You wouldn’t be applauding if you knew what.

This lecture’s going to be about. This lecture is about auditor presence. How to audit.

Well, most of you are doing fine. Most of you are doing splendidly. There was a valence here four or five days ago that did all right for one minute. But it’s been blown by this time.

You’re doing wonderfully, you’re sitting in chairs. And you’re to be congratulated. I like that.

You actually keep a continuous communication flow of one kind or another, such as it is, to the pc. I like that That’s good. That’s good. Shows fortitude. Shows fortitude. Shows you can endure. I think it’s good.

I like the alertness too. That’s very good. Anybody screams in the room, you jump! I’m also very fine to the way you’re confronting with your chests. I think that’s good. A chest’s a good thing to confront with, and it does save wear and tear on you — then you don’t have to.

Now, I don’t wish to scathe you with a bunch of (that’s one of these neglected words), a bunch of criticism or irony, because I’m really not that good at irony today. I mean, I couldn’t be ironical enough. I don’t want to be sarcastic, because you’ll get the idea that I want you to do something else than what you’re doing.

Well, I do. You’re on the next to the last week of this unit, and I want you to roll up your sleeves on this one and audit the pc who is sitting in front of you.

Now, you have been doing all right so far running presessions, and so forth, in the form of Model Sessions. But I’m going to ask you with a dull thump, from here on, to run all in Model Session forms and not to make an awful lot of yak out of it. Okay? Run it all in a Model Session form.

I’ll give you an idea. Pc leaves here reading 4.6 on the meter, comes back in reading 6.0 on the meter. The auditor alertly says, “Duh!” And goes on running the process necessary to ruin the pc.

Now, let’s look at this, let’s look at this. This is peculiar. This is very peculiar. What does a heightened arm mean? It means totally that the person is less able to confront.

Well, what did this pc run into between sessions that injured their ability to confront? There’s something happened between sessions that make them feel like they mustn’t confront something. Got it?

Well, it isn’t the process, you know, that’s the only thing that waggles the tone arm. Other things waggle tone arms, too.

For instance, between my start of this lecture and now, your tone arm has waggled. I can guarantee that.

And tone arms continue to waggle till somebody is a whole track Clear.

Now, if there was a shift between sessions, and you didn’t do it, I’ll let you in on something (this is a brilliant idea, just get this one real good), something else did. Now, what do you think of that? It isn’t that your meter suddenly didn’t read right. It isn’t that E-Meters stopped working by a royal decree of the Galactic Interholigardiy. Something happened to the pc between sessions. All right.

Therefore, therefore — got another brilliant idea now, so just hold tight, hold tight, hold tight Look for it. Now, isn’t that a terrific idea? How about that Look for it, look for that idea. Look for that nonconfront that confronted the person upscale on that meter. Find out about it That’s brilliant, isn’t it?

Because if you don’t, then you’re going to spend about half of the session just blowing it. Because the processes itself are now supposed to handle some situation that might be handled with just a few comments. Got that?

Audience: Mm-hm.

Now, look, if the pc’s behavior on the tone arm is worse in today’s session than it was in yesterday’s session — now hold on tight, because this is an earth-shattering idea, an earth-shattering idea. The pc isn’t behaving well. Behaved all right day before yesterday, but isn’t behaving well today on that tone arm.

That tone arm is going stick. It is getting up here and it just goes stick. And it isn’t waggling anymore.

Now, I hate to be personal, I hate to be personal — and evidently you do too. Because you don’t want to get the idea that it is you who did it.

And we ask this shattering question: How did you stop the process from running? Well, now look, it was running. And if it didn’t happen between sessions, it must have happened in session.

Now, let’s divide time up very precisely here: There’s the time in session, and there’s the time between sessions. Right?

Audience: Mm-bm.

Now, if the pc is going to go off the top or the bottom of the meter, from the last time you saw the pc until this time, then it must have been something in the world environment of the pc that done it. Got that?

Well, now look, if it happens in session, who do you suppose is present?

The total environment of the pc actually could be narrowed down to you. So, you must have done it.

And you say you didn’t do it. And the reason you say you didn’t do it is because you haven’t got an ARC break. Or, you know very well that nothing occurred of sufficient magnitude to cause an ARC break with the pc. But that’s only as far as you’re concerned. That’s only as far as you’re concerned.

Now, Mr. Pc is in a mentally queasy state of mind. He is thrown over onto a slight irresponsibility for his environment during the auditing session. That slight irresponsibility actually is all that permits him to plumb bank.

So what effects the pc in session can be so incomprehensibly tiny and minute, or so incomprehensible to thee and me as to why the pc would figure this was an ARC break, that it doesn’t make sense to us. But that’s what an ARC break is, it’s something that doesn’t make sense. All right.

Now, lets lay down a few little auditing rules here. First and foremost in an auditing session, you audit the pc who is sitting in front of you. That is a good pc to audit It is the one that is most available to the session, so you may as well audit that pc. Just give up and audit that pc. Don’t audit last year’s pc, or next year’s pc, just audit that one.

Now, that one goes together entirely different than every other pc, and all we have are the laws which are the common denominators to all pcs, but the patchwork, crazy quilt that these are sewn together with are different from pc to pc. Got it?

And one pc will take unction [umbrage] at the lack of shine on your shoes and the next one will be furious because you’ve shined your shoes. Seem reasonable?

Audience: Yes.

You sure got caught in that trap.

You see, an auditor isn’t a stable thing. No, you’re not a standard item. You don’t always put on the same act Because one pc will be very upset because you’re issuing auditing commands very softly, quietly and softly — you’re auditing with a feather and it’s all very fine, and this pc just gets along fine. So you make a mistake of setting up a conclusion that says, “you must always audit in a soft tone of voice because then is when you really get the results.” And you run into a pc who is stone deaf. And this pc ARC breaks five and a quarter times a minute on not being able to hear your auditing commands.

But, it isn’t even as simple as that If it were this simple, then we wouldn’t need auditors. All I’d have to do is make a tape which gives all the auditing commands, and put a start/stop button on the tape, and then just sell these tapes and all the pcs in the whole world, all they’d have to do is turn on the tape and start and stop it for the next auditing command, and they’d all be Clear, and unfortunately that doesn’t work; it just doesn’t work.

Oh, tape auditing has some workability, and that’s why your auditing has some workability. I didn’t mean to make a nasty remark, I’m only trying to be truthful.

Now, we’ve got somebody who is a total masochist sitting in the pc’s chair, and we are being pleasant as the auditor, and we’re being very nice and cheerful and reassuring, and no auditing command seems to get across to this pc at all. Well, now, your job is to get across an auditing command. Well, this person is totally masochistic. You just never seem to get auditing commands across to this person.

Because you keep saying, ‘Well, now, point to something. Thank you.”

Well, it worked with another pc, but not with this one.

Well, you start casting around and looking at this pc, and I am not asking you to change all over the place just because pcs do, but you’ll find out that this pc isn’t responding very well. How do you find out the pc isn’t responding very well? Well, maybe for a little while the process worked, and then all of a sudden the process stopped working and you know it isn’t flat. Well, that’s you that was administering the process, there was nobody else there administering the process but you.

So, this pc that’s got to have punishment probably takes an auditing command somewhat of this level: "Point to something! Thank you!”

So you say, Well, good. That works.” So you get another pc, see.

It’s a good thing to find out what reaches pcs, since that’s what you’re trying to do.

Now, the game the pc is playing is “no reach.”

I’ve seen co-audit teams set up — and, by the way, as long as we are on this particular subject and touching on it, may I ask your bountiful cooperation: that whenever you see a co-auditing team that doesn’t seem to be going anyplace, break it up or bust their heads — I don’t care which, because they’ve gotten into this beautiful tacit consent “If I don’t reach you, then you won’t reach me. And here we sit putting up a wonderful apparency.” And that is the little song they sing throughout the entirety of their sessions, and nothing seems to happen.

“I don’t take up your ARC breaks, you don’t take up my ARC breaks. I won’t take up your overts. You won’t take up my overts. Our sex lives we leave alone.”

All these various wild pitches can get built up. And what is it basically? The cases aren’t moving. They just seem to be able to put in lots of hours without very much happening.

Well, all right. Before, we could have blamed it on the process and the lack of an undercut process.

Well, the reason I’m giving you a lecture of this type is because now, actually, I don’t have to carry the full responsibility of the process doing it, I know what these processes can do and you’ve had it Now it’s up to you. Now, it’s up to you.

How you audit a pc, of course, is in the realm of your own understanding of what you’re doing. And if you don’t think you can do anything for the pc, chances are you won’t So, therefore, it’s up to you to get a nice beefy, hefty subjective reality.

Now, up to the time that you get a nice big beefy subjective reality on what can happen and what you can do with a pc — if you haven’t got one already — why, we will furnish some push.

One fine day, why, you get a case rolling, and you say, “Ha-ha! Ha-ha! That’s the way a case ought to roll.” Okay. From there on make cases roll that way. Got it?

Audience: Mm-mm.

Now, the case starts rolling, and you say, “We’ve got it made. We got it made absolutely.” And some of you characters have actually talked your Instructor into changing the presession when the only thing wrong — the only thing wrong was that you stopped delivering the old one. ARC break, present time problems, lack of trust in the auditor, queasiness about the auditing room — case changed, all of a sudden the fellow says, “Oh, my God! An effect can be created upon me.” Instandy he looks around at all the horrible effects that are being created on him, goes into an ARC break, stops, won’t duplicate it We know this phenomenon of old. Got it?

The case puts on the brakes again. You can hear them come on. And in the last day or so, we have smelled burning brake lining in this classroom.

Now, of course, we realize that if you get a tremendous effect on a pc you’ll have killed him, and once more the Galactic Engram Police will be after you. We recognize this. We recognize it.

We collect all the notice posters, all the notice posters of wanted persons. We’ve got them on file, and you’re in them a thousand times. You’re right in there: ‘Wanted for mopery and dopery and running a temple on the high seas,” you know?

A pc, by the way, who has got “prevent” in high gear will what? Will prevent What do you know? They’ll prevent effects from happening.

Now, there’s one pc — one pc in here that I was looking at who was very interesting to me because I knew what this pc was doing. There isn’t any particular process to unsnarl it, and maybe the pc wouldn’t answer up to it, and so forth, but I knew what this pc was doing. It’s usually very easy to recognize. He was not going to go any farther with any part of the whole ruddy works. There was some opportunity of ending it right now. He has never lost hope in “ending it right now.” The next moments must not and cannot exist because “they must be ended right now.”

So, any slightest effect, this pc says, ‘Well, it’s all ended now.”

Now, this sounds rather peculiar and it’s a peculiar circuit that was going, if you get the idea that “It’s all ended; there’s not going to be anymore universe.”

So, every time this pc will get a little chug of an effect or this pc goes into restim on “it’s all ended” — and this tone arm starts and then stops, then it runs for a moment or two and then it stops again, and then it goes idle-idle-idle.

Well, the process would get to this pc eventually. But what stops the process from getting there? Just the auditor, nobody else.

Now, how did the auditor do it? The auditor got an ARC break with the pc which knocked down the pc’s havingness; the auditor didn’t see it and went on by. Didn’t notice it.

Now I’m going to ask you to get out your microscopes. I’m going to ask you to get out your detectometers. I’m going to ask you to get out your micrometer measuring scales of one character or another. Your “superfluorescope look-into-the-brainectomies” can be actually on hand here.

When your E-Meter stops acting on a process that was running, two things have occurred — one of them, or either one, or both: There has been an ARC break or there’s been a PTP overlooked. One or the other.

Now, do you know how you miss ARC breaks? You think you know how to read ARC breaks. As long as I’m being rough on you, I might as well be rough all the way.

You don’t know anything about reading an ARC break or a PTP on a meter; so just sharpen up those pointed ears and here it is.

The probability is that the first question will get no meter reaction on, “Is there an ARC break?” Or “Is there a PTP?” You hear me?

Audience: Yes.

Hm?

The probability is there will be no meter reaction of any kind whatsoever.

Now, what do you think of that?

You’ve been sitting there slavishly waiting for this meter. You say, “Well, have you got a present time problem?”

Meter doesn’t react So you say, “Well, good. There’s no present time problem.” And you go on to the next question.

That is wrong. That’s wrong.

There must be some method of reiterating it at once. Even if it is, “Well, you don’t think of a present time problem now, them”

Got it? “Do you have a present time problem?” (No reaction on the meter.)

“Well, I guess there is no present time problem here then.”

That’s saying it twice, isn’t it?

Audience: Mm-hm.

Nobody even notices it So you haven’t invalidated his “No.”

But you watch that meter. You watch that needle.

Now, you’ve got absolutely — I know I’ve ARC broke all of you with me now and you figure, “Ron is mad at me and so forth. And he’s going to turn in my thetan and leave me on — he’s going to take me apart and leave me on the bench for seventy-two hours.”

But that’s not true. This is all for your own good.

Now listen: Watch the meter. Don’t look at the pc saying, “Is there a present time problem?” And then look at the meter. No, no, no! Don’t do that! That’s the wrong time to run TR 0.

The number of auditors I see catching the meter movement after it has happened are coundess. You talk to the pc while watching the meter. You look at the meter — make sure you have it in your lap — and then you say, “Do you have a present time problem?” Then look at the pc and smile politely, if you wish to.

But you’ve looked before and after the question, a long enough period to detea a motion of the E-Meter.

Now, you say to the pc, you say to the pc — looking at the meter — you say, “Do you have an ARC break? Okay. All right. Then you don’t have an ARC break”

And if it didn’t flick the first time, and it didn’t flick the second time, there is some possibility he doesn’t have one. But remember that There is just some possibility that he doesn’t have one. You have gone some slight distance in ruling it out You got that?

Audience: Yes.

And a very small distance, but you’ve gone some slight distance.

Now, if the pc is working well and is operating okay, let that suffice. Just ask him twice.

But this pc is running the like of which no pc ever ought to run. You sort of feel like going outside during the breaks and crying quietly against the pillars, you know?

Then, ask him a minimum, an absolute minimum of five times. And if you haven’t gotten a reaction by the fifth time, then suppose that the probability of your getting the ARC break right now are small. Not that there isn’t one, but just that the probabilities are small because the pc doesn’t react very well at this time on the meter.

I love these Security Checks that go on.

“Have you ever been a member of the Communist Party?”

Nothing happens to the machine.

So you say, “Well, he’s never been a member of the Communist Party.”

I swear you could run it on Khrushchev that way. The probability of this jerk being readable on an E-Meter is probably zero. But a good auditor could eventually get it to flick, by working it over left and right, and front and center, and turning it over and shoving it in his teeth and letting him see big autocue signs in front of his face, you know, like this, you know, “Are you a member of the Communist Party?” You see. “Concentrate on this sign.” Have a pointer; you read it a half a dozen times.

He’ll say finally, “He’s asking me if I am a member… Hey, he’s asking me if I am a member. .. Have I ever been a member of anything? A member, me . ..” You know? That’s what’s going on.

Now, they’ll just as glibly take this kind of a reaction. They’ll take a reaction quite reversewise to this, which is equally horrible. They’ll say, “Have you ever been a member of the Communist Party?”

And the thing drops. They say, “Ah ha! He has been a member of the Communist Party.” No, it is just dropping on the fact that he has been accused of being a member of the Communist Party.

Hardly anybody these days, with all the press publicity that these apes are getting, you see, doesn’t get some kind of a reaction on just the words “Communist Party,” one kind or another, except of course a communist.

Now, listen, as far as E-Meters are concerned, you’ve got to develop the reaction.

Now, let me tell you a couple of little things: Last fall I had a pc that I decided I’d shake some overts out of. And after working for about six or seven hours I managed to get the overts off this pc, to a large extent Boy, that was really slug. You know? No reaction. No reaction. No reaction. And then tick! Reaction, tick-tick.

“Now, are you sure that so-and-so, and so-and-so, and so-and-so?” Tick-tick-tick- tick-tick-tick — creak — dum.

Why? The questions being asked the pc are things the pc does not want to confront, and until you ask them often enough to run the confront up on them, the meter won’t register, of course.

Now, oh, months, months, months later — six, eight months later, I still knew there must be an overt on this pc. I spent two hours and finally got the meter to react Two hours!

The pc reacted mysteriously on the meter to various questions, but none of them were center, and none of it made very good sense. So, I finally got what the meter was reacting on, and got the overt and squared it around, and everything got very fine, and so forth, and the pc’s been sailing since.

Now, look at that, look at that Two hours, eight months later.

And you think you’re going to get this PTP do you, just by saying, “Well,” (looking at the pc brightly) ‘“Do you have a PTP?’ Now let’s see if the meter reacted? No, the meter hasn’t reacted, so the pc doesn’t have a PTP.”

That is not right! You’re a bunch of ruddy photographers. You’re developing the negative. And you develop that negative with questioning.

“Well, I’m awfully glad to see you don’t have a present time problem right now. Good. By the way, do you have any trouble running present time problems? Present time problems are pretty tough to run sometimes, aren’t they? Present time problems — who do you have present time problems with mostly?”

And all because you just know the pc isn’t running right and the tone arm — pc came in with a high arm, and left you with a low one. Something’s happened.

Oh, just beat it to death. Make them so damned tired of the whole subject of present time problems they break it down and say, “Yes. The bank manager just foreclosed.”

In other words, get them down to a point where they’ll actually confront this present time problem they are having.

Now, when it comes to immediate reactions of this character, you will get them by your detection of differences in the pc. Pc was running well, pc stops running well. Meter sits 4.5 from there on out Well, you either missed a present time problem or you laid in a whole series of ARC breaks and didn’t know it because you were auditing fairly well. Well, the pc thinks they’re ARC breaks. You got it? Pc thinks they’re ARC breaks.

Well, look, there’s only two things that can upset a case, and you’re awful lucky that this is a fact Given a process that has changed the case, then it can be a PTP or an ARC break. Got it?

So, if the case has ever run at all while you’re auditing the case and stops running, don’t assign it necessarily to this duplicative phenomenon and “It worked once so it mustn’t ever work again.” Pc will do that too. They’ll prevent a process from working. They’ll do that sort of thing. But the only thing which provokes them into doing it is a fancied ARC break or a big whammo PTP.

Now, another thing can happen that would be picked up actually, ordinarily, “Is it all right if I audit you?” would pick this up. It’ll show up the overts that they don’t want to tell you about.

And they ran a process yesterday, and an overt showed up during the night, and now they know about this overt, but they didn’t yesterday. And you get a little flick.

Oh, you’ve got to develop these things. You’ve got to be on the ball, you’ve got to see those flicks happen, and you’ve got to develop them. You understand? It’s got to be done.

Now, don’t settle for an odd or peculiar meter behavior.

What happens? You ask them the question and then they go off of it And you ask them the question and they go off of it And you ask them a question and they go off of it So that you get this kind of a picture: You ask them this question and you get no read, and you ask them — same question and you get a read, and you ask them the same question and you get no read. You got the idea? The thing isn’t softening up; it’s just that they’re dispersing. They confront it and then they don’t confront it And then they confront it and they don’t confront it And every time they come over close to confronting it, the meter reads. Got it?

But, every time they confront it, such a case bounces off of it.

And you say, “Well, it’s all flat now. Well, your present time problem, is it okay now? I mean, is it flat?” And look at the meter, you know — doesn’t move.

Oh, come off of it! Don’t ask them again, because on the second one it’s going to go bwom. Got it?

The meter reads only what the pc is slightly willing to confront.

And when they’ve got a big PTP and you’ve asked them to confront it by asking them if they have a PTP, it may be two or three minutes before they suddenly remember it and confront it You got that?

Now, the artistry of reading an E-Meter is the same as photography. If a picture has been taken on this negative, you put it in the developer, and you put it in the developer, and you put it in the developer, and you put it in the developer — maybe it’s just a blank piece of celluloid. Fine. No picture.

But it might take quite a little while before you see there’s an image on that piece of celluloid.

And you’d be amazed how bright this image can get, from a total null.

Don’t be suspicious, and don’t endure. Just get the PTPs and the ARC breaks and the sudden changes the pc has come up with that he hasn’t told you about Get those things, and by golly, you’ll all of a sudden find out you’re getting auditing done that you never got done before.

Now, very probably the bulk of you didn’t know this peculiarity about E-Meters. And you thought E-Meters were something that — like voltmeters. When you mm on 250 volts through a line a voltmeter will register 250 volts. Well, that’s because it is done with a simple click-click switch. You click the switch and the voltmeter reads 250 volts, and you click it off and the voltmeter does not register 250 volts. You got the idea?

Well, a pc has a more complicated switch, and it’s harder to find out whether it is on or off. That’s the only difference. You have to ask him and ask him, and sometimes ask him in various covert and strange ways, until you finally make up your mind that it is null.

Now, there isn’t a pc in the class I couldn’t develop into an ARC break reading on an E-Meter, during session.

I ran a session one time that ran like this — it was a test session. Every time the pc twitched, I said, “The pc’s got an ARC break.” I simply assumed this.

So I said, ‘What have I done wrong?”

Pc said, “Nothing. You haven’t done anything wrong.”

Well, the pc developed a little comm lag, so I assumed that the pc had an ARC break. See, I just made these — these assumptions, just because the pc all of a sudden couldn’t face his bank. Just because the pc was twitching. Just because the pc looked like he had havingness down, and so forth, see? So I’d say, “What have I done wrong?”

And the pc would flounder around and flounder around and finally find something, and maybe it had happened three, four minutes before and they’d passed it by, but they could — always found something. And the havingness of this pc stayed up without running Havingness.

Now, the other answer to the thing is every time the pc twitches or doesn’t run right, to run Havingness. You could run either one, don’t you see? Whatever Havingness command you were running, you could run that Havingness command every time a pc didn’t run right, or the pc started to dramatize, or the pc started to get upset, or the pc started to do anything that’s offbeat from just smoothly answering the auditing command, if you just at that moment said, “That was the last auditing question.” (Not even a bridge.) “That was the last auditing question. Thank you very much. We are now going to run some Havingness. Point out the wall,” or whatever it is. Got it? Just bang. Just like that, see? You’ll find the pc will come right out of it.

Now, the other side of the coin is the ARC break significance side. See, you can run the havingness side of an ARC break, or you can run the significance side.

Now, actually, you can run out a PTP with confront — Alternate Confront A PTP will run out with Alternate Confront without you even really knowing about it But if he hasn’t told you about it it may take the predear a long time to find it and run it Got the idea?

All right, you could hold up a pc’s havingness by running off all the ARC breaks. How many ARC breaks occur in a session? For a critical pc, they are something on the order of seven or eight hundred. You got it? Oh, you didn’t think it was that high, did you? Well that’s how many it is.

And if every time the pc twitched, or every time the pc said, “Nyarrh” or every time the pc suddenly gave a long comm lag or each time the pc seems to be a little bit fogged in or doesn’t seem to be alert, if you assumed at that instance there was an ARC break, and got the ARC break, and got the pc to actually hand it to you — it takes quite a little plugging sometimes, smoothly — pc gives it to you, all of a sudden you’ll find the pc will continue to run the process brighdy alert, totally relaxed. It is quite interesting. Havingness goes down on a pc to the degree that the pc has ARC breaks.

Now, we’re taking the sixth off the seventh in this, so I would advise you to run Havingness instead. Just assume that a circuit has clicked.

And what pulls in circuits? Havingness drops. Havingness drops, in comes a circuit.

So, the second the pc does something, anything, that you don’t think is optimum in the session — you know, long comm lags, starts to dope off, starts to yawn, twitches his leg a little bit, just say, “Well, that’s the last command. Havingness.” Got it?

And you’re going to be fascinated. You’re going to be fascinated that your tone arm will start up again.

Now, if a pc is very bad off, has tremendous long lots of ARC breaks in their background, and you try to run an ARC break as a significance off the case, you’ll get the ARC break but you will also get a lot of new motivators and various kinds — you’ll get overts, but then you’ll get fifty motivators for every overt they get rid of, you got the idea?

Well, this doesn’t fit with our present theory, right now, to run the significance out of the ARC break. Got it?

Audience: Mm-bm.

Run Havingness.

Now, I don’t care if it’s havingness — sort of a confront on the auditor, or what it is that you’re running to run Havingness at this particular time, but the truth of the matter is, that you will get further if you do that Right?

Now, if any case started running — you will have to do this with significance — if any case started running on a presession, and then stopped running — ah, let’s find out what happened during the running of it when it was successful, during the period that intervened until now that was an ARC break or a PTP. Let’s find out what happened in there and let’s get that straightened out and get the thing running again.

Now, you can do that with a significance. There’s no reason why you couldn’t do it with a significance, because you can start that thing running again rather easily.

Now, you’ve got to learn this sometime. You might as well learn it now. And I am sorry if I’ve given you an ARC break on the subject of it, but if I have — if I have, why, make the most of it. Consider that you’ve got a motivator by which your overt can be on the pc’s case.

Okay?

Thank you very much.