View source for 3GA Criss Cross, Secondary Prehav Scale (SHSBC 621025)

'''Series:''' Saint Hill Special Briefing Course (SHSBC)

'''Date:''' 25 October 1962

'''Speaker:''' L. Ron Hubbard

----

← [[Lecture_Index_SHSBC|Back to Series]]

All right. This is lecture two, Saint Hill Special Briefing Course, October 25, AD 12. Now, the experimental material – I've given you very factual material so far in this lecture series tonight.

The experimental material consists of, how do we find an entrance to this channel that leads to the Rock and the goal? Now, we should recognize that the pc will very often conceive he has seen and blown the Rock because he has seen a couple of dumbbell – you know, these two spheres fly off. Very often these spheres fly off and he doesn't even observe them because he's inside the mass and there's an impenetrable barrier between himself and the outside of the mass.

These things very often fly off the outside of the mass and he doesn't see them, but he happens to be located in a fortuitous position and he sees a pair of them blow off. Well, he's already progressing very well down the channel if he sees this phenomenon. And they – nobody has reported to me watching the Rock go, which I consider is very interesting that no report has existed on it and that is why you'll find me continuously working with lines and telling you that you have to finish off clearing.

You see? Because there's more there to blow. Now, you should recognize this channel on your meter, looks like a whole series of rock slams of high agitation, but in actual fact is not a series of rock slams.

That's just your meter manifestation, don't you see? It's a whole series of these dumbbells, you see, with their opposing forces. It's a whole series of these things, don't you see?

And looking at them in proportion as you would go down, they are not inverted and getting smaller; they are in actual fact getting bigger. See, they're not growing as you process the person, they simply – the earlier it is on the track, the bigger they are. You see?

So you enter it, blowing small pairs, and wind up blowing big ones. See? Now, it requires – it requires a pretty good faith in the auditor on the part of the pc in order to list.

Why? Well, actually, the pc's ability to confront is: pc plus auditor versus the bank. I give you The Original Thesis.

And when you've got the auditor plus the bank versus the pc, he's got too much to confront in present time and he doesn't do any confronting. The length of time in listing is directly – inversely proportional to skill of auditing. In other words the greater and smoother the auditing skill, why, the less time, theoretically, it would take in listing, because the pc's ability to confront is rising because he feels safe and able and so forth, under the guidance of this auditor.

Therefore, you never jump a pc; you handle the pc very smoothly and very permissively in listing, particularly. Too overwhelming an auditor activity while trying to find items at the beginning of a case, of course, will seal off finding any items. Now, that is said with reservations because when you think of this, most of you right here, right now, have an adequate auditing presence and handling of the pc in order to achieve this fact.

I'm not talking about anything that is totally beyond you. But, the better your auditing presence and ability to handle the pc, the easier it is for the pc to find items. Don't you see?

Because you see, his ability to confront is raised by the fact that somebody's helping him confront. Now, help very easily goes on an inversion. It gets covert help which is actually destructive.

There's real help high on the scale and of course like all things it has its lower‑scale mockery. You see this in psychoanalism. You do.

That's a lower‑scale mockery of help. They tell the person all about it. They're helping him out all right – only they don't see this as anything bad, that's just a built‑in procedure.

Well, we know that's quite destructive. That's evaluation and so forth. So the pc has really got to be helped.

In other words he's got to be guided into areas where he can confront things and find out what they are. He's got to be guided into areas where he can confront things and where he can find out what they are. But he's got to be guided into those areas – not shoved, beaten, pummeled.

Now, what area are you guiding him into? You're guiding him into this channel toward the Rock when you're doing it by rock slam. You're just guiding him in that direction and he goes in that direction.

And the first items you get are not the biggest items of the bank, but they're the items that the pc finds it feasible to confront at this particular time. At this stage of his case he can confront those items. Now, you find one item, he's finally – says, "Ha‑ha!

What do you know!" you know? Part of his cognition, which he never speaks, is, "Hey, you know, I can look at this and think about it, you know?" It's a locked out area. It's been a locked out area to him.

And he all of a sudden finds, "Well, hey, what do you know! I can get into that valence; I can look at that valence. Ha‑ha!

It isn't as dangerous as I thought." And that's sort of part of his cognition. So he tells you all about it, he's very interested in it, you know? "Here I am, standing in the middle of this powerhouse with a million volts flying all around me and look at‑look‑look at me, I can talk to you and I can think in here. Ha‑ha!" You know?

There's a bit of triumph involved in this. Don't you see? Because always before he has established this item at the level of reality.

His last intimate acquaintance with this item was a dim memory of how awful it was in real life. So therefore, he doesn't want very much to do with it. Now, he finds that the item can be confronted in the bank, just as you get somebody – you start him in through the beginning of the engram, let me put it this way – start him in at the beginning of the engram and he – he protests, "Heh‑heh‑heh‑heh‑heh.

Go through that – oh, no, man! Go through that opera... Oh, no!

Ha‑ha‑ha, not me! Uh‑huh, not me!" And it takes a little bit of skill to get him in there and get him going through this thing. And he runs through it and the somatics run off and you do a smooth job of auditing, he eventually winds up, "Ha‑ha!

What do you know! That wasn't anything." You know, got the somatic, confronted the thing, gee, what do you know! You get the reaction, as you – you probably had this.

Ask somebody to look at something in the bank and they say, "Oh, I'm not so sure about that. Oh, no way." Most pcs you get are that way about their whole case. See?

So you, the auditor, are overcoming this first reluctance and that is the highest level of your skill – overcoming that first reluctance to look. There are all sorts of gradients we've had in the past on this. We stress this much harder in the past than we have these days.

We kind of take it for granted that an auditor will be able to persuade somebody to look. But actually, there are all kinds of mechanisms which – you can do this. Remember "Look at me – who am I?" That was your first auditor process. "Look at me.

Who am I?" And you get pcs that are having a bad time, why they eventually come up in their level of confront and they say, "Ha‑ha! My auditor." You know, first recognition, you know? You were Aunt Grace and Uncle Bill and you were almost anybody.

You were a policeman and – God almighty, what you weren't! And then they eventually look at you, you know, and they say, "my auditor," and you thought that was a good time to begin the auditing session. Actually we've undercut this in many ways.

We don't demand that he confront the auditor by "Look at me. Who am I?" We just sort of say, "Well, if you'll not be too uneasy with me I will show you a piece of the bank you can confront." You see? Now, what can he confront?

Well, he'll confront what he – what registers on the meter. It doesn't register on the meter, he wont confront it. Now, an example of this in your assessments, an example of this – and a very good example – is the fact that early in auditing your pc will put items on his list which turn out not to be the item.

Has no cognitions or anything on it; they're just part of the list. And now we find an item, and then we find another item – we're still listing on more items, you see – and we get down and maybe with the third item or something like this, we find as one of the pc's items something he put on the first list. See?

Now, this suddenly is his item, you know? "A black bear." He says, "Ha‑ha! Black bear. Oh, yes!

I was down in camp one time and I all of a sudden – so and so and so and so on, and yeah, oh, they've been terrible to me – and so on, and that's probably why I have a craving for sweets, you know? I often think of that and I get – catch myself every once in a while doing this on tablecloths and that sort of thing. Yeah, it's probably right.

A black bear. What do you – ha, well, a black bear – well, that's funny." Why didn't this happen with the first list? You know, he put it down on the first list, didn't he?

Well, why didn't we get it on the first list? No, we got something else. We probably got "a teddy bear." In other words, the more items we find the more the pc can confront.

See, it's his state of mind versus the actual mechanics of the bank. Now, many philosophic schools of the past have erred in trying to say that it is 100 percent state of mind and that there is nothing else. Well, where are these guys on the scale of confront?

See? Well, let me tell you that these things are. They're not imaginary, they are.

Don't you see? One of your biggest arguments you will run into with some dean of psychology or something like this, when you're talking about it, is his insistence on the imaginary character, what you're handling. The fantasy of this or "Hubbard's fantasies about these things" or something like that, you know?

They're totally unreal to him. Well, in the field of, well, Christian Science, gives you a ne plus ultra on this. Wow! "All is mind and it's nothing and the physical universe is nothing and there is no more of that." Don't you see?

Well, look, look: the thing is, see? There is something in the bank. You see?

It isn't that the pc gets afraid of biting it so that it bites him. If you were to shove him in at it hard, it'd bite. You understand?

You got the same thing as when you shove somebody into the tiger's cage and he keeps – if you were of this extraction of thought, this just "all is mind and there isn't anything else," you know, "there is no world; there is no mind; all engrams are really just imaginary. Ridges, you see, don't exist, these dumbbells Ron is talking about are just conceptual things." You get that, all that kind of thing. Supposing you had that frame of mind as you had this poor "Joe" outside of a tiger's cage?

And you said, "Well now, I'm going to throw you in the cage." And he says, "You‑go‑gonna‑go‑gonna throw me in the cage?" And you say, "Yes, yes – it's merely illusion. Tigers are just illusion, you know? There's – they're really not real." And he says, "Well, looks awful damn real to me!" And you say, "Well, just, just calm yourself now, calm yourself and just realize that if you have faith, you have faith, now, why you can just go into that cage, because you see, tigers really don't exist.

You see, the bars here are just an illusion and so forth and I'm just going to open the door – and the door, that's an illusion, too. And supposing you did lose a body, a body is just an illusion of one kind or another. So what are you – what are you raising so much fuss about?" And you finally sell this poor Joe, you see, on the idea that there is no tiger, there is no tiger cage, it's not dangerous, you get the door open, you pitch him in.

There's a large snarl and a piercing scream. That'll teach him to buy your brand of religion, you see? He got et.

And somewhere up the track we find it as an engram. See? It even made a real engram. [laughter] Now supposing if he had an auditor sitting there, supposing this had happened to him, he'd been persuaded on the not‑is-ness of it all, and supposing he came up the track and got audited by an auditor, said "Now, well, now, there really isn't anything in the bank and this is just illusory and there is – really isn't anything there that bites, you see, and you can go into this with perfect bravery, and because there's just nothing there, you see?

That's all ..." so on. You throw him into this thing over his head, with a terrible insistence that he do this, that, or the other thing – and it bites! Don't you see?

And this disillusions him. He's got his second disillusion. The truth of the matter is, the meter is your best sorting out mechanism of this.

Your meter won't give you something the pc can't confront. Well, the reason it can't give you – it won't give you something he can't confront is kind of interesting, because if he's not in the vicinity of it, it won't read. See, it's kind of an idiotic reason.

You can't enter buildings unless there are buildings there to enter. Don't you see? Well, you have a fair guarantee that the pc can walk in that door with impunity if it will read nicely on the meter.

Now, a slam on the meter is the mostest confrontingness that he can do at the moment. So the first slam that you get on the pc is at one level of ability to confront the bank. Then you find a second item – that's another new increased ability, by having been increased by finding the first one and he'll find a bit more, and the next one up the line he'll find a bit more he can confront, don't you see?

I mean, this new thing that he can confront is bigger and more beefy and more powerful than the first two, you see? And then the fourth one will be bigger and beefier and more powerful, you see. You see how it goes?

And it – this individual is actually increasing, and oddly enough he's being met halfway because the bank that's there to confront is decreasing. See? So it makes a very happy combination.

Your pc doesn't have to grow nine feet tall all that fast. See? It's good enough to be six‑foot tall and look at a six‑foot bank.

Because then your pc is, next time is going to be six foot one, and the bank is going to be five feet eleven. Don't you see? You already unsettled this balance.

And then he's six foot two and the bank is five feet ten. You see how you're approaching this? So a successful discovery of an item that the pc is permitted to cognite on is marvelous.

Your Problems Intensives are absolutely phenomenal because the pc finds out he can confront this later section of his life with equanimity. He discovers that. He discovers he doesn't have to handle it with a crush and a protest and a this and a that and the other way, see?

The Problems Intensive is a very good gradient on this sort of thing. But understand, you're not asking him to confront anything very tough. When you start clearing him by finding items and then finding his goal, you're asking him to confront nice, great big bangs.

See? You're asking him to do quite a bit. So as you start on this procedure you should then fully expect to have some trouble.

Because you're jumping at one fell jump – you're asking the pc to do something the pc is very doubtful that he can do. His confidence is just about, well, that tone of voice, "Heh‑heh. Others can, but I don't know, I – per theory – I can do this perfectly well.

There's nothing much to it – you just confront these items in the bank and I could confront almost anything, I guess." But you say, "Who or what would not be part of existence?" Well, that's a long, tall order. Why does he get this reaction? Well, the pc believes he's being asked to confront more because he's already kind of quasily aware of this spook standing over there, see?

And you're saying, "Well, what isn't part of that – what isn't – what isn't over there?" Therefore, you're not sure. See? He isn't sure.

Now therefore, if any fumble is connected with clearing, if there's any real fumble, it'll slow down the process. You might even lose ground that you have to recover. In other words, it might – a badly audited pc is harder to audit than the pc who wasn't audited when it comes up to finding items and goals.

Don't you see? Now, he might have become convinced that he had less confront than he thought in the first place. In other words, he slid down in the well.

Now, fortuitously ... Well, let me make this one point: that the faster you clear somebody, the easier it is. So you see, one of my efforts forward in all this is not just making it easy so you can do it.

I'm making it easier to do by your doing it faster. Don't you see? That's part of it.

You take a couple of years to do this job and you're going to have an awful time, if only because of the intervening PTPs. So the – interestingly enough, the faster you find a goal, the easier it is to find. Now, that has only this proviso on it: that your pc has got to be up to confronting some section of the bank where his goal is located.

Now, the mind runs with wings of thought through the bank, you see – I mean, a thetan, you know, thought – easy. He can pick thoughts out of this bank, but he cant pick masses out of it. See, you can get the goal long before he can confront any masses – long before this, see, the goal will read.

But the goal tends to pull him into areas that make it pretty necessary for him to confront things and so you'll find the goal easily and then the goal submerges if the pc is already pretty bank-overwhelmed. It's quite common to find the goal and then have the goal vanish. And it'll have to be laboriously prepchecked back into position again.

Now, I can assure you at once that the prepchecking of the goal back into view again is a waste of time if it won't tiger drill in. The best way to get a goal to read is by Prepcheck, but if your Prepcheck is hard or arduous and the goal has gone out easily, you're frankly wasting time. Because somehow or another, either through a little bit of rough piece of auditing or something of the sort, you've already heaved this pc into a tougher spot than he can easily get out of.

Now, the reason why we're balancing around lines and trying to get lines that are easy, is not to get the pc in deeper than he can confront – that's the problem of lines. Now, your suddenly rising tone arm, which goes up and sticks on a series of listing lines – as you're clearing the pc after you've found the goal – is as really a result of his getting too deep to confront it. He's gone a little bit further than he would really care to confront.

Now, doing it by Prehav level, listing by Prehav level, gives us this monitoring influence: How deep can he confront? Well, it reads on the meter, so he can confront that deep. I hated to have to come back to Prehav Scales, but they have been come back to.

Because all too often the pc, left on his own with an arbitrary series of lines, will get in deeper than he can confront and then the case stalls and sticks and takes forever to list and you go on and on and on and on and on and on and on, and I finally had to make up my mind that we sacrificed the ease of listing a guy off with no Prehav levels, because it's taking much longer than if we found some Prehav levels to list him on, see? There's no choosing between these two things. You take a series of arbitrary lines – some pcs take so long on these things that it would have been infinitely faster to have found some Prehav levels.

Hence, this slump back to Prehav levels. This is how deep can he look in the bank? Well, he can look as deep as this level of doingness.

Actually, what you're finally going to run out of the bank is "kill everybody for the hell of it." See? That's what you're going to confront up to – something like that, maybe, it – on this goal, some kind or another. "Just kill everybody for the hell of it." That's going to be his feeling. You're eventually going to get that feeling.

And where do you enter it? "Not to talk to anybody with a frown on your face." See, "Don't talk to anybody with a frown on your face, that – it's an overt." Well, of course your meter will register talking to people with a frown on your face. Well, he doesn't like that and he knows about it, so he'll run out talking to people with a frown on their face and then you get some other lower level of other doingness or action of some kind and you'll get down to being able to run that. But if it shows up on the meter it'll run, see?

If you can get it on the meter, it'll run. That's your crux of the matter. Arbitrary lines occasionally will throw a pc in too deep.

And an auditor for instance who will take up an engram while listing ought to be shot. Because the engram probably isn't being confronted by the pc anyhow or wouldn't stick there, it'd blow, see? And an auditor suddenly listing and find a great big juicy item that the pc just hints at and following the old theory that we must make the auditor confront and this pc has just hinted at tigers: "I wonder if I blah‑blah small cats, I‑I – striped beasts, I‑I ...

Oh, I‑I don't really care to put that item on the list at this time – pussycats, kittens so forth." Now, the auditor would say, "Well, what were you going over there minute ago?" "I was going over a – I was just – it – just something got very unreal." Got some sensation of some kind. "No, but what – what were you – what were you trying to look at there?' "Well, I just – just – well, it's right, there's something there I really didn't really want to look at." "Well, look at it. What is it?" "Well, I‑I‑I‑I'm not sure that I‑I..." "What is it? Confront it!" Tone arm: wheee!

Case jammed. He isn't ready for this till day after tomorrow. See?

And he'll go whizzing down the line and he'll say, "Carnivory, tigers, big tigers, ferocious tigers, tigers that want to get away, tigers that run like hell, tiger skins." You get your gradients of approach as he gets deeper in clearing. Now, when we say the entrance lines – not as the playwright would use it, but the entrance question – we've got this pc, the pc's been prepchecked, no goal's been found or a goal has been found but it's gone down with a small bubble left on the surface of the sea. Goal found, something happened, pc had a goal found, the goal, can't get anything to read – that sort of thing.

That' the same case as just starting a case down the channel. We have, then, a means of putting the pc closer to the goal, masswise and in terms of mental reaction, making him more capable of confronting the goal so his thought can fly around in that zone or area of the bank and pick the goal up again. And we have both of these problems.

Either picking the goal back up or the other problem of getting him closer to it or pointed in its direction, on making him confront it. These are the same problem. In other words, make the pc more capable of confronting the goal and putting him closer to the goal for him to confront and we do those two operations.

And they're done by this series of assessment that we've called Dynamic Assessment by Rock Slam and we're calling 3GA Criss Cross, which is better descriptive terminology. Since were going to get an opposition terminal that he can confront and then we're going to get a ter... maybe another opposition terminal and the maybe a terminal that he can confront and then maybe another terminal an then maybe an opposition terminal that he can now confront – and we're just putting him within reach of where this goal is. We're just showing him which direction this is.

And the meter will show us because as long as we can go the track of the slam and follow the slam, why, we're fine. We don't care if those first things that he gets as items are highly conceptual. You know, we don't care if his first item – we don't care if his first item was "dreaming." See?

We don't care if his first item was – we're not talking about – talking about items, see? And it's – he didn't get an item all. We got this as an opposition to what he's doing.

This is a lot – this is quite up the line. Then we get to an action. We don't get an item, a solid mass, we get an action.

See? We get breathing. See, that'd be the action or then we get that as an item.

It's on his list, so it's an item. Don't think that your item – it's – the reason I don't call them terms and oppterms is because they really don't have mass yet when you go at this gradient. This is a very, very slow gradient.

But these things will all rock slam just as though they were – they were big, massy things. You see? And then the fellow has got the idea of pen scratches, see, and finally he gets to the item, and you've got him down the line – you've got an opposition terminal now of a tame horse.

See, all these things will slam. Slam doesn't mean violence – it means what's the pc up to confronting. Because he's – but – what's he up to confronting, with an effort.

Get that? That's a differentiation, see? He can stand still at this point and gaze in spite of the snap, crackle and pop going on around his ears, see?

The bank is going zzz‑bing‑click‑prent‑tow‑pow- ssqqqu‑ssss‑paawww‑blmmp‑glmpp‑ glmpp‑glnkk‑glnkk. And he can sort of – you know, it's like a guy walking uphill against a high wind. He feels he can make it.

But unless you get him pointed uphill against the high wind, hell go around and confront things that are too easy to confront. Don't you see? Why, it'd take ten thousand hours of all things he can confront.

The gradient would maybe be thousands of items between, you see, this first point you pick him up and the first item, if you were just doing it on some – some queasy idea, "Well, what can you confront? What would you rather not confront?" See? You're getting him in that direction, but you get a thousand hours of auditing maybe, to get him up to the point of your first item.

You actually find out for him that he can stand there – he actually gave you the items so he must be within reach of them. See? He can stand there in a high electronic breeze, man, and he can say, "That – that is a soup bone.

Ha‑ha!" See, feels brave. You know? Great!

Now, you take him from that to the next thing. Well, these happen to be key points on this channel, if they slam. Because realize, that he's approaching closer to the basic center of commotion, which is caused by the basic terminals originated after he made the postulate.

See? He made this postulate called a goal, and he's actually approaching the core of the situation, and he's walking inward – he isn't blowing outward. And although it's sort of uphill, has a lot of wind around here, he sort of gets the idea a tree's going down every once in a while, you know?

House roof just went by. He's sort of queasy about all this and all of a sudden he sees "soup bone" and he's made it. See?

Because it was "soup bone" that was causing a lot of commotion. He can stand there and look at "soup bone" and know that it's the source of a tremendous amount of commotion. You get the commotion commoting, but eventually he's located the source.

It wasn't an evil witch who cast spells with soup bones. See? It was just a soup bone.

See, it's actually devaluated at the moment he grasps it and cognites on it. The mystery is gone off of it – it doesn't look so tough to him now, see. He knows now, see?

Those are the things that are important. So, all right. It doesn't matter how you enter, as long as you enter it on a slam.

No slam registering on the meter – no electronic windstorms going on. Little dirty needle – probably there's the soup bone to be gazed at and he's standing way over at the side there and he's examining this little green pebble. And he knows the pebble, he's heard of the pebble before, it's a good, safe thing to look at.

Or it might very well be that it's a saber‑toothed tiger. He's only up to looking at the soup bone. See?

And he's got this little bzzz-bzzz – occasional dirty needle that goes on and off, you know. And if you said too strongly and violently, "All right, we've assessed it all on down here now to a saber‑toothed tiger. Now, why the hell don't you agree that that is your item?" You've added your force and power to the force and power residual in the saber‑toothed tiger and you've got a very overwhelmed pc.

He goes "Aggggh!" Because you let the tiger right in on him. See? A saber‑toothed tiger.

He knows it isn't real. That's one of his basic mechanisms. He's standing there with wide‑open mouth and gleaming teeth and he says, "Oh, well, it's a rug." "What do you want me to look at the rug for?" Rrrrr!

Protest. "To hell with you." See? That kind of a reaction. Not real.

Later on you'll get saber-toothed tiger and he'll say, "Yep. Tiger. Well!

Tiger, yeah! Yeah. Tiger.

Big tiger. Bigger tiger. Going into tiger caves – rugs, tiger rugs, putting tiger whiskers in your gun case for luck.

Yeah, lots of uses for tigers. We used to hitch them up to channels back in Pooh‑bah Planet." Tell you all about them, see? But at this stage of the game on this assessment, man, he's not up to it, so he tells you it isn't real – it isn't so.

You get a little, tiny zzzz. Tiny needle. See?

So you either have an item that it wouldn't do him any good if he could confront it, like a green stone, or if he could – if he did see it, by your trickery of auditing, it would be huge and tough and too much for him and he'd shut it right off – just like that. You persuade him to see it and off it goes. That doesn't mean why your rock slam turns on and off.

Your rock slam turns on and off because he's saying, "Well, I'm not sure. Well, I'll get brave now, I'll look‑look there – a-ha, I'm not sure about that. Well, I'll look – uhhhh.

It's awful murk... ah, well, we shouldn't get into that." You know that's why it is, he's suppressing it and he's protesting and he's doing this and that, and all of a sudden he says, "Soup bone! Aha‑ha‑ha‑ha! Soup bone.

There it is." Perfectly comfortable now. Actually at that point, the rock slam that he's confronting must be from something else deeper in the bank. Although you say "soup bone," you've turned his attention toward the center of the bank again and he gets the benefit of the rock slam.

But the soup bone now isn't rock slamming. Even though a soup bone now turns on a rock slam – follow me closely – soup bone turns on a rock slam and you'll find that pcs very often get haunted by slamming items you haven't found yet. This is the bane of the auditor.

This is when you should take out your insurance that doesn't refuse to pay off in the event of suicide or something. Because that's mean, man. You start getting the pc that every time the pc has the slightest withhold, has not told you all and you get a wide slam, you're going to find nothing but item after wrong item after wrong item after wrong item after wrong item.

There's going to be no cognitions to amount to anything or the pc is cogniting and the pc feels all happy about it and is trying to please you, you know? Pc, though, is getting no better and no slams and you just apparently find goals forever. Till you finally, knucklehead, get smart enough to go back to your last reliable item.

What was the last reliable item? Well, you have to sort out the items you've found by "What wouldn't you give to a ___" on each item. And find out if they turn on a slam and if the item doesn't turn on a slam, then it wasn't an item even though it slammed when it did.

In other words, you can be fooled by a lurking item that the pc has not confronted but is straight in front of his face. And it'll – every time he picks up the slightest withhold, didn't tell you that he actually was uncomfortable with his legs crossed, at that moment you're reading "fisherman." You say "fisherman. The pc says, "Well, my legs aren't very comfortable," and you get slam‑slam‑slam‑slam‑slam‑slam‑slam, and you say, "Boy, look at that – look at that rock slam.

Ho‑ho‑ho! That's a nice rock slam." And you get the next item or two and you think the rock slam is merely persisted. And then the pc gets a little bit of withhold or like he says, "I wish I had a drink of water," and at that moment you're reading "A man‑at‑arms." So it goes slam‑slam‑slam‑slam‑slam‑slam‑slam‑slam.

Then you go back and reassess the list and you can't find any slams on it. You tiger drill "fisherman," you can't find anything. You tiger drill "man‑at‑arms," you can't find anything.

What happened? Well, those are known as false items. They're slamming because the p... they're charged up enough to make a rock slam on the part of the pc's actual item show up on them if he gets a withhold at the same time they're read.

You follow that? A real item slams – there's a very easy rule on this – a real item slams when the rudiments are thoroughly in. And a real item will always – can always be coaxed to slam again, within reason, in the same session.

You can coax the slam back in the same session. A false item slams only when the rudiments are out. If the rudiments are wildly out, why, the false item will slam some more.

If the rudiments are then put in, it doesn't slam. See? A real slamming item slams only when the rudiments are in.

There's not a ghost of, "don't knows" or "Failed to reveals" in the session or on the item. And it's for that reason that the exact, proper procedure for nulling a list is asking the pc the auditing question that you're going to ask him, "Who or what ...," and making your list of his answers, and then nulling it down to the last three – sometimes you can't cut it that close and it's the last four – and you suddenly notice that you're down that low and taking your last three or four items, and then taking them one at a time, and thoroughly tiger drilling them. Tiger drill each one – Big Tiger, see – tiger drill them hard, man.

Oh, yes. Work those things over. Coax them, man, because it may be in with the tiniest, little tsk that disappears, too, as you're tiger drilling and you say, "Oh, there's nothing left on this item." Then you ask just that one more question and all of a sudden it ticks again.

And you ask one more question. Then you get bright. And you say, "In this session, have you protested anything?" "Yes, I'm protesting you using all of these rudiments and that sort of thing, because they all seem to me to be very silly." "Well, what are you doing?

What are you doing?" "Well, of course, each time you start to tiger drill, I'm just hoping they won't be in. I'm postulating they will not now be in." You get all these little things sorted out and little minor casualties that you have and you get them all sorted out, and all of a sudden you look at that item and it goes slam‑slam‑slam‑slam‑slam‑slam‑slam‑slam – like crazy, see? And then the pc, all of a sudden, gets a "Failed to reveal." It stops slamming.

You say, "What's the matter?" Pc says, "Well, I was looking at it in your magnifying glass. I was watching and I didn't tell you, but I was looking at it, heh‑heh, the reflection in your magnifying glass. It was slamming a little bit, wasn't it?" You say, "All right, thank you very much." And you say, "Tiger." Slam-slam‑slam‑slam‑no slam.

What happened? Well, actually what happened mentally with the pc, the pc is sort of – they got – you know, they remind you of putting a periscope around the doorjamb to look into the place, you know and then they get – they get brave enough, see – they get brave enough to eventually stick one eye around the doorjamb and then they get brave enough to open the door a little bit wider. You eventually got them – get them brave enough to walk in the room.

See? And every time they get unbrave, they suppress, they protest, they don't want to look at it again and so forth. So a real item goes off when the rudiments go out.

A false item is lurking around. Let's say you bypassed an item. You should have found item 3 and you just didn't find item 3.

Instead of that, you went off on a wild tear, did something very unusual, picked one off of the hat, got one off of the beginning goals – this is a mistake I made the other day and wasted about an hour and a half of auditing – get one off the goals of the session. Slam‑slam-slam‑slam. My God!

I looked this over as to reasons one couldn't get Clear and all that sort of thing. The second I got the rudiments in, it all blew up. It was the real item slamming.

The real item was slamming. But neither the pc nor I could have told what the real item was at that particular time. The real item required the pc to sit quietly.

So every time the pc sat quietly, the real item turned on. So if the pc was sitting quietly while giving me the goals of the ses... you know, consciously sitting quietly, while giving me the goals of the session, I'd get a slam. Got the idea?

Real cute. This is your problem. This is your – your problem is, that if the pc is sitting in a real item and you've monkeyed around with it and brought it up to maybe – you've found one and you've found two – you should have found three, but you didn't.

Then three is liable to linger around and trigger every time the pc has a withhold from you. This should happen to you. See?

The exact procedure, then, is to ask the pc the proper question, list that thing out till the pc says, "No, there are no more." Get your mid rudiments in. Ask the question to see if you get a bang on the meter at the question being asked – see if it instant reads, the question. If it does, make the pc list some more, get on down to a point where you can get the mid ruds in and get no reaction on the question itself on the meter.

When this occurs, be very happy that you've got a complete list or total rudiments out. You can always be certain about these things. Now, having gotten that, you go back and null the list with an appropriate question.

The questions are not all the same questions for all the same lists, so let's not say the question at this point. Null it down to the last three or four items left in – that's by elimination – and it's instant read, very sloppy, loose instant read, you know? It can happen before, it can even happen afterwards – if it disturbs the needle.

If you're trying to do a pc on a dirty needle, you ought to be spanked. You've got to clean that needle up. That needle's got to be a nice, beautiful, smooth flow before you do any list.

And that puts an awful burden on you because the pc is under very heavy agitation during this whole time. The pc just stops talking to you for a moment and says, "Well, I won't disturb the auditor," and you get a dirty needle. See?

One of the ways of getting around that is "Did you want to say anything?" you know, and don't try to keep your mid ruds in. You see, your – I mean, just don't keep punishing the pc with mid ruds or something like that. Be more graceful about the whole thing.

And here the needle was free and smooth and you say, "To shoot redcoats. To shoot redcoats," you know? Something like this, we don't care what you were saying. "Consider committing overts against redcoats," is the way you would interpret it right this minute, until I'm going to tell you this other.

And it's very beautiful, and you read this and you leave it. It read instantly, you left it in, you left it, and then all of a sudden, you're looking at this needle pattern, you know? And you can't read through it and what the hell.

And if you start chanting at the pc every time this occurs, if this is the type of pc you're auditing, "In this session, is there anything been invalidated? All right, in this session, is there anything been suppressed? In this session, has anything been protested?

In this session..." so on, every time you get a dirty needle, I tell you, on some pcs you're not going to be doing anything but sitting in session and saying, "In this session. .." on and on and on and on and on, see? There's a smoother way of getting around this. "Did you want to say something?" You get over – you're sort of hypnotizing the pc into believing he didn't have a withhold, see? "You want to say something? Did you want to say something?" ”No.

Oh, yes! Yes. I thought of redcoats.

I thought – ha‑ha! That couldn't be my item!" You say, "Good," and you go down three later and you've got "tiger," and you read, "Consider committing overts against a tiger." It read very nicely, you know? Very fine.

You mark it in. Go on to the next one, "waterbucks." You know, "Consider committing overts on a waterbuck." Yeah, they're very often same list, wrong side, you know, the pc mixing up the terminal and oppterm. And you say – you say, "Consider committing ov...

What the hell was that?" See? "Co... – co... – In this session, has anything been suppressed? In this session, has anything you have been careful of? In this session, has anything been invalidated?

In this session ‑ in this session ‑ nyah‑nyah ..." Of course your pc's going to start protesting – going to start protesting the mid ruds. Graceful thing to say is, "Did you want to say something there?" He didn't want to say anything – he thought something, see? If you ask him, "Did you think something?", why, you get a slightly different response.

But if you say something like "Did you want to say something?" You get something on this order: the pc will say, "No..." That's true, too. He didn't want to say anything. "Oh, well, I thought – I thought that that couldn't be my item. That‑that's‑that's too late on the track.

That's much too late on the track and I thought there for a minute that you looked kind of cross at me. That's-that's what I thought." And you say, "Good," and your needle cleans up again and you can carry on. Got the idea?

But don't you ever try to do any of this with a dirtied‑up needle, man. You get your auditor presence up so smooth that you can put that needle back in smooth. Put it in smooth gear, man – put it in smooth gear.

And you try to get somebody, and the pc says, "Oh, that's my heart beating." You know, tick‑tick‑tick, the needle's going. Sure it's their heart beating! But what the hell is their heart doing cooked up, connected to the E‑Meter?

Takes a withhold – takes a withhold or a Protest or an Assert or a Mistake or a Suggest or an Invalidate or a Suppress to make that – or Careful of – to make that needle register a heartbeat. Don't forget it. Pcs don't have needle patterns.

Pcs have out‑rudiments. So his rudiments have been out for the last couple of hundred years. Well get them in, man, get them in!

But learn to get them in smoothly, not abusing and bumping the pc around about them. All right, now, let's go just a little bit further here. That's your right procedure for getting those things in.

And by the way, don't give up on one because it reads faintly, because it's liable to bloom into the most gorgeous rock slam you ever saw in your life. Be wary of those that rock slam and then they don't rock slam and you haven't done anything. And neither has the pc, apparently.

And you can't find any rock slam and then you clean them up and there's no rock slam of any kind whatsoever. Well, they were rocks – you – it's a missing item. There's something missing here and the pc just keying it in.

And at the moment that item keys in, if the pc has a withhold at that exact instant, it rock slams. Don't you see? That's a floating item.

It no longer registers the moment you get the rudiments in. So a real – a reliable item is one which registers with the rudiments in and man, that is a very severe definition. Well, that's how you do this.

Now your main problem, is how do you turn on a rock slam in the first place? And this is an experimental licking of that problem. I have learned, through a great deal – you know, I have been auditing my brain to the bone here, lately, and I finally found out that with – that "oppose" and "overts" are sometimes too strong and sometimes too weak for the pc and so you overshoot the item.

This item would not commit overts against tigers. This item would go back in the brush, get under a bush and natter plaintively about tigers. [laughter] And that's not directly committing an overt on a tiger while actually being an overt on a tiger, but it won't rock slam or answer up on the word "overt". It'll answer up on "natter." And so we move into some use for the Secondary Scales of last year.

Two Secondary Scales: One is scale number 21, the Secondary Scale of Withhold and scale number 16, the Secondary Scale of Overts. This is a long, arduous, gruesomely long scale, this Overt Scale, and would undoubtedly be able to shorten it down, but these scales do exist at this exact instant and you're indebted to these Secondary Scales – to have these. Now strangely enough, there would be another way of entering this whole thing – is just to do a Prehav Assessment on the pc, find out where he wound up and then do that Secondary Scale on the pc.

There is that method of handling this. But look, look: rock slam is peculiarly withholding and peculiarly committing action. It's peculiarly a withhold and peculiarly an action.

It is action. Now, I don't think, and I'm speaking experimentally, that we have to go to the lengths of doing a Prehav Assessment and then finding its Secondary Scale and moving into the Secondary Scale and doing some kind of an assessment, or balling it up in some way. It is my concept from what I have seen, which is not very much of this yet, to merely do an Overt Scale, because you're looking for the overt terminal – and oddly enough, the Withhold Scale, because these terminals are also withhold terminals.

And the case that won't slam, and you could just drive yourself to drink trying to make this case slam, is just a super-withhold case. You have a hell of a time making this case slam, man. You get down and uhhh!

Well, the terminal they're sitting on, terminal number one, and it – by the way, the only one that is available is number one. There aren't 865 terminals available. There's only one that will slam first crack out of the box.

Discouraging, isn't it? Actually not, because you can locate that one and maybe that is a withholdy‑type terminal. So if your pc consistently and continually doesn't have anything to say and never does anything to anybody, you possibly – you possibly could pick it up with the Withhold Scale much more easily than you could the Overt Scale.

Because the withhold is the overt. Follow that? But oddly enough, anything that will flash on overts will also flash on withholds.

Now, supposing you've got a lot of items on the pc and sometimes they turned on and sometimes they didn't turn on and actually you don't know if it was the rudiments in or the rudiments out that was giving you these items and all that sort of thing. Well, just sit down and make yourself a short list on each item and see if you turn up a slam of "What wouldn't you give that item?" That is a proving action. You say, "What wouldn't you give that item?" – you get the same slam.

You'll at least get a – get some of the slam back. But items that won't slam on that particular action aren't items. They're false items – items that have been made to slam because some other session condition was present.

See? Pc had a withhold. See, they're not actually the item.

You couldn't get anything off of them. It drives you batty trying to get something off of them. All right.

Now, one of the ways of going about this, to find the entrance point of the pc, is, you just got a pc, you see, and you got a meter, and you know how to audit, and how the devil do you pick up the first rock slam? Well, here is a way to do it. There are many ways to do this.

One is to just ask him – ask him for somebody he detests and he gives you that and you notice that slams and then you check that one out and then you ask him for, well, what does that person represent? and so forth. And he gives you that and that slams and that checks out and then you ask him for what would oppose that, because it seems to be a very overt terminal. And it gets a slam, and all of a sudden you see that it kind of rocket reads, too, and you say, "All right, well what..." you haven't got much time that day and you simply say, "What – if you were part of that, what goal of yours would be imp... were impossible to achieve?” On the second item or on the third item you just say, "Well, what goal would this waterbuck have?

What goal would the waterbuck have?" and the pc says, "To – to go on a spree." Rocket read, rocket read, rocket read, rocket read, see? "To go on a spree, to go on a spree, to go on a spree," and "on this, has anything been suppressed?" and nothing's been suppressed. Everything is all clean and so forth – the rocket read, you know – there it is: bang, bang, bang, bang, "to go on a spree," that's the pc's goal and that's it. And that's an hour and eighty‑five minutes from the beginning of the first session, see?

But don't forget that there are lots of pcs like that. And you, operating with altitude, will very often land square on your feet. Next pc that sits down is going to go ninety‑nine hours to goal.

Ha‑ha. With the very best and most arduous item-finding you ever did in your life. What's the matter with this pc?

Pc won't slam because the pc slams on everything because the pc is everything, because the pc is the item that does slam. That's one type of pc. I haven't met him yet, but I imagine he exists.

He exists only in theory. He slams on everything you mention. I haven't met him yet.

You've got to find out what he's slamming on in particular. I haven't met him, but I can imagine he will exist. I simply predict somebody will run into him someday.

Now, that'd be your total‑overt pc. And then your pc who isn't saying very much, being very quiet, isn't answering up either – mostly protesting what you say. And you're not going to find anything fast.

And you after a while will just be able to ask the pc a few questions in the rudiments and the pc, well, "What have you done?" The pc says, "Well, ah, oh, uhmmm..." Fifteen minutes later, they still haven't answered the question. Well, you better ask it on the Withhold Scale, see? You'll learn to estimate your pcs this way.

We just do a plain Assessment by Elimination on something like the Withhold Secondary Scale, scale 21, on that quiet pc. You take what you've got, and then you say, "Who or what would (whatever it found)?" You'd have to put "somebody or something" after it to make it make sense sometimes. "Who or what would chain somebody or something?" So you did an assessment of the scale and you came up with the type of withhold is "chain." And they'll give you the item and it'll rock slam. All right – or you start over here on the Overt Scale and you just run down – do an Assessment by Elimination of the Overt Scale.

When you get down to the end you've got one line in, you've got one level in, just by instant read, don't you see? No trimmings. You don't have to say "Would you," or "Would the item," or something like that.

You get on down to the end and you find out that "thieve," "thieve" is it. "Who or what would thieve?" And the pc says, "A roff and a rauff and rrrof and a roff and a roff and a roff and a roff," and you finally get "magpie." Slams like mad. Get the idea? Well, we can improve these scales and improve on the line, but that is by moving right into the middle of all this.

Now, how about the next item? How about the next item? You could use exactly the same system.

Don't you see? The same system that's adaptable to the next item that you find. You want to know "Who or what would withhold from a magpie?" Seems to be very quiet on this one.

Or "Who or what represents a magpie?" is just your standard response. But a magpie being a chattery overt sort itself and so forth, would probably be something that's opposed. But you don't ask for who or what would commit overts or who or what would oppose a magpie, you'd want to know "Who or what would (Overt Scale) on the magpie?" And the funny part of it is if you – I think if you just do it straight by elimination you'll come up with the right answer.

You don't have to say magpie or anything else. Then you do a list of "Who or what would wound a magpie?" He almost gives it to you at once. "Small boy," slams – there it is. Got the idea?

Get this method of sorting it out? Not depending on the broad term of overt, "commit overts on," or something like this. So all the way down the line, as you did that resulting list, which is made "Who or what would wound a magpie?" you say, "Would a – would a cat wound a magpie?

Would a small boy wound a magpie?" or any other way you want to do it and it'll pick up the slam. Or you just do that one by elimination if it's a terminals list, just – almost the way you – you just did your list of items and you get the last four, tiger drill those and then test them. "Would a cat wound a magpie?" slam‑slam‑slam‑slam‑slam. "Would a cat wound things?" slam‑slam‑slam. This isn't slamming on magpie – it's slamming on that cat. "Cat," slam‑slam‑slam. "Cat" – you know, there you are.

Now all of a sudden that disappears. "Small boy," and the whole read settles on "small boy" and freezes in, but it's a small boy would "wound" a magpie, not "commit overts" on a magpie. The more particularized a case is, the tougher it is to find the entrance point. In other words, the case is more – is very differentiative in ideas on this and you don't get a broad – a broad class of anything slamming.

It has to be quite particular. We have these two scales in existence – I'll turn them over, by the way, to your Auditing Supervisor. We have some more of these scales.

I will be making up a more suitable scale from these old scales and we will see how this thing goes. But you get the idea how this is done? Rather simple.

Assessment by Elimination is the way this could be done, and you – I think you will – my guess is you'll be seeing slams you never saw before on pcs and seeing them faster. Doesn't take any time to do – for instance a Withhold Scale on a pc and then "Who or what would...," see, whatever it was. "Who or what would cache things?" – C‑A‑C‑H‑E, see? And he gives them to you and the item will be on it.

See, you've assessed to find the zone of the item, then you assessed to find the item by rock slam and you've got it made from there on. Got the idea? All right.

Well, we're moving in to easier, faster – I want to set you up so that you can find a pc´s goal in a morning; see, in a morning of auditing. If I can get that, that is an extreme, man. That's an extreme.

But if I can set you up so that you can do that, I will be very, very happy indeed, and go take a vacation. So make some headway, will you? I need a vacation!

Thank you very much. Good night. 3GA CRISS CROSS 	 	 -  SECONDARY PRE-HAV SCALE

[[Category:Lectures]]
[[Category:Lectures SHSBC]]
[[Category:Lectures 1962]]