All right, this is what? The 10th of January.

Audience: Yes.

AD 13, Saint Hill Special Briefing Course, lecture one.

A little bulletin here-Aussies, hang your head in shame! All through the Commonwealth with the greatest of ease, I was able to slow down this government raid on the church in Washington, but not in Australia. You see, the lines go straight from Australia to the United States and back and forth. And the whole rigged government release in Washington landed scram-bang into the press in Australia. So Australia is a seething mess of „God ‘elp us“ now, and somebody from the Australian syndicate is coming down to see me tomorrow, and they want to know all about it.

I’m not going to tell them very much beyond „a fascist government raided a church.“ I’ll tell them, „Be very, very careful, though, because apparently there’s a million dollars in the offing to fight this in the United States. They actually got all kinds of leads and money pouring in like mad from all directions, and the situation looks very dark for the United States.“

You should really understand this a little bit. You see, they’ve done everything they could do. They’ve shot all the women and children, you see, and kicked the dog-there isn’t any more they can do. They’ve shot their bolt. And having lied to a federal judge and done a few other things like this, all they can do now is stand and take it, and man, we-we’re loading up the guns!

You shouldn’t expect the situation to deteriorate anyplace; actually, we’ll handle this in Australia with the greatest of ease. But isn’t it interesting that Australia takes orders from the US to that degree. Only Commonwealth country that has published a line. Interesting.

Well, regardless of all that, let’s get down to something important — something important. Such as why your pc ARC breaks, you knucklehead!

Ah, this is very interesting. All this cost us today was the bulletin I was going to write on the subject. That’s the second one that has cost us.

But there’s some very, very important data here. Some extremely important data. 2-12, 2-10, the Routine 2, has a liability and this is a very, very, very important liability. It’s one that you must not lose sight of Otherwise you’re going to lose pcs like mad! And Scientology’s going to lose people like mad instead of gaining them. I’m not joking now. Somebody can be put off but good if you miss an item.

Now, what is a missed withhold? It’s a nearly-found-out, isn’t it? All right, now you just apply anything you ever heard of to missed withholds-to this other activity. And boy, a missed withhold of the size of a missed item — when it turns up and comes to view and isn’t picked up by the auditor-is really grim. And I do mean grim.

Because not all the pulling missed withholds in the world are going to straighten it up. You’ve got to get that missed withhold-which is the missed item.

Now, you think I mean one that isn’t opposed. No, I mean one that isn’t put on the list. You stopped listing too soon and this is under the whole subject of incomplete lists. Now, fortunately-fortunately, you can bypass items and incomplete list and maybe 60 percent of the time, 70 percent, something like that, get away with it. This is on one pc, not 70 percent of the pcs, you see. Most of the time you get away with it, I’d say even higher than that-85 percent, 90 percent. You get away with it.

And the time you don’t makes up for the whole lot. You can go ahead and do a sloppy job of Routine 2 and incomplete lists and oppose them and have a ball, endlessly list, and so forth. Nothing catastrophic occurs.

And then on one particular list-there is no telling which list this might be; you didn’t need to finish all the lists, and you could abandon some of them, and so forth-but on this one list that you’re doing, you grab the item before it’s been put on the list. After that your pc’s unauditable. Your pc becomes unauditable. Right there. Right now. And you as an auditor get your head knocked off and say, „I’m tired of auditing,“ and the pc natters and screams around and says he’s tired of being audited and that ends the whole thing, if you don’t know what it is.

So this becomes the most important single piece of Routine 2. How to patch that one up is very important.

Yeah, you can be reasonable and you can say, „Yes, I’ve made a goof. Yes, I’ve goofed. Yeah, I goofed. So therefore, of course, he’s ARC broke. Or he’s got missed withholds. Maybe he was, one time or another, a member of the US government.“ See, some other scurrilous action maybe has taken place on the part of the pc. And you say, „If I just sit there and pull missed withholds, well, I’ll be all right, because obviously it’s a missed withhold. He’s been sort of dopey in sessions, and he’s been this and he’s been that. Now, all right. Is there anything I nearly found out about you?“

And the funny part of it is the pc doesn’t know what it is. He doesn’t know why. He will give you missed withholds; and if you go on with pulling missed withholds to cure this ARC break, then you will drive him around the bend. Then you compound the felony.

Why? Because the missed withhold is the item he didn’t put on the list. Now, give any ten lists, see, on the same pc-we’re not now talking about an odd pc that behaves this way, we’re talking about every pc you will ever audit-and you have ten lists, and like a complete chump you didn’t complete any of the ten-any of these nine lists. They weren’t completed, they weren’t the right item, your opposes were all wrong, everything-nothing ghastly happens. But undeterminedly, and just for some reason, because of the peculiarities of that list… This-one of those lists out of that ten, you don’t complete that one, and that’s heading right for the center of the bank. And you don’t complete the list. You get to an item „odd bod,“ and it must be it because only five items before that R/Sed.

And you say, „That’s your item, ‘odd bod’.“

Big mass immediately appears in front of him. And he says, „Well, I-II… Yeah, I guess I can see how this is. I-it adds up. Yes, it-I guess that’s right. It adds up. I guess it packages up all right. Eh-eh-what are you wiggling your pencil for? All the time you sit there wiggling your pencil. I’ve been trying to-trying to tell you for some time, the motion bothers me. Uh-yeah. Well, you say were going to have another session tomorrow. I’m actually going to be pretty busy. Uh-well, all right, Ill come in for the session.“

And you know what he does? The only place you can really detect this-I don’t mean to be sarcastic like interjecting such comments as „even you can detect this,“ and so I won’t put it in there. But there’ll be a fee.

Now, listen very carefully. His session goals the very next session will not be as brisk and bright as his session goals have been in the past. And as you continue to oppose this wrong item, which you’ve found on this tenth list-you’re now doing an opposition list to it-his goals will get worse and worse and worse.

And the way you patch this up — the way you patch this up is you look over session goals and you find what set of goals for a session did this pc set that were less optimum than his previous goals. And then if the auditor has been very clever and if he’s heard a rumor that you should write things on auditor’s reports-like what list you were listing, what’s the name of the list you’re listing; in other words, other pertinent information; or dated the lists, if he did that, dated the lists, all of which he’s supposed to do — all you have to do is get the list he was listing on immediately before and complete that list.

You understand? It is not-not eight days before, you understand. It’s the list that he completed in the session before he set the goals for the next session. You understand? Or the list which was abandoned. You got it? And you watch those session goals, and it’ll tell you every time.

Now, actually, you’ll also see him looking darker, blacker, older, looking like hell; all these other manifestations go right along with it. And he’s very ARC breaky, and when he was given an item or not given the item, from that point on, why, he is ARC broke. In other words, the list was abandoned or it wasn’t complete or he was given an item off the list, but it was something wrong with that list.

And that’s what causes that deterioration and that ARC break. Now! Now, listen to this very carefully. That he ARC breaks or is upset because you tell him to complete that list doesn’t have anything to do with it. Because you go back very often and try to complete that list, and he natters and screams and tears his hair and bites his fingernails and says to hell with it and bashes the cans, but he’ll go on and complete the list. And then all of a sudden you’ll get his item on the list and there it’ll be.

A wrong-way-to list actually doesn’t act this way. It doesn’t act this way on the pc. The pc-just under strain and looking older and so forth-but he isn’t ARC break Wrong source very often-wrong source actually doesn’t cause ARC-breaks like this.

So this is a peculiar manifestation having to do with completeness of lists. And your indicated action-your indicated action is to watch a pc like mad when you abandon a list. And to watch a pc like mad when you give him an item. And watch for that ARC break that may follow within the next few minutes or certainly at the beginning of the next session. You understand?

Because pcs are sometimes quite propitiative and they don’t blow up in your face. They just go out the bottom. But, you can see it reflected in goals. That’s the easiest place to see it reflected-right in goals.

Now, you get this as a single indicated repair item. Now, let’s say somebody has been listed against one of these things, setting sour goals for the last eighteen sessions. Well, all right, it was eighteen sessions ago. Eighteen sessions ago, that was when it happened. And if you’ve got his auditor’s reports nineteen sessions ago, you’ll find a bright-you know, good goals, you know: work hard, get in and pitch, find this, do that, you know, bang-bang, get better, snap to, get the tone arm down, find my goal, get Clear, see. Next session: „To see if I can’t improve my case.“ Single goal set. „Huh-huh-huh-huh-huh-huh.“

Well, what was he working on at that time? See? What happened? And you’ll find out in that last one that has the bright session goal-just before the bad one, see, the bright session goal one-either a list was abandoned or it wasn’t completed before the item was given to him. And it just all comes under the heading of „You missed a withhold.“ There’s a missed item, and that’s all it amounts to. The missed item. Right there. Bang!

You missed the item-maybe you didn’t notice at the end of that session or the rest of the session, and so forth. Maybe this pc is so propitiative you didn’t really-really notice, or you weren’t on the ball that day or something, and you didn’t see this. Or you felt your auditing was a bit off that day and you’re prone to blame your auditing or something like this, See.

You adjudicate, „Well, I better pull his missed withholds.“ Well, the first thing you better pull when you pull a missed withhold is to go find the item, and pull the item that was missed. And that is paramount in missed withholds.

This all comes under the heading of missed withholds, and it all is incomplete list. Because naturally, if he was given the wrong item on the list, the list was probably incomplete. Of course, you could grab the wrong item off a list-the item on the thirteenth page was slamming like the devil, but the auditor thought that some other item looked better and you know, did something like that. But that we’re-we’re looking at goofs there that are too magnitudinous to even be included in the perimeter of auditing, you just understand. That’s just ylaah! That’s just auditing goofs. We’re talking about 2-12 goofs, see.

So, something happened that had to do with an item being missing. That’s all you got to know. Because, believe me, there’ll be many ways that items can be missed-many ways. I’d hate to try to invent all the ways items will get missed between now and the year 2000, you see. And they’ll probably be multitudinous. You’re going to find some new and original ways yourself.

Now, you understand, if the list was backwards, that he was listing, you won’t get quite the same thing. You’ll just get a continuous strain. And he wont necessarily ARC break because you missed an item on the backwards list, because that’s all missed. You see, you’re not going in the direction of it closely enough to cause it a near miss. So a backwards-listed thing wont give you the same manifestation. It gives you another variety of strain on the case.

Now, you can always tell a backwards list-always tell a backwards list with the greatest of ease-because the rock slams get more frequent. The frequency of slam increases as you keep listing. There are more and more slams. And theoretically, if you went to a hundred pages, they’d all be slamming; everything would be slamming. You get the ne plus ultra.

I’ll give you an idea: There’s two slamming items on the first page; there’s three slamming items on the second page; there’s four on the third page; there’s five on the fourth page; you see, there’s fifteen on the fifth page; and then the whole rest of the list slams. Now, that’s an exaggeration of it.

But just count your rock slams. As you’re coming down the line, those end rock slams, if there are more than there were on-per page than there were on just the preceding page, you can figure out there’s something wrong here. That’s backwards too-that list is backwards too, because the bank is beefing up. And the bank is beefing up, indicated by these gratuitous rock slams-there’s more and more rock slams. Of course, you-the pc might be wearing two rings of a certain magical constituency that gives you a rock slam on everything.

Did you know that some pcs with a ring on each hand, holding the cans, will rock slam for a phantom slam all the time. It’s quite remarkable. We had an audi — a pc here that was doing that a few months ago.

But the crux of the situation is that slams are becoming more frequent as you list. But on a right way to list, the slams are becoming less frequent as you list. Always less frequent. So that you’ll see maybe three slams on the first page, and then he could have four or five slams on the second page, because he’s just warming up, you see, but on the-on the third page, why, he’s got two slams and on the fourth page he’s got one slam, and…

Now, here’s one for you that joins right in-and why I’m talking about this-it joins right in to the missed withhold situation. And this you can shudder in your boots about; I’ll let you quietly shudder in your boots about this one. The next rock slam on that list may be as much as six pages away from the last rock slam on the early pages. You can list six pages, in other words, with a relatively clean needle, and then all of a sudden get a slam, and that’s the item. And that’s on, particularly, one of these hot lists.

But sometimes, as an auditor, you’re going to be knocking your brains out. Or you’re going to be supervising a whole bunch of co-audits and you’ll see some of these-one of these co-auditors knocking his brains out. The pc is going yap, yap, yap, yap, yap, yap, yap, yap! Howl, howl, howl!

And you’re going to sit down to try to pull the missed withhold. Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha. You’re not going to repair with auditing what’s been done wrong with Routine 2, let me tell you. You’ll find out ordinarily that a few minutes before, the pc’s been told he had an item and was apparently satisfied with it. Or the session before, something was abandoned. The list was abandoned as not being complete, or something like that. Something of this sort has happened in there.

You look over the Routine 2 and you raise hell with people who don’t put the pc’s name, date, and page number on the list sheets. The pc’s name, the date, and the list heading that they’re getting the list from. „Sheet,“ I have said, not „page.“ Each separate sheet of paper has got to be so marked. Otherwise you can never trace this back.

Now, when they’re doing auditor reports, for God’s sakes make them mark in what they are listing! „Who or what would a catfish oppose?“ „W/W wd catfish op“ is the way it’s usually written. Doesn’t take any time to write it down. Why leave everybody in a mystery? Because that may someday become of the greatest importance. Three days later: pc, „Yow, yow, yow, yap, yap.“ Or just total apathy: „Oh, I don’t know what’s gonna happen or what’s gonna happen to me. I always felt all right before Scientology came along.“

Well, you set it back and let’s look at the day before-the pc set bright goals? Then it happened yesterday. Pc set bright goals day before yesterday but not yesterday? Ah, well, then it was day before yesterday. Get the idea? It’ll be in the session that the pc set the last bright goals for. You got it? It won’t creep up. It won’t sneak up on you. It’s not on a gradient. This thing is about as gradient as dropping all the crockery in the house, two stories! See, it happens now! And your cycle of action on the thing is you say, „Well, here we are, we’ve got ‘an upchuck.’ That’s right. We’ve got this item, ‘an upchuck.’ And does that sound like it’s the right item to you?“

„Oh, yes, yes, I’ve always been vitally interested in that.“ „Well, do you have any mass?“

„No, no, no, no. Never have had any mass.“

„All right. Upchuck. Upchuck. R/Ses very nicely.“ „Yes, I suppose it does.“

„All right. Well, that’s that! We’ll-glad we found an item for you,“ and so forth! „Now, did you make any part of your goals for this session?“

„Oh, yes, I guess so,“ and so forth.

„Is there anything you’d care to ask or say before I end this session?“

„Well, yes. Has your meter been plugged in during the session?“

You say, „What the hell’s happening here?“ See? I mean this would even be a propitiative pc. One who is less propitiative just takes your head off and throws it up against the wall.

But it’ll be something like this. It’s just offbeat. They really haven’t had time maybe to really get this going.

Now, the next session you start to oppose it. The pc sets some sour goals like, „To get well, I guess,“ „To get through the session, somehow.“

And you’ll say, „All right. Now, we’re going to list ‘Who or what would oppose an upchuck.’ That all right with you?“

„Oh, yes, yes.“

„All right. Well, who or what would oppose an upchuck?“

„Oh, a bad auditor. An E-Meter. Auditing room. A criminal. Criminal negligence.“

„Do you have an ARC break?“

„No, no, I feel fine.“

And it’ll just go from there on, man. It’ll just keep going, from worse to worser. This pc will be violent about three sessions from then, or just go into complete apathy, „Huuuhhh.“ And the goals will continue to deteriorate. And that’s all there, back there on that list that you got „upchuck“ off of.

Now, the funny part of it is-the funny part of it is, you’ll occasionally say to a pc, „All right. This list here ‘Who or what has been agonizing in present time,’ „ or whatever it is, „that we got the upchuck off of,“ you see. „Now, we’re going to complete this list!“

„Oh, the hell you are. I just don’t see anything. It’s complete! You already gave me the item, didn’t you? I can’t think of anything more.“

„Well, we’re going to get the rudiments in on this list, and we’re going to continue it anyway.“

„But I just can’t think of anything more!“

Quite ordinary; you’ll get that kind of a response. They won’t complete the list. It’s incomplete. They’re now getting even with you, sort of That’s the whole motive.

You talk to them a little bit and persuade them. They say for a while, „There aren’t any more items. There aren’t this… Something.“

Then all of a sudden, why, they go, brrrrrr, bang-bang! Just-almost in the middle of the time when they’re telling you they can’t add to it, see, why, they start adding to the list. And they add to the list and add to the list and add to the list and add to the list and add to the list and add to the list. And you’re liable to go four, five, six, seven, eight pages, without a single R/S on it. And then all of a sudden there’s a crashing big R/S. Well, null it down, in case you missed an R/S, just by reading them, pocketa-pocketa-pocketa, „Hey, we may-I really got one on you.“

Talk about nulling of lists-for a week for a list, you know? I clocked myself the other night on a-on a six-page list. And it took ten minutes. I wasn’t wasting any time marking Ts and things down, you understand. I had it clean enough so I could just write „page Xed out“ before I turned it, see.

And you don’t have to wait any time to see if an R/S is going to develop. If it isn’t an instant R/S, it only takes you something on the order of about a tenth of a second of lingering glance still on the meter to see nothing is happening. And what do you mean you take your eye that far from a meter just to read the next line, you see?

You can really null these things down if you get in the groove, bow, bow, bow, bow, almost that fast, see. So you don’t care how much you null.

And it’s just on the off chance you might have missed one or something was up, something like that. Sometimes one that you can’t really tell which one R/Sed, or something like that-there was just a big R/S going on during the time.

Anyway, you get down here to the end, and bow! you see, there it is. And it’s „a tigerbat.“ Wasn’t „an upchuck!’ at all, you know? There it is, „a tigerbat.“

All this time the pc has been very cheerful. Where was the ARC break? Where’s the hopelessness? All the time you were listing, all the time you’re nulling. And you get down, and you say, „Well, we’ve got ‘a tigerbat’ here. A tigerbat, tigerbat. Yes, it R/Ses very nicely-“And the pc says, „Could’ve told you that all the time“.

Actually, he’s been swearing, you see, all the time that the thing was „a baseball.“ But, actually-yeah, he could have told you it’s „a tigerbat,“ and he’s all perfectly happy. And you oppose the thing, and he’s happy. And what happened to all this going-to-commit-suicide-tomorrow-morning and all that kind of stuff? That all just evaporated.

Now, here’s another test you can make sometime and that’s quite interesting. I don’t say to do this intentionally, but sometime when you find you have done it, mark this very carefully! You say to the pc, „Well, got your item here. It’s an upchuck.“’ And the pc, „Does that sound like it’s real to you, and so forth? You think that’s it?“

„Oh, yes, yeah, that sounds quite real.“

And then the pc starts to kind of scrape at you a little bit, one way or the other, and just watch the pc do a tone curve. Just watch that curve go down. If you knew damn well it wasn’t the item, and you did that, you’d see that curve down. I’m not telling you to do it intentionally, but sometime or another you’ll do it accidentally, and you might as well sit there and watch the-watch the thing curve. And then do this: „Well, did mass show up?“

And the pc says, „Yes, some mass showed up, and so forth.“

And you say, „Fine.“ Now, you say, „Well, I’m sorry but I don’t believe that was your item.“ See, you watched the curve. He didn’t know. You watched him start to ARC break, and some mass showed up. What more do you want, see? And you say, „Well, I didn’t think that’s your item, we’re going to have to continue the list.“ And watch the pc bright up-brighten up, right now. Bang!

„Oh! Well, are you?“

„Yes!“

„Oh. Is that so? All right. Okay. Matter of fact, I got a couple right now.“

It’s very funny. The pc apparently has bought it, you see, to some degree-no cognition or anything. Sometimes hell even cognite a little bit, you know. Because it is a lock on the real item. And you kind of watch him go down. And if you — if you just held off giving him the good news about the fact that you were going on, anywhere up there to thirty seconds, you can start to watch that ARC break. You can start to watch that thing. If you let it go, the pc will be tearing up the auditing room, see. That’s a missed withhold of an item. That’s an item that is missed, and that’s all that it takes. That is all that it takes.

That’s interesting, isn’t it?

Well, this has much more far-reaching potentials than you would think. There are a few pcs around-they are very, very rare; up at HASI London we know of four or five of them, I think, in all the years of operation up there — who just are ARC breaky as hell! And have been for two or three years.

They come back and get audited, but it’s absolutely gruesome. You know some of their names. It’s gruesome, man. Every time they get audited, I get letters too. It’s horrible.

You know what I’ll bet’s wrong with them-every single one of them-I’ll bet you, somebody left an unflat repetitive process, years ago, perhaps. That interesting’? They didn’t put the answer on the list, you understand? There wasn’t even a list! They didn’t put the answer on the list! No list. They never enunciated it. Somebody didn’t flatten the process. Somebody was running — somebody was running something on the order of „What would knock down a bodybuilder?“ You know, way back. Well, they’ve assessed something like „a bodybuilder,“ or something. All right, „What would knock down a bodybuilder? Thank you. What would a bodybuilder knock down? Thank you. What would knock down a bodybuilder? Thank you. What would a bodybuilder knock down?“ And then the auditor for some reason or other was changed or got tired or got bored or something of this sort, or something new came out on a telex the next day, and nobody flattened that process and that pc hasn’t been auditable since. Now, that rarely-but I think those cases do exist here and there. That isn’t every case by one awful long ways. But there are some of those cases around.

Now, a Problems-Intensive-type approach would handle that very well. Just search it out to find out when they were happy about auditing and pinpoint it down; help with the meter. See, you wouldn’t even need the guy’s auditor reports, only they very often are available. And pinpoint it on the meter, „When was that?“ Help the guy out. Run a little bit of Suppress, you know, on auditing, or something, and keep finagling around trying to get this period. You can fish the command with some care, and running Suppress, and so forth, and Careful of, something like that-just the suppressor buttons-you all of a sudden, the pc comes up with what process it was!

Now, you theoretically could prepcheck it out. And I say theoretically, because in actual fact I haven’t seen one of these missed-item ARC breaks mended by auditing alone. Why not let him complete the process? See, you understand?

Now, that doesn’t mean… This answers a burning question for some of you guys. Would it be best to go back and complete every process that had been left unflat on the pc? Well, this gives you-this gives you an index. And a very, very neat, nice index it is. Only those processes that left the pc in a complete state of bedraggled ARC break with the auditor or the organization should be picked up. Because they’ve got a missing item on it.

There’s some item answer that the pc didn’t give. Something happened. It was probably some very significant session to the pc, like „From where could you communicate to a foot.“ And he just didn’t put the answer that was the completed list, you understand. There’s a missing answer there. He never flattened it. And there’s possibly, maybe, no more than one of these on any Scientologist’s case line. I mean, you, as a pc, sometime in the past, audited over the years, have undoubtedly had a nonflattened process on you.

But not in all cases would this necessarily have admitted a missed withhold. But you get somebody who is pretty upset about auditing, and rather ARC breaky; well, find a time when they were not ARC breaky about auditing, flatten that process, and they’d smooth right out.

Actually, it should turn up on opposing „auditing,“ or something like that, if „auditing“ rock slammed. But I’m giving you-and I’m giving you something here. Now, this is not necessarily something that would be done on a case, you understand, unless this case had a long history. There — as I say, I think there are either five or six through the HGC of HASI London over all these years, but those five or six actually ought to be looked over on this basis of the missing answer on the question sequence. They should be looked over from that basis. Rather than try to do a new list on them.

See, it’d be a freak that a repetitive process of some kind or another actually left an unanswered question that was severe enough to cause them to severely ARC break about auditing from there on. But that can exist and ifs something that you should be aware of just as a pro. You just should be aware of it as a condition that can exist.

Now, as far as Routine 2 is concerned, this can happen on every case you audit. It’s not a selective case Condition. You can do this to every case you audit. You get some kind of a manifestation like this: Case is improving and improving and in beautiful shape, and you’ve got two packages now and then you go for the third package and you’re getting the first item of the third package and ifs just all running wonderfully, and the pc comes in and says — sets some goals like this: „To get through it. To see if I can’t get well after all.“

You say, „What the hell’s happened here?“ Well, what happened here is that third list that you were doing, that you were working on just the day before, whatever it was, that thing was-something wrong. Something wrong. But it all added up to a missed item. Whatever’s wrong with it, it had to add up to a missed item. That’s the common denominator of all these mistakes.

Now, all you have to do to square this up is not necessarily to go back and get the earliest list that ever got earlied on the case, or get the earliest complete that ever got uncompleted and go back to China, patch this up-no, it’s yesterday. And you just watch those goals. The big indicator is goals. And catch that one, right there, the one-the one they set a good goal for that session, and then a bad goal for the next session.

What was done in that good-goal session, right there, achieved a missing item. Whatever it was, it achieved a missing item.

Now, there’s another source for missing items, is failure to oppose. And the basic rule of failure to oppose is this: Here and there in organizations and field, and so forth, people were only getting the first item off List One, you see, getting it opposed and then leaving it. And then everything crumpled up like scrap paper for the pc, because they didn’t oppose what they had now found. You see, actually they’d taken it from a locked package.

The rule is simply this: That anything that keeps on R/Sing after you try to package it has to be opposed. Now, that could give you four oppositions. It could give you only two. A real Routine 2 that is perfectly done, perfect source, perfect everything-the real thing-actually blows up into a whoosh! and you can’t find any trace of anything. But one that’s a bit done off-the source wasn’t quite right, something like this; the-you took the source off of an arbitrary list, let us say, something like that, and what you wind up with is something that has still got a DR on it, and the other side of it is still slamming.

Why, I’d look it over awfully carefully to make sure that we didn’t have incomplete lists, is what resulted in all this. But for sure, you’re going to have to do something about that slamming item. Unless the slamming item came from a rock slamming item by represent. If you-you know, you never represent a rock slamming item. And you can actually get a pc in the soup. This is delicate. This is delicate. You can get a pc in the soup by taking a rock slamming item represent list and getting a rock slamming item and then opposing it.

If it is a real reliable item, it’ll be the only one that occurred on the list, and it’ll be an opposition-type thing or it was on there… But it would constitute a missed dumbbell; half of the dumbbell is missing.

I’ll give you an example. Under old 3G-this is wrong-old 3GA Criss Cross, we get an item „groups.“ And it slams like mad, and the auditor did a represent list on it, so he could have something to find goals with, and he got „Rotarians.“ And „Rotarians“ slammed like crazy. And that was seven-Six months ago, or five months ago, or something like that, and it is still slamming like crazy. Well, you just let it go on slamming! It’d be very wrong to oppose that. Because it’s in an incomplete list.

Actually, the only action you can take is to oppose „groups.“ You see, there’s that great big, constantly-slamming item staring you in the face, and you say, „Boy, we better do something about it.“ Ah, but if „groups“ was slamming-if „groups“ is slamming-ah, well, that’s a different proposition, because you can pull something proper with „groups.“

So you have to look at an item’s source. The source of an item has everything to do with an item. And you take an item that comes from a wrong source-yes, it’ll go on slamming for quite a while till somebody straightens the source out. But an item from a right source, if it continues to slam… It’s off a completed list. Everything is fine. You examine those little elementary things: Is it from the right source? Is it right way to? Was the list complete? Was it the last and only R/S on the list? Yes, yes, and the thing is still slamming. Oppose it, man! And if you don’t, you’ll get another ARC break situation.

Oddly enough, you can abandon this crashing slam on „Rotarians,“ and the pc is relieved, if anything. Pc says, „Oh yes, I’m very interested in that. I’m very, very interested in Rotarians. Yeah. Oh, yes, I’d really like to know what opposes Rotarians.“ The first time you try to oppose „Rotarians,“ the pc will ARC break a bit. Because there’s something wrong there, you see. It’s not really an item. It’s just held there because it was taken between two other items.

It’s actually some kind of a lock item on an improperly opposed item, „group“-“groups,“ see. Then when you get „groups,“ and get that all straightened out and that list is totally complete, you’ll find out „Rotarians“ will probably mysteriously vanish and won’t rock slam anymore. You see how that would be?

Now, R2-12 is something that is very easily done right, from scratch. If it’s right, from scratch, and it goes along right, all the way, see man, you’ve got a winner like mad!

The only thing that’s going to cause you trouble is where you did something wrong as you were carrying it along, and now you’ve got a pace-a case-patch-up situation, or it’s somebody else’s case that has been run wrong, and you’ve got to put it back together again. And those are the difficulties you run into.

Now, that’s why I’ve been trying to find indicators, indicators, indicators by the ton. Been trying to find all the ways you can tell if it’s running right, see. And I’ve been picking up new ones every time I turned around. There are lots of indicators now. And they’re more clear-cut as indicators.

Now, another thing that-about this is, there is no doubt about this that it can do some really marvelous things. There is no doubt about it. It can do some marvelous things. But it has enough boot to it that if you run it off the rails, it’ll wrap somebody around a Telephone pole.

It’s something like driving a racing car, you know. He can really get there in that racing car, you know, but it isn’t-it isn’t… Well, as a matter of fact the only thing that’ll get you there is a racing car, don’t you see. But by God, those curves! You know, every time it comes to an unbanked curve, why, it leaves several dollars’ worth of rubber on the concrete. And you can very easily wrap it around a Telephone pole-very easily.

Now, this makes an auditor have to have two skills. Not just the skill of driving a racing car, but the skill of putting one back together again after he’s wrapped it around a Telephone pole. So, you’re not only an auditing pro, you see, you’re also a case artisan. And at no time has artisanship on cases’ repair ever been as important as it has right now.

If you’re going to take these cases and get them out of the woods and square them up and head them on the right road, if you’re going to do that, be fully prepared that all of a sudden you hit this unbanked curve. Pc has just been going marvelous. The pc is-now looks fifteen-looked seventy-five before-pc looks fifteen; pc is doing beautifully; rave notices to the family; everything is going along fine, you see. And my God, there you hit one of these unbanked curves, you know. Pc comes into the next session and says — you say, „All right, what goals would you like to set for this session?“

And the pc says, „To get through it.“

„All right. Any others?“

„No.“

Well, for heaven’s sakes, be alive. Don’t try to repair this from last July. See, the time is readable on your wristwatch. It was just two clock winds ago that that unbanked curve connected with the wheels.

Now, you sometimes will tend to say, „Well, it must be my auditing, because after-I’ve been a little bit crude lately, and the pc’s been fighting the mid ruds, and there’s probably some various things here which I-so on, so on. So I’ll be reasonable about the whole thing, and I’ll try to pull the missed withholds which are causing this pc to ARC…“ And now you want to really see an ARC break? Because the pc sort of conceives you’re asking for the item, and boy, it just keeps restimulating and restimulating and restimulating. Only, of course, he’s got no way to give you the item. You’re not listing. So every time you ask him causes another missed withhold on top of the thing, you know? He gets very upset!

The only way to patch up Routine 2 is to patch it up with Routine 2.

That’s the way you patch it up. And you just go back there and you say, „Well, that’s a sour set of goals.“ Now, instead of trying to tie the pc even more thoroughly around the Telephone pole, you take a look at the pc, and you say, „All right, now, let’s see, we said we weren’t going to continue listing that list last session, but I’ve changed my mind about this, ha-ha, and we’re going to continue listing that. Were not going to abandon that one. Were going to continue that one.’

And the pc is liable to say, „Aw, are you really. „ or something. And then, all of a sudden, brighten up.

It’s very often the pc will tell you they can’t. Very often they’ll tell you, „What are you doing, trying to invalidate this beautiful item, ‘an upchuck’? I mean it explains my whole life, except I haven’t been explaining it.“

And you say, „Well, we’re just going to continue that list.“

Sometimes you’ll be horrified to find out how many pages you can go without a single R/S on it before all of a sudden the vital item goes blang, blang! That’s about the only discouraging thing about all this I know, but you-just be sure it’s there. Just be sure you get that item on the list, you understand. That’s the criterion. Be sure you get it on the list.

Now, knowing 2-12 and knowing other things about it and being able to run it in the first place, that’s the only one you can go headfirst into the snowdrift on, see. Now, any auditor can make this mistake; and can happen to any pc. So this is very, very interesting as a datum, isn’t it?

And you can do it, and you’ll pull the pc right out of it, and so forth, if you know exactly what it is; and if you don’t know what it is and you try to take some heroic or auditing measure to correct the thing, and boy, you’re going to be in awful shape trying to figure out this, see.

But I finally studied this down to its common-simplest common denominator. It’s just right there in the session goals, is where you’ll find it, and you can trace it back.

And I don’t care how ridiculous it seemed as an action. Don’t let anything like that get in your road, you understand. You say, „But, my God, the thing is… Actually, what we were listing in that session was just a brandnew consist-of-present-time list.“ How the-the pc was going around the bend trying to add items to it, and there hadn’t been a rock slam on it for-you know, at all! There were apparently no rock slams on it at all, and couldn’t be vital to the pc, and must be something else. No sir. What I’ve just told you takes precedence over all the something elses. It’s right there. That’s it. It’s that one where the pc shifted and it’ll be a big shift.

Now, if you know that one, if you study up that way, if you keep good auditor’s reports and you make very sure they are kept, you make darn sure that you keep an eye on these session goals as you go along and do straight Routine 2-keep it as straight as you possibly can. It’s, by the way, been getting straighter. I’ve been working with you, and watching what you’ve been doing, and so forth, and working, also myself, to make it easier to recognize what it is. Removing all possible things that might be going astray. Grooving down-it’s getting there. But that-this error I’ve been telling you about in this lecture is something that you can make. You can-you can have this happen to you. It can happen to me. It can happen to anybody. You understand? For some reason or other we missed the item.

Now, here’s one that you must remember on missed items: If there were two rock slams on the list, it might be when you went over it one didn’t slam. Pc might have been distracted or something. So therefore, you say there’s one item on the list. And because it’s the last item on the list that slammed, you-and because it came after a page, or something like that, of no slams, you say, „Oh well, that’s obviously it.“ You pick it up-no sir.

Never unload an item on the pc without great care-and this is my last message on this basis. When you tell the pc that it is his item, go ahead and tell him so with hope and enthusiasm, and anything else. We don’t care how you tell him as long as you don’t do anything else immediately afterwards. You want to be a real chump or a real knucklehead and practically spin the pc in, do something else at once.

Say, „Well, your item is ‘an upchuck.’ Now we’re going to test for the next one. Consider committing overts against an upchuck. Consider an upchuck committing overts agai-. What’s the matter with you?“ He’ll be halfway around the bend if it’s the wrong item, because you’ve given him a distraction of attention.

He’s already trying to grip this situation. He’s already trying to cope with more mass than he had before. You’ve hit right into the center of his bank-you might as well have hit him with a sixteen-inch shell, don’t you see-and then distracted his attention.

I’ll give you another method of doing it. „Well, I’ve got an R/Sing item here, uh-a tigerbat, and uh-here it is, and so forth, and now, we’ll go on finishing er-the list. Uh-a waterbuckbat, a catfishbat, a klughflat, a klu-. What’s the matter with you?“

Even if it was the right item, man, he’s going to be having a time. See, you gave him the item, and then you shifted his attention and you just mustn’t do that. That you said, „A tigerbat R/Sed,“ has practically presented him with the item, don’t you see?

Or sometimes you’re writing out here with your pencil, in very clear view, and he sees you mark the R/S down late on the list, and he says, „Haha! That’s it! It’s a tigerbat!“ And you go right on to the next one, and you just pull him through the hawsepipe, see. Brrrrr! You understand? You’ve shifted his attention badly. That’s why I say that the meter in line with the pc-the list in line with the meter face in line with the pc, and all obscured on what that pencil is doing, is actually your best action.

I’ve been adopting a rather slippy one of making a strike, a noiseless strike, after an R/Sing item, which, before, when I close the page, I go back and write R/S on it. There’s so few R/Ses you see when nulling anyhow. Use red pencil, you know, and make a strike on it. Just a single strike and mark nothing else. I’m trying to get this down to speed.

I’m not advising you to do that. It’s just a method that I’m testing out. I find it works very well-as long as you don’t miss marking the strike and marking in afterwards „R/S.“ That’s the crime.

Well, what I’m saying here is don’t give the pc something and then distract his attention, because it’ll aggravate the ARC break if it’s the wrong item. It’ll really aggravate the ARC break; it’ll tie him up in knots.

You say, „Tigerbat,“ and all of a sudden he has a new hat on his head he’d never heard of before, you see, and it’s out this big, and kind of furry ears up here, and he can feel wings out in back of them, and „Where the hell’d all this come from?“ you see.

And you say, „Well, have you made any part of your goals for this session?“ He says, „Waggllaglugh.“ You could say „Squeeze the cans,“ or something. He just won’t know what the hell to do, see. You give him a hell of a discombobulation. Now, that will catalyze the ARC break if it’s the wrong one. He’ll go right into that ARC break. You can throw him completely into apathy; you put him in a screaming fit right now, if you pull that trick, See.

What you want to do is make darn sure from where you sit that it’s the right item. Then you check it, and you tell the pc, „That’s the item. That’s your item.“ When you say, „That’s your item,“ or „Your item is a tigerbat,“ don’t you look back at the meter; don’t you look at your auditor’s report; don’t you look at another damn thing-you keep your eye right on the pc. Why? You want to see what effect this thing had. Because you just… What’s the matter with you? You fire a sixteen-inch shell into somebody’s midriff and you don’t want to see the explosion. All right, so you’ve got guilty consciences from other things you’re doing in the past.

No, you give the pc the item-you give the pc the item, you keep your eye right on the pc. Because, actually, if the item is wrong, you can see his face go dark; you can see him age right in front of your eyes; and you can see the ARC break and the uncertainty. Even though it’s very tiny, you’ll see all of that. And then ask him, „Do you now have markedly more mass than you had before,“ or „Do you have — do you — are you sensible of — lot more than you were a moment ago?“

„Yeah,“ he says, „there’s this big thing out in front of my face. I never realized it was there before.“

„Well, does that seem like your item? Does it make sense to you? Is that real to you?“

„Oh, oh, yes, yes, yeah, that is. LTh-was your E-Meter plugged in during this session? LTh…“

Well, you’ve got all the signs there, man, for a wrong item, you see. As second by second the time he has that thing as an item is increased, his tone curve will be going down, down, down. You can watch it descend by the second! I mean, it’s that-it’s that rapid. And you just see this is for the birds as far as you’re concerned. And then boy, don’t use the fact that it can be a wrong item to invalidate a right one! This is touchy business, see.

And you say, „Well, if it’s all right with you, I’d like to list on this list a bit longer, because I don’t think that’s your item.“

And you see the pc pick right up and get brighter. Or if it’s the right one, he’ll tear your head off-but you can take that. „What the hell do you mean? It’s my item! What’s the matter with you?“

Sometimes in desperation when they are so nervous and upset, and so forth, they’ll sometimes protect a false item for a short time. And you say, „Well, we’re going to list a little bit longer just to make sure, if it is all right with you. What is the next item for this list, ‘Who or what would derogate present time?’ „

„Well, you put it that way,“ and he’ll give you some perfectly nice items right away. Do you understand this?

This is the art of presenting the item. And the art of detecting whether or not a list was left incomplete, or an item, more pertinently-an item had been missed by an auditor in the immediate past history of the person’s auditing. If you can do that, you can repair any case because, by and large, you can get a lot of wrong sources and abandon them or finish them or list them or package them. Nothing happens to the pc, but he improves. But on this one list in ten on any pc, if that one isn’t completed, cut my throat! That one’s really going to go to hell. He comes back, dragging in-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha.

I think we have one person here who had a wrong item on the 21st of December, or an incomplete list or something, and then went to the 7th of January to the next session. Sounds a little rough-sounds a little rough. Told that the item was abandoned, or that list was abandoned, on the 21st of December, and has evidently been sitting in this ever since then. Because as far as I can make out from the auditing reports, that’s apparently the day, the last day a cheerful audi-set of goals was set by this pc. So it must have been.

All right. Well, there’s a-there’s a brand-new-a brand-new look at this. There’s some better indexes. There’s a way to really see this, and so on. And it’ll also — it’s also a good thing to keep your eye on the pc and do nothing — and do nothing right after you’ve given him the item anyway. So you might as well be observing the pc as doing that, because otherwise if you shift his attention, and it’s the wrong item, you’ll practically cut him in half, man. You just presented him with a bunch of gruesome mass that he hasn’t had before, and he’s very doubtful, and he’s sort of lost and half spinny on this thing, and it’s going down wrong way to, and all that sort of thing. Now, if you shift his attention in the middle of that, hell have a screaming ARC break, and you just won’t know what the hell to do with him.

But there, as far as I’m concerned, is the basic danger-let me not minimize it-the basic danger in Routine 2. That’s the basic danger in Routine 2, and right along with it there are the indicators to tell you if you run into it. And there, as well, are the cures for having done this thing of missing the wrong item on the pc.

Okay?

Right! That’s it!