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.