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.