Start your own community in Theology.  

FREEZONE BIBLE ASSOCIATION TECH POST
 
CLASS VIII TAPE TRANSCRIPTS 9/19
 
**************************************************
 
CLASS VIII TAPE TRANSCRIPTS - CONTENTS
 
01  SEP 24, 1969 WELCOME TO THE CLASS VIII COURSE
02  SEP 25, 1969 WHAT STANDARD TECH DOES
03  SEP 26, 1969 THE LAWS OF CASE SUPERVISION
04  SEP 27, 1969 STANDARD TECH DEFINED
05  SEP 28, 1969 THE STANDARD GREEN FORM AND RUDIMENTS
06  SEP 29, 1969 MECHANICS OF TECHNIQUES AND SUBJECT MATTER
07  SEP 30, 1969 CASE SUPERVISOR DO'S AND DONT'S:
08  OCT  1, 1969 CERTAINTY OF STANDARD TECH
09  OCT  2, 1969 THE LAWS OF LISTING AND NULLING
10  OCT  3, 1969 ASSISTS
11  OCT  7, 1969 ASSESSMENT AND LISTING BASICS
12  OCT  8, 1969 MORE ON BASICS
13  OCT  9, 1969 ETHICS AND CASE SUPERVISION
14  OCT 10, 1969 AUDITOR ATTITUDE AND THE BANK
15  OCT 11, 1969 AUDITORS ADDITIVES, LISTS AND CASE SUPERVISION
16  OCT 12, 1969 STANDARD TECH
17  OCT 13, 1969 THE BASICS AND SIMPLICITY OF STANDARD TECH
18  OCT 14, 1969 THE NEW AUDITOR'S CODE
19  OCT 15, 1969 AN EVALUATION OF EXAMINATION ANSWERS
 
 
**************************************************
 
STATEMENT OF PURPOSE
 
Our purpose is to promote religious freedom and the Scientology
Religion by spreading the Scientology Tech across the internet.
 
The Cof$ abusively suppresses the practice and use of
Scientology Tech by FreeZone Scientologists.  It misuses the
copyright laws as part of its suppression of religious freedom.
 
They think that all freezoner's are "squirrels" who should be stamped out as heritics.  By their standards, all Christians,
Moslems, Mormons, and even non-Hassidic Jews would be considered to be squirrels of the Jewish Religion.
 
The writings of LRH form our Old Testament just as the writings
of Judiasm form the Old Testament of Christianity.
 
We might not be good and obedient Scientologists according
to the definitions of the Cof$ whom we are in protest against.
 
But even though the Christians are not good and obedient Jews,
the rules of religious freedom allow them to have their old
testament regardless of any Jewish opinion. 
 
We ask for the same rights, namely to practice our religion
as we see fit and to have access to our holy scriptures
without fear of the Cof$ copyright terrorists.
 
We ask for others to help in our fight.  Even if you do
not believe in Scientology or the Scientology Tech, we hope
that you do believe in religious freedom and will choose
to aid us for that reason.
 
Thank You,
 
The FZ Bible Association
 
**************************************************
 
6810C02 Class VIII TAPE 9
 
THE LAWS OF LISTING AND NULLING
 
 
Well, this is lecture number what? (Nine) Lecture number 9
and this is 2 October 1968 A.D.
 
We're concerned this evening with some very precise
actions and so we will get straight along with it.
 
The laws of listing and nulling are a common and ordinary
garden variety subject of attack.
 
There are more cooks have more cock-eyed variations and
more advice on this subject than any other single thing,
because of course it is the one subject that can ruin a PC,
bongo! Now the laws of listing and nulling are not
something that you wonder about. You know them. You know
them or you don't know them. And you know them now. And you
can do them. Now I call to your attention that reading to
you the laws of listing and nulling is something like
reading to you the directions on how to play a piano. Do I
make my point?
 
You can all know where a middle C is. Now auditing is a
relatively simple piano. But nevertheless it is something
to be played. It is not something to know about. The maker
of the piano never crosses the mind of a concert pianist.
Where middle C is is not something he looks down the
keyboard. He isn't wondering what those black things are.
Now somebody can play a piano with one finger - ta - ta -
ta - ti - ta - to - ta. And somebody can play Chopin. And
the difference between these two fellows is: is one knows
his business and the other maybe in his elementary school
read a paper that said: 'A piano is an instrument which has
black and white keys.' "You get the difference?
 
Now it isn't that people can't read directions and then
apply them. It's that they misestimate the amount of
expertise required to actually apply them. So we get some
student some place and he reads a bulletin and he knows all
of these things. It is just exactly as he said 'Where is
the loud pedal?' 'The loud pedal is on the right.' 'Where
is the soft pedal?' 'The soft pedal is on the left.' In the
middle of playing the overture of 1812 he thinks now I want
to make it go loud, the loud pedal is on the right - left,
which was it, it's on the ...  maybe it's the lever over to
the side. Oh, I haven't put the top up. So then he has a
stage-assistant who comes in and when he wants it to go
loud he has him put the top up and when he wants it soft he
puts the top down.
 
You get the general idea. In playing the piano you want it
to go loud, you stamp on the loud pedal without wondering
where the loud pedal is."
 
So it is one thing to know it in theory and it is another
thing to apply it, but there is no peculiarity in
something, on somebody who can know it in theory and then
can't apply it. This isn't a strange being, it is simply a
lazy being who has never mocked it up in his skull as to
what was where, you understand? So he knows the words, 'the
laws of listing and nilling - not nulling, nilling. What he
doesn't know about that one line is, that these are all the
laws there are, there aren't any others, there aren't a
bunch of hidden data, that haven't been included in this
bulletin. These are it. This is all there is. So there is
something to know about the title. So he isn't reading at
all wondering what laws of listing and nulling have been
left out. He knows that's all there is.
 
Now the rest of it is drill, drill. You are making a list
of 'Who have you shot?' Of course that would be a very long
list and wouldn't go to one item. But ...  (laughing) ...
'Who do you feel most bad about shooting' would go to one
item and oddly enough the unmock - and stop - and
withdraw - list do go to one item. There are certain things
that are lists that go to one item and those are the
standard listing questions.
 
Now you start wandering off, you can list anything, but you
start wandering off the standard listing questions, that
are the standard line questions and you are liable to have
a question which doesn't just go to one item. Now there is
such a ...  such a thing that it is processing question and
actually the only reason you are listing it down is so you
can clean it up. You get the idea? Now it looks like a list
but it's not a list, because it's not a standard question.
You got the idea?
 
I'll give you an idea of what this is. You can say 'What is
wrong with my case?' Actually you could list this 'What is
wrong with my case?' That is, it looks like a list, it
looks like a listing question and you think you could list
it down to one reading item. Brother, I've got news for
you. It isn't a proper listing question. The laws of
listing and nulling apply to proper listing questions. If
you were to say 'What is wrong with my case?' and then make
a list and you said bongo-bingo and togobak and ragbags are
unflat and auditors missed on the floggodick. it could go
something like this: Bongo-bingo long fall, ragbags unflat
small fall .. ah .. ah .. ruggerbo long fall BD. And you all
of a sudden say, 'Well, what is wrong with my case is ruggerbo
BD. Well, maybe, maybe not, but all of a sudden it wouldn't work out.
 
Why wouldn't it work out? Well it's not a proper listing
question in the first place and you have already by-passed
the by-pasted charge you have restimulated on the first two
or three that read, so this is a list quote unquote.
 
It is simply an auditing question is all it is. It's an
auditing question which is written down. So you can ask any
auditing question, you can get a certain number of answers.
Factually, if you ask an auditing question and then you
make a write-down of the answers and then you took up
everyone of the answers as you wrote it down, you get one
of these 'What is wrong with my case?' 'What is wrong with
my case?' You see? Tingerwaps fall, okay. Tingerwaps, let's
see, when did I run into tingerwaps? See? Oh yeah, that was
a bluggulogs. Good. Ah, and then you get down to ragbags.
Wow! See? Oh yeah, wow! Uhum 1960 woff woff waggle waggle
waffle waffle waffle and yeah, what the hell do you know
about that, there's a whole chain of these ragbags. Now,
the earliest ragbag was in oh let's see 2000 numbers tough
here let's get a date. Order of magnitude. Tens of years.
hundreds of years. Thousands of years. Tens of thousands of
years. Hundreds of thousands of years. Millions of years.
Tens of millions of years. hundreds of millions of years.
Billions of years. Tens of billions of years. hundreds of
billions of years. Trillions of years fall. More than 5
trillion - fall. More than ten trillion - no read. Less
than ten trillion - fall. Ah ...  5 trillion, 6 trillion, 7
trillion, 7 trillion, 7 trillion long fall. All right,
we're in the order of magnitude of 7 trillion 954 million
762 thousand 727.
 
Good. And 2 months - BD. Well, so that was the first
ragbag. Now let's see, what the hell was that all about?
And so forth. What the hell mate, Peter had an ARC break in
it. They sent the laundry ashore and didn't get it back.
Yeah. We landed in this space right here and I lost all of
my clothes and the uniform was so bad, you know after that
they couldn't believe I was the first mate. Oh yeah - I got
that. Em.. poh.. what the hell do you know! Ragbags! Clean!
(laugh) Good. Now, wait a minute - F/N.
 
That's an auditing process by which you take up everything
in the book. It's, you wrote the thing down with a question
mark, but then it was a sort of a process. And then you got
some items which followed the process. Do you follow? And
then you handled each item and so on.
 
Now, you don't do that process that way for some peculiar
reason - not because I said so - you see it's an illegal
listing question, it's it's not a listing question, it's a
..  it's a ...  it's a process, an offbeat process - not
because I said so, but because it just works this way. Now
we get a question 'Who or what is trying to unmock you?'
(laugh) Ba ba ba - ba ba - ba ba ba ba ba -long fall BD!
Poom! Okay. Ba bow bow - ba bow bow - ba bow bow - ba bow
bow - ba bow bow - ba bow bow long fall BD - long fall BD -
BD. Very good. Your item is 'Ba bow bow.' And that is
because it is a question which makes a real list and it
goes to one item. But there are tons of questions which
don't go to one item. And you can dream up all kinds of
them and I see them in all folders from way back when. Ah..
Where are the roofs? you see, or something.
 
I'll give you one that sounds exactly like it would be a
listing question. This will guarantee to wrap some PC
around the telegraph pole. 'What environment was
dangerous?' So help me Pete it doesn't go to one item. Now
you've got to worry that it is an offbeat question and it
didn't list to one item and you can't get it down to one
item and the PC starts wrapping around the telegraph pole.
That's because it's actually just a process. It's a sort of
an out-of-ARC-process, so it is extremely limited. 'What
environment was dangerous?' And every read you got on the
list you should have taken up. (laugh) If you ever - if you
ever ran it as a process, see.
 
So there is a way of running a process to write it down.
Now theoretically, theoretically, because you often see an
F/N occur and a big BD - on any of the process questions,
theoretically they should be a list, right? Well, I'm
clearing this up with you because somebody is sooner or
later going to come along and he's going to say: "Wait a
minute - all processes are really lists. The fellow who is
answering a question on level 0 is really making a list. So
therefore the right way to run level 0 is to go down the
line to level 0 and find the reading item an give it to the
PC." Now he finds the one PC in a thousand on whom this
actually worked and he has had it. You understand, it is a
process, it is not a listing question. And the funny part
of it is, the processes that come up the line don't work.
 
Now - ARC-question - the level 3 question, the big change,
you know, the big change. It's just borderline to being an
item. It's a one-item-list. A funny thing about it is
because the unlimited nature of ARC, you can actually
occasionally run it again. You'd better not, but you can
actually occasionally run it again. Not the ARC-process
with all the change but you can find an earlier big change
on the whole track. So you can run it sort of this lifetime
and you can sort of run it on the whole track. This is not
advised, I'm just telling you the behavior of things, see.
 
But you find the real change that is listed on on the list
the PC makes and you run the process just exactly the way
it says in R3H - anybody is liable to call anything R3H
these days, it was an exact process.
 
I had somebody not too long ago actually rewrite an HCOB
and send it to me on R3H. Boy, I said, now I have seen it
all. And I find out that he was advising people to by-pass
F/Ns doing this. Oh my god! The ARC-break registrar's
proper action is Green Form. That's all an ARC-break
registrar should ever do. Green Form. He should do Green
Form - itsa similar - itsa earlier - it's all he ever ought
to do. It doesn't mess up anything. You can run almost an
unlimited number of them, because it is sort of a PT
proposition because you're just handling it with itsa and
earlier similar itsa and you clean up more cases than you
can shake a stick at.
 
The ARC-break registrar however thinks he can only run
ARC-breaks. Well he misses the guy with the PTPs, he misses
the guy with the MWH. And why do most people blow orgs?
Because they had missed withholds. So that's idiocy. I've
never gotten hold of the ARC-break registrars and told them
this up to this time directly to their faces, so I am
trusting you to do so.
 
Green Form! Green Form! Never do anything but a Green Form.
And because you probably can't trust their listing and so
forth say: 'don't list anything'. No list, no list - just
Green Form.
 
Yeah, he says, what if he strikes, he's connected to a
suppressive group? Good - itsa similar incident earlier
itsa (laugh). Oddly enough you'll find out it works, don't
you see? It worked like a bomb.
 
Now, if his TRs are fairly smooth he won't kick in BPC. You
actually can kick in by-passed charge of the PC, if the ..
if a, if the TRs are out. Fumble, bumble, stumble bum..ah..
flumble, flumble - let's see the laws of listing and
nulling I know.. I know.. I know this.. don't tell me..
don't don't tell me PC.. ah don't tell me.. ah .. I should
. let's see ... I've got three listing .. don't tell me PC ...  three reading items on the list .. and so on .. I should ....
that means it's the first item...  no no that isn't right ..
ah...  it's a dead horse...  no no no no (laughter). You're
liable to kick in some other time when the PC has been stalled
on the track in some fashion or another, which he is in most
accidents and things. You know, waiting for the doctor or
something of the sort. And here comes in some BPC, and this
hidden factor flies in sideways because of the slowness and
all-thumbs-ness of the auditor, see. Do you get it? It
doesn't show up in the auditing report.
 
Always very mysterious this fellow for some reason or other
. he .. the thing didn't clear up.
 
Now you know it didn't clear up because the session went on
and on and it's a four hour and 95 minutes session, see.
(laugh) And all he had to straighten out was did he have a
PTP, not even of long duration, see. It's what you really
wanted him to do, so you said check ARC-breaks and see if
this PC has a PTP of long duration. You've noticed.. you've
noticed that every time .. every time he comes into session
he tells the examiner the same thing. It's all through the
folder, which of course, if you know your business, the
unchanging case has a PTP of long duration. The cases which
don't change have a PTP of long duration. I mean, the one
side of the coin is the other side of the coin. You understand?
 
Well, here's .. here's .. here's Mr Blitz in here again
with his lumbosis. He says it hasn't been helped. Now you
can say, 'Oh let's see, what's the matter? Is he an
.. ARC-break or is it woff woff'. Is it some peculiar kind
of case. Maybe he was an Eskimo in a former life and these
engrams got frozen. (laughter).The datum which springs to
view at this particular moment is he still got his
lumbosis. It is still worrying him and he's got a PTS of
long duration and the other datum you know: it isn't the
lumbosis for the excellent reason that he knows that and it
hasn't resolved. So he hasn't as-ised it.
 
There could be another reason he hasn't as-ised it: he is
out of valence and can't as-is anything, but then he would
have to be out of valence with the present time problem.
But it isn't really a present time problem. It's a problem
that has been every present time for the last few thousand
years. (laughter) So, the problem of long duration, that's
what is wrong with this guy and he is always audited over
top of it - unchanging case. It's actually PTP. Every time
he's audited he has a PTP. Ah.. you can actually fix up a
case so it's unchanging by some auditor finding a PTP, that
didn't exist, existing with the fellow, has a PTP because
it always reads on PTP and the fellow goes around wondering
what his PTP is and his .. his problem is whether or not he
has a problem. You see, that's a false read, that can be
introduced on the case, so you always say 'check for false
reads, check for suppressed reads'.
 
Now, getting down to cases here then there is a thing which
is called a list and that proceeds from a thing which is
called a standard listing question and there are very few
of these. There's the Remedy A, the Remedy B. the three
suppressive question ones and there is another one
'What are you trying to prevent?' Now there are several
more that do end up in one item. And the ARC level 3 grade
ends up in one time. Not just one ARC break, but it ends up
for sure in one time. Do you understand? Now you can fool
with this ARC break all you want to and run it all over the
track, but the fact of it is you're looking for the major
change in the person's life - you ask for the major change
in the person's life. Don't you see? Whatever the question
says, what you want as an auditor, you want that one change.
Now you list for that. You find that thing accurately, you
find the ARC break in it and the guy goes release. Poom!
Very magical! Very magical!
 
Now, service facsimile. Every now and then you come across
the line and you can't rehab the service facsimile. You'd
never relist the service facsimile for the excellent reason
that the PC can't remember it. Don't be an idiot. You've
cared for this already. (laughter) It's erased. Why are you
bugging him about it? But the funny part of it is,  you
actual could list for another service facsimile - not that
he has another Service facsimile but you can always get one
out of a body thetan. So actually if the fellow had 500
body thetans you'd get 500 service facsimiles.
(laughter) You could probably do it 500 times before the PC
kicked the bucket. (laughter) Most body thetans are above
service fac, below service facsimiles, so you.. the
majority of them are.. so you would have a ball trying to
get it. But the point I am making is, is you've listed for
this service facsimile, that is the principal one and so on
and you let it go at that. Well now if you can't rehab it
somebody didn't get the right one. Once in a while you are
out of luck you can't get the original list.
 
Now what do you do? They didn't get the guy's service
facsimile and so forth. Well you could do.. this is a very
stunty stuff and isn't advised at all, but it's perfectly
valid - to ask the guy what is his service facsimile, what
the one found was, and you'll find out he usually remembers
it. Now you ask him what the one found was, that you don't
have the original list.
 
You can list in this peculiar fashion once in a blue moon
and get away with it. What . . what were the items on the
list you made? (laughter) But in order to do that, you'd
have to get in suppress on the list because his right item
was missed. What did you tell the auditor you thought it
was? On whatever the question is with the service facsimile
- has anything been suppressed? Has anything been
challenged? You know. Invalidated - we don't care what, as
long as you clean up that question. 'No, I don't know what
service facsimile. I remember I got awfully nervous at that
particular time. I..I'm not sure about that... I did
yeah... well... we... they found it alright. The service
facsimile, I think, was to jump off tall - I don't know if
it was tall blondes or tall buildings. (laughter) It was
something like that.' Didn't sound like it. He isn't sure,
but already it won't rehab. And you say - did.. ah .. you
know.. to find your service facsimile and so forth and
etc... ah you know.. to go release at that point.
 
Normal pattern. Nothing happens. 'On that time was anything
suppressed? Anything invalidated? Invalidation reads.
Ah..oh.. it did yeah. his service facsimile hasn't been
found, it won't rehab. So now you can become the hassles.
"Do you recall what somebody said it was?"
 
'Yeah.. ah.. so and so .. so and so. (unclear mumbling) You
say - well, all right. You could prepcheck the question and
ask him if he remembers any of the items he thought it was
at the time. The oddity is you may be able to get it. It's
very risky handling a list where you haven't got the list
that was listed . A better approach entirely is to say:
"Mr Jinx, we have arrived at that point where you're going to be laid off auditing until we can recover your earlier
folder which, as I understand, is in Australia. We will tell
you when we get it." And then make somebody in Australia send him the earlier auditing folder. Or make Joe Blitz who is in
Alaska mail in that damned service facsimile.
 
You don't necessarily want the whole folder, but you for
sure want that list. It might have been some other
squirrely things. If you think it was very squirrely, why
you want it all sent in. And you want it now. In view of
the fact that you are normally operating in an
organization, those that I'm talking to at the moment are
certainly working at an organization, you have
communication lines where this can occur. It's the safer
thing to try to obtain the list. Get the actual list and
null it now. What's suppressed? On ba bow bow has anything
been suppressed? On ba ba bow bow has anything been
suppressed That reads. On ba ba bow has anything been
suppressed? That one reads, you know. On catawumbs has
anything been suppressed? See? Pow! On doggerbo has
anything been suppressed? No read. On rupptittle has any
thing been suppressed? Long fall. On the listing question
has anything been suppressed? Long fall. What was it? Oh
yeah, well the guy didn't run any list on it. (unclear
speech) As a matter of fact at that particular time and so
forth...  ah...  waggle waggle waggle waggle. Okay. Now
you've unsuppressed these items, call them again. Bluey and
blah. There are two reading items on the list. Ah.. but
everything on the list isn't live so therefore you haven't
by-passed the item. Now you get down here and you put a bar
over to the left side of the list and you say list extended
date and you put the additional items on the list and one
of them blows down. You renull the list to make sure ... the
whole list to make sure you haven't got anything reading
and that is it.
 
Sometimes a PC even gets restive and unhappy because you
list the whole list. Ah, there is a degree at which he is
saying wow wee, that is it wow wee, when you don't null
but you're taking a chance. You're taking a chance. You
actually are. So you've got the fellow's service facsimile
from the original list. That is the correct action.
 
Now once in a blue moon you have to do this other action,
which I'm talking to you about.
 
You get everything unsuppressed. Now you could even ask
'Was there anything you hadn't told this auditor?' You see,
the missed withhold. Ah, at that time were you ARC broken
about anything?' And so on - you can pick it up, see. Pick
it up. Pick it up. And any every one few of these you find
out it suddenly rehabs. It was the right service facsimile
and it did rehab, but it was listed over out Ruds and the
F/N declared on it war a false report, but it was the
correct service facsimile. Do you get the complications
that can occur here? Very complicated.
 
It all comes from this: now on one of the questions I just
asked on an examination, I better repeat this, the way
standard tech ceases to be standard tech is somebody has
already done something non-standard. The way to get
standard tech back in - he's missed some piece of standard
tech - the way to get it in is you find out what piece of
standard tech was missed and you remedy this. You got it?
And the case will then fly, because there are only so many
pieces to standard tech. See, wild things could have
occurred. He could have been listed standing on his head,
any damned thing could have occurred there, thousands of
outnesses that could have occurred in the session, this is
the one thing I've got to push home to you. There are
thousands and millions - an infinity of possible errors in
a session. Do you follow? The only error you are interested
in are those errors which violate standard tech. You got
it, you've got to get this point or you won't actually be
able to repair anybody.
 
You look for the points of standard tech that have been violated - the session run over a PTS, the session run with a missed
withhold. Do you get it? The..the bird that walked in to
the org and they started to do engrams on him and he
couldn't run anything and ... (unclear speech) and so on.
His TA was up and so on and they went ahead and ran grades
and all this sort of thing, with the guy flubbed up madly
way back down the track on points of release. There weren't
any points of release ever rehabed on this case. They were
running ARC S/W without rehab. The guy came in, ran ARC
S/W, you see and got some results for God's sake. The TA
never really came down but he got results and he had a
cognition and he and so forth and that was pretty good and
actually they marked it that they had an F/N, but for some
reason the next time he came into session the TA was at 6
or something and then they're going to run Secondaries and
in some peculiar way Secondaries are run. And this case is
just doing a weird one. Well actually he walked in with a
high TA. What the hell is somebody off the street doing
with a high TA? Well, obviously he's been overrun. (laugh)
I know but he never had any auditing. He never even read a
book. But he's been overrun.
 
What overran him? Well, I want to call to your attention
that there it a lot of livingness going on. And also here
and there on the whole track, here and there on the whole
track they knew something dim about running engrams. They
didn't know it well and they didn't know enough not to
overrun it. Every point of these you find overruns
associated with them. There are various methods of getting
rid of engrams. In space opera society they had a sort of a
chopstick that came together with an awful crash while
showing the guy a photograph of the area he was injured in
and this was a signal to the thetan that he was supposed to
chop it up and wad it up into a ball and throw it away. If
you worked this area over and run that off you find the
original incident sitting there. That's quite fascinating.
 
But there was some effort from time to time to handle a
thetan's pictured here and there on the track it's been
known that a thetan had pictures. They didn't have any
other technology to back it up, but they had that and where
these were run you get an overrun. So this can happen, the
PC comes in and ARC S/W is great, Secondaries seem to be
alright and then engrams the TA went (whistles)...  'Is it
getting more solid?' 'Are we on the wrong chain?' What the
hell is this? It's an overrun on engrams.
 
You won't find it an overrun on any other part of Scientology
but you'll find occasionally an overrun on engrams. But most
frequently it's an overrun on drugs and I would adventure to
say that you occasionally have an overrun on life, just the
subject of living, and you occasionally have the subjects of
an overrun of dying - he's died too many times. (laughter)
 
Well, his death is a release, what the hell. But you'd have
to figure out what it is. What is it? What is it that's been
overrun? Well, it could be a lot of things been overrun, so
you'd better find out what's been overrun. Now what has
been overrun or what has been going on too long or what
have you done too often? Any version of the question that
would communicate is handled and it is not a list - it is a
process. But you get a read on this item and then you do a
standard rehab and then you ask - it didn't F/N - so you
ask for another one and you ask for the release on that.
And it's a little bit better and the TA comes down. And
then you ask for the next question and it didn't read and
then you ask for the next question and it read, so you
rehab that. And you keep this process up and if you do it
well you all of a sudden will have this sitting there
looking at an F/N. Go ahead. Dead simple.
 
Now the fellow lives 50 or 100 years later and he's got a
high TA, see, you could ask him again 'What has been overrun?'
If the question reads there will be one, two, three items that
have been overrun and you rehab each one and you've got it
made. In other words all that is is a method of finding
areas to rehab and it's a process, not a list. Get the
difference. Alright! Now, in sequence there are two key
processes: 1. Valence Shifter. The Valence Shifter. 'What
valence or identity would be safe?' All right. List to one
item. Bong! Because you want to list it down to the bottom
of the pile and bongo! Which is followed by a question
'What can you confront?' which is a process. Now you can
actually write down these What-can-you-confronts and sooner
or later the guy's going to BD on something and sooner or
later some wiseacre is going to tell us that all processes
should be listed.
 
Now hear me, hear me good and clean, hear me very straight.
If you list a question which is not a one item question and
by-pass the reads on the items without handling them you
pack the case up. You'll pack the case up as neat as anything
you ever packed up. So if you ever see on an auditing report
form, if you ever see on a worksheet 'What has been
overrun?' with item, item, blank, blank, item, you know
reading, item - reading, item reading, BD. And you just see
it there and you look back on the worksheet and you find
none of them have been handled.
 
The weird part of it is the case will have a tendency then
to be packed up. It is not something you do and correct
because you're trying to be pedantic, trying to be the
villain of the piece who says all the commas must be in the
right place. No, you'll find that the case is now packed
up. So somebody has got to go back over it again. That's
why you must always teach your auditors always to mark the
falls and BDs. Don't let them make a bunch of stuff
without. And you know, I see, most of the worksheets I see
these days, have no falls or BDs marked on them. There is
no SF for small fall, F for fall, ah.. LF for long fall.
You can't distinguish. And doing C/S work is very
difficult. It's no trick to writing these things down.
 
Now you would just see horror of horrors 'What has been
overrun?', some type of process of that particular
character which is really just a process and if you were to
see that listed with no falls after it, and the thing
wasn't even nulled, you're not really in trouble, you would
actually put in on the listing question 'On what has been
overrun has anything been suppressed, anything been
invalidated?' put them in very lightly, you're going to get
a lot of read out of it.
 
Ah.. very good, read the first question, on this has
anything been suppressed? Woof fall.
 
Good. Rehab it. In other words you have to unsuppress the
list and get each one of them rehabbed. Get what the proper
repair action is.
 
This is one of the vicious ones that can come your way. It
already happened a couple of times.
 
You say 'Use what has been overrun, list what has been
overrun and handle each reading item as it reads'. And the
auditor comes along and he runs a little list. It is a
list, being well trained it's a list and he doesn't even
mark the reads. And he's listed it. He didn't do anything
with it.
 
Now what I'm warning you of is liable to have packed up the
case at that exact instant. You're going to have trouble
with the case now. Wasn't rehabbed. Because every single
one of those is a restimulated by-passed charge. It was
listed wasn't handled. Now on, sooner or later some auditor
is going to make this list he's going to find an item, it
is going to blow down, it is going to go F/N and he's got
it made. And from that he's going to move over into the
thing that every process should be listed.
 
So I make it loud and clear to you that there are two types
of questions: one is simply a process and you write down
the answers and it does look like a list, but it's not a
list under the heading of listing and nulling. It's not a
legitimate question. And under that heading can come any
question that reads. An absolute infinity of questions You
can actually as a C/S dream them up if they read great. But
that's how you'd have to do it. Each one of them has to be
handled.
 
Because they are not legitimate questions. Not legitimate
lists. An infinity of it.
 
Now you sometimes do this very lightly to find information
from the case. Let's give you an example where.. where you
are trying actually, you are actually trying to find out
why this fellow has an invisible field. He somehow or
another by some mystery has wound up at about 5 or 6 OT and
he's got an invisible field. Well he can't see anything.
You've got a blind thetan or something. Now you can
actually undertake this as an as an action. It's merely an
exploratory action. You can ask the auditor to list what it
is. 'Regarding this invisible field what is it?' (laughter)
Now you hold a pistol at the auditor's head on this, you
say 'falls, small falls, long falls, BDs for god's sake
mark them down, boy, mark them down'. It's an illegitimate
list don't you see, but it's still alright. Ya, it's
handled like 'What has been overrun?' It isn't one thing
and it never will be one thing. It's always a composite.
 
Now you get into trouble this way by thinking in this
framework: the magic button. I've lived in the atmosphere
of this god damned non-existent magic button since 1950.
There is one thing wrong with the org. There is one thing
wrong with the case. Now what would you do as to all other
considerations, look for this one magic thing. In 1950 it
was the fellow who was supposed to be shot in the
gluttonous maximus by a biochemical thing which made him at
once clear and which we would by now be rehabbing like
crazy so we could get on with it.
 
(laughter) I don't know if anybody here remembers those
days but there was a great deal of discussion in those days
concerning the fact that there ought to be some chemical,
which one would load up into a syringe and the word One
Shot Clear became current, but it was actually a sarcastic
word. But people listened for this button and for quite a
while I researched on this basis, so actually I've given
time to this idea and I can absolutely assure you,
completely and 100% that there is no magic single button.
 
For instance the LRH Comm WW was looking through policy
letters the other day, he said 'something is wrong, something
is wrong' and therefore it must be contained in policy. Well
alright, undoubtedly true within limit. And so therefore I'm
going to read all of these policy letters and applying it
out and all of a sudden he found out that it says that an
organization, which has undergone a period of
interiorization, heavy traffic internal, heavy traffic
internal will shortly after that go into a slump. Heavy
internal traffic is followed by a slump. Naturally it's
interiorized and isn't handling outside, so it goes into a
slump. You probably remember the policy letter. Anyway he
found this policy letter and he promptly started applying
it and got people to promote and just dropped the idea of
internal this and that and the other thing and he said
let's just have at it and let's do this exteriorization
action. And I'm sure they'll make it. 4 or 5 weeks from now
we'll have them coming up the line. But he should .. he was
looking for a magic button, a magic single button.
 
Well the reason he came down to looking for the magic
single button which would resolve the case at that
particular instance is because a great many buttons had
been very neglected for a very long time. Now at any given
. what..what deludes you in this is at any given instant
there is a magic button, see, at any given instant there is
a magic button, which when handled changes to another magic
button. (laugh) You do that in putting in the rudiments.
When you're putting in the rudiments the single magic
button on the case - ARC break. The single magic button NOW
is PTP. The single magic button would be missed withhold.
Do you get the idea? And actually going up the grades each
grade is the next magic button. They are magic buttons
alright, but they are not just one button.
 
There is no button, there will never be a button. I can assure
you there will never be a button, which pressed with great
expertise will suddenly blow a person to OT 8 from insane
asylum or wog. There is no such thing. And the reason there
isn't such a thing is because awareness is a gradient. It's
what he becomes aware of. Now maybe you can shorten this
gradient down to an hour, but it would still be not one
button. It would have to be a whole series of buttons in
this hour, ba ba ba ba ba ba ba ba ba ba. Do you get it?
And you'd have to know what button to push at any given
instant in that hour in order to clean that thing up. Do
you see? So the one button to hell with it. You can say,
well I know the button. Yes, yes, I know of a button. The
guy is just mocking up his bank and if you could get that
and work on that he could be convinced of that, why
naturally then the whole bank would blow and he would be a
Clear. Obvious. So there is one button.
 
Well, in the first place right above that there are a whole
lot of body thetans who also have the same consideration,
only unfortunately they have the consideration they are him
when they are not, and unfortunately above that at 7 he
will discover that there is another whole row of
aberration, as a matter of fact there are about 6 of them,
quite in addition to pictures. (laugh) So you see even that
doesn't turn out to be one button. He's Clear alright.
Great. Great. Se hasn't got any pictures. Fine. Now he goes
up to III and he gets rid of all his body thetans. So he
hasn't got any body thetans and so on. He can mock up
pictures and not mock up pictures.
 
He's in beautiful condition. IV is all straightened out.
Re's all rehabbed and so forth and he suddenly begins to
ask the question 'Why am I not 9 feet tall yet? I was 9
feet tall on Thursday and I as only 2 inches tall on
Friday.(laughter) Why is that?' Well, there are 6 or 7 more
things that are wrong with him, and they're contained in
the upper line of 7 and 8. I'm not trying to make a mystery
out of these things and say, oh well you find these things
when you get to 7 and 8. There are things like postulates
and there's things like interpersonal relationships,
there's things like the interrelationship with life itself,
there's on 8 there is 'who made this damned stuff?'
(laughter) Who made it and also who didn't want him to?
(laughter) Do you see there are things like this. Is
somebody standing around holding it there and mocking..
keeping it mocked up? (laughter) You can get a lot of
questions come up. The resolutions of these questions and
so on are all that's wrong with a thetan.
 
Now let's get back to where we started here. Do you have
some idea now that the listing and nulling laws apply to
legitimate listing questions? Now there possibly could be
more legitimate listing questions than the 7 or 8 which are
already there. I don't say that some of these would not
list to one item, but if they list to one item it's because
you're asking for the mostest or the bestest or the
biggestest. Do you get it? 'Who is the biggest watermelon?'
(laughter) 'What is the biggest planet you have ever been
on?' One item question obviously because you asked for it.
And that would determine it to that degree, but there are a
little row of them, which don't have the biggest and
mostest, they just come out to one item. And unless they
come out to one item, cut the PC throat, it'd be kinder.
 
Now the questions of VA oddly enough are so centrally
located with regard to the PCs mind and beingness. What
have you got? You've got persons, places and subjects. Wow!
And the funny part of it is that you could probably carry
them on and on, you could probably get some other reads,
you could probably do this and that and they are so
centralized in the field of aberration that they.. actually
you could count on the first BD being the item on the list
so that you can cut it short, but do you realize that that
doesn't disobey the laws of listing and nulling.
 
On a centralized question like that the first BD is it on
the list. Take it. The weird point about it is when you go
back to rehab VA, the minute you go back to rehab VA,
providing the auditor marked the BD, which BD'd. You know
he didn't do A, which BD'd really, but then wrote down B
and put the BD after B. he could make some goofy error like
this. But you go back and repair these VA and it's very
very peculiar, you'll find out it's the first blowing down
item.
 
Now you say, well that therefore must be a law of all
listing. It doesn't have to be a list of S&Ds, it doesn't
have to apply to S&Ds, so it's still the one reading item
on the list. So please differentiate, that in VA you are
just being given a fast route which still follows the laws
of listing. It isn't a special case. It just happens that
VA follows the rules of listing, all the rules of listing
occur on the first BD. Bong! That's all. It's peculiar. And
you'll find on some S&Ds that it's not true. So what I've
given you you'll see in VA, it's this peculiarity, it's the
first BD.
 
Now you can look on a VA list and you can see that he took
the second BD, and it inevitably will be a wrong item. So
it's not correct, it's the second BD. You look on an S&D
list and you'll find the third BD reading is the correct
item. Insufficiently central to the intelligence of the
being, you see. (unclear) ..you've listed here over on the
fringes and he blew some charge here and he blew some
charge there and he blew.. if you say, persons,
places... what the hell man, you're going right up against
the substance of 7 and 8. Bongo! Bongo! Dead on! And the
person says 'oh yeah' because he's sitting right there.
It's just a peculiarity, so that is simply given to you in
an effort to let you get it done in a hurry. And no other
significance than that, so don't lean on it all over the
place and run up a big ridge.
 
Now where an individual is rehabbed on VA you always
carefully do the whole job, you null the whole list to see
if it has to be extended in any way...  Why? The PC thought
of something else when he was listing. He didn't have the
listing question. This. That. There is a goofy outness
here, see. The PC was still thinking about something, all
of a sudden something else distracted his attention and he
thought oh well, what the hell, I mean we've got to get
this session through with here.. I've got to meet my wife,
or something you know. Attention came off the session, he
got a BD, something goofy like this. There is no way you
can prevent this except by being an auditor. What the hell
are you doing auditing so up to? Well, what were you doing
auditing a PC who had to meet his wife? I've never audited
a PC who had to go out and meet his wife at 4 o'clock. Oh
no not me! Now I want to put in a Reality-factor here...  we
gonna run waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle. I'm going to run
a resistive case list on you...  That's a hell of a gag. Boy
that's real scum. Didn't this auditor ever hear about the
fact that he had to be in ARC with the PC?
 
One of the reasons the fellow runs the resistive case list,
he can run a resistive case list on somebody who is just
momentarily hung up and find out what it is, he still falls
in these categories. The guy was sick on Thursday, must do
an assessment on the thing. It says he is physically ill.
That's it. So, the net result, the net result, when a guy
gets the R-factor he's liable to tell you something like, ja
ja ja ja ja ja...  you know, funny attitude, this guy must be
in a hell of a rush... .ask the guy you were rushed on anything? Oh yes yes I have to meet my wife at 4 o'clock. Good. Before
we start this session actually I want you to get out on the
telephone and call her. Oh I'm sorry you can't, she's
driving around in the car now. Good.
 
Alright, I'll tell you what, at the risk of upsetting you,
and so forth...  ah.. we're going to have this session this
evening. Be back here this evening. Why, why, it's
perfectly alright with me, I can suppress this while you're
auditing. (laughter)
 
This is all part of making the PC fly, you see. You
actually could have spent time, have you had food, have you
had sleep, do you have to go any place, and so forth,
except this is so god damned pianola and play it by
dropping the penny in the machine and so forth that it is a
damned bore, as they are currently saying and they'll be
saying something else in the future sometime, it is a drag.
(laughter) It's a waste of time. Ah.. therefore, therefore
you immediately assume that your PC is in one of two
conditions to be audited, which is he set up to be audited
or he ain't. (laughter) And of the he ain't there are two
categories, the ones the auditor can repair and the ones he
can't. Well, I'm very sorry I'm in an awful rush. I have an
appointment with a physician to have my leg sawed off at 4
o'clock. (laughter) Actually there is something an auditor
can do about that - you can say go and call him up and
cancel it, huh. Why should I do that? Well, one of the
reasons is I'm auditing you. Mixed practices. (laughter) So
therefore a process can be written down and look like a
list and there is a thing called list, which you then list.
 
Now as we look into this with more intimacy we find that
the definition of a complete list is a list which hag only
one reading item on the list. Oh yes, you know all about
that. Of course the other items that just tick, no they
wouldn't do, many exceptions to this rule. Ah.. the .. ah
the list which we null with out ruds has long falls on
various items. There aren't any exceptions to it none!
None! None! That is a list and this is brought forward for
this remarkable reason: That the auditors in 1962, in 63,
used to come around and ask me all the time how many items
should be on the list. How many items should be on the
list. Should list be four items? What is a full list?
Should it be two items? Three items? Four items? Twenty
items? You have to give it some sort of a figure. You're
asking me some balderdash question like how long is a rope?
And it's as long as there is a complete item on it.
 
Now I have seen some pretty damned long lists. I have seen
a list go two or three pages before the item fell out of
the hamper. That sounds incredible and it is almost un..
incredible. It happens damned rarely, but it does happen.
So you see some auditor he says, well let's see I've gotten
down to the bottom of the first page and somebody is liable
to be very upset indeed if I go on listing page after page.
I've been shot for it in the past and I don't have any item
yet so it must be a dead horse. Listen, did the question
read? The list won't dead-horse. No listing question which
read will ever dead-horse, because the only reason a dead
horse dead-horses is the listing question did not read.
(laughter) If the question read you get an item. And I've
actually seen very recently a folder in which there was a
reading listing question and then after listing half a page
the auditor decided it must be a dead horse because all the
items up to that point did not now read, two or three of
them had read.
 
So what was he doing? He was auditing one of these wide
things. Do you know that the PCs attention, goes way out
and comes way in and goes way out and comes way in cyclically.
 
There's certain test research processes you can run and he
starts talking about this, see. he'll say the table, the
chair, the clock there, the bureau, the glass of water, the
room, a wall, that duck over there, America, that star, the
sea in the Galaxy, yes yes yes the Galaxy, the star that
other star of the planet, of the moon, that range of Hills,
the the tongue there, the floor.
 
You can watch his answers, they go out and they go in; he's
buttered around the place. Do you follow? And if he is
really dead in and he wasn't really right to recognize
there was anything like this and the list is being listed
just a little bit soon on his case should we say .. ah, it
read, it's going to be a long list. And you read it and you
null it and if the question read then one of two things is
true; the items are suppressed, which is easy to do because
you null it with suppress, or the list is incomplete. And I
actually have four little questions that you can ask and
you have them on a bulletin write-up. It' most usually the
first item on the list on a long list that's always the figure.
 
The candidate that has been by-passed is the first item.
That most frequent. The second item comes in a little bit
behind the first item. And the list is incomplete or the
list is suppressed.
 
There's certain various positive things that are wrong with
lists You can take these laws of listing and make a list of
the laws of listing for assessment and go down the case
with each one and you would eventually find every damned
reason. One assumes that standard is in before he does the
laws of listing, so you would have to put on that something
like 'Was it listed with out Ruds?' To make it a complete
assessment form I would just check on that. To make an
assessment form on this you would have to put 'Was it
listed over out Ruds?' and for the uninitiated you would
have to list the Ruds that could have been out while the
listing was going on or which were now out and then you
would have a total which was more or less known anyhow.
 
But these laws of listing could be added up. Do you see how
you could do that? You can take any of the materials of
standard tech and list them out and ask questions of it and
work them this way and work them that way, because what you
are doing. It's the difference between a mechanic using a
screw driver and a pair of pliers. You know, he uses a
screw driver and he uses a pair of pliers. Well he sure can
use them in numerous ways. Got the laws of listing, there
are probably a dozen ways you could use these lists. All
right, complete list, there's all there is about a complete
list, because that's what it is. But remember by the word
list here we mean from an authentic reading listing question.
 
Two, the TA rising means the list is being overlisted. It's
too long inevitable and invariable a rising TA inevitably
means that something has been done too long and so on.
Sometimes with a suppressive and so on you will see a TA
rise. You'll see a suppressive - TA rise. And you say aha,
that's a variation from the laws of listing, because, look
at that, it's been a stuck high TA and it has come down
like mad when we all of a sudden got this suppressive. Oh
oh oh oh, I'm not trying to make myself right. It was
simply an overrun. He was an overrun. Se was around far too
long. (laughter) One of the reactions of suppressing are
incomplete cycles of action and overrun on cycle of action.
 
To handle the handled is also very suppressive. You got a
floor all clean, somebody comes along, tells you to clean
up the floor. A Suppressive cleans cleans. It's one of the
characteristics.
 
It doesn't make somebody who cleans a clean a suppressive,
but he invariably does this. He's got.. the house is all
painted, it's all finished, just getting ready to put away
the paint brushes, the suppressive comes along and says
look at that, you'd better get to work on that, hasn't been
painted well enough, go on and paint the house. He'll also
come along with only one wall half painted and say you will
have to rake the garden now. But different suppressives
they are in the overrun or in the incomplete.
 
So you've found a suppressive is overrunning something.
Also you will find that the subject of this suppression is
an overrun. It is not a violation of this, but once in a
while you'll find an S&D is the reason of a high TA, once
in a while. And then you sit very mysterious, but of course
it's quite obvious that the person needs an S&D, he's sick,
PTS and so forth. You just happen to give him an S&D and
you happen to see the TA go down, you wouldn't necessarily
always order an S&D because some body's TA was high, do you
follow? It doesn't work.
 
Now, a TA rising while you're doing a list it means it's
overlisted. And boy you can catch that right now, right
now, right now, right now. It was the second item it starts
to rise on the third item. You can catch it right now, just
like that. Pow! Pow! Because you see a rising TA is first
signaled by a needle going from right to left, instead of
left to right. Now it's true that there is a little bump
that a person can go across, a little bump he can go across
and you said jinx and you had a surge and then you said
brown and it sort of rises a little bit. You know the
needle return to position, and then it says balderdash and
goes bbblumsp. you got it. So it isn't the first tiny
little bit of motion of the needle. And when that thing is
going up the PC starts to think. There are other things
that go along with it, he starts to comm lag the needle
starts going over to the left and you've already ...  you
have a forecast of the fact that you are just about to overlist.
 
This is forecasted.
 
Now if you did this, if you did this, if you nulled the
first three items and it was starting to apparently rise on
the fourth and it did the first three items and then having
done the first three items it looked like it was rising,
you went back and nulled the first three items, you got in
suppress on the first item and on the second item, and you
still didn't have an item you go on listing. Do you
understand? And if the TA now really started up like a
surge you would go back and examine that first item again.
Do you see? He's done something. We had an example, we had
a person of another nationality and he was given an S&D and
he put the item on the list, which by the way some sessions
later came up, but he put the item on the list and then he
thought oh my god that's not socially acceptable and he
(bang). And boy, nobody could persuade him to let that item
read again.
 
In America such an item would be mother, do you see? You
wouldn't dare put, a lot a lot of areas wouldn't dare put
the word mother on the list. In Italy it would be priest.
You know, father Giuseppee (laughter). Has anything been
unmocked? Yes. Who or what has tried to unmock you? See?
You're asking, anything tried to unmock you? Right away
this is what communicates you know. he's asking himself has
anything been unmocked, anything uncocked, father Giuseppe,
aha, oh no. (laughter) Can't give it to him. Now you do
give it to him. He is now all in the middle of guilt. He'll
give the manifestation of you having found the wrong item
but only visually, the way to really get him in trouble is
to continue with, a little bit further, and really give him
a wrong item, you let him struggle with that one, very
often you give the PC a wrong item, he struggles with it.
But you can give him a right item which he struggles with.
It's whether or not it obeys the rules of listing. It obeys
the rules of listing, that's his item. Father Guiseppi
that's it, pooh. Oh no oh no oh no, yes, yes I guess that's
it. (laughter) he'll come right straight through it, you see.
Alright!
 
Number three: a list can be underlisted in which case
nothing can be found on nulling. The question read, the
question read, you listed a list, nothing is suppressed,
two or three items read as you listed it - incomplete list.
Nothing read, so extend it. You put a little bar over here
and mark extended. Don't ever you or let your auditors get
into a position or habit of extending a list without
marking a bar over to the left of the list saying ext. And
if you ever extend a later list, later extend an early list
is what I mean why say ext with the current date so
somebody knows it's been repaired.
 
Now, if after a session the TA is still high or goes up a
wrong item has been found. And that can happen between the
session and (the environ) and the examiner. He left the
session having done a Remedy B. He left the session and his
TA was at 2 and he arrives at the examiner with his TA at
4.75, to give you an extreme example. You don't have to ask
any questions about it whatsoever, you just say wrong item,
back to session. Or you say examine the list. Now remember
that it was always wisest when you have a direct evidence
of an incorrect list to get the list corrected before you
bingle-bungle around with Ruds, because it is the out rud.
So, this can happen a couple of days later, only it doesn't
show up as a high TA, it shows up as his face went solid.
Yeah, I have some pressure on my face, or something of this
character. (unclear) I was all right after the session. I was
sure it was...  And your correct action is then go back and
have the list corrected. It's a wrong item, wrong item, wrong
item. Another evidence, particularly on VA, he got in ethics
trouble within a very short time afterwards, 48 hours
something like that he finds himself in ethics. Ah the.. he
finds himself in the hands of the medical officer.
 
Now, you might run into some firefight like I ran into one
time, whereby the galley was busy feeding badly in an
unsanitary area and a whole bunch of crew members came down
epidemically at the same time I was getting some auditing
accomplished with those guys and (laughter) and now we had
to disentangle what this was all about. Were they being
super suppressed? All of a sudden had a mad team walked in
on the scene? What had happened? What had happened? Well
all that had happened was somebody had fed them rotten meat
(laugh), but it sure made one wonder.
 
Now the funny part of it is the guy who had fed them the
rotten meat had had three wrong items on power just 48
hours before he knowingly fed them rotten meat. (laughter)
Now you say I was looking all over the place to find the
wrong items - well I found the wrong items, I found the
guy.(laughter) That's how far it can go.
 
Now if the PC says it is a wrong item, it is a wrong item.
Now the trouble with that is, is this father Guiseppi thing
that I just said. - So the PC is saying ah I don't think
that is my item, I don't think that is my item, I don't
think that is my item. All the rules of listing say it is
his item. What are you going to do? Interesting question -
what are you going to do? Alright, we leave it at that.
(laughter) I'm not going to solve all your problems
(laughter). But this is true. If he says it is a wrong item
it is a wrong item. In the first place he is going to go
around worrying about the catholic church to such a degree
that he's going to spin in if you give him father Giuseppi.
I will solve it for you, there is nothing to it
actually. Ah, you ask him, just discuss this item with me,
I 'm not trying to force it on you, you don't have to have
this item, no you just don't have to have this item,
anything been suppressed and so forth on it, invalidated
and so forth. Oh I sure invalidated it, oh wow. (laughter)
 
Now where do you put those auditing reports normally?
(laughter) he's landed up with a problem hasn't he? Well,
if you force the item on him against that sort of thing and
so forth, as far as he is concerned it's wrong item, he'll
come around to it being a right item, if you just
acknowledge it. You say, it says here that father Giuseppe
is your item. No no it couldn't possibly be. All right
thank you very much. Now do you say, it is too your item?
(laughter) On six, the question must be checked and must
read as a question before it is listed. An item listed from
an unreading question would give you a deadhorse. And
that's all, you always listed, but let me tell you
something, it could be a false read or a suppressed read.
Now a person who is being suppressed suppresses the
suppressed. Do you see, he is suppressing suppressed
because he is dramatizing being suppressed. And suppressed
reads when you say lightly with a gay heart, ah .. is it
withdrawn from, is it stop or is it unmocked? Most of the
time you'll get away with it. But the reason this guy is
PTS, he is upset, he is sick, ah he is this, he is that.
 
There is every reason in the world, but boy this guy is PTS
and remember that the whole subject can be this. WSU will
normally shine outside of the question and you normally can
get your read on a it. And it says "U" (unmock) . So you say who or what, and you can check it, is trying to unmock
you. Some guys who are a bit blue only react to 'who is trying
to unmock you.'
 
It's a current situation. Who or what has tried to unmock
you if it.. attempted to unmock you - that sense of the
question does not reach them, so you have to test the
question, get a suppress in on it and you suddenly see it
reading. Make sure it isn't a false read. In other words
you handle this. It's got to be a handlable thing, but if
even after you handle it still doesn't read and then you
knuckelheadedly go list it. Boy you want to have your own
head examined, because it'll give you a dead-horse every
tome. A dead-horse proceeds from a non-reading question and
that is the reason for a dead horse and an auditor who does
not check the listing question before he lists it is a
knuckle-head.
 
Now, if the item is on the list and nothing read on nulling
the item is suppressed or invalidated.
 
Yes, so true, so true. Now one that cures that comes in
number eight. On a suppressed list it must be nulled with
suppressed. On balderdash has anything been suppressed? And
then you don't say the item, because of course the read on
suppression transfers to suppress, so if the item is going
to read it'll read on suppress anyhow, and now you've
cleaned up suppress so you know the thing is going to read.
Now an invalidated item reads on invalidate. A suppressed
item reads on suppressed. And the odd part of it is that it
reads the exact amount on suppress or invalidated that it
reads itself. On the item the reads transfers. As to the
exact right item it's going to read on the list. On ragbags
has anything been suppressed - boom. You should try it out
a few times just to see what the hell happened. And all of
a sudden you're totally relaxed, you say ragbags, it'll
read the same read exactly that you just got on suppressed.
Exactly. Same length. Same everything. It's one of the
miraculous little things.
 
It's the wildest thing I ever saw in my life, when I saw
it. The exact read with the same hitch, the same level, the
same (unclear) it's exact. And you can transfer it off to
suppress, transfer... suppress it and now suppress will read,
you can clean it up, suppress it again, read it under the
suppress once more, the suppress now reads, you clean it up,
bring it back, make the item read again - it's the wildest
thing you ever saw in your life. So it is one of the methods
of identifying the item. Is it the item that was suppressed?
Does it read like the suppressed read? So then you'd say on
balderdash has anything been suppressed? Well you know it's
going to be it so you do it, but to hell with it.
 
Supposing you wanted to check this thing out you say
balderdash. Did it read the same as suppressed? One of the
ways of checking it. Very cute, it's identical, identical
read. Now, on an item that is suppressed or invalidated the
read will transfer exactly from the item to the button and
when the button is gotten in the item will again read. Just
as I told you. Every once in a while you see some auditor
say on balderdash has anything been suppressed. All right,
thank you very much that's your item. When you are nulling
you just say on balderdash has anything been suppressed
read. When you've got the item, say the item and then the
su.. its read will come off. Otherwise its read will stay
on it. You've got to say the item again. On balderdash has
anything been suppressed, on ragbags has anything been
suppressed, on .. bong. Balderdash is the only reading item
on the list. You say, good balderdash, there is your read.
All right, you say, your item is balderdash.
 
Now an item from an overlisted list is often suppressed.
The damnedest thing you ever saw in your life. If you see
an 89 page list some knucklehead has done in Kyokak, for
Christ's sake know that the item is probably the first or
second item on the list. (laughter) On occasion when you pass
the item in nulling all subsequent items will read to a
point where everything on the list will then read. In this
case take the first read, take the first which read on the
first nulling.
 
So, so this idea of slant, slant, slant, slant or X, X, X,
X, come off of it. Don't do that! Don't do that! It's SF;
F. LFBD. Say what the read was! So as you're coming down
you read the first item on the list (unclear), ah
balderdash, topsat, oh wait a minute! What the hell is
this? Catterwamps, that was a LF, balderdash a SF,
chipmunks F. catnip F. [unclear] F. What the hell is going
on here? Well what's going on here is you're carrying the
read of the first item right on down in the list. If you
keep doing this you're going to be in a hell of a mess In
fact I don't know of a good method of separating out this
awful mess.
 
Now, an underlisted and overlisted list will ARC break the
PC, and he may refuse to be audited until the list is
corrected and may become furious with the auditor and will
remain so until it is corrected. He'll also become sad,
he'll also get other manifestations of ARC break.
Overlisted and underlisted, an incorrect list is something
is the first thing you correct for straightening up the
case. Listing and nulling or any auditing at all beyond an
ARC break without handling the ARC break, such as
correcting the list or otherwise locating it will put the
PC into a sad effect.
 
And that is so true. Just what it says because it is the
same as an ARC break. A long-duration ARC break that is
audited over top of, will bring about a sad effect.
 
Fourteen, a PC whose attention is on something else won't
list easily. You list and null only with the rudiments in
on the PC. That's where you would put it, doing a list you
would have to expand that question as I was inferring. You
would have to say, you know while you were being listed,
you know, did you have a PTS, a MWH. Ah.. an auditor whose
TRs are out has difficulty in listing and nulling and in
finding items. Oh so true. Now if you wanted to send every
item to the examiner to be checked to make sure it was the
right item, it would simply be stating this: every auditor,
I have, has out-TRs. We are not sure that the person went
release on the process he was run on. The analogous
statement is: none of our auditors have their TRs in.
 
When TRs are out things go release and do various weird
cooky things, that they shouldn't, but when we say TRs are
out, God! it's got to be awfully damned bad. It's something
that you would break down and cry over.
 
The auditor is sitting there eating candy and the PC is
looking out the window, more or less self auditing, and the
auditor is reading a newspaper between questions. It'd
really be corny, see, for this to happen. Listing and
nulling errors in presence of auditor's code violations can
unstabilize a PC, believe me. You take a PC who is not been
fed or something like this or has not had enough sleep etc.
and you insist on listing and you carry the list over, and
it's already difficult to audit and you shouldn't be listing
at that time anyhow, can unstabilize a guy. He he can feel
like he is absolutely spinning, for a day, two days, three
days, four days, woof! Now the lack of a specific listing
question or an incorrect nonstandard listing question which
doesn't really call for an item would give you more than one
item reading on a list. Sometimes you see a list which has lots
of items reading on it, for Christ's sake go back and look
at the listing question. And it could say. "Are tractors
necessary?" (laughter) Don't get so obsessed that you think only one thing will read on that list - everything under
God's green earth will read on it.
 
You cease listing and nulling actions when a floating
needle appears, and this is perfectly true.
 
You cease listing and nulling actions when a floating
needle appears. You don't cease auditing.
 
Do you get the nuance of that? (laughter) It means what it says.
 
Now, always give the PC hit item and circle it plainly on
the list. Wait wait wait a minute! That's auditing past
listing and.. Boy, you'd better. his F/N will pack right
up, PC go around what was my item what was my item, what
was my item. See the bank freezes before the PC speaks, so
it probably went F/N before he gave you the item. You see,
he thought ragbags, F/N, and then he says ragbags and you
write it down. See, there it is. Sometimes when you are
nulling (snaps fingers) you get your F/N.
 
Now if you just sit there blankly the PC is going to go
into mystery. So you always give the PC his item. And
twenty, listing and nulling are highly precise auditing
actions and if not done exactly by the laws may bring about
a down tone and slow gain case, but if done correctly
exactly by the laws and with good auditing in general will
produce the highest gains attainable.
 
Note, there are no variations or exceptions to the above.
It does not alter VA power procedure.
 
People think sometimes this alters it or they're different.
I'm just.. I already told you why. And ethics should be put
in where these laws are violated. An auditor who isn't
convinced of something, you should list him on some
question, insists it goes to one item, particularly if the
question doesn't read. What tractors are sick? (laughter)
Went into 89 pages and insist there is an item. That's too
gruesome. I know you can't confront it. I wouldn't be able
to confront it either. I'm sure you'll all do these laws
correctly and I'm sure use a blackjack on those.
 
People regard these laws of listing and nulling far too
lightly, far far far too lightly. They are very important,
and with the auditor's code are the most important errors
that can be made as far as case effects are concerned, so
they are not to be regarded lightly. You don't list a list
and then don't null it, you don't muck about with listing
and nulling. You don't let an auditor list and null for you
as case supervisor that you are very doubtful of. You got
it? You make him itsa or something.
 
Got it? (yes)
 
Help you out a little bit? (yes)
 
All right. Thank you very much.
 
(applause)
 
**************************************************