Okay. This is lecture two, Saint Hill Special Briefing Course, January 15, AD 13. The planet Earth, as much of it as be-will be with us for awhile.

I don’t know, I’ve told you everything I know. Haven’t got anything else to tell you. I can punch up a few points for you, however.

There are a bunch of nevers arising. You’re getting nevers in 2-12. And you avoid the nevers and you’ll make somebody nervous. You’ve got „Never represent a rock slamming item.“ That is something you just never do. And that means anything you have ever seen rock slam. See, it might not be rock slamming now, but it might have rock slammed. And that makes you nervous.

All lists have a source. All lists have a source. The source is something. And that is an assumed arbitrary. And that is the most dangerous point of 2-12. There is the point where you need a little bit of luck. You say, „In present-what does present time consist of?“ Something like that, you see. You get a nice list, it’s perfectly nullable, it goes out to one rock slamming item seen during nulling, everything is fine. You oppose what you get, that all travels beautifully. No-no strain. You wind up with a nice rock slamming item and then you oppose it, because it’s still rock slamming-the rule is, of course, that if the thing is still rock slamming you oppose it-and you get your perfect package. All that is fine.

But where does this list come from? In other words, all lists have a source. Now, we find out that an arbitrary source is pretty dangerous. It isn’t somebody has interpreted this already, the misinterpretations will fly around like mad! But somebody’s already interpreted this. You take an arbitrary list and if you see more than one R/S on it then you-it isn’t complete and you complete it. That isn’t what we did recently. That just came down on telex today as an interpretation. That’s wrong. If you just don’t use arbitrary lists! That’s that. See, that just takes care of the whole question. So you never use an arbitrary list-just never do it.

Every now and then somebody sees an item, „waterbucks.“ Crash, crash, crash, crash, crash, crash, crash! „Oh, will you look at that beautiful, beautiful item! Oh ho-ho! Oh, that’s marvelous! This guy’s got sen on it. Ho-ho.“ They just can’t keep their paws off of it, you see. They’ve got to oppose it, right now. The pc’s probably rock slamming on „auditor“ at that moment, but that’s beside the point.

So, they oppose „waterbucks“ and this goes on endlessly and interminably and horribly, and the bank is collapsing on the pc and all is getting more and more ghastly and life looks worse and worse. And the main danger is the auditor says, „Well, just look.“ If he’s very new, he says, „Well, 2-12 doesn’t work.“ Now, I’m sure all of you, each one of you, some time or another, since the advent of 2-12, has said, to himself or to somebody else, that it doesn’t work. See, that includes me! See, I too have said, „Ha-ha.“ I’ve said, „Well, it can’t be taught.“ You know, that was my adjudication, you see.

I’ve also said, „Boy, it just can’t work, it doesn’t work.“ You see? Well, what that is, is you’re running into bug factors-bug factors of one kind or another-and either the answer hasn’t come your way, or you have missed something someplace or another. Because actually nothing eaves in a pc quicker than 2-12.

So we’ve got our next never. Never abandon 2-12! Because nothing else is going to patch up what 2-12 has mucked up. This is one of those-this is one of those gee-whizzers that only patches itself up. The reason why we know it is an ultimate-type process is because it repairs itself. And that, of course, by Definition, is an ultimate-type process. The ultimate process will repair itself. In other words, run right, it repairs what has been run wrong.

Now, the other never there is-never try to patch up 2-12 with something else. Because you wont ever make it. I’ll give you an instance. Wrong list, wrong way to, pc ARC broke, the item picked out was not the final item on the list and then it was opposed wrong way to. You know, I mean it’s just a good mess-up, see. And said, „Well, that’s-that’s fine, now the best thing to do is just to prepcheck this whole thing out. And just forget the whole thing.“ I proceeded to do so, got the needle clean as a whistle, pc smiling, cheerful, everything was fine and next day was four feet below bottom again. So I patched it all up again, got rid of all of the auditing, straightened it all out beautifully, and so forth. And within a few hours the pc was four feet below the bottom! In other words, it just kept going like this. I finally went back and completed the list and the pc was fine. You know, I fixed up the original list that had had an item grabbed too soon on it, got the right item for that list and opposed it properly and abandoned the list that was wrong way to. Everything’s fine.

Actually, you inadvertently will make this test some day. You inadvertently will do so. You’ll sweat it out, trying to patch up the pc at the end of the session. The pc seems all ARC broke and you just don’t seem to be making the grade at all, you see. And you’ve found an item-you found an item, „a gut-shot bear,“ you see? And the pc’s always complaining about his guts and he’s always saying he „can’t bear it.“ So you say, „Well, it must be the item.“ What you’ve missed is all items have an influence on the pc, whether they’re reliable items or not, you see? It isn’t that a-the item you choose didn’t have an influence on the pc.

Anyway, you took this thing and you’re trying to do something with it and you gave it to the pc and then you tried to patch up the ARC breaks. You think they’re coming from someplace else. And finally in desperation you say, „Well, that item, ‘a gut-shot bear,’ that is not your item. We’re going to complete the list.“ And all of a sudden the pc’s right up. there, right up top, face clears up, goes white, everything! Magic! See? Just telling him it’s not his item, when it wasn’t-in other words, telling him the truth of the situation - accomplishes more in just that short breath, than, frankly, twenty-five hours of Prepchecking! I think it’s quite remarkable, see?

And that’s the degree that 2-12 only patches up 2-12. It’s one of those self-resolving little miracle whizzers. It solves itself. And there’s no other processes that completely do. Yes, they solve what they do but they don’t also solve all cases. That’s the slight difference. We’ve had processes and all Scientology has solved itself But in actual fact they don’t-haven’t solved rapidly all cases.

Now therefore, for that reason alone, it’s worth taking these risks, it’s worth knowing it, it’s worth studying it, it’s worth getting good on it, it’s worth an awful lot of things, but you remember that there are a few nevers. I’ve given you the chief never-is, never let somebody lose their records or keep inaccurate records or fail to note down what happened on the auditor’s report and on the lists. And never, never scamp the problem of records. Just don’t do it. Because nobody will be able to patch up anything easily.

Now, there is a method of straightening up a case where the records are lost and that is of interest to you. It’s an E-Meter job. And you go back and you carefully trace down to the minute and, you know, time-spot the time when the pc’s case caved in and then go back and trace very carefully the session in which it occurred and then put your mid ruds in for that session. „That session on the 21st of December,“ you see, „1955, 63.. .“ or something, whatever it is...... has anything been suppressed?“ Well, by putting the mid ruds in, his memory returns and he can give you far more about it.

And then having patched this-it doesn’t patch up the case, see. It just-he tells you more about it. And you’ll recover the missing data, and the missing list, and it-you can deduce by some guesswork or another, synthesize if you have to, what the name of the list was and sometimes there wasn’t a list-it just was a number of items. And there was no list title. And you have to synthesize what the list title would be in order to complete the list. You get the trick?

But this is pretty grim, this-but patching up 2-12 without the records is so arduous that you can just lay down a rule. That never lose and never miskeep records. Such a thing can happen, you see, as some utterly green auditor someplace is-he nulls the list and it had rock slams on it and he missed the thing. He missed the rock slamming item. It’ll be missed from there on out. The pc’ll be all upset, so on.

And here’s another never. Never Attribute a violent ARC break to anything but a wrong item or a not-found item-which means a complete list. The ARC breaks are always attributable-whether they’re demonstrated by despair or violence or anything else-but ARC breaks are always attributable to 2-12, not the auditing. Don’t ever make the mistake of thinking it was because the pc had a missed withhold in the session that he finally blew up at you. The item is right but the pc had a missed withhold and therefore got an ARC break. Ha-ha! Don’t make that mistake. Because when you don’t complete the list …

Oh, you get away with it often enough to make you foolish. You actually can get kind of foolish on this. Because you can make some of these mistakes, you see, and still get by. And then when you really run one into the brick wall, then you say, „Well, probably, that can’t be it.“ But let me tell you, if a pc ARC breaks badly in doing 2-12, 2-10, any of this Routine 2, he ARC breaks badly, you Attribute it to the Routine 2. Don’t Attribute it to the pc’s current life and all that sort of thing. Never, never Attribute a violent ARC break, a violent decay of case, which is the same thing, I mean, pc gets so apathetic, won’t talk to you, something like that. Any manifestation of an ARC break of a violent nature, never Attribute it to anything but the Routine 2.

Actually, that’s a very sound rule. It sounds very extreme when you first take a look at it, but it’s a very sound rule. You see an ARC breaky pc come - this applies to you not just as an auditor, you understand, this applies to you in the workaday world of Scientology-you see this character come out screaming out of the HGC, slam the door, you know, and „Oh, this is just terrible!“ and so forth, everybody’s robbed him and all that sort of thing and it’s terrible and it’s terrible and …

Well, don’t stand around flat-footed! See, just, what the hell? See, who didn’t complete the list? Who missed the item? That’s your-that’s your immediate response, see. Don’t Attribute it to something else. Don’t get reasonable about it, see. You’ll find out you’re true every time.

And pc’s feeling bad and upset and so forth. Well, they can have the most fantastic things. Well, they got in an automobile accident and wrapped the car around a cop’s neck and they’re going to have to go to … By the way, if anybody ever sends you to jail, by all means, go to Alcatraz. They’re tearing it down. I’m just thinking of the Federal government. Even their prisons are going to pieces. Have you-did you know that? We’ve got to audit those people, that’s all there is to it, you know, because they’re in a violent ARC break. Somebody’s missed an item on the US government.

I think, personally, they missed it with a no-auditing situation. We haven’t had any plan for auditing the government. We got one president audited. That was Truman. We ain’t had anybody else audited. Now, I just think they’re suffering from no auditing. Course-so of course, that leaves all items missed. And that’s another way of missing items. But it isn’t to a violent state. Somebody must have missed a list or something on the FDA. They must have. They must have. „What crumb are you?“ or something like that - something. „What type of insect egg did you come out of?“ You know?

When you see these violent-these violent manifestations or swift alterations of case, or if you think it’s a slow alteration of case, go back and find where it was swift. Never consider that an-case altered slowly. It didn’t. It didn’t deteriorate slowly on 2-12. It deteriorated fast! And you’ve got to go back and find the earliest item missed. Doesn’t much matter how the item was missed, it got missed, that’s for sure! There are several ways of missing an item.

Listing wrong way to, oddly enough, doesn’t so much miss an item. You list right way to and don’t complete the list, well, you’ll get your biggest picnics when all of 2-12 is absolutely right. And then the list got extended. In other words, they had two rock slamming items on the original list, so they extended the list, found one rock slamming item and said that was it because they didn’t have another rock slamming item, did they? And nothing else was now rock slamming, was it? In other words, that one rock slam seen on nulling is very valid, used the first time. But on further study here, it is of very poor validity the second time it’s used. That’s sad but true.

In other words, you had two rock slamming items on the list, as you nulled it. You’re nulling the list, get two rock slamming items. Oh! Of course. Obviously the list isn’t complete! Obvious! Now, going on nulling, pardon me … By the way, going on nulling is senseless by the time you reach the second rock slamming item. You’ve got to continue that list. And then go back and check those two items to find out if there’s anything left on them. They can DR or something like that, but must be very slight indeed.

Now, you go on down and you get your final rock slamming item, and you say triumphantly, „Well, no one of these others-rock slams that went on are anything, nothing else-I didn’t see anything else rock slam, so therefore that is the item and therefore, there you are, there is your item. And we now have your item and we’ve checked it all out and it is gorgeous.“ And the pc, makes sense to him and he looks brighter and he looks lighter and everything-and everything is fine, but we’re checking the thing out-and let’s say it’s the first list, which is your-sort of your source list. This was in opposition to it or something-and the rock slam vanishes off the thing. It goes down to a DR suddenly.

This is rather typical. You haven’t opposed it, but it suddenly dropped down to DR. The thing you got it from went out. But it still had a rock slam on it, but then all of a sudden, as the pc cognited, that disappeared. You’ll find out right after that as long as it rock slams the pc is happy with it. But the second it ceases to rock slam he’s unhappy with it. I mean the interest is accompanying the rock slam, don’t you see? And the pc will all of a sudden find out something you’re doing wrong with your meter, or something about you. Pc gets unhappy with the auditor, the auditing session, he never Attributes it to the wrong item. He’ll go on and hang onto the item. But there’s a tone curve here. There’s a shift. Well, don’t ever Attribute it to anything but the Routine 2. There’s something wrong with the Routine 2.

You got to continue that list. Now, once in a blue moon you’ll get yourself in the serious situation of having a list you can’t continue, „In present time who or what are you upset about?“ Now, you continue and the pc’s upset. Well, you can go on and continue it and you eventually don’t find a rock slamming item. Well, don’t make the foolish mistake of going on and list fifty-five pages on it to find your next rock slamming item! Because it isn’t there! You already got a pc that’s overstrained on listing oppterms. List something like, „Who or what’d be upset about these problems that you’ve listed here on this list?“ Something of that sort, but get it over on the other side of the picture here. You’ll come back and find the item that was going to be there anyway. Pc couldn’t confront it, didn’t put it on the list.

Now, there’s your main danger as you train auditors. One, that they don’t learn that mild ARC breaks and upsets stem immediately-and little ones - stem immediately for just corny auditing. You know, Q-and-A, Q-and-A, Q-and-A, Q-and-A, Q-and-A, Q-and-A. Pc a half an hour later is still trying to tell the auditor, „I thought you said ‘express,’ not ‘suppress’!

„But I didn’t say ‘express,’ I said ‘suppress’!“

„I know, but I’m trying to tell you . . . „

„Well, but I didn’t, you know. I-I know. Awfully sorry if I did, but I-I really didn’t, you see? I really huh, ha-ha, oh. . .“

Now, I’m talking about those things that don’t pass away with the session. You know, these things that are-this guy is, „I-I don’t know whether I’m going to live or not, you know? Huh-huh-huh. Life looks pretty hopeless to me, now.“ You know? You see somebody walking around that’s been run on Routine 2, man, don’t assign it to auditing skill, lack of, see? Just assign it to Routine 2. And you’ll always be right.

You start to go into the end of the session, the pc was happy with the item and it rock slammed and the pc had some cognitions. And all of a sudden, the pc has an ARC break because you didn’t have the meter plugged in for the can squeeze. Say the item again. It isn’t rock slamming. Well, you just grabbed one too quick off the list, that’s all. Isn’t the pc’s item. Check to find out a lot of things.

Now, never run a pc darker and darker and darker and more compressed and more and more caved in, and so forth. Just-when you notice that this is occurring, come off of it! There is no cycle, they don’t get darker and lighter.

Just come right off of it. Second you notice something like that. When you …

Now, here’s another never. Never give a pc an item and do something else. Oh, I see somebody’s had that happen to them! That is about the most distracting thing that can happen. Your chances of giving him a wrong item are great even though you can really ride the bicycle down the middle of the road. The reason why is, you see, you’ve got this five-page list and it had two rock slamming items on it and you extended it to seven pages, you got a beautiful rock slamming item. There it is, it matched the same thing that it came from, everything is fine and it’s just fine and we say to the pc, „All right,“ we say, „Okay, now, there’s your item, ‘tiger.’ „

Pc is going to have some things happen that are right or he’s going to have some things happen that are wrong. And it’s up to you to make that test of observation. And let me give you the never. You see, never do something else. Never give a pc an item and do something else, even when you think it’s conditional. And never make the pc think that you’re giving him an item when you aren’t. That also you will-may goof with someday. Pc understood that you were giving him his item. And you were simply tiger drilling out a little DR that you had found, to make sure.

The pc has glommed onto this thing as his item. He didn’t understand. Because pcs are not in a good state of comprehension when they’re in the midst of a long list and all that sort of thing. You know, you can get into the most asinine windups and foul-ups that you ever wanted to get into. Make sure the pc knows what you’re doing, see? Give him his reality factor. Tell him lists rock slam, tell him they don’t rock slam, don’t tell him what rock slammed, though. See, he’ll fixate on it.

Don’t-because this is this other never, see? Never give a pc an item, whether it is the item or other item that is going to be the pc’s item or that the pc is going to think is his item and then do something else. This is a very serious thing for you to do. I’ll give you an example: „Well, we found your item here, now. It’s ‘tiger.’ Okay. All right. On this item ‘tiger’ has anything been suppressed? Okay. Oh-ho, that was clean. Anything on this item, ‘tiger’ - anything been invalidated?“ and so forth. Don’t be surprised if a chair hits YOU over the head!

Honest, this is just not a safe thing to do. I’m talking now about personal safety as far as the auditor’s … It’s just not safe! In the first place you’ve already put him in a state of shock! Now you’ve given him, „On this item has anything been suppressed“! „Huhh, duh, huhh, huhh.“ It’s, „Who are you?“ you know? Even if it is his item or isn’t his item. If it is his item you can get away with it once in a while. And brother, if it isn’t his item you’re liable to get his chair around your head. You really are.

See, you haven’t allowed that minute or so there of good observation. What effect did this have on the pc? Your eyes must not be on the meter and you mustn’t be doing something else when you give a pc an item like that. You’ve had this final R/S, nice thing, it seems to be a reliable item, and so forth, you’ve gone down the list, you’ve checked two or three of them. You say, „I’m just checking over some items here to see what they are.“ Put in the R-factor and „Everything’s coming along all right.“ A little H-factor. And you know now, you know, pc doesn’t know yet.

You make that a bit of a ceremony, see? And you pull that E-Meter up to YOU and then you look at the pc. You don’t look at another thing. And you say, „All right. Apparently here your item is ‘a tiger.’ You got that? ‘A tiger. ‘ „ And you watch that pc. And you watch him like a hawk. Because the wrong item, in those first few seconds, his face is going to darken. His eyes are going to go back in his head. His certainty level is going to alter. He may be in a comm lag for quite a little while before he has a certainty. And then it very well might be the item.

But you got to know some things. Did sudden mass appear? When you said it did he get a sudden mass? Sudden-does anything else appear in his perimeter? He’ll say, well, yes, he’s seen something, but it always seems to have been there. Well, take that with a grain of salt. That doesn’t disprove the item but it’s an indicator that it’s wrong. Face gets dark after you’ve said it-uh-uh, that ain’t it.

Another thing, pc may look sort of stunned-they usually do. Because you’ve hit them with something that they haven’t been aware of for ages. The-actually the shock of getting one of these items delivered into your paws as a statement by the auditor. You can go over them on lists. Even then sometimes they get a shock from it. Sometimes a pc says, ‘a-aaa-a.“ And you say, „What’s the matter?“

„Well, I don’t know, you read ‘a cat whisker’ there and a horrible shot went up my spine!“

Well, that again savors of some of this other stuff I’m giving you. Don’t let the auditor go on down the list to the next item and the next item and the next item. Let the pc tell you about this cat whisker, because, by God, there may be a cognition on it which has got it held up, see? Just say, „Well, how about this-well you-you got something to say about that item?“ So forth.

„No, it’s just this terrible spine, you know, it went up my back, and went zzzupp and wuff!“

And you say, „All right. You okay now?“

„Yeah. Oh yeah, ifs all right.“ Go on down with your list. You understand?

But you can do a sudden shift of attention on a pc and put him into a hell of a state of tension. You hit this thing „cat whisker,“ see? It’s followed by-it’s followed by „waterbuck tiger,“ see. All right. „Cat whisker“ and the pc says, „Ulp-eep!“ And you see the needle go off the dial-frown at him for the needle having gone off the dial, you know-and say, „Tiger. Waterbuck.“ You want to see a pc go right on in a cave, see? He’s-you’ve fixated his attention and then slapped him, see, by shifting his attention.

So, the strongest item, even though it doesn’t produce bad effects on him, the strongest item you can give him, the one most calculated to stun him, is an RI. So you just don’t dish this thing out, you see, like an old plate of soup, you See. You really serve him up this one on a silver salver, you know. Take your-don’t take your eyes off the pc, you hear me now! Don’t take your eyes off the pc. Don’t go into a lot of chatter.

Sometime he will wonder, he will ask you, „Why are you sitting there so quietly,“’

„Just thought you might have something to say about it.“

This gets him into thinking about it, you know. And he says, „Oh well, yes, a tiger.“ He’s looking doubtful. You really can’t tell what’s going on yet or not. You haven’t really been able to ascertain if he was getting darker or lighter, you’re still in a little state of doubt yourself with regard to this thing, you know. He’ll go on, „Huh! Wonder if that’s why I’ve got fur on my ears! You suppose so?“ Then recognize what you’re looking at, see?

Now your next test: Does the rock slam continue as he talks about it or does it suddenly vanish? Ware shoal, if it suddenly vanishes. Now, get that meter so that while you’re-while he start-after he starts cognition, you see, that’s the second period. You’ve already got your period of inspection, then you’ve got your cognition period, if you want to get real technical, following that. You’ll see that thing R/S, as long as he has cognitions on it.

And actually, if it’s a real RI his cognitions on it are endless. It just goes on R/Sing. That’s perfectly safe.

But you can get an item which is not the last item on the, list-there’s one still on the list to get, which R/Ses for a moment, the pc cognites for a moment, everything seems to go along beautifully, all tests are in. And then you sit back all ready to shape it up or find out whether it’s a term or an oppterm, getting ready to list something to it, and the pc says, „Well, there’ve been quite a few times I’ve suppressed things in this session.“

Oh, yeah? Here we go! Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha! That was not the last item on the list. That was not the item. You didn’t have your paws on the item. And that there is this funny condition where everything there is one-this can happen-that the inspection is all right. He doesn’t seem to get more mass. He seems to be cogniting. His skin tone is lighter. Don’t you see? All this seems to be fine. And the R/S was there. And he gives you this cognition. And you look down and get ready to drill the doggone thing, you know-to find out whether or not it’s this way or that or commit overts, you know - and he just ran out of R/S!

In other words, it blew as a lock on the right item. And at that moment it will follow the whole chain of sequence of a wrong item. Mass will show up, he will get darker, the R/S vanishes down to a DR. It’s interesting. So that period of inspection is very important-very, very important. And never shift the pc’s attention during a period of inspection. Just never shift bis attention onto something else or doing anything else. Never do anything during this. It’s quite important. And that way you’ll save a lot of heartbreak on the thing. He won’t get all tangled up and very ARC broke, then, if it’s the wrong item. And you say, „Well, did any-any mass show up there?“ Of course, this is not shifting his attention-he’s right on it, you know?

„Oh, well, yes, this big-big round sphere showed up on the end of my nose.“

„Yeah. Well, all right. Seem like your item all right?“

„I guess so. I-I-I-I guess, possibly.“

His face is getting darker, just as you watch him, see. Thing to do at that moment-thing to do at that moment is just don’t let it go any further. Say, „Well, all right. Now, I myself would like to make just a little bit further test on this if it’s all right with you. I would like to list the list a little further.“

He brightens up. You can add the fatal words, „That’s not your item,“ and he’ll brighten all the way up. You understand? But boy, you have to be pretty good. Because if it is his item and you tell him it’s not, you also got an ARC break.

You get-you get how this little period goes? This is-this period of the presentation of the item to the pc can be the difference between a case that runs smoothly in spite of goofs and a case that compounds the goofs into a real-a real upside-down, backwards-and-forwards, God-’elp-us, see. The longer you let a pc keep a wrong item, the longer you list a wrong item, the more collapsed the pc is going to get. So in all patch-ups, when you decide to patch something up, patch it up accurately and patch it up now! Don’t ever let your heels drag on patching a case up. Do it straight away.

The longer you let that case go, with everything wrong way to and so forth-in other words, you’re not quite sure so you-I-this is the way it is.

This is another never, is just never persist with a wrong action because you don’t know what to do to correct it. Just never persist with a wrong action.

Lot of your difficulty comes from the fact that you persist occasionally with a list when you don’t know what else to do. Well, you’ve got to do something. Actually, it’d be far better off… Somebody was telling me the other day he didn’t have time to study the pc’s case. Well, I don’t know. I-you can take a pc’s folder and look it over. It doesn’t require any vast amount of time.

But in actual fact, rather than persist with a wrong action it is far, far better for you to say, „Well, put your cans down on the table there. I want to take a look at your line plot and go over this with you, right now.“ And it’s far better, if the case is running wrong, to straighten out the case on session time. I’m not recommending this. But you would be far better off to straighten it out on session time than to persist with some kind of a wrong action just to put in auditing time! You understand?

You-it’s a good-it’s good sense to find out what you’re doing before you do it! And it’s very, very necessary to come off an evident wrong action the moment you discover it is wrong. Now, I’ll give you an example. We say list the list both way to. „All right,“ you say, „Well, how much is a list-how much of a list do you have to list?“ So I say to you a page. All right. That is actually one of these „dumb-ox“ type responses, see? How do you ask a pc if he’s tired, you know? So you say, well, you say-ask him, „Are you tired?“ You know?

Now, let’s look at this thing sensibly. You list it wrong way to, when do you come off of wrong way to list, in actual fact? Keep your eye on a pc. You’ll see him getting darker. He starts to get-his skin tone and so forth Starts to darken, well, his needle starts to tighten up, it’s less loose than it was and so forth. This is only four items deep on this list. Oh, hell, get out of there like a scalded cat! You say, „Well, that’s fine. Thank you!“ He’s still listing, you know. „Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you!“ And he manages to get the brakes on and he stops.

You say, „Well, that’s all of that. We’re going to list this list the other way, apparently it is the other way.“ And you start listing that and you say aw-or tell him the truth, you know, „I’ll have to confirm it the other way,“ if you haven’t listed that yet-“And we’ll go on with this.“

In other words, don’t persist with an action which is obviously worsening the case, hoping for the best. Now, there’s an example here … This does not mean somatics. Brother, somatics have nothing to do with worsening a case. Cases improve up through somatics. Something that’s wrong with some of the cases you will audit from time to time, is that they don’t-aren’t getting any somatics. No pain. They don’t get any sen. Well, it’s a happy win, when all of a sudden they start to get pain or sen, don’t you see? Somatics turn on, so you’re winning. So, just because a case is getting somatics don’t think it’s getting worse.

I only would add that if I’d - had not - on occasions been remarked to me: „I had to stop the process because it was giving the pc so much pain.“ And I think of this poor pc sitting out in North Umbrella, California-ha-ha-ha! Who somebody stopped a list on because they were-you know. Ho-ho-ho! It makes me feel bad.

So somatics aren’t this. These are these other signs. Mass is obviously closing in on him. He’s obviously getting darker. His eyes are going way out of gear. There’s something going on here. The pc is looking older, and so forth. You’d better make damn sure what you’re doing. Now, on occasion, a pc has gotten quite sick at his stomach. But actually, this has only been from a questionable source. There’s something a bit wrong with the source or a wrong way to. There’s been something wrong with that, when they get very violently sick at their stomach and start throwing up or something like that, or diarrhea or something. There’s something wrong with the source. In other words, some-usually it was an item which was picked out of the middle of an arbitrary list. You wouldn’t expect that normally as a reaction.

But if it did happen as a reaction and I was absolutely sure of why I was doing it, I sure would go on with it. But don’t ever persist with a wrongness. Now that you know that thing is wrong, knock it off now! See, just skip it! Pc is turning a bright green, don’t keep on until he’s a brighter green. Don’t consider that you’re always flawless and that you never make mistakes. You’re going back, patching up neglected items, bypassed items. You’re looking at this line plot and you’re patching them all up and you’re-you’re opposing all the bypassed items on this case. Getting it all up to present time. Everything is fine. And the case is coming along all right. And you’re listing and the case starts to look slightly yellow. And you list another-this, if you didn’t follow this rule would be what would happen, see-you list another ten, fifteen, twenty items, the pc is now pretty yellow!

Now, you list another thirty, forty items and the pc-is just-now got much yellower and starts to turn black around the mouth. „Oh,“ you say, „well, we really haven’t proved the point yet, so we will list another seventy or eighty items on this thing.“ Pc’s tongue starts to swell up and he can’t get it out because he can’t get his mouth closed over his tongue, so forth. You say, „Well, that doesn’t prove very much, everything … This list ran it in and therefore will run it out.“ No, it wont! Oddly enough it’ll only run out when you take the source and complete the list the source came from, you know? You’ve got to complete the source list. That’s what’s wrong.

You’re doing something wrong with an item. You can also do this with a wrong way to from a right item. There aren’t too many things here that go wrong. You’re working with a finite number of things, but they can add up to several combinations.

Anyway, you go back and you take a look at this to find out where this doggone source came from. And by God! A represent of a rock slamming item has gotten by you! Somebody at-well, some time or another had done 3D Criss Cross on this character and had left this item sitting there and it wasn’t identified immediately to your view as having come from a rock slamming item. Or maybe you did it yourself at some time or another and you hadn’t noticed this interesting fact-wrong source. So everything is going into the soup in a grand fashion.

No, when you see something going wrong, don’t be nervous about it, you’re not going to kill anybody if you know your business. It is only the amateur surgeon that leaves his tools inside and joins the AMA or BMA. You know? It’s only the amateur. You know, something is wrong with the fellow’s knee, so they cut off his foot, you know. And then they find out they’ve cut off the foot of the wrong leg! So they cut off his arm because he irritates his knee by scratching it. And a low-toned government, of course, gives him medals for doing it.

But the main point is here, they get into some wild thing of really not knowing what the hell is wrong, but trying to look good and trying to go on and not try to go back and understand what the hell they’re doing that makes it go wrong. So therefore, you want to develop a very bright eye on the subject of the pc’s appearance. And you can get it down to where actually you can tell a pc’s difference of appearance, the then-now, you can tell it in any given ten minutes. It starts to worsen in any given ten minutes, let’s find out what’s going on. It’s not-nothing to be nervous about. Nothing to be nervous about, but it just picks a pc up, it saves auditing time like mad, See?

Actually, a pc can take an awful lot before he kicks the bucket. He can. He can take a terrific amount. He can take an awful beating. You’d be amazed. And recover from it. If you remember the earlier never, is don’t try to heal it up with something else. If he got bad on Routine 2, then he’ll get better on Routine 2. Providing it’s patched up properly.

Now, you can start compounding a felony by the case has had three case errors on it so you add a fourth. Now, that’s wrong, so you add a fifth. Now, you find that’s wrong, so you add a sixth. Well, the never here is to never let case errors accumulate or multiply. Don’t let case errors accumulate or multiply. It’s all right to have had two or three errors on a case, so what? But the second that you’re aware of the fact that there is an error on the case, why, put it together. Remembering that one of the errors on the case is to fail to complete a cycle of action.

You’re going down the list pocketa-pocketa-pocketa, it’s a right way to list, it’s going beautifully, it’s „Who or what does present time consist of?“ Pocketa-pocketa-pocketa-pocketa, you’re going right down the line, everything is fine, rock slamming, you’re going to get an item. And halfway down that list you happen to get-halfway through the list, you happen to discover that the pc is-my God! This pc has been upset and rather ARC broke, ever since we found „Valhalla.“ I hadn’t noticed that before. And „Valhalla“ has never been opposed, and it probably came from an incomplete list. Ulp!

Well, the way you multiply the error is abandon the list that is now running all right and leave that as an incomplete cycle of action and go back and patch up this earlier action, you see, because that’s liable to lead you to another earlier action and then you abandon the patch-up of the first one you found and you go back to the second one, the earlier one and patch that, and you’re just multiplying errors, don’t you see?

Now, it is a tossup. Let’s say the-it’s the whole question is answered by, „Is the case running all right?“ And it’s a tossup. It’s a tossup. Apparently the pc seems to be interested in the list we’re doing. We’re all of a sudden aware of the fact the pc’s apathy is probably coming from something a bit earlier. And we look this up.

Well, in that case the pc isn’t running all right, is the pc? See, there’s your point of judgment. And there’s a rule that can go along with this, is before starting a new action make sure that all of your earlier actions are correct and complete. And you’ll always avoid having to make that gruesome decision. Now that we know why represent lists look so funny sometimes and now that we know we must never take an arbitrary list-and I mean never.

You know, all lists stem from an arbitrary source. They all do. And you can be slightly unlucky. Well, you take an arbitrary list. Just like the List One we’re using, the Scientology List One. That’s an arbitrary list. And you assess that thing and it’s not a complete list. The reason we got away with it to the degree we did is because the pc had never listed it and therefore was not complete or incomplete. But the pc very rapidly restimulates on that list and you get more than one R/Sing item on it or something like this and of course, it’s obviously an incomplete list, because it follows-whether the pc listed it or not-the rules of a complete list. So therefore, we have to find out what it came from and complete it.

But look, what it came from is an arbitrary point. See, although we’re abandoning arbitrary lists or precanned lists and aren’t doing them, See, good training, and so forth. In desperation sometime you’re just going to get tired of this pc and you’re going to say, „Well, I’m just going to oppose ‘auditor’ and see what happens.“ And you’re going to get away with it and that’s all right. Auditing’s always been what you could get away with.

But remember the point you depart from to get his first List One listed by the pc is also an arbitrary point. You had to select it. Now, to reduce this, clearing the auditing command is always good sense. There are three universes for listing. There’s the present time physical universe, right up in PT, that the pc is cheek by jowl with in his life and livingness. There is the second universe which is the universe of auditing. And that’s the auditor and the meter and that sort of thing, and now the reason that has to be separated out as a separate universe is, you know, some pcs will sit there rock slamming like mad and never realize they-there’s anything wrong between them and an auditing session, and making no gains at all. You’ll run across this phenomenon often enough to make this an important division.

And then you’ve got your third universe of the parts of existence. That’s slightly less than whole track. Then in view of the fact that we’ve got positive and negative on all these things, here are six potential lists. The three basic universes, positive and negative on each one, six potential lists. I’ve just given you another Variation tonight. List each one of them as a terminal list or each one of them as an oppterminal list, and of course, you have a brand-new series on the thing, and you have a total of twelve. You get why the variations are, because you can have an oppterminal negative and an oppterminal positive, and a terminal negative and a terminal positive.

Now, you can also make an error-there are two errors you can make here-one is failure to clear the auditing command from which you’re getting this arbitrary source point. You’re already using an arbitrary source point, see. And to fail to test it and clear it-let me put it that way-to fail to test it and to clear it. Now, what do you test it for? Well, you’re going to test it for R/S, because you’re just never going to list a-represent a rock slamming item. Never. So the first thing you’re going to do is test for R/S. I don’t care what it is! Test it for R/S!

Now, you can segment it and test the segments. Sooner or later somebody’s going to-going to rock slam on, „Who or what…“ You read him the question and see a-see a vlt! of a rock slam and read him sections of it and you’re all of a sudden going to find some section of that thing R/Ses. Well, if it’s a represent list you better omit that section, man! See, that’s a never represent a rock slamming item. So therefore, that continues over into never represent a rock slamming question. And beyond that point you rather takes your chance.

But here’s a way of narrowing the number of chances you take. Clear the auditing command with the pc and vary it around until it gets real to him. „In present time who or what are you associated with?“ He can’t make it. But „In present time what is he in contact with?“ That makes good sense to him. He seems to be able to list that. You got this?

So, as far as the list is concerned, is never try to list a list question that the pc cannot answer. That sounds awfully elementary, but it’s already happened. In other words, clear it with the pc and get it squared away so the pc knows what he is supposed to answer here. Get his agreement to answer this thing. And you can have an ARC break or an upset or a wrong list and so forth, just on that crazy little point.

You just make up your mind carelessly someday, you just carelessly, bang!-or you’ll see some auditors do it that you’re supervising-carelessly bing! He’ll say, „All right, what’s present time consist of?“ He just audited a pc a short time ago, you see or you have and he had very good luck with this list. So you know it’s … And case is going noplace. The guy can’t list and he’s obviously having trouble, and so forth. This is-this is an auditing error, not an R2 error, more than anything else, because „clear the auditing command“ has always been part of auditing. Although we haven’t been doing it or stressing it very hard lately, I’m stressing it hard here, because it goes right over into a Routine 2 error.

And you get some little boy or something and he cant answer this, it’s just too many words and too much this and that for him. And he cant list it. He doesn’t understand it. And you finally say, „What’s here?“ or „What’s life?“ You know? And he lists it like a bomb. „What life are you living?“ you know, or something. You know, you clear it around until it’s something he can answer.

All right. Now, you can get a missed withhold effect-this is quite important-you can get a missed withhold effect by listing in the wrong universe of these three universes. And as I told you in the earlier lecture, you can get various dead horses, skunks, cycling lists, and so forth, by taking a wrong way to. You know, you’re listing a terminals-you’re listing an oppterm list, you should be listing a terminals list. You get the idea. The „Who or what would have these problems?“ is what you should be listing. „Who or what would have these problems?“

Now, you can get a similar mess by choosing the wrong universe. You should be listing the auditing session and you’re listing the present time environment, the life and livingness universe, you see, of the pc, or you’re trying to list the parts-the wheel of life type of thing, you know, the dynamics list, and so on, when you damn well ought to be running his life and livingness. And he’ll actually ARC break-this is an important point to you-he’ll ARC break just as though you’d missed an item. That’s worth knowing.

He won’t ARC break the same way just by reason of not clearing the command or something. He’ll go on and try and he won’t ARC break. But you should be listing the auditing session and you go and list the parts of the universe, you know, or the parts of the dynamics. The guy’s acting just like you missed an item. And you can’t quite figure out what the hell’s wrong. Well, the thing is, is you missed the whole universe. See, the next item ready to come up was an auditing item and you didn’t ask for it. So that is a danger. It won’t be regular and routine and you won’t always be doing it.

So there’s always a little bit of luck and a little bit of thought goes into choosing what type of a list to list on this pc. So it’s got to be the right universe and it’s got to be the right terminal or oppterm-whatever’s going to come up next. Don’t feel too bad if you occasionally hit a dead horse or something like that.

But, the final never on this whole list of nevers-I don’t pretend that this is a complete list of nevers-well, they haven’t all been invented, you know? But these are some principal ones that are quite interesting-is never in your anxiety to clear somebody or pacify somebody who demands auditing, never fail to get out of the road his hidden standards and gross unseen present time problems before you try to clear him. That is what Routine 2 is designed for.

Actually, it’s designed only to get out of the road his PTPs, only to get out of the road his hidden standards, clear the way, open up the track and get the fellow so that you can find his goal and clear him. Well, never omit that step. Because the only thing that’s been chancy about clearing and the only thing that’s been sour with clearing, general, on a broad basis, have been wrong goals. And the source of wrong goals are the existence of present time problems and hidden standards.

On a very few pcs, no goal at all could be found, it was so serious. No goal at all could be found. Endless, endless, endless, endless, endless lists! Well, those endless, endless lists are not caused by a charged up goal list. You’re listing on by a present time problem and you are listing straight on by, all goofed up, a hidden standard and that is squarely in the road of everything you’re trying to do.

Because it is: goals go out hard, cases messing up, pcs sort of ARC broke, you can’t quite-your liability of getting a wrong goal is very great. Now, you get such a good clean, clean, clean goal, when you’ve done your 2-12 real well on a pc, that it’s very well worth knowing. It’s just happened, I just got a despatch just before I came over here. It was rather remarkable, but they’d run this pc on 2-12 and they’d gotten something on the order of about six items, three packages. And they did a goals list and the goal is right there! See? I mean, you know, practically number one or two on the list. Rocket read every time! No suppresses, noth-every time you say the goal - beautiful rocket read.

Now, as you know in your experience with 3-12, I mean with 3-21-the number of times you find a virgin goal, when just found, it reads and then it flicks and then it reads, you know? That kind of behavior. You almost never can get one of the confounded things to read, pow, pow, pow! Every time, you know, rocket read, rocket read, rocket read, you know? And then you don’t have to worry about suppresses or fight with the pc at all, you just keep reading it and it keeps reading.

Well, they’ve just found a goal like that and it’s the first one that’s come up the line. It’s got reported in here from California. And I think it is quite, quite interesting, because it’s in actual fact, the first Central Organization goal that’s been reported after the fact of having run 2-12 on somebody. Interesting.

Well, most of the troubles you are having-you go back and review lectures and notes and so forth from 1961, 1960. The troubles which were recounted are centered around PTP and hidden standards. And that’s talked about and talked about. There were innumerable methods used to get by these things-nothing got by them. Now, that we can get by them, with Routine 2 - it is not a simple process, it is one which is - requires precision, but it also doesn’t have endless bugs in it.

It’s got plenty of indicators, and I’m grooving it down to where the indicators are better and better, and more and more noticeable. That’s my job right now. And to cut down the amount of work done before you hit the nail on the head.

So happens, that this process-Routine 2-12-also does more for a case than anything we’ve had before. But understand the relationship here. See, that it does more for a case, that’s just dandy. We’re very happy with that. That isn’t what we expect of it. But it just so happens it does more for a case. So it’s a natural to run on almost anybody. Raw meat or anything else. You’re not telling them, „I’m going to run this to get your goal.“ You tell them, „I’m going to run this.“

When in actual fact, you’re trying to sweep enough items aside so as to pave the way toward the goal. Therefore, it is up to you to run very smooth 2-12 and very rapid 2-12-very smooth, very rapid. Because the more you goof it the harder it will be to get a pc’s goal. The more wrong items you find, the more garbage you’re leaving in PT, see? You’re really strewing the track. Fortunately 2-12 takes it apart. So the final never turns up and that is: Just never mistake the purpose of 2-12.

Thank you very much.

Good night.