6110C12 SHSpec-66  Problems

     Rockslams always take precedence over other needle phenomena.  A rockslam
is a very badly overrun flow.

     A rise, on the other hand, means nothing because you don't know what
turned it off.  It's a latent response to something that exceeded the PC's
reality, so you can't tell where it come from.  The rise means something: it
means the PC isn't going to confront something, but you can't spot what, so
it's not worth pursuing.  Also, the PC wouldn't respond to auditing of it
anymore, since it's beyond his reality.  Sometimes, when the PC has an ARC
break, all the needle will do is rise.  When you get ruds in, the needle won't
rise much.

     Note that, on running a problems intensive, you get the problem before
the change, it can turn out to be a problem he's had for hundreds or millions
of years.  So don't ask for the confusion before the problem.  You want the
confusion before the this-lifetime change.  You must realize that the only
reason that people move slowly and get parked on the track or anything else is
that problems become timeless.  The timelessness of problems composed the
reactive mind.  People and organizations are slow he degree that they have
problems they can't solve; they are inactive to the degree that they have
problems they can't solve.  Most of their actions are reactive.  Every new
action adds into the old problem, to the point of feeling it doesn't matter
what we do.  Also, the magnitude of the problem can make any other
non-connected thing seem very trivial.  Other people's reality is viewed
apathetically, since he's so overwhelmed that he can't look at it, no matter
how immediate it is.  Such people react to everything in life this way.  It's
an apparent apathy which is apathy toward life, the person being in terrific
agony about the problem.  He can't even articulate what the problem is.  If
you ask him to take his attention off the problem, he knows it'll eat him up.
He has no attention to spare for you or for auditing.

     You often have a PC who is escaping from present time by being in the
past.  You can make a mistake by believing he'd audit better on his terminals
line, so you should skip ruds and any this-lifetime difficulties and just go
back on the line.  No.  The PC is back on the line because it's safer.  One of
the symptoms of that is the PC who never gets a picture.  Pictures are
dangerous.  They became dangerous at some time in the past, possibly during a
session.  Getting rudiments in on someone can turn on his pictures.  Rudiments
can show someone who has never had auditing that life is solvable at these
little finite points.

     It's a characteristic of a PC who is in apathy that he has got to solve
it all at once, now.  Move the apathy off and you'll get the franticness.
They won't do the available auditing command you've given them.  They'll take
it and make it something to resolve their whole case by one answer.  Why?
Because their whole track is collapsed.  The fact that problems are timeless
and problems join to problems makes it all a timeless explosive stratum.  And
anything that explosive about which they worry that much, must be solved
explosively: A desperate solution for a desperate problem, which occurs at one
point.  People look for one command -- one magic word which will make the PC go clear.  This becomes what the PC wants when he can't do any of the little things.  In desperation he will have to do one of the big ones.  Auditing, however, is done by gradients; it depends for success on reaching a reality a PC can tolerate, getting to a picture the PC can see at this moment of time in session.  What the PC really can do are little gradients.  You've got to find the gradient which is real to the PC.  Something confrontable, not the explosive, right now effect.

     There are people with a frantic desire to have lots of money right now.
They may have fantastic schemes to get it, very unworkable ones.  If you asked
them, "How much money could you have?" and sorted it out on the meter, you'd
find that while they said, "Oh, millions!", the amount that would be real to
them would be a farthing, a nickel -- something so small that they don't make
that coin.  It's the other side of the circle.  They think in terms of
millions, while they get poorer and poorer and poorer.

     The case that has to have total change now and the case that makes no
change now are almost the same case.  The case that just sits there
apathetically knows that there can't be a big enough change or a big enough
effect right now to solve his problems, so he's given up on the idea that
anything is going to happen at all.  He has cancelled all this out.  He is on
a lower rung than that.  He can't have a change, because there's no change
tiny enough, until you figure out what it is.

     How did he get into this state?  By having problems that were so
overwhelming that he must keep his attention on them all the time, and he
knows nothing could be done about them, but they are terribly important, but
you have to do something about them, but nothing can be done about them, so
that everything else in life is trivial, including your auditing command.
Your command has nothing to do with his problems, unless you have his exact
problem, in which case your commands will have something to do with his case.
That's actually the only process that will work on him.

     The whole of this problems intensive is to find where the PC is stuck and
what problem he's looking at.  The trick is: he doesn't know, or he wouldn't
be overwhelmed with it.  The problems he glibly tells you aren't it.  A proper
assessment will get you the right one, not one with a lot of figure-figure and
must-have-been.  The clue to this is that he's figuring from a different time
band and the real problem is this moment in time, the time band of the PC;
it's now.  If the PC were looking at the problem he is stuck in, he wouldn't
say, "A person who would have had that problem then," because he is in "then";
he's in that problem and no other.

     A PC who is ARC breaking or getting apathetic during a goals or terminal
assessment is doing it because you're taking his attention off the only thing
it's safe to keep it on, which is the problem he's stuck in.  If his ruds are
very well in and he has a lot of confidence in the auditor, you can do it and
he'll feel fine, but he still has his attention on the problem.  Now when you
try to run his prehav level on the terminal, it takes too much attention, so
he puts that on a via so he can keep his attention on the problem.  He is ARC
breaky and gets upset, or he's apathetic and just grinds, if he's lower on the
scale.  In this case, he'll be running with his attention at monotone, because
most of his attention is glued to a problem so horrendous that if it were
solved, the whole universe would blow up.  It's even too much effort to say
what the problem is, so it all operates as a withhold.  Every time you have an ARC breaky PC, you have violated to some degree fixation of attention on problems.  You've asked him to do something he doesn't consider safe, and he is protesting having his attention shifted.  If someone is in this state, you have to work like mad to keep his attention centered where it is centered and not shift it around.  So it's about the hottest thing you can do with a case to give a problems intensive. We're getting the backtrack problems which slide up and become PT problems of long duration, the problems which underlie the hidden standards and the prior confusions which made the hidden and the problems necessary.  It works because you are putting his attention where it already is, so it goes easily.

     Auditors blame themselves because PC's ARC break.  So if you can get a
certainty as an auditor on exactly why a session goes wrong and see the exact
mechanism and its magnitude, exactly when and why a session detours; if you
can see that the PC's attention is fixated on a problem of great importance to
a degree that any shift of attention causes him to go through this ARC break
phenomenon, you will see that all you have done is to disturb his attention.
You very often have been running pcs with PTP's without recognizing any part
of it.  Very often a PC has unknowingly to himself stated his problem to you
many times, and you have never heard it as a problem, so you go ahead and
solve it.  A problem is a problem.  It is what the PC is worried about, and
feels he has to do something about or that he can't do anything about.
Auditing the problems intensive, he may give it to you again and you'll
suddenly recognize it as a problem.  Don't feel silly about it.  But do
recognize that there aren't problems which should be solved as opposed to
being run, as far as PTP's of long duration are concerned.  Furthermore, the
problem you think you see, some usual problem, may well not be the problem at
all.  E.g. the instructor who has a problem with students that turns out to be
the problem of not believing auditors can audit, including his present
auditor, so how could he get auditing?

     Problems about scientology are of the order of magnitude of withholds on
the subject of scientology, in terms of stopping case gain.  The fact that
he's in a session acts to restimulate the withhold or the problem, and
everything you are doing restimulated it.  Don't solve his problem about
auditing by giving him more or better auditing.  The PC has a PTP and will
behave like a case with one no matter what you do to solve it.

