem to be
getting any reads on this particular list. Let's go back
and take this goal,'to eat.'" 

"Well, I told you all the time that the thing was the goal. 
It's the right goal. I mean, for Christ's sakes - could have 
told you a long time ago it's the right goal. What's..."

And you say, "Well, when he lists goals, he isn't ARC
broken. Therefore, we have found a wrong goal." Slippy,
see. You can use an ARC break to adjudicate it.

There are many ways of steering through it. Case
analysis - here's another tip I better give you - is always
done by blowdown and even then is about 50 percent reliable.

Case's analysis is always done by blowdown. Don't ever
believe only the needle. Believe the blowdown. "Is this an
actual GPM?" Tick. So what? You can buy ticks anyplace. Any
watch company has lots of ticks, see? They're cheap. You
can get them by the barrel-load. It means absolutely
nothing. And you say, "Is this an actual GPM?"

Pseeeeeew. Little blowdown on the tone arm. Ah, yes. Yeah.
That's an actual GPM. That's - we got some little confidence.
There's a 50 percent chance that it's an actual GPM.
Maybe - maybe better. Maybe 64 percent chance it's an actual
GPM. Not 100 percent, but the blowdown gives you that
chance. Tick gives you no chance at all. Forget it.

The case analysis you should really depend on in your 
analyses - results that you should really depend on - 
should be accompanied by a blowdown, particularly after 
an ARC breaky, upset period. You finally found something
wrong and then you finally found what was right about this
and you find out what was right and it goes pseeeeur.

Well, you've got a 64 percent chance that that was what it
was, see? And you got a 36 percent chance that it wasn't.
And that, having accepted this, you will now be in just as
much soup as before, if not more so.

But the blowdown - the blowdown is what you want to put your
paws on. That's what you want to have count. A little bit
of a blowdown. Doesn't matter whether it's a big blowdown
or a little blowdown, you know. But let's make sure the
tone arm moves when you ask that signal question, see? Move
that tone arm with the question.

If you don't move the tone arm with a question, regard it
with a very jaundiced eye. Stuff like, "Is this list
complete?" I might believe it if I had a half-a-division
tone arm action.

See, I say, "Is this list complete?" Get a half a division
tone arm action. Well, that particular question, I think
there's a 30 percent chance in favor of the list being
complete. Cynicism is the rule of the day on case analysis.

You do everything possible to overrule the tremendous
opportunity for error in case analysis because it's only as
good as the pc can do. It's only as good as the pc can itsa
and it's just a little bit sub-itsa below where the pc is
actually itsaing, don't you see?

And this also is attended by pc's skill. It's horrifying to
realize that the only people who will ever get to be OT are
Class IVs. That's horrifying. Nobody else will. Nobody will
make it. I know that sounds horrible. It sounds absolutely - 
I saw an old-timer look up back of here and say what? What? 
It's true, though. You'd have to practically educate a guy 
into the whole skills of auditing before he knew where he 
was going.

His case would have to be as cleaned up as that level of
case would clean up a case, and so forth, before he could
head in that direction with any reliability. Because let me
tell you, you took some guy who isn't educated and doesn't
know what's happened to him about it, you wrap him around a
telegraph pole, you have wrapped him around it with
adequate mystery to spin him.

He doesn't know what the hell's happened to him now. He has
no confidence in anything and so forth. Now, I'm afraid
you're not going to make OTs out of non-Scientologists.

So it takes a lot of education to bring them up to that
level. So your case analysis is actually as reliable as the
pc's educational standards.

Does he really know what an actual GPM is? Well, that's the
only read you're going to get. "Is this an actual GPM?"
CLank!

Supposing he thinks actual GPMs are actually something that
you implant people with.

So your case analysis is as reliable as the education of
the pc, and it is reliable as the pc's itsa.

Now the - you - it goes a little bit lower than the pc's
itsa, but it's actual fact depends on the pc's itsa because
the distance between the pc's itsa and the sub-itsa is a
constant distance.

Well, that's why case analysis has to be regarded with a
jaundiced eye. Every once in a while, you're going to make
a mistake and you're going to blame case analysis and its
frailties for your own errors. You'll forget to ask some
salient question. You will become so expert - become so
expert a cook you see, that you don't bother to light the
fire or something in order to cook the beans, you know?
Some little mistake like this. You forget to ask if it's an
actual GPM, you see. You just slip somewhere and then
you'll say, "See, case analysis let me down." Well, case
analysis will let you down often enough without assistance.
You don't have to help it out any.

All right. Well, I've tried to give you some very factual
data about the running and handling of these OT processes
and you noticed today I have not been using the designation 
which we've been using because the designations that we have 
been using have become antiquated.

And we're grouping up all auditing skills, techniques,
technologies and levels of auditing into new groups. And I
found out we didn't have enough groups and so your
classifications are about to go up. Isn't that nice? Now
you can really swank it over people. 

Thank you.

(end of lecture)




