6209C18 SHSpec-190 3GA: Dynamic Assessment by Rock Slam The rock Slam is so-called, because it is achieved when the auditor is approaching what we once called "The Rock". There is something earlier than the Rock: a goal. If it were called a "goal slam" you would have it. It is producing a lot of random needle motion because of currents being set up amongst the items and identities that the person has assumed or fought in the process of executing the goal. The individual has no way to go towards or away from the goal. He is in a state of agitation. It is a thetan convulsion. In the absence of a slamming needle, you may well see convulsions of the body, when the convulsion gets to a great degree of solidity. This is surmise, with some evidence behind it. That is called an epileptic fit. If it went beyond that, to enter the physical universe around the person, you would get other effects. First the physical universe gets enturbulated; auditors drop commands; people have accidents. Further on, you could get poltergeist phenomena. You get enMEST in any case. What this is, is obsessive and random motion, or a postulate that is in a state of producing obsessive and random impulses when restimulated. One may well get one's goal restimulated in the course of life. So the rock slam is the goal track. The PC's interest follows the track of the goal and therefore also the slam. The PC is being reached as a case when he is rockslamming. Don't ARC break a PC while he is rockslamming! You won't get away with things that you could get away with when he wasn't rockslamming, so your auditing had better be smooth. The case will hang up if you bungle it during that time. The PC's interest is very much on his case and the distraction is severe if you yank his attention out of session. He goes from Tone 30 to minus 8.0 with no curve, and it is hard to clean that up. Dynamic assessment is an intense activity, and it should be so regarded by the auditor, since, as the PC goes down the track, he is unknowingly running into all the items that you will later list. You will find his detested person, which will make him very happy. You will take a lot of edges off the case. You will find the dynamic that slams, and this means a great deal to him. Now we find the item, and here is something that is enormously significant to him. It explains all sorts of things. Then you find the goal, beside which all else pales. This gives the PC gradient gains, which is an improvement over ordinary 3GA. A nervousness can build up while you are tiger-drilling [See p. 295a] the 850 goal list. The tension that built up when we were assessing by elimination was enough to break the PC's and the auditor's heart. The PC was so nervy and ARC breaky, he was almost impossible to audit. If you tiger drill a list, the goals, but not the Goal, are being erased as you go along, and the PC feels better and better. But this is still not good enough or fast enough. There is such a terrific attention line here that any little wiggle is super-upsetting. Doing dynamic assessment by rock slam eliminates most of the liabilities. It goes into the goal line, not direct for the goal, and it goes by a gradient of interest, with the PC an active participant, making gains every few hours. Also, a successful dynamic assessment by rock slam makes the PC feel great. The auditor doesn't really care about this, because the end product is getting the goal. The auditor can get distracted by the spectacular successes that he is getting, but anything other than going for the goal is a waste of time. If you are going to get to be a Class IV auditor, you have to do it fast. To clear earth, you have to be able to find a PC's goal in a week. This is something LRH can do, so you have to learn to be that effective. This is an upgrade. LRH wants Class IV's to handle a group co-auditing to clear, per the program for world clearing. That is the only way to get it done as fast as it needs to be done. This would produce fifty clears in one year. When the technology is trimmed a bit more, you should be able to get it done in twelve and a half hours. But to do this, you have to be pretty slick as an auditor. There is a point of diminishing returns, where it is done so fast that it is unreal to the PC. As a PC's listing continues, his interest in the goal ebbs and fades. It is brought back by tiger-drilling. It takes one minute, on the average, to clean up a goal by tiger drilling. At 460 down the list of 850, that's 450 minutes or seven and a half hours, plus rudiments, to get to the goal. That is not bad, and that was the place where the second goal was found on one PC. But the first goal is rockier to find. Many PCs will never find one without a dynamic assessment by rock slam. So we are looking for a positive and efficient method of finding goals on all PCs in a fairly predictable amount of time. Some ACC's found PCs running for six weeks without finding a goal. This was very disappointing. Dynamic assessment by rock slam has the luck factor of whether the list you are assessing is complete. If no item assesses out unmistakably, the list was incomplete. There is no other reason. We know that if we can get a dynamic that rockslams when the PC considers committing overts against it, we can then list what represents that dynamic on a dwindling rock slam. We can assess that list to get an item. The goal will be an overt against that item, in one shade of meaning or another, as given on the list. The tough point is the entrance point: trying to find the first slam. There is a new caper: "the most detested person". This is experimental at present. "Who or what have you detested?" could get it, but you may or may not get an item, or what looks like an item. A short cut is to say, "What do you wish was not part of existence?" Oil him up by getting a list. Then ask, "What isn't part of existence?" This will serve you as an item, if it will develop a rock slam. You assess it by "Consider overts against _______ ." You will find that the common denominator of all dynamics and items is that the person will not admit that they are part of existence. They are things from which the PC has individuated. So when you get the slamming item, you might build it back to a dynamic, when all else fails, by asking, "What part of existence does _______ belong to?" This could give a rock slam when the list is assessed. Then you could list, "What part of existence does a _______ represent?" This could give the dwindling slam. The normal way is to ask, "What opinionated person have you detested?" Assess the list with "Think of doing bad things to _______ ." Get down to an elimination by rock slam. Get one person (often the first on the list). List, "What part of existence does _______ represent?" This gives a list of dynamics on which there will be rock slams. Assess with, "Think of doing bad things to _______ ." If you are lucky you will get an unmistakable rock slam on one dynamic. Then the list of the item will be a dwindling slam, down to a dirty needle. Assess that with, "Think of doing bad things to _______ ." One will fire well, and now we have the PC's goals line on that item. You list with, "What goal might you have that would be an overt against _______ ?" That will go also by dwindling rock slam. Then list line six. In a high percentage, the goal will be number 1, 2, 3, or 4 on that list. Just tiger drill each goal. There is an action that must precede any dynamic assessment by rock slam. The PC must first list 850 goals and find and list every goal ever listed on the PC and tiger drill the whole list. First, however, you tiger drill the tiger drill buttons, e.g. "On the word 'suppress' has anything been suppressed?" etc., down to flatness or cognition. This is a must on anyone who has been audited much. You should also be sure to get the PC to tell you the consequences of your clearing him. It could be so horrendous that the PC will never give you his goal. Work the suppress and the careful buttons hard. "Careful" is especially likely to turn on a rock slam, when the rock slam is off. The command you use to tiger drill early goals is, "In auditing on the goal _______ , has anything been suppressed?", etc. Thus a goal that has been buried will begin to read again. You can also use, "Since (date goal was found), on (goal), has anything been _______ ?" Don't ever discard old goals. The case can be stalled from that point forward.