Thank you.

Ah, that’s very good, that’s very good. I thank you, my goal thanks you, my auditor thanks you.

All right. Got some announcements here right off the bat; we’re going to christen the new building as soon as I get back, but you are going to be using the chapel here in just a few days, as soon as they get a floor in it, why, you’ve got it. And we’ll have a bit of a party when I come back and because we’ll have some space we’ll have some party there for that, now and then, on a weekend. And we’ve also got a canteen planned out there, small size and a few things to make life more livable for you. I am leaving Thursday on the Queen Elizabeth for America and I’ll return here, be back here the seventeenth of September.

Now, I’ve given you an extra lecture so that your Thursday unit doesn’t mess up. But actually you are only losing two weeks of lecture because one of them is blank anyway. Okay?

Audience: Yes.

Is it all right with thee to do this?

Audience: Yes.

All right, thank you.

I always ask the kids is it okay if I go, you know and they always think it over very carefully and tell me yes.

All right. And the Washington congress goes off on Labor Day and so forth and I’ll be saying hello for you and so forth and I’ll tell them how good you are so it’s up to you not to make a liar out of me. Okay? All right.

Okay. We have some new students amongst us. Probably some of the older students are already telling the new students about the-they should have been here in the old days when … You know, you know. I’ll bet-I’ll bet this has already occurred, „You think it’s tough now, well, you ought to have been here last June.“ I suppose this is already happening.

All right, we’ve got two lectures tonight-both of them are quite fundamental. The first lecture is the „Dynamic Assessment,“ the other one is the „Basics of Auditing.“ The other one, depending on how embracive the material is and that sort of thing, will be a lecture which you better take to heart because you will be using this very lecture in training students.

But this particular lecture, this first lecture, lecture number one, Saint Hill Special Briefing Course-date?

Audience: 21st, 22nd.

Somebody says the 22nd, somebody says the 21st.

Audience: 21st.

Twenty-first, all right, thank you. Had me mixed up there for a minute. I was in two days. All right, the twenty-first September, October, December, what’s the date?

Audience: August. 21st of August.

August, the 21st of August. All right, AD 12. Thank you very much.

The way I start my stories to the children, Saint Hill, England, planet Earth, solar system, this galaxy in this part of this universe, see. Oncet uponet a timet.

All right, Dynamic Assessment. Now, there has been a considerable advance made and I gave you the Tiger Drill. I told you at the time when I gave you the Tiger Drill that I really didn’t much like releasing it. But you needed it, it’s released. All right. Similarly, you’ve been walking on my heels with Dynamic Assessment. I’ve got the whole story here on Dynamic Assessment all the way down the line.

The first thing you should realize about this is that ordinary Routine 3GA, exactly as you have had it a week or so ago - a couple of weeks ago when I gave you the full rundown on the thing-that is totally valid, there is nothing wrong with it anyplace at all. The ‘Tiger Drill can be a little bit improved by which you null the goals, but I’ll give you that improvement in this lecture.

Now, but that’s perfectly valid. You go out and you say to somebody, „Do 850 goals.“ You find the goals list is still charged. You ask him, „Who would oppose your goal?“ you know, and get that four-way list and get, „What goal might you have?“ as a separate list. And you just use all of these things and then you just start from goal one and you go on through and in a large majority of cases you’ll find the pc’s goal before you’ve hit the mark 500. Okay? Providing you do a good job of nulling. You understand that’s a perfectly valid procedure. That’s in the can.

Now, another one is this: There is a fancy way of finding a goal and this fancy way is by Dynamic Assessment. And this will be done by a Class IV Auditor.

You could probably find a goal on anybody, even though he was riding 8,785 goal-type case, don’t you see. I mean you could have him run goals and goals and goals and write goals and goals and the paper is accumulating. You use a small shopping cart, you know, coming back and forth from the auditing sessions in order to carry all the goals list, you know. Thing has to be put on IBM microfilm, you know, special projectors to read the stuff off; otherwise, it would take up the space of the Library of Congress or something like that, you know.

Now, this character-the goal is almost impossible to find on him and that comprises a large percentage of the cases, about 25 percent. You are not going to find any goal on this character until you’ve gone out. So 3GA would find the goal on this pc. You understand that. But it is becoming uneconomical, see, in terms of time. And the difference between these two pcs is specifically and directly this: that the goal of the pc that is going to take you a long, long while, you see, in terms of hundreds of hours of auditing, to find on 25 percent of the cases is an overt-a direct overt-type goal. In other words it’s an overt goal that is directly overt. You see.

And the other is an inadvertent overt goal. You get the idea? The inadvertent overt goal is very easy to find. But the one that is a direct overt goal is very difficult to find.

Now, you think that the wording of the goal is what makes the goal difficult to find. Let’s take such a goal as „Not to be located,“ you see. And you offhand would say at once that this was the most difficult type of goal following Dianetie-phrase reasoning, you see, therefore the goal would duck, whereas as a matter of fact that does not hold true. Those goals very often turn up in the first hundred goals listed, by experience and are not the difficult goal to find.

The difficult goal to find is the direct overt goal, it’s a direct overt goal. And the pc who has this can be told on the meter because in the process of auditing he commonly has a rock slam turn on which is wider than an inch or two. And that is that pc. That’s 25 percent of the pcs and that pc has a direct overt goal-wide rock slam.

You run a little bit of O/W on this pc, you are prepchecking this pc, you get a wide rock slam. Well, actually, this wide rock slam is not because your ordinary pc has done something personally to you as an auditor. You could have this as a freak.

Let’s say you are auditing your girlfriend or your boyfriend and you’ve got a dial-wide slam starts turning on and they don’t have a directly overttype goal at all. No, they’ve just been two-timing you, that’s all. Now, you get that overt off against you, personally, the auditor. It has to be against you the auditor to come into that classification. It must have been done to you personally, see, and you will get that dial-wide slam. But they’ve done something pretty wild and that they’re not admitting. It’s not something they are just trying to keep you from finding out, you know, nothing mild like this you know, but they were the person who foreclosed your mortgage and threw you out on the street, see. You get the idea, they’ve been having illicit affairs. They have a prison record and don’t want you to know it because if it came to be known of this it would do something to you, the auditor. You get the difference here.

Now, that’s what this means. You just get that off. You keep testing for that as a direct overt and if a direct overt doesn’t exist there, you see, or if the dial-wide slam turns on any other, this is a better test, on any other thing than you, commonly, why this is a direct overt-type goal.

The way to test this is the simplest thing in the world. You say, „What have you done to me? What overt have you committed against me?“ And you fish around for a while along this type of line and you get a slam. Well, that’s just the person has got a fantastic overt against you, personally. But this also can miss as a test, because you might be included in the goal. You got it?

Now, it is so infrequent that the overt is against you, personally, as the auditor, even though you are living with the person and everything else, it is so infrequent that this is the case that it can be neglected. Now, this is getting much simpler isn’t it? It can actually be neglected in the main course of auditing, but only must be remembered on the off chance that it exists.

And the error that you could make is not very serious. It is not serious at all, you see, because you would simply take a course of action with this person and nothing would work out. You just couldn’t get to first base with anything. Remember that there is another chance that the person has a fantastically direct overt against you, personally. Got it?

But oddly enough you could make up your mind to that far too easily, see. Because there is another factor saving it, you see, that it takes pretty heavy charge to get that much slam, you see, on a needle-takes pretty heavy charge. And even though the person had an overt against you directly you probably could find the goal anyhow. Do you see all the logic behind this? Now, it all sums down to this, that you could sort this out, which one it was; but having sorted it out, you would only know this: that you had to prepcheck the pc more carefully than otherwise.

And now wait a minute, the goal could also be found, the goal could also be found on the dial-wide slam proposition by a Dynamic Assessment even though the person had this much overt against you, providing you could read the person’s meter. You understand, providing you could and of course you can’t. You see, you can’t read that person’s meter. Person’s meter is not responsive. Do you follow this? Do you follow this out?

Audience: Yes.

So although I’m giving you all this logic, it doesn’t matter. I don’t like to give you a statement which is a partial truth, see, so I’m giving you all the data back of this. You could just say for all working principles that any person who turns on at anytime during his processing, a quarter, half-a-dial slam - you do a Dynamic Assessment type goal and you are going to find the goal easily - Got that? If you are able to read the meter at all you can do a Dynamic Assessment, you understand?

If you cant read the meter at all and it never responds at the right points and so forth, you must also assume the person has overts on you.

But then, of course, what are you doing running a non-prepcheck pc on a goals run? If you’d prepared the pc properly, you would have found this all out anyhow, see. You see how this is? So I just don’t want to give you a half-truth.

But for working purposes you don’t have to worry about it-you get any kind of slam, I don’t care if it’s only this wide or if it’s this wide, see, I don’t care if it’s this wide or only this wide or if it’s hitting both pins-you just take a look at that, that has occurred to the pc-just know then that your chances of finding the goal easily, by 3GA usual-I mean the commonest - not the commonest but the simplest method because you probably all will be using Dynamic Assessments on all pcs, see. I’m just telling you the limitation and you just know that you’re in for a hell of a run, that’s all.

But listen, on some of those cases ordinary Routine 3 old-time Goals Assessment found the proper goal on some of them, very small percentage of them. So it probably scales it down to about 20 percent you would sweat for ahhhhh, see and then oh, my God, months later you’d come up with a goal. You get the idea? By ordinary Goals Assessment.

Now, this is the other side of the coin. All pcs can have their goals found by Dynamic Assessment, see. It is not limited to those pcs. I’m just telling you the pcs that the possibilities of locating the goal are very remote-except by Dynamic Assessment. But now on Dynamic Assessment this makes it even more easy. You are talking about a 100 percent of your pcs. You can use it on all of them if you can use it. If you can pull this card trick, why it is the fast road to finding goals. This is the high, fast, Ml superexpress, no crossroad highway to finding goals. See, this is fast.

It is fast, but it is also fatal if an auditor were to do this on a pc and bleed all the charge out and get all of the data and not turn it over to his next auditor and not sort of pin it on the pc’s lapel, you’ve had it. Just that! You’ve just had it, that’s all. You’ve got to meter this pc now and straighten this whole thing out by recalling the sessions the pc has had to get the data back.

Now I’ll tell you one of the methods of getting the data back. We knew that a pc who just left here as a second-goal Clear-we knew a pc had run Clear on a goal and we didn’t even have the goals list and we didn’t remember what the goal is. So I told her auditor to do a list of goals on this pc in which this word occurred which we knew the pc had been run on. That was all the data we had, see. And we did a list of, I don’t know how many goals were done. I said fifty. I don’t know how many got done. And then they assessed this list and they found this goal back. Well, of course, it was the most obvious one. Well, we couldn’t take a chance, don’t you see? And we found that goal and then we went ahead and ran and listed that goal and the pc went Clear on it. Don’t you see? The right goal had been found.

But remember this, you desensitize the case. You desensitize the case terribly by doing this Dynamic Assessment. Do you realize that by removing the charge on these lines, that is the only time you are ever going to get that data at the end line. You never are going to be able to do it again; it is a one shot. You understand, you are going to be able to do it once.

Now, the odd part of it is, is you can’t do it once wrong. You can do it wrong a thousand times and the charge will still be on the bank. You see this now? You could do it wrong all you want to. You are not going to bleed any charge off the bank. Get the wrong dynamic and the wrong item and the wrong this, the case will just simply be a little more ARC breaky to audit, that’s the final end result of that.

But do it right and then don’t make the data known. Do it-do it right, find the dynamic, find the item we are looking for on this Dynamic Assessment, find all these steps and then get a goals list and don’t find the goal. If we’ve gone this far, aghhh, this poor pc has had it. If we don’t make this data known to organizations or auditors or central clearing point for such data, some pc is going to get hung, man, because there is just no recovering it, that’s it. You follow me? You can’t do this again.

It is something on the order of going up on a tower and pouring all the water out of the tower and there is no pump to ever get any water back up to it again except another 200 trillion years of living. Now, you go up and you empty all the water out of the tower and you are supposed to find the key at the bottom of the barrel. Next auditor comes along he can’t even find the tower, much less the key, if he doesn’t have the data that was found by this, see.

So your auditor’s reports must note with great care-now let me impress this upon you-note with great care whether or not certain phenomena such as rock slam dwindling out was present. And you must know what a dwindling-out rock slam is, because you can do it wrong and have the rock slam occur on the first part of the list and then vanish because you are not on the list. Just like any wrong goal practically will list the first hundred items without killing the pc and even doing him a little bit of good. After that, the second hundred throws him sort of into a state of where he isn’t quite sure whether he wants to go on living or not. The third hundred kills him and the fourth hundred, if you can get him to sit still to run them, of course, you bury him. That’s just that, see.

It looks awful good there for a moment sometimes on the beginning of a Dynamic Assessment or list or something like that. We get a dizzzza and we say, „That’s it,“ you know. And we go to the next step and nothing happens.

So you want to make all these things clear in your auditor’s report that you did a Dynamic Assessment and you found a hell of a slam on the „physical universe“ and you couldn’t get anyplace else. See, make that very clear. Or, if you got someplace else that-as you were listing the items derived from „physical universe“ - that you got a dwindling slam or you got a slam which persisted very widely for the first ten items and then vanished and never went down to a dirty needle.

Never went down to a dirty needle, you know. Never got smaller and smaller and smaller and smaller and smaller and smaller and mash. You saw one of those on my television demonstration. You saw a type of list and it went bwow and then it didn’t do a thing, see. That was one of those. See, wrong line, see. I went in the wrong corner of the slot. You were watching there actually research auditing sessions, not demonstrations, see. Trying to find out about this. Thought you could learn from it, too. Hoped it would come out all right.

Since that time I’ve really done some auditing, see. Man, the engrams have been flying, you know. I don’t know how much auditing has happened since you last saw the last demonstration last Friday, but it’s, oh, I don’t know, must be something on the order of about-what is it about thirty-five hours, thirty hours, thirty-five hours? Almost as much auditing as there were days.

And getting this thing taped out. Getting this thing grooved because - it’s always before I take trips-it was much more vital when I was still riding airplanes.

You know why I’m not riding airplanes? It’s just too much responsibility. It’s not whether you’d lose me, you see, but it’s just my responsibility, see. My responsibility is just a little too heavy. And furthermore, I think that a thirty-six thousand-foot fall is very hard on Rolleiflex cameras. Of course, they are shedding airplanes out of the sky these days something like raindrops in England. And, oh, you have to wear steel umbrellas lately where they are crashing airplanes, you know. But it is awfully hard on my cameras and I know you wouldn’t want me to lose any more cameras. I have lost one camera for the sake of Dynamic Assessment. You actually lost two and we don’t want to lose any more. We can afford so much for research, but beyond that …

All right. Now, let me give you a packaged statement of the person you must run, in case somebody got lost here or he got confused on it, the person you must run a Dynamic Assessment on.

I’m going to hear some-hear some whistles here in a minute and „Oh, I see, oh yeah, what do you know, huh, yeah, that’s so true,“ you know, that kind of a reaction it is. Just listen now.

The wide rock slamming needle turning on once in a while or now and then, what-but which has been known to turn on on this pc in auditing. Got it? Under all those classifications, see. It turns on and you’ve seen it. An auditor tells you it has turned on, don’t you see. It’s on a lot. It’s on now and then. It’s on rarely. Just however we’ve learned about this wide rock slam needle, you know, heavy, searching, hunting, banging, crashing needle, you know. Doesn’t matter how we learned about it. You needn’t try to find a goal on that pc by any other method than the Dynamic Assessment method because you are going to lay an egg. You are going to be up there about three thousand goals up the line and you are still sweating. Got it?

But remember, don’t worry about it too much if you can only do old 3GA only, see, don’t worry about it too much because a certain percentage of pcs, a very small percentage of those pcs, still have found their goals early on the list. You see that. So you are not taking your life in your hands.

Now, that’s type 1, see, wide rock slamming needle, known, reported, we don’t care how, wide rock slamming needle.

Number 2, a pc who is unresponsive to the auditor on the meter. You say, „Are you willing to talk to me about your difficulties?“

And the pc says, „Myah, I guess so, yeah I’ll talk about my difficulties.“

And you don’t get any knock on the thing and you get suspicious and you sort of put the meter aside for the moment.

And you say, „Well are there any difficulties that you aren’t willing to talk to me about?“ Just check them over carefully and you might …

„Oh well,“ and he gives you an automaticity. Naaahhhh, you might say it’s a pc in a chronic ARC break state, unresponsive on a meter. The pc is too remote. There is no impingement can be made on this pc.

Now, it doesn’t matter how good you are, this is a rare piece; not-not too rare but this is a special class of pc. You can never get a rudiment in on him, anything. The clue and key to this pc is everything is suppressed. We’ll go into that later. Pc’s got everything suppressed and suppresses the auditor and suppresses this and suppresses that. The clue to this is you ask the pc-you can find out what this pc is doing and establish the suppressed pc rather easily-and you say, „When I say there, there, there to you, what do you do?“ Because the pc is seldom answering you.

„Well, what do I do?“ Pc doesn’t react to steering, you see. You say, „What do I do?“ Pc says, „What do I do? Well, well, I throw aside those that you are saying because they couldn’t be it.“ And you know that’s quite a few pcs. And the only thing you have to know about is the pc doesn’t answer up to steering. That’s all you have to know about it. That takes care of your whole Class II pc here of this type, see. That’s the whole lot. They just don’t answer up to steering.

You say, „Are you willing to talk to me about your difficulties?“ and you get a tick, tiny tick. And you say, „Yes, there, there, what difficulty aren’t you willing to be talking about?“ you know. „There, there, there, there.“ Pc doesn’t say anything. „There, there,“ pc doesn’t say anything. You say, „There, there, there,“ you say, „What are you looking at?“ The pc tells you something. Get the idea?

Now, the normal pc, when you say, „There, there.“

Pc, „Oh well, that, yeah, well, I don’t know what that is, you know. I’ve got a picture of a bed, I don’t know what that is. Oh I know, I know, that was where I murdered the policeman. Yeah, I guess that’s the sup.. .“ That’s that, see, they give it to you, see. Give it to you as a result of the steering.

This other type of pc never gives you anything as a result of steering. So watch the steering. Keep your weather eye open on this pc. Pc doesn’t react to steering, the clue to the case is suppress and the only thing you’ve got to do with this case is run suppress till it runs out of the pc’s ears and you can make the meter operate, goal or no goal. Got it?

All right. Now, your next class of pc is a pc who turns on a dirty needle, ever. I see you like that. Now, of course, you will get a slightly tick-tickety needle on a missed withhold, you will get on a Failed to reveal, on almost any pc you will get a tickety-tick once in a blue moon. But a pc who regularly gets a tickety-tick has not got his goal found. It’s not been found, it isn’t on the list, hasn’t been elucidated and is nowhere to be located.

Well, that was a surprise. I told you you’d say ha-ha-ha, I didn’t expect you to laugh. You probably don’t believe me. Any pc around whose needle is going bzzt-bzzt, particularly on the other rudiments, now that’s for sure on the other rudiments, but any pc whose needle you have to work to clean up because it is a dirty needle, you have not got the pc’s goal on the list or the pc’s goal is so buried and so suppressed and it’s been found a long time ago or something, but the probability is it hasn’t been found at all.

A good test, which you could never find out, by the way, the data is never available, is the pc who had had a goal found sometime previously; it read with an instant dirty needle. Any goal that reads with an instant dirty needle is not only not the goal, but it indicates that the goal has not been found. It doesn’t exist on the list and has not been enunciated to the pc-by the pc to anybody, see?

Does this apply to your pc? Any pcs you are auditing at the present moment ever turn on a dirty needle? Well, that pc’s goal is not on the list.

Life becomes fascinating doesn’t it? What does it take to make a dirty needle turn on? Well, brother, it is something like the power or force of Krakatoa which, when it blew its head gave the world red sunsets from the Sunday-Monday line clear on around and back for three years, see. There’s power, there’s force underneath that, see. It is somewhat like trying to sit on a plain lid on a superheated boiler with the steam accumulating, see, and as that comes up and hits the underside of the thing you’ll get this little phenomenon known as a dirty needle, see. It’s not that the pc is feeling upset or something like that, it is that the pc is definitely and desperately suppressed with magnitude and then they are holding charge on that that would blow a nova, see. That’s charge.

Now, the more goofy the pc’s needle is, now let’s take an E-Meter Essentials, the more pattern a needle develops, the more charge is on the goals line. And a vaguely-well, a pc whose goal is on the list or a pc whose goal is very accessible or a pc’s goal is very easy to audit or something like this-never gets a tick or a tack. You’d have to put him into the most remarkable state, you’d have to run the most weirdly offbeat processes to finally turn on a bzzt, and then you’d only turn it on very briefly.

But this pc who gets a little missed withhold-they want to sneeze and they don’t sneeze, you know. And the needle goes bzzt-bzzt-bzzt, a little tiny, dirty, rock slam, zzt-zzt-zzt-zzt-zzt-zzt. You say, „All right. What withhold have I missed on you?“

„Well I wanted to sneeze.“ And it disappears, see.

Why look, a sneeze doesn’t turn on that much dirty needle oh-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho. Uh-uh, takes more than that, man. It takes something like enough force and power to blow the whole planet to pieces, see, sitting down underneath the bank for a person just to think that they don’t want to sneeze and turn on a dirty needle because these are a series of reversing currents in the reactive bank. How jammed in does a fellow have to get?

Now, how about the fellow, now that boy-that boy, you could probably 3GA him, Routine and find his goal, see. You probably still could do that rather easily.

But how about this guy? You get a quarter-of-a-dial rock slam and you say, „What was that, what was that, what’s that, what-what-what-what’s happened?“ You know, „What-what-what’s the matter?“ you know.

He says, „Well, I was suppressing a sneeze.“ There is only one method of finding that character’s goal, by Dynamic Assessment, unless somebody has a shot in the pants with luck, see.

Find my goal the other night, one of my-for that session one of the session goals was „to be lucky.“ And we were. First time I ever put it up as a session goal.

Now, look I’m probably wasting a lot of your time on going into the ramifications of this and that, but I’m just trying to tell you who this is - should be runnable on and who it’s best on. But remember it can be run on anybody.

Now, exactly what do you do? Now, let’s go into the one, two, three, four, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang. Well, the first thing you do is you get the pc to write 850 goals and then you strip the list one way or the other. And then you save that carefully and you save any goals list the pc has. You got all that? He does that on his own, bang, that’s just 3GA, see.

All right. Now, if you are a goals-finding auditor and you just get this pc-you get a pc by the scruff of the neck and you’ve got him-somebody else has prepared him, they’ve prepchecked him and everything like that. You set him down and you just go right in and you do this action, bang, bang, bang, see, you do this action. You make him build the wheel of life, see. Make him build the wheel of life. You give him a lot of samples. You give him a basic wheel that’s got eight parts. That’s just your eight dynamics, see. It’s a lot of little pies can be put into this thing and the reason you use a wheel sort of a thing, not that it is easy to assess, as it is not, but it gives him the idea of entirety. It’s good symbolism. And you give him some sample lists. You give him some samples, you know, like there’s these, you know. There’s sex divides into family, children, marriage, wives, so forth and other things you might think of, you see, other things you might think of, you see. And he can draw all these things out and he can find these things here. Get this?

Some old-time Scientologists say, „Well, what are the dynamics according to you?“ And he gives you thirty, bang, that’s items on it. That’s simple. The raw meat pc, mysticism rears its ugly head, see. The whole track opens and gapes, you see. You say, „Do an entirety of existence.“ He won’t even be able to embrace an entirety of existence unless you give him some symbolism of some kind to help him. You say, „This is the whole of existence, this thing. And it’s divided into eight segments here, as you can see and there is all this and that. Complete it and here’s some samples on the back. We’ll give you some of them,“ see. And you can draw one up. Give him a whole bunch of samples. You know, divide marriage up into homes and cooking and, you know, anything. And he just goes ahead and he fills this out. Well, I don’t care whether he does that in session or not, see. It’s a good thing when you first hear of him to go around and hand this to him with all of its directions on it. He’s supposed to complete the wheel of life before he comes in and talks to you, see. You can sit there with your turban on, you see I don’t care whether you call it this or not, I’m gagging to some degree, but it’s just your old eight dynamics, see.

But there is-you want some additional segments. And it’s a good thing to have a whole list of them of various, optional segments that might be part of it according to him, see. It’s a good thing and-but coax him at the same time to believe that there might be a lot more missing. Sort of give him the idea that unless he solves this puzzle, all of his auditing may be held up, which is absolutely true. You tell him to solve this puzzle and get all of it on there, see.

An old-time Scientologist has already solved the puzzle. He’s thought over this and he’s sat around and he’s said, „Well, let’s see, there was four in the first book and then there was four more and I think there are also this many and these really divide this way.“ And he’s given you several subdivisions of the sub-divisions, see. And he’s got his own ideas of what these things are and he’s just laid his case in your lap. Savvy?

I made a mistake the other day. The reason you didn’t see a good session is because I didn’t take the pc’s list. Don’t often make an error. For Christ’s sakes profit by it.

All right. Now, look-a-here. You got this thing now, see and you assess by rock slam and you just go around this thing calling everything off that is on it until you get a rock slam. And you go round and round and round on this thing, see. And it’s just Assessment by Elimination, just that. The ones that are in, you go over them a second time, the same way you do a Prehav Scale and everything else.

But the auditing command for this assessment is entirely different than an old Dynamic Assessment. And it is not a common Dynamic Assessment. It’s overts against, so you say, „Think of doing bad things to „ or „Consider committing overts against dynamic,“ see. And you just keep that up, keep that up, keep that up, keep that up. You got it? And „Consider committing overts to sex. Consider committing overts to children. Consider committing overts to marriage. Consider committing overts to home and family,“ whatever he’s put down there, you see, as these sub-divisions, you know. And you go round and round and round on this thing and you mark each one to its reaction-that reacts. But you are looking there, not for a necessarily instant reaction, but one in the vicinity of it.

And I’ll tell you something. The more-if his item is on there, you’ll get instant rock slams and if his item isn’t, you won’t. Got it? Isn’t that a nice indicator? I do you a favor every once in a while, see. You are not going to get an instant rock slam if his item is off there. The read is late and scrubby and all this sort of thing. The item is off that list. So if you see that this isn’t instant rock slam, don’t break your heart. Go around on this thing and if the first couple of times around you haven’t got something rock slamming; takes maybe about three times around to do the whole thing till you know for sure, my God is this thing „spirit,“ you know. You hit spirit, it’s bzzt, boom, boom, knack, knack, boom, boom, spurp, spurp, blurp, you know. Like one of these electronic plays you hear, the ions going around inside the tube, you know. Crash-crash-crash-crash, it is unmistakable. It is something like the difference between driving on a rough country road and hitting a tree, you know. You can tell the difference.

If you don’t get that kind of a reaction after about the third time around and haven’t already made up your mind, you better get him to do the wheel of life again and just pat him on the back and say, „Well, son you haven’t solved this and I think you’d better just take this up and you’d better consider this more,“ and so forth. You can let him consider it in the session, but why waste your time. You could say, „Now, let’s get down to business here. There are eight basic dynamics, you realize that, according to Hubbard there are eight basic dynamics.“ What you’ve got to do is correct him on this because there are obviously more. What are they? Now, you’ve obviously left one out here. Give him another list of things to study like Webster’s International Dictionary, anything you want to.

Now, there will probably be lots of tricks of the trade as to how to get this wheel of life out of the pc, but everything else depends on making sure that’s complete. Okay? Everything depends, because what you are going to get if you follow through an incomplete list of the dynamics is they will all come down to little dzzzs-dzzzs-dzzzs-dzzzs, and then they all go out and then maybe a dirty needle stays on everything. And then you say, „Well this dirty needle is more than the rest so we will list it.“ And the whole thing lists to a little dirty needle and you get down to the end, you’ve got a little dirty needle and there’s a little dirty needle and he gets a rock slam, there’s a little dirty needle and you ask him a question, he gets a little dirty needle and … You know.

It’s definitely laundry work to hand, see, and all of that is caused because the dynamic that you want is not on this wheel. That whole phenomena is caused by just that. There is a piece of life that he thinks is an integral section of life that he hasn’t put down.

Now, the odd part of it is he may not think of it without some suggestions, so some lists will sometimes be necessary. Maybe if you could divide marriage up into thirty parts. „Which one of these are actually parts of marriage?“ you see. You know, I mean, second dynamic into thirty parts, „Which one of these are actually parts of the second dynamic?“ you know. Let him choose one or two, because he’s going to be too random for us to make a patent basic list. He’s going to be too random.

You’d be surprised but toothpicks will be a necessary dynamic on some pc. Toothpicks, that’s the seventh dynamic, yes. Maybe so, but if it is, man, will that assess out. You get the rock slam on it. It’s an integral part of life. Life consists of God and self and sex and he’s not sure about mankind or species or living things of the physical universe or that sort of thing, but toothpicks, see, there-that’s what life consists of. And he’ll give you this item.

Now, what do you do with this item? Now, look, don’t monkey with it if you haven’t got that item. That item will sit there and rock slam. You are not going to wear the rock slam out of it as long as the pc stays in-session and he isn’t all ARC breaky and so forth. He can even ARC break and you still get the rock slam. It’s a nice, hefty rock slam. Everything else eventually disappears and the whole reaction goes into this thing. It’s usually a couple of divisions, three divisions, somebody with a decent needle, you see. It’s a nice, nice, heavy atch-atch-atch-atch-ach-ach-ach-ach-ach. You read him the next one to it, nothing. It’s also instant. Bang-bang-bang-bang-bang, bang-bang-bang-bang-bang, you see. „Physical universe.“ Bang-bang-bang-bang-bang. „Physical universe.“ Bang-bang-bang-bang-bang. „Spirits, God, self, sex,“ psst. That’s one time around, „Sex,“ psst. And then, „Physical universe.“ Bang-bang-bang-bang-bang-bang-bang. You got the idea? Unmistakable. It’s not one of these equivocal things. No matter how lousy the needle is, this will do.

Now, something else I should tell you is it doesn’t matter how lousy the pc’s needle is to do this. It just doesn’t matter. You should get him into session somehow or another, but it really doesn’t matter how lousy his needle is because you are going to address this subject, he’s going to have a lousy needle. Doesn’t matter how clean and whistle clean his needle was before you brought up this nasty subject of the wheel of life, his needle is now going to be dirty and you start assessing it, it’s going to be a mess. You got it?

All right. You take that one you found and this is what you do with it. You say, „What represents the dynamic you found (it’s the one that rock slammed) to you?“ And you just make a list of this and you go on down and you make a list of this and this is the way it ought to look. And if it doesn’t look-it can look three ways. Everything is dirty needle. That’s wrong. These items as you list them each one goes bzzt. He says these, you know, bzzt, bzzt, bzzt. It’s undiminishing. It never diminishes, never gets smaller, never gets less. Little tiny dirty-well, you did a lousy Dynamic Assessment in the first place for that to have happened. The dynamic wasn’t on the list. You went and guessed at it out of desperation or you did something corny, see. Something wrong was done at that point.

Now, the next action is, is it goes, (and this is also a wrong one) it goes crash, crash, crash, crash, for the first five items and then you don’t have anything. Big rock slam for a few items and then you don’t have anything. Well, that’s also wrong, so you haul off of that one.

No, the exact proper phenomenon is big rock slam, slightly less, slightly less, slightly less, slightly less, slightly less, slightly less, diminishing each item he gives you. He may give you a couple of null items, but the next hot item that is on the list you’ve got bzzt, bang, brrr, bang, brrr, bang, brr, bang, br, bng, tick, tick, nothing. Got the idea? It’s almost like going down a river which has got less and less water in it and you finally go aground when you are at the end. See the idea.

In other words, you steer into this thing called the wheel of life-the dynamics-you steer into this thing and you find a channel and you go down through this channel and it’s wide, rock slam all the way down this channel, see. And you get to the end of that list of „What represents „ and you shouldn’t have anything left. There should be no reaction to the question „What represents dynamic?“ There should be no reaction to dynamic. There should be no reaction to anything, don’t you see? You run that totally . . . „Do you have any more items? Is the list complete?“ All this kind of thing, you see. That’s gone, that’s dead now.

The list is relatively short. It certainly seldom will exceed, I think you’ll find in actual practice, a couple of hundred items. That would be a rather hefty list, see.

All right and that’s gone, but it sort of dwindled away, don’t you see. It is sort of like going down a cone. It just dwindled away and got to be nothing, see the charge was less and less. In other words the phenomenon of bleeding charge off of this thing is definitely present.

When you see this you’ll say, „Well, how did Ron know that?“ you know. Well, I’ll ask the same question.

Anyhow, our next action now is a little unexpected. And this is all new stuff now. You take the item, you assess the thing by elimination and you’ll get this nice, big, rock slam back, but it won’t be quite so big. And one of them will rock slam. You do it by elimination, you don’t do it by Tiger Drill or anything like that. One of them rock slams and that thing is it. There shouldn’t be any question in your coco but what-that is it.

Meantime, you’ve found the dynamic. For God’s sakes write it on an auditor’s report in capital letters so it can be seen, so it doesn’t get lost anyplace, because no auditor coming in your wake is ever going to find it again because you found it by bleeding the charge and the charge is now gone. Okay?

Now, you do the next action, see. First the dynamic, then you’ve listed the dynamic. Then you assess by elimination on that list and you find this item which is now rock slamming and now you take that item and you say, „What represents that item to you?“ And you do another list and that will do the same thing. That will cone down and it will be rather slight. This list is much less, probably less lengthy, less charged and it should dwindle away too and leave one item in it rock slamming. And maybe it’s the same item you found, but maybe it’s slightly different. In other words, you are asking him to rephrase this item and then you are finding the rephrasing by assessment. You got that? You got that?

Now, all you’ve got to do is take a Prehav assessment, the old Auxiliary Pre-have Scale, do it by elimination. But, by the way, all these assessments are, you know, „What represents this to you?“ That’s not dynamic against, don’t you see. You follow this? It’s not considered „Committing overts against these items,“ it’s just „What represents to you,“ don’t you see. It’s as simple as that. You can assess that way.

But you can also assess by, „Consider overts against these things,“ and you could go down the line that same way, don’t you see. This would again pep it up and that sort of thing, but in actual fact, the thing will just rock slam if you just assess it. You got that?

Of course you can, you know, „Think of committing bad things against these-this item,“ list. You could do that, see and „What represents that?“ In other words there’s a couple of ways you could go about this thing, neither one of them wrong.

Now, you can take the old Prehav list and take your final item and that was catfish, see. „Ha-ha. It was fish, see. It was dynamic’s fifth dynamic. What assessed out was fish on the first list and you’ve got fish again. All right. What represents fish to you?“ And the fellow gives you this and that and the other thing and the other thing. And you find out it was catfish, ha-ha-ha-ha, wasn’t fish, it was catfish, ha-ha-ha-ha. Now, you can actually do a Prehav assessment on the subject of catfish. „Should you (dynamic line) catfish? Should you withdraw from catfish? Should you leave catfish? What should you do to catfish?“ You got this? And one of those is going to rock slam and you’ve got the guy’s goal in a bucket.

There’ll be a fee for all this heavy work. I mean I’m not going to work for nothing on this. That’s a real fancy Dynamic Assessment. Actually you don’t have to be quite that fancy to come up with the answer, but that’s getting real fancy, see. You not only found the dynamic, but you found the item that represented the dynamic and then you found the item that represented the item that represented the dynamic. That brought you in awful close didn’t it? You practically got the exact thing that the goal is worded with and then you did the Prehav assessment to find the verb. Ha-ha-ha, ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho.

You may get such a thing as, „to withdraw from catfish,“ but you know damn well that it is not exactly this type of goal. See, it’s not exactly „to withdraw from catfish.“ So now you’ve got to have a list of things, goals he might have that would express this action, „to withdraw from catfish.“

Now, there’s only one hole in this. If it’s an inadvertent goal it may be entirely different. But an inadvertent list, remember, was a non-rock slamming, not upsetting … You do the same thing and you’ll get the same phenomena and everything else will turn on. It will all go up according to Hoyle, but if it’s a non-overt-no, I mean it’s an inadvertent overt, see, not intentional. It’s just the fact he wants to make steel and you know, he wants to make steel. That’s the goal, you see. And oddly enough they make fish hooks out of steel and he’s committing an overt continuously against catfish with fishhooks, see. He didn’t have catfish in mind. That’s the inadvertent goal-the inadvertent overt goal. He didn’t have catfish in mind, but it’s collided with this thing just in the natural course of the events.

This other goal is to take catfish and do something very overt to them. See the overt-the direct overt goal will probably contain the word catfish and the inadvertent goal won’t. So if the list wasn’t much charged why it’s probably inadvertent.

Now, here is the way you get around that. You give the pc-after you’ve done all this, and you also then do this list of goals and that runs charge out until there is no charge on it. But the fact there is no charge on it is no guarantee that the goal is on that list. That is not a guarantee. You got that?

It is no guarantee at all. You could actually ask him to do a couple of hundred more goals, just off the bat. He could go ahead and do that.

Here is why you wrote your 850 list. You say, „Now, go back to the beginning of your goals list,“ and give him a purple pencil with red polka dots, see. And you say, „You mark in every goal there that would be an overt-would express anything like withdrawing from catfish, see. You just mark any goal that would even vaguely mean this or any goal that would be an overt against catfish. Any goal-any goal, see, you just mark in anything.“ And he starts in at the beginning and he marks in every one of these goals which would be.

Now, when you take his goals list to assess it you take the 850 list, the items he’s marked in and run it from the beginning, forward. See how you do that? He did the 850 list before you fooled around with the Dynamic Assessment. But now he knows where the goal is targeted. There is no slightest doubt in his mind about where the goal is targeted. And you know whether the goal is the right goal or not. Of course you know whether it is the right goal at that, but you can get a goal there that-you spend time on these goals now.

Now, the only other thing that can go wrong with this type of assessment is the fact that there is a hole in the original Tigers Drill that I released it to you. That is, that’s-things can be suppressed below the level of meter read. You got that?

So you prepcheck Suppress. One of the best ways to handle this, the offhand pitch is you prepcheck Suppress with the meter laid aside, see, when I say Repetitive Prepcheck, see, with the meter laid aside. Don’t look at the meter. Look at the goals list and say, „On the goal to catch catfish, has anything been suppressed?“ And you are looking straight at the pc and he says, „Brrjrrnn.“ You say, „Well, answer it, has it or hasn’t it been? Try to think, any suppression on this goal?“

And he says, „So-and-so and so-and-so.“

Then ask him, „Do you have any additional answers?“ „Well,“ he says, „so-and-so and so-and-so and so-and-so.“

And you say, „All right, now, I’ll check it on the meter, see. On the goal to catch catfish, has anything been suppressed?“ And only then can you promote a tick.

A goal can be so suppressed that the Suppress won’t read and if the Suppress won’t read nothing else will read and you’ve got to promote the read. And when you are checking an old goal and trying to get it alive again, don’t worry about the meter until you’ve got the pc flat on the Suppress on the subject of goals, on the subject of clearing, on the subject of, you know, your Prepcheck. But don’t do these things down the line the way it is in the policy letter, see, and forget to ever go back and check any of these things. When you finish one of these sections on that Prepcheck, ha-ha-ha-ha-ha, you better check all of those over and see if there is anything else on.

In other words, you’ve got to clear each one of those sections, not just run over it indifferently, one item at a time. Let’s find out if there is anything else on this thing. Do a fast check on them after that. You find out this thing has hotted up and the suppress may have hotted up on you again because suppress is the only tricky button.

Don’t worry about the rest of them being tricky. You’ll find the reads on those, but you won’t find the read on Suppress. If you don’t find the read on Suppress you can’t get the read on the rest of them. You got that? And that’s the only hole in goals finding and that’s how your goals disappear and that’s how goals can’t be found and that sort of thing. You got it?

Now, on the beginning of any goals list by Dynamic Assessment and so forth, you make awfully sure that you have the pc’s goals that have been found before. Put those to the beginning of the list. I don’t care who prepchecked them. I don’t care what he did with them. I don’t care anything else.

My own goal was found last June and has sat suppressed ever since. And five wrong goals were found on top of it, one right after the other. And only by accident after Dynamic Assessment did that goal blow into view again and of course it was the perfect overt. It was an inadvertent overt. That was why it was lying there sleepily. You follow this?

Now, I don’t care whether you do the Prehav assessment or not. I don’t care whether you do that or not. It is just another string to your bow. Got it? Just another string to the bow. That will give you the item, the goal is an overt against. But an inadvertent overt goal won’t have the item mentioned in it. And it might be far wide of the point, too wide for the pc to guess. So that is why you go back over the first 850 goals and have him mark in those that it would be an overt against whatever the final item was.

He may start marking in too many, but don’t upset him too much about it. The probability is, is the goal is in the first few pages. Maybe he’s only marked in twenty on the first-in the first 300 goals, you see. That’s a lot different than doing 300 goals isn’t it? See, you are saving time all the way and you know what the goal is-looks like. See, you know about what it is.

The pc may badger himself around all over the place trying to find out what this goal is, but you can locate the goal.

Now, there are probably other tricks by which you can define and make the goal definitive and so forth. Those tricks can be developed from time to time. Ideas can come up about this. We know exactly what the anatomy and structure of goal charge is and exactly what it leads down to. Now, you can probably do a tremendous number of things with that, but that is Dynamic Assessment as it exists right now here on the 21st of August, AD 12. Okay?

Thank you.