Volume VI 1965-1969 - Technical Bulletins

Volume VI 1965-1969 - Technical Bulletins

Сообщение auditor » 27 дек 2016, 16:33

Web auditing in any place on the planet http://webauditing.org/

The
Technical Bulletins
of
Dianetics and Scientology

by
L. Ron Hubbard
FOUNDER OF DIANETICS AND SCIENTOLOGY

Volume
VI
1965-1969
_____________________________________________________________________

I will not always be here on guard.
The stars twinkle in the Milky Way
And the wind sighs for songs
Across the empty fields of a planet
A Galaxy away.

You won’t always be here.
But before you go,
Whisper this to your sons
And their sons —
“The work was free.
Keep it so. “


L. RON HUBBARD

L. Ron Hubbard
Founder of Dianetics and Scientology

EDITORS’ NOTE


“A chronological study of materials is necessary for the complete training of a truly top grade expert in these lines. He can see how the subject progressed and so is able to see which are the highest levels of development. Not the least advantage in this is the defining of words and terms for each, when originally used, was defined, in most cases, with considerable exactitude, and one is not left with any misunderstoods.”

—L. Ron Hubbard

The first eight volumes of the Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology contain, exclusively, issues written by L. Ron Hubbard, thus providing a chronological time track of the development of Dianetics and Scientology. Volume IX, The Auditing Series, and Volume X, The Case Supervisor Series, contain Board Technical Bulletins that are part of the series. They are LRH data even though compiled or written by another.

So that the time track of the subject may be studied in its entirety, all HCO Bs have been included, excluding only those upper level materials which will be found on courses to which they apply. If an issue has been revised, replaced, or cancelled, this has been indicated in the upper right-hand corner along with the page number of the issue which should be referred to.

The points at which Ron gave tape recorded lectures have been indicated as they occurred. Where they were given as part of an event or course, information is given on that event or course on the page in the chronological volumes which corresponds to the date. The symbol “**” preceding a tape title means that copies are available from both Publications Organizations. A tape preceded by “*” means that it will soon be available. No asterisk (*) means that neither Publications Organization nor Flag has a master copy of that lecture. If you have, or know anyone who has, copies of these tapes, please contact the Flag Audio Chief, P.O. Box 23751, Tampa, Florida, 33623, U.S.A. The number in the tape title is a code for the date; example: 5505C07—55 = year, 1955; 05 = month, May; C = copy; 07 = day, 7th; 7 May 1955. The abbreviation tells what group the tape is a part of. For an explanation of the abbreviations see Volume X, page 539.

At the back of this volume is a Subject Index covering only the material in this volume. Use the index to locate the LRH source material in context, don’t just get data from the index. This index has been combined with indexes from other volumes to form the Cumulative Index which is in Volume X, starting on page 287.

TECHNICAL BULLETINS
1965-1969


CONTENTS


1965

ca. 1965 My Philosophy
7 Feb. Keeping Scientology Working (HCO PL) (reissued 28 Jan. 1973) 4
14 Feb. Safeguarding Technology (HCO PL) (reissued 7 June 1967) 10
27 Feb. Course Pattern (HCO PL) OEC Vol. 4—449
Feb. The Book of E-Meter Drills 12
5 Mar. Book of Case Remedies—Application of Tech 13
10 Mar. Words, Misunderstood Goofs 14
29 Mar. ARC Breaks 16
2 Apr. The Road to Clear 19
4 Apr. ARC Breaks and Missed Withholds 22
5 Apr. A Conditions Test Process I—X—Registrars 25
5 Apr. Handling the Suppressive Person—The Basis of Insanity
(HCO PL) OEC Vol. 1—375, Vol. 4— 53
5 Apr. Academies Relation to HCO Justice—Student Training—
The No-Gain-Case Student (HCO PL) OEC Vol. 1—383, Vol. 4—61
7 Apr. Premature Acknowledgements 26
16 Apr. The “Hidden Data Line” (HCO PL) OEC Vol. 4—186
16 Apr. Drills, Allowed (HCO PL) OEC Vol. 4—188
18 Apr. How to Apply Level Processing 27
27 Apr. Clay Table Healing Goof 29
5 May Application—More on the Application of Scientology to Children 30
5 May Classification, Gradation and Awareness Chart (HCO PL)
(reissued 4 July 1970) 33
1965 Classification Gradation and Awareness Chart of
Levels and Certificates 36
10 May Releases—Vital Data (HCO PL) (revised & reissued 19 Sept. 1967) 38
17 May CCHs (HCO PL) 40
20 May Power Processes (HCO PL) OEC Vol. 4—595
22 May Auditing by Lists(replaced—see Vol. VII, 316) 41
27 May Processing (HCO PL) 43
3 June R6 EW (HCO PL) OEC Vol. 4—461
4 June Class II Model Session (cancelled—see 60) 44
14 June Summary Report 47
14 June Folders, Marking of (HCO PL) OEC Vol. 4—571
17 June Staff Auditor Advices (HCO PL) 49
18 June Clear and OT Behaviour 51

1965 (cont.)

26 June HGC Pc Review Auditing Form (HCO PL)
(revised—see Vol. VIII, 321) 52
28 June Releases, Different Kinds 56
30 June Release, Rehabilitation of Former Releases and Thetan Exteriors 57
1 July Comm Cycle Additives (HCO PL) 59
3 July Model Session Revised (cancelled—see 259) 60
12 July States of Being Attained by Processing 61
12 July Release Policies—Starting the Pc (HCO PL) OEC Vol. 2—326, Vol. 4—572
13 July Testing (HCO PL) OEC Vol. 4— 73
19 July Release Checks, Procedure for (HCO PL) OEC Vol. 4—574
21 July Release Rehabilitation 63
27 July Auditing by Lists(cancelled—see Vol. VII, 316) 64
2 Aug. Release Goofs 66
3 Aug. Auditing Goofs—Blowdown Interruption 69
5 Aug. Release Check Outs (HCO PL) OEC Vol. 5—143
5 Aug. Release Stages 70
6 Aug. Qualifications Technical Actions 73
9 Aug. Release Check Outs (HCO PL) OEC Vol. 5—145
19 Aug. Model Session Revised 78
23 Aug. Abbreviations and Symbols of Dianetics and Scientology 79
23 Aug. Classification at Upper Levels—Temporary Measure
(HCO PL) OEC Vol. 4—392
23 Aug. Deletion of TR 5 (HCO PL) OEC Vol. 4—191
30 Aug. Art (Art Series 1 ) 83
30 Aug. Release Stages 86
Sept. The Aims of Scientology 88
13 Sept. Out Tech and How to Get It In 89
21 Sept. Out Tech 93
21 Sept. E-Meter Drills (HCO PL) 94
21 Sept. Qualifications Technical Actions see footnote— 78
22 Sept. Release Gradation—New Levels of Release 95
27 Sept. Release Gradation—Additional Data 98
29 Sept. Cyclical and Non-Cyclical Process Conclusions 101
29 Sept. The Continuing Overt Act 102
1 Oct. Mutter TR(revised—see Vol. VIII, 395) 104
4 Oct. Clearing Course Materials—Security of Data (HCO PL) see—105
14 Oct. Course Pattern (HCO PL) OEC Vol. 4—464
25 Oct. Saint Hill Solo Audit Course (HCO PL) OEC Vol. 4—473
5 Nov. Five Way Bracket on Help 106
5 Nov. Lecture Graphs 106
7 Nov. Release Rehabilitation Error 107

1965 (cont.)
8 Nov. Suppressives and Hidden Standards 109
14 Nov. Clearing Commands 110
16 Nov. E-Meter Sensitivity Setting 110
16 Nov. Commands for Upper Indoctrination TR 6, TR 7, TR 9 111
19 Nov. Problems Process 111
19 Nov. Auditing Reports (HCO PL) 112
24 Nov. Search and Discovery 113
26 Nov. Information on Rehabilitation 117
30 Nov. Library Record of Levels see footnote—117
1 Dec. CCHs 118
6 Dec. Low TA Cases 121
10 Dec. E-Meter Drill Coaching 122
27 Dec. Vitamins 123
28 Dec. E-Meters Allowed (HCO PL) OEC Vol. 4— 77
30 Dec. PTS Auditing and Routing (HCO PL) OEC Vol. 1—439, Vol. 4—578
Dec. Scientology—A New Slant on Life 125


1966

19 Jan. Danger Conditions—Technical Data for Review Auditors 126
21 Jan. Search and Discovery (Ethics Type Cases, PTSs)—S & D Errors 127
28 Jan. Search and Discovery Data—How a Suppressive Becomes One 128
Feb. Psychotics (Certainty Vol. 13, No. 2) 131
Feb. HGC Cure—Interne Training and Staff Auditors
(HCO PL) OEC Vol. 4— 78, Vol. 5— 63
5 Feb. S and D Warning 136
5 Feb. “Letting the Pc Itsa”—The Properly Trained Auditor 138
9 Feb. Release Grades 141
10 Feb. Check Sheets, Course (HCO PL) OEC Vol. 4—466
10 Feb. Tech Recovery (HCO PL) 143
11 Feb. Free Needles, How to Get Them on a Pc 147
12 Feb. The “Dangerous Auditor” 149
21 Feb. Definition Processes 150
Mar. What Is Greatness? (Certainty Vol. 13, No. 3) 154
7 Mar. HGC Cure (Continued) (HCO PL) OEC Vol. 4—84, Vol. 5— 69
8 Mar. High Crime (HCO PL) 156
3 Apr. Dianetic Auditing Course 158
29 Apr. Policy Check Outs and E-Meter (HCO PL) OEC Vol. 5—252
10 June S & D Commands 164
10 June S & D—The Missed Item 165
20 July The Type Two PTS 166
21 July Tech vs. Qual (HCO PL) 167

1966 (cont.)
27 July Meter Trim Check (replaced—see 369) 168
2 Aug. Dianetic Auditing (HCO PL) OEC Vol. 4—229
10 Aug. Errors of Students 169
16 Aug. List L4 S & D (cancelled—see 213) 171
22 Aug. Floating Needles, Listing Processes 172
23 Aug. Service Facsimile 173
Sept. The Book Introducing the E-Meter 174
20 Sept. Minus Scale Releases: ARC Straight Wire—Dianetic 175
21 Sept. ARC Break Needle 176
27 Sept. The Anti-Social Personality—The Anti-Scientologist 177
29 Sept. Library Record of Levels see footnote—183
13 Oct. HGC Pc Review Auditing Form (HCO PL)
(revised—see Vol. VIII, 321) 184
18 Oct. SH Staff Auditor’s Purpose (HCO PL) OEC Vol. 4—579
10 Nov. Security of Data (HCO PL) see—105
14 Nov. OT Course (HCO PL) OEC Vol. 4—483
18 Nov. Rehab on Self Analysis 188
30 Nov. Assessment for Service Facsimiles 189


1967

2 Jan. Sub Zero Releases—Examiner’s Safeguard 190
2 Jan. Dating—Forbidden Words 191
17 Jan. An Open Letter to All Clears (HCO PL) OEC Vol. 4—484
19 Jan. Manifestations of Engrams and Secondaries Further Defined 192
3 Feb. Scales see—200
22 Mar. Admin Know-How—Alter-Is and Degraded Beings 193
22 Mar. Personnel Requirement (HCO PL) OEC Vol. I—102
18 Apr. Religious Philosophy and Religious Practice 195
21 May Theory Check-out Data (HCO PL) Vol. V—488
7 June Safeguarding Technology (HCO PL) (reissue of 14 Feb. 1965) 10
7 June Responsibility Again (HCO PL)
(reissue of 17 Jan. 1962) Vol. V— 8
30 June Evidences of an Aberrated Area 196
19 Aug. The Supreme Test 197
13 Sept. Remedy B 199
15 Sept. The Supervisor’s Code (HCO PL) OEC Vol. 4—141
18 Sept. Scales (corrected 4 Apr. 1974) 200
18 Sept. Study—Complexity and Confronting (HCO PL) Vol. IX—309
19 Sept. Releases—Vital Data (HCO PL) (revision of 10 May 1965) 38
24 Sept. A Report to Ron on Seasickness 202
8 Oct. Clear Checks and Re-Clear Checks 203

1967 (cont.)

11 Oct. Clay Table Training 205
9 Nov. Revision of Remedy A, Remedy B, and S and Ds 206
22 Nov. Out Tech (HCO PL) (revised—see Vol. VII, 115) 209
28 Nov. The Key S & D Question 210
27 Dec. List Handling 210
28 Dec. Qual Senior Datum (HCO PL) 211


1968

9 Jan. List L4A—For Assessment of All Listing Errors, S & Ds,
Remedy A, Remedy B, etc. (revised—see Vol. VIII, 138) 213
9 Jan. Money Process 215
13 Jan. S&Ds 216
16 Jan. Starting of Preclears 217
19 Jan. S & Ds—S & Ds by Button 218
26 Jan. HGC Pc Review Auditing Form (HCO PL) see footnote—226
12 Mar. Mistakes, Anatomy of 219
15 Mar. HGC Pc Review Auditing Form (HCO PL) see footnote—226
18 Apr. Needle Reactions Above Grade IV 220
9 Apr. HGC Pc Review Auditing Form (HCO PL) see footnote—226
19 Apr. HGC Pc Review Auditing Form (HCO PL)
(revised—see Vol. VIII, 321) 221
4 May Dianetic Courses—Stuck Pictures 227
7 May Upper Indoc TRs 228
20 May Overt-Motivator Sequence (corrected & reissued 5 Mar. 1974) 231
24 May Coaching 233
July Introduction to Scientology Ethics 235
1 Aug. The Laws of Listing and Nulling 236
5 Aug. Change of Commands—Overt-Motivator Sequence 238
6 Aug. R 3 H 239
Aug. The Phoenix Lectures 240
26 Aug. Rehab & Correction 241
28 Aug. Out Tech 242
28 Aug. Drugs 243
29 Aug. Drug Data (corrected & reissued 10 June 1975) 244
31 Aug. Written C/S Instructions 245
Sept. Summary of How to Write an Auditor’s Report, Work Sheets and
Summary Report, with some Additional Information 246
Sept. Points on Case Supervision 248
4 Sept. Don’t Force a Pc Who Is Ill 249
6 Sept. Checking for False Reads 249
10 Sept.-1 Green Form, S & D (addition of 28 Feb. 1975) 250

1968 (cont.)
11 Sept. False Reads 250
11 Sept. Case Supervisor Data 251
17 Sept. Overrun Process 251
17 Sept. Six Zones of Action (revised 31 Jan. 1975) 252
17 Sept. Ethnics 253
17 Sept. Gross Case Supervision Errors 254
18 Sept. Examiner’s Form(HCO PL)(revised—see Vol. VII, 193) 255
19 Sept. Old Lists Are Not To Be Copied (reissued 8 May 1972) 256
20 Sept. Review, Ordering People to 256
20 Sept. Glee 257
22 Sept. CCHs Not Grade I (cancelled) 257
23 Sept. Resistive Cases—Former Therapy see Vol. VII—449
23 Sept. Drugs & Trippers (reissued 22 Jan. 1972) 258
23 Sept. New Rudiments 259
24 Sept. Class VIII Lectures (24 Sept.—15 Oct.) 259
25 Sept. Continuous PT Overts (reissued 5 Oct. 1972) 260
27 Sept. ARC Straight Wire 261
28 Sept. Dianetics 262
30 Sept. Lists (reissued 8 May 1972) 263
3 Oct. New Rudiments Questions(cancelled) 264
4 Oct. Ruds 265
5 Oct. LX1 Form, Research List for Class VIII see—432
7 Oct. ARC Break Needle 265
7 Oct. Assessment 266
8 Oct. Assessment: LX1 267
8 Oct. Case Supervisor—Folder Handling 268
14 Oct.R The Auditor’s Code (HCO PL) (revised 1 Jan. 1976) 269
14 Oct. Meter Position 271
14 Oct. Definition of Recall 271
16 Oct. Supervisor’s Duty 272
18 Oct. Processing Sequence 272
19 Oct. Course Completion—Student Indicators (HCO PL) OEC Vol. 4—202
20 Oct. The Purpose of Class VIII 273
21 Oct. Floating Needle 275
22 Oct.R Teaching the Class VIII (revised 31 Jan. 1975) 276
24 Oct. Supervisor Know-How—Running the Class (HCO PL) OEC Vol. 4—203
24 Oct. Supervisor Know-How—Handling the Student (HCO PL) OEC Vol. 4—204
24 Oct. Supervisor Know-How—R Factor to Students (HCO PL) OEC Vol. 4—205
24 Oct. Supervisor Know-How—Tips in Handling Students
(HCO PL) OEC Vol. 4—206
28 Oct. OT Exterior (cancelled) 276

1968 (cont.)

1 Nov. High TA 277
2 Nov.R Case Supervisor—Class VIII—The Basic Processes
(revised 31 Jan. 1975) 278
2 Nov. Auditor’s Code—Add to Pol Ltr 14 Oct. 68 (HCO PL) see footnote—270
9 Nov. Clearing Commands—All Levels 284
10 Dec. Correction 284
15 Dec. L4A—For Assessment of All Listing Errors
(revised—see Vol. VIII, 138) 285
16 Dec. Green Form (HCO PL) see footnote—226
26 Dec. The Third Party Law 288

1969

8 Jan. Drugs and “Insanity”-Non-Compliance and Alter-Is 291
24 Jan. Sub-Zeros—Triple Grades—Lower Levels—Triple Grades (cancelled) 294
25 Jan. Targets & Computers 304
25 Jan. Triple Lower Grades (cancelled) 305
3 Feb. Triple Grades—Flows 307
3 Feb. Triple Grades (cancelled-see Vol. VII, 54) 308
5 Feb.R Code of a Scientologist (HCO PL) (revised 15 May 1973) OEC Vol. 0— 25
12 Feb. L4A-For Assessment of All Listing Errors
(correction of 15 Dec. 1968) 285
28 Feb. Medical Doctors 309
3 Mar. Case Gain-Completing Levels 310
12 Mar. Auditor’s Report-Triple Grades (cancelled) 311
12 Mar. Physically Ill Pcs and Pre OTs 312
17 Mar. Politics 317
2 Apr. Dianetic Assists (revised 14 May 1969) 318
5 Apr. New Preclears—The Workability of Scientology
(reissued & corrected 26 May 1970) 321
6 Apr. Fundamental Auditing 325
6 Apr. Dianetics (HCO PL) OEC Vol. I—524, Vol. 2-285, Vol. 4—232
6 Apr. Dianetics Course Auditing Requirements 327
11 Apr. Dianetic Health Form 332
16 Apr. Health Form, Use of (with Dianetic Health Form of 11 Apr. 1969)
(revised—see 3 78) 329
17 Apr. Dianetic Case Supervision 336
17 Apr. Dianetic Case Failures 337
22 Apr. Dianetics vs. Scientology 338
22 Apr. Somatics and OTs 339
23 Apr. Dianetics-Basic Definitions 340
23 Apr. Dianetics—Erasure—How to Obtain 344
23 Apr. Past Lives 345
24 Apr.R Preclear Assessment Sheet 346A

1969 (cont.)
24 Apr. Dianetic Use 347
24 Apr. Dianetic Results 351
26 Apr. Somatics 352
27 Apr. R-3-R Restated—Commands on Second Run on an Incident 354
27 Apr. Dianetic Failures 355
28 Apr. High TA in Dianetics 356
29 Apr. Assessment and Interest 357
30 Apr. Auditor Trust 359
May Grinding Out Engrams 360
7 May Policies on “Sources of Trouble” (HCO PL) OEC Vol. 1—525
7 May The Five GAEs 361
7 May Floating Needle 362
7 May Summary of How to Write an Auditor’s Report, Worksheets
and Summary Report, with some Additional Information 363
8 May Out Tech (HCO PL) see footnote—209
8 May Teaching the Dianetics Course 365
9 May Case Supervising Dianetics Folders 366
9 May Case Supervisor Forms 368
11 May Meter Trim Check 369
11 May Forcing a Pc(revised—see 442) 369
13 May Peculiarities 370
14 May Dianetic Assists (revision of 2 Apr. 1969) 318
14 May Sickness 371
14 May F/N and Erasure 373
14 May Cultural Lag 374
15 May Green Form (HCO PL) see footnote—226
15 May Dirty Needle 375
17 May TRs and Dirty Needles 375
18 May Erasure 376
19 May Drug and Alcohol Cases—Prior Assessing 377
19 May Health Form, Use of—A Brief Description of Auditing
(with Pastoral Counselling Health Form of 22 July 1969) 378
20 May Keeping Dianetics Working in an Area 386
21 May Assessment 388
22 May Dianetics—Its Background 391
23 May Auditing Out Sessions—Narrative Versus Somatic Chains 394
24 May The Difficult Case 395
24 May Dianetic High Crimes 396
25 May High TA Assessment 397
27 May The VIII’s Nightmare 399
28 May How Not To Erase 400

1969 (cont.)

28 May Dianetics and Results—Dianetic Counseling Groups 402
6 June Prediction and Consequences 404
11 June Materials, Scarcity of 406
23 June F/N 407
26 June C/S—How to Case Supervise Dianetics Folders see—409
28 June C/S—How to Case Supervise Dianetics Folders 409
16 July Urgent—Important 413
19 July Dianetics and Illness 415
22 July Pastoral Counselling Health Form 381
22 July Auditing Speed 417
22 July High TA Assessment 418
23 July Auditor Assignment Policies 420
24 July Seriously Ill Pcs 421
27 July Antibiotics 422
29 July The “Art” of Case Supervision 424
2 Aug. “LX” Lists 426
3 Aug. LX2 427
4 Aug. LX3 (Attitudes) see—446
9 Aug. Case Folder Analysis, Dianetics 428
9 Aug. LX1 (Conditions) 432
15 Aug. Flying Ruds 433
16 Aug. Handling Illness in Scientology 435
2 Sept. Triple Grades (HCO PL) OEC Vol. 2-294
7 Sept. Green Form (HCO PL) see footnote-226
19 Sept. Study Slowness 437
5 Oct. Triple Flows 438
5 Oct. Dianetic Triples 440
6 Oct. Triple Errors in Dianetics (replaced—see Vol. VII, 1) 441
12 Oct. Forcing a Pc (revision of 11 May 1969) 442
12 Oct. Dianetic Triples Plural Item 442
17 Oct. Drugs, Aspirin and Tranquilizers 443
15 Oct. Welcome to the Sea Org Lectures (15 Oct.—21 Oct.) 445
5 Nov. LX3 (Attitudes) 446
15 Nov. Case Supervision Auditing and Results 447
15 Nov. Case Supervision, How It Goes Non-Standard 449
23 Nov. Student Rescue Intensive (revised 26 June 1973) 451
2 Dec. Rising TA 453
18 Dec. Organizational Health Chart see footnote OEC Vol. 7—115

Subject Index 455
Alphabetical List of Titles 483


PERIODICALS BY ISSUE NUMBER


Certainty Magazine

Vol.-No.
13-2 Feb. 1966 Psychotics 131
13-3 Mar. 1966 What Is Greatness? 154


LONG CONTENTS



ca. 1965 MY PHILOSOPHY, 1

First principle is that wisdom is meant for anyone who wishes to reach for it, 1
Second principle is that it must be capable of being applied, 1
Third principle is that any philosophic knowledge is only valuable if it is true or if it works, 1
LRH’s travels, 2
LRH cured himself from war injuries, 2

HCO PL 7 Feb. 1965 KEEPING SCIENTOLOGY WORKING, 4

Ten points to get the correct technology applied, 4
A group can’t evolve truth, 5
Scientology in its formative stages was not discovered by a group, 6
Why the early Scientology organizations failed, 6
Group vs. individuals, 6
Examples of failures in keeping the ten points in, 7
Importance of tough training, 8
Turn “open-minded” people into dedicated ones, 8
Proper attitude to Scientology, 9

HCO PL 14 Feb. 1965 SAFEGUARDING TECHNOLOGY, 10

Why “squirreling” exists, 10
Scientology is a workable system, 10

HCO B 5 Mar. 1965 BOOK OF CASE REMEDIES—APPLICATION OF TECH, 13

Book of Case Remedies used by person himself to spot by-passed charge, 13

HCO B 10 Mar. 1965 WORDS, MISUNDERSTOOD GOOFS, 14

Don’t substitute synonyms for words, 14

HCO B 29 Mar. 1965 ARC BREAKS, 16

How to identify and handle ARC breaks, 16
An ARC break occurs on a generality or a not there, 16
Case manifestation of generality and handling, 17
Formula to handle ARC break using generalities, 17
Generality and Not There, 18
Level VI ARC breaks, 18

HCO B 2 Apr. 1965 THE ROAD TO CLEAR, 19

Release was called “keyed out clear”, 19
Level VI, l9
Liability of the reactive mind, 20
The states of being, 20

HCO B 4 Apr. 1965 ARC BREAKS AND MISSED WITHHOLDS, 22

ARC break procedure doesn’t work when pc really has a missed withhold, 22
The bottom of ARC breaks is a missed withhold, 22
“Withholdy pc that ARC breaks a lot”, 22
Continuous overt case, 23

HCO B 5 Apr. 1965 A CONDITIONS TEST PROCESS I—X—REGISTRARS, 25

Process I—X, 25


HCO B 7 Apr. 1965 PREMATURE ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS, 26

Premature acknowledgement leads to inadvertent withholds, 26

HCO B 18 Apr. 1965 HOW TO APPLY LEVEL PROCESSING, 27

Only alter-is of routine auditing can cause case failure, 27
Levels are designed for all cases, 27

HCO B 27 Apr. 1965 CLAY TABLE HEALING GOOF, 29

Handling of “What should be near (body part)?” question, 29

HCO B 5 May 1965 APPLICATION—MORE ON THE APPLICATION OF SCIENTOLOGY TO CHILDREN, 30

Processes for children, 30
Process Zero-Zero on children, 31
Much time is used to flatten things on children, 32

HCO PL 5 May 1965 CLASSIFICATION, GRADATION AND AWARENESS CHART, 33

Awareness scale and auditing, 33
The bridge, 34
Auditor classifications, 34

HCO PL 10 May 1965 RELEASES—VITAL DATA, 38

What Grade Vs and VAs can be audited on, 38
Next step for a Grade VA Release in auditing is R6 EW, 38
Release’s increased abilities regarding training, 39

HCO PL 17 May 1965 CCHs, 40

CCHs are processes, not drills, 40
Processes vs. drills, 40

HCO B 22 May 1965 AUDITING BY LISTS, 41 [REPLACED]

HCO PL 27 May 1965 PROCESSING, 43

Auditing rules: get the pc through it; what turns it on will turn it off; the way out is the way through, 43

HCO B 4 June 1965 CLASS II MODEL SESSION, 44 [CANCELLED]

Session preliminaries, 44
Start of session, 44
Beginning rudiments, 44
Running O/W, 44
Start of process, 45
Middle rudiments, 45
End of process non-cyclical, 45
End of process cyclical, 45
End rudiments, 45
Goals and gains, 45
Havingness, 46
End of session, 46

HCO B 14 June 1965 SUMMARY REPORT, 47

What information to put on the Summary Report, 47

HCO PL 17 June 1965 STAFF AUDITOR ADVICES, 49

Comm cycle and Ethics, 49
Case Supervisor puzzle, 49

Auditor to Ethics, 50
When to report withholds, 50
D of P work is completely textbook, 50

HCO B 18 June 1965 CLEAR AND OT BEHAVIOUR, 51

Clear vs. keyed-out Clear, 51
OT vs. keyed-out OT, 51

HCO PL 26 June 1965 HGC PC REVIEW AUDITING FORM, 52 [REVISED]

Green Form, 52

HCO B 28 June 1965 RELEASES, DIFFERENT KINDS, 56

First Stage Release, 56
Second Stage Release or a Power Release, 56
Third Stage Release, 56
Keyed-out Operating Thetan, 56
Clear and OT, 56

HCO B 30 June 1965 RELEASE, REHABILITATION OF FORMER RELEASES AND THETAN EXTERIORS, 57

Rehab procedure, 57
Rehab theory, 58
Liability of rehab, 58

HCO PL 1 July 1965 COMM CYCLE ADDITIVES, 59

There are no additives permitted on the auditing comm cycle, 59
Mannerism additives, 59

HCO B 3 July 1965 MODEL SESSION REVISED, 60 [CANCELLED]

What to do when Release is reached, 60

HCO B 12 July 1965 STATES OF BEING ATTAINED BY PROCESSING, 61

Types of Releases, 61
Locks, 61 Secondaries and engrams, 61
The whole track, 61 Exterior, 61
Processes that make 1st, 2nd and 3rd Stage Releases, 62
Clear—the R6 bank, 62
Operating Thetan, 62

HCO B 21 July 1965 RELEASE REHABILITATION, 63

Rehab procedure amplification, 63

HCO B 27 July 1965 AUDITING BY LISTS, 64 [CANCELLED]

How to use List 1, 64

HCO B 2 Aug. 1965 RELEASE GOOFS, 66

Overrun, 66
Rehabilitation goof, 66
Rough comm cycle, 66
Meter misuse, 66
E-Meter dating on rehab, 66
Not recognizing a floating needle, 67
Not getting all releases, 67
Pc’s own purposes, 67
Declare errors, 67
Unalert org, 68


HCO B 3 Aug. 1965 AUDITING GOOFS—BLOWDOWN INTERRUPTION, 69

Auditor must not speak or move during a blowdown, 69
Floating needle cannot be observed during a blowdown, 69
Basic auditing, 69

HCO B 5 Aug. 1965 RELEASE STAGES, 70

Release Stages 1 to 5 described, 70
How to obtain Release Stages 1 to 5, 71

HCO B 6 Aug. 1965 QUALIFICATIONS TECHNICAL ACTIONS, 73

Review’s standard procedure: don’t audit the case, audit the procedure, 73
Former Release check, 73
Case Supervisor request for Review, 74
Review to repair, 74
Student assists, 75
Declare? for Release, 75
Basis of Qual actions, 75
HGC uses of Qual tools, 76
The eight big rules of auditing, 76
Don’t mistake a PTP or withhold for an ARC break, 77
Handling of SPs and PTSes, 77

HCO B 19 Aug. 1965 MODEL SESSION REVISED, 78

HCO B 23 Aug. 1965 ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS OF DIANETICS AND SCIENTOLOGY, 79

HCO B 30 Aug. 1965 ART, 83

The fundamentals of art, 83
Art is a word which summarizes the quality of communication, 83
Perfection vs. communication, 84
An artist’s relation to his audience, 85
Decline of art forms, 85

HCO B 30 Aug. 1965 RELEASE STAGES, 86

Release—Clear—OT, 86
Release Stages 1 to 5, 86
Locks, 86
Secondaries and engrams, 86
The whole track, 87
The reactive mind, 87
Operating Thetan, 87

Sept. 1965 THE AIMS OF SCIENTOLOGY, 88

HCO B 13 Sept. 1965 OUT TECH AND HOW TO GET IT IN, 89

Meaning of out tech and tech, 89
Difference between theory and practice, 89
The need for practice, 90
Evaluation of importances, 90
Condition of “can’t-apply” is handled by drills, 90
The important data in a session, 91
Six reasons a case does not advance, 91
Assessment to find the “why” for failed auditors and bogged cases, 92

HCO B 21 Sept. 1965 OUT TECH, 93

The five gross auditing errors, 93
The six things that can be wrong with a pc, 93
Getting in tech, 93


HCO PL 21 Sept. 1965 E-METER DRILLS, 94

Imperative that E-Meter drills be done well, 94

HCO B 22 Sept. 1965 RELEASE GRADATION—NEW LEVELS OF RELEASE, 95

Grades of Release and type of process run, 95
Subjects of each grade, 96
Training levels, 97
Gradation Chart modernized, 97

HCO B 27 Sept. 1965 RELEASE GRADATION—ADDITIONAL DATA, 98

Table of Grades of Release, 98
Rehabilitation of Former Release, 99
Error in rehabilitation, 99
Don’t underrun or overrun processes, 100

HCO B 29 Sept. 1965 CYCLICAL AND NON-CYCLICAL PROCESS CONCLUSIONS, 101

HCO B 29 Sept. 1965 THE CONTINUING OVERT ACT, 102

Criminals get no case gain, 102
Continuous overts means no case gain, 102
Discipline vs. reactive mind, 102
Fast, slow and no gain case, 103

HCO B 1 Oct. 1965 MUTTER TR, 104 [REVISED]

Purpose, commands, position and training stress of Mutter TR, 104

HCO PL 11 Aug. 1971 SECURITY OF DATA, 105

Reason for confidential materials, 105
Safeguarding Scientology materials, 105
From Power Processing on up the data is confidential, 105

HCO B 5 Nov. 1965 FIVE WAY BRACKET ON HELP, 106

Commands and how to run, 106

HCO B 5 Nov. 1965 LECTURE GRAPHS, 106

HCO B 7 Nov. 1965 RELEASE REHABILITATION ERROR, 107

There are no release points prior to auditing, 107
Only auditing keys out bank, 107

HCO B 8 Nov. 1965 SUPPRESSIVES AND HIDDEN STANDARDS, 109

Data on what a hidden standard means, 109
PTS handling, 109

HCO B 14 Nov. 1 965 CLEARING COMMANDS, 110

Example of how to clear commands, 110

HCO B 16 Nov. 1965 E-METER SENSITIVITY SETTING, 110

HCO B 16 Nov. 1965 COMMANDS FOR UPPER INDOCTRINATION
—TR 6, TR 7, TR9, 111

HCO B 19 Nov. 1965 PROBLEMS PROCESS, 111

Commands and how to run Level I Problem Process, 111


HCO PL 19 Nov. 1965 AUDITING REPORTS, 112

What the auditing report should contain, 112

HCO B 24 Nov. 1965 SEARCH AND DISCOVERY, 113

Three types of PTS, 113
PTS Type One handling, 113
PTS Type Two handling, 114
Search and Discovery, 114
Actual SP vs. apparent SP, 114
PTS Type Three handling, 115

HCO B 26 Nov. 1965 INFORMATION ON REHABILITATION, 117

Incorrect rehab procedure, 117

HCO B 1 Dec. 1965 CCHs, 118

CCH 1, command and how to run, 118
CCH 2, commands and how to run, 119
CCH 3, commands and how to run, 119
CCH 4, commands and how to run, 120

HCO B 6 Dec. 1965 LOW TA CASES, 121

Power Processing and low TA cases, 121

HCO B 10 Dec. 1965 E-METER DRILL COACHING, 122

List of E-Meter Drill outnesses and what they mean, 122

HCO B 27 Dec. 1965 VITAMINS, 123

Vitamin E assists auditing, 123
Vitamin E data, 123
“Guk Bomb” and Vitamin E, 123
Effect of Vitamin E on body, 124

HCO B 19 Jan. 1966 DANGER CONDITIONS—TECHNICAL DATA FOR REVIEW AUDITORS, 126

How to cure a disagreement, 126
How to handle compulsive by-passing, 126

HCO B 21 Jan. 1966 SEARCH AND DISCOVERY (ETHICS TYPE CASES, PTSs)
—S & D ERRORS, 127

Causes of S & D failure, 127
Golden rule of S & D, 127

HCO B 28 Jan. 1966 SEARCH AND DISCOVERY DATA—HOW A SUPPRESSIVE BECOMES ONE, 128

Getting “myself” as item in Search and Discovery, 128
The main trouble in S & D, 128
S & D listing, 129
S & D listing rules, 129
Review action, 129

Certainty Vol. 13, No. 2, Feb. 1966 PSYCHOTICS, 131

Insanity statistic is growing, 131
Inadequate definition of psychosis, 131
Why psychosis is becoming more widespread, 132
Psychosis classification has become relatively meaningless, 132
Source of psychosis, 132
Apparent and actual psychotic, 133

Characteristics of a psychotic, 133
Psychotics and help, 133
Handling the actual psychotic, 134
Handling of institutional psychosis, 134
Answer to doubt about sanity, 135

HCO B 5 Feb. 1966 S AND D WARNING, 136

Listing and nulling errors in S & Ds, 136
Actions of SPs, 136

HCO B 5 Feb. 1966 “LETTING THE PC ITSA”
—THE PROPERLY TRAINED AUDITOR, 138

What Itsa is, 138
Cure for auditor who is “letting the pc itsa”, 139
Tech savvy, 139
Cure for auditor who can’t control pc, 140

HCO B 9 Feb. 1966 RELEASE GRADES, 141

Release—Clear—OT, 141
Locks, 141
Secondaries and engrams, 141
The whole track, 142
The reactive mind, 142
Operating Thetan, 142

HCO PL 10 Feb. 1966 TECH RECOVERY, 143

Rehabbing lower grades, 143
Overrunning free needle, 143
Rehab by rehab procedure, don’t use another process, 144
Don’t use unusual solutions, 144
When SP is discovered, give an S & D to his associates, 144
After SP is removed, if stats are still down, look for another SP, 144
Case Supervisor lives in an ivory tower, 145
Primary indicator of the presence of an SP, 146

HCO B 11 Feb. 1966 FREE NEEDLES, HOW TO GET THEM ON A PC, 147

Rehabbing several overruns, 147
Free needle and sensitivity setting, 147
Pcs are most apt to go free needle after a big cog, 147

HCO B 12 Feb. 1966 THE “DANGEROUS AUDITOR”, 149

Actions of “dangerous auditor”, 149
Bad auditor vs. dangerous auditor, 149

HCO B 21 Feb. 1966 DEFINITION PROCESSES, 150

Assists, 150 Primary and secondary auditing styles, 150
Remedies, 150
Guiding style, 151
Guiding secondary style, 151
Definitions Processing, 151
Remedy A patter, 151
Remedy B patter, 152
Purpose of Definitions Processing, 152
Cycle of mis-definition, 153
Overts and misunderstood words, 153

Certainty Vol. 13, No. 3, Mar. 1966 WHAT IS GREATNESS?, 154

HCO PL 8 Mar. 1966 HIGH CRIME, 156

Highest crime in Tech and Qual, 156

Star-rated checkouts of processes are required before application, 156
Failure to check out, star-rated, the Tech and Qual HCO Bs results in crashed stats, 157

HCO B 3 Apr. 1966 DIANETIC AUDITING COURSE, 158

Dianetic auditor instructions, 158
Dianetics is the entrance way for an auditor, 159
Dianetics vs. Scientology, 160
Dianetic auditing procedure, 161

HCO B 10 June 1966 S & D COMMANDS, 164

If you find a group on an S & D do a represent list, 164

HCO B 10 June 1966 S & D—THE MISSED ITEM, 165

Illness = only PTS; only PTS = illness, 165
What it means if a person who has had an S & D gets sick, 165

HCO B 20 July 1966 THE TYPE TWO PTS, 166

S & D and disconnection letters, 166

HCO PL 21 July 1966 TECH vs. QUAL, 167

When to send pcs to Review, 167

HCO B 27 July 1966 METER TRIM CHECK, 168 [REPLACED]

HCO B 10 Aug. 1966 ERRORS OF STUDENTS, 169

Common errors on Level 0, I, II, III, IV, VI and Solo Audit, 169

HCO B 16 Aug. 1966 LIST L-4 S & D, 171 [CANCELLED]

List used to assess an ARC break on Search and Discovery, 171

HCO B 22 Aug. 1966 FLOATING NEEDLES, LISTING PROCESSES, 172

F/N during listing means no charge left and no item, 172

HCO B 23 Aug. 1966 SERVICE FACSIMILE, 173

Service facsimile is a computation generated by the being not the bank, 173
Pc giving a doingness, 173

HCO B 20 Sept. 1966 MINUS SCALE RELEASES: ARC STRAIGHT WIRE
—DIANETIC, 175

Three specific grades of Release below Zero, 175
Straight Wire Release, 175
Dianetic Secondary Release, 175
Dianetic Engram Release, 175
Overruns that can require repair, 176

HCO B 21 Sept. 1966 ARC BREAK NEEDLE, 176

HCO B 27 Sept. 1966 THE ANTI-SOCIAL PERSONALITY
—THE ANTI-SCIENTOLOGIST, 177

Crime and criminal acts are perpetuated by anti-social personalities, 177
Attributes of anti-social personality, 177
Basic reason for anti-social behavior, 179
Relief when anti-social persons are found, 179
The social personality, 180
Primary characteristics of the social personality, 181
Basic motivation of the social personality, 182
Social vs. anti-social personality, 183

HCO PL 13 Oct. 1966 HGC PC REVIEW AUDITING FORM, 184 [REVISED]

HCO B 18 Nov. 1966 REHAB ON SELF ANALYSIS, 188

How rehab on Self Analysis lists was done, 188

HCO B 30 Nov. 1966 ASSESSMENT FOR SERVICE FACSIMILES, 189

Methods to find service facsimile, 189

HCO B 2 Jan. 1967 SUB ZERO RELEASES—EXAMINER’S SAFEGUARD, 190

Assessing the awareness levels on pc, 190

HCO B 2 Jan. 1967 DATING—FORBIDDEN WORDS, 191

In dating don’t use “more”—”less”, use “greater than”—”lesser than”, 191

HCO B 19 Jan. 1967 MANIFESTATIONS OF ENGRAMS AND SECONDARIES FURTHER DEFINED, 192

Somatics defined, 192
Pain defined, 192
Sensation defined, 192

HCO B 22 Mar. 1967 ADMIN KNOW-HOW—ALTER-IS AND DEGRADED BEINGS, 193

Very degraded beings alter-is, 193
Data on degraded beings, 193

HCO B 18 Apr. 1967 RELIGIOUS PHILOSOPHY AND RELIGIOUS PRACTICE, 195

Scientology as a religious philosophy and practice, 195

HCO B 30 June 1967 EVIDENCES OF AN ABERRATED AREA, 196

HCO B 19 Aug. 1967 THE SUPREME TEST, 197

The supreme test of a thetan is his ability to make things go right, 197
Aberration considered in a passive and active way, 197
Validity of purpose, 198

HCO B 13 Sept. 1967 REMEDY B, 199

Remedy B is done by listing, 199

HCO B 18 Sept. 1967 SCALES, 200

Emotional Tone Scale, 200 C-D-E-I Scale, 200
C-D-E-I Scale Expanded, 200
Scale of Identification, 200
Effect Scale, 200
Scale of Knowingness, 200
Expanded Know to Mystery Scale, 201
Havingness Scale, 201
Reality Scale (old), 201
Reality Scale (new), 201
Needle characteristics, 201

HCO B 24 Sept. 1967 A REPORT TO RON ON SEA SICKNESS, 202

Example of handling seasickness, 202

HCO B 8 Oct. 1967 CLEAR CHECKS AND RE-CLEAR CHECKS, 203

Rehabbing grades, 203

Re-Clear check, 204

HCO B 11 Oct. 1967 CLAY TABLE TRAINING, 205

Clay table training purpose, 205
Make glib student demonstrate application, 205
Check for application in checkouts, 205

HCO B 9 Nov. 1967 REVISION OF REMEDY A, REMEDY B, AND S AND Ds, 206

Remedy A, 206
Remedy B, 206
List 1B, 206
List 2B, List 3B, 207
Search and discovery of suppression is called an “S and D”, 207
How to handle general item on S & D, 208

HCO PL 22 Nov. 1967 OUT TECH, 209 [REVISED]

Description of out tech, 209
Ways you can fail to get results on a pc, 209

HCO B 28 Nov. 1967 THE KEY S & D QUESTION, 210

HCO B 27 Dec. 1967 LIST HANDLING, 210

Green Form handling, 210

HCO PL 28 Dec. 1967 QUAL SENIOR DATUM, 211

Qual never takes order on what to do technically, 211
Keynote of Qual is correction, 211

HCO B 9 Jan. 1968 LIST L4A—FOR ASSESSMENT OF ALL LISTING [REVISED] ERRORS, S & Ds, REMEDY A, REMEDY B, ETC, 213

HCO B 9 Jan. 1968 MONEY PROCESS, 215

Command of and how to run Money Process, 215

HCO B 13 Jan. 1968 S & Ds, 216

S&D Type U, 216
S&D Type S, 216
S&D Type W, 216

HCO B 16 Jan. 1968 STARTING OF PRECLEARS, 217

All raw meat preclears should be run on ARC S/W, Secondaries and Engrams, 217

HCO B 19 Jan. 1968 S & Ds—S & Ds BY BUTTON, 218

S & Ds by assessment for question, 218 Purpose S & Ds, 218

HCO B 12 Mar. 1968 MISTAKES, ANATOMY OF, 219

In the presence of suppression, one makes mistakes, 219

HCO B 18 Apr. 1968 NEEDLE REACTIONS ABOVE GRADE IV, 220

Clear’s postulates read as a surge, 220
Brief dirty needle on a pre-OT means “No”, 220

HCO PL 19 Apr. 1968 HGC PC REVIEW AUDITING FORM, 221 [REVISED]

Green Form, 221


HCO B 4 May 1968 DIANETIC COURSES—STUCK PICTURES, 227

Why a picture is stuck, 227

HCO B 7 May 1968 UPPER INDOC TRS, 228

TR 6, 8-C (Body Control), 228
TR 7, High School Indoc, 228
TR 8, Tone 40 on an Object, 229
TR 9, Tone 40 on a Person, 230

HCO B 20 May 1968 OVERT-MOTIVATOR SEQUENCE, 231

Overt-motivator sequence of engrams, 231
Why motivator is called a motivator, 231
Two extreme stages of overt-motivator phenomena, 231
Nonextant engrams, 232 Secondaries, 232

HCO B 24 May 1968 COACHING, 233

Coach with a purpose, 233
Coach with reality, 233
Coach with an intention, 233
In coaching take up only one thing at a time, 233
Don’t give opinions, give direct statements, 234
Validate rightnesses, 234
Flunk “self-coaching”, 234

HCO B 1 Aug. 1968 THE LAWS OF LISTING AND NULLING, 236

HCO B 5 Aug. 1968 CHANGE OF COMMANDS—OVERT-MOTIVATOR SEQUENCE, 238

Commands to be used to clean up overts, 238

HCO B 6 Aug. 1968 R 3 H, 239

Way to handle the ARC breaks of a case with R3H, 239

HCO B 26 Aug. 1968 REHAB & CORRECTION, 241

When to rehab Grades, 241 Overrunning auditing actions, 241

HCO B 28 Aug. 1968 OUT TECH, 242

Standard tech alone resolves all cases, 242

HCO B 28 Aug. 1968 DRUGS, 243

Why drugs are dangerous, 243
Drug or alcohol burns up the Vitamin B1 in the system rapidly, 243

HCO B 29 Aug. 1968 DRUG DATA, 244

Description of LSD-25, marijuana, hashish, peyote, mescaline, STP and DMT, 244
Users of drugs cannot as-is, do not get TA, nor do they have cognitions, 245

HCO B 31 Aug. 1968 WRITTEN C/S INSTRUCTIONS, 245

Giving verbal C/S instruction is a high crime, 245

HCO B 1 Sept. 1968 SUMMARY OF HOW TO WRITE AN AUDITOR’S REPORT, WORK SHEETS AND SUMMARY REPORT, WITH SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, 246

Auditor’s report, 246
Worksheets, 246
Summary report, 247

HCO B 1 Sept. 1968 POINTS ON CASE SUPERVISION, 248

HCO B 4 Sept. 1968 DON’T FORCE A PC WHO IS ILL, 249

Ill pcs require light auditing, 249

HCO B 6 Sept. 1968 CHECKING FOR FALSE READS, 249

When to check for false read, 249


HCO B 10 Sept. 1968-1 GREEN FORM, S & D, 250

Additives which are not altogether correct, 250

HCO B 11 Sept. 1968 FALSE READS, 250

How to handle E-Meter false reads, 250

HCO B 11 Sept. 1968 CASE SUPERVISOR DATA, 251

Case Supervisor should watch for Ethics record of pcs who have been C/Sed, 251

HCO B 17 Sept. 1968 OVERRUN PROCESS, 251

Handling high TA by rehab, 251

HCO B 17 Sept. 1968R SIX ZONES OF ACTION, 252

Six zones of action in Class VIII, 252

HCO B 17 Sept. 1968 ETHNICS, 253

Mores and changing fashions, 253

HCO B 17 Sept. 1968 GROSS CASE SUPERVISION ERRORS, 254

HCO PL 18 Sept. 1968 EXAMINER’S FORM, 255 [REVISED]

HCO B 19 Sept. 1968 OLD LISTS ARE NOT TO BE COPIED, 256

HCO B 20 Sept. 1968 REVIEW, ORDERING PEOPLE TO, 256

HCO B 20 Sept. 1968 GLEE, 257

Remedy B can remedy glee, 257
Glee is a kind of insanity, 257

HCO B 22 Sept. 1968 CCHs NOT GRADE I, 257 [CANCELLED]

HCO B 23 Sept. 1968 DRUGS & TRIPPERS, 258

Rehabbing drug “releases”, 258
Drug “releases” are deadly because they give the sensation of release while actually pulling in mass, 258
Drugs can cause forceful exteriorization, 258
Unhandled drugs can inhibit exteriorization, 258

HCO B 23 Sept. 1968 NEW RUDIMENTS, 259

Commands for ARC break, PTP and missed withhold, 259

HCO B 25 Sept. 1968 CONTINUOUS PT OVERTS, 260

How to handle continuous present time overt question on Green Form, 260

HCO B 27 Sept. 1968 ARC STRAIGHT WIRE, 261


Commands for ARC Straight Wire, 261
ARC Straight Wire can crack neurotic cases, 261

HCO B 28 Sept. 1968 DIANETICS, 262

Erasure vs. release of engrams, 262
If a secondary or engram goes solid or won’t discharge, you find the earlier similar one and run it, 262

HCO B 30 Sept. 1968 LISTS, 263

Correction of lists, 263

HCO B 3 Oct. 1968 NEW RUDIMENTS QUESTIONS, 264 [CANCELLED]

HCO B 4 Oct. 1968 RUDS, 265

Clear the commands, 265

HCO B 7 Oct. 1968 ARC BREAK NEEDLE, 265

HCO B 7 Oct. 1968 ASSESSMENT, 266

Assessment vs. Listing and Nulling, 266

HCO B 8 Oct. 1968 ASSESSMENT: LX1, 267

HCO B 8 Oct. 1968 CASE SUPERVISOR—FOLDER HANDLING, 268

Analyzing folders, 268
Reviewing folders, 268
Standard tech, 268

HCO PL 14 Oct. 1968R THE AUDITOR’S CODE, 269

HCO B 14 Oct. 1968 METER POSITION, 271

Pc must not be able to see TA position on E-Meter, 271

HCO B 14 Oct. 1968 DEFINITION OF RECALL, 271

HCO B 16 Oct. 1968 SUPERVISOR’S DUTY, 272

HCO B 18 Oct. 1968 PROCESSING SEQUENCE, 272

Correct order in which Sub-zeros, Grades and OT sections are administered, 272

HCO B 20 Oct. 1968 THE PURPOSE OF CLASS VIII, 273

Standard tech produces 100% results, 273
Cycle of the decline of an auditor and student, 273
Auditors are not gauged by results, but by flawless application of standard tech, 273
Causes of session failure, 274

HCO B 21 Oct. 1968 FLOATING NEEDLE, 275

Floating needle defined, 275
Indicating floating needle, 275
ARC break needle, 275

HCO B 22 Oct. 1968R TEACHING THE CLASS VIII, 276

Class VIII Course principles, 276

HCO B 28 Oct. 1968 OT EXTERIOR, 276 [CANCELLED]

HCO B 1 Nov. 1968 HIGH TA, 277

How to get down high TA, 277
Don’t run ruds if TA high, 277
Overrun past F/N will cause TA to rise, 277
Process can go F/N in a session break and intention of auditor to continue sends TA high, 277

HCO B 2 Nov. 1968R CASE SUPERVISOR—CLASS VIII
—THE BASIC PROCESSES, 278

Limited processes, 278
Unlimited actions, 278
Recall, 279
Secondary, 279
Engram, 279
Prepcheck is an unlimited action, 280
Ruds questions if not done in the same day tend to be unlimited, 280
Assessing prepared lists is unlimited so long as the items are varied, 280
Green Form, 280
Itsa Earlier Itsa is unlimited, 280
Rudiments, 280
Symptoms of overcharged cases, 281
Determining and lightening charge is the problem of the C/S, 281
Think processes are unlimited, 282
C/S is limited by what his auditors can do, 282
Case remedies, 282
Case set-up for auditing, 283

HCO B 9 Nov. 1968 CLEARING COMMANDS—ALL LEVELS, 284

HCO B 10 Dec. 1968 CORRECTION, 284

HCO B 15 Dec. 1968 L4A— FOR ASSESSMENT OF ALL
LISTING ERRORS, 285 [REVISED]

HCO B 26 Dec. 1968 THE THIRD PARTY LAW, 288

Quarrel or conflict, to occur, requires an unknown third party, 288
Examples of third party actions, 289

HCO B 8 Jan. 1969 DRUGS AND “INSANITY”—NON-COMPLIANCE AND
ALTER-IS, 291

When threatened with unmocking a thetan mocks up obsessively, 291
Time track is a composite, 291
Basis of alter-is, 291
Reactions to drugs, 292
Being out of present time, 292
Explanation of enturbulation, 292
Exteriorization, 293
Dangerous environment, 293

HCO B 24 Jan. 1969 SUB-ZEROS—TRIPLE GRADES—LOWER LEVELS
—TRIPLE GRADES, 294 [CANCELLED]

Straight-Wire Triple, 294
Dianetic Secondaries Triple, 295
Dianetic Engrams Triple, 297
Level 0 Triple, 300
Level One Triple, 301
Level Two Triple, 301
Level Three Triple, 301
Level Four Triple, 303

HCO B 25 Jan. 1969 TARGETS & COMPUTERS, 304

Developments on targets and purposes adaptable to computer programming, 304

HCO B 25 Jan. 1969 TRIPLE LOWER GRADES, 305 [CANCELLED]

Running Triple Grades, 305
Auditor confusion, 305
Clearing commands, 305
Don’t overrun, 306
Listing, 306
Out ruds, 306
Old pcs, 306
Tight C/Sing, 306
Invalidated auditors, 306

HCO B 3 Feb. 1969 TRIPLE GRADES—FLOWS, 307

Flows used in Triples Grades, 307

HCO B 3 Feb. 1969 TRIPLE GRADES, 308 [CANCELLED]

Class IV, 308
Class V, 308
Advantage of Triple Grades, 309

HCO B 28 Feb. 1969 MEDICAL DOCTORS, 309

Training medical doctors in orgs, 309

HCO B 3 Mar. 1969 CASE GAIN—COMPLETING LEVELS, 310

Any level is capable of giving a stable case gain, 310
To solve an earlier out tech situation one does not “give the next level”, 310

HCO B 12 Mar. 1969 AUDITOR’S REPORT—TRIPLE GRADES, 311 [CANCELLED]

Don’t copy off the processes onto the Auditor’s Report Form, 311
Worksheet, 311
Reason for admin, 311

HCO B 12 Mar. 1969 PHYSICALLY ILL PCS AND PRE OTS, 312

Mental illness vs. physical illness, 312
Reduce time of healing by auditing, 312
Medical examination, 313
“Failed cases” are medically ill or injured cases, 313
Insanity can be suppressed pain, 314
Handling of insane, 314
“Hereditary insanity” is an apparency, 315
If pc wants illness cured send him to medical doctor first, 315

HCO B 17 Mar. 1969 POLITICS, 317

Political philosophies placed against the Tone Scale, 317

HCO B 2 Apr. 1969 DIANETIC ASSISTS, 318

Touch Assist, 318
Contact Assist, 318
Auditing Assist, 318
Handling of illness, 319
Dianetic auditing speeds up healing from illness or injury, 320
First research on Dianetics, 320

HCO B 5 Apr. 1969 NEW PRECLEARS—THE WORKABILITY OF SCIENTOLOGY, 321

Conditions of a new preclear, 321
Poster type pictures defining basic auditing terms, 321
Persons on drugs, 322
Examples of “no auditing”, 323
Outnesses in an area that thinks Dianetics and Scientology don’t work, 323


HCO B 6 Apr. 1969 FUNDAMENTAL AUDITING, 325

Difference between Dianetics and Scientology, 325
Dianetic auditor is the natural inheritor of all mental healing, 325
Pc must be well to start on Scientology auditing, 325

HCO B 6 Apr. 1969 DIANETICS COURSE AUDITING REQUIREMENTS, 327

Ill pcs need Dianetics, not Scientology, 328

HCO B 16 Apr. 1969 HEALTH FORM, USE OF, 329 [REVISED]

Preclear’s illness or upset has more than one source; it is a composite, 329
Health Form procedure, 330
Dianetic Health Form, 332

HCO B 17 Apr. 1969 DIANETIC CASE SUPERVISION, 336

Dianetic auditors are not expected to do Scientology actions, 336

HCO B 17 Apr. 1969 DIANETIC CASE FAILURES, 337

Foremost failure is a failure to do Dianetics, 337
Illnesses are composed of several symptoms; each must be run, 337

HCO B 22 Apr. 1969 DIANETICS vs. SCIENTOLOGY, 338

Dianetics addresses the body; Scientology addresses the thetan, 338

HCO B 22 Apr. 1969 SOMATICS AND OTS, 339

Pc with physical difficulties needs Dianetics, 339
Scientology = thetan rehabilitation; Dianetics = body improvement, 339

HCO B 23 Apr. 1969 DIANETICS—BASIC DEFINITIONS, 340

Erasure, lock, secondary and engram defined, 340
Cause of psychosomatic ills, 340
Somatic and misemotion defined, 341
Pc who is ill needs Dianetics, 341
Run what is offered, don’t force the pc, 341
Time track, pleasure moment, black field and invisible field defined, 342
Key out vs. erasure, 342
Multiple illness, 342
Chain, automatic bank, basic, unburdening, basic basic, valence and ally defined, 343
What assess means in Dianetics, 343

HCO B 23 Apr. 1969 DIANETICS—ERASURE—HOW TO ATTAIN, 344

Run the somatic, not the narrative content, 344

HCO B 23 Apr. 1969 PAST LIVES, 345

Failures from not running past lives, 345
Don’t question data, run what comes up, 345
Valences of famous figures, 345

BTB 24 Apr. 1969RA PRECLEAR ASSESSMENT SHEET, 346A

Who does assessment, 346A
When is assessment done, 346A
Purpose of preclear assessment sheet, 346A
The assessment sheet, 346A

HCO B 24 Apr. 1969 DIANETIC USE, 347

Illegal to cure illness, 347
Dianetics used for pastoral counseling is completely legal, 347

Correct procedure for ill pcs wanting auditing, 347
Examples of use of Dianetics, 348
Dianetics and Scientology, 349

HCO B 24 Apr. 1969 DIANETIC RESULTS, 351

Dianetics vs. Scientology, 351
Dianetic results are a well body and a being happy with it, 351
Scientology results are a free, powerful and immortal being, 351

HCO B 26 Apr. 1969 SOMATICS, 352

Narrative vs. somatic, 352
Never assess medical terms or symptoms, 352
On Health Form run the feeling not the physical disability, 352

HCO B 27 Apr. 1969 R-3-R RESTATED—COMMANDS ON SECOND
RUN ON AN INCIDENT, 354

Erasure or going solid, 354
Pc interest, 354
Erasing last incident found, 354
Completing chains, 354
F/Ns vs. erasure, 354
Ending sessions, 355
Ending Dianetics, 355

HCO B 27 Apr. 1969 DIANETIC FAILURES, 355

Ways to make Dianetics difficult, 355

HCO B 28 Apr. 1969 HIGH TA IN DIANETICS, 356

High TA in Dianetics means an engram too late on the chain to erase is in restimulation, 356
TA behavior on engram chains, 356

HCO B 29 Apr. 1969 ASSESSMENT AND INTEREST, 357

Assessment for Longest Read, 357
Symbols of reads, 357
Why assessment is done, 357
E-Meter measures the awareness depth of the pc, 358

HCO B 30 Apr. 1969 AUDITOR TRUST, 359

Pc tends to be able to confront to the degree that he or she feels safe, 359
Auditor plus pc is greater than the bank, auditor plus bank is greater than the pc, pc minus auditor is less than the bank, 359

HCO B 1 May 1969 GRINDING OUT ENGRAMS, 360

OTs and Dianetics, 360
Not following somatic, 360
Through only once, 361
No past lives, 361

HCO B 7 May 1969 THE FIVE GAEs, 361

HCO B 7 May 1969 FLOATING NEEDLE, 362

Indicating floating needle, 362

HCO B 7 May 1969 SUMMARY OF HOW TO WRITE AN AUDITOR’S REPORT, WORKSHEETS AND SUMMARY REPORT, WITH SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, 363

Auditor’s report, 363
Worksheets, 363

Summary report, 364

HCO B 8 May 1969 TEACHING THE DIANETICS COURSE, 365

Principles of teaching Dianetics auditors, 365

HCO B 9 May 1969 CASE SUPERVISING DIANETICS FOLDERS, 366

R3R exactly followed gives uniform results, 366
Dianetic auditor requirements, 366
Dianetic errors, 3 66

HCO B 9 May 1969 CASE SUPERVISOR FORMS, 368

Dianetic C/S No. 1, 368
Dianetic C/S No. 2, 368

HCO B 11 May 1969 METER TRIM CHECK, 369

Meter trim check procedure, 369

HCO B 11 May 1969 FORCING A PC, 369 [REVISED]

HCO B 13 May 1969 PECULIARITIES, 370

Dianetic peculiarities handled by Scientology Review, 370 Odd phenomena of Dianetics, 370

HCO B 14 May 1969 SICKNESS, 371

Homeopathy, 371
Illness “running out” after session, 371
Pc “stuck” in time can make medicine ineffective, 371
Medicine made effective by Dianetics, 372

HCO B 14 May 1969 F/N AND ERASURE, 373

Tone arm position, 373
Overrun, 373
Cognition, 373

HCO B 14 May 1969 CULTURAL LAG, 374

Examples of cultural lag, 374

HCO B 15 May 1969 DIRTY NEEDLE, 375

Dirty needle indicates that a pc has withholds or is ARC broken, 375

HCO B 17 May 1969 TRS AND DIRTY NEEDLES, 375

Three causes for pc having dirty needle, 375

HCO B 18 May 1969 ERASURE, 376

Erase a picture, not only the somatic, 376
Beginning of incident, 376
Narrative vs. somatic items, 376

HCO B 19 May 1969 DRUG AND ALCOHOL CASES—PRIOR ASSESSING, 377

Characteristics of drug cases, 377
Reads on Dianetic lists, 377
Why Prior Assessing is done, 377

HCO B 19 May 1969 HEALTH FORM, USE OF
—A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF AUDITING, 378

Illness is a composite, 378

Health Form procedure, 379
Pastoral Counseling Health Form, 381

HCO B 20 May 1969 KEEPING DIANETICS WORKING IN AN AREA, 386

Dianetic case failures are traced to departure from standard procedure, 386
Early Dianetic problems now solved, 386
Four points of greatest potential failure, 387
Dianetics not working is being varied, 387

HCO B 21 May 1969 ASSESSMENT, 388

Assessment and TA, 388
Operating definition of assessment, 388
Indicators of a right item, 389
Scientology listing and nulling actions have NOTHING to do with Dianetics, 389
Run somatics not medical terms, 389
Dianetic lists, 390

HCO B 22 May 1969 DIANETICS—ITS BACKGROUND, 391

“Researchers” in the field of the human mind, 391
Psychology and “conditioning”, 391
Psychology and psychiatry were state subjects, 391
Groups are built from individuals, 392
Product of Dianetics and Scientology, 392
Development of Dianetics, 393

HCO B 23 May 1969 AUDITING OUT SESSIONS—NARRATIVE VERSUS
SOMATIC CHAINS, 394

When running a narrative chain, ask for “earlier similar incident”, 394

HCO B 24 May 1969 THE DIFFICULT CASE, 395

Use of Green Form, 395
OT cases, 395

HCO B 24 May 1969 DIANETIC HIGH CRIMES, 396

Four high crimes Dianetic auditor can commit, 396

HCO B 25 May 1969 HIGH TA ASSESSMENT, 397

What makes a TA high, 397
Scientology rehab vs. Dianetic erasure, 397
Cause of low TA, 397

HCO B 27 May 1969 THE VIII’s NIGHTMARE, 399

Importance of a competent Review auditor, 399

HCO B 28 May 1969 HOW NOT TO ERASE, 400

Dianetic grinding, 400
Basic of chain, 400
Asking “solid or erasing”, 400
Blowing by inspection, 400
Take earliest one of several similar incidents, 401
Earlier beginning, 401

HCO B 28 May 1969 DIANETICS AND RESULTS
—DIANETIC COUNSELING GROUPS, 402

Essential hats of isolated practitioner, 402
Auditing is a team activity, 403


HCO B 6 June 1969 PREDICTION AND CONSEQUENCES, 404

Overts and prediction, 404
Pavlov and stimulus response mechanism, 404
Psychology and psychiatry are political subjects aimed at control, 404
Creation of criminals, 404
Awareness of good and evil, 405
Road to sanity, 405

HCO B 11 June 1969 MATERIALS, SCARCITY OF, 406

Course can be wrecked by lack of study materials, 406

HCO B 23 June 1969 F/N, 407

Dianetic erasure vs. key-out, the criterion is to let the pc have his win, 407
F/N on a lock can be by-passed, 407
Blowing engrams by inspection, 407
What a win consists of, 408

HCO B 28 June 1969 C/S—HOW TO CASE SUPERVISE DIANETICS FOLDERS, 409

Four possible actions for a Dianetics C/S to take, 409
Two types of cases, 410
Dianetic “oddity” case, 410
Roller-coaster after Dianetic auditing, 410
Sick pcs are sent directly to a medico, 411
Handling of insane, 411
C/S procedure, 411
Auditing result is the result of a team, 412

HCO B 16 July 1969 URGENT—IMPORTANT, 413

When you have a failed session you ask the pc what the auditor did, 413
Failing to give the next command, 413

HCO B 19 July 1969 DIANETICS AND ILLNESS, 415

Illnesses can be physical; if so medical action is the first action, 415
Illness is a composite somatic, 415

HCO B 22 July 1969 AUDITING SPEED, 417

Failed sessions caused by lack of speed, 417
Pre-OTs require fast auditors, 417

HCO B 22 July 1969 HIGH TA ASSESSMENT, 418

High TA equals mental energy mass, 418
Scientology rehab vs. Dianetic erasure, 418
Low TA, 419

HCO B 23 July 1969 AUDITOR ASSIGNMENT POLICIES, 420

Do not assign an auditor whose grade and class is less than that of the pc, 420

HCO B 24 July 1969 SERIOUSLY ILL PCS, 421

Medical examination, 421
Medical care, 421
Dianetic auditing, 421

HCO B 27 July 1969 ANTIBIOTICS, 422

Pc on antibiotics should be given Dianetic auditing, 422
Postoperative auditing, 422
Use of Vitamin B1, B complex and C, 422

Dianetics changes and improves the rate of healing, 423
Medicine made effective by Dianetics, 423

HCO B 29 July 1969 THE “ART” OF CASE SUPERVISION, 424

C/S against standardness of application, not against results, 424
Cases that can’t get into or run past lives, 424
Missing Dianetics Grade, 424
Basic rationale behind C/Sing, 425

HCO B 2 Aug. 1969 “LX” LISTS, 426

End phenomena of LX Lists, 426
Use of LX Lists, 426

HCO B 3 Aug. 1969 LX2, 427

Emotional Assessment List, 427

HCO B 9 Aug. 1969 CASE FOLDER ANALYSIS, DIANETICS, 428

The nine Dianetic session wrongnesses, 428
Pc repair, 429 Out ruds, 429
Handling of physically ill pcs, 429
Special cases, 430
Health Forms, 430
Exterior, 431

HCO B 9 Aug. 1969 LX1 (CONDITIONS), 432

HCO B 15 Aug. 1969 FLYING RUDS, 433

Use of Suppress and False, 433
If a rud reads you always follow it earlier until it F/Ns, 433
Green Form, 433
ARC break, 433
PTP, 434
Missed withhold, 434
Don’t recheck a read, 434
How to ask False question, 434

HCO B 16 Aug. 1969 HANDLING ILLNESS IN SCIENTOLOGY, 435

Sickness is the result of engram chains in restimulation, 435
Illness handling steps, 435
Life ruds, 43 5
Procedure for three S & Ds, 436
Second and third flows, 436

HCO B 19 Sept. 1969 STUDY SLOWNESS, 437

Course Supervisor outnesses make slow courses, 437

HCO B 5 Oct. 1969 TRIPLE FLOWS, 438

Examples of Flow 1, 2 and 3, 438
Flow 1 items, 438
Sick pcs, 439
Necessity of triples, 439

HCO B 5 Oct. 1969 DIANETIC TRIPLES, 440

Flow No. 2 and 3 commands, 440

HCO B 6 Oct. 1969 TRIPLE ERRORS IN DIANETICS, 441 [REPLACED]

HCO B 11 May 1969 FORCING A PC, 442


HCO B 12 Oct. 1969 DIANETIC TRIPLES PLURAL ITEM, 442

Starting with Triples, 442

HCO B 17 Oct. 1969 DRUGS, ASPIRIN AND TRANQUILIZERS, 443

Actions of aspirin and other pain depressants, 443
Drugs make auditing very difficult, 444
Cycle of drug restimulation of pictures, 444
Drugs chemically inhibit the creation of mental image pictures but inhibit as well the erasure, 444
Drug taker wanting auditing, 444

HCO B 5 Nov. 1969 LX3 (ATTITUDES), 446

HCO B 15 Nov. 1969 CASE SUPERVISION AUDITING AND RESULTS, 447

Major errors of Dianetics, 447
Dianetic auditing is so simple that it demonstrates cleanly whether the person can audit or not, 447
Value of being a proven Dianetic auditor, 448

HCO B 15 Nov. 1969 CASE SUPERVISION, HOW IT GOES NON-STANDARD, 449

Points a C/S must realize, 449

HCO B 23 Nov. 1969R STUDENT RESCUE INTENSIVE, 451

Steps of Student Rescue Intensive, 451
Dianetic Study Intensive, 452
Promoting Study Intensives, 452

HCO B 2 Dec. 1969 RISING TA, 453

Erasing—solid, 453
Erasing—solid, asked when TA is low, 453



My Philosophy

by

L. Ron Hubbard


The subject of philosophy is very ancient. The word means: “The love, study or pursuit of wisdom, or of knowledge of things and their causes, whether theoretical or practical.”

All we know of science or of religion comes from philosophy. It lies behind and above all other knowledge we have or use.

For long regarded as a subject reserved for halls of learning and the intellectual, the subject, to a remarkable degree, has been denied the man in the street.

Surrounded by protective coatings of impenetrable scholarliness, philosophy has been reserved to the privileged few.

The first principle of my own philosophy is that wisdom is meant for anyone who wishes to reach for it. It is the servant of commoner and king alike and should never be regarded with awe.

Selfish scholars seldom forgive anyone who seeks to break down the walls of mystery and let the people in. Will Durant, the modern American philosopher, was relegated to the scrap heap by his fellow scholars when he wrote a popular book on the subject, The Outline of Philosophy. Thus brickbats come the way of any who seek to bring wisdom to the people over the objections of the “inner circle.”

The second principle of my own philosophy is that it must be capable of being applied.

Learning locked in mildewed books is of little use to anyone and therefore of no value unless it can be used.

The third principle is that any philosophic knowledge is only valuable if it is true or if it works.

These three principles are so strange to the field of philosophy, that I have given my philosophy a name: SCIENTOLOGY. This means only “knowing how to know.”

A philosophy can only be a route to knowledge. It cannot be crammed down one’s throat. If one has a route, he can then find what is true for him. And that is Scientology.

Know Thyself . . . and the truth shall set you free.

Therefore, in Scientology, we are not concerned with individual actions and differences. We are only concerned with how to show Man how he can set himself free.

This, of course, is not very popular with those who depend upon the slavery of others for their living or power. But it happens to be the only way I have found that really improves an individual’s life.

Suppression and oppression are the basic causes of depression. If you relieve those a person can lift his head, become well, become happy with life.

And though it may be unpopular with the slave master, it is very popular with the people.

Common man likes to be happy and well. He likes to be able to understand things, and he knows his route to freedom lies through knowledge.

Therefore, for 15 years I have had Mankind knocking on my door. It has not mattered where I have lived or how remote, since I first published a book on the subject, my life has no longer been my own.

I like to help others and count it as my greatest pleasure in life to see a person free himself of the shadows which darken his days.

These shadows look so thick to him, and weigh him down so, that when he finds they are shadows and that he can see through them, walk through them and be again in the sun, he is enormously delighted. And I am afraid I am just as delighted as he is.

I have seen much human misery. As a very young man I wandered through Asia and saw the agony and misery of overpopulated and underdeveloped lands. I have seen people uncaring and stepping over dying men in the streets. I have seen children less than rags and bones. And amongst this poverty and degradation I found holy places where wisdom was great, but where it was carefully hidden and given out only as superstition. Later, in Western universities, I saw Man obsessed with materiality and with all his cunning, I saw him hide what little wisdom he really had in forbidding halls and make it inaccessible to the common and less favored man. I have been through a terrible war and saw its terror and pain uneased by a single word of decency or humanity.

I have lived no cloistered life and hold in contempt the wise man who has not lived and the scholar who will not share.

There have been many wiser men than I, but few have travelled as much road.

I have seen life from the top down and the bottom up. I know how it looks both ways. And I know there is wisdom and that there is hope.

Blinded with injured optic nerves, and lame with physical injuries to hip and back, at the end of World War II, I faced an almost nonexistent future. My Service record stated: “This officer has no neurotic or psychotic tendencies of any kind whatsoever,” but it also stated “permanently disabled physically.”

And so there came a further blow . . . I was abandoned by family and friends as a supposedly hopeless cripple and a probable burden upon them for the rest of my days. I yet worked my way back to fitness and strength in less than two years, using only what I knew and could determine about Man and his relationship to the universe. I had no one to help me; what I had to know I had to find out. And it’s quite a trick studying when you cannot see.

I became used to being told it was all impossible, that there was no way, no hope. Yet I came to see again and walk again, and I built an entirely new life. It is a happy life, a busy one and I hope a useful one. My only moments of sadness are those which come when bigoted men tell others all is bad and there is no route anywhere, no hope anywhere, nothing but sadness and sameness and desolation, and that every effort to help others is false. I know it is not true.

So my own philosophy is that one should share what wisdom he has, one should help others to help themselves, and one should keep going despite heavy weather for there is always a calm ahead. One should also ignore catcalls from the selfish intellectual who cries: “Don’t expose the mystery. Keep it all for ourselves. The people cannot understand.”

But as I have never seen wisdom do any good kept to oneself, and as I like to see others happy, and as I find the vast majority of the people can and do understand, I will keep on writing and working and teaching so long as I exist.

For I know no man who has any monopoly upon the wisdom of this universe. It belongs to those who can use it to help themselves and others.

If things were a little better known and understood, we would all lead happier

And there is a way to know them and there is a way to freedom.

The old must give way to the new, falsehood must become exposed by truth, and truth, though fought, always in the end prevails.




HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 7 FEBRUARY 1965

Remimeo REISSUED 15 JUNE 1970
Sthil Students
Assn/Org Sec Hat (Reissued 28.1. 73 to correct a word [page 8,
HCO Sec Hat para 5/. Change in this type style.)
Case Sup Hat
Ds of P Hat
Ds of T Hat
Staff Member Hat
Franchise
(issued May 1965)

Note. Neglect of this Pol Ltr has caused great hardship on staffs, has cost countless millions and made it necessary in 1970 to engage in an all-out International effort to restore basic Scientology over the world. Within 5 years after the issue of this PL with me off the lines, violation had almost destroyed orgs. “Quickie grades” entered in and denied gain to tens of thousands of cases. Therefore actions which neglect or violate this Policy Letter are HIGH CRIMES resulting in Comm Evs on ADMINISTRATORS and EXECUTIVES. It is not “entirely a tech matter” as its neglect destroys orgs and caused a 2-year slump. IT IS THE BUSINESS OF EVERY STAFF MEMBER to enforce it.

ALL LEVELS


KEEPING SCIENTOLOGY WORKING

HCO Sec or Communicator Hat Check on all
personnel and new personnel as taken on.

We have some time since passed the point of achieving uniformly workable technology.

The only thing now is getting the technology applied.

If you can’t get the technology applied then you can’t deliver what’s promised. It’s as simple as that. If you can get the technology applied, you can deliver what’s promised.

The only thing you can be upbraided for by students or pcs is “no results”. Trouble spots occur only where there are “no results”. Attacks from governments or monopolies occur only where there are “no results” or “bad results”.

Therefore the road before Scientology is clear and its ultimate success is assured if the technology is applied.

So it is the task of the Assn or Org Sec, the HCO Sec, the Case Supervisor, the D of P, the D of T and all staff members to get the correct technology applied.

Getting the correct technology applied consists of:

One: Having the correct technology.
Two: Knowing the technology.
Three: Knowing it is correct.
Four: Teaching correctly the correct technology.
Five: Applying the technology.
Six: Seeing that the technology is correctly applied.

Seven: Hammering out of existence incorrect technology.
Eight: Knocking out incorrect applications.
Nine: Closing the door on any possibility of incorrect technology.
Ten: Closing the door on incorrect application.

One above has been done.

Two has been achieved by many.

Three is achieved by the individual applying the correct technology in a proper manner and observing that it works that way.

Four is being done daily successfully in most parts of the world.

Five is consistently accomplished daily.

Six is achieved by instructors and supervisors consistently.

Seven is done by a few but is a weak point.

Eight is not worked on hard enough.

Nine is impeded by the “reasonable” attitude of the not quite bright.

Ten is seldom done with enough ferocity.

Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten are the only places Scientology can bog down in any area.

The reasons for this are not hard to find. (a) A weak certainty that it works in Three above can lead to weakness in Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten. (b) Further, the not-too-bright have a bad point on the button Self-Importance. (c) The lower the IQ, the more the individual is shut off from the fruits of observation. (d) The service facs of people make them defend themselves against anything they confront, good or bad, and seek to make it wrong. (e) The bank seeks to knock out the good and perpetuate the bad.

Thus, we as Scientologists and as an organization must be very alert to Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten.

In all the years I have been engaged in research I have kept my comm lines wide open for research data. I once had the idea that a group could evolve truth. A third of a century has thoroughly disabused me of that idea. Willing as I was to accept suggestions and data, only a handful of suggestions (less than twenty) had long-run value and none were major or basic; and when I did accept major or basic suggestions and used them, we went astray and I repented and eventually had to “eat crow”.

On the other hand there have been thousands and thousands of suggestions and writings which, if accepted and acted upon, would have resulted in the complete destruction of all our work as well as the sanity of pcs. So I know what a group of people will do and how insane they will go in accepting unworkable “technology”. By actual record the percentages are about twenty to 100,000 that a group of human beings will dream up bad technology to destroy good technology. As we could have gotten along without suggestions, then, we had better steel ourselves to continue to do so now that we have made it. This point will, of course, be attacked as “unpopular”, “egotistical” and “undemocratic”. It very well may be. But it is also a survival point. And I don’t see that popular measures, self-abnegation and democracy have done anything for Man but push him further into the mud. Currently, popularity endorses degraded novels, self-abnegation has filled the South East Asian jungles with stone idols and corpses, and democracy has given us inflation and income tax.

Our technology has not been discovered by a group. True, if the group had not supported me in many ways I could not have discovered it either. But it remains that if in its formative stages it was not discovered by a group, then group efforts, one can safely assume, will not add to it or successfully alter it in the future. I can only say this now that it is done. There remains, of course, group tabulation or co-ordination of what has been done, which will be valuable—only so long as it does not seek to alter basic principles and successful applications.

The contributions that were worthwhile in this period of forming the technology were help in the form of friendship, of defence, of organization, of dissemination, of application, of advices on results and of finance. These were great contributions and were, and are, appreciated. Many thousands contributed in this way and made us what we are. Discovery contribution was not however part of the broad picture.

We will not speculate here on why this was so or how I came to rise above the bank. We are dealing only in facts and the above is a fact—the group left to its own devices would not have evolved Scientology but with wild dramatization of the bank called “new ideas” would have wiped it out. Supporting this is the fact that Man has never before evolved workable mental technology and emphasizing it is the vicious technology he did evolve—psychiatry, psychology, surgery, shock treatment, whips, duress, punishment, etc, ad infinitum.

So realize that we have climbed out of the mud by whatever good luck and good sense, and refuse to sink back into it again. See that Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten above are ruthlessly followed and we will never be stopped. Relax them, get reasonable about it and we will perish.

So far, while keeping myself in complete communication with all suggestions, I have not failed on Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten in areas I could supervise closely. But it’s not good enough for just myself and a few others to work at this.

Whenever this control as per Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten has been relaxed the whole organizational area has failed. Witness Elizabeth, N.J., Wichita, the early organizations and groups. They crashed only because I no longer did Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten. Then, when they were all messed up, you saw the obvious “reasons” for failure. But ahead of that they ceased to deliver and that involved them in other reasons.

The common denominator of a group is the reactive bank. Thetans without banks have different responses. They only have their banks in common. They agree then only on bank principles. Person to person the bank is identical. So constructive ideas are individual and seldom get broad agreement in a human group. An individual must rise above an avid craving for agreement from a humanoid group to get anything decent done. The bank-agreement has been what has made Earth a Hell—and if you were looking for Hell and found Earth, it would certainly serve. War, famine, agony and disease has been the lot of Man. Right now the great governments of Earth have developed the means of frying every Man, Woman and Child on the planet. That is Bank. That is the result of Collective Thought Agreement. The decent, pleasant things on this planet come from individual actions and ideas that have somehow gotten by the Group Idea. For that matter, look how we ourselves are attacked by “public opinion” media. Yet there is no more ethical group on this planet than ourselves.

Thus each one of us can rise above the domination of the bank and then, as a group of freed beings, achieve freedom and reason. It is only the aberrated group, the mob, that is destructive.

When you don’t do Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten actively, you are working for the Bank dominated mob. For it will surely, surely (a) introduce incorrect technology and swear by it, (b) apply technology as incorrectly as possible, (c) open the door to any destructive idea, and (d) encourage incorrect application. It’s the Bank that says the group is all and the individual nothing. It’s the Bank that says we must fail.

So just don’t play that game. Do Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten and you will knock out of your road all the future thorns.

Here’s an actual example in which a senior executive had to interfere because of a pc spin: A Case Supervisor told Instructor A to have Auditor B run Process X on Preclear C. Auditor B afterwards told Instructor A that “It didn’t work.” Instructor A was weak on Three above and didn’t really believe in Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten. So Instructor A told the Case Supervisor “Process X didn’t work on Preclear C.” Now this strikes directly at each of One to Six above in Preclear C, Auditor B, Instructor A and the Case Supervisor. It opens the door to the introduction of “new technology” and to failure.

What happened here? Instructor A didn’t jump down Auditor B’s throat, that’s all that happened. This is what he should have done: grabbed the auditor’s report and looked it over. When a higher executive on this case did so she found what the Case Supervisor and the rest missed: that Process X increased Preclear C’s TA to 25 TA divisions for the session but that near session end Auditor B Qed and Aed with a cognition and abandoned Process X while it still gave high TA and went off running one of Auditor B’s own manufacture, which nearly spun Preclear C. Auditor B’s IQ on examination turned out to be about 75. Instructor A was found to have huge ideas of how you must never invalidate anyone, even a lunatic. The Case Supervisor was found to be “too busy with admin to have any time for actual cases”.

All right, there’s an all too typical example. The Instructor should have done Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten. This would have begun this way. Auditor B: “That Process X didn’t work.” Instructor A: “What exactly did you do wrong?” Instant attack. “Where’s your auditor’s report for the session? Good. Look here, you were getting a lot of TA when you stopped Process X. What did you do?” Then the Pc wouldn’t have come close to a spin and all four of these would have retained certainty.

In a year, I had four instances in one small group where the correct process recommended was reported not to have worked. But on review found that each one (a) had increased the TA, (b) had been abandoned, and (c) had been falsely reported as unworkable. Also, despite this abuse, in each of these four cases the recommended, correct process cracked the case. Yet they were reported as not having worked!

Similar examples exist in instruction and these are all the more deadly as every time instruction in correct technology is flubbed, then the resulting error, uncorrected in the auditor, is perpetuated on every pc that auditor audits thereafter. So Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten are even more important in a course than in supervision of cases.

Here’s an example: A rave recommendation is given a graduating student “because he gets more TA on pcs than any other student on the course!” Figures of 435 TA divisions a session are reported. “Of course his model session is poor but it’s just a knack he has” is also included in the recommendation. A careful review is undertaken because nobody at Levels 0 to IV is going to get that much TA on pcs. It is found that this student was never taught to read an E-Meter TA dial! And no instructor observed his handling of a meter and it was not discovered that he “overcompensated” nervously, swinging the TA 2 or 3 divisions beyond where it needed to go to place the needle at “set”. So everyone was about to throw away standard processes and model session because this one student “got such remarkable TA”. They only read the reports and listened to the brags and never looked at this student. The pcs in actual fact were making slightly less than average gain, impeded by a rough model session and misworded processes. Thus, what was making the pcs win (actual Scientology) was hidden under a lot of departures and errors.

I recall one student who was squirreling on an Academy course and running a lot of off-beat whole track on other students after course hours. The Academy students were in a state of electrification on all these new experiences and weren’t quickly brought under control and the student himself never was given the works on Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten so they stuck. Subsequently, this student prevented another squirrel from being straightened out and his wife died of cancer resulting from

physical abuse. A hard, tough Instructor at that moment could have salvaged two squirrels and saved the life of a girl. But no, students had a right to do whatever they pleased.

Squirreling (going off into weird practices or altering Scientology) only comes about from non-comprehension. Usually the non-comprehension is not of Scientology but some earlier contact with an off-beat humanoid practice which in its turn was not understood.

When people can’t get results from what they think is standard practice, they can be counted upon to squirrel to some degree. The most trouble in the past two years came from orgs where an executive in each could not assimilate straight Scientology. Under instruction in Scientology they were unable to define terms or demonstrate examples of principles. And the orgs where they were got into plenty of trouble. And worse, it could not be straightened out easily because neither one of these people could or would duplicate instructions. Hence, a debacle resulted in two places, directly traced to failures of instruction earlier. So proper instruction is vital. The D of T and his Instructors and all Scientology Instructors must be merciless in getting Four, Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten into effective action. That one student, dumb and impossible though he may seem and of no use to anyone, may yet some day be the cause of untold upset because nobody was interested enough to make sure Scientology got home to him.

With what we know now, there is no student we enrol who cannot be properly trained. As an Instructor, one should be very alert to slow progress and should turn the sluggards inside out personally. No system will do it, only you or me with our sleeves rolled up can crack the back of bad studenting and we can only do it on an individual student, never on a whole class only. He’s slow = something is awful wrong. Take fast action to correct it. Don’t wait until next week. By then he’s got other messes stuck to him. If you can’t graduate them with their good sense appealed to and wisdom shining, graduate them in such a state of shock they’ll have nightmares if they contemplate squirreling. Then experience will gradually bring about Three in them and they’ll know better than to chase butterflies when they should be auditing.

When somebody enrols, consider he or she has joined up for the duration of the universe—never permit an “open-minded” approach. If they’re going to quit let them quit fast. If they enrolled, they’re aboard, and if they’re aboard, they’re here on the same terms as the rest of us—win or die in the attempt. Never let them be half-minded about being Scientologists. The finest organizations in history have been tough, dedicated organizations. Not one namby-pamby bunch of panty-waist dilettantes have ever made anything. It’s a tough universe. The social veneer makes it seem mild. But only the tigers survive—and even they have a hard time. We’ll survive because we are tough and are dedicated. When we do instruct somebody properly he becomes more and more tiger. When we instruct half-mindedly and are afraid to offend, scared to enforce, we don’t make students into good Scientologists and that lets everybody down. When Mrs. Pattycake comes to us to be taught, turn that wandering doubt in her eye into a fixed, dedicated glare and she’ll win and we’ll all win. Humour her and we all die a little. The proper instruction attitude is, “You’re here so you’re a Scientologist. Now we’re going to make you into an expert auditor no matter what happens. We’d rather have you dead than incapable.”

Fit that into the economics of the situation and lack of adequate time and you see the cross we have to bear.

But we won’t have to bear it forever. The bigger we get the more economics and time we will have to do our job. And the only things which can prevent us from getting that big fast are areas in from One to Ten. Keep those in mind and we’ll be able to grow. Fast. And as we grow our shackles will be less and less. Failing to keep One to Ten, will make us grow less.

So the ogre which might eat us up is not the government or the High Priests. It’s our possible failure to retain and practise our technology.

An Instructor or Supervisor or Executive must challenge with ferocity instances of “unworkability”. They must uncover what did happen, what was run and what was done or not done.

If you have One and Two, you can only acquire Three for all by making sure of all the rest.

We’re not playing some minor game in Scientology. It isn’t cute or something to do for lack of something better.

The whole agonized future of this planet, every Man, Woman and Child on it, and your own destiny for the next endless trillions of years depend on what you do here and now with and in Scientology.

This is a deadly serious activity. And if we miss getting out of the trap now, we may never again have another chance.

Remember, this is our first chance to do so in all the endless trillions of years of the past. Don’t muff it now because it seems unpleasant or unsocial to do Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten.

Do them and we’ll win.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:jw.rr.nt.ka.mes.rd
Copyright © 1965, 1970, 1973
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

























SAINT HILL SPECIAL BRIEFING COURSE LECTURES
23 February—2 March 1965


** 6502C23 SHSBC-52 Level VII
** 6503C02 SHSBC-53 Technology and Hidden Standards

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 14 FEBRUARY 1965
(Reissued on 7 June 1967, with the word
“instructor” replaced by “supervisor”.)
Remimeo
All Hats
BPI

SAFEGUARDING TECHNOLOGY


For some years we have had a word “squirreling”. It means altering Scientology, off-beat practices. It is a bad thing. I have found a way to explain why.

Scientology is a workable system. This does not mean it is the best possible system or a perfect system. Remember and use that definition. Scientology is a workable system.

In fifty thousand years of history on this planet alone, Man never evolved a workable system. It is doubtful if, in foreseeable history, he will ever evolve another.

Man is caught in a huge and complex labyrinth. To get out of it requires that he follow the closely taped path of Scientology.

Scientology will take him out of the labyrinth. But only if he follows the exact markings in the tunnels.

It has taken me a third of a century in this lifetime to tape this route out.

It has been proven that efforts by Man to find different routes came to nothing. It is also a clear fact that the route called Scientology does lead out of the labyrinth. Therefore it is a workable system, a route that can be travelled.

What would you think of a guide who, because his party said it was dark and the road rough and who said another tunnel looked better, abandoned the route he knew would lead out and led his party to a lost nowhere in the dark. You’d think he was a pretty wishy-washy guide.

What would you think of a supervisor who let a student depart from procedure the supervisor knew worked. You’d think he was a pretty wishy-washy supervisor.

What would happen in a labyrinth if the guide let some girl stop in a pretty canyon and left her there forever to contemplate the rocks? You’d think he was a pretty heartless guide. You’d expect him to say at least, “Miss, those rocks may be pretty, but the road out doesn’t go that way.”

All right, how about an auditor who abandons the procedure which will make his preclear eventually clear just because the preclear had a cognition?

People have following the route mixed up with “the right to have their own ideas.” Anyone is certainly entitled to have opinions and ideas and cognitions—so long as these do not bar the route out for self and others.

Scientology is a workable system. It white tapes the road out of the labyrinth. If there were no white tapes marking the right tunnels, Man would just go on wandering around and around the way he has for eons, darting off on wrong roads, going in circles, ending up in the sticky dark, alone.

Scientology, exactly and correctly followed, takes the person up and out of the mess.

So when you see somebody having a ball getting everyone to take peyote because it restimulates prenatals, know he is pulling people off the route. Realize he is squirreling. He isn’t following the route.

Scientology is a new thing—it is a road out. There has not been one. Not all the salesmanship in the world can make a bad route a proper route. And an awful lot of bad routes are being sold. Their end product is further slavery, more darkness, more misery.

Scientology is the only workable system Man has. It has already taken people toward higher I.Q., better lives and all that. No other system has. So realize that it has no competitor.

Scientology is a workable system. It has the route taped. The search is done. Now the route only needs to be walked.

So put the feet of students and preclears on that route. Don’t let them off of it no matter how fascinating the side roads seem to them. And move them on up and out.

Squirreling is today destructive of a workable system.

Don’t let your party down. By whatever means, keep them on the route. And they’ll be free. If you don’t, they won’t.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:jw.jp.rd
Copyright © 1965, 1967
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

THE BOOK OF E-METER DRILLS

Published February 1965


The Book of E-Meter Drills, Volume III of the Clearing Series booklets, consists of twenty seven E-Meter drills developed by L. Ron Hubbard and compiled by Mary Sue Hubbard. It was first published at Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex, England.

In the Foreword which Ron wrote for this book, he says, “This present booklet contains all the standard E-Meter drills used in training in Scientology.

“There are no other drills. Many have been developed from time to time and have proven less workable or useless. These drills have been of the greatest possible value.

“There are many ways of using drills, but the recommended way is using the standard Scientology coach and student auditor arrangement, where the coach does the training and the student auditor the actions required.

“A drill should be done until the student auditor is letter-perfect before going on to the next drill.

“These drills cover levels as indicated. Do not do the drills of a higher level until the student auditor is perfect at a lower level and has been classed or certified for that level. Then go on to the higher level.

“Metering is a very precise activity and requires much familiarity and expertise.

“Even small meter errors are considered Gross Auditing Errors at any level.”

This booklet has a plastic comb binding, which makes it easy to lay flat on a table while doing the drills contained therein. It is used today on every auditing course which includes the use of the E-Meter.

76 pages, 1 photograph, soft-cover. Translation available in German. Available from your nearest Scientology Organization or Mission, or direct from the publishers: Scientology Publications Organization, Jernbanegade 6, 1608 Copenhagen V, Denmark; or Church of Scientology Publications Organization U.S., 2723 West Temple Street, Los Angeles, California, 90026, U.S.A.

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 5 MARCH 1965
Issue II
Remimeo
Franchise
Sthil Students
Sthil Staff ALL LEVELS

BOOK OF CASE REMEDIES
APPLICATION OF TECH

A sure road to award and glory is to find a new application for an existing Scientology process or principle or book.

The period of the discovery of principles, processes or original works is surely over as we have everything between the snake’s stomach and the high sky by way of natural laws. Inventing and using new processes is a sure way to slow down the advance. There were only so many anyway and it’s been done.

But new ways to apply or disseminate what we’ve got are welcome, welcome, welcome. We’ve not nearly enough of those and we’ll be inventing or seeing them for the next umpty trillion years.

So my hat is off to Beth Fordyce, HCO Area Sec Detroit, U.S.A., who informed us via U.S. Continental of a new use for The Book of Case Remedies for which she’ll receive a bow and appropriate award, to wit her DScn.

Here is her report.

“At the January D.C. Congress, I had some interesting data about The Book of Case Remedies that you (HCO Cont Sec U.S.) thought I ought to write up for Ron because you felt he’d be interested in it. Here it is.

“We’ve had several instances where people have read the remedies and come in to tell me that certain ones ‘fit’ them. Then when they started to tell me which ones specifically, they couldn’t remember them—or they would be able to remember only one. The book obviously indicates by-passed charge, and handles most of the problems. They find out what their problem actually is.

“One fellow who has been ARC broken with Scientology for years (even before I heard of Scn), came in and I asked him to find himself in the remedies. He started reading them, and each one seemed to fit him (except about 3 or 4 of them). I noted them down one by one, as he called them to me. When he finished, I said no more about it.

“Later on—about 15 minutes—he decided he’d better look through those again because he ‘was sure that they didn’t all fit—maybe some of them have changed’. So he went through them again, one by one, and only 3 still seemed to apply—and only ONE of them was strongest, he felt. The other two seemed to have lost their punch.

“He was quite different after that. I also did what the remedy called for, which cleaned it up. The last time I saw him—at our Congress—he not once mentioned the problem he’s always had with eye-spots. (And, frankly, I was afraid at that point to say ‘eye-spots’ to him for fear he’d key it back in again, so I just settled for HIS not mentioning it ! )

“As soon as we get our next batch of Remedies, I intend to send at least 4 of them as gifts to people who are badly ARC broken with us. If they actually read them, I know exactly what will happen—they can’t stay ARC broken.

Best,
Beth”

So there’s a wide open door. Try it out on “rough cases” and demand ARC Broken ones do it and write you back or tell you which one it is.

LRH:jw.pw.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 10 MARCH 1965
Remimeo
Sthil Students
Sthil R6 Co-audit
Scientology 0
Scientology VI



WORDS, MISUNDERSTOOD GOOFS



It has come to my attention that words a student misunderstands and looks up can yet remain troublesome. And that R6 materials are suffering from the same fate when meter activity lessens.

It’s this way: The student runs across a word he or she doesn’t understand. He or she looks it up in a dictionary, finds a substitute word and uses that.

Of course the first word is still misunderstood and remains a bother.

Example: (Line in text) “The size was Gargantuan.” Student looks up Gargantuan, finds “Like Gargantua, huge.” Student uses “huge” as a synonym and reads the text line “The size was ‘huge’.” A short while later is found still incapable of understanding the paragraph below “Gargantuan” in the text. Conclusion the student makes—”Well it doesn’t work.”

The principle is that one goes dull after passing over a word one does not understand and brightens up the moment he spots the word that wasn’t grasped. In actual fact, the brightening up occurs whether one defines the word or not.

But to put another word in the place of the existing word, whether in Level 0 or Level VI is to mess it all up.

Take the above example. “Huge” is not “Gargantuan”. These are synonyms. The sentence is “The size was Gargantuan.” The sentence was not “The size was huge.” You can’t really substitute one word for another at Level 0 or Level VI and get anything but an alteration. So something remains not understood at Level 0 and the meter stops at Level VI. It just isn’t what was said or thought.

The correct procedure is to look over, get defmed well and understand the word that was used.

In this case the word was “Gargantuan”. Very well, what’s that? It means “Like Gargantua” according to the dictionary.

Who or what was Gargantua? The dictionary says it was the name of a gigantic King in a book written by the author Rabelais. Cheers, the student thinks, the sentence meant “The size was a gigantic king.” Oops! That’s the same goof again, like “huge”. But we’re nearer.

So what to do? Use Gargantuan in a few sentences you make up and bingo! You suddenly understand the word that was used.

Now you read it right. “The size was Gargantuan.” And what does that mean? It means “The size was Gargantuan.” And nothing else.

Get it?

There’s no hope for it mate. You’ll have to learn real English, not the 600 word basic English of the college kid, in which a few synonyms are substituted for all the big words.
---------------

And as an “aside” (like they use on the stage), may I say that golly some people have to reach a long way to find goofs.

(The data in this HCO B was given to me by Mary Sue Hubbard and called to attention by Ian Tampion.)


L. RON HUBBARD

LRH:ml.rd
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED





































SAINT HILL SPECIAL BRIEFING COURSE LECTURES
9—16 March 1965


** 6503C09 SHSBC-54 The New Organizational Structure
** 6503C16 SHSBC-55 The Progress and Future of Scientology

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 29 MARCH 1965
Remimeo
Students ALL LEVELS

ARC BREAKS

Great News!

I’ve found the basis of ARC Breaks!

As you know, only a PTP (Present Time Problem) can hold a graph unchanging and only an ARC Break can lower one. Therefore the Anatomy of an ARC Break is more vital to know, as it can worsen, than the anatomy of a PTP. But both are very important and with the overt act and misunderstood words in study form the vital four things anyone should know in auditing Pcs.

The average student has a hard time getting rid of ARC Breaks in others, mostly because he never really finds the ARC Break. One Auditor was sure a Pc had been ARC Broken by “the last few inches of a lecture tape” and was madly calling Washington to borrow the tape so the poor Pc could “listen to it again to cure his ARC Break” ! Well I don’t mind being cause, but my tape never ARC Broke the Pc. The Auditor just didn’t locate the Charge.

The whole trick is to keep cleaning up the ARC Break until the Pc is happy again and then quit. When you find it, that’s it. You don’t find it and still have an ARC Broken Pc! No, the terribly simple truth is that

1. The Pc is ARC Broken because something happened.

2. The Pc will continue to be ARC Broken until the thing is found.

3. The ARC Break will vanish magically when the source is found.

Finding the ARC Break and indicating it clears the ARC Break. If it doesn’t clear on what you find, then you haven’t found it !

You must not continue to run a Pc on some process when the Pc is ARC Broken. You must find the ARC Break and clear it.

The Pc will go into a sad effect if you don’t find the ARC Break but instead, continue the process. If you think you have found the ARC Break (and haven’t) and then go on auditing, the Pc will go into a sad effect.

ARC Broken Pcs are easy to identify. They gloom and mis-emote. They criticise and snarl. Sometimes they scream. They blow, they refuse auditing.

If you can read a lighted neon sign at 10 feet on a dark night, you can detect a Pc who has an ARC Break. Some Auditors can detect them sooner than others. I can see one coming in a Pc 11/2 hours of auditing before the Pc starts to get misemotional in earnest. Some newcomer in the business might not detect one until the Pc wraps a chair around the auditor’s head. As I say, the ability to perceive one varies. The better you are the sooner you see one. If an auditor’s Pc isn’t bright and happy, there’s an ARC Break there with life or the bank or the session.

The thing to do is find it and clean it up.

And now all is revealed: This is what makes an ARC Break occur:

AN ARC BREAK OCCURS ON A GENERALITY OR A NOT THERE.

The Generality

Example of a Generality

“They say you are cold-hearted.” “Everybody thinks you are too young.” “The People Versus Sam Jones.” “The will of the masses.”

Case Manifestation

Example: Little boy screaming in rage when he makes a mistake in drawing. Auditor observes little boy is upset. Auditor: “What are you upset about?” Little Boy: (howling) “My drawing is no good!” Auditor: “Who said your drawing is no good?” Little Boy: (crying) “The teachers at school (plural).” Auditor: “What teacher (singular)?” Little Boy: (sobbing) “Not the teachers, the other children (plural)!” Auditor: “Which one of the other children?” Little Boy: (suddenly quiet) “Sammy.” Auditor: “How do you feel now?” Little Boy: (cheerfully) “Can I have some ice cream?”

The Formula

1. Ask what the Pc is upset about.

2. Ask who thought so.

3. Repeat the generality the Pc used and

4. Ask for the singular.

5. Keep 3 and 4 going until the Pc is happy.

As it’s a near Q and A it should be awfully easy. They name prunes, you say what prune is prunes.

Result

It’s quite magical done barehanded or on a meter.

Errors

You can miss in English sometimes on YOU. The Pc says YOU are mean. We have no plural or singular signal in the word YOU. Therefore a statement that “YOU are ARC Breaking me” or “YOU ARE MEAN” may not mean, as an egocentric auditor may take it, the auditor but YOU may be being used as THE WHOLE WORLD. The above formula holds 1 to 5. Just find out “Which person is meant by the word you?”

Our old “Look at me, who am I?” was not too wrong.

So next time your Pc says, “The Instructors are mean,” don’t be goofy enough to indicate the charge with “OK, you are ARC Broken because the Instructors are mean.” And then be amazed when the ARC Break continues. You didn’t find out “What Instructor is Instructors?” If you ask a bit further you’ll find it probably wasn’t “the Instructors” but somebody else. And that somebody will be a unit, not a group.

A less workable but interesting approach is “Who uses the word ‘everybody’ frequently?” It’s of interest only because “everybody” makes a dispersal which the Pc can’t see through. It will take quite a while sometimes for a Pc to spot such a person!

How many people have died heartbroken because “they” were mean to him. And it was just one vicious being who had been blown up to “they”.

The Not There is also a generality because it can be anywhere. But it is a special case.

When something becomes unlocatable it can cause an ARC Break.

The cure for this one is to find out what’s gone.

If you see somebody with a cold, ask “Who’s gone?” and you’ll be amazed at the recovery if you pursue the matter.

One concludes it’s less the loss than not knowing where something has gotten to, making a one into a generality.

The common response to sudden loss is to feel everything is gone or going.

This is the state of anxiety explained.

The beaten and downtrodden respond well on this (when brought up through normal levels to the Level of Remedies).

A very sneaky question is “Who (or what) was everything to you?”

But use it sparingly. The Pc will go whole track like a flash if overworked.

Remarkably (at this late date to find it!) that’s why he rather fancies his pictures! At least he has a picture of it!

Dreams follow a sudden loss. It’s an effort to orient oneself and get something back.

Level VI ARC Breaks

Of course, there’s nothing wrong really with a thetan but his reactive bank. He can recover from the rest. And his reactive bank is full of generalities which explains the hard ARC Breaks of Level VI. But don’t tamper with Level VI if the Pc belongs at II. You can get enough locks off any day from normal life to cure the ARC Breaks you’ll encounter getting up to VI.

Main thing to know is: AN ARC BREAK OCCURS BECAUSE OF A GENERALITY OR A NOT THERE.

Fortunately it doesn’t always occur. Only sometimes. And when it does: Find the singular form of the generality.

In Admin particularly you save more executives that way. And in auditing you just don’t have failed cases or blows if you know it.


L. RON HUBBARD


LRH:wmc.aj.cden
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED



SAINT HILL SPECIAL BRIEFING COURSE LECTURE
30 March 1965

** 6503C30 SHSBC-56 ARC Breaks and Generalities

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 2 APRIL AD15
Remimeo
BPI
Mag Art ALL SCIENTOLOGY
Auditor Issue 8
Franchise
Sthil Students
THE ROAD TO CLEAR


I have just made a breakthrough in finding what a clear really is.

And we can certainly make it now.

The ROAD TO CLEAR is very definite and the state is very attainable today.

A clear has no vicious Reactive Mind and operates at total mental capacity just like the first book (“Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health”) said. In fact every early definition of CLEAR is found to be correct.

People have been unable to define release to their own satisfaction. I find now a RELEASE is a person who has been able to back out of his “bank”. The bank is still there but the person isn’t sunk into it with all its somatics and depressions. The E-Meter reads at the Clear read! The needle of the meter is floppy. This is a simulated clear. We called it a “keyed out clear” quite properly. But it isn’t a clear I know now, it’s a RELEASE. The person has been released from his reactive mind. He still has that reactive mind but he’s not in it. He is just released from it. He may go into it again but it feels good to be out of it. His IQ and ability rise and he is far more effective in changing his environment into a better one. The state is beyond homo sapiens by considerable.

This happens today before or at LEVEL V in most cases if the preclear has followed the grades and levels properly.

Just one level up from there, a rather long level and a rough one, is the state of CLEAR.

This is LEVEL VI. This level consists of several processes. The preclear (still a preclear) has to be able to audit to make it. It can’t be done for him, that was the hitch. All the lower levels can be done for him but not Level VI. That’s a technical fact. The preclear has to be able to handle Scientology technology to handle his own bank.

Level VI requires several months to audit through even with expert training.

But at its end, MAGIC. There’s the state of clear we’ve sought for all these years. It fits all definitions ever given for clear.

The state at the end of Level VI is not Operating Thetan any more than a baby is a Man.

Operating Thetan is several levels above clear. The bridge from clear to OT already exists and is found in Route I, in the book “The Creation of Human Ability”.

The reactive mind (and a rotten mess it is, too!) prevented pcs from doing Route I drills. It stood like a huge black spider between the person and his realizing his full potential. Trying to do Route I as given years ago with a Reactive Mind still in place was, to be blunt, not possible for a human.

Some people also get frightened of ridding themselves of a Reactive Mind. Having looked it all over now I can state that it is as much use as a sewer in the living room. It says the bad is good and the good is bad! It’s a slave maker and “stupidifier” and a body killer. Any time you think it has value, imagine trying to swim in the city dump or trying to fly with an anvil in each pocket, all the while saying, “This is exactly the right thing to do.”
-------------

What’s happened that caused the blunder is that a “keyed out clear” looked like a clear but was only a release. And one had to have a very precise map and the skill to walk through the still present dark barriers that existed unsuspected between “keyed out clear” and the real state of clear.

So CLEAR CAN BE ATTAINED. And further it is being attained right this minute by dozens of Class VI preclears. It will take them months to get there but they are soaring and will tell you so. One session on it sends them the equivalent distance that ten intensives did in their early auditing. Why? Because they did the earlier auditing.

The road was just a longer road. Man looks for the quick way, the one-shot way, the needle and the rocket to sudden glory. CLEAR takes now an exact progress over exact levels. And the way is not long really. But it could be a few years for some.

But what’s a few years if one is bargaining for Eternity?

The point here is that I’ve finally been able to tell you what it is and where it is and exactly how to get there. Sorry I couldn’t sooner. It took some time to find the way for you and communicate how to do it.

I always tell you as soon as I know. I tell you when I’ve goofed and where. Well here it is. That’s what a CLEAR is.

And it’s a road you can travel.

THE STATES OF BEING

A RELEASE is at the top of Level V.

A CLEAR is at the top of Level VI.

A THETA CLEAR is at Level IX.

An OPERATING THETAN is at Level XVIII.

Above Level VI there are no “mental auditing processes” as we know them. There are only various drill and familiarization processes like those in the “Creation of Human Ability” processes and the regaining of abilities one supposed one couldn’t ever attain.

That’s the road and road map.

The only real error I made was in believing the road was a bit shorter than it was.

The plan of going on to clear is to get processed up to Grade IV or V. Then, being a RELEASE and quite beyond the top range of most IQ tests, get trained rapidly up through from Level 0 to Level VI. And then audit up to Grade VI which is CLEAR.

(“Grade” and “Level” are the same but when one is a pc one has a grade and when one has a Level one is studying its data.)

There are about 3 or 4 intensives to a Grade (pc) up to Grade V. That’s perhaps 15 to 20 25-hour intensives. (15 to 20 weeks.) Then training as a student of the same material one was audited on from Level I to Level V. That’s six separate months worth of training. Then to Level VI (that’s only as a student at Saint Hill) which takes about 2-3 months usually. Then a year or less depending on how hard you work and at no further cost, to CLEAR.

The total of this is about two years and two months of continuous processing and training time.

The total elapsed time might be longer even up to 5 or 10 years depending on one’s own economics and all that.

The fact is that economics aren’t a real factor, contrary to what one might be thinking. For today the increase in ability at one grade of processing is capable of delivering an economic boost adequate to earn or obtain much more extra wherewithal than the auditing or training cost. Economic increase because of auditing and training is a sure thing today.

A faster route (but not quite as secure as you might think as one isn’t already a Release while studying) is to train from Level 0 on up only. I myself wouldn’t like to do that as it would be rougher and could be even slower than the Grade I to V pc then Level I to VI auditor route. But it could be done.

We’ve had 15 years of experience now. We had to feel our way, as Man has never had a road to clear. It’s been through totally new territory never before viewed by Man. Even the wise Tibetan only achieved Release and only after he invested 20 years of hard work at it at that.

From Release as a case on up to Level VI as an auditor is pretty easy. In fact the Grade-Level roadway is like walking in a pleasant countryside now. Oh, one has a few stumbles even on a gravel path but that’s part of it. The pioneer times are all over and the pioneer always has it rough.

The 49ers left a freeway to follow! So have we. It just took a while to build.

So that’s clear!


L. RON HUBBARD


LRH: ml.cden
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 4 APRIL AD15
Remimeo
Franchise

ARC BREAKS AND MISSED WITHHOLDS


The primary error one can make in ARC Break handling is to handle the pc with ARC Break procedure when the pc really has a missed withhold.

As some auditors dislike pulling withholds (because they run into pcs who use it to carve the auditor up such as “I have a withhold that everybody thinks you are awful ——”) it is easier to confront the idea that a pc has an ARC Break than the idea that the pc has a withhold.

In case of doubt one meter checks on a withhold to see if it is non-existent (“Am I demanding a withhold you haven’t got?”). If this is the case the TA will blow down. If it isn’t the case the needle and TA remain unchanged. If the pc’s nattery or ARC Breaky condition continues despite finding by-passed charge, then of course it is obviously a withhold.

ARC Break finding does work. When the pc doesn’t change despite skillful ARC Break handling, locating and indicating, it was a withhold in the first place.

The hardest pc to handle is the missed withhold pc. They ARC Break but you can’t get the pc out of it. The answer is, the pc had a withhold all the time that is at the bottom of all these ARC Breaks.

Scientology auditing does not leave the pc in poor condition unless one goofs on ARC Breaks.

ARC Breaks occur most frequently on people with missed withholds. \-

Therefore if a pc can’t be patched up easily or won’t stay patched up on ARC Breaks, there must be basic withholds on the case. One then works hard on withholds with any and all the tools that we’ve got.

ARC Breaks don’t cause blows. Missed withholds do. When you won’t hear what the pc is saying, then you have made him have a withhold and it responds as a missed withhold.

In short, the bottom of ARC Breaks is a missed withhold.

But an anti-social act done and then withheld sets the pc up to become “an ARC Breaky pc”. It isn’t an accurate remark really since one has a pc with withholds who on being audited ARC Breaks easily. So the accurate statement is “the pc is a withholdy type pc that ARC Breaks a lot”. Now that type exists. And they sure have lots of subsequent ARC Breaks and are regularly being patched up.

If you have a pc, then, who seems to have a lot of ARC Breaks, the pc is a “withholdy pc” not an “ARC Breaky pc”. Any auditor miss causes a pc blow-up. The auditor by calling this pc an “ARC Breaky pc” is not using a description which leads to a resolution of the case as thousands of ARC Break assessments leave the case still liable to ARC Break. If you call such a case that ARC Breaks a lot a “withholdy pc that ARC Breaks a lot” then you can solve the case. For all you have to do is work on withholds.

The actual way to handle a “withholdy pc that ARC Breaks a lot” after you’ve cooled off the last of his many ARC Breaks is:

1. Get the pc to look at what’s going on with his sessions.

2. Get the pc in comm.

3. Get the pc to look at what’s really bugging him.

4. Get the pc’s willingness to give withholds up on a gradient.

5. Bring the pc to an understanding of what he’s doing.

6. Get the pc’s purpose in being audited in plain view to him or her.

Those are of course the names of the first six grades. However, low down, these six things are all crushed together and you could really pursue that cycle in one session just to get the pc up a bit without even touching the next grade up.

Whenever I see a sour-faced person who has been “trained” or is being “trained” I know one thing—there goes a pc with lots of withholds. I also know, there is a pc who ARC Breaks a lot in session. And I also know his co-auditor is weak and flabby as an auditor. And I also know his auditing supervisor doesn’t shove the student auditor into doing the process correctly.

One sour-faced student, one glance and I know all the above things, bang!

So why can’t somebody else notice it?

Auditing is a pleasure. But not when an auditor can’t tell a withhold from an ARC Break and doesn’t know that continual ARC Breaks are caused by missed withholds on the bottom of the chain.

I never miss on this. Why should you?

The only case that will really “bug you” is the CONTINUOUS OVERT case. Here’s one that commits anti-social acts daily during auditing. He’s a nut. He’ll never get better, case always hangs up.

Unless you treat his continual overts as a solution to a PTP. And find what PTP he’s trying to solve with these crazy overt acts.

You see, we can even solve that case.

BUT, don’t go believing Scientology doesn’t work when it meets an unchanging or continually misemotional pc. Both of these people are foul balls who are loaded with withholds.

We’ve cracked them for years and years now.

But not by playing patty-cake or “slap my wrist”.

Takes an auditor, not a lady finger.

“Mister, you’ve been wasting my time for three sessions. You have withholds. Give!” “Mister, you refuse just once more to answer my question and you’re for it. I’ve checked this meter. It’s not a withhold of nothing. You have withholds. Give!” “Mister, that’s it. I am asking the D of P to ask the Tech Sec for a Comm Ev on you from HCO for no report.”

If skill couldn’t do it, demand may. If demand couldn’t do it, a Comm Ev sure will.

For it’s a no report!

How can you make a man well when he’s got a sewer full of slimy acts.

Show me any person who is critical of us and I’ll show you crimes and intended crimes that would stand a magistrate’s hair on end.

Why not try it? Don’t buy “I once stole a paper clip from the HASI” as an overt or “You’re a lousy auditor” as a withhold. Hell, man, people who tell you those things just stole your lunch or intend to empty the till.

Get clever, auditor. Thetans are basically good. Them that Scientology doesn’t change are good—but down underneath a pile of crimes you couldn’t get into a Confession Story Magazine.

Okay. Please don’t go on making this error. It grieves me.


L. RON HUBBARD


LRH:ml.rd
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 5 APRIL 1965

Remimeo
BPI
Franchise

A CONDITIONS
TEST PROCESS
I - X
REGISTRARS


Send this out to people and have them do it and send it back.

Preferably send to your inactive list.

Tell me the responses.

PROCESS I—X

Write these down as you recall them.

Cross section your life at five year periods since you were 5.

5 ? What were the conditions?

10 “ “ “ “

15 “ “ “ “

etc. “ “ “ “

Now compare these to see whether they are better or worse.

What is your conclusion?

_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________




L. RON HUBBARD
LRH: ml.bh
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED




SAINT HILL SPECIAL BRIEFING COURSE LECTURE
6 April 1965


** 6504C06 SHSBC-57 Org Board and Livingness

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 7 APRIL AD 15

Remimeo
Franchise
Sthil Students LEVEL I


PREMATURE ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS


Here’s a new discovery. Imagine my making one on the Comm Formula after all these years.

Do people ever explain to you long after you have understood?

Do people get cross with you when they are trying to tell you something?

If so, you are suffering from Premature Acknowledgement.

Like body odor and bad breath, it is not conducive to social happiness. But you don’t use Life buoy soap or Listerine to cure it, you use a proper comm formula.

When you “coax” a person to talk after he has begun with a nod or a low “yes” you ack, make him forget, then make him believe you haven’t got it and then make him tell you at GREAT length. He feels bad and doesn’t cognite and may ARC Break.

Try it out. Have somebody tell you about something and then encourage before he has completely told you all.

THAT’S why pcs Itsa on and on and on and on with no gain. The auditor prematurely acknowledged. THAT’S why pcs get cross “for no reason”. The auditor has prematurely and unwittingly acknowledged. THAT’S why one feels dull when talking to certain people. They prematurely acknowledge. That’s why one thinks another is stupid—that person prematurely acknowledges.

The quickest way to become a social pariah (dog) is to prematurely acknowledge. One can do it in many ways.

The quickest way to start the longest conversation is to prematurely acknowledge for the person believes he has not been understood and so begins to explain at greater and greater length.

So this was the hidden ARC Break maker, the cognition wrecker, the stupidifier, the Itsa prolonger in sessions.

And why some people believe others are stupid or don’t understand.

Any habit of agreeable noises and nods can be mistaken for acknowledgement, ends cycle on the speaker, causes him to forget, feel dull, believe the listener is stupid, get cross, get exhausted explaining and ARC Break. The missed withhold is inadvertent. One didn’t get a chance to say what one was going to say because one was stopped by premature acknowledgement. Result, missed w/h in the speaker, with all its consequences.

This can be counted on to make you feel frightened of being “agreeable with noises or gestures” for a bit and then you’ll get it straight.

What a piece of tech to remain incompletely explained. Fair scares one it does. And in the Comm Formula too!


LRH:wmc.cden L RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


** 6504C13 SHSBC-58 The Lowest Levels

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

Remimeo HCO BULLETIN OF 18 APRIL AD 15
Franchise
Sthil Students
Sthil Execs
Sthil Staff Auditors
HOW TO APPLY LEVEL PROCESSING

(FOR HGCs AND ACADEMIES AND
COURSES)

HCO Secs, Org Secs, Assn Secs
take notice!


The advent of levels and their final forms now being released bring us into a new phase in auditing.

You no longer have to “audit the pc in front of you” but need now only audit with the process next in line.

Level processes must be audited in sequence in the level itself.

Levels must be audited in sequence.

Therefore all that is required of the auditor is to do a good technical job of auditing, avoiding Q and A and alter-is like the plague.

Your Comm Course and Upper Indoc TRs and your meter drills from The Book of E-Meter Drills are now the only drills permitted.

Only alter-is of routine auditing can cause case failure.

Directors of Processing must-must-must be alert for departures from standard level processing and stamp it out quickly. If they do not do so they will have case trouble.

The Levels are designed for all cases from psycho to OT. It now does not matter what condition a case is in. You just start at the lowest process of the lowest level on all cases begun. Flatten that. Go to the next process of the level. Flatten that. When all processes of that level are flat the pc is examined and given a GRADE CERTIFICATE for the level completed and may go to the next level. And the first process of that level is flattened and so on.

Even The Book of Case Remedies is handled at its own place in its own level and is not used below or above that place.

Our technical reach is now so effective that you need no analysis of the case. You just run the levels.

You do not estimate a pc’s level. You ask for his Grade Certificate and if he hasn’t one, just start at the lowest level, skip any level already run and do on up.

You’ll not only catch all cases. You will get maximum TA on each pc in that fashion.

One must not skip around within the level or amongst levels.

Screwy application such as giving the first command of an alternate command process and then “getting the TA out of the second command”, or any departure from good old standard auditing must be jumped all over hard.

Rewording a process given in the levels can be catastrophic. It’s worded that way for a reason. Clear the command well with the pc but never vary the given wording.

These actions with the new levels will be found magical.

Directors of Processing must not tolerate any slightest goof, any Q and A, any variation of any kind whatever and must be very severe with anyone who messes these processes up. They are violently strong processes from bottom to top and they must be handled with exact duplication and skill.

In Academies this injunction is particularly urgent. Standard student auditing can work wonders with these processes unless an Instructor advises or permits alter-is.

The processes developed are too powerful to admit of goofs and departures and unusual solutions. If anyone reports “it didn’t work” you had better get in there fast as that auditor really goofed and didn’t run the process the way it was given in the HCO B.

The most banal, routine, grind auditing will produce results splendidly. The flighty, undisciplined, Q and Aed, alter-ised fooling about will rapidly ditch the pc.

I am putting strong tools in your hands. Don’t play about with them. They might explode on you. Give them the respect they deserve and every case will come up bright and progress rapidly.

Something new is here. Just follow the new map even dully and the pc will arrive. Louse it up and it will get awful.

--------------

All auditors at a higher meter class run all lower level processes with a meter providing only that they can get the pc to hold the cans.

For a meter classed auditor there are no unmetered processes except ones like 8C and even then the pc is checked on a meter.

It does not matter how low on the levels an auditor begins to use a meter as a student. Just don’t ask him to do much with it until the training level calls for meter training.
--------------

Ds of T and Ds of P and Examiners must be very careful of false reports in case folders regarding what was run. They should regard an illegible report as a no report. They must also be alert for false attestations concerning grade requests for a pc and for training check sheet completion. It is a false attestation to declare an incomplete grade or check sheet complete or done when it is not.

--------------

New ethics policies are levelled primarily at making auditing and training honest and flawless.

I can give you all the processes. It is however necessary that they be honestly run and honestly reported.

Only in that way can you make releases and clears.

--------------

The renumbering of levels and grades will be released in Auditor 8. They make it easier to audit and train.

The materials for each level will shortly be released in HCO Bs.


From Academies and courses I want auditors who are trained not to alter-is technical materials.

In HGCs I want auditing exactly by the book.

It’s easier to do training and processing that way.

And you will get all the results you could ever use—but only if it’s by the book, unaltered in application.

It will be the easiest auditing you ever did.


L. RON HUBBARD

LRH: ml.rd
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED




HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 27 APRIL 1965
Remimeo
Sthil Students



CLAY TABLE HEALING GOOF


The following letter from Ian Tampion outlines a common trouble with CTH. The pc doesn’t answer the question!

This comes really from running it on a pc who isn’t that high in grades. The pc can’t yet hear and answer a question.

L.R.H. Assoc Sec Perth

Dear Ron, re Clay Table Healing

I have heard something “on the grapevine” about CTH which if correct (as it sounds) will be something that is pretty uniformly being goofed, at least in Australia.

It comes with the question “What should be near (body part)?”—as I understand it you want what should be near it, that is, the guy has a headache, body part “head”, should be near it is “no headache”. In other words, is the “should be near part” the absence of or reverse to, the condition being healed?

I was formerly taking anything that seemed to make sense to the pc so I bet plenty of other people have too—amazingly enough it’s even worked quite well too!


LRH:wmc rd Best,
Copyright (©) 1965 Ian
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

L. RON HUBBARD


** 6504C27 SHSBC-59 Awareness Levels

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 5 MAY 1965
Remimeo


APPLICATION
MORE ON THE APPLICATION OF SCIENTOLOGY TO CHILDREN


The following observations and experiences on the processing and training of children were written up and sent in to me by Founding Scientologist Marcia Townsend.

It is an excellent application of standard procedure to children and is released for general interest. It is especially noteworthy to see that standard 0-0 runs just as wonderfully on children as it does on older preclears.

These are all standard Scientology procedures.

April 5, 1965

Dear Ron:

As you may know, I have given my children several Scientology Courses. Vern and I started when Davy was 3, Denise 41/2 and Dane 51/2 and they were given a rigorous Academy Course. Surprisingly, it went well-but never flattened—even after a number of hours.

Next about 6 months later they received a shorter course based on the child’s version of “Watch Him” etc written by Rusty Wright then HCO Area Sec.* This was easier but still did not flatten completely.

In Phoenix a year and a half later I ran CCHs on all three children—again they would not flatten. The gains were very good-but signs of unflat processes appeared months afterward (despite gains like a body growth for all three children of 4 clothing sizes in 2l/2 months) during this time, etc.

When we moved to Los Angeles the McKees and we set up a children’s co-audit. I had been giving mine a co-audit for a few months previously so they had both an HAS Comm Course and a child’s co-audit at this time.

My observations on the use of the processes and training of children follow:

S-C-S run on the group of children as a whole outdoors with a “goon” to help.

Excellent gains—however we had to handle several “can’t stop” ones individually and it became more and more unflat after several hours. I found running a “follow the leader” type S-C-S easier and only 2 or 3 children at one time on this and you need to be on your toes!

On the smaller children mimic processes on the group and follow the leader type stuff with each one getting a turn at leading and winning at it before sitting down worked well. For example:

One child stands up and claps hands once in front-group follows. She being


[*For a full explanation of “Watch Him”, see BTB 5 November 1959R, Revised and Reissued 8 August 1974, Scientology Games for Children.]

shy at first, then claps twice—group follows (adult acts as a goon and makes sure the group does it). When she’s happily clapping over her head and back of her and smiling you then tell her “thank you” and she sits down and the other children do a job as leader one by one. Nearly all group process commands can be introduced in a child’s version like instead of “Look at the front wall”—the Leader (and the adult gets a turn too) points at the front wall—use: Pointing at the front wall—or touching it, etc. Almost any basic process can be made simple for children. The liability is it must be repeated often and long—the harder it is the longer it takes to flatten so only very simple ones can be used—the younger the child the simpler the process or motion must be run over and over to flatten it.

The participation of the group works very well—for instance you have each give an example of:

A time they won at something or some such and does the interest ever rise. Keep to one subject only!

The Comm Course works if very simply given. Confronting is used over and over with no invalidation smirks—comments, etc allowed. If a child is a real problem just watching until he feels he wants to participate sometimes helps. The main job of an adult teaching or supervising children is to see they do not invalidate or evaluate for one another. Also when a large group, switch teams occasionally and make sure no-one gets “cheated”. It seems children always elect one or two “most popular” and everyone wants them! Well, just switch every so often when it seems advisable and make sure everyone gets a chance. This way you can put 8 year olds with teenagers and still succeed.

“Itsa” ran well on the group in L.A. All but one or two did it very well and tone rose accordingly. Too detailed an “itsa” or too limited a subject however ran into some difficulties.

Later I tried to flatten S-C-S on my 3 children and did somewhat and got gains but again it didn’t flatten totally. I think anyone will find if one level isn’t flattened as “itsa” before going on to the next level that the next level will only partially flatten—if at all! Unless run forever with very good wins and then by that time the level beneath it would have run and flattened anyway—right?

So the best method to use on children is the one I am currently using I feel. It is as follows:

Comm Course: Only confronting (which my children have had hours and hours of), no coach, no auditor.

PE Course: Only words to define like

auditor preclear

session etc

very simple ones done old PE style and “hours” spent on each one with more than a few cognitions per child on each and every word—going back over each word again and again to be sure each is completed!

And the real meat:

Each running the same commands: zero-zero

“What are you willing to talk to me about?”

“What would you like to tell me about that?”

And altho’ we’ve only had a few sessions (we run 3 sessions [2 in session and one observer] 10 minutes each—5 min breaks or a total of 45 min) 2 or 3 times a week.

This zero-zero is fabulous! It is even flattening unflat processes. For instance my older boy has had some auditing on o/w! He will run a few answers like o/w and come off a withhold then something a bit lighter and etc. Runs wonderfully well. My daughter has trouble usually talking to her “brothers”. She is running real well on this. She’s telling them all about her boyfriends and her feminine things-her room, etc.

My smallest has trouble keeping an itsa going but on this he starts to run present time objects and it leads right into an itsa every time!

What I like is that it seems to be flattening some unflat processes in a funny sort of way. And I won’t need to go to a different command for ages as it seems to be running what can be run on the higher levels just using this one command!


SUMMARY

People nearly always overestimate what needs to be done to a child for good gains.

And they nearly always underestimate how long it takes to really flatten just one thing! (Hours and hours.)

Any really simple process could be adapted but would not flatten totally unless the itsa was in totally. That’s a tall order.

I feel zero-zero run flat on a child is the biggest gift a parent can give him.


TIPS

Do not try to squash their enthusiasm. Instead channel it! If they goof running sessions take them aside after and tell them and let them know that you know they can do better. Never use auditing or training as a punishment or as a last resort.

Auditing should be a “prize”, a “gift”! It helps to make them earn it—doing chores or helping out ! I’ve even gone so far as to make ‘em pay money ! It’s valuable! Be sure they understand this!


L. RON HUBBARD















LRH :wmc.rd
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 5 MAY 1965
REISSUED 4 JULY 1970

Remimeo


CLASSIFICATION, GRADATION AND
AWARENESS CHART


You will find a chart enclosed in The Auditor Issue 8. It covers many things.

There are about 52 levels of awareness from Unexistence up to the state of CLEAR.

By “Level of Awareness” is meant that of which a being is aware.

A being who is at a level on this scale is aware only of that level and the others below it.

To get a case gain such a person must become aware of the level next above him. And so on up in orderly sequence, level by level.

If you skip a person on one level several levels up, he or she will experience only an unreality and will not react. This is expressed as “no-case-gain”. On the E-Meter it registers as “No Tone Arm Action” meaning there is no meter registry of change on the meter control lever (tone arm).

A person audited a bit below or at his level of awareness gets “Tone Arm Action”, Case Gain and has cognitions (new concepts of life).

A principal contribution of Scientology is the technology necessary to change people so that they progress into higher states of ability when processed on the exact processes required by an auditor qualified by training to apply the processes expertly.

It is not only general ability that increases, but IQ, renewed livingness and the skill and ability to better self and conditions.

The state of homo sapiens runs from around - 4 down to the bottom. Normal is probably much lower.

As you study the chart you will see it is a road map upward.

On the left we see the Class of the Auditor necessary to take the person up as well as the Grade the preclear reaches.

In the next column we see his certificate name, obtained through his training at an Academy and, later, Saint Hill.

Then we see a very general description of the processes used on that grade.

The next column shows what pcs a classified auditor can audit. He can audit anyone at his Class numeral or below. He cannot audit pcs higher because of course he has not been trained to do so and is likely to have upset pcs.

The final column shows where the certificate and class is obtained.

THE BRIDGE

This is the famous bridge mentioned at the end of Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health.

It is now complete and is functioning. The being enters it from somewhere in the minus regions as a Beginning Scientologist and moves on up. At about Grade II he has definitely reached Homo Novis. He becomes a RELEASE somewhere between II and V. And he becomes CLEAR at the top of VI. The state of Operating Thetan is attained above VI and is a Grade VII.

For Man to have this at all is quite remarkable. He never had it before since we find him improving but still, on the average, well below - 4.

By following this chart one can make RELEASE and then CLEAR.

Up to Grade V one of course has help. But above that technical limitations bar completely the idea of CO-auditing. Some auditors will attempt it, themselves very far from there case-wise, and some have tried to show untrained pcs how to “solo audit” with a meter. The common result is that the pcs eventually collapse in a total overwhelm as they are not trained to handle such forces and so it is a cruel thing to do.

The preclear moves safely on the proper bridge and somewhere along the line must be trained in the classifications that match his Grade. Then (and only then) can he make it all the way.

One can be audited quite a ways. Then he had better get trained from zero on up.

You see here some new certificates. These were made necessary by the gap which existed between the higher-toned public person (- 5) and the beginning of the span. We had to have a longer approach on the bridge. And so we put a certificate ladder there.

Beginning Scientologist is given for a PE and so on up as the chart shows.

The Class material has not been changed. If anyone has a Class Zero he is still a Class Zero but we will give him a new certificate to replace his old one. And so on. There is no change in Grades and Certificates from Class II up. Class V has been blank for years. Thus there is a proper certificate there, the HUBBARD VALIDATED AUDITOR. It says this auditor has been through a review of all his lower skills plus new ones and can jump off now for Solo and CLEAR.

Previously we not only did not reach into the average homo sapiens awareness but we also had no means of touching cases much below - 4.

You are probably intrigued by Class VII. These Power Processes are what the CLEAR (or Auditor almost there) audits on low level pcs. Auditors below that case level can of course run them a bit but the processes shortly cave him in. These processes are only available at Saint Hill as they have just recently been perfected and an auditor to do them without danger to himself or the pc has to have interned at Saint Hill as a Saint Hill HGC staff auditor, not the same as a Class VI Saint Hiller.

The thing to do is start in your local Academy at Zero on the chart and move on up.

Today that is faster and less expensive than you would think.

There are two courses to one class. First one does the Certificate Course (Theory) and gets his certificate. This takes the average student about two weeks. Then one takes the Classification Course (Practical) for that class and gets his Provisional Classification. Every auditor must be classified now. This again takes the average student about two weeks. All the courses from Class 0 up to IV are arranged that way.

The material has been streamlined. Class V, obtained at Saint Hill, is longer (and remains the same price as always) as it reviews all the classes and retrains where necessary and awards permanent classification for all the lower certificates as well as Class V.

Some auditing occurs in the Classification Course and group auditing occurs daily.

An unclassed auditor cannot charge a fee for auditing a grade he is not classed for and if he is turned in to HCO because of it the pc can regain all the fee from him. We must make it a safe bridge. Our entire Ethics system is formed just to make it a safe passage for the pc and to hold the bridge together so it can be crossed by Man.

Auditors routinely make Releases with Academy courses today.

Auditors graduated from the Saint Hill course can then take the final steps to make themselves Clear and Saint Hill Interns are trained to make Releases of the lowest cases.

Training fees are uniform in the U.S. now at $100 for each course. In all Commonwealth countries the cost is £28 a course sterling (convert to local currency). There is one course for Certificate, followed by another for Classification.

Field auditors can charge anything they like for HAS and Beginning Scientologist courses. And Hubbard Book Auditors can become HQS through extension courses. Your org may possibly give the lowest course free and charge very little for the HAS.

--------------

My job is to give you the materials to make Releases and the skill to make Clear. I have done and will do everything I can to help anyone attain these hitherto unreachable heights of life and ability.

The bridge is not only in, it is functioning every hour right now. Book early. The traffic is heavy already. And auditors are the scarcest and most valued beings on this planet.


L. RON HUBBARD




LRH:nt.aap
Copyright © 1965, 1970
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED










SAINT HILL SPECIAL BRIEFING COURSE LECTURES
11—18 May 1965

** 6505C11 SHSBC-60 ARC Breaks and PTPs, the Differentiation
** 6505C18 SHSBC-61 Organization and Ethics



HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 10 MAY 1965
(Revised and reissued on 19 Sept 1967)
Remimeo
Issue a copy
to every Person
attaining Release
Qual Pers Hats
Tech Pers Hats
Students
RELEASES
VITAL DATA


Persons who have attained Grade V and VA Release may not be audited on any processes except assists, By Passed Charge Assessments, Present Time Problems, and missed withholds until they are trained up to Level VI and started on R6 processes unless a lower level including Dianetic Release was later found to be missed.

Although the training of the Release is necessary, and auditing knowledge of lower level process is vital, the Release’s case as a case must be left alone except as above.

The only thing left is the R6 bank itself and low level auditing becomes unworkable on a person already Released up to Grade V.

When we called a Release a “Keyed out Clear” we erred in giving any further casual auditing. It was this which made the state of Release look unstable when it seemed so—the person was further audited to relieve him or her of locks, secondaries and engrams which had ceased to exist.

Withholds may be pulled, present time problems may be lightly handled, even By Passed Charge Assessments may be run, touch assists and ordinary brief repair processes may be used on a Release.

The Release can audit lower level processes than V with complete safety.

Auditing a Release on repetitive Comm processes, etc., etc., or doing any continued sessioning will only key in the only thing left—the R6 bank.

A Release is stable as long as he or she is not pushed into the R6 bank.

The next step for a Grade VA Release in auditing is R6 EW. However the Release may not begin this until auditing skill is acquired by coming up the levels.

It will now become quite common for a student to be Released by a Clear and then study and audit his way up the grades to VII.

Nobody can do the VII clearing job for him but himself, and fragmentary auditing training will only lead him to mess up his case when he comes to Grade VI and VII auditing.

On the other hand a Release with his high IQ and ability can scoot up the Classes at considerable speed if not stopped by having to be audited as part of his training.

There is no special concession made to a Release by way of checksheets or a different kind of Course. The Release must move on up through the Classes Course by Course like any other student.

There are two saving graces to being a Release as far as training is concerned:

1. The Release ordinarily experiences a heightened ability to put his life to rights economically; and

2. The heightened IQ and ability reflects in speed of study and comprehension.

A person does not have more Scientology data just because he or she is a Release. The Release simply acquires it much faster and exhibits more skill doing it.

For example, a student able before Release, to get only one or two passes a week on a Course should be able, when Released, to get ten times that.

The Release is cautioned not to fool about with the R6 materials until fully trained and to pay no attention to suppressive persons who “seek to show him in an hour or two how to audit and run R6 and be clear.”

The safe way is the correct way. Leave the Reactive mind alone until one is fully trained as an auditor. Then go on to Clear.

A Release is also warned that he becomes a particular target for suppressive persons who seek to invalidate his auditing and gains and to report them promptly to the nearest Hubbard Communications Office. Such people become afraid when they see another get better and are usually psychotic.

--------------

The next action for a person who has attained Release is to take the next Course in Scientology and move on through to Clear properly. This is shown on the Gradation Chart issued in May 1965, and later issues. There is no other way to Clear.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder





LRH:mh.jp.rd
Copyright © 1965, 1967
by L. Ron Hubbard ALL
RIGHTS RESERVED

















[This 19 Sept. 1967 issue contains the following changes: (1) in paragraph 1, addition of “unless a lower level including Dianetic Release was later found to be missed”, (2) in paragraph 3, addition of phrase “up to Grade V”, (3) in paragraph 10, word “grades” used instead of “Classes”, (4) in paragraph 11, “Grade VI and VII auditing” instead of “Class VI”.]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 17 MAY 1965

Remimeo
TECH DIV
QUAL DIV

URGENT


CCHs

(Cancels HCO Pol Ltr 15 May 62)


The CCHs are PROCESSES. They are not drills.

HCO Pol Ltr of 15 May 1962 (replacing 2 Nov 61 HCO Pol Ltr) was written by staff. It is CANCELLED. Processes are not drills. Nobody may convert hereafter a process to a drill.

The Upper Indoc TRs are the drills that teach the CCHs.

The CCHs are then run on pcs.

S-C-S processes may not be drills.

Processes are done on pcs.

Drills are done by students to accustom them to the actions that will be necessary in doing processes.

Upper Indoc contains TRs 5 to 9. These are done as the ONLY practical actions leading to the student being able to run the processes called the CCHs.

To use a PROCESS as a DRILL leaves it unflat on students and is one of the many reasons why auditing has been taken out of Academies.

During the past few years, unbeknownst to me, a whole sphere of action built up which made students drill processes. I swear, there has been a “practical drill” made out of half the processes we have.

These were all abolished as DRILLS in HCO Pol Ltr 16 April AD15.

Drills are just actions the student has to become familiar with before doing processes. The actual process is NEVER used as a drill. Because it is left unflat. A drill takes the action the auditor will use when doing a process and gets him familiar with it. That’s all.


L. RON HUBBARD





LRH:mh.rd
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 22 MAY 1965
Replaces HCO Bulletin of 23 April 1964
Remimeo
Franchise
Sthil Students
SCIENTOLOGY III


AUDITING BY LISTS


The earlier genus of this process was Sec Checking on the Joburg. With no reference to these, I recently developed for Level III a process called Auditing by Lists. Any list can be used.

As a preview to the process I asked staff member Roger Biddell to use List One. The questions were generalized. Instead of “Have I____”, “Has there been____” was used. Otherwise the question remained the same as given in the HCO Bulletin for L. l. He ran the process for some hours on a preclear with excellent results and summarized my verbal and written instructions as applied.

AUDITING BY LISTS
L.1.

Use meter at sensitivity 16.

Use ARC Break assessment List l. The questions asked are generalized and without time limiters.

i.e. Has a withhold been missed?
Have you been given a wrong goal? etc.

Begin with List 1. Ask the first line of this list while watching the meter for an instant read.

If the line does not read, say, “That’s clean” and move on to the next line of the list and do the same action with this new line.

If the pc has something to say about a line that is clean, let him say it, acknowledge it and then you ask the next line. Don’t Q and A.

If the line when asked has an instant read say, “That reads” then, “What do you consider this could be?” or, “What considerations do you have about this?”

Let the pc answer all he wants to. While he is giving his considerations, mark down any blowdowns of the TA and what he was talking of at the moment of the blowdown.

When the pc has given all his considerations say, “Thank you. I’ll check the line on the meter” and call the line again. If it instant reads say, “There’s another read here” then again ask for considerations, etc.

Continue these actions until the line goes clean.

When clean say, “That’s clean” then—

“Of what you have told me on this line, what do you consider the main thing to be here?”

When pc has answered say, “Thank you.”

Then, “I want to indicate that the meter gave us our biggest blowdown ______on (Indicate charge to the pc by repeating the charge named in the question, not the charge announced by the preclear) and that charge had been bypassed on this. “

Then move on to the next line.

When List 1 is completed, and then List 1, then List 1 and so on.

If running correctly, the TA total should increase from session to session. The pc should get more and more blowdowns on his considerations. Then he should get blowdowns on what he considers the main thing is and finally get blowdowns on your indication of the bypassed charge.

Don’t Q and A. Don’t take up or do anything with the pc’s considerations. Don’t ever say, “That still reads.” It’s always “Another read” as “It still reads” makes the pc feel he has not answered the question.

This process gets charge off the case.


L. RON HUBBARD

LRH:ml.rd
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED



[This HCO B was replaced by HCO B 27 July 1965, Auditing by Lists, Volume VI-64, and by HCO B 3 July 1971, Auditing by Lists Revised, Volume VII-316, which also cancelled the 27 July 1965 issue. ]
























SAINT HILL SPECIAL BRIEFING COURSE LECTURE
25 May 1965


** 6505C25 SHSBC-62 The Five Conditions

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

Remimeo HCO POLICY LETTER OF 27 MAY 1965
Sthil Cl VII Course
Students Qual & Tech Divs
Sthil Staff All HATS
Ethics HATS
Star-Rated Check HCO Div
All HATS

PROCESSING

Since 1950 we have had an ironbound rule that we didn’t leave pcs in trouble just to end a session.

For fifteen years we have always continued a session that found the pc in trouble and I myself have audited a pc for nine additional hours, all night long in fact, just to get the pc through.

Newer auditors, not trained in the stern school of running engrams, must learn this all over again.

It doesn’t matter whether the auditor has had a policy on this or not—one would think that common decency would be enough—as to leave a pc in the middle of a secondary or an engram and just coolly end the session is pretty cruel. Some do it because they are startled or afraid and “Rabbit” (run away by ending the session). Auditors who end a process or change it when it has turned on a heavy somatic are likewise ignorant.

WHAT TURNS IT ON WILL TURN IT OFF.

This is the oldest rule in auditing.

Of course people get into secondaries and engrams, go through misemotion and heavy somatics. This happens because things are running out. To end off a process or a session because of the clock is to ignore the real purpose of auditing.

The oldest rules we have are

(a) GET THE PC THROUGH IT.
(b) WHAT TURNS IT ON WILL TURN IT OFF.
(c) THE WAY OUT IS THE WAY THROUGH.

These now are expressed as POLICY. A falsified auditor’s report is also subject to a Court of Ethics. Any auditor violating this policy letter is liable to an immediate Court of Ethics convened within 24 hours of the offence or as soon as is urgently possible.

Auditing at all levels works well when it is done by the book.

The purpose of Ethics is to open the way for and get in Tech. Then we can do our job.

THERE IS NO MODERN PROCESS THAT WILL NOT WORK WHEN EXACTLY APPLIED.

Therefore in the eyes of Ethics all auditing failures are Ethics failures—PTS, Suppressive Persons as pcs, or non-compliance with tech for auditors.

And the first offence an auditor can commit is ceasing to audit when he is most needed by his pc.

Hence it is the first most important consideration of Ethics to prevent such occurrences.

Then we’ll make happy pcs, Releases and Clears.

LRH:wmcjh L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 4 JUNE 1965
Remimeo
Franchise
Sthil Students
CLASS II MODEL SESSION

(Amends and cancels HCO Bulletin of May 19, 1964)


The Class II Model Session has the benefit of requiring no other Rudiments process (except in the Havingness Questions) than the question itself. There are, therefore, no additional processes except Havingness.

Beware of any Q and A in using this script (HCO Bulletin May 24, 1962 [ l ] ).

Don’t stray off Model Session into unusual questions or processes. Use Model Session as the surround for processes to be run on the pc. Don’t use it as a process.

Questions are asked of the pc and not checked on the needle. Auditor watches meter and records TA.

SESSION PRELIMINARIES

All auditing sessions have the following preliminaries done in this order.

1. Seat the pc and adjust his or her chair.

2. Clear the Auditing room with “Is it all right to audit in this room?” (not metered).

3. Can squeeze, “Put your hands in your lap.” “Squeeze the cans, please.” And note that pc registers on the meter by the squeeze read on the meter, and note the level of the pc’s havingness. (Don’t run hav here.)

4. Put in R Factor by telling pc briefly what you are going to do in the session. (What you intend to run.)

START OF SESSION:

“Is it all right with you if I begin this session now?”

“START OF SESSION.”
“Has this session started for you?” (If pc says, “No,” say again, “START OF SESSION. Now has this session started for you?”)

BEGINNING RUDIMENTS:

GLL: “What goals would you like to set for this session?”

O/W: One would run General O/W if the pc was emotionally upset at the beginning of the session or if the session did not start for the pc, the latter being simply another indication of the pc’s being upset or ARC broken, but these symptoms must be present, as sometimes the session hasn’t started merely because of poor Tone 40 or because the pc had something he wanted to say before the auditor started the session.

RUNNING O/W:

“If it is all right with you, I am going to run a short general process. The process is: ‘What have you done?’, ‘What have you not done?’ “ (The process is run very

permissively until the needle looks smooth and the pc is no longer emotionally disturbed. )
“Where are you now on the time track?”
“If it is all right with you, I will continue this process until you are close to present time and then end this process.” (After each command ask, “When?”)
“That was the last command. Is there anything you would care to ask or say before I end this process?”
“End of process.”

Aud: “Are you willing to talk to me about your troubles?” “What trouble aren’t you willing to talk to me about?”

W/h. “Since the last time I audited you, have you done anything you are withholding?” (If pc says, “Yes”) “What was it?”

PTP. “Do you have a present time problem?” “What is the problem?”

START OF PROCESS:

“Now I would like to run this process on you (name it). What would you say to that?” (Get pc’s agreement; if not obtainable, choose another process unless old process is not complete.)

MIDDLE RUDIMENTS:

“In this session is there anything you have suppressed, not-ised, failed to reveal, or been careful of?” “What was it?”

END OF PROCESS NON-CYCLICAL:

“If it is all right with you, I will give this command two more times and then end this process.” (Gives command two more times.)
“Is there anything you would care to ask or say before I end this process?” “End of process.”

END OF PROCESS CYCLICAL:

“Where are you now on the time track?”
“If it is all right with you, I will continue this process until you are close to present time and then end this process.” (After each command ask, “When?”)
“That was the last command. Is there anything you would care to ask or say before I end this process?”
“End of process.”

END RUDIMENTS:

1/2-Un T. “In this session, have you told me any half-truth, untruth, or said something only to impress me, or tried to damage anyone?” “What was it?”

? or C: “In this session, have you failed to answer any question or command?” “What question or command did you fail to answer?”

Dec: “In this session, is there anything you have decided?” “What was it?”

W/h: “In this session, have you thought, said, or done anything I have failed to find out?” “What was it?”

Aud: “In this session, has anything been misunderstood?” “What was it?”

GOALS & GAINS:

“Have you made any of these goals for this session?” “Thank you for making these goals for this session,” or “Thank you for making some of these goals for this session. I’m sorry you didn’t make all of them,” or “I’m sorry you didn’t make these goals for this session.”

“Have you made any gains in this session that you would care to mention?” “Thank you for making these gains for this session,” or “I’m sorry you didn’t make any gains for this session.”

HAVINGNESS:

(After adjusting the meter) “Put your hands in your lap. Please squeeze the cans.” (If the squeeze test was not all right, the Auditor would run the pc’s Havingness process until the can squeeze gives an adequate response.)

END OF SESSION:

“Is there anything you would care to ask or say before I end this session?”

“Is it all right with you if I end this session now?”

“END OF SESSION. Has this session ended for you?” (If pc says, “No,” repeat, “END OF SESSION.” If session still not ended, say, “The session has been ended. “)

Most flagrant errors that can be made:

1. Fumbling with script, not knowing Model Session.

2. Failing to get in the R Factor by telling pc what you are going to do at each new step.

3. Doing only what the pc suggests.

4. Adding unusual questions or remarks or making sudden irrelevant statements.

5. Using parts of Model Session as repetitive processes which deter the completion of auditing cycles already begun.

6. Failure to complete the Auditing Comm Cycle on any part of Model Session.


L. RON HUBBARD

LRH: mh.rd
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED










SAINT HILL SPECIAL BRIEFING COURSE LECTURE
8 June 1965

** 6506C08 SHSBC-63 Handling the PTS

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 14 JUNE 1965
Issue II
Remimeo
Students
TECH DIVISION

QUAL DIVISION

STUDENTS


SUMMARY REPORT


In order to expedite the handling and review of case folders and in order to teach Auditors how to quickly and concisely analyze and report on a case, the following is the summary form to be used:

1. The date of the summary report is in the upper right-hand corner.

2. On the top line is PC: AUDITOR:_______________________

The preclear’s name is written in and underscored and the auditor’s name is written in and underscored.

3. Indent for the beginning paragraph and write the following:

PROCESS RUN: TA: TIME:_________

The above will be printed in BLOCK letters. The auditor gives the process run, the total tone arm action for the session and the length of the session in hours and minutes.

4. Indent again for the next paragraph and write the following:

GOALS & GAINS.

The auditor should now note whether the preclear made his goals and gains for the session or whether the goals and gains were sour. Any highly unrealistic goal should be noted down by the auditor also.

5. Indent for the next paragraph and write the following:

ASPECTS OF RUNNING PROCESS:

Here write down briefly what the preclear was doing in the session. Do not write opinions with regard to what was happening or how the preclear was running the process. Here we are interested in the aspects of the case in relationship to the process or processes being run.

We are interested in the following:

How the preclear is doing on the process in relation to what is being run.
Any signs indicating whether or not the process is near to the desired flat point or at the desired flat point.
Emotional tone of the preclear and whether this improved.
Discharges of misemotion.
Absence or appearance of communication lags.
Preclear appearance.

Any difficulty in session.
Whether or not the preclear is cogniting.
General needle behaviour.
Somatics turning on and blowing.

6. Indent for the next paragraph and write the following:

ETHICS REPORT:

Here you must note any action you have taken as regards reports to Ethics. So far any Ethics report has been undertaken for the auditor, when it is the auditor’s responsibility to turn in an Ethics report on anyone invalidating or suppressing your preclear’s auditing and on your preclear if you find your preclear to be engaging in any action which requires reporting. Further, if you think your preclear may be a Potential Trouble Source or a Suppressive Person, you must ask for this to be reviewed by the Case Officer in the Department of Review.

7. Indent for the next paragraph and write the following:

SUGGEST:

Here briefly suggest what is required—the process to be continued, the next process to be run, or the preclear to be reviewed by the Case Officer.

This summary should be done for the auditing session given the preclear for the day and put in front of the preclear’s folder, but not stapled to the auditing report form or worksheets. Two sessions in one day calls for only one summary report with the TA and data of each session. It should be LEGIBLE and READABLE. If an auditor’s handwriting is poor, it should be printed out by the auditor.

Writing the reports should only take the auditor about 15 minutes to do at the most. Having just audited the preclear, you should quite easily fill the report out. Do these reports on the proper paper for the Division, 8 x 10 [inches] and leave enough space for directions to be given.


L. RON HUBBARD


LRH: mh.rd
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED














[This HCO B is amended by HCO B 24 January 1969 which is amended by HCO B 17 March 1969 both titled Summary Report. The 17 March 1969 issue is amended by HCO B 20 June 1970, which is cancelled by BTB 20 June 1970, both titled Summary Report. A copy of the latter can be found in BTB 6 November 1972R, Issue V, Auditor Admin Series 12R, The Summary Report Form, Volume IX-35. None of these amendments are written by LRH.]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 17 JUNE 1965


Remimeo

ALL TECH DIV
ALL QUAL DIV
ETHICS SECTION
CLASS VII INTERNES


STAFF AUDITOR ADVICES


No Staff Auditor or Interne or organization auditor or any auditor on a Staff Co-audit may seek advices on what to do from any person except the officially appointed person doing the auditing folders.

Seeking advice on cases verbally or in writing from the person not doing the folders is OFF LINE except in Ethics matters when Ethics may be consulted or Saint Hill advised.

When an auditor seeks advice off-line and accepts it, unbeknownst to the official supervising the auditing via the folders, a random factor is introduced into the running of cases that can be quite fatal.

At Saint Hill, on Power Processes, such an action is a crime as the consequences can be so catastrophic to cases run on Power Processes.

The proper sources of instruction are tapes and HCOBs. Adding bits to these that aren’t there is the commonest auditor error.

Asking for unusual solutions from a case supervisor who is doing the folders is a sure sign that the last directives have not been followed; giving instructions that are unusual is useless because they won’t be complied with either.

The Dev-T situation of asking for advice off-line burdens lines and fouls up cases.

COMM CYCLE AND ETHICS

When an auditor has a fractured comm cycle very often processing still works on the average pc.

When an auditor has a fractured comm cycle and the pc is an Ethics type case (SP, PTS, W/Hs) a mess ensues. One can always tell if an auditor’s comm cycle is poor or if the Code is being broken because when put on an Ethics type pc, things collapse.

When a pc won’t run, one can be sure that

1. The Auditor’s Comm Cycle is out and

2. The pc is an Ethics type case.

When both these are present, no results can possibly occur.

When only one is present, usually the auditing works somewhat.

CASE SUPERVISOR PUZZLE

When a Case Supervisor doing folders sees a process going wrong, he should not blame the process or his own advice if these are even faintly educated.

Instead the pc is an Ethics type or the Auditor’s Comm Cycle is out.

If neither of these seem to be the case and things still go wrong then the auditor just isn’t running what he says he is or running what he is supposed to run.

If all the above seems not to be the case, then the auditor is seeking off-line advices and some screwball interpretation has been added to the process.

A clever Case Supervisor marking folders, goes by the text—case running well, continue the standard approach. Case not running well, send to Review for analysis REGARDLESS OF ANY AUDITING TIME LOST.

When a pc goes to Review, it is clever to send the auditor to the Review Cramming Section to check over his Auditor’s Code and Comm Cycle with TRs.

If when auditor and pc still don’t run well, send the pc to Ethics. (Review may already have done so.)

ETHICS

If the Case Supervisor ever finds an auditor not following instructions or seeking or taking off-line directions he must at once send the auditor to Ethics. It is usually an Ethics Hearing and a minor suspension.

If a Case Supervisor doing the folders finds a false report has been made, he must send the offender to Ethics.

WITHHOLDS

A pc is not sent to Ethics because of withholds gotten off in a session. However, on the Invalidation button one commonly finds suppressive persons around the pc and the auditor must send the pc to Ethics at session end to get the matter disconnected or handled.

Sometimes one finds another person’s offences than the pc’s in getting off withholds. These are reported to Ethics for investigation.

TEXT BOOK

D of P work is completely text book. PC doing okay—get on with it as per the process, the next process to be run, or the next grade.

PC not doing okay—to Review to find out why.

If Review finds pc is an Ethics type, sends pc to Ethics.

It’s all text book. It is so easy.


L. RON HUBBARD



LRH:mh.bp.cden
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 18 JUNE 1965
Remimeo
Franchise
CLASS III AND UP
CLASS VII CHECK SHEET

CLEAR AND OT BEHAVIOUR


We know all the attributes of Clear and Operating Thetans.

In the history of this universe there has never been a true Clear or true OT.

Every Clear ever encountered in this universe was a Keyed-out Clear—a Release. He still had all his bank, GPMs and engrams. They were simply keyed out and not influencing him.

We have known that for some time. But here is a new one.

Every Operating Thetan in the history of this universe was only a KEYED-OUT OT!

This is startling. It accounts for the wild conduct of some OTs. They still had a complete bank (all their GPMs and engrams, secondaries, the lot). This bank could be restimulated causing them to indulge in bad conduct. When it was restimulated too much they suddenly ceased to be OT and became powerless and human or animal.

Thus there has not only never been a real Clear in this universe, also there has never been a real Operating Thetan! Every one contacted on the track or history had an R6 bank, momentarily keyed out.

This is then the Roller Coaster effect one encounters in one’s own history—OT— aberree—Clear—aberree—OT—aberree, etc, depending on accidental key-outs and keyins of the bank.

We are for the first time in the history of the universe making real Clears and real OTs, no bank.

You may accidentally make a keyed-out OT as well as a Release.

And if you don’t go on auditing even in that session he or she will stay that way.

I have good subjective reality on making keyed-out Clear and keyed-out OT in auditing. And also on being overrun.

Auditors must be trying for a result not a number of hours. Then they’ll see some of these phenomena.

The trick is stopping when the result is obtained !

It can be fatal even to conclude the session in which keyed-out Clear (Release) or keyed-out OT were attained. Just say, “Oh! That’s it!” And STOP. This is true for all attainable phenomena, even getting well. An overrun brings it back.


LRH: ml.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 26 JUNE 1965
Remimeo
Qual Div Hats
Tech Div Hats
Good Supply to Review

HGC PC REVIEW AUDITING FORM


When the Case Officer of Review receives a pc from the HGC for “Review” he instantly and immediately gets the pc into Session and handles the following form only. All Handling of this form is counted as Auditing time in Review.

The D of P and Tech Division must not say what is wrong with the pc or what to do with the pc as this is monitored by the very firm broad policy that Tech cannot order Review.

The Case Officer checks all these things. They are done on a Meter. Significant TA actions noted on the lines on which they occur with pc holding the cans.



NAME OF PC DATE _______________

1. PC’S FOLDER IN HAND

CONTAINS GRAPH PC BEGINNING ASSMT FORM_____

2. PC BEEN INVOICED INTO REVIEW AT CHARGE_____________________

3. PC’S HGC AUDITORS (TAKEN FROM FOLDER)______________________

4. ARC BREAK
SESSION ASSMT_________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

ENVIRONMENT ASSMT___________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

5. IGNORED PC ORIGINATIONS _____________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

6. MISSED WITHHOLDS_____________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

CLEAN__________________________________________________________

7. PRESENT TIME PROBLEM_________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

CLEAN__________________________________________________________

8. CLEANED CLEANS ______________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

9. PROCESSES LEFT UNFLAT (BY FOLDER EXAMINATION)_____________

DATE OF SESSION _______________________________________________

PROCESS LEFT UNFLAT__________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

DATE OF SESSION _______________________________________________

PROCESS LEFT UNFLAT__________________________________________

DATE OF SESSION _______________________________________________

PROCESS LEFT UNFLAT__________________________________________

DATE OF SESSION _______________________________________________

10. PROCESS OVERRUN (BY FOLDER EXAMINATION)___________________

DATE OF SESSION _______________________________________________

PROCESS OVERRUN _____________________________________________

DATE OF SESSION _______________________________________________

11. NON-STANDARD PROCESSES _____________________________________

12. BAD AUDITING COMM CYCLE_____________________________________

13. CODE BREAKS___________________________________________________

14. HIDDEN STANDARD (WHAT WOULD HAVE TO HAPPEN FOR YOU TO KNOW SCIENTOLOGY WORKS) ___________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

SPOTTED________________________________________________________

15. PC AND DRUGS (TAKING ANY DRUGS) ____________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

16. ALCOHOL_______________________________________________________

17. ENOUGH SLEEP _________________________________________________

ENOUGH FOOD (BREAKFAST)_____________________________________

(LUNCH)________________________________________________________

(DINNER) _______________________________________________________

18. MIXED THERAPIES (ANY OTHER TREATMENT IN PROGRESS)________

________________________________________________________________

19. CONNECTED TO A SUPPRESSIVE PERSON__________________________

20. CONNECTED TO A SUPPRESSIVE GROUP___________________________

21. HERE TO GET DATA FOR SOMEONE ELSE___________________________

22. HERE BECAUSE SOMEONE ELSE DEMANDED IT_____________________

23. FORMER RELEASE_______________________________________________

24. FORMER THETAN EXTERIOR______________________________________

25. SELF AUDITING DURING INTENSIVE ______________________________

26. BEING AUDITED BY SOMEONE ELSE DURING INTENSIVE OTHER THAN HGC AUDITOR_____________________________________________

27. CRIMINAL RECORD OR CRIME FOR WHICH YOU COULD BE ARRESTED______________________________________________________

28. INSANE ASYLUM HISTORY_______________________________________

29. HERE TO BE CURED OF SOMETHING NOT MENTIONED______________

________________________________________________________________

30. UNPAID DEBTS TO ORGS_________________________________________

31. KNOWLEDGE OF A CRIME AGAINST SCIENTOLOGY_________________

32. WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF SCIENTOLOGY WORKED ON EVERYONE __

________________________________________________________________

33. ANYTHING UPSETTING ABOUT THIS REVIEW______________________

34. HAS ANYTHING BEEN SUPPRESSED?______________________________

35. HAS ANYTHING BEEN INVALIDATED? _____________________________

36. HAS ANYTHING BEEN RUSHED? __________________________________

37. HAS ANYTHING BEEN MISSED?___________________________________

38. PC STATEMENT OF THE TROUBLE AS IT IS NOW____________________

39. READS I COULD NOT CLEAN UP___________________________________

40. BOOK OF CASE REMEDIES (IF PC NOT SOLVED BY THIS POINT)______

________________________________________________________________

41. OTHER ACTIONS CASE OFFICER HAD TO TAKE_____________________

________________________________________________________________

42. FALSE REPORTS_________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

STATE OF TA AT CONCLUSION________________________________________

TA DIVS DURING REVIEW_____________________________________________

PC TO ETHICS________________________________________________________

PC TO HGC __________________________________________________________

RECOMMENDATIONS_________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________

DATE CASE OFFICER SIGN ___________________

EXAMINER FINALLY DIRECTS

TO ETHICS TO HGC_______________________________


L. RON HUBBARD




LRH:mh.rd
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED












[The above HCO PL was amended or revised on the following dates: 13 October 1966, page 184; 26 January 1968, 15 March 1968, 9 April 1968, see footnote page 226; 19 April 1968, page 221; 16 December 1968, 15 May 1969, 7 September 1969, 7 April 1970, 8 August 1970, 17 September 1974, see footnote page 226; and 29 September 1974, Volume VIII, page 321.]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
BPI
Franchise HCO BULLETIN OF 28 JUNE AD15
Sthil Students
Remimeo RELEASES, DIFFERENT KINDS

There are different kinds of Releases.

They all have the similar meter phenomena: floating needle and on or near clear read on a calibrated Mark IV or Mark V.

There is the plain First Stage Release. This occurs in auditing up to Grade IV. It is not very stable. The person is very well off and definitely a Release. But he or she can now postulate and in postulating sometimes gets into the R6 Bank. The First Stage Release is eased out of the bank but subject to call-back.

Then there is the Power Process Release. This is very stable and should be called a Second Stage Release or a Power Release to be technically exact. You can run only Power Processes on a First Stage Release. These knock out all factors of the track that force a person back into the R6 Bank and leave the person able to go into or get out of the R6 Bank easily. This Second Stage Release is definitely Homo Novis. The person ceases to respond like a homo sapiens and has fantastic capability to learn and act.

The Third Stage Release (called for a few days a Second Stage before terminology was firm) is an improved Second Stage Release in that selective areas of learning are handled to return special skills to the person. The case state does not necessarily improve but certain zones of knowledge have been polished up.

There is another state near that of Release. This is a Keyed-Out-Operating Thetan. At this time it occurs sometimes by accident in Power Processing, but I think I will be able to process a Second Stage Release to it directly some day. The pc is still a pre clear though a Keyed-Out-OT. This really isn’t a Thetan Exterior. The Thetan Exterior is quite unstable and can be attained below an ordinary First Stage Release.

A real Clear is of course on the other side of the Reactive Bank and above all these states. It is completely stable. One needs to know how to audit to get there.

A real Operating Thetan is of course a Clear who has been familiarized with his environment to a point of total cause over Matter, Energy, Space, Time and Thought.

This accounts for all states of being discussed in Dianetics or Scientology. They are all attainable and only one, Keyed-Out-OT, is not done by routine auditing, being an offshoot of it that happens sometimes. The First Stage Release is as high as we got in Dianetics, so you can see we are five states of being above where we first arrived.

We are doing these today on a routine assembly line basis on all cases. Orgs do a lot of First Stage Releases. Saint Hill is doing Power Releases and moving people up to Clear through Academy and Saint Hill training.

A lot of cases would have to spend a lot more time in Power Processing if they weren’t already successfully processed in Grades 0 to IV.

The majority of cases even when trained, will not be able to go Clear without being Released.

And of course nobody is going to go OT before they have been Audited, Released, trained and cleared, all of which are currently standard actions in Scientology today.

We are definitely on our way.

LRH:mh.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

** 6506C29 SHSBC-64 The Well-Rounded Auditor

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 30 JUNE 1965

Remimeo
Review Hats
Qual Division

RELEASE, REHABILITATION OF
FORMER RELEASES AND
THETAN EXTERIORS


There are probably a great many processes that will recover the state of First Stage Release or First Stage Thetan Exterior or Released OT.

Poorest but easiest of these is plain Itsa. Itsa probably will not recover a floating needle but will pull down the TA. When it’s down, stop—don’t press your luck too far.

The real technical job (other than Itsa) requires expert metering and a thorough knowledge of dating on a meter and a smooth comm cycle.

Best at it would be an auditor who himself was a Former Release and who had himself (or herself) recovered the state.

The technically correct procedure is unfortunately a delicate one which requires good command of tech on the subject of the Time Track and perception of the pc and meter alert enough to stop exactly when Re-Release occurs and say “That’s It!” (Never say “End” in such sessions.)

Remember all recovery must be by Key-out, not erasure. Key-outs are done by finding Key-ins. It is de-stimulation, not re-stimulation. Therefore all must be smooth and jolly with no forcing or overrun.

The exact tech follows:

To regain a Former Release (or Thetan Exterior or Keyed-Out OT [Released OT]):

1. Loosely locate the session or time in which it occurred.

2. Get in Suppress, Invalidate buttons on the session or time.

3. Get in “Unacknowledged” or “What was unacknowledged”.

4. Indicate anything found to the pc, as By-Passed Charge.

5. Find the Key-in that was Keyed out in that time or session (the person went release because something keyed out in that time or session).

6. When this is found and recognized by the pc, the pc will then return to Release or Released OT.

7. If this does not happen, find what keyed in that ended the state and repeat (1) to (6) on it.

This is all rough to communicate to the pc who is not well trained.

This datum will help (a standard datum of early Dianetics): The analytical mind when it becomes aware of a point in the Reactive Mind, makes it vanish. In other

words one needs but become aware of the actual cause of an aberration to have it vanish.

We see this mainly in Cognitions. But it is the backbone of all auditing.

When the person was originally released he had become aware of something that caused the reactive mind to de-stimulate at that point or become weak. And so he Released. You have to find that point of sudden awareness again as in ( I ) to (6) above and if you miss it you can at least find (7). You could find both and in a lot of cases will probably do so. But if you win on ( I ) to (6), for heaven’s sakes don’t go on to (7). If you do (7) you may suddenly turn up with (5).

When you’ve done it realize you’ve done it and come off of it. Don’t overrun.

When you have done it, tell the person to get trained so he or she can go on to actual Clear.

LIABILITY

The Liability in all this is finding the original thing that was keyed in (which when keyed out gave Release).

If this happens you have a new key-in in the session you are running right now. It is a new key-in and is handled as one.


TECH COMMENT

This tells us that finding and running out key-ins will make a First Stage Release out of someone who has never been one. Standard Grade Processing does this.


L. RON HUBBARD






LRH: ml.rd
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

















[This HCO B is referred to and amplified by HCO B 21 July 1965, Release Rehabilitation, page 63, and HCO B 2 August 1965, Release Goofs, page 66.]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO POLICY LETTER OF I JULY 1965
Issue II
Remimeo
Tech Hats HCO Division
Qual Hats Tech Div
Qual Div


COMM CYCLE ADDITIVES


There are no additives permitted on the Auditing Comm Cycle.

Example: Getting the pc to state the problem after the pc has said what the problem is.
Example: Asking a pc if that is the answer.
Example: Telling pc “it didn’t react” on the meter.
Example: Querying the answer.

This is the WORST kind of auditing.

Processes run best MUZZLED. By muzzled is meant using ONLY TR 0, 1, 2, 3 and 4 by the text.

A pc’s results will go to HELL on an additive comm cycle.

There are a hundred thousand tricks that could be added to the Auditing Comm Cycle. EVERY ONE of them is a GOOF.

The ONLY time you ever ask for a repeat is when you couldn’t hear it.

Since 1950, I’ve known that all auditors talk too much in a session. The maximum talk is the standard model session and the TR 0 to 4 Auditing Comm Cycle ONLY.

It is a serious matter to get a pc to “clarify his answer”. It is in fact an Ethics matter and if done habitually is a Suppressive Act, for it will wipe out all gains. There are mannerism additives also.

Example: Waiting for the pc to look at you before you give the next command. (Pcs who won’t look at you are ARC Broken. You don’t then twist this to mean the pc has to look at you before you give the next command.)

Example: A lifted eyebrow at an answer.
Example: A questioning sort of ack.

The Whole Message is

GOOD AUDITING OCCURS WHEN THE COMM CYCLE ALONE IS USED AND IS MUZZLED.

Additives on the Auditing Comm Cycle are ANY ACTION, STATEMENT, QUESTION OR EXPRESSION GIVEN IN ADDITION TO TRs 0-4.

They are Gross Auditing Errors. And should be regarded as such.

Auditors who add to the Auditing Comm Cycle never make Releases. So, that’s Suppressive.

Don’t do it!

LRH:ml.cden L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [Reissued verbatim as HCO B 23 May 1971, Issue X.]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

Remimeo HCO BULLETIN OF 3 JULY 1965
All Students
Saint Hill Courses All Tech Activities
All Staff All Levels

0 to VII

MODEL SESSION REVISED

It is important for reasons of preventing restimulation to cancel and discard all issues and forms of Model Session and use only the following, particularly for Releasing.

The auditor examines the room to make sure it is all right to audit in, adjusts the pc’s chair and checks his E-Meter for battery up and set, gives the pc the cans and states “THIS IS THE SESSION.” Tone 40.

(The following rudiments are used only in metered sessions.)

“What gains have you had from your last session?” (Omitted on a pc’s very first session but not from the first session of an intensive: written in the right-hand column at the top.)

“Is there an ARC Break?” (On raw meat, “Are you upset by anything?”)

“Is there any current problem that will interfere with auditing?”

“Should you have told me anything you didn’t?”

“Has anything been suppressed?”

“Has anything been denied?”

“Has anything been rushed?”

“This is the process: (states process).” (If a new process, clear the commands.)

Body of session

“I will give you two more commands of this process.”

“That was the body of the session.”

“Are there any comments on the session?”

“That’s It.”

This is the totality of Model Session used. To add words to the patter is to risk restimulation and it is expressly forbidden to do so.

RELEASE REACHED

It is VITAL when the proper phenomenon of a process occurs that the process be promptly concluded.

It is VITAL on lower level auditing if a needle floats and TA comes down to between 2 and 3 that the process and the session be unobtrusively ended with a soft “That’s It” and the preclear sent to the Qualifications Division to be declared a Release. It is a Gross Auditing Error to run one command more.

With this Model Session, Releases will be more stable and sessions run better.


LRH :ml.jh L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [Clarified by HCO B 19 August 1965, page 78.]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 12 JULY 1965

Remimeo
Franchise
STATES OF BEING
ATTAINED BY PROCESSING

Types of Releases

The states of Release differ in that one is more stable than another.

The Reactive Mind (known also as the R6 Bank) can only be audited out by someone who is trained up to Class VI. When the Reactive Mind is fully audited out (erased completely) one has a Clear.

When a Clear has been refamiliarized with his capabilities you have an Operating Thetan (an OT).

A Release then is pulled OUT of his Reactive Mind.

A Clear has fully erased his Reactive Mind.

An Operating Thetan is one who is Cause over Matter Energy Space and Time and is not in a body.

The degree and relative permanence of being pulled out of the Reactive Mind determines the state of Release.

There are numerous things that can pull one back into the Reactive Mind.

These are (l) Locks (2) Secondaries (3) Engrams (4) The Whole Time Track.

Locks

By reducing locks as in Levels 0 to IV we then remove the ability of locks to pull the being back into his R6 Bank.

Locks are mental image pictures of non-painful but disturbing experiences the person has experienced. They depend for their force on secondaries and engrams.

Thus one who has had his locks reduced is a FIRST STAGE RELEASE.

Secondaries and Engrams

When a being has had the secondaries and engrams reduced he is far less likely to be pulled into the Reactive Mind than if he has just had their locks reduced.

Secondaries are mental image pictures containing misemotion (grief, anger, apathy, etc.). They contain no pain. They are moments of shock and stress and depend for their force on underlying engrams.

Engrams are mental image pictures of pain and unconsciousness the person has experienced.

When these are reduced one has a SECOND STAGE RELEASE.

The Whole Track

Bits and pieces of the whole track remain after the locks, secondaries and engrams are reduced. These bits inhibit the being from recovering knowledge.

The Whole Track is the moment to moment record of a person’s existence in this universe in picture and impression form.

When these bits are cleaned up, a being is a THIRD STAGE RELEASE.

Exterior

If a being is a 1st, 2nd or 3rd Stage Release and has also become exterior to his body in the process, we simply add “OT” to the state of Release. It is secondary in importance to the fact of being a Release. As soon as the being seeks to exert his “OT” powers he tends to restimulate his R6 bank and so goes back into his body.

This is all that is meant when a person is called a First Stage Released OT. The person has not only come out of his bank but also out of his body.

Processes

Many processes, all below Class V, make 1st Stage Releases. We have been making them for 15 years. When audited on low level grades after being released by them, the person goes into his secondaries and engrams. He can be fished back out again by modem technology and can easily regain the state of First Stage Release.

Power Processes alone can be run on a First Stage Release. These vanquish the secondaries and engrams. This requires very expert Class VII auditors as it is touchy work. These make a Second Stage Release.

In doing the earlier Power Processes the preclear often attains First Stage Release or First Stage Released OT. Only doing all the basic Power Processes (including one called Pr Pr 6) makes a Second Stage Release.

Certain Advanced Power Processes make a Third Stage Release. These mainly recover knowledge and smooth out one’s understanding of the awareness of the environment achieved by Second Stage Release on Power Processing.

Clear
The R6 Bank

When a being has been trained up to Class VI and has been given the materials of the basic Reactive Mind to audit out (they took years to find and are too complex to be tackled without training and the actual patterns), he can then attain the state of Clear.

The Reactive Mind is composed of significance and masses as old as the Universe itself and is the basic cause of the decline of the individual. Each person has his own basic bank but they are all exactly alike. The materials are quite useless and inhibiting.

A Clear is not under the great stress of this bank and so can be free. He uses his own basic purposes and is for the first time wholly himself.

Operating Thetan

This state of being is attained by drills and familiarity after the state of Clear has been obtained.

A real OT has no Reactive Bank, is cause over Matter, Energy, Space, Time and Thought and is completely free.

Summary

This HCOB contains a brief description of each of the States of Being one can recover by processing.

This is the first time they have ever been isolated and crisply defined.

These are all the states there are except for homo sapiens and animal and we know too much about those already.


L. RON HUBBARD

LRH:ml.cden
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 21 JULY AD15
Remimeo
Tech Div Hats
Qual Div Hats
Classes III & IV
Students

RELEASE REHABILITATION
Refers to and amplifies
HCOB 30 June 1965


In doing a Former Release rehabilitation, if you find the point of key-out of the moment the pc was formerly released, and then the moment of key-in afterwards and then get the pc to Itsa these alternate points, one after the other, with a bit of guiding when you see a fall (telling the pc [who is thinking] the needle fell by saying, “What’s that?”), and then if you get off any unacknowledgment by the auditor in the rehabilitation session, and if you handle all such moments in the pc’s auditing history, recent or distant, you will get the TA down and momentary floats of the needle.

Then if you end it with the pc happy and all well in the release rehabilitation session, the pc will feel terrific and you will probably have regained the floating needle.

Remember it isn’t a repetitive alternate question, “What was keyed out then?” “What was keyed in then?” but a use of these and any such wording one after the other as Itsa invitations, until you get the TA off it and the TA down (and not up again on session comm cycle goofs).

By hitting the key-out, then the key-in in that former session where the pc went release, he or she really gets the charge off it and you’ve regained it.

I daresay you could take a stuck TA at 5 on an old-time pc and by locating the moments when he or she felt good in sessions and handling each one in turn until you get the pc happy he or she has “got it”, you would eventually get the TA to clear read and a momentary or continuously floating needle.

It’s gentle.

The only goof you can really make, aside from comm cycle and code breaks, is not to quit when the needle floats in your rehabilitation session.

The rule of ALL processing is NEVER RUN A PROCESS FURTHER THAN IT PRODUCES A FLOATING NEEDLE WITH THE TA BETWEEN 2 AND 3.

This applies to former release rehabilitating session as well. When that needle floats again, if it does, you have to gently “That’s it” and desist and send to Declare? To go on is to overaudit.

Good hunting.


L. RON HUBBARD



LRH: ml.rd
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 27 JULY 1965

Replaces HCO Bulletin of 22 May 1965 which
replaced HCO Bulletin of 23 April 1964.
Remimeo HCO Bulletin of 23 April 1964 was written by
Sthil Students Roger Biddell and is corrected by this Bulletin.


SCIENTOLOGY III

AUDITING BY LISTS


The earlier genus of this process was Sec Checking on the Joburg. With no reference to these, I recently developed for Level III a process called Auditing by Lists. Any list can be used.

As a preview to the process I asked staff member Roger Biddell to use List One. The questions were generalized. Instead of “Have I ?”, “Has there been ____?” was used. Otherwise the question remained the same as given in the HCO Bulletin for L. 1. He ran the process for some hours on a preclear with excellent results and summarized my verbal and written instructions as applied.

AUDITING BY LISTS
L.1.

Use meter at sensitivity 16.

Use ARC Break assessment List 1. The questions asked are generalized and without time limiters.

i.e. Has a withhold been missed?

Have you been given a wrong goal? etc.

Begin with List 1. Ask the first line of this List while watching the meter for an instant read.

If the line does not read, say, “That’s clean” and move on to the next line of the List and do the same action with this new line.

If the pc has something to say about a line that is clean, let him say it, acknowledge it and then you ask the next line. Don’t Q and A.

If the line when asked has an instant read say, “That reads” then, “What do you consider this could be?” or, “What considerations do you have about this?”

Let the pc answer all he wants to. While he is giving his considerations, mark down any blowdowns of the TA.

When the pc has given all his considerations say, “Thank you. I’ll check the line on the meter” and call the line again. If it instant reads say, “There’s another read here” then again ask for considerations, etc.

Continue these actions until the line goes clean.

When clean say, “That’s clean.”

Then move on to the next line.

When List 1 is completed, and then List 1, then List 1 and so on.

If running correctly, the TA total should increase from session to session. The pc should get more and more blowdowns on his considerations. Then he should get blowdowns on what he considers the main thing is.

Don’t Q and A. Don’t take up or do anything with the pc’s considerations. Don’t ever say, “That still reads.” It’s always “Another read” as “It still reads” makes the pc feel he has not answered the question.

This process gets charge off the case.

If pc still wonders what the main charge on a line was, tell him according to what gave the most TA action.


LRH: ml.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED



[This HCO B is cancelled by HCO B 3 July 1971, Auditing by Lists Revised, Volume VII-316.]


































SAINT HILL SPECIAL BRIEFING COURSE LECTURE
27 July 1965


** 6507C27 SHSBC-65 Stages of Release

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 2 AUGUST 1965
Remimeo
Tech Div Hats Star Rated on all Check-Outs
Qual Div Hats
Classes III & IV
Students
RELEASE GOOFS


1. Overrun

The first goof relating to Releases is the one done for 15 years—running past a free, floating needle on any type of process. THIS is the goof that held back all Scientology. And if it continues to be done, known as well as it is now that you mustn’t, one can only consider it suppressive—not just ignorant—as who now doesn’t know you wreck a Release by running past the floating needle?

2. Rehabilitation Goof

Not doing a Rehabilitation by the book, HCOB 30 June 1965, HCOB 21 July AD15 and now this one would constitute a breach of tech.

To say you are “Rehabilitating a Former Release” and yet do only current rudiments is, of course, a lie.

Rehabilitation is an exact series of actions covered in the above HCOBs and NOTHING ELSE.

I have seen a case being given an assist on PTPs and current ARC Breaks and had the auditor say, “Oh yes, I’m following orders. I’m rehabilitating a former release.”

Rehabilitation of a Former Release is a PRECISE SET OF ACTIONS covered only in the above HCOBs and this one.

One only does THOSE actions given in these HCOBs.

3. Rough Comm Cycle

The roughness of the Auditor’s Comm Cycle can prevent, not only a Release from occurring but can prevent rehabilitation.

All auditing is best done muzzled with the auditor drilled on Mutter TRs.

4. Meter Misuse

In Step I of HCOB 30 June 65 it says, “Loosely locate the session or time in which it (Release) occurred.”

This means a METER DATING.

By “loosely” is meant to the year, month and day, not the minute. You can of course locate to the hour.

ADD AS THE PRIMARY STEP TO HCOB 30 JUNE 65

1. LIST AND EXACTLY DATE BY METER EACH AND EVERY TIME THE PC HAS ATTAINED A STATE OF RELEASE IN THIS LIFETIME.

That should dispel any doubts about what rehabilitation of former release is aiming to do.

ADD ALSO AS A PARAGRAPH IN HCOB 30 JUNE 1965:

IF THE PC’S NEEDLE GOES FREE WITH THE TONE ARM BETWEEN 2 AND 3 ON A CALIBRATED METER, CEASE REHABILITATION AT THAT INSTANT AND DECLARE. DO NOT CONTINUE BEYOND THE FLOATING NEEDLE ON A REHABILITATION EITHER.

IF A PC’S NEEDLE FLOATS DOING THE HCO POLICY LETTER FORM 26 JUNE 65 CEASE AT THAT INSTANT AND SEND TO GET THE STATE DECLARED. DO NOT KEEP ON DOING THE FORM PAST FLOATING NEEDLE EITHER.

IN FACT DON’T CONTINUE ANY PROCESS OR AUDITING BEYOND A FLOATING NEEDLE. YOU CAN SHIFT FROM PROCESS TO PROCESS, A FREE NEEDLE ATTAINED ON EACH ONLY IN POWER PROCESSING AND ONLY ON R6-GPMI.

An auditor must also realize that handling current matters and all on a former release in a rehabilitation is violating further the rule DON’T AUDIT PAST A FLOATING NEEDLE. The whole trouble with the pc was auditing beyond Release. Therefore in rehabilitation even ruds are just more auditing aren’t they? You can only do HCOB 30 June 65 and its further HCOBs.

5. Not Recognizing a Floating Needle

Floating needle, free needle are the same thing. What does one look like? Once you’ve seen one you’ll never make a mistake on one again. For it floats. It ceases to register on the pc’s bank. It just idly floats about or won’t stand up even at low sensitivity.

The TA goes to any place between 2 and 3 and the needle floats.

Differences in cans used as electrodes and not keeping the meter calibrated with 5,000 ohm and 12,500 ohm resistors clipped between the two cans and setting the TA to (F) and (M) can lead an auditor to “find” a floating needle at TA 3.8 but ignore it because the meter is out.

Also, two meters used can both be out. Particularly if the wrong cans are used.

Steel cans, chromium plated or tin plated (like ordinary vegetable soup tin cans) are the best electrodes.

6. Not Getting Them All

Not getting every time the pc has been a Release in this lifetime can be a big goof.

Sometimes the last one is just yesterday, but omitting it can halt rehabilitation.

Getting whole track (before this lifetime) former release periods is of questionable benefit but cannot be ruled out.

7. Pc’s Own Purposes

The leader in making a high state of being collapse (given an R6 bank) is the pc’s own purposes.

A person shot up scale can postulate. Postulating going down scale or an attack on something can collapse a state of release.

Protest, wanting to get even, revenge are some things that a pc postulated that made him go back into the bank.

It’s a goof for a pc to postulate himself down scale or to postulate himself right by showing another he is wrong.

This is why Class IV processing (Service Fac) can so easily make a 1st Stage Release.

8. Declare Errors

Sometimes a pc is not rehabilitated yet is so declared. This causes a serious upset.

Sometimes the Examiner fails to detect the flaw that the pc doesn’t think he was released and passes the pc.

Sometimes the Examiner challenges and fiddles about too much. This is a withhold of acknowledgment of the state and will cause an upset before it can be awarded.

9. Unalert Org

An org which is not alert to the way SPs go for new releases when the release is still finding his or her “feet” will make very few that remain stable.

If an org develops a lazy attitude toward auditor and personnel discipline then two things happen:

(a) Auditors and execs alike think it is all right to audit past a floating needle on a form, action or process or

(b) Start declaring people who aren’t released.

Either way is catastrophe. The middle road of honest and precise tech is vital.

Auditors with sloppy comm cycles almost never release anyone to floating needle. Such begin to believe it is “all gas” so it doesn’t matter what they do.

An org not alert to what a bad comm cycle can do to prevent release is “for it” as tech will fade.

Summary

For fifteen years auditors have made and then undone keyed-out-clearing all over the world.

We can then assume that, as they had the data about floating needles in 1958 and did not heed it, we will have this battle with us from here on.

The end product of all auditing right up to clear is a floating needle.

There is no other end product from the auditors’ viewpoint.

So, shall we get on with it, see it when it occurs and declare it?

Please?

L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:ml:cden
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 3 AUGUST 1965

Remimeo
All Students
All Staff

AUDITING GOOFS
BLOWDOWN INTERRUPTION


It is a serious goof for the auditor to speak or move during a blowdown of the Tone Arm.

When a Tone Arm has to be moved rapidly down, the needle appears to float to some but it is just falling.

To see if a needle is floating the TA must have stopped moving down.

A Blowdown is a period of relief and cognition to a pc while it is occurring and for a moment after it stops.

Therefore it is a serious goof for an auditor to speak or move during the blowdown or for a moment afterwards.

This was noted years ago and is given in early materials on goals.

AN AUDITOR MUST NOT SPEAK OR MOVE DURING A BLOWDOWN.

When the auditor has to move the TA from right to left to keep the needle on the dial and the movement is .I divisions or more then a blowdown is occurring. The needle of course is falling to the right.

That is a period of charge blowing off the bank. It is accompanied by realizations for the pc. Sometimes the pc does not voice them aloud. They nevertheless happen.

If the auditor speaks or moves beyond adjusting the TA quietly with his thumb the pc may suppress the cognitions and stop the blowdown.

To see if a needle floats the TA must be halted for the moment between 2 and 3 on a calibrated meter. A floating needle cannot be observed during a blowdown.

For an auditor to sit up suddenly and look surprised or pleased, or for an auditor to say the next command or “That’s It” during a blowdown, can jolly well wreck a pc’s case. So it’s a real goof to do so.

To get auditing results one must audit with a good comm cycle, accept the pc’s answers, handle the pc’s originations, be unobtrusive with his auditing actions, not hold the pc up while he writes, not develop tricks like waiting for the pc to look at him before giving the next command, not prematurely ack and so start compulsive Itsa, and be very quiet during and just after a blowdown.


L. RON HUBBARD


LRH:ml.cden
Copyright ©1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 5 AUGUST 1965
Remimeo
BPI
Certs & Awards
Issue to all new
Releases
RELEASE STAGES


Once a pc has begun to come out of his bank, he either continues to come out or goes back in a bit.

He (or she) does not remain in status quo (unchanging state) while a Release.

A First Stage Release often pulls further out to First Stage Released OT after processing.

Similarly a Second Stage Release may become a Second Stage Released OT.

In their understandable enthusiasm—they feel so much better and bigger and stronger—a release sometimes seeks additional acknowledgment by requesting a further release check.

A pc who has attained a First Stage can go First Stage Released OT but cannot possibly go Second Stage without Power Processing. In short, one can’t upgrade Stages 1 to 2, etc, without the actual processing.

Why? Because a key out is just that, a key out. Just because one no longer has a tiger in his lap does not mean the tiger has vanished. He’s merely stepped out into the hall. In the course of life somebody is going to leave the door open. The tiger won’t come back into one’s lap but he’ll sure sit on the rug and sneer. Key out means there’s still a tiger. Release means he’s away. One First Stage can be more released than another First Stage. The tiger is further off.

But when you start upgrading numbers (1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc) you are talking about less tiger.

There’s less bank.

First Stage removes a few tiger whiskers and the sneer. That’s the locks going. The tiger is near or far—that means more or less 1st Stage, it doesn’t mean there’s less tiger.

Second Stage removes the tiger’s misemotion and his front claws. The tiger can now be near or far but he is that much tiger. He can be so far away one is sure he has vanished. But he’s just far. He remains that much tiger (minus whiskers, sneer, temper and front claws), he just isn’t evident.

Third Stage pulls the tiger’s ability to paralyze one’s wits. In effect Third Stage removes impediments to one’s ability to know. The tiger, though now minus whiskers, sneer, temper, front claws, and the ability to paralyze, is still about. He may at this stage walk off so far that one is positive there is no more tiger. But it’s early to break out the champagne. Maybe he won’t be back for years, even centuries, but he still exists.

Fourth Stage Release removes the tiger’s claws all about and blunts his teeth. And causes him to hide in closets. But though he hasn’t whiskers, sneer, claws, or his frightening effect, or the old sharpness, he is still a tiger. One can gambol about in the sun cheerily, feeling quite sure there is no tiger at all. Only the locks on the R6 bank are gone. That R6 bank is still there.

At this stage the pc feels he can move mountains single-handed and is given to chest thumping. That he still depends upon a body gets overlooked.

But ahead of him is the BIG job. There is still a tiger. This tiger if not vanished utterly will sooner or later creep up and eat up the goodies.

So one has to handle Mr. Tiger once and for all, run the total R6 bank and become a 5th Stage Release.

Now, and only now, with a bit of reorientation can one be CLEAR. No more tiger. He is not near or far. He doesn’t exist. And one can go on for the trillions.

Early on my pcs went keyed out clear and went away. They stayed that way a long time.

They were sure they had attained the zenith.

Today we are going to have the same problem.

A Release is going to feel sure he has gone up in number of Release when it’s only the tiger out for lunch.

I am the last one to throw cool water over anyone’s head about Release. But I have a passion for stating truth as I know it when I know it. You can always depend on that. It’s not always popular but it’s honest.

Therefore these are the only ways to go up in number as a Release.

To obtain FIRST STAGE RELEASE, one must have had lower grade auditing of some sort. This removes the locks (the distressful moments of life) off the Reactive Mind. As these pinned one to it, one can now get out of it.

To obtain SECOND STAGE RELEASE one must have been run on the highest of the Power Processes. This gets rid of the secondaries (misemotions and upsets) and the engrams (moments of pain and unconsciousness). And as these pinned one to the Reactive Mind one can now move out of it and isn’t so likely to go back into it as he has no secondaries and engrams to call him back.

To obtain THIRD STAGE RELEASE one has to tackle the beings, places and subjects one has long detested. And when these are gone one isn’t likely to be called back into the Reactive Mind very soon as bits of his daily life don’t remind him of beings, places and subjects he once detested.

To obtain FOURTH STAGE RELEASE one has to take the lock end words off the R6 bank. He has to be an R6 Auditor himself to do this properly. With these gone, the R6 bank is left on its naked basics and one can be very free of it for quite a while.

But now we are down to the concrete and bedrock.

To obtain a FIFTH STAGE RELEASE, one has to have run out the whole remaining Reactive Mind. We are awfully lucky to have the combination to the vault as it’s been shut thoroughly for the trillions. That’s done by a process known as R6-GPMI-or GPMs by Items. And I assure you

1. It can be done and

2. It was pure hell going it blind when I was trying to find it. It took several years and thousands of hours of research auditing to just find the pattern of it. This is the longest job (R6-GPMI) and requires now at least 14 months of daily solo auditing. And then one is 5th Stage and ready for a polish and Clear.

Now understand, at each of these stages one has to go unrelease to make it to the next stage of release. This requires guts—and faith. One is feeling GRAND. The world is beautiful. The unbrave get nervous at the thought of diving back into the asphalt or, to keep our metaphor, about deliberately whistling up the Tiger—”Here Tiger! Here Tiger! Come out wherever you are!” So a way that is cooked up to avoid this further combat is to pretend an upgrade in number of release without the hard work and scratches necessary to honestly achieve it.

Add to all this that one has a present time, and a body to receive the slings and arrows and one sees that it is a complex picture.

But we have the way. It is the way.

Many will come along selling the frightened the idea one can leap up through the numbers without pain or toil or auditing by flexing one’s chest or eating Wheaties or praying. But that isn’t the WAY. There’s no bridge there.

The main point that will be stumbled on is this: Nobody has any real reality on how high up these states are or how utterly tall Clear really is.

---------------

Well, that’s the score. Does it help?


L. RON HUBBARD

LRH:ml.rd
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 6 AUGUST AD15
Remimeo
All Qual Hats
All Staff Auditor Hats
Tech Executives
Ethics QUALIFICATIONS TECHNICAL ACTIONS
HCO Sec
Div 7 THIS IS A STAR RATED TECHNICAL HAT
FOR EXAMINERS, REVIEW AUDITORS AND
QUAL EXECUTIVES AND IS THE STANDARD
GUIDE FOR THEIR TECHNICAL ACTIONS


All cases that come to the Qual Division are unusual.

The solution to ALL cases that come to the Qual Division is to do the USUAL.

If you don’t hold on to that datum hard, all the “unusual” cases will soon have Review doing the unusual. And the only salvation for any Qual situation is to do the USUAL.

Don’t go into a dispersal because of the unusual nature of the Review cases. If they were standard they would not be in Review.

But Review has a standard procedure. It is an Always, invariable standard procedure. Don’t audit the case, audit the procedure. If you do so YOU WILL NEVER MISS. You will only miss if you get wrapped up in how unusual it all is.

Today Case Supervision and Review actions are all very, very standard. And very, very workable. You only get in a mess with a case when you don’t use standard actions.

It took more than a third of a century to find the keys to all cases. None is going to repeat all that research in the 20 minutes given to handle a case, so the best solution is to do what’s known.

FORMER RELEASE CHECK

When someone buys a Former Release Rehabilitation, he first goes to Review to get a check. This must be a perfunctory check. If you audit the pc you may float a needle on the check. The Review Auditor merely puts the pc who wants a Former Release check on a meter and asks: “Have you been Released earlier?” If it reads, THAT’S the end of the check. One says, “Yes you evidently were,” and adds, “Go to the Registrar and get a Former Release Rehabilitation.” If it doesn’t read it doesn’t mean, not Former Release. THE PC MAY BE ARC BROKEN, and the meter of an ARC Broken pc may not read for the auditor. In fact an inexperienced auditor sometimes calls an ARC Broken needle a “floating needle” merely because it doesn’t react to the auditor. So if the meter doesn’t react on the question of was the pc a Former Release, all you do in Review is say, “There may be ARC Breaks around Former Release. It therefore doesn’t read right now. It may read if the ARC Breaks are picked up,” and sends the pc to the Registrar for Rehabilitation just the same.

In short two things can happen in a Former Release check. It reads. It doesn’t read. In both cases send the pc to the Registrar for a Former Release Rehabilitation.

So that action is real simple.

What the pc says and does has nothing to do with it. Say what you have to to get the pc to the Registrar, but encourage no Itsa or you’ll be tied up for an hour or two, working for nothing.

If the pc has already been to the Registrar and bought a Former Release Rehabilitation then after the above check send the pc to the HGC Admin.

That’s all there is to it. You do anything else and you’ll goof up everything. Start to audit the pc, invite the pc to Itsa, start picking up times or ARC Breaks and you’ve had it. You’ll be wearing the HGC hat and costing the org money and slowing your own lines.

Believe me, do just the above and NO MORE on a “Former Release check” in Review.

Don’t get all wound up in the guy’s case. They’re ALL different and unusual. That’s no reason why a Former Release check should be unusual.

Get it?
CASE SUPERVISOR CHECK

When the Case Supervisor sends a pc already in the HGC to Review there is only ONE standard action:

Form 26 June 1965 is done like an assessment, fast, no excessive Itsa.

Further, it’s done NOW. The Case Supervisor wants it right away. NEVER have a “backlog” of Reviews on Case Supervisor request for Review.

Pc comes in, gets the Form done BANG. Right now. Takes 10-15 minutes. No more than that.

One puts down under recommendations what has been found on the assessment. “Pick up Cleaned Cleans” or “Auditor’s Comm Cycle out, do ARC Break List I Auditing by List”. Whatever you found you recommend it be done. Former Release gave a big read and BD. All right, put “Do Former Release Rehab,” as the recommendation.

When the Case Supervisor asks for a Review of the case one ONLY does the form and does it only as an assessment. One does not handle any part of that form on a Case Supervisor request. And one does it straightaway. A Review “Backlog” is a disgrace. One day wait is too many. It’s done at once. Why? Because it only takes a few minutes.

Do the form, send the pc to the Examiner and the Examiner returns the pc at once to the HGC or at once sends to Ethics if a Roller Coaster is found or no case change.

Honest, it’s too easy.

If it takes anyone longer than that then it’s because an assessment isn’t being done. The form is being used for auditing! When all that’s needed is an assessment.


REVIEW TO REPAIR

When a pc is to be handled or finished off by Review, we now have a different matter.

The Review Auditor sees “Review to handle” on the slip or “Review to complete case”.

This is his signal to do Form 26 June 1965 AS AN AUDITING ACTION.

Same form, different use. One now doesn’t assess with the Form. One Audits with the Form.

This means one cleans it all up, section by section as one goes along.

ARC Break reads. Find out if it’s a session ARC Break or a process ARC Break, and do the appropriate list, find it (or them) and indicate the By-Passed Charge (don’t audit it by list).

If it’s an environment ARC Break adapt List I to the environment. Locate and indicate the By-Passed Charge.

DON’T go on with ARC Break reading when Review is handling the pc. Clean it up.

Clean everything else up.

Polish up the entire Form 26 June 65 and leave it all beaming.

Now do what’s indicated with the case such as Former Release Rehab or flatten unflat processes.

If the case turns out on the Form to be an Ethics type, have the Examiner send to Ethics and don’t do anything else after finding the pc is an Ethics type. No Case Gain in the past = SP. Roller Coaster = PTS. Leave it to Ethics to find out why. When (and if) the pc gets a clean “bill of health” from Ethics (has disconnected or whatever) Review can get the pc back again and finish up the incomplete actions outlined in this section.

In short, in “Review to handle” one handles the whole case and finishes it off.

The same form (Form 26 June 1965) can be used in two different ways: as an assessment and as an auditing list of things to handle.


STUDENT ASSISTS

On a student assist the Review Auditor uses Form 26 June 65 as an assessment form and handles what is found on the form. The Review Auditor does not fail to do the form and also does not fail to handle what was found during assessment after it is done. Note, one assesses, then handles what was found. He doesn’t audit the whole form. And also Review doesn’t complete the case as a case. It’s just an assist.

Public assists are done the same way in Review.


DECLARE? FOR RELEASE

When the Examiner does not declare a pc and does not send the pc to Certs and Awards, he sends the pc to Review. (He can also, instead, send the pc to Ethics.)

When the Examiner sends a Declare? to Review, instead of Declaring, the Review Auditor does Form 26 June 65 as an assessment, locates the trouble and after the assessment is done handles what was found or indicates it’s an Ethics matter.

In either case (audits or sends to Ethics) the Review Auditor hands the pc back to the Examiner. The Examiner may now send the pc to Certs and Awards to get the Release award, or to Ethics to handle the indicated Ethics matter (usually PTS situation).

But the Examiner must not send the pc back to the HGC after the Case Supervisor has said Declare? (except when the Declare? is for an earlier stage than the pc is being audited for). If anything else has to be done, Review does it.


BASIS OF QUAL ACTIONS

You see Qual Div handles the flat ball bearings that didn’t roll on the assembly line of the HGC. Qual is wholly in the flat ball bearing business. The HGC and Academy are wholly in the assembly line business, dealing in fairly round ball bearings.

So when the HGC or Academy has said that’s it (either, “We can’t handle” or “Declare?” or “Graduate”) it’s now up to Qual. If the pc or student is not a Release or not well skilled or the pc doesn’t think he or she is a Release or the student feels he can’t make it, then it’s all up to Review.

Qual’s tools for the student are the Assist and Cramming Section and for the pc are:

1. 26 June 65 Form.

2. Any standard process or auditing action.

3. HCO B 30 June 65 and any other Former Release Rehabilitation HCO B.


HGC USES OF QUAL TOOLS

The HGC also uses these same tools. The Case Supervisor commonly orders one of his or her auditors to do 26 June 1965 Form.

On Power Processing and Former Release Rehab, an HGC Intensive on a pc always starts with:

1. The old pc assessment form from Dianetic days (if not already done and in hand on the pc).

2. 26 June 65 Form (if the pc has ever been audited before).

It cuts down the clutter and keeps auditors calmer and makes assignment easier when the HGC uses the Qual tools routinely and only squawks when baffled. Qual takes over on a pc if the HGC has really goofed or has mis-Declared?

The HGC assembly line considers all pcs a bit dented and runs an assembly line on the basis of “some dents in ball bearings must be handled in the HGC”. When the ball bearing just won’t roll at all in the HGC, the Case Supervisor throws in the chips and says, “To Review to Handle.” If the Case Supervisor wants a check on his auditor, he says, “To Review for check.” And the HGC gets the pc back.

Students and public wanting assists are sent straight to Review by the Registrar, by-passing the HGC as this is bit and piece auditing.


THE EIGHT BIG RULES

Qual (and the HGC) are not exempt from handling the Eight Big Rules of auditing:

1. A pc must never be audited while ARC Broken. (Assessment of a list is not auditing unless one is Auditing by List meaning cleaning up each line, not looking for the thing on the List.)

2. A pc will make no case progress while suffering from a Present Time Problem which fixes his attention on the environment.

3. A pc with withholds will be critical, natter or blow and is out of comm.

4. A pc will worsen after auditing if connected to a Suppressive Person (and only worsens when so connected).

5. A pc who makes no case gains is Suppressive (and can only be handled by Power Processes and a Class VII Auditor).

6. Auditing a pc past a state of Release on the processes of that stage can make the pc’s tone arm rise and bar further case gain even at upper stages of Release. (If you don’t rehabilitate at least in part a 1st Stage Release that was overrun, you won’t get results at the 2nd Stage or any higher stage. If you don’t rehab an overrun on 2nd Stage you won’t get results on Third Stage, etc. Also, a pc who went 1st Stage on R6EW won’t run on 2nd Stage until the 1st Stage is found. In some cases the pc won’t now run on 2nd Stage if he went 4th Stage, by-passing the lot. In short you can’t by-pass free needles.)

7. A pc whose needle doesn’t react to the auditor even at TA 2 or 3 may be ARC Broken, not Released.

8. An auditor’s fractured Comm Cycle, unseen additives, lack of skill on a meter, attitude or false report can make a standard process not seem to work, and only these may make one work toward unusual solutions and get unreal about standard tech.

There are other rules. They are important but not as important as each of the EIGHT BIG RULES.

Therefore, the only unusual solution you ever have to take in auditing is to straighten up one of the Eight Big Rules when it’s out on the pc. It is rare but can happen. Example: Pc’s ARC Break is too bad to get a read on any of the lower lines of Form 26 June 65. Obviously, then, to assess Form 26 June 65 at all on a few cases you have to locate and indicate the By-Passed Charge.

In checking a free needle, finding it doesn’t respond at all, one has to know by looking at the pc whether the pc is Keyed Out or ARC Broken. The only other bug here is “Dead Thetan” wherein the old “Stage 4” needle so called has never responded to anyone (this is obvious as the pc never got any TA in auditing either).

A pc can have such a withhold that he just chops the auditor or the course or the org. It’s always a withhold that makes him chop or blow. Don’t be reasonable about it-it’s a technical fact.

If an auditor really knows his Eight Big Rules, he can work then very easily with a form and know what he is looking at. The eight are on Form 26 June 65, too, you know. Only Rule 7 may prevent a straightforward assessment, as the ARC Break may have to be handled before one can get on down the list with reads.


COMMON MISTAKE

The Common Mistake of Review is to mistake a PTP or Withhold for an ARC Break.

This is easy to do. Supervisors are prone to say “Pc ARC Broken” when a pc looks nattery or gloomy.

Review, although it takes no instructions on tech from Tech, can get mixed up on this too, prompted by the Supervisor’s error or the pc’s own statement. SPs commonly start a Review session with “I’m ARC Broken ...” when, fact is, the SP has a big withhold or PTP.

REPORTS

When a Review Auditor or an Examiner finds a tech mess like alter-is or the fractured comm cycle of an HGC auditor, they MUST report it to Qual Sec who MUST send in an Ethics chit on it. The chit is written by the Examiner or the Review Auditor and sent to Qual Sec for forwarding to Ethics.

ONLY in this way will Examiners or Review ever hold onto their own activities. If they don’t chit gross auditing errors found in pcs or in auditing instructions then their whole larger purpose is defeated. Qual is the technical cop. Handle flat ball bearings, yes. But also proof up the Tech Division against having so many by reporting its goofs.

This applies to any student received also. Qual, getting a student or pc who has then to be sent to Ethics MUST chit to Ethics whoever overlooked it in Tech. When Qual finds a student who is SP or PTS who has been on course a while, Qual must chit the student’s Course Supervisor for a big goof in having the student on course at all. Similarly, Qual chits an auditor whose pc, sent to Review, turns out to be PTS or SP. The Academy or HGC must have gone stupid to be auditing or training such a student or pc. For they bring total chaos to the assembly line. Supervisors and auditors who don’t send pcs who are PTS or SP to Ethics deserve Psychiatric Awards. For they are wrecking the org by continuing to train or process such a person. So that’s Qual’s hat, too.

When Ethics won’t handle a Roller Coaster or an SP and pushes the being back into the Org Qual must cable or despatch the Office of LRH Saint Hill. We have the tech on PTS and SP. We mustn’t train or audit them until the condition is handled properly in Ethics (and even then we train and process them with a cynical squint in the left eye, alert for further messes from them.)

SUMMARY

The technical activities of Qual are all standard, all laid out neatly. There are no unusual solutions if one does the usual as above.

No need to get in a panic about a case. Do the usual. If THAT doesn’t work, it was done in an unusual way, wasn’t it?

Qual can win all the way.

Just do the usual Qual actions on the standard Qual internal routing lines, and UP go tech standards and results.

And that’s what we want, don’t we?

L. RON HUBBARD

LRH: ml.rd
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


[This HCO B has been corrected per HCO B 21 September 1965, Qualifications Technical Actions, the full text of which said to alter the last word in the second sentence, paragraph 3, under section entitled “Reports”, from “Qual” to “Tech”.]





HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 19 AUGUST 1965

All Students Clarification of HCO Bulletin
Saint Hill 3 July 1965—
Courses
All Staff
MODEL SESSION REVISED


Pertaining to Level 0 training, whereas the student is to use a meter in order to familiarize himself with it and with using it in a session, he is not trained in the fine points of metering until Level II. Therefore during the training of Level 0 the Model Session as per HCOB 3 July 1965 is to be used, but the questions are actually unmetered (the student does not follow up needle reads), except for the fact that the student has a meter in front of him.

Any auditor from Class II up would, of course, meter such questions in running Level 0 processes on a preclear.

At Level 0 the student MUST know the parts of the meter and be able to recognize a floating needle and be able to record tone arm action.


L. RON HUBBARD


LRH:ml.bh
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
Remimeo
Franchise HCO BULLETIN OF 23 AUGUST 1965
Sthil Students
Sthil Staff ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS OF DIANETICS

AND SCIENTOLOGY

The following are the abbreviations and symbols most used in Scientology:

1. ACC Advanced Clinical Course
2. ACK Acknowledgement
3. AD After Dianetics (1950) e.g. 1965 = AD15
4. ADCOUNCIL Advisory Council
5. ADD I/C Addressograph-in-Charge
6. ADDRESSO Addresses Section
7. ADCOMM Advisory Committee
8. ADMIN Administration or Administrator
9. APA American Personality Analysis
10. ARC Affinity, Reality, Communication
11. ASSN SEC Association Secretary
12. AUD Auditor
13. BA STEPS Bring About Steps—R6 Material
14. BPC By-passed Charge
15. BPI Broad Public Issue
16. BS Beginning Scientologist
17. B.Scn Bachelor of Scientology
18. CCHs Communication, Control and Havingness Processes
19. CF Central Files
20. COG Cognition
21. COMM Communication
22. COMM CENTRE Communications Centre
23. COMM CYCLE Communication Cycle
24. COMM EV Committee of Evidence
25. COMM LAG Communication Lag
26. COURSE SUP Course Supervisor
27. CSW Completed Staff Work
28. D Deputy
29. D of P Director of Processing
30. D of T Director of Training
31. Dev T Developed Traffic
32. DD Doctor of Divinity
33. DECLARE? “Preclear has reached a grade or Release. Please look
at preclear and pass on to Certs and Awards.”
34. DEP DIR Deputy Director
35. DN Dirty Needle
36. Dn Dianetics
37. DR Dirty Read
38. D.Scn Doctor of Scientology (Honorary Award by LRH for
the application of Scientology processes, principles,
books or literature.)
39. DIR COMM Director of Communications
40. DIR COMP Director of Compilations
41. DIR CERTS & AWARDS Director of Certificates and Awards
42. DIR DISB Director of Disbursements
43. DIR EXAMS Director of Examinations
44. DIR FA Director of Field Activities
45. DIR INCOME Director of Income
46. DIR INSPEC & REP Director of Inspections and Reports
47 DIR MAT & RECS Director of Materiel and Records
48 DIR PBLs Director of Publications
49. DIR PROM Director of Promotion
50. DIR RAP Director of Routing, Appearances and Personnel
51. DIR REC Director of Records
52. DIR REG Director of Registration
53. DIR REV Director of Review
54. DIR TECH SERVICES Director of Technical Services

55. DIST DIV Distribution Division
56. DIST SEC Distribution Secretary
57. E-METER Electropsychometer
58. ETH? “This preclear may be an Ethics case, roller coaster or
no case gain.”
59. EXEC DIR Executive Director
60. EXEC LTR Executive Letter
61. F Fall, type of meter read
62. FC Founding Church of Scientology
63. FCDC Founding Church of Scientology Washington, D.C.
64. FCNY Founding Church of Scientology New York
65. FCTC Founding Church of Scientology Twin Cities,
Minnesota
66. GAE Gross Auditing Error
67. GPM Goals Problem Mass
68. HAA Hubbard Advanced Auditor—Level IV Certificate
69. HAS Hubbard Apprentice Scientologist
70. HASI Hubbard Association of Scientologists, International
71. HBA Hubbard Book Auditor
72. HCA Hubbard Certified Auditor—Level II Certificate
73. HCO Hubbard Communications Office
74. HCO AREA SEC Hubbard Communications Office Area Secretary
75. HCO B Hubbard Communications Office Technical Bulletin
76. HCO Bd of REVIEW Hubbard Communications Office Board of Review
77. HCO EXEC SEC Hubbard Communications Office Executive Secretary
78. HCO DISSEM SEC Hubbard Communications Office Dissemination Secretary
79. HCO POL LTR Hubbard Communications Office Policy Letter
80. HCO WW Hubbard Communications Office World Wide
81. HCS Hubbard Clearing Scientologist—formerly Level IV
Certificate
82. HDA Hubbard Dianetic Auditor (Dianetic Certificate)
83. HGA Hubbard Graduate Auditor—Level VII Certificate, Saint
Hill
84. HGC Hubbard Guidance Centre
85. HGC ADMIN Hubbard Guidance Centre Administrator
86. HPA Hubbard Professional Auditor—Level III Certificate
87. HQS Hubbard Qualified Scientologist
88. HRS Hubbard Recognised Scientologist—Level 0 Certificate
89. HSS Hubbard Senior Scientologist—Level VI Certificate, Saint
Hill
90. HTS Hubbard Trained Scientologist—Level I Certificate
91. HVA Hubbard Validated Auditor—Level V Certificate, Saint
Hill
92. I/C In Charge
93. INFO LTR Information Letter
94. INT International
95. L.1 List One
96. LTR REG Letter Registrar
97. LRH L. Ron Hubbard
98. MEST Matter, Energy, Space and Time
99. MID RUDS Middle Rudiments
100. MSH Mary Sue Hubbard
101. M. WlH Missed Withhold
102. NON-CO-OP Non-Co-operation from us
103. OCA Oxford Capacity Analysis
104. OFF POL Off Policy
105. OFF TECH Off Technical
106. ORG Organization
107. ORG BD Organization Board
108. ORG EXEC SEC Organization Executive Secretary
109. ORG SEC Organization Secretary
110. OIC Organization Information Centre
111. OP PRO By DUP Opening Procedure by Duplication (Process)
112. OPPTERM Opposition Terminal. Designation of a type of GPM Item
(R6 Material)
113. O.T. Operating Thetan

114. O/W Overt/Withhold
115. PC Preclear
116. PE Personal Efficiency Foundation
117. PN Pain
118. P.O. Purchase Order
119. POL LTR Policy Letter
120. PREPCHECK Preparatory Check. A process.
121. PTP Present Time Problem
122. PTS Potential Trouble Source
123. Q & A Question and Answer. It means “failure to complete a
cycle of action”.
124. QUAL DIV Qualifications Division
125. QUAL SEC Qualifications Secretary
126. R Routine—prefix on process designations
127. R FACTOR Reality Factor
128. RR Rocket Read—type of meterread
129. RS Rock Slam—type of meter read
130. R6 Routine Six
131 R6EW Routine 6 End Words
132 R6GPMI Routine Six Running GPMs by Items
133. R6O Routine Six Original Bank
134 R6R Routine Six Review of all Bank run
135 R4H Routine Four. Process used to relieve ARC Breaks
136. R4SC Routine Four. Process used to locate and run out
Service Facsimiles
137. REC Reception
138. REG Registrar
139. REVIEW Department of Review
140. REV! “This preclear is in trouble, please do a Review hard.”
141. REV FL? “Could you please find out if this process is flat for me? “
142. REVIV Revivification
143. RUDS Rudiments
144. SCN Scientology
145. SEC Secretary
146. S—C—S Start—Change—Stop (Level II process)
147. SECED Secretarial Executive Director
148. SEC CHECK Security Check
149. SEN Sensation
150. SER FAC Service Facsimile
151. SH Saint Hill
152. SHSBC Saint Hill Special Briefing Course
153. SOM Somatic
154. SOP Standard Operating Procedure
155. SP Suppressive Person
156 Sthil Saint Hill
157 TA Tone Arm. Also total divisions of Tone Arm motion for
a session
158. TECH Technical
159. TECH DIV Technical Division
160. TECH SEC Technical Secretary
161. TERM Terminal—designation of a type of GPM Item
(R6 material)
162. TONE 40 An execution of intention
163. TR Training Drill
164. TR 0 Confronting
165. TR 1 Dear Alice (getting a command across to a preclear)
166. TR 2 Acknowledgements (Acknowledging a preclear)
167. TR 3 Duplicative Question (delivering question or command
in a new unit of time)
168. TR 4 Handling preclear originations
169. TVD Television Demonstration
170. UPPER INDOC Upper Indoctrination Training Drills (6-9)
171. WH Withhold
172. WW World Wide
173. 8C Name of Process. Also used to mean good control


HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 30 AUGUST AD 15

Remimeo
Saint Hill Executives
Saint Hill Students
Art Series 1

A R T


For some fifteen years I have been studying, amongst other branches of philosophy, the subject of ART.

The reason for this is: Art is the least codified of human endeavors and the most misunderstood. What is Art? is one of the least answered of human questions.

Art abounds with authorities. It was chosen because “that field containing the most authorities contains the least codified knowledge.” The obvious invitation is to answer the question and codify the subject. This has now been done.

The subject was originally brought up in a conversation with Donald H. Rogers at 42 Aberdeen Road, Elizabeth, New Jersey, in 1950.

As this zone of human activity seemed to stand outside the field of Dianetics and Scientology, I thereafter worked with it on a casual basis.

Having published 1 5 ,000,000 words between 1 929 and 1 94 1, I was not unacquainted with the arts. Since 1950 I have worked with other arts than that of literature in order to make an advance on the general subject of ART.

I have made a breakthrough at last in this matter. And I find it is applicable to what we are doing and therefore also has practical value.

To make it a matter of record rather than a filed sheaf of notes, I am publishing these findings as an HCO B. I also feel they will be of some assistance in forwarding Scientology.

As in the case of all “pure research” (by which is meant study without thought of possible application) there is a sudden pay-off in these answers including the better dissemination of Scientology and the rehabilitation of the artist.

My incidental studies in the fields of photography and music materially assisted these discoveries.

Approaching the state of Clear has also assisted in comprehending this rather vast subject of ART. It is adventurous to state one has solved such a sweeping subject but here at least are the fundamentals and basics.

The following are rough notes but are in fact the basis of that branch of activity we call ART.


THE FUNDAMENTALS OF ART

BASIC DEFINITION

ART is a word which summarizes THE QUALITY OF COMMUNICATION.

It therefore follows the laws of communication.

Too much originality throws the audience into unfamiliarity and therefore disagreement, as communication contains duplication and “originality” is the foe of duplication .

TECHNIQUE should not rise above the level of workability for the purpose of communication.

PERFECTION cannot be attained at the expense of communication.

Seeking perfection is a wrong target in art. One should primarily seek communication with it and then perfect it as far as reasonable. One attempts communication within the framework of applicable skill. If perfection greater than that which can be attained for communication is sought, one will not communicate.

Example: A camera that shoots perfectly but is not mobile enough to get pictures. One must settle for the highest level of technical perfection obtainable below the ability to obtain the picture.

The order of importance in art is:

1. The resultant communication,

2. The technical rendition.

2 is always subordinate to 1. 2 may be as high as possible but never so high as to injure 1.

The communication is the primary target. The technical quality of it is the secondary consideration. A person pushes 2 as high as possible within the reality of 1.

A being can take a lot of trouble with 2 to achieve I but there is a point where attempting 2 prevents 1.

If the ardures of 2 prevent 1, then modify 2, don’t modify 1.

Perfection is defined as the quality obtainable which still permits the delivery of the communication.

Too much time on 2 of course prevents 1.

It is usually necessary to lower a standard from absolute perfection to achieve communication. The test of the artist is how little it is lowered not how high it is pushed.

A professional in the arts is one who obtains communication with the art form at the minimum sacrifice of technical quality. There is always some sacrifice of quality to communicate at all.

The reduction of mass or time or impedimenta or facilities toward the ability to render a result is the exact measurement of how much technical perfection can be attempted. The rule is if one is being too perfectionistic to actually achieve a communication, reduce the mass, time, impedimenta or facilities sufficiently low to accomplish the communication but maintain the technique and perfection as high as is reconcilable with the result to be achieved and within one’s power to act.

No communication is no art. To not do the communication for lack of technical perfection is the primary error. It is also an error not to push up the technical aspects of the result as high as possible.

One measures the degree of perfection to be achieved by the degree of communication that will be accomplished.

This is seen even in a workman and tools. The workman who cannot accomplish anything but must have tools is an artistic failure.

“Art for art’s sake” is a complete paradox as a remark. “Art for the sake of communication” and “Attempted perfection without communicating” are the plus and minus of it all.

One can of course communicate to oneself, if one wishes to be both cause and effect.

One studies art only if one wishes to communicate and the search for artistic perfection is the result of past failures to communicate.

Self-improvement is based entirely on earlier lack of communicating.

Living itself can be an art.

The search for freedom is either the retreat from past failures to communicate or the effort to attain new communication. To that degree then the search for freedom is a sick or well impulse.

Searching for and discovering one’s past failures to communicate an art form or idea about it will therefore inevitably rehabilitate the artist.

However, due to the nature of the Reactive Mind, full rehabilitation is achieved only through releasing and clearing.

How much art is enough art? The amount necessary to produce an approximation of the desired effect on its receiver or beholder, within the reality of the possibility of doing so.

A concept of the beholder and some understanding of his or her acceptance level is necessary to the formulation of a successful art form or presentation. This includes an approximation of what is familiar to him and is associated with the desired effect.

All Art depends for its success upon the former experience and associations of the beholder. There is no pure general form since it must assume a sweeping generality of former experiences in the beholder.

Artists all, to a greater or lesser degree, need comprehension of the minds and viewpoints of others in order to have their work accepted; since the acceptability of a communication depends upon the mental composition of the receiver. Scientology then is a must for any artist if he would succeed without heartbreak.

In any art form or activity one must conceive of the beholder (if only himself). To fail to do so is to invite disappointment and eventual dissatisfaction with one’s own creations.

An artist who disagrees thoroughly with the “taste” of his potential audience cannot of course communicate with that audience easily. His disagreement is actually not based on the audience but on former inabilities to communicate with such audiences or rejections by a vaguely similar audience.

The lack of desire to communicate with an art form may stem from an entirely different inability than the one supposed to exist.

Professionals often get into such disputes on how to present the art form that the entirety becomes a technology, not an art, and, lacking progress and newness of acceptance, dies. This is probably the genus of all decline or vanishment of art forms. The idea of contemporary communication is lost. All old forms become beset by technical musts and must nots and so cease to communicate. The art is the form that communicates not the technology of how, the last contributing to the ease of creating the effect and preservation of the steps used in doing it. A form’s reach, blunted, becomes involved with the perfection alone, and ceases to be an art form in its proper definition.

A communication can be blunted by suppressing its art form: Example, bad tape reproduction, scratched film, releasing bits not authorized. This then is the primary suppression.

On the other hand, failing continuously to permit a non-destructive communication on the grounds of its lack of art is also suppressive.

Between these two extremes there is communication and the task is to attain the highest art form possible that can be maintained in the act of communicating. To do otherwise is inartistic and objectionable.

These, therefore, are the fundamentals of ART.


L. RON HUBBARD


LRH:ml.cden
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED










[See also HCO B 29 July 1973, Art, More About, Volume VIII-196, which refers to this HCO B.]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 30 AUGUST 1965
Remimeo



RELEASE STAGES


There are five stages of Release. When one of these is attained the next one up can be run.

A preclear who has attained a stage of Release may not be run further on the processes of that stage or below or he will go back into his Reactive Mind.

All Releases however can have their problems handled, their withholds pulled, their ARC Breaks repaired and any Release at any stage can be audited on the exact processes of Release Rehabilitation.

The states of Release differ in that one is more stable than another.

The Reactive Mind (known also as the R6 Bank) can only be audited out by someone who is trained up to Class Vl. When the Reactive Mind is fully audited out (erased completely), one has a Clear.

When a Clear has been refamiliarized with his capabilities, you have an Operating Thetan (an OT).

A Release, then, is pulled OUT of his Reactive Mind.

A Clear has fully erased his Reactive Mind.

An Operating Thetan is one who is Cause over Matter, Energy, Space and Time and is not in a body.

The degree and relative permanence of being pulled out of the Reactive Mind determines the state of Release.

There are numerous things that can pull one back into the Reactive Mind.

These are ( I ) Locks (2) Secondaries (3) Engrams (4) The Whole Time Track.

LOCKS

By reducing locks as in Levels 0 to IV, we then remove the ability of locks to pull the being back into his R6 Bank.

Locks are mental image pictures of non-painful, but disturbing, experiences the person has experienced. They depend for their force on secondaries and engrams.

Thus, one who has had his locks reduced is a FIRST STAGE RELEASE.

SECONDARIES and ENGRAMS

When a being has had the secondaries and engrams reduced, he is far less likely to be pulled into the Reactive Mind than if he has just had their locks reduced.

Secondaries are mental image pictures containing misemotion (grief, anger, apathy, etc). They contain no pain. They are moments of shock and stress and depend for their force on underlying engrams.

Engrams are mental image pictures of pain and unconsciousness the person has experienced.

When these are reduced, one has a SECOND STAGE RELEASE.

THE WHOLE TRACK

Bits and pieces of the whole track remain after the locks, secondaries and engrams are reduced. These bits inhibit the being from recovering knowledge.

The Whole Track is the moment to moment record of a person’s existence in this universe in picture and impression form.

When these bits are cleaned up, a being is a THIRD STAGE RELEASE.

THE REACTIVE MIND

When the pc has taken the locks off the Reactive Mind itself, using R6EW, he attains Fourth Stage Release.

THE REACTIVE MIND

When the entire Reactive Mind has been erased and the person is again wholly himself, one could call it a Fifth Stage Release.

But that is really CLEAR.

OPERATING THETAN

When a being once more has recovered his full abilities and freedom, a state much higher than Man ever before envisioned is attained. This state is called OPERATING
THETAN.


L. RON HUBBARD





LRH:ml.rd
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


[This HCO B is replaced by HCO B 9 February 1966, Release Grades, page 141.








LRH TAPE LECTURES
3—9 September 1965


6509C03 CC-1 Material of the R6 Bank (filmed lecture)

** 6509C09 SHSBC-66 Classification and Gradation [also available as a
film]

The Aims of Scientology
by
L. Ron Hubbard


A civilization without insanity, without criminals and without war, where the able can prosper and honest beings can have rights, and where Man is free to rise to greater heights, are the aims of Scientology.

First announced to an enturbulated world fifteen years ago, these aims are well within the grasp of our technology.

Non-political in nature, Scientology welcomes any individual of any creed, race or nation.

We seek no revolution. We seek only evolution to higher states of being for the individual and for Society.

We are achieving our aims.

After endless millenia of ignorance about himself, his mind and the Universe, a breakthrough has been made for Man.

Other efforts Man has made have been surpassed.

The combined truths of Fifty Thousand years of thinking men, distilled and amplified by new discoveries about Man, have made for this success.

We welcome you to Scientology. We only expect of you your help in achieving our aims and helping others. We expect you to be helped.

Scientology is the most vital movement on Earth today.

In a turbulent world, the job is not easy. But then, if it were, we wouldn’t have to be doing it.

We respect Man and believe he is worthy of help. We respect you and believe you, too, can help.

Scientology does not owe its help. We have done nothing to cause us to propitiate. Had we done so, we would not now be bright enough to do what we are doing.

Man suspects all offers of help. He has often been betrayed, his confidence shattered. Too frequently he has given his trust and been betrayed. We may err, for we build a world with broken straws. But we will never betray your faith in us so long as you are one of us.

The sun never sets on Scientology.

And may a new day dawn for you, for those you love and for Man.

Our aims are simple, if great.

And we will succeed, and are succeeding at each new revolution of the Earth.

Your help is acceptable to us.

Our help is yours.




L. Ron Hubbard
Saint Hill
September, 1965

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 13 SEPTEMBER 1965
Remimeo
Vital Data for
Tech Secs
Ds of P
HGC Training Officers
Ds of T OUT TECH
Course Supervisors AND HOW TO GET IT IN
All Students


The term “OUT TECH” means that Scientology is not being applied or is not being correctly applied. When Tech is IN we mean that Scientology is being applied and is being correctly applied. By TECH is meant technology, referring of course to the application of the precise scientific drills and processes of Scientology. Technology means the methods of application of an art or science as opposed to mere knowledge of the science or art itself. One could know all about the theory of motor cars and the science of building them and the art of designing them and still not be able to build, plan or drive one. The practices of building, planning or driving a motor car are quite distinct from the theory, science and art of motor cars.

An auditor is not just a Scientologist. He or she is one who can apply it. Thus the technology of Scientology is its actual application to oneself, a preclear or the situations one encounters in life.

Tech implies USE. There is a wide gap between mere knowledge and the application of that knowledge.

When we say tech is out, we might also say, “While that unit or person may know all about Scientology, that person does not actually apply it.”

A skilled auditor knows not only Scientology but how to apply the technology to self, pcs and life.

Many persons auditing have not yet crossed over from “knowing about” to “applying”. Thus you see them fooling about with pcs. When a skilled auditor sees a critical pc he knows BANG—pc has a withhold and pulls it. That’s because this auditor’s tech is in. Meaning he knows what to do with his data.

Some other person who knows a lot of Scientology, has had courses and all that, yet sees a critical pc and then tries to add up everything he knows about pcs and stumbles about and then decides on a Zero pc it’s a new thing that’s wrong that’s never been seen before.

What’s the difference here? It’s the difference between a person who knows but cannot apply and a skilled technician who can apply the knowledge.

Most golfers know that you have to keep your eye on the ball just before, during and after you hit it. That’s the basic datum of powerful, long drives down the fairway. So if this is so well known then why do so few golfers do it? They have arrived at a point of knowing they must. They have not yet arrived at a point of being able to. Then their heads get so scrambled, seeing all their bad drives which didn’t go down the fairway, that they buy rabbits feet or new clubs or study ballistics. In short, not being able to do it, they disperse and do something else.

All auditors go through this. All of them, once trained, know the right processes. Then they have to graduate up to doing the right processes.

Observation plays an enormous role in this. The auditor is so all thumbs with his meter and unfamiliar tools he has no time or attention to see what goes on with the pc. So for 15 years lots of auditors made releases without ever noticing it. They were so

involved in knowing and so unskilled in applying, they never saw the ball go down the fairway for a 200 yard drive!

So they began to do something else and squirrel. There was the pc going release, but the auditor, unskilled as a technician for all his knowledge of the science, never saw the auditing work even though even the auditing done that badly did work.

Do you get the point?

You have to know your tools very very well to see past them! An auditor who squirrels, who fools about with a pc, who fumbles around and seldom gets results just isn’t sufficiently familiar with a session, its patter, his meter and the mind to see past them to the pc.

Drill overcomes this. The keynote of the skilled technician is that he is a product of practice. He has to know what he is trying to do and what elements he is handling. Then he can produce a result.

I’ll give you an example: I told an auditor to look over a past session of known date on a pc and find what was missed in that session. Something must have been missed as the pc’s tone arm action collapsed in that session and ever afterwards was nil. So this auditor looked for a “missed withhold from the auditor in that session”. The ordered repair was a complete dud. Why? This auditor did not know that anything could be missed except a withhold of the hidden overt type. He didn’t know there could be an inadvertent withhold wherein the pc thinks he is withholding because the auditor didn’t hear or acknowledge. This auditor didn’t know that an item on a list could be missed and tie up TA. But if he did know these things he didn’t know them well enough to do them. A second more skilled auditor took over and bang! the missed item on the list was quickly found. The more skilled auditor simply asked, “In that session what was missed?” and promptly got it. The former auditor had taken a simple order, “Find what was missed in that session,” and turned it into something else: “What withhold was missed in that session?” His skill did not include applying a simple direct order as auditing looked very complex to him as he had so much trouble with doing it.

You can train somebody in all the data and not have an auditor. A real auditor has to be able to apply the data to the pc.

Importances play a huge part in this. I had a newly graduated darkroom photographic technician at work. It was pathetic to see the inability to apply important data. The virtues of ancient equipment and strange tricks to get seldom required effects were all at his fingertips. But he did not know that you wiped developer off your hands before loading fresh film. Consequently he ruined every picture taken with any film he loaded. He did not know you washed chemicals out of bottles before you put different chemicals in them. Yet he could quote by the yard formulas not in use for 50 years! He knew photography. He could not apply what he knew. Soon he was straying all over the place trying to find new developers and papers and new methods. Whereas all he had to do was learn how to wash his hands and dry them before handling new film.

I also recall a 90-day wonder in World War II who came aboard in fresh new gold braid and with popped eyes stared at the wheel and compass. He said he’d studied all about them but had never seen any before and had often wondered if they really were used. How he imagined ships were steered and guided beyond the sight of land is a mystery. Maybe he thought it was all done by telepathy or an order from the Bureau of Navigation!

Alter-is and poor results do not really come from not-know. They come from can’t-apply.

Drills, drills, drills and the continual repetition of the important data handle this condition of can’t-apply. If you drill auditors hard and repeat often enough basic auditing facts, they eventually disentangle themselves and begin to do a job of application.

IMPORTANT DATA

The truly important data in an auditing session are so few that one could easily memorize them in a few minutes.

From case supervisor or auditor viewpoint:

1. If an auditor isn’t getting results either he or the pc is doing something else.

2. There is no substitute for knowing how to run and read a meter perfectly.

3. An auditor must be able to read, comprehend and apply HCO Bs and instructions.

4. An auditor must be familiar enough with what he’s doing and the mechanics of the mind to be able to observe what is happening with the pc.

5. There is no substitute for perfect TRs.

6. An auditor must be able to duplicate the auditing command and observe what is happening and continue or end processes according to their results on the pc.

7. An auditor must be able to see when he’s released the pc and end off quickly and easily with no shock or overrun.

8. An auditor must have observed results of his standard auditing and have confidence in it.

CASE REACTION

The auditor and the Case Supervisor must know the only six reasons a case does not advance. They are:

1. Pc is Suppressive.

2. Pc is ALWAYS a Potential Trouble Source if he Roller Coasters and only finding the RIGHT suppressive will clean it up. No other action will. There are no other reasons for a Roller Coaster (loss of gain obtained in auditing).

3. One must never audit an ARC Broken pc for a minute even but must locate and indicate the by-passed charge at once. To do otherwise will injure the pc’s case.

4. A present time problem of long duration prevents good gain and sends the pc into the back track.

5. The only reasons a pc is critical are a withhold or a misunderstood word and there is NO reason other than those. And in trying to locate a withhold it is not a motivator done to the pc but something the pc has done.

6. Continuing overts hidden from view are the cause of no case gain (see number 1, Suppressive).

The only other possible reason a pc does not gain on standard processing is the pc or the auditor failed to appear for the session.

Now honestly, aren’t those easy?

But a trainee fumbling about with meter and what he learned in a bog of unfamiliarity will always tell you it is something else than the above. Such pull motivators, audit ARC Broken pcs who won’t even look at them, think Roller Coaster is caused by eating the wrong cereal and remedy it all with some new wonderful action that collapses the lot.

ASSESSMENT

You could meter assess the first group 1 to 8 on an auditor and the right one would fall and you could fix it up.

You could meter assess the second group 1 to 6 on a pc and get the right answer every time that would remedy the case.

You have a list in the HCO Pol Ltr Form of 26 June 1965 done for Review. That covers the whole of any errors that can be made on a pc scouting both the auditor’s application and the pc’s reaction to the auditing.

When I tell you these are the answers, I mean it. I don’t use anything else. And I catch my sinning auditor or bogged down pc every time.

To give you an idea of the simplicity of it, a pc says she is “tired” and therefore has a somatic. Well, that can’t be it because it’s still there. So I ask for a problem and after a few given the pc hasn’t changed so it’s not a problem. I ask for an ARC Break and bang! I find one. Knowing the principles of the mind, and as I observe-pcs, I see it’s better but not gone and ask for a previous one like it. Bang! That’s the one and it blows completely. I know that if the pc says it’s A and it doesn’t blow, it must be something else. I know that it’s one of six things. I assess by starting down the list. I know when I’ve got it by looking at the pc’s reactions (or the meter’s). And I handle it accordingly.

Also, quite vitally, I know it’s a limited number of things. And even more vitally I know by long experience as a technician that I can handle it fully and proceed to do so.

There is no “magic” touch in auditing like the psychiatrist believes. There is only skilled touch, using known data and applying it.

Until you have an auditor familiar with his tools, cases and results you don’t have an auditor. You have a collected confusion of hope and despair rampant amongst non-stable data.

Study, drill and familiarity overcome these things. A skilled technician knows what gets results and gets them.

So drill them. Drill into them the above data until they chant them in their sleep. And finally comes the dawn. They observe the pc before them, they apply standard tech. And wonderful to behold there are the results of Scientology, complete. Tech is IN.


L. RON HUBBARD


LRH:ml.rd
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


[Additional data to this HCO B can be found in HCO B 21 September 1965, Out Tech, on the following page.]









SAINT HILL SPECIAL BRIEFING COURSE LECTURE
21 September 1965


** 6509C21 SHSBC-67 Out Tech

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 21 SEPTEMBER 1965
Vital Data for
Tech Sec OUT TECH
Qual Sec
Dir Rev (Additional Data on HCO Bulletin
Ds of P of 13 September 1965)
HGC Training Officers
Ds of T ALL THIS DATA COVERED AND EXPLAINED
Course Supervisor IN THE SAINT HILL SPECIAL BRIEFING
All Students COURSE TAPE OF 21 SEPTEMBER 1965

Note the 5 GAEs are also covered in Tape Lecture of 10 July 1963
See also HCO Pol Ltr 21 September 1965, Issue II, “Auditor Estimation Test”


The five Gross Auditing Errors (GAEs) are:

1. Can’t handle and read an E-Meter.

2. Doesn’t know and can’t apply Technical data.

3. Can’t get and keep a pc in session.

4. Can’t complete an auditing cycle.

5. Can’t complete a repetitive auditing cycle. (Including repeating a command long enough to flatten a process.)

These are the only errors one looks for in straightening up the auditing of an Auditor.

The six things that can be wrong with a pc are:

1. Pc is Suppressive.

2. Pc is ALWAYS a Potential Trouble Source if he Roller Coasters and only finding the RIGHT suppressive will clean it up. No other action will. There are no other reasons for a Roller Coaster (loss of gain obtained in auditing).

3. One must never audit an ARC Broken pc for a minute even but must locate and indicate the by-passed charge at once. To do otherwise will injure the pc’s case.

4. A present time problem of long duration prevents good gain and sends the pc into the back track.

5. The only reasons a pc is critical are a withhold or a misunderstood word and there is NO reason other than those. And in trying to locate a withhold it is not a motivator done to the pc but something the pc has done.

6. Continuing overts hidden from view are the cause of no case gain (see number 1, Suppressive).
IN TECH

In getting in Tech one need only locate in the auditor (or self as an auditor) which of the 5 GAEs are being committed and, in the pc, which of the above six is out.

There are no reasons exterior to the 11 given. To get Tech In, requires getting the 5 in for auditors and the six in for pcs and after that, watching the 5 for auditors and 6 for pcs, running standard processes.

If you look for other reasons, this is itself a gross goof. There are no others.

LRH: ml. cden L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard [Edited for use on the Dianetics Course as HCO B 7 May 1969,
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Issue IV, The Five GAEs, page 361.]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 21 SEPTEMBER 1965
Issue V

Remimeo
Tech Div
Sthil Students

E-METER DRILLS


Having the data that Out-technology is the result of a lack of study, drill and familiarity, it is imperative that meter drills be done well.

As it is the Academy’s purpose to train auditors, students must do the required meter drills for each level and must not resort to the use of a pen to represent the needle of an E-Meter.

Irrespective of whether a student is or is not a Release, these drills must be done. If a student should have a coach whose needle only floats, that student should request of the Supervisor another coach.

The state of Release can always be rehabilitated, so the Academy should not be overly concerned with the protection of Releases. Studying the mind and spirit of Man may be restimulative, but it is the only way through and out.

A real Roller Coaster of processing results is never because of restimulation caused by training, it is always the sole result of association with a Suppressive Person.

Don’t back off in the training of auditors. Only a well trained auditor will eventually make it all the way to Clear.


L. RON HUBBARD



LRH: ml.kd
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 22 SEPTEMBER 1965

Remimeo
All Scientology
URGENT URGENT URGENT


RELEASE GRADATION
NEW LEVELS OF RELEASE


Further research has revealed additional data concerning Releases which makes it necessary to re-name the types of Release, or else deny preclears all the benefits available from states of Release.

As mentioned in earlier lectures there are several intermediate stages of Release between Level Zero and Level Five. I have finally isolated these and they agree with the Gradation Chart of Levels.

This changes also in some degree the upper levels of Academy training materials without actually adding any but only reassigning the same materials to different levels.

This discovery came out of a survey of the only things that could balk a case. These also are the main things an auditor has to be careful about in pcs. Further study revealed the state of Release to be available on each of these points and therefore, both to make Releases and better trained auditors, these were fitted in to the Gradation Chart in natural sequence as the dominant points stressed on each level.

The points are the same as those covered in the current “Out Tech” Bulletins and lecture.

They are:

Communication
ARC Breaks
PTPs
O/Ws
Continuous Overts

So as to minimize any upset in introducing these additional levels of Release we will cease to call Release by stages and call them by Grades. In earlier material and lectures the terms “1st Stage Release” indicated a person released anywhere between Level Zero and Level IV, a “Second Stage Release” indicated a Power Process Release, a “Third Stage Release” was one made by orientation processes and a “Fourth Stage Release” meant one made by R6 EW. This was before I found that the additional levels were important or obtainable. Without wiping out the meaning of these “stages”, we will simply cease to use them to designate Releases and designate by GRADES. We will then use the exact processes of the grades that obtain the state of Release for the preclear and thus keep things straight.

This then is the new Grading:

Type of Release Type of Process

Grade VII — CLEAR

Grade VI Release — R6 EW

Grade V Release — Power Processes

Grade IV Release — Service Facsimiles

Grade III Release — ARC Break Processes (old R-4-H renamed R-3-H)

Grade II Release — O/W Processes (including the “Joburg”)

Grade I Release — Problems Processes (such as Probs Intensive or CCHs)

Grade 0 Release — Communication Processes

Any one of the above group of processes can (and should be) run to a Floating Needle (and not one command beyond it).

With auditors warned of the consequences of running beyond the state of Release and people easily rehabilitated to the state even if it is overrun, it will be found that the state is attainable at each level with smooth auditing.

This ties smoothly into training as a class of auditor is capable of making a class of Release.

Knowing why people Roller Coaster (Potential Trouble Source) and what an SP (Suppressive Person) is and by carefully handling training of auditors in accordance with the “Out Tech” materials we can easily attain these states for preclears.

The discovery is actually contained in the first material issued that calls attention to not further auditing Releases. They could have their ARC Breaks, PTPs and Overts handled. This when I followed it up showed that additional Release states existed for these types of phenomena.

There are some additional processes that can be run at certain levels and as these are proven out they will be added as alternate processes to the level. However, it will be found that when a preclear goes Release at a Grade, it will not be advisable to further audit him or her in that grade on an additional process once the phenomena of Release has been attained for that grade. It may be that if a pc fails to go Release on the recommended process for that grade, another process for that grade included under the type of process for that grade may be used. For instance, on Problems, the pc does not go Grade I Release in the regular buttons of a Problems Intensive. Other buttons may be found and used. Or the preclear may be run on “Rising Scale Processes” or another process listed for that grade, all toward the goal of making the pc a Release from Problems. You don’t run a pc on the next grade just because you couldn’t Release him on the lower grade. You run the additional processes of a grade until he releases at that grade.

At Grade Zero you run Comm Processes of whatever kind until you have a Grade O Release. That means a “Communication Release”. Then you do the same at Grade I and run any version of problems, that affects the person’s problems until you have a Grade I Release, a “Problems Release”.

Therefore you are releasing the person on certain subjects at each grade. The scale can then be written like this.

Grade VII CLEAR — Bank Erased

Grade VI Release — Whole Track Release

Grade V Release — Power Release

Grade IV Release — Habit Release

Grade III Release — ARC Release

Grade II Release — Overt Release

Grade I Release — Problems Release

Grade 0 Release — Communication Release

You can readily spot that under each of these headings we have several effective processes in addition to a principal process.

The most indicated processes for these levels are listed in the first list of grades above.

If a former Release went Release on, let us say, Problems, he can be rehabilitated on the Problems Release and then audited on any of the other Grades from IV down. In short, anyone who went Release on one of these Grades from IV down may not be audited further on that Grade but can be released on any one of the other Grades 0 to IV omitting only Grade I Release, Problems.

Of course from V (Power Processes) on up it becomes improbable to run a lower grade but it possibly could be done on some cases. However, a Grade VI Release (R6 EW) can’t possibly be run below Grade VI. And on a Clear, there’s no bank at all, only freedom.

It’s also noteworthy that it’s all but impossible to do Grade V, Power Processes, on a former Release that has not been fully rehabilitated on the lower grade.

In training it is therefore necessary to put a Meter in the hands of a student at Zero and have him able to clean Tone Arm action well at Level I, be able to detect and clean reads at II and not clean cleans, be able to assess at III and find Service Facs at IV.

This means also that at Zero you teach the student all about Communication, its formula and the Comm Cycle and TRs. At I you teach repetitive commands, Problems Intensives (assessed by an upper class auditor as we used to do) and the CCHs (which pull the person out of problems and into PT). At II you teach a student all about STUDY (the genus of overts is the misunderstood) and O/Ws. At III you teach the student all about ARC and ARC Breaks and assessment and how to do old R-4-H in full and expertly. And at IV you teach the student all about “Deds” and “Dedexes” (History of Man) and justified O/Ws and Suppressives and PTSs and how to find and run Service Facs. And at V you review the student and classify fully all lower grades. And at VI you teach the student all about R6 and how to do R6 EW and as the student moves to VII you teach Power Processing and give the student the final materials to go on to Clear himself.

As I promised to do some time ago, that neats up all training into a form that can be firm, finally published in eventual book form, and which puts the stress on the most important data in auditing.

Parts of the mind, Codes, scales, other background data can be woven into the proper levels without overloading any.

Obviously then, you teach the student the theory in the Certification course and the drills and key processes for the grade in the Classification course of the proper level.

This neats up both training and processing, releasing and clearing.

This does not prohibit one from handling ARC Breaks or PTPs or overts in rudiments at any level, really. Handling a rudiment is just getting the pc going. It puts the heavy processes that handle ARC Breaks in life and the past, the problems, etc each in its proper level.

The rule applies that you must not overrun one of these heavy grade processes and must halt it the moment a free needle appears on it. Or if the TA goes out of it and it hasn’t released the pc and hasn’t been overrun another process can be run for that grade to handle the subject of that grade.

But I think you will find that the primary process of the grade will do it uniformly if well audited.

Here then is the additional data that belongs on your Gradation Chart and modernizes it.


L. RON HUBBARD





L RH:ml.rd
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED







[This HCO B is supplemented by HCO B 27 September 1965, Release Gradation Additional Data, on the following page.]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 27 SEPTEMBER 1965
Remimeo
All Scientology
Staff
All Students
RELEASE GRADATION
ADDITIONAL DATA
(Supplements HCOB 22 Sept 65)


The Grades of Release as covered in HCOB 22 Sept 65 have been named and will be found, with auditor classes, in the ROUTING CHART of 26 Sept 65 being issued with “Auditor 10” in October 65.

These Grades and names are final, and they designate what is to be run on the pc to obtain the various states of Release.

A table follows:

Grade Name Materials Former Name Where Done

Grade VIII Operating Thetan R1 Drills Operating Thetan Saint Hill

Grade VII CLEAR Clearing Course Clear Saint Hill
Solo

Grade VI Whole Track R6 EW Stage 4 Release Saint Hill
Release Release Solo

Grade VA Power Plus Added Power Stage 3 Release Saint Hill by
Release Release Process Class VII
Auditor

Grade V Power Release Power Processes 2nd Stage Saint Hill by
Release Release Class VIIs

Grade IV Ability Release Service None Saint Hill or
Release Facsimiles HGCs—Any
Class IV or
above

Grade III Freedom Release R3H None SH or HGCs—
Release ARC Breaks Any Class III
or above

Grade II Relief Release O/W Processes None SH or HGCs—
Release Missed w/hs Any Class II
Joburg or above

Grade I Problems Release Probs Intensive None SH or HGCs—
Release Any Problems Any Class I
Process or above
Hidden Standards
Book of Case
Remedies

Grade 0 Communications Level 0 Processes Keyed-Out Clear SH or HGCs—
Release Release (0-0, 0-A, etc) Book I Clear Any Class 0
or above

Ungraded Scientologist Assists of all None Anywhere—any
types Qualified
auditor or
Scientologist

It is obvious then that GRADE CERTIFICATES FOR PRECLEARS lapse and are no longer issued and are replaced by Release awards, awarding “Grade ____Release” when attained.

It is also obvious that as these states all existed before they were discovered then REHABILITATION OF FORMER RELEASE is addressed to rehabilitating these grades. When rehabilitation is done and the state recovered for the pc a “Grade_ Release” for the Grade actually recovered is issued.

The SAME rehabilitation processes as issued are used for every type of Release.

Preclears were sometimes released in more than one grade and Former Release is rehabilitated (and sold) for each grade the pc was formerly released on.

All grades formerly attained must each one in turn be found and rehabilitated and each one is separately declared by Certs & Awards. Therefore a pc going release on a simple Qual Division check-out must be urged to get a rehabilitation as there may be other former release states there and for anyone rehabilitated as a former Release many other grades (as per chart above) are available to be audited up to.
----------------

REHABILITATION OF FORMER RELEASE

Technically you will find just these phenomena as given in the Routing Chart of Auditor 10 and the 22 Sept HCOB were the subjects of release.

Sometimes a pc was according to him released formerly on some other process or subject than those given on the Chart. You will however find that it relates to one of the Grade Subjects (Comm, Problems, O/W, ARC Brks, Service Facs, as the total of the Grades up to IV).

Example: Pc reads as Released on CCHs. OK, that was a Problems or a Comm Release. Why? It was because pc came to PT away from his problems of the past or because pc got into comm with the universe. Just decide which.

Example: Pc checks as Released on the button “Importance”, run in brackets or concepts. This wasn’t any Grade Vl Release! It was probably Problems that were cleaned up or even O/Ws; therefore it was a Grade I or II.

You have to see which Release Grade it was and that’s easy since the pc will tell you even without your asking that he “got over his ARC Breaks” or “His problems didn’t worry him”.

On old-time processes, R2-12, Rising Scale, even Engram Running, the point where Release was attained was because a Comm block, a Problem, an O/W, an ARC Break cleaned up. It wasn’t the old process that determines the Grade the pc was formerly released at so much as which of the Grade subjects were relieved at the time.

ERROR

The biggest error you can make in rehabilitation of a former release is to grade him too high and by-pass available charge for further releasing.

In the earlier grades you can go from Grade IV Release to Grade 0 Release to Grade II, etc.

They are not entirely consecutive from 0 to IV. They are from V up.

For instance you rehabilitate a pc as Grade II Release (overts and withholds) by standard rehab approach. He is then declared a Grade II Release of course. However he can be run on Comm Processes to obtain Grade 0 Release or on Problems to obtain Grade I Release and better had be.

As we have formerly released so many on so many different processes the background for rehabilitation is ragged at this time.

New people can be moved up smoothly from Zero to IV. Older Scientologists will go up and down from Zero to IV.

You will find at times that somebody you are trying to audit to a certain Grade suddenly recalls being released at that Grade. The proper action then is rehabilitation of the Grade, not continuing to run the Grade.


All this is really quite simple.

The BIGGEST error is and will continue to be not noticing a state of Release occurring while running a process and then overrunning it and engulfing it. You don’t always see the free, floating needle—it is at times brief.

NERVES

For a while auditors will be very nervy and err by underrunning processes and failing to flatten them. Some auditors will see a floating needle everywhere. Some will remain blind to them and grind on and on.

The thing to do is eventually find the happy medium. Don’t underrun or overrun. Just notice when the process has produced a floating needle and carry on when it has not. And listen for those big pc upsurges in tone and halt there. And watch for the rising Tone Arm that goes to 5. Mostly it’s an overrun. But some pcs who always were at 5 weren’t ever formerly released and will need Power Processes to get them started. Power Processing also combines a lot of lower grade results. But it is hard to Power Process pcs who have never had lower grade releasing. The Power Processing becomes very lengthy. However, real tough cases can’t attain lower grade release states and so have to be Power Processed at once instead of after properly attaining the lower grades. These “at once” Power Process cases, who have had no former release grade, are pretty Suppressive. However, some pcs’ Tone Arms can be at 5 and the pc can act Suppressive if it all stems from unnoticed lower Grade releasing that was never observed or rehabilitated .

It is interesting that a Grade V Release (Power Process) cannot thereafter be processed below his Grade. But this is a new set of processes. You won’t find any Former Release Grade Vs. They just never made Grade V before, even by accident.

Grade VI Releases (R6 EW) don’t easily respond thereafter to Power Processes. But remember, that’s a Grade VI Release, not somebody who came up with a few bits of R6 EW.

You can’t run a Grade VII (Clear) on anything but he can be drilled on getting about the universe and getting familiar with himself and what he can do.

Grades VI and VII really cannot be successfully audited except by oneself—solo. If somebody else did audit them on a pc, the pc would not prosper. He’d be a fool and quite confused. These Grades (VI and VII) require knowledge. Without it it’s pitiful. Auditors who have tried to audit raw meat pcs on these Grades have gotten into serious messes not with us but in their own activities all stemming from trying to make a baby be vice president in six easy lessons. Two such auditors blew Scientology—they themselves had no real data or release grade or even case gain yet they tried to use VI materials on raw meat and it all went wrong and the pcs today mostly snarl and natter. Their way is barred by their antagonism.

It takes a real thetan to stand up to VI and VII. Ask somebody who has been there.

I trust these new Grades I found will help straighten out a lot of things.


L. RON HUBBARD


LRH: ml.cden
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS
RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 29 SEPTEMBER 1965

Remimeo
All Students
Saint Hill Courses
All staff




CYCLICAL AND NON-CYCLICAL PROCESS
CONCLUSIONS



A Non-Cyclical Process (i.e. a repetitive process which does not cause the preclear to cycle on the Time Track) is concluded precisely as stated in HCO Bulletin 3 July 1 965.

A Cyclic Process—a repetitive process which does cause the preclear to cycle on the Time Track as in Recall type processes—must be concluded in Model Session as follows

“Where are you now on the Time Track?”

“I will continue this process until you are close to present time.” (After each command ask “When?”) When the pc is in PT, “That was the body of the session.”


L. RON HUBBARD






LRH: ml.rd
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 29 SEPTEMBER 1965
Issue II
Remimeo
Franchise
Students
BPI
All Levels


THE CONTINUING OVERT ACT


Pity the poor fellow who commits daily harmful acts.

He’ll never make it.

A criminal pilfering the cash box once a week has himself stopped cold as far as case gains are concerned.

In 1954 I counted some noses. I checked up on 21 cases who had never had any gains since 1950. 17 turned out to be criminals! The other 4 were beyond the reach of investigation.

That gave me my first clue.

For some years then, I watched for no-gain cases and carefully followed up those that I could. They had major or minor criminal backgrounds.

This gave the 1959 breakthrough on the meter checks (Sec Checking).

Following it further since 1959 I have finally amassed enough histories to state:

THE PERSON WHO IS NOT GETTING CASE GAINS IS COMMITTING CONTINUING OVERTS.

While this sounds like a very good “out” for us, we assume that the auditor at least tried something sensible.

Today—the running of a pc by grades is a saving grace for merely “tough cases”. Directors of Processing are doing well with the modern graded process approach, level by level, and the D of P Washington has just told me they were cracking cases with the lowest grade processes DC had never been able to handle well before.

So, given processing by Grades (the best case approach we’ve ever had), we crack the rough ones.

But will that be all cases?

There’s still one. The case who continually commits overts before, during and after processing.

He won’t make it.

One thing helps this, however.

You have seen the Ethics Codes appear.

By putting a bit of control in the Scientology environment we have enough threat to restrain dramatization.

The phenomena is this: The reactive bank can exert stress on the pc if it is not obeyed. Discipline must exert just a shade more stress against dramatization than the bank does. This checks the performance of the continual overt long enough to let processing bite.

Not everyone is a continuous overt committer by a thousand to one. But this phenomenon is not confined to the no-gain case.

The slow gain case is also committing overts the auditor doesn’t see.

Therefore a little discipline in the environment speeds the slow gain case, the one we’re more interested in.

The no-gain case, frankly, is one I am not panting to solve. If a fellow wants to sell his next hundred trillion for the sake of the broken toy he stole, I’m afraid I can’t be bothered. I have no contract with any Big Thetan to save the world complete.

It is enough for me to know:

1. Where bottom is, and

2. How to help speed slow gain cases.

Bottom is the chap who eats your lunch apple and says the children did it. Bottom is the fellow who sows the environment with secret suppressive acts and vicious generalities.

The slow gain case responds to a bit of “keep your nose clean, please, while I apply the thetan-booster.”

The fast gain case does his job and doesn’t give a hoot about threatened discipline if it’s fair. And the fast gain case helps out and the fast gain case can be helped by a more orderly environment. The good worker works more happily when bad workers see the pitfalls and desist from distracting him.

So we all win.

The no-gain case? Well, he sure doesn’t deserve any gain. One pc in a thousand. And he yaps and groans and says “Prove it works” and blames us and raises hell. He makes us think we fail.

Look down in our Sthil files. There are actually thousands upon thousands of Scientologists there who each one comment on how wonderful it is and how good they feel. There are a few dozen or so who howl they haven’t been helped! What a ratio! Yet I believe some on staff think we have a lot of dissatisfied people. These no-gain characters strew so much entheta around that we think we fail. Look in the Saint Hill files sometime! Those many thousands of reports continue to pour in from around the world with hurrah! Only the few dozen groan.

But long ago I closed my book on the no-gain case. Each of those few dozen no-gains tell frightening lies to little children, pour ink on shoes, say how abused they are while tearing the guts out of those unlucky enough to be around them. They are suppressive persons, every one. I know. I’ve seen them all the way down to the little clinker they call their soul. And I don’t like what I saw.

The people who come to you with wild discreditable rumours, who seek to tear people’s attention off Scientology, who chew up orgs, are suppressive persons.

Well, give them a good rock and let them suppress it!

I can’t end this HCO B without a confession. I know how to cure them rather easily.

Maybe I’ll never let it be done.

For had they had their way we would have lost our chance. It’s too near to think about.

After all, we have to earn our freedom. I don’t care much for those who didn’t help.

The rest of us had to sweat a lot harder than was necessary to make it come true.


L. RON HUBBARD





LRH: ml.rd
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 1 OCTOBER 1965

Remimeo
All Students

MUTTER TR



NAME: Mutter TR.

PURPOSE: To perfect muzzled auditing comm cycle.

COMMANDS: “Do fish swim?” “Do birds fly?”

POSITION: Student and coach sit facing each other a comfortable distance apart.

TRAINING STRESS:

1. Coach has student give command.

2. Coach mutters an unintelligible answer at different times.

3. Student acknowledges.

4. Coach flunks if student does anything else but acknowledge.

(Note: This is the entirety of this Drill. It is not to be confused with any other Training Drill.)


L. RON HUBBARD





LRH:ml.cden
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED














SAINT HILL SPECIAL BRIEFING COURSE LECTURE
14 October 1965


** 6510C14 SHSBC-68 Briefing to Review Auditors

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 11 AUGUST 1971
Remimeo
AOs Issue V
Tech Hats (Taken from and replaces
Qual Hats HCO PL 10 November 1966)
Ethics (Amended and reissued
R6EW, CC & OT 28 March 1974)
Course Packs
SECURITY OF DATA


Issued with a small amount of R6 data in 1964, three or four persons promptly used it on pcs knowing well it was forbidden. The pcs became ill or misemotional toward us. And just the day I write this (original writing 4 October 1965) I myself encountered a pc, very ill, who had had some original R6 data misused on her and did not suspect why her case and health worsened. She was not ready for it at all.

The issue earlier was a trial balloon, in a sense. I found certain persons (a small minority) were not up to responsibility for the material of April 1964.

Therefore our firm action will be that the moment we find the material of the Clearing Course or OT Course has escaped or been misused we will quickly trace the person who was insecure and cut off all further or any future Clearing or OT data issue to that person. The likelihood of independent discovery even with clues has proven to be nonexistent by actual review of auditors trying to find pieces of it when they had over half of the answers already.

You must realize that we suffer, all of us, from the misuse of knowledge concerning the mind at a very early period. To place this data near such people as psychiatrists or even states places them in a position to enslave people or repeat the original action and cave people in. A very small minority, receiving incorrect data, did promptly use it harmfully on others after April 1964.

Until we ourselves have climbed well out of the hole, we must safeguard the materials. Our case gains depend on it. And others could make our salvage of people impossible.

We do not safeguard these materials from any commercial consideration. Our futures, those of each of us and those of all Scientologists, depend on our keeping this material under lock and safeguarded from abuse until we are well away as a group and can handle things better as individuals as well as a group.

The road is wide open to anyone to come up the grades and obtain them. But it is shut to any who misuse them or injure their security.

Students of the Advanced Courses, the Advanced Course C/S and Supervisor, Ethics Officers and all HCO and Org staff have it in their personal interest to enforce security of materials to the limit.

These restrictions apply to no data up to Grade V.

From Power Processing on up the data is confidential. Up to there, you can release Scientology data as you always have—freely and to everyone. But this last bit is dangerous in unskilled or uneducated or unscrupulous hands and it is purely ours. It belongs to the Scientologists who keep the show on the road and must be available to them when they are ready.


LRH:sb.ntm jh L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1966,1971,1974 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


[The text of this issue was originally part of HCO PL 4 October 65, “Clearing Course Materials”.]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 5 NOVEMBER 1965

Remimeo
Students
Level I


FIVE WAY BRACKET ON HELP

Commands

How could you help me?

How could I help you?

How could you help another?

How could another help you?

How could another help another?


The above commands are run consecutively as one process—muzzled style.


L. RON HUBBARD
LRH: ml.rd
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED




HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 5 NOVEMBER 1965
Issue II
Remimeo
Students

LECTURE GRAPHS


The following graphs accompany Saint Hill Special Briefing Course Lecture of July 25, AD13:

(1); (2); (3); (4) and (5).

L. RON HUBBARD

LRH:ml.bh
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


[The graphs referred to above are duplicates of those contained in HCO B 14 August 1963, Lecture Graphs, Volume V-339. They are not repeated here.]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 7 NOVEMBER 1965

Remimeo
Qual Personnel
Tech Personnel
Tech Division
Students
Qual Division


RELEASE REHABILITATION ERROR


The most laughable error commonly being made in Release Rehabilitation is one in which the auditor discounts the value of his own auditing, keys out a lock in a pre-Scientology period and tells the pc he was a Release sometime before he was audited.

Auditors have declared pcs released when 9 days old or in 1942 or almost any earlier time. All through non-comprehension of the phenomenon of Release. It leaves some pretty puzzled pcs too !

“When you fell on your head when you were five you were a former Release because I now have a floating needle.” This auditor statement betrays a lack of comprehension of the phenomenon of Release.

Of course if you key out a major lock you may today get a Release State.

Because the needle floats today does not mean it was floating just before the pc fell on his head at the age of 5.

The pc today, with better understanding through auditing, can attain Release by keying out an incident which made him worse than normal.

His needle was not floating before he gagged on his bottle at the age of two. Blowing the lock of gagging on his bottle may now, added to his new study, the auditor’s interest and the very powerful technology of just basic auditing, make him go Release.

An auditor doing this is downgrading his own presence, skill and comm cycle. These, added to blowing a lock, make a Release today—it does not make a Release years before the pc was ever audited.

I’ve never seen a “natural floating needle” in the absence of auditing. I never expect to.

People are normal, worried, neurotic or psychotic. Hobby therapy, a change of surroundings, taking up tapestry can move a person upscale toward normal. They never moved anyone up to Release. Becoming happier doesn’t key out bank. It causes a person to occlude keyed-in bank—to “forget it”.

Only auditing keys out bank.

And an auditor doing rehabilitation, using a meter, using a comm cycle, using his knowledge of the mind is doing something that was not done before. And he makes Releases. He makes them today by keying out yesterday. He does not make them years ago. He is not auditing years ago. He is auditing today’s pc today and making today’s Release today.

Life keys out no locks. Trillions of years of living never undid a moment of it. Come off the mystic mystic kick that one can if he lives long enough experience himself to Release or Clear. That’s trap.

Do not unduly complicate your actions in Release Rehabilitation by misassigning the pc’s period of Release. If you do he’ll be confused as the datum given him is false.

If you find in asking for a period of Release that you get pre-Scientology times, realize the pc has found something which if released would cause him to go Release today. You’d get the same response if you asked “What period would I have to contact to get you Released?” or “Give me a major time of key-in.” Or “Give me a major time of change.” Or do a Problems Intensive Assessment. Or do an ARC Break of former times assessment. You’ll come up with the same date for it. Treat that period with rehab processes (or any of many other processes) and you’ll get the phenomenon of Release right before your eyes.

So don’t be telling pcs “You were a Release before you were ever audited. I see here you were a Release just before you fell in the garbage can at two.” Both statements are false.

Lasting results are based on Truth alone.

Do what you’re doing in rehabs. Just don’t make a false assertion about it. Your auditing is pretty powerful. Don’t discount it.


L. RON HUBBARD







LRH:ml.cden
Copyright ©1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 8 NOVEMBER 1965
Remimeo
Tech Personnel Tech Div
Qual Personnel Qual Div

SUPPRESSIVES AND HIDDEN STANDARDS

If you find a Suppressive on a case you will also find a chronic problem.

A problem is postulate—counter-postulate.

When a person is faced with suppression he is facing a counter-postulate.

A hidden standard is a problem a person thinks must be resolved before auditing can be seen to have worked. It’s a standard by which to judge Scientology or auditing or the auditor.

This hidden standard is always an old problem of long duration. It is a postulate—counter-postulate situation—the source of the counter-postulate was suppressive to the pc.

Therefore you can always find a Suppressive by finding a pc’s hidden standard and following it back to when it began. You will find there a Suppressive to the pc.

Similarly if you trace back the persons and groups who have been suppressive of the pc you will find a hidden standard popping into view.

The datum is—a case that betters then worsens (a “Roller Coaster Case” or a “Roller Coaster”) is always connected to a suppressive person.

The Roller Coaster is caused by the hidden standard going into action. “My eyesight didn’t get better.” Locate a present time Suppressive on the case and trace that suppressive back to others earlier and you suddenly see the pc brighten up and (apparently for no reason) state his eyesight suddenly improved.

A case that betters and worsens (a Roller Coaster) is always connected to a suppressive person and will not get steady gain until the Suppressive is found on the case or the basic suppressive person earlier.

Because the case doesn’t get well he or she is a Potential Trouble Source. To us, to others, to himself. You can’t successfully audit that pc because there is a hidden standard. It makes the pc think he is no better. Suppressives also suppress the pc just like that so long as a hidden standard is present.

Find the Suppressive, make the pc handle or disconnect. Then audit the pc up to Problems Release by getting rid of the hidden standard and the basic suppressive.

Never audit a pc who is a Potential Trouble Source other than on the infallible, never varied datum, a Roller Coaster is always a PTS connected to an SP.

Note also that a person going clear is now a thetan with a new view of life and has new hidden standards (requiring the location of suppressives) which he had no reality on as a Man or later as a Release.

LRH :ml.cden L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 14 NOVEMBER 1965

Remimeo

CLEARING COMMANDS

Always have a dictionary in the auditing room with you. When running a process newly or whenever the preclear is confused about the meaning of the commands, clear the commands with the preclear, using the dictionary, if necessary.

It could take a long time to clear the command. The worse off the pc, the longer it takes.

Example:

Auditor is going to run 0-0 on the pc. Auditor reads the commands one at a time to the pc and asks the pc “What does this command mean to you?” From the pc’s answer the auditor realizes that the pc has a confusion on the words “willing” and “talk”. He tells the pc to look them up in a dictionary. The pc now understands “talk”, but still seems slightly puzzled about “willing”. Now the auditor could tell the pc to use the word “willing” in a few sentences. When the pc understands it, the auditor again gets the pc to tell him what the whole command means to him.

If necessary, the auditor could get the pc to define each word of the command to be used.

UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES IS THE AUDITOR TO EVALUATE FOR THE PC AND TELL HIM WHAT THE WORD OR COMMAND MEANS.

The worst fault is the pc using a new set of words in place of the actual word and answering the alter-ised word, not the word itself, (see HCOB 10 March 1965, “Words, Misunderstood Goofs”).


LRH:ml.cden L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


[This HCOB is amended by BTB 2 May 1972R, Revised and Reissued 10 June 1974, Cleaning Commands, which gives the rules of clearing commands.]




HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 16 NOVEMBER 1965
Remimeo
Students

E-METER SENSITIVITY SETTING

When preparing for a session, an auditor sets up his E-Meter as per E-Meter
Drill #4.

Rudiments are run at Sensitivity 16.

Lower level processes are run at Sensitivity 16.

Above Grade V sensitivity is run at 5.


LRH : ml.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 16 NOVEMBER 1965
Issue II
Remimeo
Students

COMMANDS FOR UPPER INDOCTRINATION
TR6, TR7, TR9

(This HCO B cancels commands as given in
Scientology Training Course Manual)


The commands to be used for 8-C are: Look at that wall. Thank you. Walk over to that wall. Thank you. Touch that wall. Thank you. Turn around. Thank you.

The auditor points to show which wall each time.


LRH:ml.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED







HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 19 NOVEMBER 1965
Remimeo
Students
LEVEL I


PROBLEMS PROCESS


This is an extremely fast process for use at Level I to handle problems. The process commands are simply:

“What is the problem?”

“What solutions have you had for that problem?”

One gets the pc to give his problem then runs TA off solutions. Then a new statement of the problem and more questions about solutions.

These commands are run in very strict muzzled style—no additives or diversions whatsoever.


LRH:ml rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright ©1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 19 NOVEMBER 1965

Remimeo
Students SH & Academies
All Auditors

AUDITING REPORTS


An auditing report is the report of a session given, written during the session, on the session.

It is not a copy of the report of a session given. Or a report drawn from notes taken on a session given.

Auditing reports and worksheets should be neat as possible under the circumstances of a session.

They must contain pertinent data of the session given, i.e. BDs noted, TA and time notations, etc. These should be entered on the worksheet at the time they occur.

Later entries done to clarify bad writing where one was rushed or where a shorthand was done that is not clear to the D of P or Examiner, should be indicated as a later entry by using a different colored pen, etc.

A made-up report, or one done later to obtain neatness or completeness by an auditor who failed to keep a good session report at the time of the session, will be disqualified as evidence of auditor ability when presented to the Examiner and chitted by the D of P when turned in by an HGC auditor.

The whole idea of requiring an auditor report of a session is to have a record of the session for the D of P or Examiner, upon which to adjudicate what is going on with a PC. And a report done later is NOT a report of the session given.

The Summary Report, done after the session, should be a l 5-minute or so summary and should be done immediately after the session, not a day later, and should be done as per policy on Summary Reports. A Summary cannot be substituted for the actual auditing report.


L. RON HUBBARD


LRH:ep.rd
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 24 NOVEMBER 1965

Remimeo
Required for
Level IV Students
To Review Auditors
LEVEL IV

SEARCH AND DISCOVERY

Prerequisite: A Knowledge of Ethics
Definitions and Purposes.


The process called Search and Discovery requires as well a good knowledge of Ethics.

One must know what a SUPPRESSIVE PERSON is, what a POTENTIAL TROUBLE SOURCE is and the mechanism of how and why a case Roller Coasters and what that is. All this data exists in Ethics policy letters and should be studied well before one attempts a “Search and Discovery” or further study of this HCOB. Ethics is not merely a legal action—it handles the whole phenomena of case worsening (Roller Coaster) after processing and without this technology an auditor easily becomes baffled and tends to plunge and squirrel. The only reason a case Roller Coasters after good standard auditing is the PTS phenomena and a Suppressive is present.


THREE TYPES

There are Three Types of PTS.

Type One is the easy one. The SP on the case is right in present time, actively suppressing the person.

Type Two is harder for the apparent Suppressive Person in present time is only a restimulator for the actual suppressive.

Type Three is beyond the facilities of orgs not equipped with hospitals as these are entirely psychotic.

HANDLING TYPE ONE PTS

The Type One is normally handled by an Ethics Officer in the course of a hearing.

The person is asked if anyone is invalidating him or his gains or Scientology and if the pc answers with a name and is then told to handle or disconnect from that person the good indicators come in promptly and the person is quite satisfied.

If however there is no success in finding the SP on the case or if the person starts naming Org personnel or other unlikely persons as SP the Ethics Officer must realize that he is handling a Type Two PTS and, because the Auditing will consume time, sends the person to Tech or Qual for a Search and Discovery.

It is easy to tell a Type One PTS from a Type Two. The Type One brightens up at once and ceases to Roller Coaster the moment the present time SP is spotted. The pc ceases to Roller Coaster. The pc does not go back on it and begin to beg off. The pc does not begin to worry about the consequences of disconnection. If the pc does any of these things, then the pc is a Type Two.

It can be seen that Ethics handles the majority of PTSs in a fast manner. There is no trouble about it. All goes smoothly.

It can also be seen that Ethics cannot afford the time to handle a Type Two PTS and there is no reason the Type Two should not pay well for the Auditing.

Therefore, when Ethics finds its Type One approach does not work quickly, Ethics must send the person to the proper division that is handling Search and Discovery.

TYPE TWO

The pc who isn’t sure, won’t disconnect, or still Roller Coasters, or who doesn’t brighten up, can’t name any SP at all, is a Type Two.

Only Search and Discovery will help.


SEARCH AND DISCOVERY

The first thing to know is that CASE WORSENING IS CAUSED ONLY BY A PTS SITUATION.

There never will be any other reason.

As soon as you doubt this datum and think about “other causes” or try to explain it some other way you no longer prevent cases from worsening and no longer rescue those who have worsened.

The second thing to know is that A SUPPRESSIVE IS ALWAYS A PERSON, A BEING OR A GROUP OF BEINGS. A suppressive is not a condition, a problem, a postulate. Problems and Counter-Postulates come into the matter but the SP as a being or group must always be located as a being or a group, not as merely an idea. As the technology is close to and similar to that of a service facsimile, a poorly trained auditor can get confused between them and produce a condition he says is the cause. Persons who cannot confront and who therefore see persons as ideas not people are the ones most likely to fail in doing Search and Discovery.

The third thing to know is that there can be an actual SP and another person or being similar to the actual one who is only an apparent SP.

An actual SP actually suppresses another.

An apparent SP only reminds the pc of the actual one and so is restimulated into being a PTS.

The actual SP can be in present time (Type One PTS) or is in the past or distant (Type Two PTS).

The Type Two always has an apparent SP who is not the SP on the case, is confusing the two and is acting PTS only because of restimulation, not because of suppression.

Search and Discovery as a process is done exactly by the general rules of listing. One lists for persons or groups who are or have suppressed the pc. The list is complete when only one item reads on nulling and this is the item.

If the item turns out to be a group, one does a second list of who or what would represent that group, gets the list long enough to leave on nulling only one item reading, and that is the SP.

An incident is not a person or a group.

A condition is not a person or a group. And a group is not a person, what you want is one being.

The E-Meter signs are unmistakable and the good indicators come in strongly when the actual SP is found.

This is the entire action. It is liable to the various ills and errors of writing and nulling a list, such as overlisting, underlisting, ARC Breaking the pc by by-passing the item or getting an incomplete list. These are avoided by knowing one’s business as an Auditor and being able to handle an E-Meter with skill and confidence.

When one goofs on a Search and Discovery and finds the wrong actual SP the signs are the same as those where a Type Two is handled as a Type One—not sure, no good indicators, Roller Coasters again, etc.

The actual SP can be back track but it is seldom vital to go far out of PT and usual for a lifetime person to turn up.

Done correctly the pc’s good indicators come in at once, the pc cognites, the meter reacts very well with Blowdowns and repeated long falls, and the pc ceases to Roller Coaster.

Care should be taken not to get too enthusiastic in going far back track on the pc as you run into whole track implants etc, easily handleable only at Level V. The pc can get “over whumped” if you go too far back and you’ll wish you hadn’t. This normally happens however, only when the pc has been ARC Broken by the Auditor, when the right item has been by-passed and the list is overlong, or when 2 or 3 items are still reading on the list (incomplete list).

Locating a Service Facsimile is quite similar to Search and Discovery but they are different processes entirely.

Only the doingness is similar. In Search and Discovery the end product is a being. In Service Facsimile the end product is an item or concept or idea. Don’t get the two mixed.

HANDLING TYPE THREE

The Type Three PTS is mostly in institutions or would be.

In this case the Type Two’s apparent SP is spread all over the world and is often more than all the people there are—for the person sometimes has ghosts about him or demons and they are just more apparent SPs but imaginary as beings as well.

All institutional cases are PTSs. The whole of insanity is wrapped up in this one fact.

The insane is not just a bad off being, the insane is a being who has been overwhelmed by an actual SP until too many persons are apparent SPs. This makes the person Roller Coaster continually in life. The Roller Coaster is even cyclic (repetitive as a cycle).

Handling an insane person as a Type Two might work but probably not case for case. One might get enough wins on a few to make one fail completely by so many loses on the many.

Just as you tell a Type Two to disconnect from the actual SP (wherever found on the track) you must disconnect the person from the environment.

Putting the person in a current institution puts him in a Bedlam. And when also “treated” it may finish him. For he will Roller Coaster from any treatment given, until made into a Type Two and given a Search and Discovery.

The task with a Type Three is not treatment as such. It is to provide a relatively safe environment and quiet and rest and no treatment of a mental nature at all. Giving him a quiet court with a motionless object in it might do the trick if he is permitted to sit there unmolested. Medical care of a very unbrutal nature is necessary as intravenous feeding and soporifics (sleeping and quietening drugs) may be necessary, such persons are sometimes also physically ill from an illness with a known medical cure.

Treatment with drugs, shock, operation is just more suppression. The person will not really get well, will relapse, etc.

Standard Auditing on such a person is subject to the Roller Coaster phenomena. They get worse after getting better. “Successes” are sporadic, enough to lead one on, and usually worsen again since these people are PTS.

But removed from apparent SPs, kept in a quiet surroundings, not pestered or threatened or put in fear, the person comes up to Type Two and a Search and Discovery should end the matter. But there will always be some failures as the insane sometimes withdraw into rigid unawareness as a final defense, sometimes can’t be kept alive and sometimes are too hectic and distraught to ever become quiet, the extremes of too quiet and never quiet have a number of psychiatric names such as “catatonia” (withdrawn totally) and “manic” (too hectic).

Classification is interesting but non-productive since they are all PTS, all will Roller Coaster and none can be trained or processed with any idea of lasting result no matter the temporary miracle.

Remove a Type Three PTS from the environment, give him or her rest and quiet, do a Search and Discovery when rest and quiet have made the person Type Two.

(Note: These paragraphs on the Type Three make good a promise given in Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health to develop “Institutional Dianetics”.)

The modern mental hospital with its brutality and suppressive treatments is not the way to give a psychotic quiet and rest. Before anything effective can be done in this field a proper institution would have to be provided, offering only rest, quiet and medical assistance for intravenous feedings and sleeping draughts where necessary but not as “treatment” and where no treatment is attempted until the person looks recovered and only then a Search and Discovery as above under Type Two.


L. RON HUBBARD

LRH:ep.cden
Copyright ©1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 26 NOVEMBER 1965

Remimeo


INFORMATION ON REHABILITATION


The following despatch was sent to me by Len Small, Legal Officer WW:


“After reading SEC ED 212SH, I have realized that in London when I was CERTS & AWARDS, we were doing something grossly wrong which was responsible to some extent for our low income and probably ‘created’ missed withholds and by-passed charge, by false declares.

“The facts are that an old-timer would buy 5 hrs rehab and after having former release check and passed on to TECH, all the levels would be rehabbed at once using a Form 26 June. The auditor would e.g. ‘suggest declare 0-IV’, or ‘0, II-IV’. Most rehabs were done in under two hours. The pc would be declared if TA position OK, good indicators in, and pc agreeing that he had been rehabbed on those levels.

“On occasion, a pc would say ‘What about the release point I reached on 3M?’ ‘I went release on whole track processes. What does that make me?’

“If they knew how rehabs were done here at SH, and followed procedure, it would be a great boost to their statistic.

“I suggest that an HCOB stating explicitly how Rehabs must be done and declared will put stable data on line.

“From my own personal experience as a preclear, if a level has been left un-rehabilitated, the mass on that level tends to key in and make life uncomfortable. It was only when the auditor started listing the processes I had been run on that I really felt good and that I was getting somewhere.

“If all release points obtained in past processing were rehabbed, pcs would be a lot happier and less likely to key in subsequently.”


L RON HUBBARD


LRH:neg.rd
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


[SEC ED 212 SH, Rehab Scheduling, which was written by L. Ron Hubbard, stated that a pc was rehabbed on only one level at a time.]


[HCO B 30 November 1965, Library Record of Levels, is a 3 l-page mimeo that simply lists training materials divided into the subjects of Levels 0-IV and Instruction Technology. The only text is at the beginning which says:
“This is a complete list of all HCO Bulletins and books containing the materials as per The Auditor 10 Gradation Chart applying to each training level.
“While not all these are to be issued to students, they give the total of available materials.
“Tapes will be issued as a separate list.”]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 1 DECEMBER 1965

Remimeo
All Students
St Hill Courses
All staff

CCHs

(Replaces HCO Bulletin of July 5th, 1963, “CCHs Rewritten”)



As per HCO Pol Ltr May 17th, 65, the CCHs are processes. They are not drills. The following revised rundown on the CCHs is to be used by all Auditors.

CONTROL—COMMUNICATION—HAVINGNESS PROCESSES

The following rundown of CCH 1, 2, 3 and 4 has been slightly amended. CCHs are run as follows:

CCH l to a flat point then CCH 2 to a flat point then CCH 3 to a flat point then CCH 4 to a flat point then CCH I to a flat point, etc.

---------------

No: CCH 1.

NAME: GIVE ME THAT HAND. Tone 40.

AUDITING COMMANDS: GIVE ME THAT HAND.

Physical action of taking hand when not given and then replacing it in the PC’s lap. Making physical contact with the PC’s hand if PC resists. THANK YOU ending each cycle.

All Tone 40 with clear intention, one command in one unit of time. Take up each new physical change manifested as though it were an origin by the PC, when it happens, and querying it by asking “What’s happening?” This two-way comm is not Tone 40. Run only on the right hand.

AUDITING POSITION: Auditor and PC seated in chairs without arms. Auditor’s knees on outside of both PC’s knees.

PROCESS PURPOSE: To demonstrate to PC that control of PC’s body is possible, despite revolt of circuits, and inviting PC to directly control it. Absolute control by auditor then passes over towards absolute control of his own body by PC.

Never stop process until a flat place is reached. Freezes may be introduced at end of cycle, this being after the THANK YOU and before the next command, maintaining a solid comm line, to ascertain information from the PC or to bridge from the process. This is done between two commands, holding the PC’s hand after acknowledgement. PC’s hand should be clasped with exactly correct pressure. Make every command and cycle separate. Maintain Tone 40, stress on intention from Auditor to PC with each command. To leave an instant for PC to do it by own will before Auditor decides to take hand or make contact with it. Auditor indicates hand by nod of head.

Tone 40 Command = Intention without reservation. Change is any physical, observed manifestation.

No: CCH 2.

NAME: TONE 40 8c

AUDITING COMMANDS: YOU LOOK AT THAT WALL. THANK YOU.
YOU WALK OVER TO THAT WALL. THANK YOU.
YOU TOUCH THAT WALL. THANK YOU.
TURN AROUND. THANK YOU.

Take up each new physical change manifested as though it were an origin by the PC, when it happens, and querying it by asking “What’s happening?” This two-way comm is not Tone 40. Commands smoothly enforced physically when necessary. Tone 40, full intention.

AUDITING POSITION: Auditor and PC ambulant, Auditor in physical contact with PC as needed.

PROCESS PURPOSE: To demonstrate to PC that his body can be controlled and thus inviting him to control it. To orient him in his present time Environment. To increase his ability to duplicate and thusly increase his Havingness.

Absolute Auditor precision. No drops from Tone 40. No flubs. Total present time. Auditor on PC’s right side. Auditor body acts as block to forward motion when PC turns. Auditor gives command, gives PC a moment to obey, then enforces command with physical contact of exactly correct force to get command executed. Auditor does not block PC from executing commands. Method of introduction as in CCH l. Freezes may be introduced at the end of cycle, this being after the THANK YOU and before the next command, maintaining a solid comm line, to ascertain information from the PC or to bridge from the process, this being the acknowledgement “THANK YOU” after the command “TURN AROUND”.

CCH 1 and CCH 2 were developed by L. RON HUBBARD in Washington, D.C., in 1957 for the 19th ACC.


No: CCH 3.

NAME: HAND SPACE MIMICRY

AUDITING COMMANDS: Auditor raises 2 hands palms facing PC’s about an equal distance between the Auditor and PC and says “PUT YOUR HANDS AGAINST MINE, FOLLOW THEM AND CONTRIBUTE TO THEIR MOTION”. He then makes a simple motion with right hand then left. “DID YOU CONTRIBUTE TO THEIR MOTION?” Acknowledge answer. Auditor allows PC to break solid comm line. When this is flat, the Auditor does this same with a half inch of space between his and the PC’s palms. The command being “PUT YOUR HANDS FACING MINE ABOUT 1/2 INCH AWAY, FOLLOW THEM AND CONTRIBUTE TO THEIR MOTION”. “DID YOU CONTRIBUTE TO THEIR MOTION?” Acknowledge. When this is flat, Auditor does it with a wider space and so on until PC is able to follow motions a yard away.

AUDITING POSITION: Auditor and PC seated, close together facing each other, PC’s knees between Auditor’s knees.

PROCESS PURPOSE: To develop reality on the auditor using the reality scale (solid communication line). To get PC into communication by control and duplication. To find Auditor.

Auditor should be gentle and accurate in his motions, all motions being Tone 40, giving PC wins. To be free in 2-way communication. Process is introduced and run as a formal process. If PC dopes off in this process Auditor may take PC’s wrist and help him execute the command one hand at a time. If PC does not answer during anaten to

question “DID YOU CONTRIBUTE TO THEIR MOTION?” Auditor may wait for normal comm lag of that PC, acknowledge and continue process.

TONE 40 Motion = Intention without Reservation. Two-Way Communication = One Question—The Right One.

HISTORY. Developed by L. Ron Hubbard in Washington, D.C., 1956 as a therapeutic version of Dummy Hand Mimicry. Something was needed to supplant “Look at me. Who am I?” and “Find the auditor” part of rudiments.


No: CCH 4.

NAME: BOOK MIMICRY

AUDITING COMMANDS: THERE ARE NO SET VERBAL COMMANDS.

Auditor makes simple motions with a book. Hands book to the PC. PC makes motion, duplicating Auditor’s mirror-image-wise. Auditor asks PC if he is satisfied that the PC duplicated the motion. If PC is and Auditor is also fully satisfied, Auditor takes back the book and goes to next command. If PC is not sure that he duplicated any command, Auditor repeats it for him and gives him back the book. If PC is sure he did and Auditor can see duplication is pretty wrong, Auditor accepts PC’s answer and continues on a gradient scale of motion either with the left or right hand till PC can do original command correctly. This ensures no invalidation of the PC. Tone 40, only in motions, verbal 2-way quite free.

AUDITING POSITION: Auditor and PC seated facing each other, a comfortable distance apart.

PROCESS PURPOSE: To bring up PC’s communication with control and duplication (control and duplication = communication).

Give PC wins. It is necessary for Auditor to duplicate his own commands. Circular motions are more complex than straight lines. Tolerance of plus or minus randomity is apparent here and the Auditor should probably begin on the PC with motions that begin in the same place each time and are neither very fast nor very slow, nor very complex. Introduced by the Auditor seeing that PC understands what is to be done, as there is no verbal command, formal process.

HISTORY. Developed by LRH for the 16th ACC in Washington, D.C., 1957. Based on duplication. Developed by LRH in London, 1952.


L. RON HUBBARD


LRH :ep.rd
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 6 DECEMBER 1965

Remimeo

LOW TA CASES


Low TA Cases (who go below 2.0) will not react to any processing but Power Processing.

The last power process is all that has ever been known to improve the low TA case.

Don’t be optimistic if a case is found to go below 2.0, the ONLY remedy I have ever known is Power Processing flattened.


L. RON HUBBARD


LRH:ep.bh
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 10 DECEMBER 1965
Remimeo
Academy Tech Division
Students

E-METER DRILL COACHING


The following was submitted by Malcolm Cheminais, Supervisor on the Saint Hill Special Briefing Course.

Here are some observations I have made on the coaching of E-Meter drills, which I feel could be of use:

1. The coach’s needle is dirty. The student’s out comm cycle has cut his comm in some way, but PRIOR to that the coach failed to flunk the part of the comm cycle that went out. Correct flunking by coaches equals students with no dirty needles.

2. If a coach’s TA starts climbing on a drill and the needle gets sticky, it means that the student’s comm cycle has dispersed him and pushed him out of PT. The coach is either (1) not flunking at all (2) flunking the incorrect thing.

3. The correct flunking by the coach of an out comm cycle, which has dispersed him and pushed his TA up, will always result in a TA blowdown. If there is no blowdown, the coach has flunked the wrong thing.

4. Needle not responding well and sensitively on assessment drills, although the needle clean. Coach has failed to flunk TR 1 (or TR0) for lack of impingement and reach.

5. Coach reaching forward and leaning on the table, means TR 1 is out with the student.

6. Student asking coach for considerations to get TA down, but TA climbing on the considerations—the coach is cleaning a clean, instead of flunking the out comm cycle, which occurred earlier and pushed his TA up.

7. Student getting coach’s considerations off to clean the needle, but needle remaining dirty—student is cutting the coach’s comm while getting the considerations off and the coach is not picking this up.

8. Students shouting or talking very loudly on assessment drills to try and get the Meter to read by overwhelm. The reason for this is invariably—”but I’m assessing the bank!” They haven’t realized that banks don’t read, only thetans impinged upon by the bank—therefore the TR1 must be addressed to the thetan. The meter responds proportionately to the amount of ARC in the Session.

L. RON HUBBARD

LRH:emp.rd
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


[For use on the HDG, this HCO B has been revised by HCO B 27 January 1970, E-Meter Drill Coaching. ]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 27 DECEMBER 1965

Remimeo
Solo Audit Course
Clearing Course
Saint Hill Pcs
Franchise
VITAMINS


I have found that 600 milligrams of Vitamin E (minimum) per day assists Scientology processing very markedly.

Data on Vitamin E applied to other fields is available from Webber Pharmaceuticals, Ltd, 14 Ronson Drive, Rexdale, Ontario, Canada. An excellent popular book on Vitamin E in its various uses is available from booksellers. It is Your Key to a Healthy Heart: The suppressed record of Vitamin E by Herbert Bailey, published by the Shilton Company, Philadelphia. The Shute Foundation for Medical Research, London, Ontario, Canada, pioneered the subject and will give general advice.

In Johannesburg due to high altitude, no pc may be processed who is not taking at least 600 mg per day of Vitamin E.

The apparent action of this Vitamin is to oxygenate the blood and inhibit the body from pulling in mental masses due to oxygen-energy starvation.

In areas where it is against the law to recommend vitamins this HCO B does not apply.

Vitamin E, according to Bailey, is suppressed because it cures heart disease which furnishes 50% of the revenue of the U.S. medical doctor.

I read the book by Bailey and did some experimental work with Vitamin E with interesting success. Webber Pharmaceuticals has airmailed me further literature.

It is useless, I believe, to take less than 600 mg per day and lesser doses have little or no reaction on processing. One has to take it for two or three days before it begins to have any effect.

The most direct result is quite measurable on an E-Meter. Reads of the needle become longer. Tone Arm action increases.

It works by itself but is best taken with an old-time “Guk Bomb”. The formula of the “bomb” is variable but is basically 100 mg of Vitamin B1, 15 gr of calcium, 500 mg of Vitamin C. If you add 100 mg of old-time nicotinic acid (not niacinamide) and take it daily it becomes “Dianazene” for radiation prevention. Don’t include nicotinic acid in the formula with Vitamin E unless you are trying to get rid of radiation or radiation sickness. The nicotinic acid is not necessary to smoother processing and will not assist it. 100 mg of Vitamin B1 lasts for only 47 minutes so far as processing is concerned. But it helps in general tone. Vitamin E does not have a quick reaction so far as processing is concerned, one merely takes it and as the days go by processing is easier to do. It doesn’t wear out in a session, but you have to keep on taking it daily. 600 mg is the minimum. There is no maximum but some heart cases take up to 1,250. Shutes in treatment of disease recommend 400-600 mg per day for the average sized woman and 600-800 mg per day for the average sized male.

It doesn’t seem to matter to processing whether the Vitamin E is “Alpha Tocopherol”, synthetic or what. Just any Vitamin E apparently works.

Vitamin E assists a great many ills including diabetes and may have some effect on many others.

It, even with “Guk”, will not by itself release or clear anyone. When dosage is discontinued what it “cured” might relapse. But while it is being taken one feels fine and there’s no reason to stop taking it.

To get the best results one should probably take 600 mg and a Guk bomb each day, preferably after eating.

One person in a million is said to get an adverse “side effect” from taking Vitamin E but it is not fatal and this may not even be true. The “side effect” is said to be temporarily raised blood pressure.

If anyone makes this up into a single tablet be sure that the tablet is not pressed so hard that it won’t dissolve easily in the stomach.

Dianazene (for radiation) fails utterly when all ingredients are pressed together into one tablet.

Vitamin E is generally available but sometimes has to be specially ordered. It is useless to buy it in less than 100 mg tablets. Preferably 200 mg tablets of it should be bought. However it is bought, just be sure there’s enough of it (300 to 600 mg). Small quantities don’t produce any effect at all, which is why the medicos earlier missed its value.

Anyone’s auditing can benefit from it but at Levels VI and VII it becomes quite vital.

Oxygen causes the body to attract mental image pictures less. Carbon dioxide pulls mental images hard in on the body.

Vitamin E, oxygenating the body, acts mentally like taking oxygen. The body can go longer on less oxygen and becomes less exhausted when taking Vitamin E in sufficient quantity.

The body is of course a carbon-oxygen engine running at a temperature of 98.6 degrees F. There is possibly less oxygen in Earth’s atmosphere than there was and the body runs better when it can better utilize what oxygen there is. Vitamin E assists it to do this and so it doesn’t pull in mental masses. At least that’s the theory I’ve been able to work out to account for the observed increase in E-Meter action in the preclear who is daily taking sufficient Vitamin E. When the vitamin is no longer administered, in about 24 hours the preclear begins to run less easily (same as before Vitamin E plus any auditing gain) and the needle read size returns to what it was before Vitamin E was used. When Vitamin E is again daily administered, in two days, meter behavior improves again.

I have not had time to do many series but the observational data is so marked that it’s like proving stones are solid. One doesn’t feel like repeating the experiment endlessly—it is so obvious.

A mental subject addressed reads longer (more reads) in the presence of Vitamin E than in its absence but clears more thoroughly, leaving less mental mass.

I only insist that persons in England on the Level VI and VII Courses should use Vitamin E and that Saint Hill preclears for Grade V be put on it and only forbid pcs to be processed without it in high altitude Johannesburg.

The cost of it is the pc’s. No org is to supply it. Webber Pharmaceuticals, Ltd can probably direct one to better supplies or brands of it.

We are not in the Vitamin business or even in the health business. Anyone else using it in processing does so at his or her own choice. This HCO B is a release of scientific data.

Vitamins are food. They are not drugs. Processing under drugs is very bad. Some vitamins, however, help. And Vitamin E is a wonder.


L. RON HUBBARD


LRH:ml.rd
Copyright © 1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

SCIENTOLOGY: A NEW SLANT ON LIFE
by L. Ron Hubbard

Published
December 1965


Scientology: A New Slant on Life has been a steady best seller since it was first published at Saint Hill Manor. Here are twenty-eight of the best-loved essays written by L. Ron Hubbard between 1950 and 1959. Some were originally magazine articles, some were lectures, and some are favorite chapters from some of his books.

This is an excellent book for newcomers, for advanced Scientologists—for just anybody.

There is a wide range of subjects, as, for instance:

Two Rules for Happy Living On Human Character
What Is Knowledge? Playing the Game
How to Live with Children Freedom versus Entrapment
On Marriage Justice
The Man Who Succeeds The Vocabularies of Science
Accent on Ability How to Study a Science
Honest People Have Rights, Too The Human Mind
On Bringing Order Communication

Each one is food for thought and observation—an uncommonly pleasant way to attain new understandings.

160 pages, hardcover with dust jacket. Available from your nearest Scientology Organization or Mission, or direct from the publishers: Scientology Publications Organization, Jernbanegade 6, 1608 Copenhagen V, Denmark; or Church of Scientology Publications Organization U.S., 2723 West Temple Street, Los Angeles, California, 90026, U.S.A.

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 19 JANUARY 1966
Review Auditors
Level III Students
DANGER CONDITIONS
TECHNICAL DATA FOR REVIEW AUDITORS


To cure a disagreement one can:

1. Locate disagreements on certain subjects by listing a question such as “On ......what do you disagree with?” and locating the item with assessment and blowing it by inspection (itsa).

2. Locate former similar subjects the person disagreed with.

3. Locate things on the subject the person has not understood and get them clarified.

4. Locate earlier similar subjects the person has not understood and get them clarified.

IMPORTANT—if a person’s attitude does not change after doing one of the above, do another or find another item using same process (listed above) as before.

A whole case will fall apart this way.

Compulsive by-passing can be handled by:

1. Doing disagreements as above.

2. Doing misunderstoods as above.

3. Finding persons similar to the person being by-passed, using standard listing and assessing as in all these.

4. Flattening a question “Who shouldn’t be ignored?” (Don’t run “Who has by-passed you?” or “Who should be ignored?” as these are out-of-ARC processes.)

Ordinary Comm processes also help of course and a good Grade 0 release helps. Higher Release Grades help. And Clearing, naturally takes care of the lot of course.

There is direct co-ordination between the state of a case (state of meter also) and the ability to follow a command line. The worse off the case (or meter) the less the person can follow a comm line. A person with a very high or very low TA and/or a stuck needle or an ARC Broke needle (floats but never responds and lots of bad indicators) should not only never be an executive but also will raise havoc in an org.

It is a standard review action in an org to handle such cases sent to Review by reason of having been part of Danger Condition assignments. In such cases, aside from usual Review actions, the above should be done.

LRH:ml.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

[This HCO B is modified by BTB 22 March 1972R, Revised 12 July 1973, Reissued 6 July 1974, Disagreement Remedy.]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 21 JANUARY 1966

Remimeo



SEARCH AND DISCOVERY
(ETHICS TYPE CASES, PTSs)
S & D ERRORS
(Handling PTSs with S & D)


When you have a failed Search and Discovery, the following are incorrect or have been omitted:

1. Incorrect item (errors in listing or assessment, over or under listing, bad metering, poor question).

2. Person has not actually been made to disconnect from the SP by declaration in writing.

3. It was really an ARC Break, not an SP and ARC Breaks should have been looked for instead of SPs.

4. The SP found was refused by the Auditor or Ethics.

The golden rule of S & D also applies—if it isn’t the correct person or group that was “found” the good indicators won’t come in.

So any incorrectly done S & D (as above) will not result in a pc bright-eyed and bushy tailed. All S & Ds correctly done on a pc that is PTS result in remarkable recoveries magical to see. So don’t blame S & D if it “fails”. Blame the lack of skill in using it and the person who ordered it or did it should be retrained.


L. RON HUBBARD






LRH:ml.cden
Copyright ©1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 28 JANUARY 1966
Remimeo
Tech Hats
Qual Hats (Edited from a taped Conference with
All students Level Saint Hill Tech and Qual Personnel
—20 Dec 1965)


LEVEL IV

SEARCH AND DISCOVERY DATA
HOW A SUPPRESSIVE BECOMES ONE


Search and Discovery is being made and auditors are finding on one person and another “Myself”. Well, just amongst us girls, of course, you are going to find it. One of the best reasons you are going to find it is that it is part of the R6 bank. The other reason you are going to find it is that after a person is totally overwhelmed by a Suppressive he assumes the valence of the Suppressive. And a person you would find that on has actually been pretty suppressive.

What you’re doing is, you are pushing S & D to a point where you are clearing suppression. It wasn’t intended to go that far.

If you were to ask the listing question however, “Name ‘Myself’“ or “Give ‘Myself’ a name”, you would then get the Suppressive.

But this is getting very adventurous, because it is part of the R6 bank. It is getting very adventurous to do anything about it. We seem to be happy about having “Myself”. I would just let them go right on being happy about it. With skill you probably could bring out the identity of this person whose valence had come over them. It would all depend on the auditor who is doing it. If I were doing it, I’d go ahead and break it down. But not a Class III auditor who is not sure what he is going up against, who is repeating the word several times, repeating the question, trying to check it to make sure the listing question is clean. Don’t you see, you are never going to get that listing question clean. That I assure you. That question can’t be listed out.

That is the mechanism of suppression overwhelming a person. Oddly enough you will only find it on persons who are suppressive and of course you’ve walked into the real mechanism of how does a Suppressive become a Suppressive? He becomes a Suppressive by taking over the valence of a Suppressive.

Then when you list it out you get “Myself” and this is compounded by the fact that it’s part of the R6 bank so you don’t dare do much with it but it will let a bunch of steam off the case.

With some very, very, very, very upstage auditing, very careful indeed, give them the auditing question once, then say, “Go on and answer the question” but never repeat it, never check the thing to find out if it’s a clean list—you probably would get at least one recent SP out of that combination. How we do that at that stage when I’ve not worked with it technically I would not be able to tell you, but I just know that it would be very risky. It makes me feel like maybe I shouldn’t do anything about it at all because it’s too risky, but I can see somebody getting messed up.

THE MAIN TROUBLE IN S & D

Your main trouble in S & D is much worse than that—it is simply an inability to assess. And auditors since time immemorial have had trouble assessing. They have two troubles in assessing. They underlist and they overlist. It’s almost an accident that an

auditor ever lists the right lists the right way. I’m not saying that sarcastically but it has been my experience in teaching auditors to assess that they have two faults, they underlist and they overlist.

If they do either one of these things, they are going to ARC Break the pc and then the list isn’t going to be nullable because the pc is not responding to the auditor’s voice as well, and it quite often was the first one on the list which is where they never looked. More fundamental than that is simply the problem of reading an E-Meter. Those technical facts are in the road of S & D.

ASSESSING AN S & D

Actually an auditor who can assess can pass off an S & D so fast it would be like dealing cards done by a Monte Carlo Vingt-et-Un player; he could just roll them off left, right and centre. There’s no real trouble in it. It’s a very fast action. It all depends on how much you want to keep the pc under tension in the action, because an assessment isn’t auditing to begin with.

You would start Session with, “Sit down, I’m going to assess you now. Do you have some answers to this question. Brr. Brr. Brr.” And the pc says, “I want to tell you about ....” “All right, good, I’m glad you’re going to tell me about that but right now I want some answers to this question.” See? Then “brrrrr” on down and then you’ll notice your needle relax. Then you say, “All right, now I’m going through this list.” Ratatat, etc. “That’s it, all right. Thanks very much.” Pc cognites 10 minutes. Pc cognites and the Meter blows up and good indicators come in, and you’ve done an S & D. There is nothing more complicated than that.

You’ve got auditors who were trying to do an S & D in a session. You got them that are afraid the pc has already given it on the list. You got them that haven’t learned how the Meter reacts when you’ve got a complete list. (A Meter just falls flat when you’ve got a complete list. The needle goes clean.) And you’ve got them that aren’t sure that they’ve got any SP, and they just didn’t see that the Meter did a surge on one of them. Then you get somebody who has overlisted and he’s just ploughed the guy in, so he can’t assess it back easily.

Then you get the fellow who had four of them fall. Certainly if you’ve got four falling there’s two things that can be wrong at this point which makes it very difficult to run back. In one you have passed it. It’s above the four which are falling. You’ve missed it, and the pc is simply discharging on it. And actually you can ask the pc which one was it and he’ll say, “Well, it was Joe, of course.” That’s above the four. Practically every one after the right one will read, because it’s actually blowing down all the time. He’s no longer paying any attention to the auditor.

Then the other thing is you just haven’t completed the list.

You have to make an opinion as to whether or not you’ve overlisted or underlisted. You can also pick up a dirty needle and an ARC Broken pc or protesty pc if you’ve gone by the right one.

Here are the evils of listing, and here are the evils of assessment showing up on S & D. They are simply auditor goofs—it’s just lack of experience on the part of the auditor and lack of understanding of what he’s supposed to be doing. But an auditor who can really assess can knock these things off. I’d spot what auditors can assess reliably, and I’d give them specialized jobs of that character that require listing. This is a very, very highly skilled action. You save a lot of time by pulling such an auditor back into specialty.

REVIEW ACTION

In Review you have to do it sometimes when it’s been done. So you have the additional answer of “How do you patch up an assessment that’s already been goofed?” And “Where is the list that was lost?” You’ve got the problem of the list that

was completed out of session. “And I got home and was lying in bed . . .” and so forth. So in Review you always assume the pc continued the list after the session. If the pc is there as a flat ball bearing, you just automatically assume the pc thought of it afterwards or something. It isn’t that the Tech auditor always got it.

I’ll give you a tip in Qual. If you assume automatically that standard technology has not been applied, as your first gambit, in anybody that you’re putting back together again, you’ll about 99% be right. Somehow or other it slipped by in Tech. It slipped by. Somebody thought he did it. Somebody thought it was on the report. And therefore it looked like it didn’t work or something. Something was there. And in all of my D of Ping I have not found it possible to detect all departures from tech by auditors. I’ve never been able to bat 1000 on that. Naturally, it’s nearly impossible.

Technically, what you have to do doesn’t mean that you have to invent technology because there are very standard answers to all these things.


L. RON HUBBARD

LRH:ml.rd
Copyright © 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

CERTAINTY


Vol. 13 No. 2 [February, 1966]


Official Periodical of
SCIENTOLOGY
in the
British Isles



Psychotics


L. Ron Hubbard


In a footnote early in the book DIANETICS: THE MODERN SCIENCE OF MENTAL HEALTH I promised to publish material someday on the subject of institutional psychosis.

Recently I was fortunate enough to make a breakthrough on this subject. I had supposed that it would be necessary to undertake a considerable amount of research work in institutions to complete that which I began so many years ago. Researching recently on the reasons cases worsen after they become better, the answer tumbled out all unexpectedly and shed an entirely new light on the whole subject of insanity.

We are confronted in our modern society with a growing statistic for insanity. The number of psychotics is increasing, apparently, faster than the population growth. This could mean many things. It could mean that the psychiatrist was inept in applying what he knew, it could mean that there were insufficient numbers of psychiatrists, as they state, or it could mean, as they tell the legislators, that insufficient funds are being appropriated for the handling of psychosis. But the answer is apparently none of these.

If one wished to halt an epidemic it would be necessary to isolate the germ or virus which was causing it. This has become accepted procedure in the field of public health and is intensely effective. However, scientific methodology has never really been applied to the field of psychosis. It is such a frantic and desperate field that anyone associated with it has little time for careful consideration. The patients are in such dangerous condition, their families and friends are so desperate, that no-one could be expected to look for the actual cause of the situation. Thus the true facts concerning psychosis have been masked.

If you want to know why people are having trouble with something it is a good thing to look at the something. There you will find that things have not been defined. There is no true, acceptable definition of psychosis. The root word “PSYCH” refers only to a being or soul and the “OSIS” could loosely be defined as “the condition of”. Therefore, in actual fact, it is not much of a word and if we look it up in the larger dictionaries we will find some long, complex dissertation or a sweeping generality which, frankly, would never be accepted in the physical sciences as a definition for anything, reflecting as it does wholly opinion. The word “psychosis” is not, however, completely inept as it at least indicates that it is something about a spirit or soul or its quality of animation.





Copyright ©1966 by L. Ron Hubbard. All Rights Reserved.

Thus we can suspect, if the thing has never adequately been defined, that a great many misconceptions exist concerning it and furthermore, it would seem pretty obvious that if man had not defined what it was then he was very far from being able to identify the source of it.

We all have some idea of what we mean when we say “insane” or “crazy” or “nutty” but half the time we only mean that we don’t agree with the action. Things which are unreasonable to us or not understood we commonly refer to as “insane” or “crazy” or “nutty”. Thus man does not make a differentiation between what he disagrees with and an actual deteriorated mental state dangerous to the society and the individual.

So the first thing we can know about Psychosis is that it is becoming more widespread for two reasons:

1. Man has not adequately or workably defined it, and

2. The true source of it has not been identified.

There follows, naturally, a third fact that it has not been cured, quite obviously, because it is getting worse.

The whole subject has been so wrapped up in untested opinion that the ordinary scientist has found it quite unapproachable. The whole field bristles with authoritarian differences of view and bitter arguments.

The number of types of “psychoses” which have been listed over the years have become so great that classification has become relatively meaningless. Further, the names given mean different things to different schools of psychiatry.

Examining this sea of turmoil, human misery, mistreatment and failure, one would not ordinarily expect to find any ready solution. If one intended to find a solution, one could have expected to search for some years amongst the institutional population observing and taking notes until at last one had identified some common denominator of the illness which might lead to relief.

The orderly mind of a research scientist would, however, begin to take the problem itself apart on the basis of excluding those things which had not led to a ready solution, and the fact I am about to give you here should have been realized a long time ago.

Psychosis has not been solved because it has been studied in the wrong place. This is the first observation which might lead to a resolution of the problem. The source of psychosis is rarely to be found in the artificial atmosphere of an institution, therefore the problem was not earlier solved. After all, it didn’t occur in the institution. The person was sent there after it occurred. So the source of psychosis is obviously outside institutions. Further, a psychotic patient is seldom able to discuss accurately his life outside, so the institution would only give one evidence on the results of the source of psychosis; the source would be elsewhere.

The true psychotic is not always found in an institution. Behind those grey walls you mainly discover his victims. The true psychotic is one who causes hysteria, apathy, misconceptions and the reactions of stress in others. That is the identity of the being that is the source of psychosis.

He is, by and large, rather unconfrontable as a being, talking in the widest generalities, and sounds quite sane unless you listen to him closely. Then it will be found that the reasons he gives do not quite make sense, but are all directed toward the necessity

of smashing or brutalizing anyone and everyone or selected groups, or material objects.

The actual psychotic is covertly or overtly destructive of anything the rest of us consider good or decent or worthwhile.

Sometimes such a being is “successful” in life, but the end result of his activities are what you would expect—total smash. Some notable examples were Hitler and Napoleon. Not even historians are quite brave enough to state that these two beings were totally, completely and incomprehensibly separated from reality and acted without good cause, reason or justification other than an obsession to destroy, ruin and bring misery to millions.

How Napoleon, for instance, justified beginning an attack on Russia too late in the year for his troops to operate there at all is very hard to see. Why Hitler had to destroy the Jewish people in Germany as a “necessary act in prosecuting his war against the world outside of Germany” has no other answer other than madness.

The true psychotic brings about an hysterical, apathetic, or deranged mental condition in others. He or she does it for “many good reasons”, does it for no reason at all, or doesn’t even notice that he is doing it.

The true psychotic worships destruction and abhors reasonable, decent or helpful actions.

Although history affords us innumerable examples, they are so common in the society around us that one does not have to go into a study of mass murderers to find them. The phenomenon is by no means rare and at the absolute minimum is 2l/2% of the population.

This individual fills the institutions with victims, the hospitals with the sick and the graveyards with the dead. The statistics of psychosis are not going to lessen in the society until this type of personality is completely isolated and understood.

The first problem one confronts in identifying the true psychotic is that anyone detecting in himself, or herself, some destructive urge is likely to believe that he or she is psychotic. This is definitely not the case. One of the primary characteristics of the true psychotic is a total lack of introspection, a total irresponsibility to the pain or suffering of others, coupled with a logic which explains it all away but uses reasons which are not sensible to any of the rest of us.

An actual psychotic never for a moment suspects his madness. You and I have often wondered about our own sanity, particularly since nobody could define it, but a psychotic never does.

Further, he would not help his fellow man if his own life depended upon it—he would rather perish.

This being is difficult to spot because he does not, ordinarily, fling himself about and make scenes. He is often entirely emotionless, completely cold-blooded and apparently perfectly controlled. The control, however, is only apparent, as this being is in the grip of a force far more powerful than himself and is a thoroughly controlled being. He or she must destroy and must not help or assist in any way. Such a case is almost impossible to treat even when identified. They do not easily respond to therapy since their level of responsibility is too low to experience even hope or despair about themselves. Thus they never assist anyone seeking to help them, and indeed are far more likely to turn on any benefactor than to permit assistance by them.

Therefore, under the subject of psychosis, we have the actual psychotic and the victims of the psychotic. As long as we only studied the symptoms of the victims we could not discover the source of their difficulty.

Any theory is only as good as it can be proven or as it works. Theories are not good because they are appealing or because they are uttered by a famous name, but are only good if they are useful. The question is—do they lead to a resolution of the problem?

Therefore, does the theory that the psychotic is ordinarily not in the institution and that the institution contains mainly his victims open the door to a solution of psychosis?

One could be charged with “oversimplification”, or “total ignorance of the subject”, or “lack of experience”, but none of this would alter the fact that a solution which worked was the true solution to the problem.

I never promised to resolve the whole field of psychosis. I was only interested in institutional psychosis, for I do not think that an actual psychotic, by the above definitions, is likely to be salvaged even if one were able to apply the solution to his case.
------------------

There are several reasons for this. The first and foremost is that he wouldn’t sit still or stand still long enough. Another is that he isn’t likely to be caught very easily and the third and most powerful is that he usually cannot be persuaded to forego his destructive actions long enough to receive any benefit from treatment.

Another reason is that when people are able to identify him, they do not wish to help him.

With those reservations the actual psychotic probably could be handled so far as technical actions are concerned, but these need to be applied before they can hope to work and the application of them in this particular case is prevented by nearly insurmountable difficulties of non-cooperation, disdain, contempt and a total lack of desire on the part of the actual psychotic to salvage himself.

Last and not least, any true psychotic can be counted upon to attack or attempt to destroy Scientology groups or activities as these help people. The source of such attacks traces back usually to pretty dangerous psychotics who aren’t in institutions or even suspected, some in public places where not only Scientology groups suffer from their actions. Thus it isn’t likely that Scientologists will do much to help cure them even if Scientology was in the business, which it is not.

It is easy to handle a large number of those persons who are the victims of actual psychotics. These are found in a majority in institutions as well as other places. Once again one has the problem of accessibility and communication but with those limitations institutional psychotics can be helped.

As I have said, the proof of any theory is its workability and it will take a considerable number of case histories to display the success of the observations. But if a person were sick from a certain germ and one knew what that germ was and one killed that germ and then that person became well, one would have to conclude that he had located the source of the illness.

The total indicated therapy cure for an institutional psychotic who is, after all, only the victim of an actual psychotic is to locate the actual psychotic in that person’s life. There is a very magic response to this action. The technology now exists. It is called “Search and Discovery”.

It is commonly observed that whole families will exhibit psychotic tendencies. This is too great a generality. In such a case it should be stated “the whole family except one” exhibit very obvious traces of insanity. The actual psychotic is most probably that one. This person is continually performing acts, often hidden, atrocious in nature, which destroy the confidence and reality of those about him. The others exhibit the hysteria or apathy commonly associated with the illness Psychosis. They never once locate, until it is done for them, the actual source of their obsessions and confusions.

Whether or not a victim exhibits one or another symptom depends largely upon what has been done to the person. To catalogue these is not easy and indeed is not helpful. In each of the cases it is only necessary to find the source of menace (an actual psychotic) which has made them as they are.

I have not tried to give you this as a learned paper. It is rather a discussion of a subject into which man has made almost no inroad. Today a Class III Auditor could expect some success in the field of Institutional Psychosis providing they were well trained, and we permitted him to practice in that field.

Today in institutions the treatment of the psychotic differs from that administered in Bedlam centuries past in that today they have cleaner beds. Otherwise there is no real change. Instead of whips, they use electricity; instead of chains they use brain surgery to incapacitate the person.

A great deal could be done in the field of Institutional Psychosis and being able to isolate the germ in the society which causes Psychosis is only a small step in the direction of lessening the degree of psychosis in the society but it is at least a step in a definite direction.

And if this leaves you wondering whether or not you are insane, all you have to do is ask yourself the questions:

1. Have I ever helped anybody or wanted to?

2. Am I violently opposed to those who help others?

If you can answer “Yes” to 1 and “No” to 2 there is no slightest doubt about your sanity. You are quite sane and those times in your life when you have wondered about your own wits you were only in connection with an actual psychotic somewhere in your environment.

The actual psychotic sometimes climbs to high places in the society, as witness Napoleon and Hitler. But even so he can be identified. Those who advocate violent measures as the only means of solving problems—such as advocating war—those who are violently opposed to organizations which help others are easily identified.

And in the smaller world when you see a cold, indifferent smile to the agony of another, you have seen an actual psychotic.

We do not consider psychosis a field of practice in Scientology and Scientology was not researched or designed as a cure for psychosis or “substitute for psychiatry”. But in the course of research, I have discovered these things and found them to be workable. I trust they may be of some use to you who, who knows, may someday become involved with an actual psychotic or his victim and need the data.

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 5 FEBRUARY 1966

Remimeo
Tech Div Hats
HGC Auditors
Qual Div Staff Level III
Franchise

S AND D WARNING


Search and Discovery, done incorrectly (incorrect SP found) can make a preclear ill within a week or two after.

Assessment is a very proper skill. There is a great deal written on it and many tapes.

The common errors of assessment (aside from the usual Gross Auditing Errors) are:

1. Too short a list

2. Too long a list

3. Clumsy or improper meter handling

4. List getting suppressed

5. Item getting invalidated

6. Pc being allowed too much Itsa

7. Pc getting ARC Broken by under or over-listing

8. Auditor not letting the pc have his item

9. Whole list going live because the item was by-passed earlier on the list

10. Auditor not looking for good and bad indicators to see if he was correct in his assessment.

When the right SP is found the good indicators flood in and the pc does not cave in in 36 to 72 hours.

The bug in S & D is that one can almost get the right item. An item can be found that is nearly the right one. If the nearly right one is accepted the pc will be doubtfully more cheerful and may insist this is it. The pc however is still not quite sure. Inevitably that is the sign of a nearly right item.

The real reaction to the correct person is an “Of Course!” no doubt about it reaction.

It is the action of nearly finding the right one that may make the pc ill in the next few days or a week. One has restimulated the by-passed charge of the right one without finding it.

Remember that the real Suppressive Person (SP) was the one that wove a dangerous environment around the pc. To find that person is to open up the pc’s present time perception or space. It’s like pulling a wrapping of wool off the pc.

The SP persuaded or caused the pc to believe the environment was dangerous and that it was always dangerous and so made the pc pull in and occupy less space and reach less.

When the SP is really located and indicated the pc feels this impulse not to reach diminish and so his space opens up.

The difference between a safe environment and a dangerous environment is only that a person is willing to reach and expand in a safe environment and reaches less and contracts in a dangerous environment.

An SP wants the other person to reach less. Sometimes this is done by forcing the person to reach into danger and get hurt so that the person will thereafter reach less.

The SP wants smaller, less powerful beings. The SP thinks that if another became powerful that one would attack the SP.

The SP is totally insecure and is battling constantly in covert ways to make others less powerful and less able.

Scientology flies into the teeth of an SP. One will go to the most extraordinary lengths to try to injure Scientologists or an organization or a staff member.

But SPs existed long before Scientology and finding the basic SP around the pc just because of Scientology or the pc is a Scientologist is in actual fact unlikely.

Childhood is the most fertile area in which to locate the SP on the case. A child is weak and at the mercy of adults. It is this fact alone that gave all the cures Freud ever stumbled onto. The analyst accidentally located an SP when his work was successful. But then he proceeded to overrun and restimulate the patient without erasing. In other words he would not let the patient have his item. An hour with a meter in the hands of an expert auditor who can assess correctly will produce everything the analyst or Freud ever hoped to achieve and will do it invariably compared to the small results analysts did achieve.

But if you get one almost right, and not get the really correct SP, then you get the same phenomena that dogged the analyst-the pc gets better for a moment and collapses.

I am not saying you can permanently injure persons. The analyst techniques operated far more restimulatively than our S & D. They made the person talk about it for years!

But you can still give a pc a nasty cold if you miss on an S & D.

So don’t miss.

Do it correctly.

Find the correct SP.

It’s all correct if you assess by the book—complete list, not too long or too short. Correct item on the list. Good indicators then in. And no relapse for at least 2 weeks.

That’s how a real S & D is done.

L. RON HUBBARD


LRH : ml.rd
Copyright © 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 5 FEBRUARY 1966
Issue II
Remimeo
Franchise


LEVEL 0




“LETTING THE PC ITSA”
THE PROPERLY TRAINED AUDITOR


The most painful thing I ever hope to see is an auditor “letting a pc Itsa”.

I have seen auditors let a pc talk and talk and talk and talk and run down and talk and run down and talk again until one wondered where if anywhere that auditor had been trained.

In the first place such an auditor could not know the meaning of the word ITSA.

The word means “It is a ........”

Now how an auditor letting a pc talk believes he is getting a pc to spot what IT is is quite beyond me.

This pc has been talking all his life. He isn’t well. Analysts had people talk for five years and they seldom got well.

So how is it supposed to happen today that a pc, let talk enough, will get well.

It won’t.

The auditor does not know the very basics of auditing skills. That’s all. These are the TRs.

An auditor who can’t do his TRs can’t audit. Period.

Instead he says he is “letting the pc Itsa”.

If by this he means he is letting the pc drive all over the road and in both ditches, then this isn’t auditing.

In auditing an auditor guides. He gives the pc something to answer. When the pc answers the pc has said “IT IS A ......” and that’s Itsa.

If the pc answers and the auditor acknowledges too soon the pc tends to go into an anxiety—he has been chopped. So he talks more than he wanted.

If the pc answers and the auditor does not acknowledge, then the pc talks on and on, hoping for an acknowledgement that doesn’t come, “runs dry”, tries again, etc.

So premature or late-or-never acks result in the same thing—the pc running on and on and on.

And they call it “letting the pc Itsa”. Bah! If a pc talks too much in session he either is getting cut off too fast by the auditor or hasn’t got an auditor at all. It isn’t

“Itsa”. It’s lousy TRs. (The one single exception is the pc who had years in analysis but even he begins to get better with proper TRs used on him.)

The proper cure is to drill the auditor until the auditor realizes:

1. The auditor asks the questions.

2. The pc says what is the answer, “It’s a .......”

3. The auditor acks when the pc has said it to the pc’s satisfaction and

4. The auditor acks when the pc has finished saying “It’s a .......”

And that’s Itsa.

Scientology auditing is a precision skill, not a gag blop goo slup guck blah.

1. The auditor wants to know ........

2. The pc says it is ........

1.2.1.2.1.2. etc.
TECH SAVVY

Now an auditor who doesn’t know his technology about the mind and his processes of course never knows what to ask. So he or she simply sits like a lump of sacking hoping the pc will say something that makes the pc feel better.

A sure sign that an auditor doesn’t know an engram from a cow about processes is seeing a pc “Itsa” on and on and on.

In Scientology we do know what the mind is, what a being is, what goes wrong in the mind and how to correct it.

We aren’t psychoanalysts or psychiatrists or Harley Street witch doctors. We do know

The data about beings and life is there in Scientology to be learned.

It isn’t “our idea” of how things are, or “our opinion of” ....

Scientology is a precision subject. It has axioms. Like geometry. Two equilateral triangles aren’t similar because Euclid said so. They’re similar because they are. If you don’t believe it, look at them.

There isn’t a single datum in Scientology that can’t be proven as precisely as teacups are teacups and not saucepans.

Now if we get a person fresh out of the study of “the mystical metaphysics of Cuffbah” he’s going to have trouble. His pcs are going to “Itsa” their heads off and never get well or better or anything. Because that person doesn’t know Scientology but thinks it’s all imprecise opinion.

The news about Scientology is that it put the study of the mind into the precise exact sciences. If one doesn’t know that, one’s pcs “Itsa” by the hour for one doesn’t know what he is handling that he is calling “a pc”.

By my definition, an auditor is a real auditor when his or her pcs DON’T overtalk or undertalk but answer the auditing question and happily now and then originate.

So how to tell an auditor, how to determine if you have trained one at last, is DO HIS PCS ANSWER UP OR DO THEY TALK ON AND ON.

If I had an auditor in an HGC whose pcs yapped and yapped and ran dry and yapped while the auditor just sat there like a Chinese pilot frozen on the controls, I would do the following to that “auditor”:

1. Remedy A, Book of Case Remedies.

2. Remedy B, Book of Case Remedies.

3. Disagreements with Scientology, technology and orgs and Scientology personalities all found and traced to basic and blown.

4. A grind study assignment of the Scientology Axioms until the “auditor” could DO THEM IN CLAY.

5. A memorization of the Logics, Qs (Prelogics) and Axioms of Dianetics and Scientology.

6. TRs 0 to 4 until they ran out of his or her ears.

7. TRs 5 to 9.

8. Op Pro by Dup until FLAT.

9. A hard long study of the Meter.

10. The ARC triangle and other scales.

11. The Processes of Level 0.

12. Some wins.

And I’d have an auditor. I’d have one that could make a Grade Zero Release every time.

And it’s lack of the above that causes an “auditor” to say “I let the pc Itsa” with the pc talking on and on and on.

Scientology is the breakthrough that made the indefinite subject of Philosophy into a precision tool.

And pcs get well and go Release when it is applied.


L. RON HUBBARD


LRH: ml.rd
Copyright © 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED











[The above HCO B was reissued on 23 May 71 as Basic Auditing Series 8. See Vol. VII, page 253.]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 9 FEBRUARY 1966
Remimeo

RELEASE GRADES
(Replaces HCO Bulletin of 30 Aug 1965,
“Release Stages”)


There are five grades of Release. When one of these is attained the next one up can be run.

A preclear who has attained a grade of Release may not be run further on the processes of that grade or below or he will go back into his Reactive Mind.

All Releases however can have their problems handled, their withholds pulled, their ARC Breaks repaired and any Release at any grade can be audited on the exact processes of Release Rehabilitation.

The states of Release differ in that one is more stable than another.

The Reactive Mind (known also as the R6 Bank) can only be audited out by someone who is trained up to Class VI. When the Reactive Mind is fully audited out (erased completely), one has a Clear.

When a Clear has been refamiliarized with his capabilities, you have an Operating Thetan (an OT).

A Release, then, is pulled OUT of his Reactive Mind.

A Clear has fully erased his Reactive Mind.

An Operating Thetan is one who is Cause over Matter, Energy, Space and Time and is not in a body.

The degree and relative permanence of being pulled out of the Reactive Mind determines the state of Release.

There are numerous things that can pull one back into the Reactive Mind.

These are (1) Locks (2) Secondaries (3) Engrams (4) The Whole Time Track.

LOCKS

By reducing locks as in Levels 0 to IV, we then remove the ability of locks to pull the being back into his R6 Bank.

Locks are mental image pictures of non-painful, but disturbing, experiences the person has experienced. They depend for their force on secondaries and engrams.

Thus, one who has had his locks reduced is a GRADE 0-IV RELEASE.

SECONDARIES AND ENGRAMS

When a being has had the secondaries and engrams reduced, he is far less likely to be pulled into the Reactive Mind than if he has just had their locks reduced.

Secondaries are mental image pictures containing misemotion (grief, anger, apathy, etc). They contain no pain. They are moments of shock and stress and depend for their force on underlying engrams.

Engrams are mental image pictures of pain and unconsciousness the person has experienced.

When these are reduced, one has a GRADE V RELEASE.

THE WHOLE TRACK

Bits and pieces of the whole track remain after the locks, secondaries and engrams are reduced. These bits inhibit the being from recovering knowledge.

The Whole Track is the moment to moment record of a person’s existence in this universe in picture and impression form.

When these bits are cleaned up a being is a GRADE VA RELEASE.

THE REACTIVE MIND

When the pc has taken the locks off the Reactive Mind itself, using R6EW, he attains GRADE VI RELEASE.

THE REACTIVE MIND

When the entire Reactive Mind has been erased and the person is again wholly himself, one could call it a GRADE VII RELEASE.

But that is really CLEAR.

OPERATING THETAN

When a being once more has recovered his full abilities and freedom, a state much higher than Man ever before envisioned is attained. This state is called OPERATING THETAN.


L. RON HUBBARD




LRH: ml.rd
Copyright © 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 10 FEBRUARY 1966
Issue II
Remimeo
Tech Hats
Qual Hats
Ethics Hats


TECH RECOVERY


My study of a Nov 1965 plummeting HGC Completion Statistic indicates certain policies are necessary in all HGCs and Qual Divisions.

The following errors were found:

1. The HGC ceased to look for former release grades to rehabilitate and ignored opportunities to do so on the basis that “outer orgs have rehabbed them all already”. This came out in the Comm Ev held on a D of P of that period. Of course, if the HGG failed to rehab earlier grades (or earlier life overruns) it could achieve no later grades or Grade V. This alone would have ended completions promptly on all grades and wiped out the graph.

2. Invalidation of the appearance of a free needle and invalidating any auditor who “thought he saw one”. This wiped out all release attainments and made for total overrun of all pcs of all grades. This error existed for 15 years so it is not surprising that it got back in again.

3. Whenever an overrun occurred, “rehabilitation of it” was done by running different new processes instead of standard rehab routine as in HCO Bs, i.e. doing ARC Break, PTPs, Rudiments, anything but a real rehab of that process that was overrun.

4. Abandonment of standard tech in favor of unusual solutions. This is always present when a collapse of Tech occurs.

5. One SP was found in the middle of all this but after his departure the statistic did not recover so one can assume another SP was in the middle of it still or that the HGC remained PTS and didn’t separate from the SP found because he was so convincing, so reasonable and so persuasive as to why a Tech statistic must remain down.
-------------

It is interesting that (1) above—Ceasing to rehab lower grades—would be absolutely fatal to any upper grades. Therefore this becomes policy:

NO UPPER GRADE OF RELEASE MAY BE BEGUN NEWLY ON A PC UNTIL ALL LOWER GRADES ARE FULLY REHABBED TO FREE NEEDLE. THIS APPLIES TO ALL GRADES 0 TO VII.

Regarding (2)—Invalidation of what a free needle is—and thus running past all free needles, let it be noted that this is an Auditor’s Code Break—continuing a process that has ceased to produce change—and is therefore a crime. This was wrong too long to be allowed to go wrong again. Thus we get the policy:

AN AUDITOR WHO HAS BEEN FOUND TO HAVE OVERRUN A FREE NEEDLE ON A PRECLEAR MUST BE GIVEN AN ETHICS CHIT; AND IF THE ACTION IS SEVERAL TIMES REPEATED, ETHICS MUST ORDER A FULL REVIEW OF THE AUDITOR’S CASE INCLUDING AN EYESIGHT TEST AND CONDUCT A THOROUGH ETHICS INVESTIGATION AND HEARING.
Note that a Mark V Meter run with too high a sensitivity does not give a marked change when a needle floats. Thus sensitivity must be reduced in ordinary running and increased only to get in rudiments. Then a free needle becomes more visible. A Mark V cranked up to 128 sensitivity looks like a floating needle all the time at a casual glance on most pcs. Sensitivity 5 is ample.

Also, meters go out of 5,000 ohm calibration and don’t read on the M and F “Clear” reads and change of electrodes can change M and F “Clear” reads.

A free needle, if a process is overrun, vanishes with just one extra command so an auditor must be alert.

Please also note that this has been part of the Auditor’s Code for ages—running past a flat point of a process has been forbidden since the first formulations of the Auditor’s Code.
--------------

Regarding (3)—Rehabilitation by using other processes—the HCO Bs on rehabs are very explicit. To run another process would clobber the pc. Thus we get the policy:

REHABILITATIONS MUST BE DONE BY REHABILITATING THE PC ONLY ON THE PROCESS OVERRUN AND ONLY BY STANDARD HCO BS ON REHAB PROCEDURE.

Re (4)—Unusual solutions—we get the policy:

ANY AUDITOR ACCEPTING AN UNUSUAL SOLUTION WITHOUT FILING A JOB ENDANGERMENT CHIT OR FOUND USING AN UNUSUAL SOLUTION MUST BE CHARGED WITH A CRIME AND GIVEN AN ETHICS HEARING. FAILING TO REPORT AN UNUSUAL SOLUTION ADVISED OR USED IS ALSO SO HANDLED. AN UNUSUAL SOLUTION IS ONE EVOLVED TO REMEDY AN ABUSE OF EXISTING TECHNOLOGY.

On (5)—Statistic failing to recover after an SP is spotted in a department gives us the 2 policies:

WHENEVER AN SP IS DISCOVERED AND DECLARED IN AN ORGANIZATION ALL HIS ASSOCIATES IN THAT PORTION OF THE ORG MUST BE CHECKED OUT FOR OR GIVEN AN S & D.

And

WHEN AN SP IS DISCOVERED IN AN ORGANIZATION, IS DISMISSED OR REMOVED AND THE STATISTIC DOES NOT RECOVER, ANOTHER SP MUST BE LOOKED FOR.
--------------

It is noted that the general condition of the Completion Statistic of Dec 65 to Jan 66 could be attributed to the above gross errors.

It is now certain that (l) Rehabilitation of earlier grades, (2) Free Needle and (3) Rehabilitation by standard practice are primary targets in our technology for anyone seeking to mess it up and that unwitting tampering with these three things and lack of HCO Enforcement on them will reduce HGC statistics and prevent their recovery.

Of course one could also go mad in the opposite direction—( I ) rehabilitate earlier grades endlessly on a pc regardless of how many times a free needle had been obtained, (2) call any loosening up of a needle a free needle and (3) refuse to even 2-way comm with a pc under repair for overrun for fear it violates standard procedure for rehab.

The middle course is the correct course in this case. Relax and just be very sure the pc has been properly rehabbed to free needle on each grade up to the one one is

going to start by demanding the awards of release that were granted and if these weren’t ever awarded, then do the rehabs necessary grade by grade. The only sticky point in this is that if a pc had ever been run on a higher grade without rehab of a lower, one must rehab “from the top down” at times, tackling the highest overrun first, but nevertheless doing all of them that were by-passed eventually.

The way to recognize a free needle is watch for one. When it happens you will see one. Then you will never afterwards wonder. The free needles available on a case can all be swallowed up by a failure to rehab all grades ever by-passed or overrun. If no free needles show up on a case at all then partially rehab any grade available for rehab back and forth until one has one of them go free needle and then get a free needle on the remainder. Life can also be an overrun and a pc never audited will respond to a rehab of “something overdone”. This doesn’t mean the pc went release before Scientology—it means that purpose overrun then jams—rehab of life situations of overrun consists of hitting the purpose that was overrun and when this is hit, the pc goes release in PT and was not a release in the past. An example is an overrun located in 20 AD when the person, alert to Christianity, decided to be good, made it and then overran it for 1945 years. When the purpose was found (to be good) and dated and the overrun spotted the needle went free. Rough auditing, bad TRs, “letting the pc Itsa”, etc, can swallow up free needles. Also a totally ARC Broke meter that won’t read at all with bad indicators all over the place won’t record a read, looks sometimes like a floating needle, the difference being the pc has total bad indicators— sour, mean, sad, etc. A free needle occurs most often after a big cognition and the unskilled auditor looks at the pc who is being bright and interesting and just doesn’t see the needle float, asks more questions and overruns, and the free needle vanishes— when a pc is cogniting, look at the meter not the pc. And the instant the TA starts up and the needle goes sticky suspect an overrun and check.

As for doing something else rather than Standard Procedure for rehab, plain ignorance can cause it. The auditor’s desire to help the pc if unaccompanied by solid tech background leads to wild efforts, new processes and anything but cool standard procedure.

When the person checking out pcs is also the Case Supervisor, unusual solutions creep in. The most errors I’ve seen made by a Case Supervisor were made after he had seen the pc or talked with the auditor. Cases have to be run by report only and auditors have to be supervised and their sessions listened to by somebody else besides the Case Supervisor. Tech is Tech. There is such a thing as Standard Tech. Pc wild tales and hollow eyes and auditor hobbyhorses have to be kept off Case Supervisor lines. So there must be a person who checks out pcs and supervises auditors and their auditing performance but who never opens his or her face to suggest instructions about the pc and only writes down that the auditor is rough or the process is flat or the process is overrun. The Case Supervisor lives in an Ivory Tower. Sounds strange but unless it’s done that way, wild departures from Standard Rehab Procedure and from Standard Tech in general will occur. Hell, all psychiatry went down that drain—the desperate patient, the desperate measures. Squirrelling stems from the Case Supervisor being the auditor supervisor and the pc interviewer. Oil, water, being in two divisions, Commies and Fascists, dogs and cats, won’t mix. Neither will the personal contacter of auditors and pcs and the Case Supervisor ever successfully stay crossed. The individual practitioner breaks down only because he does both auditing and Case Supervision. Auditing is an organization action which is why today we have Field Staff Members and HGCs.
--------------

Additional notes of things discovered in the investigation of the plummeted statistic on Completions were:

1. Auditors rabbiting out of uncertainty and so stumbling past End Phenomena and floating needles.

2. Case Supervisor getting auditors to ask leading questions on Pr Pr 2—”Ask the pc if he is interested in Medical Practices.”

3. D of P: “Find out what the needle is floating on.”

4. Case Supervisor: Told auditor that a floating needle was not the End Phenomenon of a Process in which “the TA had to be run out”.

5. Lack of knowledge and understanding of the Technology and not knowing the difference between such things as Anaten, Secondaries and Engrams by Case Supervisor, D of P, and so confusing auditors.

---------------

Of course the one thing one can’t technically overcome is an SP keeping an area messed up. His case doesn’t improve because of his intentions and overts and fear of people getting better or being bigger than he. When an SP dominates an area, only Ethics actions can handle.

The primary indicator of the presence of an SP in an org is a plummeting statistic immediately after he starts handling a portion of it.

Indifferent leadership, even inaction, can’t drive a statistic down. Only active suppression can.

So watch the statistics and don’t get reasonable when they fall. Either outside the org suppression has been brought down on that portion of the org, making it PTS or there is an SP there. The final answer is what happened just before the statistic fell. If a new appointment was made and it fell, unappoint it fast. If nothing cures the down statistic find the SP or handle the PTS situation because one or the other is there.

Completions stayed down for 15 years. Then we found auditors never noticed free needles. Now for Heaven’s sakes, 15 years was enough. Don’t repeat the error!

It does work you know.


L. RON HUBBARD

LRH: ml.rd jh
Copyright © 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 11 FEBRUARY 1966
Remimeo
All Students
All Scn Staff
Franchise

FREE NEEDLES, HOW TO
GET THEM ON A PC


Free needles can be obscured only by overruns and auditor goofs in the rehab session and ARC Breaks in past auditing.

When a TA goes up or is up it means an overrun in life or on a process or grade of release.

The only place you can’t get an overrun is at Grade VII. All grades below that are subject to overrun.

Life subjects are subject to overrun before Scientology. The mechanism is this: one conceived a purpose. He or she succeeded in it, then kept on and overran it. In auditing one hits the purpose and the overrun of it and gets a free needle on it. That doesn’t mean the person was a release then. It means that the spotting of the purpose and the overrun by auditing produces a free needle today.

It may be necessary to find whole track overruns on some pcs in rehabilitation of grades. If a lot of levels have been run past free needle it may be necessary to take apart the mess like a bundle of yarn to get the first free needle. In such a case one rehabs any grade the pc has been run on that the pc can remember. One handles this briefly until the pc is happy but not necessarily to free needle. One then finds another overrun, does the same. One goes on and on looking for moments the pc felt good about processing at one or another time. If you keep this up, suddenly you will see a free needle on the pc! Establish what grade it is free on, then quickly get the needle free on the remaining overrun grades (but not grades pc was never run on). It may be necessary to take into account a whole track overrun of a purpose or even the purpose to get release, clear or OT.

It is all very quick, deft auditing, very much on procedure using standard rehab tech—but no repetitive grind.

--------------

You won’t see a freeing up of a needle unless you set your sensitivity on a Mark V to a stiff needle for the pc. You can increase sensitivity or decrease it as the pc progresses but by setting the sensitivity so the needle is pretty still and stiff you will see easily a freeing up of the needle and then a free needle. Using sensitivity 128 will obscure every free needle as the needle is too loose already for the auditor to see any change.

--------------

Pcs are most apt to go free needle after a big cog. So don’t be so engrossed in looking at the pc during cognitions. Keep an eye on that needle. And if it goes free, don’t ask anything else. Just gently give the pc a “That’s it” and without a chop of comm, ease the pc off to “Declare?” in Qual. (Or if a field auditor, start the next grade. )

--------------

Gently, gently, smooth TRs get you free needles.

A dirty needle is always caused by auditor chops, flubs, etc. You can always trace a dirty needle right back to a TR error by the auditor. If a needle goes dirty in a rehab session, get the List 1 out right now and quickly find why. It’s always an auditor goof on the TRs or tech procedure.

--------------

Rehabs are not a substitute for processes. If a grade hasn’t been run, you can’t rehab it of course.

In rehab, never use a new process to cure an overrun. Rehab the process that was overrun, not new ruds.

And see HCO Pol Ltr 10 Feb 1966 on this subject.

---------------

You can get free needles on pcs. It just requires standard TRs, standard tech, standard rehab and wanting to get one and letting a pc have one.


L. RON HUBBARD


LRH:ml.rd
Copyright © 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 12 FEBRUARY 1966
Remimeo
Staff Auditors’ Hats
Tech Hats THE “DANGEROUS AUDITOR”
Qual Hats

We long have had a term for an auditor who consistently did things that were upsetting to a pc’s case. We call this a “dangerous auditor”.

There are certain exact specific actions or omissions that make such an auditor dangerous.

These are:

1. Breaks the Auditor’s Code or ignores it as “only applying in certain cases”.

2. Audits past floating needles or directs additional auditing on that process when a floating needle has occurred.

3. Ceases to audit a process before the needle has gone free.

4. Starts a new grade of release without rehabilitation or making sure at least by record that an earlier grade has been rehabbed and was not overrun.

5. Does not locate the right SP on S & D but over or under lists or misses while assessing.

6. Goes on auditing the pc after an ARC Break without caring for the ARC Break (and believes it possible or usual to continue past one).

7. Consistently has hostile and derogatory opinions about his pcs.

These are the really dangerous points that make an auditor who does them dangerous.

(This list is composed by tracing back upset cases to the errors which made the upset.)

An auditor who merely makes the five Gross Auditing Errors is just a bad auditor. (See HCO B 21 Sept 65 “Out Tech”.)

A dangerous auditor often seems to be quite accomplished, but does the above. On some pcs he seems to get away with it and so will argue the virtue of his approach or violations. But on the next pc he doesn’t and has a mess on his hands.

A “careful” auditor is not necessarily not dangerous. One doesn’t audit carefully. One audits with a relaxed competence that follows the rules and avoids the errors listed above.

There is no compromise for knowing one’s business.

Most auditors, when they are trained and no longer make the 5 Gross Auditing Errors, become very excellent auditors and do a fine job and I am proud of them.


LRH:ml.cden L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 21 FEBRUARY 1966
(Amends HCO B of 12 November 1964)
Remimeo
Franchise
Sthil students SCIENTOLOGY II

PC LEVEL O—IV


DEFINITION PROCESSES


The first thing to know about DEFINITION PROCESSES is that they are separate and distinct and stand by themselves as processes.

In The Book of Case Remedies we find on page 25 REMEDY A and REMEDY B.

These two remedies are A and B because they handle a primary source of worry to supervisors and auditors.

AUDITING STYLE

Each level has its own basic auditing style.

The Auditing Style of Level II is Guiding Style. The Secondary Style is GUIDING SECONDARY STYLE or Guiding S Style.

ASSISTS

An assist is different from auditing as such in that it lacks any model session. Assists are normally short periods of auditing but not always. I have seen a touch assist go on for months at the rate of 15 minutes a day, two or three days a week. And it may take hours to do a touch assist on an accident victim. What characterizes an assist is that it is done rapidly and informally and anywhere.

“Coffee Shop Auditing” isn’t really an assist as it is usually done over coffee too casually to be dignified by the name of auditing. The pc is never informed at all of the existence of a session.

The pc, in an assist, is however informed of the fact and the assist is begun by “This is the Assist” and ended by a “That’s it”, so an assist, like a session, has a beginning and an end.

The Auditor’s Code is observed in giving an Assist and the Auditing Comm Cycle is used.

As an Auditor one sets out in an Assist to accomplish a specific thing for the pc like relieve the snivels or make the ache in the leg better. So an Assist also has a very finite purpose.


SECONDARY STYLES

Every level has a different primary STYLE OF AUDITING. But sometimes in actual sessions or particularly in Assists this Style is altered slightly for special purposes. The Style altered for assists is called a SECONDARY STYLE. It doesn’t mean that the primary style of the level is merely loosely done. It means that it is done a precise but different way to accomplish assists. This variation is called the SECONDARY STYLE of that level.

REMEDIES

A Remedy is not necessarily an Assist and is often done in regular session. It is the Remedy itself which determines what auditing style is used to administer it. Some Remedies, as well as being used in regular sessions, can also be used as Assists.

In short, that a process exists as a Remedy has no bearing on whether it is used in an Assist or a Model Session.

GUIDING STYLE

The essence of Guiding Style is:

1. Locate what’s awry with the pc.

2. Run a Repetitive Process to handle what’s found in 1.

In essence—steer the pc into disclosing something that needs auditing and then audit it.


GUIDING SECONDARY STYLE

Guiding Secondary Style differs from proper Guiding Style and is done by:

1. Steering-the pc toward revealing something or something revealed;

2. Handling it with Itsa.

Guiding Secondary Style differs from Guiding Style only in that Guiding Secondary Style handles the matter by Steer + Itsa. Guiding Style Proper handles the matter with Steer + Repetitive Process.

DEFINITIONS PROCESSING

Definitions Processes, when used as Remedies, are normally processed by Guiding Secondary Style.

Both Remedies of The Book of Case Remedies A and B are Guiding Secondary Style in their normal application.

One would expect them to be used by a Class II Auditor.

One would expect the Assist to last 10 or 15 minutes, perhaps more, but less than a regular session would take.

One would expect that any case in a PE class, any student that was getting nowhere, would be handled by the Instructor with Guiding Secondary Style using Remedies A and B as precision processes.

REMEDY A PATTER

One would not expect the person or student in trouble to be turned over to another student for handling. It’s too fast, sharp and easy to handle that trouble oneself if one is Class II or above and far more certain. You can do it while you’d be finding another student to do the auditing. It would be uneconomical in terms of time not to just do it right then—no meter—leaning up against a desk.

The auditor’s patter would be something like what follows. The pc’s responses and Itsa are omitted in this example.

“I am going to give you a short assist.” “All right, what word haven’t you understood in Scientology?” “Okay, it’s pre-clear. Explain what it means.” “Okay, I see you are having trouble, so what does pre mean?” “Fine. Now what does clear mean?” “Good. I’m glad you realize you had it mixed up with patient and see that they’re different.” “Thank you. That’s it.”

In between the above total of auditing patter, the student may have hemmed and hawed and argued and cognited. But one just steered the pc straight along the subject selected and got it audited and cleaned up. If the student gave a glib text book definition after challenging the word preclear, we wouldn’t buy it, but would give the student a piece of paper or a rubber band and say “Demonstrate that.” And then carry on as it developed.

And that would be Remedy A.

You see it is precision auditing and is a process and does have an Auditing Style. And it works like a dream.

You see this is Steer + Itsa as to its style. And that it addressed the immediate subject.

What makes A Remedy A is not that it handles Scientology definitions, but that it handles the immediate subject under discussion or study.


REMEDY B

What makes Remedy B Remedy B is that it seeks out and handles a former subject, conceived to be similar to the immediate subject, in order to clear up misunderstandings in the immediate subject or condition.

Remedy B, run on some person or student, would simply be a bit more complex than Remedy A as it looks into the past.

A person has a continuous confusion with policy or auditors, etc. So one runs B like this (the following is auditor patter only):

“I’m going to give you an Assist. Okay?” “All right. What subject were you mixed up with before Scientology?” “I’m sure there is one.” “Okay. Spiritualism. Fine. What word in Spiritualism didn’t you understand?” “You can think of it.” “Good. Ectoplasm. Fine. What was the definition of that?” “All right, there’s a dictionary over there, look it up.” “I’m sorry it doesn’t give the spiritualist definition. But you say it says Ecto means outside. What’s plasm?” “Well, look it up.” “All right. I see, Ecto means outside and plasm means mould or covering.” (Note: You don’t always break up words into parts for definition in A & B Remedies.) “Yes, I’ve got that. Now what do you think spiritualists meant by it?” “All right, I’m glad you realize that sheets over people make ghosts ghosts.” “Fine, glad you recalled being scared as a child.” “All right, what did the spiritualist mean then?” “Okay. Glad you see thetans don’t need to be cased in goo.” “All right. Fine. Good. You had Ectoplasm mixed up with engrams and you now realize thetans don’t have to have a bank and can be naked. Fine. That’s it.” (Note: You don’t always repeat after him what the pc said, but sometimes it helps.)

Student departs still cogniting. Enters Scientology now having left Spiritualism on the back track. Doesn’t keep on trying to make every HCO Bulletin studied solve “Ectoplasm”, the buried misunderstood word that kept him stuck in Spiritualism.


DEFINITIONS PURPOSE

The purpose of definitions processing is fast clearing of “held down fives” (jammed thinking because of a misunderstood or misapplied datums) preventing someone getting on with auditing or Scientology.

Remedies A and B are not always used as Assists. They are also used in regular sessions. But when so used they are always used with Guiding Secondary Style—Steer + Itsa.

As a comment, people who seek to liken Scientology to something, “Oh, like Christian Science,” are stuck in Christian Science. Don’t say, “Oh no! It isn’t like Christian Science!” Just nod and mark them for a fast assist or a session the moment the chance offers if they seem very disinterested or aloof when asked to a PE Course.

There’s weapons in that arsenal, auditor. Use them.

As Remedies A and B stand as the first and second given in The Book of Case Remedies, so before a large number of potential Scientologists stands the confusion of definitions.

We have made Scientology definitions easy for them by compiling a dictionary, using words new to people only when useful.

But those that don’t come along at all, are so wound up in some past subject they can’t hear or think when that earlier subject is restimulated. And that earlier subject is held down only by some word or phrase they didn’t grasp.

Some poor pawn howling for the blood of Scientologists isn’t mad at Scientology at all. But at some earlier practice he got stuck in with mis-definition of its terms.

You see, we inherit some of the effects of the whole dullness of Man when we seek to open the prison door and say, “Look. Sunshine in the fields. Walk out.” Some, who need Remedy B say: “Oh no! The last time somebody scratched the wall that way

I got stupider.” Why say, “Hey. I’m not scratching the wall. I’m opening the gate”? Why bother. He can’t hear you. But he can hear Remedy B as an assist. That’s the channel to his comprehension.

UNDERSTANDING

When a person can’t understand something and yet goes on facing up to it, he gets into a “problems situation” with it. There it is over there, yet he can’t make it out.

Infrequently (fortunately for us) the being halts time right there. Anything he conceives to be similar presented to his view is the puzzle itself (A=A=A). And he goes stupid. This happens rarely in the life of one being, but it happens to many people.

Thus there aren’t many such messes in one person in one lifetime that have to be cleaned up. But there are a few in many people.

The cycle of Mis-definition is:

1. didn’t grasp a word, then
2. didn’t understand a principle or theory, then
3. became different from it, commits and committed overts against it, then
4. restrained himself or was restrained from committing those overts, then
5. being on a withhold (inflow) pulled in a motivator.

Not every word somebody didn’t grasp was followed by a principle or theory. An overt was not committed every time this happened. Not every overt committed was restrained. So no motivator was pulled in.

But when it did happen, it raised havoc with the mentality of the being when trying to think about what seem to be similar subjects.

You see, you are looking at the basic incident + its locks as in a chain of incidents. The charge that is apparently on the lock in present time is actually only in the basic incident. The locks borrow the charge of the basic incident and are not themselves causing anything. So you have a basic misunderstood word which then charges up the whole subject as a lock; then a subject charging up similar subjects as locks.

Every nattery or non-progressing student or pc is hung up in the above 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 cycle. And every such student or pc has a misdefined word at the bottom of that pile. If the condition is new and temporary it’s a Scientology word that’s awry. If natter, no progress, etc, is continuous and doesn’t cease when all is explained in Scientology or when attempts to straighten up Scientology words fail, then it’s an earlier subject at fault. Hence, Remedies A and B. Hence Guiding Secondary Style. Hence, the fact that Definitions Processes are processes. And VITAL processes they are if one wants a smooth organization, a smooth PE, a smooth record of wins on all pcs. And if one wants to bring people into Scientology who seem to want to stay out.

Of course these Remedies A and B are early-on processes, to be audited by a Class II or above on a Level 0 or I pc or student. However, some in Scientology, as of this date, are studying slowly or progressing poorly because A and B haven’t been applied.

One expects that very soon, now that auditors have this data, there will be nobody at upper levels with his definitions dangling.


L. RON HUBBARD






LRH :jw.ml.rd
Copyright ©1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

CERTAINTY

Vol. 13 No. 3 [March, 1966]


Official Periodical of
SCIENTOLOGY
in the
British Isles



What Is Greatness?


L. Ron Hubbard


The hardest task one can have is to continue to love one’s fellows despite all reasons he should not.

And the true sign of sanity and greatness is to so continue.

For the one who can achieve this, there is abundant hope. For those who cannot, there is only sorrow, hatred and despair, and these are not the things of which greatness or sanity or happiness are made.

A primary trap is to succumb to invitations to hate. There are those who appoint one their executioners. Sometimes for the sake of the safety of others, it is necessary to act, but it is not necessary also to hate them.

To do one’s task without becoming furious at others who seek to prevent one is a mark of greatness—and sanity. And only then can one be happy.

Seeking to achieve any single desirable quality in life is a noble thing. The one most difficult and most necessary to achieve is to love one’s fellows despite all invitations to do otherwise.

If there is any saintly quality, it is not to forgive. “Forgiveness” is a much lower level action and is rather censorious.

True greatness merely refuses to change in the face of bad actions against one— and a truly great person loves his fellows because he understands them.

After all, they are all in the same trap. Some are oblivious of it, some have gone mad because of it, some act like those who betrayed them. But all, all are in the same trap—the generals, the street sweepers, the presidents, the insane. They act the way they do because they are all subject to the same cruel pressures of this universe.

Some of us are subject to those pressures and still go on doing our jobs. Others have long since succumbed and rave and torture and strut like the demented souls they are.

To re-save some of them is a dangerous undertaking. Were you to approach many ruling heads in the world and offer to set them free (as only a Scientologist can) they





Copyright ©1966 by L. Ron Hubbard. All Rights Reserved.

would go berserk, cry up their private police and generally cause unpleasantness. Indeed, one did—he was later assassinated by no desire of ours but because of the incompetence of his own fellows about him. He could have used Scientology. Instead, he promptly tried to shoot it down by ordering raids and various berserk actions on Scientology organizations. That he was then shot had nothing to do with us, but only demonstrated how incompetent and how mortal he really was.

As we become stronger, we can be completely openhanded with our help. Until we do, we can at least understand the one fact that greatness does not stem from savage wars or being known. It stems from being true to one’s own decency, from going on helping others whatever they do or think or say and despite all savage acts against one; to persevere without changing one’s basic attitude toward Man.

A fully trained Scientologist is in a far better position to understand than a partly trained one. For the Scientologist who really knows is able not only to retain confidence in himself and what he can do, but also can understand why others do what they do and so knowing, does not become baffled or dismayed by small defeats. To that degree, true greatness depends on total wisdom. They act as they do because they are what they are—trapped beings, crushed beneath an intolerable burden. And if they have gone mad for it and command the devastation of whole nations in errors of explanation, still one can understand why and can understand as well the extent of their madness. Why should one change and begin to hate just because others have lost themselves and their own destinies are too cruel for them to face.

Justice, mercy, forgiveness, all are unimportant beside the ability not to change because of provocation or demands to do so.

One must act, one must preserve order and decency, but one need not hate or seek vengeance.

It is true that beings are frail and commit wrongs. Man is basically good but can act badly.

He only acts badly when his acts done for order and the safety of others are done with hatred. Or when his disciplines are founded only upon safety for himself regardless of all others; or worse, when he acts only out of a taste for cruelty.

To preserve no order at all is an insane act. One need only look at the possessions and environment of the insane to realize this. The able keep good order.

When cruelty in the name of discipline dominates a race, that race has been taught to hate. And that race is doomed.

The real lesson is to learn to love.

He who would walk scatheless through his day must learn this.

Never use what is done to one as a basis for hatred. Never desire revenge.

It requires real strength to love Man. And to love him despite all invitations to do otherwise, all provocations and all reasons why one should not.

Happiness and strength endure only in the absence of hate. To hate alone is the road to disaster. To love is the road to strength. To love in spite of all is the secret of greatness. And may very well be the greatest secret in this universe.

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 8 MARCH 1966

Exec Secs’ Hats Exec—HCO—Tech—Qual
ES Comm Qual Hat Ethics
HCO Sec Hat
Dir 1 & R Hat
Ethics Hat U R G E N T
Tech & Qual Hats
LRH Comm Hat

HIGH CRIME
Effective 1 June 1966


In any instance of a heavily falling statistic in Tech or Qual or a chronically low statistic in Tech or Qual in an org or in any org which has chronically low statistics in all divisions:

The Ethics Officer must look for this policy violation which is the highest crime in Tech and Qual:

TOLERATING THE ABSENCE OF, OR NOT INSISTING UPON STAR-RATED CHECK OUTS ON ALL PROCESSES AND THEIR IMMEDIATE TECHNOLOGY AND ON RELEVANT POLICY LETTERS ON HGC INTERNES OR STAFF AUDITORS IN THE TECH DIV OR STAFF AUDITORS OR INTERNES IN THE QUAL DIV FOR THE LEVELS AND ACTIONS THEY WILL USE BEFORE PERMITTING THEM TO AUDIT ORG PCS AND ON SUPERVISORS IN TECH AND QUAL WHO INSTRUCT OR EXAMINE OR FAILING TO INSIST UPON THIS POLICY OR PREVENTING THIS POLICY FROM GOING INTO EFFECT OR MINIMIZING THE CHECK OUTS OR LISTS.

If an Ethics Officer or any person in HCO Dept 3 discovers this high crime to exist he must report it at once to the HCO Area Secretary.

The HCO Area Secretary must at once order a thorough investigation into any and all persons who might have instigated this high crime and report the matter to the HCO Exec Sec.

The HCO Exec Sec must then convene a Committee of Evidence with the persons

accused as interested parties and must locate amongst them the suppressive or suppressives by the “reasonableness” of their defence, state of case and other signs.

The Committee of Evidence must declare the located S.P. suppressive by HCO Ethics Order and dismiss.

If any Ethics Officer, Director of I & R or HCO Area Secretary fails to obtain co-operation by superiors in carrying out this Policy Letter quickly then he or she must inform the LRH Communicator.

The LRH Communicator must then cable full particulars to Worldwide.

The Worldwide AdCouncil must then carry out this policy letter expeditiously and at any cost.

If the HCO personnel making this discovery cannot obtain action in any other way he or she must go outside the org and cable LRH Comm WW and his actions and costs in so cabling will be reimbursed on claim to WW and his post will be fully protected.

If the AdCouncil WW suspects this policy not to be in full force in any org despite assurances an HCO WW personnel must be sent to that org to investigate and may be deputized to remove either or both Exec Secs of that org by Comm Ev on the spot or at WW.
------------

It has been discovered that failure to check out, Star-Rated, the Tech and Qual HCO Bs applying to levels being audited or taught or examined and their processes and the data used in Review and relevant policy on those using the material in orgs results in a crashed Division 4 completion statistic, crashed income and low statistics throughout and a failing org and was the reason through 1965 for struggling orgs—the public would not pay more for service than it was worth to them and with this policy out, the service was not worth very much.

It has been found that a suppressive person will discourage this check out policy as one of his first actions.
------------

This policy applies whether an auditor has been trained or not with star-rated check outs. Staff and Review auditor and Supervisor are special technical status grades and one cannot consider this double training.

------------

“Star-Rated” means = 100 percent letter perfect in knowing and understanding, demonstrating and being able to repeat back the material with no comm lag.

Org Exec Sec Communicator for Qual WW is the final authority for any check sheets on this matter and is responsible for preparing and standardizing them from time to time. But the lack of a check sheet from ES Comm Qual WW does not set aside any provision or penalty of this policy letter.

------------

This policy letter is issued in the complete knowledge that the absence of this policy in full effect is the primary reason for orgs not growing and is based on actual experience.
------------

The only higher crime I could think of would be to pretend to have an org but have no technical personnel on staff in Tech or Qual. That is suppressive also and will crash an org. Handle it similarly to the above.


L. RON HUBBARD


LRH:ml.cden
Copyright © 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED







[Added to by HCO PL 21 November 1971, Scientology Courses Examination Policy, OEC Volume 5, page 139, which made it firm policy that anyone examining a student for certification on any Scientology Course, including Admin, must have first star-rated related Policies, HCO Bs or other issues before writing or grading exams.]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 3 APRIL 1966

Remimeo
All Orgs (Tech Div)
Exec Secs
Tech Sec
All Tech Hats (The original issue of this HCO B contained a number of
All Qual Hats typographical errors- Please replace your copy with this
corrected issue. The original copies should be returned to
the HCO Area Sec.)



DIANETIC AUDITING COURSE



The first requisite of any auditor trainee is to find and run secondaries and engrams on a preclear, preferably a fellow student, and to have secondaries and engrams run on self.

Due to the fantastic speed of results today it is not possible for a student to get enough auditing experience using the standard tech of 0 to VI.

To remedy this we use dolls for model session practice and learning the processes.

But even further training is needed, using live preclears.

The tech used is that of Book I, Dianetics. The Modern Science of Mental Health, but omitting the countdown and canceller, this not being necessary today and using instead a simple “Start of Session” and “End of Session” and then running the engram.

Do not try to use past track incidents. The preclear may eventually fall into these but try instead for current lifetime.

Try first for secondaries (moments of misemotion) particularly loss. Try to find these on a gradient, first trying for minor losses and eventually locating the death of a loved one.

Certain pcs (Black Vs they used to be called) are not able to run track incidents but try to coax them through incidents of loss on a gradient (small losses first) and then get on with it. They usually will get visio on incidents turned on if this is done.

There is a complete method of running engrams on anyone, developed by me about three years ago whereby the date is found then the duration of the incident. This always permits an incident to be run with visio.

Don’t try for sonic.

Get the pc to regress to the moment of the incident.

Don’t try to run them conceptually with the pc in present time.

Emphasize getting the pc to start at the beginning and go through to the end several times. Don’t be too keen on repeater technique to get phrases. They show up if you get the pc to run through the incident a few times.

When the pc can run secondaries successfully try for actual engrams.

Once again try for light incidents like a pinprick and graduate up to real engrams— moments of real pain and unconsciousness.

Most students shy off actual secondaries and engrams and try to run conceptual blah that could never have affected anyone’s life with the pc in PT. This alone is the cause for failure of case gain running secondaries and engrams.

Don’t try to pull withholds, etc, or handle present time problems but send the pc who ARC Breaks with the auditor (not with life) to Qual at once for an ARC Break assessment. DON’T CONTINUE TO AUDIT AN ARC BROKEN PC who has ARC Broken with an auditor.

All Ethics data applies—don’t audit a Potential Trouble Source. If you encounter an SP (no case gain no matter what you do) send to Ethics. Lack of Ethics facilities and Ethics know-how was the primary reason Dianetics occasionally didn’t work. So the new student has to be genned in on:

1. If pc starts chopping auditor send to Qual at once.

2. Suppressives.

3. Potential Trouble Sources.

4. The org pattern showing Tech Div and Qual.

E-Meters must be used and regardless of whether the student knows anything about them or not the pc “must be on the cans”. We don’t care if the student learns much or little about meters at this stage but a bright student will catch on fast. There is no E-Meter training at this stage.

The texts supplied the student are those which cover I to 4 above, Dianetics the Modern Science of Mental Health which he must buy or own and an E-Meter he must buy or borrow but may not be lent by the school.

There is real magic in running secondaries and engrams. I have seen the most fantastic recoveries from running merely a secondary (most spectacular recoveries with secondaries were obtained from running the death of an ally). I have seen severe physical ailments—heart disease, arthritis, malfunction, allergies, impotency, frigidity, lameness, etc, through the catalogue of human ills—vanish or reduce on properly running engrams to erasure. We are not in healing but we have a fantastic success with Dianetics in this activity.

No auditor will ever be worth very much unless he has come in the right way—through Dianetics. The concept of physical and mental difficulty stemming from a mental image picture was a great discovery and the technology of erasing such pictures as developed must not be lost in our trained Scientologists. This very instant I know of 3 cases with whom I am in daily contact whose whole lives would be changed by finding and running the incident necessary to solve the case. I have seen a woman who looked 60 appear 20 after 9 hours of auditing out a single secondary (the recent death of her husband).

When we originally tried to teach this technology (running of secondaries and engrams, 1950-1952) we had no Ethics, we were at that time already drowned with SPs. Auditors weren’t duplicating tech. They often couldn’t even state the basic definitions of “secondary” or “engram”. They steered the pc all over the track or let him wander like a lost soul. They tried to force the pc to run the auditor’s aberrations. And it was a jolly old mess ! But those few I taught personally and simply had, as any old-timer will tell you, the most fantastic successes with incredibly low effort by the auditor.

It’s just a picture, secondary or engram. The whole of the technique is just finding the incident the pc is “in”, running the pc through the incident, beginning to end, several times and not letting him digress and letting him come up the tone scale past boredom to enthusiasm by doing so. When I think of the millions of words I have had to speak or write just to get that terrible simplicity across, I see it can be bent as technology in a thousand thousand ways.

The student has today guides he never had in 1950-52. He has the Auditor’s Code, the actual responses of the E-Meter, Ethics and the final solution of how to turn on visio even in SPs as per three years ago.

The startling gains of the exact tech of 0-VII of course overawe the old plodder of 1950. But there is a sting here as far as training goes. No understanding of the mind is complete without a thorough grasp of secondaries and engrams and running them. I have seen a person trained up to a high level who suddenly flopped at V because he had no faintest notion of what he was auditing.

The budding psycho-analyst gets the shock of his life when he sees there IS SOMETHING THERE. Before us, people thought the brain had short circuits in it (psychologists and psychiatrists) or that a beast called a Censor lived in a dungeon in it (Freud), or that evil spirits haunted one (Christianity).

The whole answer to the mind is mental pictures and masses created by the thetan. There is no other source or cause of aberration. Unless a student knows this he will never make a good auditor and Scientologist. The only early way to get a reality on it is to audit secondaries and engrams and be audited through them. One does encounter all this phenomena by the time one is a Grade VII even though not audited on Dianetics. BUT students beginning their training are not Grade VII. And unless they have actually audited or been audited on secondaries and engrams they will never, even though Grade VII, really have a reality on why people act as they do or the complex nature of the bank.

Dianetics the Modern Science of Mental Health was written before whole track was known. It made releases like mad but they were then overrun like mad. It failed only on SPs and PTSs. It was and is the answer to psycho-somatic ills and human aberration.

My results with Dianetics were not often duplicated because:

1. I stopped when the ability of the pc on any one subject was regained.

2. I audited smoothly.

3. I didn’t use the subject to invalidate the pc (see Original Thesis on why auditing works).

Many auditors did duplicate my results and made “clears” which we now call releases due to total Clear being so much higher.

That we are today making a TOTAL Clear as well as Operating Thetans is completely out of comparison with what Dianetics was trying to do.

Scientology is the route from human being to total freedom and total beingness. Dianetics was the route from aberrated or aberrated and ill human to capable human. This step had never before been achieved in Man’s history.

Oddly, the step from human being to a spirit had been achieved, if rarely, but was not generally credited (Buddhism, other spiritual practices, even Christianity). Scientology really achieves it and for the first time with TOTAL stability, no relapse and invariably one for one. Nevertheless Man had an inkling of the goals of Scientology even though he considered them almost beyond God.

But Man had no inkling whatever of Dianetics. None. This was the bolt from the blue. Man was hacking and sawing and shocking and injecting and teaching and moralizing and counselling and hanging and jailing men with enthusiasm without any idea at all of what caused Man to behave as he did or what made him sick or well.

THE answer was and still is Dianetics.

As we can now go directly toward total freedom on a precise and narrow roadway without any IFs and as it can be done by a human being in about a year minimum time due to my discarding of all non-essentials, by developing the exact steps and techniques of administration, and as the result is so hugely startling grade to grade compared to anything anybody had ever even dreamed of and as the final result was never before known in this universe, we tend to turn up our noses at poor little old Dianetics.

But it was the grandpa, the ancestor, the basic discovery which led to and the reason for Scientology.

AND we have the gigantic problem amongst us that Scientology works too fast in an auditor’s hands and forbids him to overrun a result. Therefore HOW CAN HE EVER LEARN TO AUDIT? He can’t, running Scientology, as he’ll never get enough practice on live pcs.

Dianetics, however, has a virtue we never would have called one in 1950. It is slow. You can grind away on a secondary for hours. You can one by one whittle down a chain of related engrams for days, even weeks. You can audit a pc for a long, long time. And you can get auditing practice.

Now just one change—have the pc sit in a chair in Dianetic sessions. No reason to use a couch. Thus the auditor has the same set-up as in grade auditing. The same approach and patter he will use in his standard Scientology grade auditing MUST be used in this Dianetic auditing or the practice will not train one to do Scientology auditing. (Yes, I know the pcs will roll up in a ball or leap into the air, but this is a hazard of the trade! Put such a pc seated on the floor after one roll off from a chair.)

And one Supervisor caution: Tell such students to watch that tone arm for reading at clear read and watch the needle for a float and if they see the release phenomena occur to gently ease off the session without even one more command “to go on” or any other command. Unless you watch this you will overrun some pc on a release grade. (Also tell him what to do in case of a pc refusing to co-operate or chopping the auditor—send to Qual quick.)

Dianetics is easy to do.

1. You say, “Start of Session.”

2. You locate an incident (an actual past happening).

3. You tell the pc to GO to the beginning of it.

4. When the pc says he’s there the auditor tells the pc to go through it to the end and say what is happening as he goes along.

5. When the pc reaches the end of it, the auditor tells the pc to go to the beginning of the same incident.

6. When the pc has, the auditor tells him to GO through it (not “again”) and say what is happening.

7. Repeat 5 and 6. Repeat 5 and 6. Repeat 5 and 6.

8. When the pc is up to tone 4.0 (cheerful) on it, repeat 2.

9. On the new incident repeat 3 to 7.

10. When the new incident has come up to tone 4.0, repeat 2.

11. Repeat 3 to 7.

12. When the new incident has come up to tone 4.0, repeat 2.

13. At end of the body of the session tell the pc to spot the environment a few times.

14. End the session by saying, “End of Session.”

That’s Dianetic auditing.

Refined, one can handle “bouncers” or “denyers”, etc. But frankly, I found the pc would only reach to these when he was in over his head and the gradient of incident selected had not been followed. If you choose incidents IN THE PC’S CONSCIOUS RECALL not by flash answer or meter the refinements aren’t necessary. You just do 1 to 12.

The ORIGINAL version of Dianetic auditing was all done on a gradient. One searched nothing out by meters or trick questions or tests or flash answers. One got what the pc could comfortably face and audited it. If the auditing was smoothly done, the next incident was tougher but the pc was comfortable in facing it. In that way the incidents (secondaries or engrams) become progressively more horrifying but the pc is quite comfortable facing each one in turn. This is what is meant by “gradient”—it is a steepening or an increasing from the slight to the heavy. But you see the pc smoothly audited is gaining ability and confidence all the time and so can face more and more violence in his past. It’s all there in pictures. Blackness is either his unwillingness to face things or his basic bank. It cures (vanishes) if you do it by gradients. And the pc soon can see pictures very well.

Therefore IF your student is becoming a good auditor all you need to do is look at his pc. If the pc is more confident and cheerful, then the auditor is learning and doing well. If the pc isn’t, the auditor has a rough spot and should go to cramming. If this doesn’t work, training being good, then the auditor is probably an SP who has no idea of helping the pc at all but is using “auditing” to bust somebody up.

Dianetics is too easy, really, for the student to conceive that his minimum mild actions will produce such fabulous results. So the auditor feels called upon to add. Additives are what checked Dianetic results in the vast majority of cases that were checked.

The pc who wants to “psycho-analyze” (talk) by the hour isn’t getting audited and isn’t going to get any better. This pc simply isn’t under auditor control so the auditor’s control and TRs are at fault. (Pcs explain this sometimes by saying they’re “cogniting” whereas a cognition is rather quick, not an hour’s maundering.)

The pc has to be told what is expected of him. “We’re going to find an incident in your life of which you have an exact record. Then by sending you through it at the moment it happened several times we’re going to erase it. Just do what I tell you and all will be well. Do you have any questions about that?” That exact quote must be made to the pc who has not been Dianetically audited (which includes many Scientology pcs too) and the pc must understand it and be satisfied he does before locating and running incidents.

Very bad off pcs jump about on the “time track” and really need only grade auditing. Such pcs should be rejected for the purposes of this Dianetic auditing and sent to any Hubbard Guidance Centre.

Some pcs just won’t get the idea and just won’t run incidents. Simply reject for these purposes and send to the HGC.

Some pcs are so snarly and choppy even before meeting the auditor, they have to be sent to Qual and afterwards only to the HGC as they’re no good for this. They’ll make it, but are not easy enough to afford any training to a student.

Some pcs are simply Ethics cases (SPs and PTS) and these too should be rejected for this purpose. The PTS is known by “roller coastering” (Coney Island fast up and down quarter-mile of aerial railway). They slump. So they’re Ethics cases.

If a pc ARC Breaks suddenly or seems very sad after auditing it’s an ARC Break with the auditor and needs Qual attention—and the student auditor should be looked over very carefully as a possible Ethics case.

------------

Engrams are hard to run in a room full of auditing teams. So if possible one should assign the auditing to be done after class hours in their lodgings.

------------

The way to fit this programme of Dianetic auditing into training in general must be worked out and is left to the Org Exec Sec WW who may from time to time issue, through the Org Executive Secretary’s Communicator for Tech, Sec Eds covering its arrangements and materials to study (check sheets). In the absence of such Sec Eds an Academy may make up its own. It is possible to make it a whole new course with an equivalent of the old Hubbard Dianetic Auditor certificate. And one recalls that a course not even vaguely as good as this one can be was the course on which all others have been based since 1954. The course outlined herein is a smoothed version of the course I personally taught in 1950 to thousands.

------------

“Secondary” in its original use meant “a moment of loss” and incidents should be chosen on that basis.

A secondary derives all its power from an underlying engram (containing real pain and unconsciousness).

Therefore many, many secondaries (which bury engrams) must be taken off the case first and the job thoroughly done before engrams should be approached in auditing. Secondaries may again be approached when engrams seem to have been “all cleaned up”.

This alternation of:

1. Take off a lot of secondaries

2. Take off a lot of engrams—should be followed one after the other.


Past life incidents are handled just like any other secondaries and engrams. A “past life” and memory of it is buried under the terrific loss of possessions and body and natural recall can be restored by just general Dianetic auditing as given in this HCO B. No special attention is required.

Do not run prenatal or birth engrams unless they come up naturally. The pc must run only consciously recalled incidents. He need not recall the details consciously. Only that the incident happened.

------------

The state of release attained by Dianetic auditing is probably below Grade 0 and should be regarded as such and is declared by Qual as “Dianetic Release”—no grade number being given.

THE MATERIAL IN THIS HCO B TAKES PRECEDENCE OVER ANY DIANETIC MATERIAL, BOOKS OR TAPES INCLUDING DIANETICS THE MODERN SCIENCE OF MENTAL HEALTH WHERE A CONFLICT MAY OR MAY SEEM TO EXIST.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:lb-r.jd.rd
Copyright © 1966, 1967
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 10 JUNE 1966

Remimeo
Tech Div Hats
HGC Auditors
Qual Div Staff


S & D COMMANDS



WHAT PERSON OR GROUP HAS SUPPRESSED YOU?

The above is the listing question to be used when running an S & D.

Note: If you find a group on the list be sure to then do a represent list of that group.

Note: Do not do new lists where old lists exist. Use old lists.


L. RON HUBBARD







LRH :Ib-r.rd
Copyright © 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 10 JUNE 1966
Issue II
Remimeo
Tech Div Hats
HGC Auditors
Qual Div Staff

S & D—THE MISSED ITEM


There are four points I want to get across to you.

1. ILLNESS = ONLY PTS

2. ONLY PTS = ILLNESS

3. ONLY A PTS CONDITION CAN MAKE A GRADE V (or any grade) SICK

4. A BAD S & D MAKES A PERSON SICK

Get it? GOOD!!

Now, if a person who has had an S & D gets sick, what do you know? You know that:

(a) They are a PTS
(b) The S & D was not properly done
(c) An item was missed

NOTE: The missed item may be on a list that was made 2 or 3 years ago.

On the HCO B 5th February 1966 “S & D WARNING”, I clearly stated that “It is the action of nearly finding the right one that may make the pc ill”. One has restimulated the charge of the RIGHT item, but, has found and okayed the WRONG item.

A bad S&D is DEADLY.

A bad S & D can cause a dangerous physical condition. A bad S & D can land a pc in hospital (I know of two such cases where it did).

So please! PLEASE!! get this, it is so very important. Always, repeat, ALWAYS look for the MISSED item on a priorly done list when the pc gets sick.

Know your S & D bulletins, know your listing and nulling bulletin—THOROUGHLY—and you won’t go wrong.

Let’s fix up roller coasters, not help keep them roller coasting.

IT’S VERY EASY.


LRH:lb-r.cden L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


** 6607C19 SHSBC-69 About Rhodesia

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 20 JULY 1966

Remimeo

Required for
Level IV Students
TO REVIEW AUDITORS
TO ETHICS OFFICERS


THE TYPE TWO PTS


It has been revealed at Saint Hill that HGC auditors and Review auditors are permitting their preclears to be sent through to Ethics for writing disconnection letters to any person or group which the preclear thinks to have been suppressive of him and then continuing the Search and Discovery to find the SP on the list.

This is improper. The auditor should continue the proper auditing of an S and D until the proper item on the list is found.

An Ethics Officer should only accept from a Type Two PTS, the proper SP found upon the completion of an S and D properly listed and nulled to one SP.


L. RON HUBBARD






LRH:lb-r.rd
Copyright © 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

















SAINT HILL SPECIAL BRIEFING COURSE LECTURES
21—26 July 1966


** 6607C21 SHSBC-70 Dianetic Auditing
** 6607C26 SHSBC-71 The Classification Chart and Auditing

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 21 JULY 1966

Remimeo
TECH vs. QUAL


The general rule is laid down that, except for Declaration of Grade, Certificate or Class, Tech shall attempt to handle all it can on all cases and students and only when Tech personnel consider it hopeless (or the student or pc is ready for Declare, Cert or Grade) shall the student or pc be sent to Qual.

“Review flat” is not now to be considered mandatory. The pc previously has been sent to the D of P and then to Qual to verify that a flat point has been reached. This routing is ended. If the auditor or Case Supervisor, either one, wants a check for the flatness of a process, only then is the pc sent to the D of P (not to Qual also). If the flatness indicates a grade has been attained the usual action is just send from auditor to Examiner in Qual.

To routinely and always send a pc for a flatness of process check is actually a violation of the Fast Flow Management System. It checks things which may be all right.

Review, when it finds a rehab incomplete, should quickly route the pc back to Tech. As a general rule, only when Tech is utterly at a loss does Review take over and audit the pc.

The Case Supervisor should keep and post HGC auditor “statistics” announcing goofs and wins. The Case Supervisor must require a retrain of an HGC auditor whenever a pc winds up being audited in Review. I always send the auditor to Interne Training for retrain whenever I have to send a pc to Review.

Processing today is very simple but very exact. The data is all there. That’s the only data. Don’t add any. Just do what the HCO Bs say. There are no exceptional cases.

HGC auditors who over-run just don’t know what a free needle is. They should ask a Clear to hold the cans so they can see one.

When you check for flatness on a process gone to free needle you may overrun it. For the auditor, the D of P and the Examiner and Review to check, each one, for flatness, will goof up a flat point every time.

For the Case Supervisor to neglect ordering retraining of his auditors when he finds pcs not doing well is a grave omission.

For Tech not to carry on trying and limply turn all bits and pieces over to Qual is to train Tech into weakness.

Two rules:

In Tech, when all else fails, then hand it over to Review.

In any difficulty, when all else fails, do what Ron says.


LRH:lb-r.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 27 JULY 1966
Remimeo
All Orgs
Tech Sec (Qual Div)
Qual Sec
All Tech Hats
All Qual Hats

METER TRIM CHECK


E-Meters can go out of trim during a session because of temperature changes.

Thus even if the meter is properly calibrated and reads at 2.0 with a 5,000 ohm resistor across the leads and 3.0 with 12,500 ohms, by the end of the session a pc can be apparently reading below 2.0 because the meter is off trim.

Low TA cases are not cracked by lower level auditing, and have to be handled with Power Processing. Erroneously calling a pc a “low TA case” could thus deny him lower level processes that he could win on.

The following meter procedure is therefore to be followed AT THE END OF EACH SESSION (AFTER GIVING “THAT’S IT”):

1. DON’T MOVE THE TRIM KNOB

2. PULL OUT THE JACK PLUG

3. MOVE THE TA UNTIL THE NEEDLE IS ON “SET” AT THE SENSITIVITY YOU WERE USING IN THE SESSION

4. RECORD THE TA POSITION AT THE BOTTOM OF THE AUDITOR’S REPORT FORM AS: “Trim check—TA = . . .”

5. IF YOUR METER IS KNOWN TO BE OUT OF CALIBRATION (as in Para 2 above) RECORD ALSO: “Calibration error — ..................on meter= 2.0 actual” at the bottom of the form.


L. RON HUBBARD

LRH:lb-r.rd
Copyright © 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


[This HCO B is replaced by HCO B 11 May 1969, Meter Trim Check, page 369.]




SAINT HILL SPECIAL BRIEFING COURSE LECTURES
28 July—4 August 1966


** 6607C28 SHSBC-72 Dianetic Auditing and the Mind
** 6608C02 SHSBC-73 Suppressives and GAEs
** 6608C04 SHSBC-74 Dianetics, Scientology and Society

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 10 AUGUST 1966

Remimeo
Tech Sec
D of T

ERRORS OF STUDENTS


The following list of common errors causing student flunks in the Saint Hill Special Briefing Course has been obtained from the Student Examiner by the Guardian WW:

Level 0

Theory—Not knowing commands—model session.

Written—Not fully understanding what a Q & A is.
The symptoms of Premature Acknowledgement.
What a PTS is.

Practical—Poor TR 0.

Auditing—By-passing floating needles.
Auditing PTS.
Saying the needle floated below 2.0 on the Tone Arm.

Level I

Theory—Not knowing what makes a meter read (female students mostly).
Not knowing the various scales.

Written—Not understanding how an auditor can prevent a Pc from coming into PT in the CCHs.
Q & A—not recognizing it in an auditing situation, (most students pass this written exam).

Practical—TR 9, not running TR 9 with fine clear intention.
Too much force being applied when not necessary.

Auditing—Over-running—under-running.
Saying Pc went Problems Release on Grade 0 Processes.
Auditing over unflat ruds.
By-passing FN.

Level II

Theory—Missed W/Hs—understanding of. Model session.
ARC Breaks and their relationship to overts and M/W/Hs.
How to do Auditing by List.

Written—M/W/Hs and W/Hs—critical thoughts—ARC Breaks and what caused which.
Study material—appreciation of.

Practical—Not knowing and understanding how to do Auditing by List.
Reading meter through a D/N.
Long comm lags with admin and asking next question.
Bad TR 0.

Auditing—Additives to process—not stopping at floating needle or under-running.

Level III

Theory—How to do an ARC Break Assessment.
Difference between By-passed Charge Assessment and ARC Break Assessment.
When to stop doing ARC Break Assessment.

Written—The primary error in handling ARC Breaks.
How to do listing and nulling.
Confusing ARC Breaks with by-passed charge.

Practical—Goofing up nulling a list.
Doing nulling through D/N.
Turning the sensitivity up in the assessment.
Not being able to clean the needle on the Pc.

Auditing—Not knowing what to do with CDEI Scale or method of running R3H.
Over-running—under-running.
Not handling an ARC Break properly.

Level IV

Theory—Definition of Service Fac. Rehab procedure. Understanding what PTS is.

Written—Recognizing a PTS situation. Details on rehabbing. Listing & Nulling rules. Recognizing when a new key-in has occurred in a rehab session. Knowing the rules on when to run a grade or when to rehab.

Practical—Slow nulling of a list—not doing it slickly and with certainty and with good TRs. Correct procedure on Listing and Nulling. Correct procedure on Auditing by List. Reading through D/N.

Level Vl

Very few flunks—occasionally over confusions on R6EW running—either shows in Theory or Written Exam.

Solo Audit

Lots of flunks—model session, scales, basics, what makes a meter read, comm cycle, admin, how to do a worksheet.
Sometimes running process—R6EW—usually basics are weak.

Dangerous Auditor’s Exam—No flunks!


L. RON HUBBARD


LRH:lb-r.rd
Copyright © 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED





** 6608C16 SHSBC-75 Releases and Clears

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 16 AUGUST 1966
Remimeo
Academies, Level
III & above
HGC Auditors,
Ill & above LIST L-4 S & D
Franchise, Level
III & above


The following list may be used to assess an ARC Break on Search and Discovery:


1. An incorrect item been found?
2. A withhold been missed?
3. An item been by-passed?
4. An item been abandoned?
5. An item been suppressed?
6. An item been invalidated?
7. An item been protested?
8. An item been asserted?
9. An item been decided about?
10. You not given items you thought of?
11. The item on another list?
12. The item already been given?
13. The item been refused?
14. The list not been completed?
15. The item been found?
16. You already volunteered the item?
17. You thought of an item and not put it on the list?
18. An item been misworded?
19. An item been mispronounced?
20. An item not been understood?
21. Is there another name for any person on the list?
22. An item been forced on you?
23. An item been evaluated?
24. An item been suggested?
25. Earlier listing been restimulated?
26. Earlier wrong items been restimulated?
27. Earlier listing ARC Breaks been restimulated?
28. An ARC Break on having an S and D?
29. Some other kind of by-passed charge?
30. Nothing wrong in the first place?
31. The upset been handled?
32. An overt been committed by listing someone?


L. RON HUBBARD


LRH:ec.rd
Copyright © 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED




** 6608C18 SHSBC-76 Study and Intention (also known as Roundup of
Study Materials); also issued as ST-8

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 22 AUGUST 1966
Remimeo
All Exec Hats
Qual Hats
Tech Hats
HCO Hats
FLOATING NEEDLES, LISTING PROCESSES


In sessions where the process being run on a pc involves a listing question (including S & D), please note that after the listing question has been thoroughly cleared with the preclear and then given to the pc that the process is being run.

Should it happen, then, that while the pc is actually listing off the question (and has not gone momentarily out of session), the needle floats, this is the flat point or end phenomenon of the process and the whole subject and all further steps of it are dropped at once.

Whatever charge was on the listing question has blown, either with or without the preclear being analytically aware of it.

To continue the process beyond this point is Out Tech by the process being overrun and is also a violation of our basic Fast Flow System.

Please note that whether there is a second leg to the process or not, like fitting an item found off a list into a bracket of commands, has no bearing on the fact that the process is flat.

If the needle floats while the pc is in session listing off a question, then there is no charge left on that question and there will be no item to fit into the second leg of the process.

The process has served its purpose.

With training as immaculately precise as it is and auditors’ comm cycles becoming effortlessly superlative, the gradients of our technology are so fine that the results of each process on each level will be achieved faster and faster.

Sometimes the velocity of the processing is such that the end phenomenon will occur on the process without the preclear being aware of what has happened. Ending the process at this point then gives the preclear the chance to move into the velocity of the process.

Please then acknowledge the power of our technology and keep winning.


LRH:lb-r.cden L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright ©1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


[For further data on F/N during listing see C/S Series 43, Volume VII, page 278.]



SAINT HILL SPECIAL BRIEFING COURSE LECTURE
23 August 1966

** 6608C23 SHSBC-77 Organization

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 23 AUGUST 1966
All Exec Hats
Qual Hats
Tech Hats
HCO Hats
SERVICE FACSIMILE


A Service Facsimile is a computation generated by the being not the bank. An example of this is:

“All horses sleep in beds.”

Such a computation locked away in the mind will obviously precipitate many compulsive doingnesses, beingnesses and havingnesses.

An example of a doingness precipitated by the above computation would be:

“Making beds for horses.”

If on assessing for a Service Facsimile you get “Making beds for horses” as the service facsimile please note that it is a doingness and not a computation, so if you fit the doingness into the bracket of Service Fac Commands, i.e.:

How does “Making beds for horses” make you right?

How does “Making beds for horses” make others wrong? etc.,

then observe very carefully exactly what the preclear says, because he might give the EXACT WORDS OF THE ACTUAL SERVICE FACSIMILE—”ALL HORSES SLEEP IN BEDS”. And observe very carefully and note all meter reaction to what he or she says.

Note all of this, remembering that you were NOT running a real Service Facsimile in the first place, and that in order to really flatten all the compulsive doingnesses, beingnesses and havingnesses precipitated by the basic computation you will have to run the exact computation in the Service Fac bracket.

If the doingness you run is a basic one then it is possible that the preclear will blow all the charge on the Service Fac and this you will assess by pc indicators and meter phenomena (i.e. free needle).

It is obviously best to get a real Service Fac (computation) and taking beingnesses, doingnesses and havingnesses as Service Facsimiles if done by auditors must be thoroughly understood.

Service Facsimile auditing can give great gains, so understand what you are doing with the technology and have many wins.


LRH:lb-r.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


** 6608C25 SHSBC-78 The Anti-Social Personality
** 6609C01 SHSBC-79 Gradients and ARC
** 6609C08 SHSBC-80 States of Identity

THE BOOK INTRODUCING THE E METER


Photographed and compiled
from the lectures and
demonstrations
of
L. Ron Hubbard


Published
September 1966


The Book Introducing the E-Meter, Volume IV of the Clearing Series, was published at Saint Hill Manor. A new revised edition was published in May, 1975, at Los Angeles.

It contains pictures and explanations of all parts of the E-Meter, inside as well as outside; pictures of how to set it up, how to recharge it, what happens when you move the various knobs in different directions. Tone arm positions and needle actions are illustrated and explained very graphically.

In the latest edition two HCO Bulletins (“False TA” of 24 October 1971, and “False TA Addition” of 12 November 1971 R) have been added, and these give additional valuable data to any auditor who uses an E-Meter—and today that is any student or graduate of any course from the Dianetics Courses upward.

58 pages, 45 photographs, soft-cover with plastic comb binding. Translation available in German. Available from your nearest Scientology Organization or Mission, or direct from the publishers: Scientology Publications Organization, Jernbanegade 6, 1608 Copenhagen V, Denmark; or Church of Scientology Publications Organization U.S., 2723 West Temple Street, Los Angeles, California, 90026, U.S.A.

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 20 SEPTEMBER 1966
Remimeo



MINUS SCALE RELEASES:
ARC STRAIGHT WIRE
DIANETIC


There are several grades of Release below Zero, in the minus scale of the original complete Gradation Chart.

Many of the minus scale can be attained by simple assessment. (And ceasing to assess the moment the release occurs is vital—don’t keep on assessing as the same session auditing action.)

There are three specific grades of Release below Zero and above the lower minus scale. These are, from lowest:

Straight Wire Release
Dianetic Secondary Release
Dianetic Engram Release

Old ARC Straight Wire is not at Grade Zero or Grade III but way down below the Dianetic Releases. The original purpose still holds—to make a person able to run secondaries and engrams. (Our Tech is still valid, you know, despite the 1950 origin of ARC Straight Wire.)

ARC Straight Wire was fantastically effective in moving a person from “neurotic” to “normal” .

But in running ARC Straight Wire one must use a meter and cease to audit the pc the moment the needle goes free. Don’t keep making the blunder of the ‘50s and early ‘60s.

The pc released by ARC Straight Wire can now have secondaries run. When a needle goes free on a secondary, one again must cease to audit secondaries.

The Dianetic Secondary Release can be run on engrams. When the needle goes free while running engrams, one ceases to audit the pc at once.

Declares for these lower release grades can be confirmed by Qual and even declared by Certs and Awards by a small note from the Director of Certs and Awards.

Thus you can possibly get a Release on the minus scale by assessment of the minus scale, a higher Release by running ARC Straight Wire, an even higher one by running Dianetic Secondaries, and yet a higher one by running Dianetic Engrams. And then, by good TRs and standard tech as usual, get a Grade 0.

As many people go Grade 0 Release easily, these lower bands get overlooked. But those who don’t go Grade 0 Release easily (unless it is overrun as the reason for “no Release”) they can be begun by a Minus Scale assessment, then ARC Straight Wire, etc, back up to Zero for another try there.

All pcs could be started on the minus scale with no harm.

QUAL NOTE

Remember, there are several overruns that can require repair. These are:

Life (overrun in a past life on some subject).
Straight Wire (including Self Analysis).
Earlier Repetitive Processing (Locational, etc).
Dianetic Secondaries.
Dianetic Engrams.

Some cases hang and won’t go Release at Grade 0 unless the above are rehabbed or (if never run) actually audited on the pc.

ARC Breaks can cause a failure to go Release on Grade Zero or any other level and can prevent rehabs. And poor TRs can block the lot.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:lb-r.rd
Copyright © 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED









HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 21 SEPTEMBER 1966

Remimeo



ARC BREAK NEEDLE


The needle of a preclear with an ARC Break may be dirty, stuck or sticky, but may also give the appearance of FLOATING. This is not a Release point however, as the pc will be upset and out of comm at the same time. The auditor must observe the preclear and determine which it is.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:lb-r.cden
Copyright © 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 27 SEPTEMBER 1966
Remimeo


THE ANTI-SOCIAL PERSONALITY
THE ANTI-SCIENTOLOGIST


There are certain characteristics and mental attitudes which cause about 20% of a race to oppose violently any betterment activity or group.

Such people are known to have anti-social tendencies.

When the legal or political structure of a country becomes such as to favor such personalities in positions of trust, then all the civilizing organizations of the country become suppressed and a barbarism of criminality and economic duress ensues.

Crime and criminal acts are perpetuated by anti-social personalities. Inmates of institutions commonly trace their state back to contact with such personalities.

Thus, in the fields of government, police activities and mental health, to name a few, we see that it is important to be able to detect and isolate this personality type so as to protect society and individuals from the destructive consequences attendant upon letting such have free rein to injure others.

As they only comprise 20% of the population and as only 2l/2% of this 20% are truly dangerous, we see that with a very small amount of effort we could considerably better the state of society.

Well-known, even stellar, examples of such a personality are, of course, Napoleon and Hitler. Dillinger, Pretty Boy Floyd, Christie and other famous criminals were wellknown examples of the anti-social personality. But with such a cast of characters in history we neglect the less stellar examples and do not perceive that such personalities exist in current life, very common, often undetected.

When we trace the cause of a failing business, we will inevitably discover somewhere in its ranks the anti-social personality hard at work.

In families which are breaking up we commonly find one or the other of the persons involved to have such a personality.

Where life has become rough and is failing, a careful review of the area by a trained observer will detect one or more such personalities at work.

As there are 80% of us trying to get along and only 20% trying to prevent us, our lives would be much easier to live were we well-informed as to the exact manifestations of such a personality. Thus we could detect it and save ourselves much failure and heartbreak.

It is important then to examine and list the attributes of the anti-social personality. Influencing as it does the daily lives of so many, it well behooves decent people to become better informed on this subject.

ATTRIBUTES

The anti-social personality has the following attributes:

1. He or she speaks only in very broad generalities. “They say ...” “Everybody thinks...” “Everyone knows...” and such expressions are in continual use,

particularly when imparting rumor. When asked, “Who is everybody . . .” it normally turns out to be one source and from this source the anti-social person has manufactured what he or she pretends is the whole opinion of the whole society.

This is natural to them since to them all society is a large hostile generality, against the anti-social in particular.

2. Such a person deals mainly in bad news, critical or hostile remarks, invalidation and general suppression.

“Gossip” or “harbinger of evil tidings” or “rumormonger” once described such persons.

It is notable that there is no good news or complimentary remark passed on by such a person.

3. The anti-social personality alters, to worsen, communication when he or she relays a message or news. Good news is stopped and only bad news, often embellished, is passed along.

Such a person also pretends to pass on “bad news” which is in actual fact invented.

4. A characteristic, and one of the sad things about an anti-social personality, is that it does not respond to treatment or reform or psychotherapy.

5. Surrounding such a personality we find cowed or ill associates or friends who, when not driven actually insane, are yet behaving in a crippled manner in life, failing, not succeeding.

Such people make trouble for others.

When treated or educated, the near associate of the anti-social personality has no stability of gain but promptly relapses or loses his advantages of knowledge, being under the suppressive influence of the other.

Physically treated, such associates commonly do not recover in the expected time but worsen and have poor convalescences.

It is quite useless to treat or help or train such persons so long as they remain under the influence of the anti-social connection.

The largest number of insane are insane because of such anti-social connections and do not recover easily for the same reason.

Unjustly we seldom see the anti-social personality actually in an institution. Only his “friends” and family are there.

6. The anti-social personality habitually selects the wrong target.

If a tyre is flat from driving over nails, he or she curses a companion or a non-causative source of the trouble. If the radio next door is too loud, he or she kicks the cat.

If A is the obvious cause, the anti-social personality inevitably blames B, or C or D.

7. The anti-social cannot finish a cycle of action.

Such become surrounded with incomplete projects.

8. Many anti-social persons will freely confess to the most alarming crimes when forced to do so, but will have no faintest sense of responsibility for them.

Their actions have little or nothing to do with their own volition. Things “just happened”.

They have no sense of correct causation and particularly cannot feel any sense of remorse or shame therefore.

9. The anti-social personality supports only destructive groups and rages against and attacks any constructive or betterment group.

10. This type of personality approves only of destructive actions and fights against constructive or helpful actions or activities.

The artist in particular is often found as a magnet for persons with anti-social personalities who see in his art something which must be destroyed and covertly, “as a friend”, proceed to try.

11. Helping others is an activity which drives the anti-social personality nearly berserk. Activities, however, which destroy in the name of help are closely supported.

12. The anti-social personality has a bad sense of property and conceives that the idea that anyone owns anything is a pretense made up to fool people. Nothing is ever really owned.

THE BASIC REASON

The basic reason the anti-social personality behaves as he or she does lies in a hidden terror of others.

To such a person every other being is an enemy, an enemy to be covertly or overtly destroyed.

The fixation is that survival itself depends on “keeping others down” or “keeping people ignorant”.

If anyone were to promise to make others stronger or brighter, the anti-social personality suffers the utmost agony of personal danger.

They reason that if they are in this much trouble with people around them weak or stupid, they would perish should anyone become strong or bright.

Such a person has no trust to a point of terror. This is usually masked and unrevealed.

When such a personality goes insane the world is full of Martians or the FBI and each person met is really a Martian or FBI agent.

But the bulk of such people exhibit no outward signs of insanity. They appear quite rational. They can be very convincing.

However, the list given above consists of things which such a personality cannot detect in himself or herself. This is so true that if you thought you found yourself in one of the above, you most certainly are not anti-social. Self-criticism is a luxury the anti-social cannot afford. They must be RIGHT because they are in continual danger in their own estimation. If you proved one WRONG, you might even send him or her into a severe illness.

Only the sane, well-balanced person tries to correct his conduct.

RELIEF

If you were to weed out of your past by proper search and discovery those anti-social persons you have known and if you then disconnected, you might experience great relief.

Similarly, if society were to recognize this personality type as a sick being as they now isolate people with smallpox, both social and economic recoveries could occur.

Things are not likely to get much better so long as 20% of the population is permitted to dominate and injure the lives and enterprise of the remaining 80%.

As majority rule is the political manner of the day, so should majority sanity express itself in our daily lives without the interference and destruction of the socially unwell.

The pity of it is, they will not permit themselves to be helped and would not respond to treatment if help were attempted.

An understanding and ability to recognize such personalities could bring a major change in society and our lives.


THE SOCIAL PERSONALITY

Man in his anxieties is prone to witch hunts.

All one has to do is designate “people wearing black caps” as the villains and one can start a slaughter of people in black caps.

This characteristic makes it very easy for the anti-social personality to bring about a chaotic or dangerous environment.

Man is not naturally brave or calm in his human state. And he is not necessarily villainous.

Even the anti-social personality, in his warped way, is quite certain that he is acting for the best and commonly sees himself as the only good person around, doing all for the good of everyone—the only flaw in his reasoning being that if one kills everyone else, none are left to be protected from the imagined evils. His conduct in his environment and toward his fellows is the only method of detecting either the antisocial or the social personalities. Their motives for self are similar—self-preservation and survival. They simply go about achieving these in different ways.

Thus, as Man is naturally neither calm nor brave, anyone to some degree tends to be alert to dangerous persons and hence, witch hunts can begin.

It is therefore even more important to identify the social personality than the anti-social personality. One then avoids shooting the innocent out of mere prejudice or dislike or because of some momentary misconduct.

The social personality can be defined most easily by comparison with his opposite, the anti-social personality.

This differentiation is easily done and no test should ever be constructed which isolates only the anti-social. On the same test must appear the upper as well as lower ranges of Man’s actions.

A test that declares only anti-social personalities without also being able to identify the social personality would be itself a suppressive test. It would be like answering “Yes” or “No” to the question “Do you still beat your wife?” Anyone who took it could be found guilty. While this mechanism might have suited the times of the Inquisition, it would not suit modern needs.

As the society runs, prospers and lives solely through the efforts of social personalities, one must know them as they, not the anti-social, are the worthwhile people. These are the people who must have rights and freedom. Attention is given to the antisocial solely to protect and assist the social personalities in the society.

All majority rules, civilizing intentions and even the human race will fail unless one can identify and thwart the anti-social personalities and help and forward the social personalities in the society. For the very word “society” implies social conduct and without it there is no society at all, only a barbarism with all men, good or bad, at risk.

The frailty of showing how the harmful people can be known is that these then apply the characteristics to decent people to get them hunted down and eradicated.

The swan song of every great civilization is the tune played by arrows, axes or bullets used by the anti-social to slay the last decent men.

Government is only dangerous when it can be employed by and for anti-social personalities. The end result is the eradication of all social personalities and the resultant collapse of Egypt, Babylon, Rome, Russia or the West.

You will note in the characteristics of the anti-social personality that intelligence is not a clue to the anti-social. They are bright or stupid or average. Thus those who are extremely intelligent can rise to considerable, even head-of-state heights.

Importance and ability or wish to rise above others are likewise not indexes to the anti-social. When they do become important or rise they are, however, rather visible by the broad consequences of their acts. But they are as likely to be unimportant people or hold very lowly stations and wish for nothing better.

Thus it is the twelve given characteristics alone which identify the anti-social personality. And these same twelve reversed are the sole criteria of the social personality if one wishes to be truthful about them.

The identification or labelling of an anti-social personality cannot be done honestly and accurately unless one also, in the same examination of the person, reviews the positive side of his life.

All persons under stress can react with momentary flashes of anti-social conduct. This does not make them anti-social personalities.

The true anti-social person has a majority of anti-social characteristics.

The social personality has a majority of social characteristics.

Thus one must examine the good with the bad before one can truly label the anti-social or the social.

In reviewing such matters, very broad testimony and evidence are best. One or two isolated instances determine nothing. One should search all twelve social and all twelve anti-social characteristics and decide on the basis of actual evidence, not opinion.

The twelve primary characteristics of the social personality are as follows:

1. The social personality is specific in relating circumstances. “Joe Jones said...” “The Star Newspaper reported...” and gives sources of data where important or possible.

He may use the generality of “they” or “people” but seldom in connection with attributing statements or opinions of an alarming nature.

2. The social personality is eager to relay good news and reluctant to relay bad.

He may not even bother to pass along criticism when it doesn’t matter.

He is more interested in making another feel liked or wanted than disliked by others and tends to err toward reassurance rather than toward criticism.

3. A social personality passes communication without much alteration and if deleting anything tends to delete injurious matters.

He does not like to hurt people’s feelings. He sometimes errs in holding back bad news or orders which seem critical or harsh.

4. Treatment, reform and psychotherapy particularly of a mild nature work very well on the social personality.

Whereas anti-social people sometimes promise to reform, they do not. Only the social personality can change or improve easily.

It is often enough to point out unwanted conduct to a social personality to completely alter it for the better.

Criminal codes and violent punishment are not needed to regulate social personalities.

5. The friends and associates of a social personality tend to be well, happy and of good morale.

A truly social personality quite often produces betterment in health or fortune by his mere presence on the scene.

At the very least he does not reduce the existing levels of health or morale in his associates.

When ill, the social personality heals or recovers in an expected manner, and is found open to successful treatment.

6. The social personality tends to select correct targets for correction. He fixes the tyre that is flat rather than attack the windscreen. In the mechanical arts he can therefore repair things and make them work.

7. Cycles of action begun are ordinarily completed by the social personality, if possible.

8. The social personality is ashamed of his misdeeds and reluctant to confess them. He takes responsibility for his errors.

9. The social personality supports constructive groups and tends to protest or resist destructive groups.

10. Destructive actions are protested by the social personality. He assists constructive or helpful actions.

11. The social personality helps others and actively resists acts which harm others.

12. Property is property of someone to the social personality and its theft or misuse is prevented or frowned upon.

THE BASIC MOTIVATION

The social personality naturally operates on the basis of the greatest good.

He is not haunted by imagined enemies but he does recognize real enemies when they exist.

The social personality wants to survive and wants others to survive, whereas the anti-social personality really and covertly wants others to succumb.

Basically the social personality wants others to be happy and do well, whereas the anti-social personality is very clever in making others do very badly indeed.

A basic clue to the social personality is not really his successes but his motivations. The social personality when successful is often a target for the anti-social and by this reason he may fail. But his intentions included others in his success, whereas the anti-social only appreciate the doom of others.

Unless we can detect the social personality and hold him safe from undue restraint and detect also the anti-social and restrain him, our society will go on suffering from insanity, criminality and war, and Man and civilization will not endure.

Of all our technical skills, such differentiation ranks the highest since, failing, no other skill can continue, as the base on which it operates—civilization—will not be here to continue it.

Do not smash the social personality—and do not fail to render powerless the anti-social in their efforts to harm the rest of us.

Just because a man rises above his fellows or takes an important part does not make him an anti-social personality. Just because a man can control or dominate others does not make him an anti-social personality.

It is his motives in doing so and the consequences of his acts which distinguish the anti-social from the social.

Unless we realize and apply the true characteristics of the two types of personality, we will continue to live in a quandary of who our enemies are and, in doing so, victimize our friends.

All men have committed acts of violence or omission for which they could be censured. In all Mankind there is not one single perfect human being.

But there are those who try to do right and those who specialize in wrong and upon these facts and characteristics you can know them.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:lb-r.rd.jh
Copyright © 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE see
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 13 OCTOBER 1966
Issue III

(HCO Pol Ltr of 26 June 1965, amended and reissued)

Remimeo
Qual Div Hats
Tech Div Hats
Good supply to Review

HGC PC REVIEW AUDITING FORM


When the Case Officer of Review receives a pc from the HGC for “Review” he instantly and immediately gets the pc into session and handles the following form only. All handling of this form is counted as Auditing time in Review.

The D of P and Tech Division must not say what is wrong with the pc or what to do with the pc as this is monitored by the very firm broad policy that Tech cannot order Review.

The Case Officer checks all these things. They are done on a Meter. Significant TA actions noted on the lines on which they occur with pc holding the cans.



NAME OF PC DATE TIME_____________

NAME OF AUDITOR TA ______________

1. PC’S FOLDER IN HAND_________________________

CONTAINS GRAPH PC BEGINNING ASSMT FORM_______

2. PC BEEN INVOICED INTO REVIEW AT CHARGE _____________________

3. PC’S HGC AUDITORS (TAKEN FROM FOLDER)______________________

4. ARC BREAK
SESSION ASSMT ________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

ENVIRONMENT ASSMT___________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

5. IGNORED PC ORIGINATIONS _____________________________________

________________________________________________________________

6. MISSED WITHHOLDS_____________________________________________

________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________

CLEAN__________________________________________________________

7. PRESENT TIME PROBLEM_________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________

CLEAN__________________________________________________________

8. MISUNDERSTOOD WORD OR SYMBOL _____________________________
________________________________________________________________

CLEAN__________________________________________________________

9. COMMITTING CONTINUOUS PT OVERTS ___________________________
________________________________________________________________

CLEAN__________________________________________________________

10. CLEANED CLEANS_______________________________________________
________________________________________________________________

11. PROCESSES LEFT UNFLAT (BY FOLDER EXAMINATION) ____________
DATE OF SESSION _______________________________________________
PROCESS LEFT UNFLAT__________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________

DATE OF SESSION _______________________________________________
PROCESS LEFT UNFLAT__________________________________________
DATE OF SESSION _______________________________________________
PROCESS LEFT UNFLAT__________________________________________
DATE OF SESSION _______________________________________________
12. PROCESS OVERRUN (BY FOLDER EXAMINATION)___________________
DATE OF SESSION PROCESS OVERRUN DATE OF SESSION ___________
13. NON-STANDARD PROCESSES _____________________________________
14. BAD AUDITING COMM CYCLE ____________________________________
15. CODE BREAKS___________________________________________________

16. HIDDEN STANDARD (WHAT WOULD HAVE TO HAPPEN FOR YOU TO KNOW SCIENTOLOGY WORKS) ___________________________________
________________________________________________________________

SPOTTED________________________________________________________

17. PC AND DRUGS (TAKING ANY DRUGS) ____________________________

18. ALCOHOL_______________________________________________________

19. ENOUGH SLEEP _________________________________________________
ENOUGH FOOD (BREAKFAST)_____________________________________
(LUNCH)________________________________________________________
(DINNER) _______________________________________________________

20. MIXED THERAPIES (ANY OTHER TREATMENT IN PROGRESS)________
________________________________________________________________

21. CONNECTED TO A SUPPRESSIVE PERSON__________________________
22. CONNECTED TO A SUPPRESSIVE GROUP___________________________
23. HERE TO GET DATA FOR SOMEONE ELSE___________________________
24. HERE BECAUSE SOMEONE ELSE DEMANDED IT_____________________
25. FORMER RELEASE _______________________________________________
26. FORMER THETAN EXTERIOR______________________________________
27. SELF AUDITING DURING INTENSIVE ______________________________

28. BEING AUDITED BY SOMEONE ELSE DURING INTENSIVE OTHER THAN HGC AUDITOR_____________________________________________

29. CRIMINAL RECORD OR CRIMES FOR WHICH YOU COULD BE ARRESTED ______________________________________________________
30. SHOCK TREATMENT HISTORY ____________________________________
31. HERE TO BE CURED OF SOMETHING NOT MENTIONED______________
32. UNPAID DEBTS TO ORGS_________________________________________
33. KNOWLEDGE OF A CRIME AGAINST SCIENTOLOGY_________________
34. WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF SCIENTOLOGY WORKED ON EVERYONE __
________________________________________________________________
35. ANYTHING UPSETTING ABOUT THIS REVIEW______________________
36. HAS ANYTHING BEEN SUPPRESSED?______________________________
37. HAS ANYTHING BEEN INVALIDATED?_____________________________
38. HAS ANYTHING BEEN RUSHED?__________________________________
39. HAS ANYTHING BEEN MISSED?___________________________________
40. PC STATEMENT OF THE TROUBLE AS IT IS NOW____________________
41. READS I COULD NOT CLEAN UP___________________________________

42. BOOK OF CASE REMEDIES (IF PC NOT SOLVED BY THIS POINT) ______
________________________________________________________________

43. OTHER ACTIONS CASE OFFICER HAD TO TAKE_____________________
________________________________________________________________

44. FALSE REPORTS_________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________

FINISH TA POSITION FINISH TIME_________

TOTAL TA DIVS DURING REVIEW TOTAL TIME _________

PC TO ETHICS________________________________________________________

PC TO HGC __________________________________________________________
RECOMMENDATIONS________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

DATE CASE OFFICER SIGN______________

EXAMINER FINALLY DIRECTS

TO ETHICS TO HGC________________________


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:rd
Copyright © 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED




[The following items have been added in this amendment: “Name of Auditor”, “Time”, “TA”, “8. Misunderstood Word or Symbol, Clean”, “9. Committing Continuous PT Overts, Clean”, “Shock Treatment History”, “Finish Time”, and “Total Time”.]









SAINT HILL SPECIAL BRIEFING COURSE LECTURE
1 November 1966


** 6611C01 SHSBC-81 Government and Organization

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 18 NOVEMBER 1966

Remimeo


REHAB ON SELF ANALYSIS


The following letter is of importance on rehab of pcs run on Straight Wire or Self Analysis:

“Dear Ron,

The following is an account of rehabbing an ARC Straight Wire Release; the info may be of use to other auditors.

I got a read on PC being Release on ‘Book of Self Analysis’ which several people had run on her. I checked on meter if PC had ‘Gone Release on (Name of Process).’ ‘Can you recall a time when (on General Incidents)?’ (List I in Book of Self Analysis.)

‘Did you go Release on “Can you recall an incident which happened on Time Orientation?” ‘ (List 2 in Book of Self Analysis.)

‘Did you go Release on “Can you recall a time when (on Orientation of Senses)?” ‘ (List 3 in Book of Self Analysis) etc.

PC had 6 of the Processes she had been Release on. I then dated the release points, all over a period of 2 years, then put Rehab steps in on each time until needle floated.

PC ended shining. I hope this will help other auditors rehabbing this level.

Very best,

Ron Pook.

P.S. Auditors need the book of Self Analysis with them when doing Rehabs at ARC Straight Wire level.”


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:jp.rd
Copyright © 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED







SAINT HILL SPECIAL BRIEFING COURSE LECTURE
29 November 1966


** 6611C29 SHSBC-82 Scientology Definitions I—OT and Clear Defined

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 30 NOVEMBER 1966
Tech Hats
Auditors
Level IV
Students

ASSESSMENT FOR SERVICE FACSIMILES


The location of service facsimiles requires a proper listing question, the absence of which can lead to missing the actual service fac or overrunning a lower release grade.

Of the assessment methods, the following should probably be ruled out as an overrun of earlier grades or on the basis of getting a free needle on a previous grade:

1. Slow assessment with ITSA (overrun Grade 0)

2. Assessment by problems (overrun Grade 1)

3. Assessment by parts of existence (overrun Grade 0)

This leaves as acceptable methods:

1. “In this lifetime, what do you use to make others wrong?”

2. “In this lifetime, what do you think your service facsimile is?”

(for a Scientologist trained to Level IV)

3. “In this lifetime, what would be a safe solution to .....?” (the blank having been obtained by questions given on the tapes to find either a hidden standard or hidden problem).

4. Assessment of a prepared list, using level found, in “In this lifetime, what have you ......(prehav level)?”

The point being not to start out at the beginning by listing a question which OBVIOUSLY WILL NOT RESULT IN FINDING A SERVICE FAC, in which instance the rule of declaring the grade on a floating needle obtained on the list could not possibly apply.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:jp.cden
Copyright © 1966
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED




SAINT HILL SPECIAL BRIEFING COURSE LECTURES
6—13 December 1966

** 6612C06 SHSBC-83 Scientology Definitions II
** 6612C13 SHSBC-84 Scientology Definitions III

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 2 JANUARY 1967

Remimeo
Qual Hats
Tech Hats


SUB ZERO RELEASES
EXAMINER’S SAFEGUARD


The Pc Examiner in the Department of Examinations, employs the FAST FLOW SYSTEM in examining pcs sent for Release declare. If in doubt when faced with raw meat pc who seems to show nowhere near the expected awareness level for the grade of release he or she has come in for (Grades 0—IV), the Examiner simply tells the pc that he is going to assess a list and that the pc does not have to say anything unless he wants to.

THE AWARENESS LEVELS from the GRADATION CHART are then assessed from the bottom -34 up (to -52 when published).

When the pc’s AWARENESS LEVEL is called the needle will float. This will be most real to the pc and he will probably comment on it.

The Examiner stops at that instant, indicates the floating needle. The Examiner notifies the Auditor that a Sub Zero Release has been obtained. The pc is now ready to receive auditing on the level on which he originally came for declare and will be returned to the Auditor.

This verifies that the indicators didn’t justify the grade of Release being claimed prior to finding the Sub Zero Release.

NOTE: A good dictionary should be at hand. If no float is obtained, find out if the pc is hung up on any word, and clear it using the dictionary.

The Fast Flow System is observed, assess first, if any trouble arises from misunderstoods, clear it.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder




LRH :jp.rd
Copyright © 1967
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 2 JANUARY 1967

Qual Personnel
Tech Personnel
Clearing Course
Students
SHSBC Students


DATING—FORBIDDEN WORDS


THE WORDS “MORE”—”LESS” OCCUR IN THE BANK AND THEIR USE IN DATING IS FORBIDDEN.

In The Book of E-Meter Drills the patter for Track Dating, E-Meter Drill 25, containing the words “more”—”less”, has to be changed to “GREATER THAN”— “LESSER THAN”.

E-Meter Drill 22, E-Meter Hidden Date, This Life, remains unchanged.

Anyone who is using the words “earlier”—”later” in dating, words which are not to be found in any E-Meter Drill, is not only guilty of alter-ising Tech, but will grind his student or preclear into the Bank, since these words also occur in the Bank and are therefore forbidden.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder



LRH:jp.cden
Copyright © 1967
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 19 JANUARY 1967
Dianetic Course
Students
(Star Rated)
Qual Execs MANIFESTATIONS OF ENGRAMS AND
Tech Execs
SECONDARIES FURTHER DEFINED


In order to provide a more accurate differentiation between the manifestations of an engram and a secondary, below are listed detailed definitions of Pain and Sensation.

Pain (in its various forms) is the indication of an Engram.

Sensation (in its various forms) is the indication of a Secondary, which precedes the actual Engram.

DEFINITIONS

SOMATICS = This is a general word for uncomfortable physical perceptions coming from the reactive mind. Its genus is early Dianetics and it is a general, common package word, used by Scientologists to denote “pain” or “sensation” with no difference made between them. To understand the source of these feelings, one should have a knowledge of engrams, ridges and other parts of the reactive bank. To the Scientologist anything is a SOMATIC if it emanates from the various parts of the reactive mind and produces an awareness of reactivity. Symbol SOM.

PAIN = PAIN is composed of heat, cold, electrical, and the combined effect of sharp hurting. If one stuck a fork in his arm, he would experience pain. When one uses PAIN in connection with clearing one means awareness of heat, cold, electrical or hurting stemming from the reactive mind. According to experiments done at Harvard, if one were to make a grid with heated tubes going vertically and chilled tubes going horizontally and were to place a small current of electricity through the lot, the device, touched to a body, would produce the feeling of PAIN. It need not be composed of anything very hot or cold or of any high voltage to produce a very intense feeling of pain. Therefore what we call PAIN is itself heat, cold and electrical. If a pc experiences one or more of these from his reactive mind, we say he is experiencing PAIN.

“Electrical” is the bridge between sensation and PAIN and is difficult to classify as either PAIN or sensation when it exists alone. Symbol PN.

SENSATION = All other uncomfortable perceptions stemming from the reactive mind are called SENSATION. These are basically “pressure”, “motion”, “dizziness”, “sexual sensation”, and “emotion and misemotion”. There are others, definite in themselves but definable in these five general categories. If one took the fork in the pain definition above and pressed it against the arm, that would be “pressure”. “Motion” is just that, a feeling of being in motion when one is not. “Motion” includes the “winds of space”, a feeling of being blown upon especially from in front of the face. “Dizziness” is a feeling of disorientation and includes a spinniness, as well as an out-of-balance feeling. “Sexual sensation” means any feeling, pleasant or unpleasant, commonly experienced during sexual restimulation or action. “Emotion and Misemotion” include all levels of the complete tone scale except “pain”; emotion and misemotion are closely allied to “motion”, being only a finer particle action. A bank solidity is a form of “pressure”, and when the sensation of increasing solidity of masses in the mind occurs, we say “the bank is beefing up”. All these are classified as
SENSATION. Symbol SEN.


LRH:jp.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1967 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


6702C25 LECTURE The Big Auditing Problem

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 22 MARCH 1967
Remimeo
Level 0
IMPORTANT


ADMIN KNOW-HOW
ALTER-IS AND DEGRADED BEINGS


Alteration of orders and tech is worse than non-compliance.

Alter-is is a covert avoidance of an order. Although it is apparently often brought about by non-comprehension, the non-comprehension itself and failure to mention it, is an avoidance of orders.

Very degraded beings alter-is. Degraded ones refuse to comply without mentioning it. Beings in fair condition try to comply but remark their troubles to get help when needed. Competent higher toned beings understand orders and comply if possible but mainly do their jobs without needing lots of special orders.

Degraded beings find any instruction painful as they have been painfully indoctrinated with violent measures in the past. They therefore alter-is any order or don’t comply.

Thus in auditing pcs or in org, where you find alter-is (covert non-compliance) and non-compliance, given sensible and correct tech or instructions, you are dealing with a degraded low level being and should act accordingly.

One uses very simple low level processes on a degraded being, gently.

In admin, orgs and especially the Tech Div where a staff member alter-ises, or fails to comply you are also dealing with a degraded being but one who is too much a pc to be a staff member. He cannot be at cause and staff members must be at cause. So he or she should not be on staff.

This is a primary senior datum regulating all handling of pcs and staff members.

A degraded being is not a suppressive as he can have case gain. But he is so PTS that he works for suppressives only. He is sort of a super-continual PTS beyond the reach really of a simple S & D and handled only at Sect 3 OT Course.

Degraded beings, taking a cue from SP associates, instinctively resent, hate and seek to obstruct any person in charge of anything or any Big Being.

Anyone issuing sensible orders is the first one resented by a degraded being.

A degraded being lies to his seniors, avoids orders covertly by alter-is, fails to comply, supplies only complex ideas that can’t ever work (obstructive) and is a general area of enturbulence, often mild seeming or even “cooperative”, often even flattering, sometimes merely dull but consistently alter-ising or non-complying.

This datum appeared during higher level research and is highly revelatory of earlier unexplained phenomena—the pc who changes commands or doesn’t do them, the worker who can’t get it straight or who is always on a tea break.

In an area where suppression has been very heavy for long periods people become degraded beings. However, they must have been so before already due to track incidents.

Some thetans are bigger than others. None are truly equal. But the degraded being is not necessarily a natively bad thetan. He is simply so PTS and has been for so long that it requires our highest level tech to finally undo it after he has scaled up all our grades.

Degraded beings are about 18 to 1 over Big Beings in the human race (minimum ratio). So those who keep things going are few. And those who will make it without the steam of the few in our orgs behind them are zero. At the same time, we can’t have a world full of them and still make it. So we have no choice.

And we can handle them, even when they cannot serve, at higher levels.

This is really OT data but we need it at lower levels to get the job done.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:jp.rd
Copyright © 1967
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 18 APRIL 1967

Remimeo
Staff
Students


RELIGIOUS PHILOSOPHY AND RELIGIOUS PRACTICE
(HCOB of 21 June 1960, “Religious Philosophy
and Religious Practice” Revised)


Scientology is a religion by its basic tenets, practice, historical background and by the definition of the word “religion” itself. The following will help clarify the philosophical and practical aspects of religion.

Religious practice implies ritual, faith-in, doctrine based on a catechism and a creed.

Religious philosophy implies study of spiritual manifestations; research on the nature of the spirit and study on the relationship of the spirit to the body; exercises devoted to the rehabilitation of abilities in a spirit.

Scientology is a Religious philosophy in its highest meaning as it brings man to Total Freedom and Truth. Our Confessional relieves the being of the encumbrances which keep his awareness as a being limited to the physical aspects of life.

Scientology is also a Religious practice in that the Church of Scientology conducts basic services such as Sermons at Church meetings, Christenings, Weddings and Funerals.

Scientology does not conflict with other Religions or Religious Practices as it clarifies them and brings understanding of the spiritual nature of man.

Scientology has amongst its members people of all the major faiths, including many priests, bishops and other ordained communicants of the major faiths.

Scientology’s closest spiritual ties with any other religion are with Orthodox (Hinayana) Buddhism with which it shares an historical lineage. But even here the relationship is based mainly on friendship and the recognition of the Being as a Spirit rather than on any organizational ties.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:jt jp.cden
Copyright © 1967
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 30 JUNE 1967
Remimeo


EVIDENCES OF AN ABERRATED AREA



1. Bad memory in that area.
2. Comes up with wrong answers for that area which give
3. PTPs on that subject (since one’s answers are wrong).
4. ARC Breaks on that subject (as the trauma gives the opportunity for B P Chg).
5. Is emotional on the subject (continuous B P Chg).
6. Can’t confront its subject matter (as represents painful experience).
7. Is ill in the body part or part of existence which was injured.
8. His mest in that area is “sick” (enmested), as degraded by trauma.
9. Is inattentive on that subject.
10. Has perception lapses on things similar to the objects in the traumatic area.
11. Detests or ignores or can’t have the objects similar to those in the traumatic experience.
12. Acts irrationally on the subject that is uncleared.
13. Is regarded as odd on that subject (not normal behavior).
14. Resents any criticism of self regarding the subject or area.
15. Ridicules the subject or object.
16. Cannot understand similar objects or experiences.
17. Commits overts on the subject or object.
18. Justifies any overt committed.
19. Thinks critical thoughts of the subject or object.
20. Dwells on the subject or object continuously.
21. Desires to get subject or object out of mind.
22. Wants processing for the subject, area or object.
23. Reacts on the needle when any near subject word is mentioned.
24. Reacts on the Tone Arm when any close version of the word is mentioned.
25. Becomes ill when invalidating the subject or object.
26. Has withholds concerning subject or object.
27. Doesn’t want to discuss subject or object.
28. Alters data about the subject or object.
29. Tells lies concerning the subject or object.
30. Subjects pc got low grades on, can’t understand.
31. And most important of all, attempts to stop things in that area and uses innumerable methods, covert and overt to do so.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder



LRH :jp.cden
Copyright © 1967
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 19 AUGUST 1967
Level IV
and up
Remimeo
Scn Execs
THE SUPREME TEST


THE SUPREME TEST OF A THETAN IS HIS ABILITY TO MAKE THINGS GO RIGHT.

This of course is a rather savage and brutal datum for it thrusts aside all justification, reasonableness, excuses and even does not take into account the size or obstacles of the opposition.

But please note that the datum is not “are things all right around him” as this is a passive test and could mean only that he was simply sitting still.

Whether things are currently all right or not is beside the point. The thetan who is making things go right may be tackling a mountain of confusion and of course things are not all right because what he is attacking is mainly wrong. It is whether or not he is making things go right in spite of “hell or high water” that is the test.

Many beings live lives of quiet correctness without ever once making anything do anything. Things around them just happen to be orderly. The social system props them up. But someday—bang—the society gets into a turmoil which knocks out the props. THEN we see that there were too few present who could MAKE things go right and that is the end of the society. Thus died all old civilizations. Their people lived in a system correctness and things went right only so long as nothing was going wrong. Then one day things go wrong. These sophisticated but weak beings never were able to MAKE things go right and so the whole society collapses.

One might also ask, “What is meant by right?”

This would be forwarding a purpose not destructive to the majority of the dynamics.
--------------

Aberration is by definition “a crooked line”. It is from the Latin aberratio, “a wandering from” and from the Latin errare, to wander or to err.

A sane person thinks, looks and sees in straight lines. Black is black, white is white. The aberrated person looks toward black and wanders off in his gaze to something else and makes the error of saying it is “grey”.

You can consider aberration in a passive way (supinely, of no force or action). A person is sane or not sane. He thinks straight or crookedly.

Now consider aberration in a forceful way. A person looks, then an opposing force to him pushes aside his gaze or distracts it. But the really sane, forceful person looks right on through and past the opposition and sees what is there anyway.

Let us take real action. Mr. Q rolls a ball from A toward B. En route Opposition X pushes the ball aside toward C. Mr. Q then shoves the ball toward C and says the reason he did not arrive properly at B was because ......

Mr. S rolls a ball from A toward B. Opposition X diverts the ball toward C. Mr. S pulls the ball back into line and despite, over and through Opposition X arrives at B anyway.

You can see that Mr. Q in the first example is willing to be aberrated or pushed aside or at least does not contest it enough. Mr. Q is aberrated.

Mr. S on the other hand was not willing to be diverted and went right on to B. Mr. S is not aberrated.

Now society, being mainly suppressive, observes that Mr. Q never has much commotion around him. True, he never arrives and gets nothing done, but he isn’t noisy so he is “okay”.

Mr. S on the other hand makes an awful row and bashes Opposition X on the head and snarls his way onward toward B. Society says he is a bad fellow because he has fusses. Of course he also gets something done. But in a decadent society men are measured by how pleasant they are, not how effective they are, so Mr. S is regarded as a bit “mad”. YET when trouble comes it is only the Mr. Ss who will save the day while the Mr. Qs all give up and die.

There is another point here, however. That is purpose. The difference between one thetan’s forward thrust and another’s is PURPOSE, validity of.

A madman can also go from A toward B relentlessly where B is a totally undesirable and destructive point. But in actual practice, real madmen never really arrive at the B they wanted to arrive at. A madman only goes toward but never really arrives. So he only makes everything go wrong.

B must be a desirable point not destructive to a majority of the dynamics for rightness to occur.

So there is the savage and bare datum:

THE SUPREME TEST OF A THETAN IS THE ABILITY TO MAKE THINGS GO RIGHT.

People who explain how wrong it is all going and who have reasons why and WHO AREN’T PUTTING IT RIGHT are the real crazy people in the universe. The only ones crazier than they are are the ones who are quite happy to have everything fail and go wrong with no protest from them. And the only ones even worse are those who work endlessly to make things go wrong and prevent anything from going right and oppose all efforts instinctively.

Fortunately there are a few around who DO make things go right in spite of everything and anyone.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:jp.cden
Copyright © 1967
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 13 SEPTEMBER 1967

Applicable Levels
Internes
Remimeo


REMEDY B


Remedy B in The Book of Case Remedies MUST NOT BE RUN TO LIMIT THE PC TO THIS LIFE.

The way to do this remedy is BY LISTING. It is a process of Level III.

One asks for subjects or practices similar to Scientology. He LISTS the answers. He makes a complete list, not too short, not too long, and the item on it. Usually the correct subject or practice gives a Blowdown.

The pc sometimes cognites at this point and good indicators come in strongly.

If this does not spectacularly occur, one asks for the misunderstoods (not the misunderstood words) the pc might have on this subject. This probably cleans it all up IF YOU GOT THE RIGHT ITEM ON THE LIST.

Remedy B has been run lately in a manner to limit it to this life. That is an error. The pc never has done anything in this life that aberrated him. The subject on which Scientology is hanging up is almost always in a past life. Hence it is reached only by generalized listing.

You don’t ask, in Remedy B, for misunderstood WORDS in the found subject as these would be in Hottentot, Arabic, lingua spacia or some outlandish tongue the pc has no memory of.

As a comment, why can’t people just understand a process and do it without goofing it. Remedy B has been rendered wholly ineffective by the misinterpretation it has received.

Remedy B is a vital process and if run and run right as above it cures the slow Academy student.

So let’s do it do it do it and without goofs, huh?


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:jp.cden
Copyright © 1967
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 24 SEPTEMBER 1967

General
Non Remimeo





The following report from Yvonne Gillham is of interest:

“Dear Ron,

Coming from Hull to here I found that when I started to feel sea-sick and when I indicated to myself that I was PTS and had some SP on my sea track restimulated, it completely blew, and I never had it again.

When I indicated this to Pooky, Thok and Craig it had the same effect on them. I gave the info to Haskell, who was doing review at the time, and he had similar success.

All sickness is PTS, etc, so it follows that sea-sickness would come under this too.

Love,

Yvonne.”


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder



LRH:jp.bh
Copyright © 1967
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


















LRH TAPE LECTURES
20 September 1967


** 6709C20 SPEC LECT Ron’s Journal 1967

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 8 OCTOBER 1967
Remimeo


CLEAR CHECKS AND RE-CLEAR CHECKS
(Reference HCO PL 13 Sept 67)

“Clear Check or a Re-Clear Check is done exactly per HCOPL 13 Sept 67, “Clear Check Outs”.

The first step, CC materials to FN, is a folder inspection. If no FN was noted in the CC folder, the point is rehabbed if it exists. Standard Rehab—date time or times, etc. Materials not run to FN is a flunk.

The second step requires the TA between 2 and 3. Proper cans giving full hand contact must be used. Solo cans are NOT used. The meter and cans must be checked out before the check by placing a 5000 ohm resistor between the cans, and then a 12,500 ohm resistor. The resistor is clipped to the cans, not the leads.

Use sensitivity 5 on the Clear and Re-Clear Check.

In rehabbing the grades keep in mind HCO B 11 Feb 66, “Free Needles, How to Get Them on a Pc”. That is, if a grade does not rehab to FN, go on to the next grade, etc, until you have an FN. Then pick up those that you left. The one really keyed in will hold down the others.

You do HCO Bs 30 June 65, 21 July 65, 2 Aug 65, 21 Oct 65 exactly. Listing and dating each and every release on a grade. REMEMBER that a pc may have gone release more than once on a given process, so check for it. You get in all steps and do a proper job of it, getting the pc happy about it before leaving the grade. When you are done you will have isolated the out grades, if any. Such a pc goes to Review to get them put in.

You must have down that the grade was RUN. “Have you been run on ARC Breaks, yes, FN, that’s it”, is incorrect. See 21 Oct 65. What processes were run?—list them-find which went release on, etc. Standard tech.

N.B. Straight wire, secondaries, engrams, and Grade Va do not need to be run. Their absence does not constitute a flunk.

However, if they were run and the pc did not go release, they would naturally have to be completed. But, this is only done IF they were run previously.

Some pcs have not been run on Grade V due to ED on old SH grads. Point is, are they whole track engram releases? If not, handle any by-passed charge. DO NOT run Power. Do not run Power on anyone who has run the CC materials.

So, on such a pc as falls under this ED, when you get to where you would be rehabbing Grade V, you instead just locate his old track processes, like Helatrobus, Fac One, etc, and find out if he went release. You use your 27 Sept 65 bulletin here—what did the pc look at that got the release—what keyed out. This determines whether or not he’s whole track engram release.

For example, pc ran on old Advanced Procedure and Axioms process of go to a moment of occlusion in this lifetime. Bang, he went whole track, a picture of two anthropoids showed up in an electronics incident. The key-out gave the pc a release lasting 31/2 years. On rehab, when this electronic was spotted again, there was a great resurgence and FN.

During these grade rehabs the TA may go below 2 or above 3. This is OK, you continue the rehabs as you usually would.

After rehabs are all done, any out grade is run to FN in Review, excluding those listed above.

A person pending an S & D does not receive his check until the S & D has been completed on the person and Ethics clearance has been given on it.

A Clear who acquires an Ethics record of a Crime level obviously is a misdeclare, and must be put on the usual lines and get a Re-Clear Check, then a complete Review to get in the out grade or grades. This Ethics record must be accurate and proven, not just some chit written which may or may not be true. It is a PROVEN record resulting from a Hearing, Board of Investigation, or Comm Ev. If the record is in question, it must be cleared up before revoking a Clear Certificate.

Failure to pass a Re-Clear Check by TA position is meaningless technically because upper Levels key in after Clear and will move the TA all over the dial and can tighten the needle (tighten, not scratchy). So do not withdraw the Certificate. Continue the check, do rehabs, and get in any out grades in Review. Exams does the Check.

You get a person cleaned up on whatever you found out so that he can then pass a Check.

A person who flunks a Clear Check or Re-Clear Check does NOT run the CC materials to another FN before getting another check. If, however, the flunk was because the CC materials had not been run to FN, he would of course do so before another check.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH :jp .rd
Copyright © 1967
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED






















[HCOPL 13 September 1967, Clear Check Outs, OEC Volume 5, page 148, referred to above, is cancelled by HCO PL 9 January 1968, Cancellation of HCO Policy Letter of 12 Sept 1967 and HCO Policy Letter of 13 Sept 1967, OEC Volume 5, page 154.]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 11 OCTOBER 1967

Remimeo
CLAY TABLE TRAINING


PURPOSE: 1. To make the materials being studied real to the student by making him DEMONSTRATE them in clay.

2. To give a proper balance of mass and significance.

3. To teach the student to apply.

The student is given a word or auditing action or situation to demonstrate. He then does this in clay, labeling each part. The clay SHOWS the thing. It is not just a blob of clay with a label on it. Use small strips of paper for labels. The whole demonstration then has a label of what it is.

On the checkout, the student removes the overall label. The student must be silent. The examiner must not ask any questions.

The examiner just looks and figures out what it is. He then tells the student who then shows the examiner the label. If the examiner did not see what it was, it is a flunk.

Clay table must not be reduced to significance by the student explaining or answering questions. Nor is it reduced to significance by long-winded labels of individual parts. The clay shows it, not the label.

The clay demonstrates it. The student must learn the difference between mass and significance.

For example, the student has to demonstrate a pencil. He makes a thin roll of clay which is surrounded by another layer of clay—the thin roll sticking slightly out of one end. On the other end goes a small cylinder of clay. The roll is labeled “lead”. The outer layer is labeled “wood”. The small cylinder is labeled “rubber”. Then a label is made for the whole thing: “pencil”. On checkout, the student removes “pencil” before the examiner can see it. If the examiner can look at it and say, “It’s a pencil,” the student passes.

It might also be noted that checkouts on bulletins must also ask for demonstrations. Use paper-clips, rubber bands, etc. The examiner should ask questions that require an ability to apply. Give the student a situation and have him tell you how he would handle it.

Questions about what is rule “a” do not detect the glib student. Long-winded explanations on clay table put it back into significance, prevent the student from learning to apply, and prevent the student from getting the proper balance of mass, and do not blow confusion.

All checkouts must keep in mind that the purpose is application, not just getting a checksheet complete.

If clay table training is not brightening that student up, then the above is NOT being done. Someone is in such a rush that real learning is being put aside for the sake of speed.

This student has to audit with his materials. Don’t let him fall flat by lousy checkouts and lousy demonstrations. A well done clay demo, which actually does demonstrate, will produce a marvellous change in that student. And he will retain the data.


LRH jp.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1967 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 9 NOVEMBER 1967

Remimeo

REVIEW AUDITORS
BOOK OF CASE REMEDIES



REVISION OF REMEDY A, REMEDY B, AND S AND Ds
(Note: To be reprinted for insertion in every
copy of The Book of Case Remedies. )


This bulletin is to be inserted in and changes The Book of Case Remedies PROCEDURES for Remedy A, Remedy B and S and Ds (Search for and Discovery of Suppressives).

Recent analyses made of Qualifications Divisions Departments of Review and of the flow of students and pcs through the Saint Hill org show:

1. The KEY processes so far as orgs are concerned are Remedy A, Remedy B and S&Ds.

2. Auditors need direct mechanical technology to do these three processes effectively.

REMEDY A

Remedy A locates the MISUNDERSTOODS a person has in Scientology. Originally it read “Misunderstood words”. Words of course will emerge in the general run of misunderstoods.

REMEDY A is done only by LISTING. It must not be done verbally alone. It is a Level III process.

The listing question is “In the subjects of Dianetics or Scientology who or what has been misunderstood?”

The item is found on the list and given to the student. That is all. There is no other step.

The rules of listing all apply.

If the student won’t have the item it is not correct and the list must be straightened up with the general auditing rules that govern listing.

REMEDY B

The form of this process is changed. It is done by three lists. These three may only be done by formal LISTING and the general tech of listing as governed by Level III tech.

The lists make the form of an I


LIST 1B

This is done to locate what in the Scientology PT is giving trouble. It is done as a list and the item is found.

The listing question is

“In your studies of Dianetics and Scientology who or what are you having trouble with? “

The item is found and given to the student.

This step is governed by all the tech of listing.

LIST 2B

The item found on List 1B is now listed in order to find the past track subject similar to what is giving trouble in present time.

The listing question is

“In your past, who or what was similar to ............(item found in List 1B)?”

It is highly illegal to limit the question to this lifetime.

All the rules of listing apply.

The item is found and given to the student.

LIST 3B

The third list of the process is now done.

The listing question is

“Who or what was misunderstood in ..........(the item found on list 2B)?”

The listing is covered by the general tech of listing as found in Level III.

The item is found and given to the student.

This completes the Remedy B.

If a floating needle occurs any time during the process with good indicators thoroughly visible in the student the process is concluded at that point.

The process is used on anyone having trouble studying Dianetics or Scientology. The trouble, as it doesn’t clear up with Remedy A, is coming from some prior subject.

More than one of these can be done if all steps are done for each one.

S & D

Search and Discovery of Suppression is called an “S and D”. It locates the suppressives on the case.

I have several times undercut (gotten processes that reach deeper) on S & Ds.

The earliest process asked merely who might have been suppressive to the pc. This is still valid but I have found 2 flaws in it.

1. The auditor does not do a listing type S & D at all but just chattily brushes it off.

2. The list from this question contains an actual suppressive that is passed right over.

Therefore I undercut the question and obtained much better results because the new question reached deeper.

The new question was “Who or what might have suppressed you?”


Then I recalled an even deeper question. This was “What purpose has been suppressed?” This was given to Qual Div SH some time ago. It would have 2 lists. The first is for the purpose as above and the second would be “Who or what suppressed ......(purpose found)?”

For some reason, probably because no one did 2 lists, this undercut was neglected.

Therefore I researched further and developed what we will now use as an S & D.

It is one of these killer processes. It is VERY strong. So it isn’t to be carelessly done.

If you get a wrong item on an S & D YOU CAN MAKE THE PC ILL. So one has to do an S & D right and follow all the rules of listing as given in Level III tech.

Also I find now that when a list item found is a generality (multiple subject, not specific such as “dogs” or “the public”) the list is simply not complete. One does not have to settle for a generality and then list the generality. He will find that the pc will eventually list the specific non-general item anyway. Of course one can also do a represent list of a general item found if that seems best.

The real question for an S & D was established only when I found a purpose all Suppressives have in common and is a very fundamental effort in suppressives. This effort by suppressives, when found, then permitted me to form the question.

The key S & D question is:

“Who or what has attempted to unmock you?”

Unmocking (an effort to reduce or make disappear) is the primary effort of suppressives.

Therefore the listing question on test delivers up items totally overlooked by the earlier types of S & D.

The question needs to be cleared carefully for non-Scientology. If it has to be rephrased, watch out as the meaning may vanish. “Tried to make nothing of you” might substitute but at this writing only unmock has been tested and a question for others than educated Scientologists will be developed and issued and made part of the enclosure for the book.

This S & D question must be done by LISTING only and with great care to follow Level III Listing tech as it, being powerful, will backfire on the pc if done carelessly and a wrong item is found.

The item is found by listing and given to the pc, which is the end of the process. If a generality results it may be represented. But listing continued will give the same result of a single item. A general item must not be given to the pc as the final result.

This process will now be standard review S & D.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.cden
Copyright © 1967
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

[This HCO B is modified by HCO B 28 November 1967, The Key S & D Question, page 210.]


LRH TAPE LECTURES
16—18 November 1967

* 6711C16 SO Watch, Quarter and Station Bill (WQSB)
* 6711C18 SO A Talk to Saint Hill and World-Wide Ethics Officers

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 22 NOVEMBER 1967

Student Hat All Students
Remimeo
All Courses


OUT TECH


If at any time a supervisor or other person in an org gives you interpretations of HCOBs, Policy Letters or tells you, “That’s old. Read it but disregard it,” or gives you a chit for following HCOBs or tapes or alters tech on you or personally cancels HCOBs or Policy Letters without being able to show you an HCOB or Policy Letter that cancels it, YOU MUST REPORT THE MATTER COMPLETE WITH NAMES AND ANY WITNESSES ON DIRECT LINES TO THE INTERNATIONAL ETHICS OFFICER AT WORLD WIDE.

The only ways you can fail to get results on a pc are:

1. Not study your HCOBs and my books and tapes.

2. Not apply what you studied.

3. Follow “advice” contrary to what you find on HCOBs and Tapes.

4. Fail to obtain the HCOBs, books and tapes needed.

There is no hidden data line.

All of Dianetics and Scientology works. Some of it works faster.

The only real error auditors made over the years was to fail to stop a process the moment they saw a floating needle.

---------------

Any supervisor or executive who interprets, alters or cancels tech is liable to the assignment of a Condition of Enemy. All the data is in HCOBs or Policy Letters or on tape.
---------------

Failure to make this mimeo known to every student carries a $10 fine for every student from which it is withheld.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:jp.cden
Copyright © 1967
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED



[The above HCO PL was revised and reissued on 18 July 1970, a copy of which is in Volume VII, page 115. It was also revised for the Standard Dianetics Course as HCO PL 8 May 1969, Issue IV, OEC Vol. 4, page 239.]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 28 NOVEMBER 1967
(Modifies HCOB 9 Nov 67)

Remimeo


The key S & D question is:


“Who or what has unmocked you?”



L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH :jp.rd
Copyright ©1967
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED




HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 27 DECEMBER 1967

Remimeo

LIST HANDLING


By using a list such as the Green Form Review of 13 October 1966 to handle a case, one handles each item that reads before going on with assessment.

There are two ways to use an assessment list.

(a) Direct assessing of the whole list to obtain data and find what to do.

(b) Assess down the list only until something reads, then handle that. Then when it’s handled, continue on down from it to the next read, handle that, etc.

The pc’s attention often hangs up when his trouble is by-passed by a full list assessment without handling.

If in handling an item you get an FN you don’t then go on assessing the list.


LRH:jp.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1967 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


* 6711C30 SO Crew Training
** 6712C10 SO Form and Manner of Keeping Watches

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 28 DECEMBER 1967

Remimeo
Star Rated on All Qual
Personnel and on Exec
Secs and Secs

QUAL SENIOR DATUM


The Senior datum of Qual is that:

QUAL NEVER NEVER NEVER TAKES THE ORDER OR DIRECTION OF ANY OTHER DIVISION OR STAFF MEMBER ON WHAT TO DO TECHNICALLY WITH A STUDENT OR PC.

Qual only really comes into action when other divisions and staff of other divisions have failed. So if they knew what to do the person would not be turning up in Qual for tech remedies. So if Qual takes their orders of what to do it will also fail.

This datum originated at SH when Qual, in a collapse, was found to be obediently doing what Div 4 and Dept 3 ordered on students and pcs. It was getting no results. I analyzed the situation and over a period of a couple of weeks worked on it. The result was the above datum and the GREEN FORM.

Qual always does its own analysis and its own internal routings independent of other directions. It can use any process ever released and a Review auditor must be able to do them.

The GREEN FORM must be added to from time to time as new difficulties are found due to advancing technology or new errors developed by poor training.

A student sent by Tech Sec for Cramming may be routed instead by Qual to case repair if that is what is needed.

The keynote of Qual is CORRECTION. This of course applicable to diagnosis as well.

NO OTHER DIVISION MAY CHIT QUAL FOR REFUSING TO OBEY THEIR DIRECTIONS REGARDING WHAT TO DO WITH STUDENTS OR PCS.

Other divisions are assembly lines. Qual is an individual approach. Qual’s Review only gets flat ball bearings—which could not or would not roll on the assembly line of Div 4.

People can’t be sent to Qual for “disagreements checks” “sec checks” or other stated actions as these are an attempted diagnosis and will normally be found to be the wrong process.

Qual is the students’ and pcs’ friend. A last refuge when other doors close.

AND cases must leave Qual and students must leave Qual WITH THE WHOLE THING HANDLED in a way that will STAY HANDLED. Qual has no Qual Div for the Qual Div. When it goes irresponsible and lets an unhandled case or student out, then that person HAS NO PLACE TO TURN.

I know how bad a failed Qual case can be because when I’m in an org, having no part of the org to go to (unless the Chaplain) they come to me. I usually find (a) that

some imaginary rule has stopped the person’s progress or policy has been used to stop or (b) that Qual was obedient to some other division and (c) always that Qual has either not been approached or has failed when it was.

So the senior datum of Qual is important.

----------------

There is another datum in Qual that is very important. And that is:

NO AUDITOR MAY BE EMPLOYED IN QUAL WHO CANNOT SUCCESSFULLY LIST AND ASSESS FLAWLESSLY WITHOUT ANY ERRORS.

All you have to do to wreck Qual is put an auditor in it who is not letter perfect in ALL the tech of listing and assessing. (Some isolated summary is not enough—all the original tapes and all the original HCOBs must be studied to make an auditor able in listing and assessing. It is the weakest applied point in our tech—too many can’t or don’t learn how to do it. But a Qual auditor MUST be a shark on it.)

One can say that the health of an org depends on Qual finally handling. The key processes which keep an org healthy are new (67) style Remedy A, Remedy B and S & Ds and the GREEN FORM. These are listing and assessing or assessing processes. Thus the vital tech is listing and assessing. So Qual auditors have to be carefully trained to do these perfectly.

At this writing Qual is being streamlined into a new fast flow pattern. This policy still applies and in 2068 will still apply and in 200068 as well.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH :jp. cden
Copyright © 1967
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 9 JANUARY 1968
(Cancels HCO B 16 August 1966, “LIST 1A S & D”)
Remimeo
Academies, Level
III & above
HGC Auditors,
III & above
Franchise, Level
III & above

________________________
Pc’s name
________________________
Date
________________________
Auditor

LIST L4A
FOR ASSESSMENT OF ALL LISTING ERRORS,
S & Ds, REMEDY A, REMEDY B, ETC

1. DO YOU HAVE AN ARC BREAK? (ARE YOU UPSET?)
(If this question reads establish if the upset is due to a break in Affinity, Communication or Reality and then having established which one by meter [A, R or C] locate by meter and indicate to the pc the by-passed charge.)
(Do not go on further until the ARC Break has been vanished. The pc might also have a PTP, etc, so continue on when the ARC Break question is null or has been handled.)

2. DO YOU HAVE A PRESENT TIME PROBLEM?
(If this reads, handle by any quick problems process.)

3. IS A LIST INCOMPLETE?
(If this reads find out what list and handle.)

4. HAS A LIST BEEN TOO LONG?
(If so, find what list and get the item off from it by nulling with “Suppress”, the nulling question being “Has____been suppressed?” for each item on the overlong list.)

5. HAVE WE TAKEN THE WRONG ITEM OFF A LIST?
(If this reads put in Invalidate and Suppress on the list and null as in 4 above and find the right item.)

6. HAS AN ITEM ON A LIST BEEN DENIED YOU?
(If this reads find what it was, clean it up with supp & inval and give it to the pc.)

7. HAS AN ITEM BEEN PUSHED OFF ON YOU YOU DIDN’T WANT?
(If so, find it and get in supp & inval on it and tell the pc it wasn’t his item and continue the original action to find the correct item.)

8. HAVE YOU INVALIDATED A CORRECT ITEM FOUND?
(If so, rehab the item and find out why the pc invaled it or if somebody else did, clean it up and give it to the pc again.)

9. HAVE YOU THOUGHT OF ITEMS THAT DID NOT GET PUT ON THE LIST?
(If so, add them to the correct list.)

10. HAVE YOU BEEN LISTING TO YOURSELF OUT OF SESSION?
(If so, find out on what question and try to write a list from recall and get an item and give it to the pc.)

11. HAVE YOU BEEN GIVEN SOMEBODY ELSE’S ITEM?
(If so, indicate to pc that it was not his item. Don’t try to find whose it was.)

12. HAS YOUR ITEM BEEN GIVEN TO SOMEBODY ELSE?
(If so, find if possible what item it was and give it to the pc. Don’t try to identify the “somebody else”.)

13. HAS IT BEEN AN OVERT TO PUT AN ITEM ON A LIST?
(If so, find out what item and why.)

14. HAVE YOU WITHHELD AN ITEM FROM A LIST?
(If so, get it and add it to the list if that list available. If not, put item in the report.)

15. HAS A WITHHOLD BEEN MISSED?
(If so, get it.)

16. HAS AN ITEM BEEN BY-PASSED?
(Locate what one.)

17. HAS AN ITEM BEEN SUPPRESSED?
(If so, null by use of the suppress button or just have pc tell you if he can.)

18. HAS AN ITEM BEEN ABANDONED?
(If so, locate it and get it back for the pc and give it to him.)

19. HAS AN ITEM BEEN PROTESTED?
(If so, locate it and get the protest button in on it.)

20. HAS AN ITEM BEEN ASSERTED?
(If so, locate what item and get in assert button on it.)

21. HAS AN ITEM BEEN SUGGESTED TO YOU BY ANOTHER?
(If so, get it named and the protest and refusal off.)

22. HAS AN ITEM BEEN VOLUNTEERED BY YOU AND NOT ACCEPTED?
(If so, get off the charge and give it to the pc, or if he then changes his mind on it, go on with the listing operation.)

23. HAS THE ITEM ALREADY BEEN GIVEN?
(If so, get it back and give it again.)

24. HAS THE ITEM BEEN FOUND PREVIOUSLY?
(If so, find what it was again and give it to pc once more.)

25. HAS AN ITEM NOT BEEN UNDERSTOOD?
(If so, work it over with buttons until pc understands it or accepts or rejects it and go on with listing.)

26. WAS NULLING CARRIED ON PAST THE FOUND ITEM?
(If so, go back to it and get in suppress and protest.)

27. HAS AN ITEM BEEN FORCED ON YOU?
(If so, get off the reject and suppress. And get the listing action completed to the right item if possible.)

28. HAS AN ITEM BEEN EVALUATED?
(If so, get off the disagreement and protest.)

29. HAS EARLIER LISTING BEEN RESTIMULATED?
(If so, locate when and indicate the by-passed charge.)

30. HAS AN EARLIER WRONG ITEM BEEN RESTIMULATED?
(If so, find when and indicate the BPC.)

31. HAS AN EARLIER LISTING ARC BREAK BEEN RESTIMULATED?
(If so, locate and indicate the fact.)

32. DO YOU HAVE AN ARC BREAK BECAUSE OF BEING MADE TO DO THIS?
(If so, indicate it to pc.)

33. IS THERE SOME OTHER KIND OF BY-PASSED CHARGE?
(If so, find what and indicate it to pc.)

34. WAS THERE NOTHING WRONG IN THE FIRST PLACE?
(If so, indicate it to pc.)

35. HAS THE UPSET ALREADY BEEN HANDLED?
(If so, indicate it to pc.)


LRH:jp.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1968 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

[This HCO B is amended by HCO B 15 December 1968, L4A-For Assessment of All Listing Errors, page 285.]




HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

Remimeo HCO BULLETIN OF 9 JANUARY 1968
Tech Personnel
Qual Personnel
Students MONEY PROCESS

The command of the Money Process is:

MOCK UP A WAY TO WASTE MONEY.

This is run until a person can have money.

Also one may add to the Money Process, Clay Table all Org money flows.

All to Free Needle.

LRH :jp.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1968 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED



** 68....C.... SPEC LECT Talk to EC WW on RS at Southampton
** 6801C05 AO-1 Fast Flow and Inspection Before the Fact
** 6801C12 AO-2 Those Who Will Put Things Right

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 13 JANUARY 1968
Remimeo

S & Ds


There are three types of S & D (Search and Discovery). These are used to nullify the influence of Suppressive persons or things on a case so the person will be able to be processed and will no longer be PTS (a Potential Trouble Source). People who are PTS became that way because of suppression by persons or objects. Insanity is also remediable by S & Ds where the person can be processed.

These are all LISTING processes and if the auditor is not well-trained and good at the technology of listing, not only will no good result occur but the pc (given a wrong item, overlisted or underlisted, or audited over an ARC Break or PTP) can be made ill.

Pcs who become ill are always to a greater or lesser degree PTS.

These questions should not be shown to a pc as they may start him self-listing.

The “type” is determined by the 1st letter of the key word in the listing question.

S & D TYPE U

“Who or what has attempted to unmock you?”

Where this does not communicate, use “Who or what has tried to make nothing out of you?” A very bad off case may respond best to “Who or what has unmocked you?”

This (above) is the standard and most used S & D.

S & D TYPE S

“Who or what are you trying to stop?”

This works on all cases to a greater or lesser degree. It is particularly useful on a case that is giving a great deal of trouble, gets small reads or is rather suppressive. This should work on the insane also as the point where a qn (thetan) becomes insane is the point where he begins to generally stop things. I looked for years for the exact point where a qn ceased to be sane and became insane on any given subject and fmally found that it was the exact moment he became dedicated to trying to stop whatever it was.

S & D TYPE W

“Who or what are you trying to withdraw from?”

This is the action after a failure to stop has occurred.

In administering these, the best order would be Type W, Type S and then Type U, if you are going to give them all to the same pc in a row.

Any or all can be given to the same pc.

S & Ds can be given more than once to the same pc.

Properly listed the results are magical. If they are not magical, then listing tech is badly out and should be restudied from ALL materials and tapes on the subject.

Errors are located and repaired by the recent new L4A (HCOB of 9 January 1968).


LRH:jp.cden L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright ©1968 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 16 JANUARY 1968

Remimeo
Sthil Staff
Sthil Students
Franchise



STARTING OF PRECLEARS


All raw meat Preclears (one who has never had Scientology processing), before being run on Level Zero, should be run on ARC S/W, Secondaries and ENGRAMS. This, then, gets their basic levels in.

On the Dianetic Courses running ARC S/W, Secondaries and ENGRAMS comes as the last requirement after the Course Supervisor is satisfied that the TRs 0 to 4 are in on the Student.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder




LRH:jp.rd
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 19 JANUARY 1968

Remimeo


S & Ds

S & Ds BY BUTTON


The most certain way to handle a pc with an S & D is to assess for the type to give first.

With the pc on the meter, say, “Unmock” (or “Make nothing of”) “Stop” “Withdraw from” “Suppress” “Invalidate” (or any of the buttons used in old Problems Intensives). Then take the one that read largest and put it in the Question “Who or what has attempted to________you?” or “Who or what are you trying to_______?”

When you have listed the question and found the item and given it to the pc, you can take the above list, with the one used omitted, and take the largest read now on the remaining words and put that in the question and get another item for it.

So long as you can get one of the buttons to read, you can get an item by doing an S & D with it.

CAUTION: Do not continue to do S & Ds beyond a floating needle.

CAUTION: Do not list an S & D button if the question for the list does not read.


S & Ds BY ASSESSMENT FOR QUESTION

You can also do an S & D by assessing for a button to use in an S & D question.

This is done by asking the question:

“What are they trying to do to you?”

Get the pc to list it, find the item and then use it in an S & D question.

This works on any case but always works best on cases that haven’t responded to S & Ds previously.

Fit the resulting item in the question “Who or what is trying to______you?”


PURPOSE S & Ds

A Purpose S & D By Assessment for Question can be done by first listing “What are you trying to do?” or “What have you tried to do?” You test these two questions for the largest read, then you list the one that reads best.

When you have the item of “What are you trying to do” or “What have you tried to do” you fit it into the S & D Question “Who or what have you failed to_______(item found)?” or “Who or what have you tried to_______?”, the two questions tested for largest read and then listed for an item.

CAUTION: The question must make sense and be answerable. Don’t change the wording of the item. Change the question into a sensible one.

This form of S & D can give an Effect question as the only possible question.

If the item found on the first list “ trying to do” won’t word causative, word it by effect—”Who or what has tried to you ?”

The whole attempt of this S & D is to find the person or thing that has blunted the purpose of the pc.
--------------

All these S & Ds do not set aside the standard S & D Types W, S and U. “Type U” is the basic S & D. They are for use mainly when the pc has had a long Review history or a bad Ethics history, or is insane or suppressive. BUT using them does not evaluate the pc as down tone. They give rather magical effects on anyone.

The Purpose S & D is from earlier research and is very magical on Artists. It has the liability of having to be done sensibly, being a sort of goals assessment plus an S & D. Sometimes the goals assessment (“What are you trying to do”) is magical enough to produce a floating needle. If so, don’t ever go past it to the second question that uses the goal.


L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:jp.cden Founder
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


[For further data on F/N during listing see C/S Series 43, Volume VII, page 278.]





HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 12 MARCH 1968

Remimeo


MISTAKES, ANATOMY OF


In the presence of Suppression, one makes mistakes.

People making mistakes or doing stupid things is evidence that an SP exists in that vicinity.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jc.cden
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED



** 6801C17 SO Weather
** 6801C26 AO-4 Ron’s Talk at 4th Graduation on RS (Apollo)

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 18 APRIL 1968
Remimeo
Qual Divs
Rev
AOs
OT Study
Materials

NEEDLE REACTIONS ABOVE GRADE IV


In doing Green Forms or Analysis Lists on any Clears (but not in nulling) or doing them on most cases above 5 and some cases below it, there are 2 different E-Meter needle phenomena which have to be given attention:

1. As a Clear’s postulates read as a surge, usually fairly long (over 1”), “No” can read if the pc says it to himself as an answer to a question asked.

A read, therefore, does not mean invariably “yes” or that the question is charged. All it means is that the Meter has read.

The Auditor must now find out what the read was before determining he should do something about that portion of the Green Form or List. One doesn’t just assume the read was “yes”.

One asks about the read as a general rule, not assuming at once the thing asked was charged.

Example—

Auditor: “Do you have a missed withhold?” Meter surges.
Auditor: “What was that?”
Pre OT: “I thought No I don’t.”
Auditor: “Ok. Do you have a missed withhold?”
Pre OT: “No.”—Meter didn’t read.
Auditor: “Anything suppressed—asserted—protested—invalidated. Ok that’s clean.”

Ticks (1/8 inch) often mean something is there. A Pre OT’s postulates have greater length when they surge.

It is not important how you handle this phenomena of postulate or to-oneself comment by a high level case. It is important that the Auditor does not hang the case with a wrong adjudication of what’s wrong by thinking every surge means “yes”, or that the question is charged because it surges. A question is charged only if it won’t clean up with buttons until the action itself is taken.

A Pre OT, unlike pcs below Grades I or II, usually recognizes what is wrong as soon as it is mentioned. He or she is more aware.

2. A response like a brief dirty needle on a Pre OT means “No” always.

So there is a certain and trustworthy negative to be had on a Pre OT.

A real dirty needle is constant and continues. The same small jerky needle action on a person Grade 5 or above means “No!” or that the question is negative.

On pcs below 5 it means a withhold or an ARC break or almost anything and is of course continuous.


LRH:jc.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1968 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 19 APRIL 1968

(HCO Pol Ltr of 9 April 1968, amended and reissued)
Remimeo
Qual Div Hats
Tech Div Hats

HGC PC REVIEW AUDITING FORM


WHEN THE REVIEW AUDITOR RECEIVES A PC FOR REVIEW, HE INSTANTLY AND IMMEDIATELY GETS THE PC INTO SESSION AND HANDLES THE FOLLOWING FORM.

(The Auditor goes down the Form and handles each item as he goes along. He does not assess first and then, later, handle the items that read. The Form is ended on a Free Needle. It is done in the same style as L4A, HCO Bulletin 9 January 1968. This Green Form is handled as the first standard action and is done on a meter and significant TA is noted on the line on which it occurred. The list is in order of importance.)

NAME DATE TIME__________

NAME OF AUDITOR________________________

1. FOLDER IN HAND LAST AUDITOR’S NAME_________________

2. CONTAINS BEGINNING ASSESSMENT FORM _______________________

3. PC OR PRE OT ROUTED INTO REVIEW AT CHARGE __________________

PC OR PRE OT SENT BY EXAMINER________________________________

4. ARC BREAK
SESSION ASSESSMENT___________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

ENVIRONMENT__________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________

4. (b) NO AUDITING ________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________

5. IGNORED ORIGINATIONS_________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________

6. MISSED WITHHOLDS_____________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________

CLEAN__________________________________________________________

6. (a) OVERTS______________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________

7. PRESENT TIME PROBLEM_________________________________________
________________________________________________________________

EVALUATION____________________________________________________

INVALIDATION __________________________________________________

CLEAN__________________________________________________________

8. MISUNDERSTOOD WORD OR SYMBOL _____________________________
________________________________________________________________

CLEAN__________________________________________________________

9. COMMITTING CONTINUOUS PT OVERTS ___________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________

CLEAN__________________________________________________________

10. CLEANED CLEANS_______________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________

a. SOMETHING THAT ISN’T THERE ________________________________
________________________________________________________________

b. TRYING TO PUT SOMETHING WHERE THERE IS NOTHING_________
________________________________________________________________

c. FALSE ASSERTION_____________________________________________
________________________________________________________________

d. ASSESSED BEYOND RIGHT ITEM________________________________
________________________________________________________________

e. WRONG DATE_________________________________________________

f. INCOMPLETE LIST_____________________________________________
________________________________________________________________


g. OVERLIST_____________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________

h. LOWER LEVELS UNFLAT _______________________________________
________________________________________________________________

i. LOWER LEVELS OVERRUN______________________________________
________________________________________________________________

j. LOWER LEVELS NEVER RUN____________________________________
________________________________________________________________

k. HAS A POWER PROCESS BEEN LEFT UNFLAT?____________________
________________________________________________________________

l. HAS A POWER PROCESS BEEN OVERRUN?________________________
________________________________________________________________

m. FALSE ATTESTATION__________________________________________
n. UNTRUE ASSERTS ABOUT CASE ________________________________
o. TOLD A LIE____________________________________________________
p. WASN’T SURE_________________________________________________
q. STUCK PICTURE ______________________________________________
r. ALL BLACK ___________________________________________________
s. MISUNDERSTOOD TECH________________________________________
t. MISUNDERSTOOD CASE CONDITION_____________________________
u. EXPERIMENTING______________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
v. ALTERING TECH ______________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
w. DOING SOMETHING ELSE WITH TECH __________________________
________________________________________________________________

x. HAVE YOU TYPED, HANDWRITTEN OR TAPED COPIES OF ANY CONFIDENTIAL MATERIALS? _____________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________

11. PROCESS LEFT UNFLAT__________________________________________

DATE OF SESSION _______________________________________________

PROCESS LEFT UNFLAT__________________________________________

DATE OF SESSION _______________________________________________

PROCESS LEFT UNFLAT__________________________________________

DATE OF SESSION _______________________________________________

PROCESS LEFT UNFLAT__________________________________________

DATE OF SESSION _______________________________________________

12. PROCESS OVERRUN _____________________________________________

DATE OF SESSION _______________________________________________

PROCESS OVERRUN _____________________________________________

DATE OF SESSION _______________________________________________

13. NON-STANDARD PROCESSES _____________________________________
________________________________________________________________

14. BAD AUDITING COMM CYCLE_____________________________________

15. CODE BREAKS___________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________

16. HIDDEN STANDARD (WHAT WOULD HAVE TO HAPPEN FOR YOU TO KNOW SCIENTOLOGY WORKS) ___________________________________
________________________________________________________________

SPOTTED _______________________________________________________

17. PC AND DRUGS (TAKING ANY DRUGS)____________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________

18. ALCOHOL_______________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________

19. ENOUGH SLEEP _________________________________________________

ENOUGH FOOD (BREAKFAST)_____________________________________

(LUNCH)________________________________________________________

(DINNER) _______________________________________________________

20. MIXED THERAPIES (ANY OTHER TREATMENT IN PROGRESS) ________
________________________________________________________________

21. CONNECTED TO A SUPPRESSIVE PERSON__________________________
________________________________________________________________
22. CONNECTED TO A SUPPRESSIVE GROUP___________________________
________________________________________________________________
23. HERE TO GET DATA FOR SOMEONE ELSE___________________________
24. HERE BECAUSE SOMEONE ELSE DEMANDED IT ____________________
25. FORMER RELEASE _______________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
26. FORMER THETAN EXTERIOR______________________________________
27. SELF AUDITING DURING INTENSIVE ______________________________

28. BEING AUDITED BY SOMEONE ELSE DURING INTENSIVE OTHER THAN HGC AUDITOR_____________________________________________

29. CRIMINAL RECORD OR CRIMES FOR WHICH YOU COULD BE ARRESTED______________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
30. INSANE ASYLUM HISTORY_______________________________________
SHOCK TREATMENT HISTORY____________________________________
31. HERE TO BE CURED OF SOMETHING NOT MENTIONED______________
________________________________________________________________
32. UNPAID DEBTS TO ORGS_________________________________________
33. KNOWLEDGE OF A CRIME AGAINST SCIENTOLOGY_________________
34. WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF SCIENTOLOGY WORKED ON EVERYONE___
________________________________________________________________
35. ANYTHING UPSETTING ABOUT THIS REVIEW______________________
36. HAS ANYTHING BEEN SUPPRESSED?______________________________
37. HAS ANYTHING BEEN INVALIDATED?_____________________________
38. HAS ANYTHING BEEN RUSHED?__________________________________
39. HAS ANYTHING BEEN MISSED?___________________________________
40. PC STATEMENT OF THE TROUBLE AS IT IS NOW____________________
41. READS I COULD NOT CLEAN UP___________________________________
42. BOOK OF CASE REMEDIES (IF PC NOT SOLVED BY THIS POINT)______
________________________________________________________________

43. OTHER ACTIONS CASE OFFICER HAD TO TAKE_____________________
________________________________________________________________
44. FALSE REPORTS_________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________

FINISH TA POSITION FINISH TIME_________

TOTAL TA DIVS DURING REVIEW TOTAL TIME _________

PC TO ETHICS________________________________________________________

PC TO HGC __________________________________________________________

RECOMMENDATIONS_________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________

DATE CASE OFFICER SIGN____________________

EXAMINER FINALLY DIRECTS

TO ETHICS TO HGC _________________________


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:jc.rd
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED








[The earlier HGC Pc Review Auditing Form, HCO PL 13 October 1966, Issue III, page 184, was amended and reissued as HCO PL 26 January 1968 which made the following changes: the beginning explanatory text and Numbers 1, 3, 11 and 12 were changed to read the same as the above HCO PL; Items a-q were added to Number 10, which in the above issue became f, g, e, k, l, m, n, o, p, q, r, s, t, u, v, w, x, respectively.

The 26 January 1968 issue was amended by HCO PL 15 March 1968, same title, which changed Number 10 to read the same as the above HCO PL.

A further amendment was made by HCO PL 9 April 1968 which changed Numbers 7 and 6 (a) to the text in the above HCO PL.

An additional amendment, HCO PL 19 April 1968, added Number 4 (b) above.

The above issue was amended by HCO PLs dated 16 December 1968 (which changed the title to Green Form), 15 May 1969, 7 September 1969, 7 April 1970, and 8 August 1970, all of which were done by staff, not LRH.

A further revision was issued on 17 September 1974 which was revised by HCO PL 7 April 1970RA, Revised 29 September 1974, Green Form, which is in Volume VIII, page 321.]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 4 MAY 1968
Remimeo
DIANETIC COURSES
STUCK PICTURES

A picture is stuck because of—

(a) An effort to withdraw from it or something in it.

(b) An effort to stop or stop something in it.

(c) A stop-withdraw combination.

(d) An effort to suppress the picture or something in it.

(e) An effort to invalidate the picture or something in it.

(f) A protest against the picture or its content.

(g) An effort to hold on to the picture.

(h) An ARC Break about the picture.

(i) A Present Time Problem about the picture.

(j) An overt picture of which the stuck one is the motivator.

(k) Too late on the chain of similar pictures.

Long before one gets to (k) it should have blown.

One should have had good luck running engrams himself before being very expert on others.

The above also applies to secondaries.

Engrams which go solid when you try to run them are too late on the chain, really.

If you run too far back you get a preclear into masses he can’t easily handle.

A pc should never be forced into or through engrams. If he has a struggle he should be running locks.

Reality on engrams increases in ratio to the charge taken off the case.

In handling the above (a) to (k) you use (a) to run through until the needle doesn’t react, then (b) through. Then (c) through. And so on. One at a time.

Although I say stuck picture, you can use the above on any engram, particularly if one “hangs up” in some portion.

Good running.


LRH:jc.pw.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1968 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 7 MAY 1968

Remimeo


UPPER INDOC TRS


Following are the Upper Indoc TRs 6 to 9 inclusive.

Number: TR 6

Name: 8—C (Body Control)

Commands: Non-verbal for first half of training session. First half of coaching session, the student silently steers the coach’s body around the room, not touching the walls, quietly starting, changing and stopping the coach’s body. When the student has fully mastered non-verbal 8—C, the student may commence verbal 8—C.

The commands to be used for 8—C are:

“Look at that wall.” “Thank you.”
“Walk over to that wall.” “Thank you.”
“Touch that wall.” “Thank you.”
“Turn around.” “Thank you.”

Position: Student and coach walking side by side; student always on coach’s right, except when turning.

Purpose: First part: To accustom student to moving another body than his own without verbal communication. Second part: To accustom student to moving another body, by and while giving commands, only, and to accustom student to proper commands of 8—C.

Training Stress: Complete, crisp precision of movement and commands. Student, as in any other TR, is flunked for current and preceding TRs. Thus, in this case, the coach flunks the student for every hesitation or nervousness in moving body, for every flub of command, for poor confronting, for bad communication of command, for poor acknowledgement, for poor repetition of command, and for failing to handle origination by coach. Stress that student learns to lead slightly in all the motions of walking around the room or across the room. This will be found to have a great deal to do with confronting. In the first part of the session student is not allowed to walk coach into walls, as walls then become automatic stops and the student is then not stopping the coach’s body but allowing the wall to do it for him.

History: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard in Camden, New Jersey in October 1953, modified in July 1957 in Washington, D.C., and the commands were modified in HCO Bulletin of 16 November 1965, Issue II.


Number: TR 7

Name: High School Indoc.

Commands: Same as 8—C (control) but with student in physical contact with coach. Student enforcing commands by manual guiding. Coach has only three statements to which student must listen: “Start” to begin coaching session, “Flunk” to call attention to student error, and “That’s it” to end the coaching session. No other remarks by the coach are valid on student. Coach tries in all possible ways, verbal, covert and physical, to stop student from running control on him. If the student falters, comm lags, fumbles a command, or fails to get execution on part of coach,

coach says “Flunk” and they start at the beginning of the command cycle in which the error occurred. Coach falldown is not allowed.

Position: Student and coach ambulant. Student handling coach physically.

Purpose: To train student never to be stopped by a person when he gives a command. To train him to run fine control in any circumstances. To teach him to handle rebellious people. To bring about his willingness to handle other people.

Training Stress: Stress is on accuracy of student performance and persistence by student. Start gradually to toughen up resistance of student on a gradient. Don’t kill him off all at once.

History: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard in London, England, in 1956.


Number: TR 8

Name: Tone 40 on an Object.

Commands: “Stand up.” “Thank you.” “Sit down on that chair.” “Thank you.” These are the only commands used.

Position: Student sitting in chair facing chair which has on it an ashtray. Coach sitting in chair facing chair occupied by student and chair occupied by ashtray.

Purpose: To make student clearly achieve Tone 40 commands. To clarify intentions as different from words. To start student on road to handling objects and people with postulates. To obtain obedience not wholly based on spoken commands.

Training Stress: TR 8 is begun with student holding the ashtray which he manually makes execute the commands he gives. Under the heading of training stress is included the various ways and means of getting the student to achieve the goals of this training step. During the early part of this drill, say in the first coaching session, the student should be coached in the basic parts of the drill, one at a time. First, locate the space which includes himself and the ashtray but not more than that much. Second, have him locate the object in that space. Third, have him command the object in the loudest possible voice he can muster. This is called shouting. The coach’s patter would run something like this: “Locate the space.” “Locate the object in that space.” “Command it as loudly as you can.” “Acknowledge it as loudly as you can.” “Command it as loudly as you can.” “Acknowledge it as loudly as you can.” That would complete two cycles of action. When shouting is completed, then have student use a normal tone of voice with a lot of coach attention on the student getting the intention into the object. Next, have the student do the drill while using the wrong commands—i.e., saying “Thank you” while placing in the object the intention to stand up, etc. Next, have the student do the drill silently, putting the intention in the object without even thinking the words of the command or the acknowledgement. The final step in this would be for the coach to say “Start” then anything else he said would not be valid on student with the exception of “Flunk” and “That’s it”. Here, the coach would attempt to distract the student, using any verbal means he could to knock the student off Tone 40. Physical heckling would not be greater than tapping the student on the knee or shoulder to get his attention. When the student can maintain Tone 40 and get a clean intention on the object for each command and for each acknowledgement, the drill is flat.

There are other ways to help the student along. The coach occasionally asks, “Are you willing to be in that ashtray?” When the student has answered, then, “Are you willing for a thought to be there instead of you?” Then continue the drill. The answers are not so important on these two questions as is the fact that the idea is brought to the student’s attention. Another question the coach asks the student is, “Did you really expect that ashtray to comply with that command?”

There is a drill which will greatly increase the student’s reality on what an intention is. The coach can use this drill three or four times during the training on Tone 40 on an Object. As follows: “Think the thought—I am a wild flower.” “Good.”

“Think the thought that you are sitting in a chair.” “Good.” “Imagine that thought being in that ashtray.” “Good.” “Imagine that ashtray containing that thought in its substance.” “Good.” “Now get the ashtray thinking that it is an ashtray.” “Good.” “Get the ashtray intending to go on being an ashtray.” “Good.” “Get the ashtray intending to remain where it is.” “Good.” “Have the ashtray end that cycle.” “Good.” “Put in the ashtray the intention to remain where it is.” “Good.” This also helps the student get a reality on placing an intention in something apart from himself. Stress that an intention has nothing to do with words and has nothing to do with the voice, nor is it dependent upon thinking certain words. An intention must be clear and have no counter-intention in it. This training drill, Tone 40 on an Object, usually takes the most time of any drill in Upper Indoc, and time on it is well spent. Objects to be used are ashtrays, preferably heavy, coloured glass ashtrays.

History: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard in Washington, D.C., in 1957 to train students to use intention when auditing.


Number: TR 9

Name: Tone 40 on a Person.

Commands: Same as 8—C (Control). Student runs fine, clear-cut intention and verbal orders on coach. Coach tries to break down Tone 40 of student. Coach commands that are valid are: “Start” to begin, “Flunk” to call attention to student error and that they must return to beginning of cycle, and “That’s it” to take a break or to end the training session. No other statement by coach is valid on student and is only an effort to make student come off Tone 40 or in general be stopped.

Position: Student and coach ambulant. Student in manual contact with coach as needed.

Purpose: To make student able to maintain Tone 40 under any stress or duress.

Training Stress: The exact amount of physical effort must be used by student plus a compelling, unspoken intention. No jerky struggles are allowed, since each jerk is a stop. Student must learn to smoothly increase effort quickly to amount needed to make coach execute. Stress is on exact intention, exact strength needed, exact force necessary, exact Tone 40. Even a slight smile by student can be a flunk. Too much force can be a flunk. Too little force definitely is a flunk. Anything not Tone 40 is a flunk. Here the coach should check very carefully on student’s ability to place an intention in the coach. This can be checked by the coach since the coach will find himself doing the command almost whether or not he wants to if the student is really getting the intention across. After the coach is satisfied with the student’s ability to get the intention across, the coach should then do all he can to break the student off Tone 40, mainly on the basis of surprise and change of pace. Thus the student will be brought to have a greater tolerance of surprise and a quick recovery from surprise.

History: Developed in Washington, D.C., in 1957 by L. Ron Hubbard.

Purpose of these four training drills, TR 6, 7, 8 and 9, is to bring about in the student the willingness and ability to handle and control other people’s bodies, and to cheerfully confront another person while giving that person commands. Also, to maintain a high level of control in any circumstances.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:js.cden
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

[This HCOB has been corrected per BTB 22 May 1971R, TR-8 Clarification, which added the first sentence in TR-8 Training Stress above. ]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 20 MAY 1968
CORRECTED & REISSUED MARCH 1974
Remimeo
(Only change is in this type sty/e)

OVERT-MOTIVATOR SEQUENCE

DIANETICS COURSES
LEVEL TWO
SOLO AUDIT
OT SECTIONS

There was an important discovery made in 1952 on the subject of engrams which did not get included in “Book One”, Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health.

This was the “Overt-Motivator sequence of ENGRAMS”.

AN OVERT, in Dianetics and Scientology, is an aggressive or destructive ACT by the individual against one or another of the 8 dynamics (self, family, group, Mankind, animals or plants, MEST, Life or the Infinite).

A MOTIVATOR is an aggressive or destructive act received by the person or one of the dynamics.

The viewpoint from which the act is viewed resolves whether the act is an overt or a motivator.

The reason it is called a “Motivator” is because it tends to prompt that one pays it back—it “motivates” a new overt.

When one has done something bad to someone or something one tends to believe it must have been “motivated”.

When one has received something bad, he also may tend to feel he must have done something to deserve it.

The above points are true. The actions and reactions of people on the subject are often very falsified.

People go about believing they were in an auto accident when in actual fact they caused one.

Also people may believe they caused an accident when they were only in one.

Some people, on hearing of a death, at once believe they must have killed the person even though they were far away.

Police in large cities have people turn up and confess to almost every murder as a routine.

One doesn’t have to be crazy to be subject to the Overt-Motivator sequence. It is not only used on him continually by others, it also is a basic part of his own “case”.

There are two extreme stages of Overt-Motivator phenomena. One is a person who gives up only motivators (always done to him) and the other is the person who “has done only overts” (done to others).

In running engrams you will find

1. All overt engrams that hang up (won’t audit easily) have also a motivator engram as the same or different incident.

2. All motivator engrams that hang up have an overt engram in the same or different incident.

The two types of engrams then are OVERT Engrams and MOTIVATOR Engrams.

Example of Overt Engram—SHOOTING A DOG.

Example of Motivator Engram—BEING BITTEN BY A DOG.

The rule is that the SUBJECT MATTER MUST BE SIMILAR.

They can be in different points in time.

When you can’t run out (erase) a dog bite engram, why then you find the “shoot dog” engram.

PSYCHOSOMATIC ILLS OR ABERRATIONS THAT DO NOT RESOLVE BY RUNNING ONE SIDE, USUALLY RESOLVE BY FINDING AND RUNNING THE OTHER.

When you can’t erase an engram about shooting a dog, why then there’s a bitten by dog.

It’s all very simple really. There are always two sides to the coin. If one won’t run, you try the other.
BASICS

Finding the basic engram on a chain also applies to finding the basic overt or basic motivator engram.

Engrams then hang up (won’t run out) when
(a) The other type needs to be run and
(b) The one found has earlier engrams on it.

NONEXTANT ENGRAMS

An “engram” sometimes didn’t exist. A pc can be trying to run being run over by a car when he never was. What needs to be done, when the incident won’t run, is get the pc’s incident of running over somebody. It also works in reverse. A pc can be trying to run an engram of running over somebody when he was in fact only run over himself and never did run over anyone.

So BOTH engrams can exist and be run or only one side exists and can be run or with a heavy foul-up on overts and motivators, one side can be non-factual and won’t run because only the other side exists.

It is easy to visualize this as a matter of flows. An overt of course is an Outflow and a motivator is an Inflow.
SECONDARIES

It may never have been said that secondaries always sit squarely on incidents of actual pain and unconsciousness.

Also secondaries can exist on the overt-motivator sequence pattern just as in engrams.

This is the cause of frozen emotions or “unemotional” people. Also some people complain they can’t feel anymore.

This works out by overt-motivator sequence. A person in grief over loss (grief is always loss) who then can’t run it has caused grief and that overt-secondary can be run.

Also a person misemotional over causing grief has been caused grief. It works both ways with ALL POINTS ON THE TONE SCALE.

The last is a newer discovery and wasn’t known to early Dianeticists.

The Overt-Motivator Engram phenomena did not receive adequate dissemination. The principle applied to secondaries has not before been released. It is basically Dianetic Engram running that resolves all cases in the end so one had better be pretty good at auditing Engrams and Secondaries, Motivator and Overt both.


LRH:jp.nt.cdenjh L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1968, 1974 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 24 MAY 1968

Remimeo


COACHING



In order to help you to do the best you possibly can in the course as far as being a coach is concerned, below you will find a few data that will assist you:

1. Coach with a purpose.

(a) Have for your goal when you are coaching that the student is going to get the training drill correct; be purposeful in working toward obtaining this goal. Whenever you correct the student as a coach just don’t do it with no reason, with no purpose. Have the purpose in mind for the student to get a better understanding of the training drill and to do it to the best of his ability.

2. Coach with reality.

(a) Be realistic in your coaching. When you give an origination to a student really make it an origination, not just something that the sheet said you should say; so that it is as if the student was having to handle it exactly as you say under real conditions and circumstances. This does not mean, however, that you really feel the things that you are giving the student, such as saying to him, “My leg hurts.” This does not mean that your leg should hurt, but you should say it in such a manner as to convey to the student that your leg hurts. Another thing about this is do not use any experiences from your past to coach with. Be inventive in present time.

3. Coach with an intention.

(a) Behind all your coaching should be your intention that by the end of the session your student will be aware that he is doing better at the end of it than he did at the beginning. The student must have a feeling that he has accomplished something in the training step, no matter how small it is. It is your intention and always should be while coaching that the student you are coaching be a more able person and have a greater understanding of that on which he is being coached.

4. In coaching take up only one thing at a time.

(a) For example: Using TR 4, if the student arrives at the goal set up for TR 4 then check over, one at a time, the earlier TRs. Is he confronting you? Does he originate the question to you each time as his own and did he really intend for you to receive it? Are his acknowledgements ending the cycles of communication, etc. But only coach these things one at a time; never two or more at a time. Make sure that the student does each thing you coach him on correctly before going on to the next training step. The better a student gets at a particular drill or a particular part of a drill you should demand, as a coach, a higher standard of ability. This does not mean that you should be “never satisfied”. It does mean that a person can always get better and once you have reached a certain plateau of ability then work toward a new plateau.

As a coach you should always work in the direction of better and more precise coaching. Never allow yourself to do a sloppy job of coaching because you would be doing your student a disservice and we doubt that you would like the same disservice. If you are ever in doubt about the correctness of what he is doing or of what you are doing, then the best thing is to ask the supervisor. He will be very glad to assist you by referring you to the correct materials.

In coaching never give an opinion, as such, but always give your directions as a direct statement, rather than saying “I think” or “Well, maybe it might be this way,” etc.

As a coach you are primarily responsible for the session and the results that are obtained on the student. This does not mean, of course, that you are totally responsible but that you do have a responsibility toward the student and the session. Make sure you always run good control on the student and give him good directions.

Once in a while the student will start to rationalise and justify what he is doing if he is doing something wrong. He will give you reasons why and becauses. Talking about such things at great length does not accomplish very much. The only thing that does accomplish the goals of the TR and resolves any differences is doing the training drill. You will get further by doing it than by talking about it.

In the training drills the coach should coach with the material given under “Training Stress” and “Purpose” on the training sheet.

These training drills occasionally have a tendency to upset the student. There is a possibility that during a drill a student may become angry or extremely upset or experience some misemotion. Should this occur the coach must not “back off”. He should continue the training drill until he can do it without stress or duress and he feels “good about it”. So, don’t “back off” but push the student through whatever difficulty he may be having.

There is a small thing that most people forget to do and that is telling the student when he has gotten the drill right or he has done a good job on a particular step. Besides correcting wrongnesses there is also complimenting rightness.

You very definitely “flunk” the student for anything that amounts to “self-coaching”. The reason for this is that the student will tend to introvert and will look too much at how he is doing and what he is doing rather than just doing it.

As a coach keep your attention on the student and how he is doing and don’t become so interested in what you yourself are doing that you neglect the student and are unaware of his ability or inability to do the drill correctly. It is easy to become “interesting” to a student; to make him laugh and act up a bit. But your main job as a coach is to see how good he can get in each training drill and that is what you should have your attention on; that, and how well he is doing.

To a large degree the progress of the student is determined by the standard of coaching. Being a good coach produces auditors who will in turn produce good results on their preclears. Good results produce better people.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder





LRH:js.cden
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

INTRODUCTION
to
SCIENTOLOGY ETHICS

by
L. Ron Hubbard

Published July 1968

Introduction to Scientology Ethics by L. Ron Hubbard was published at Saint Hill Manor in answer to a demand for a manual for learning and applying the Scientology Ethics system, which had proved to be so tremendously workable.

L. Ron Hubbard says, “All that Ethics is for—the totality of the reason for its existence and operation—is simply that additional tool necessary to make it possible to apply the technology of Scientology.

“Man does not have that purpose for his law or his justice. He wants to squash people who are giving him trouble.

“That is not the case with Scientology Ethics, which, having the above purpose, is a fabulously successful activity.”

In this manual Ron gives the principles and formulas of the Scientology Ethics system. He draws an easy-to-recognize picture of the person who can be trusted and the one who cannot be trusted. He gives the exact formulas to be used to better any condition (operating state) in which a person finds himself. He gives a Code of Offenses and Penalties; and then an essay on Rewards and Penalties in which he introduces a “seemingly obvious law” which explains “the whole decay of Western government”: “When you reward down statistics and penalize up statistics you get down statistics.” He goes on to show why and how to “reward the up statistic and damn the down”—a new and honest look. Finally, he shows how, once you get things going in the right direction, you maintain this upward trend.

This Ethics system can be applied in any area of your life—business, marriage, family, personal—with startlingly good results.

72 pages, hardback with dust jacket, glossary. Available from your nearest Scientology Organization or Mission, or direct from the publishers: Scientology Publications Organization, Jernbanegade 6, 1608 Copenhagen V, Denmark; or Church of Scientology Publications Organization U.S., 2723 West Temple Street, Los Angeles, California, 90026, U.S.A.

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 1 AUGUST 1968

Remimeo


CLASS III, SOLO VI & VII, ACADEMY AND SHSBC
REQUIRED REVIEWED FOR SOLO AND VII


(Compiled from earlier HCOBs and TAPES of
the early 60’s to give the exact stable data)



THE LAWS OF LISTING AND NULLING

(Star Rate. No attestations
allowed, clay and demos required)



The following laws are the ONLY important rules of listing and nulling. If an auditor doesn’t know these he will mess up pcs thoroughly and awfully. An auditor who doesn’t know and can’t apply these is not a Level III auditor.


LAWS

1. The definition of a complete list is a list which has only one reading item on list.

2. A TA rising means the list is being overlisted (too long).

3. A list can be underlisted in which case nothing can be found on nulling.

4. If after a session the TA is still high or goes up, a wrong item has been found.

5. If pc says it is a wrong item it is a wrong item.

6. The question must be checked and must read as a question before it is listed. An item listed from a non-reading question will give you a “Dead Horse” (no item).

7. If the item is on the list and nothing read on nulling, the item is suppressed or invalidated.

8. On a suppressed list, it must be nulled with suppressed. “On ....has anything been suppressed.”

9. 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.

10. An item from an overlisted list is often suppressed.

11. On occasion when you pass the item in nulling, all subsequent items will read to a point where everything on list will then read. In this case take the first which read on first nulling.

12. An underlisted and overlisted list will ARC break the pc and he may refuse to be audited until list is corrected, and may become furious with auditor and will remain so till it is corrected.

13. Listing and nulling or any auditing at all beyond an ARC Br without handling the ARC Break first such as correcting the list or otherwise locating it will put a pc into a “sad effect”.

14. A pc whose attention is on something else won’t list easily. (List and null only with the rudiments in on the pc.)

15. An auditor whose TRs are out has difficulty in listing and nulling and in finding items.

16. Listing and nulling errors in presence of Auditor’s Code violations can unstabilize a pc.

17. The lack of a specific listing question or an incorrect non-standard listing question which doesn’t really call for item will give you more than one item reading on a list.

18. You cease listing and nulling actions when a floating needle appears.

19. Always give a pc his item and circle it plainly on the list.

20. Listing and nulling are highly precise auditing actions and if not done exactly by the laws may bring about a down tone and slow case gain, 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. (Does not alter 5A Power procedure.)

A failure to know and apply this bulletin will result in the assignment of very low conditions as these laws, if not known or followed, can halt case gain.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder





LRH :jp js.cden
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 5 AUGUST 1968

Remimeo


LEVEL II

CHANGE OF COMMANDS
OVERT-MOTIVATOR SEQUENCE

IMPORTANT

(This HCOB takes precedence over all other
tapes and HCOBs on overts)


Whereas it is workable to ask for “What have you done” and “What have you withheld”, it is NOT the Level II Grade II process any longer.

The original work on this used the overt-motivator sequence and the commands are

“What have you done?”

“What has been done to you?”

There is a third “leg” which is

“What has another done to another?”

which can be used and if not used may stick as a flow.

This is a problem in flows. (I) Inflow, (2) Outflow, (3) Cross Flow.

Therefore the only commands to be used to clean up overts are three in number. They are run one at a time to floating needle on the process (not F/N on each leg).

“What has been done to you?”

“What have you done?”

“What has another done to another?”

(By drawing three symbols



an auditor can put his pen on each as it is asked and so keep his place.)


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH :jp.js. cden
Copyright ©19 68
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 6 AUGUST 1968
Remimeo
LEVEL III
IMPORTANT—STAR RATED

R 3 H
(Takes precedence over all other HCOBs & Tapes)

The way to handle the ARC Breaks of a case with R3H as the process for Level III is:

1. Locate a change in life by listing to a blowdown. Use that period. “What change has happened in your life” is a version of the question.

2. Get it dated.

3. Get some of the data of it (don’t run as an engram) so you know what the change was.

4. Find out by assessment if this was a Break in

Affinity
Reality
Communication or
Understanding

and have the pc examine that briefly.

5. Taking the one found in (4) find out by assessment if it was

Curious about__________
Desired_______________
Enforced______________
Inhibited______________

That is all there is to it.

That was the research process.

It works like a bomb.

To make sure it works well, get in the rudiments before you do it.

-------------

It has been said that you can do this several times on a pc beyond a floating needle on one. I have not verified this.

-------------

Doing Know—Unknown—Curious, etc. first is definitely wrong. ARC is dominant. ARC is done first as above. Understanding is the composite of ARC and so is added to ARC as U in (4) above.


LRH:jp.s.cden L. RON HUBBARD
copyright ©1968 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

THE

PHOENIX LECTURES


by
L. Ron Hubbard

Published August 1968


The Phoenix Lectures is a selection of the celebrated lecture series given by L. Ron Hubbard in Phoenix, Arizona, between May and December, 1954, tapes of which became known as the “Professional Course of July, 1954.”

It begins with a fascinating three chapter description of the philosophical and historical background of Scientology, followed by the considerations, theory and mechanics behind instruction. Seven chapters detail and thoroughly cover the Four Conditions of Existence (As-isness, Alter-isness, Isness and Not-isness).

The first fifty Axioms of Scientology, which any student of Scientology is expected to thoroughly absorb, are each individually described and explained. Although these Axioms are selfevident truths, they are not so thoroughly self-evident that they leap out of the page and introduce themselves to you. You have to introduce yourself to them, and the four chapters on the Axioms of Scientology greatly assist this process. In addition to the axioms on time, a whole chapter is devoted to this subject.

Of particular interest to auditors are the chapters on Two-Way Communication and the Present Time Problem, Opening Procedure of 8-C, Opening Procedure by Duplication, Viewpoint Straightwire, Remedy of Havingness and Spotting Spots in Space, Description Processing, and Group Processing. Ron ends off with an intriguing chapter on the application of Scientology to one’s everyday life.

A companion work to these Professional Course Lectures was the August, 1954, Auditor’s Handbook later expanded into The Creation of Human Ability).

336 pages, 2 drawings, hardcover with dust jacket, glossary. Available from your nearest Scientology Organization or Mission, or direct from the publishers: Scientology Publications Organization, Jernbanegade 6, 1608 Copenhagen V, Denmark; or Church of Scientology Publications Organization U.S., 2723 West Temple Street, Los Angeles, California, 90026, U.S.A.

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 26 AUGUST 1968
Remimeo
Sea Org
QUALS


REHAB & CORRECTION


You can correct a pc or Pre OT half to death.

For instance the practice of rehabbing up to Grade II if it has been a week or two or more since the pc made Grade II in order to run III is a bit bonkers and serves as an Invalidation. You’re going to get any upset anyway in the rudiments so why the rehab?

At SH lower grades are rehabbed before Power only when the pc had the lower grades elsewhere as the grades aren’t to be trusted and that’s for Power only. And only when there’s no good report available.

Doing a Green Form “every day” on a pc or Pre OT may shove up Qual stats but it’s actually an overrun of Green Forms. They go to F/N on the Green Form and to do another WITHOUT ANY REAL TROUBLE having occurred is asking for it.

Sec Checks can be overrun and overdone. By-passing 2 or 3 Floating Needles on a Sec Check is bad business.

Doing Disagreements Checks and S & Ds wholesale on pcs and Pre OTs eventually winds them up in a ball.

Outnesses can usually be spotted by folder inspection by a good Case Supervisor.

When Remedy Bs and S & Ds are done by auditors who haven’t got the Laws of Listing recent HCOB down by heart and use it will generally mess up more pcs than they will help.

Qual corrects. But it can get into over-correction and then invalidate the pc’s or Pre OT’s levels, fill his folder with bad lists, etc.

If any organization, any Qual, at this writing had its folders fully gone over by a competent Case Supervisor who KNEW his Laws of Listing, knew his auditing, I guarantee that Org’s stats would soar, not just Qual’s. And having for once and all straightened out the folder then cease to correct things that would better be handled by the next Grade or Section.

When over-correction has been present YOU STRAIGHTEN OUT THE BLUNDERS IN THE FOLDER not just maul the pc around some more. And when you have the folder straight you mark it up to that point as remedied and after that only handle the pc when there’s something really gone wrong with him.

At the present writing I am organizing the Class VIII Course to make Class VIII auditors. These are essentially Case Supervisors and crack standard tech people who can straighten out folders and pcs and Pre OTs. Looking over old Qual case folders I see they are desperately needed.

But keep the fact in view, don’t correct a pc who needs no correction. Don’t rehab and Remedy him to death. Get him onto the next level or section and let him have his wins.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.ei.cden
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 28 AUGUST 1968

Remimeo
Class VIII
All Orgs


OUT TECH


After Standard Tech is out for just so long in an org, Scientology ceases to have any meaning.

Squirrel processes and repairs wind the staff up in a ball, enturbulate the field and cause a general lethargy and trouble.

Ethics then goes in hard or it all goes up in smoke.

There is only one Standard Tech! It contains only a few dozen processes and actions. It was not complete before 1966. Students study mainly the Research Line. Standard Tech consists of the exact grade processes and Case Repair.

Some still look for magic buttons that resolve a case all at once. Some can’t duplicate what they read and hear.

They need the broad body of knowledge.

BUT the actual application of Dian & Scn today contains only a few dozen STANDARD INVARIABLE SIMPLE actions and processes.

When these are not used, when opinion enters, it’s all gone.

STANDARD TECH ALONE RESOLVES ALL CASES.

No matter how bright, the other processes and new inventions of someone else (a) work only on a few and (b) are efforts to solve one’s own case by auditing others.

To let Standard Tech go out is an act of Treason as Scientology then loses all meaning in an org.

This is why I am teaching a Class VIII Course.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder




LRH-jp.ei.bh
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 28 AUGUST 1968
Issue II
Remimeo
FO
DRUGS

(Note: Drug taking has become very common
in the West, pushed by psychiatrists.)

It is possible to come off drugs without convulsions.

Drugs essentially are poisons. The degree they are taken determines the effect. A small amount gives a stimulant. A greater amount acts as a sedative. A larger amount acts as a poison and can kill one dead.

This is true of any drug. Each has a different amount. Caffeine is a drug. So Coffee is an example. 100 cups of coffee would probably kill a person. 10 cups would probably put him to sleep. 2 or 3 cups stimulates. This is a very common drug. It is not very harmful as it takes so much of it to have an effect so it is known as a stimulant.

Arsenic is known as a poison. Yet a tiny amount of arsenic is a stimulant, a good sized dose puts one to sleep and a few grains kills one dead.

But there are some drugs which have another factor. They directly affect the reactive bank. Marijuana (pot), peyote, morphine, heroin, etc. turn on the pictures one is stuck in. And they turn them on too hard to audit out.

LSD-25 is a psychiatric drug designed to make schizophrenics out of normal people. It is evidently widely distributed by psychiatrists. It looks like cube sugar and is easily made.

Drugs are considered valuable by addicts to the degree that they produce some “desirable effect”.

But they are dangerous to those around because a person on drugs

(a) has blank periods
(b) has unrealities and delusions that remove him from PT
(c) is very hard to audit.

Thus a drug taker can be holding a boat alongside, go into one of his blanks, think he is on Venus and let go.

A drug taker left on watch may go blank and miss a menacing situation and not handle it because he is “somewhere else”.

Giving an order to a drug taker can be grim as he may simply stand and stare at one. He ARC breaks anyone with it.

It takes about six weeks apparently for LSD to wear off. After that a person can be audited. But it ruins his case to a marked degree as it builds up ridges which don’t as-is well.

A drug or alcohol burns up the Vitamin B1 in the system rapidly. This increased speed of burning up B1 adds to his “happy state”. But now his system is out of B1 so he goes depressed.

To avoid convulsions take lots of B1 daily when coming off drugs.

And wait for six weeks before one is audited.

And then lay off. It’s a pretty poor trick on those who are dependent on one and get let down.


LRH:jp.ei.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright ©1968 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 29 AUGUST 1968
Remimeo
(Corrected & reissued 10 June 1975
as contained a misprint in para 4)


DRUG DATA

LSD-25 is a colourless, odourless, tasteless and virtually undetectable derivative of a rye mould called ergot. The use of sugar cubes as a medium was discontinued several years ago. Dosage is fantastically small, 50 to 1000 micrograms per dose, so capsules and tablets are used to reduce evaporation. Price varies from 3 to 7 dollars and it is only sold on the black market. Prior to 1964 the drug was administered by psychologists and psychiatrists. However, it is now illegal for them to do so. Despite its illegal status, LSD is very popular among teenagers and college students. An entire sub-culture of psychedelic (mind-manifesting) posters, light shows, and electronic music has emerged on the West Coast. Most of the Pop music has hidden drug references. A recent survey indicated that over 50% of the students graduating from the Los Angeles City School System had tried either LSD or marijuana.

Marijuana is the most popular of the psychedelic drugs. One ounce may be readily purchased for $10 and will furnish 30-50 cigarettes or “joints”. A smoker quickly progresses from the one ounce “lids” to purchasing a “brick” or “kilo”. This is a kilogram (2.2 lbs) and sells for $75 to $150. Marijuana may be easily identified. It has a strong characteristic odour which is similar to fresh hay or wet, freshly cut grass. Smoking some tea leaves, rolled up into a cigarette will give you a good stable datum for identifying marijuana odour. Marijuana may be physically identified as a green or greenish brown tobacco with varying amounts of brown stems and small round seeds.

Hashish, like marijuana, comes from the female hemp plant, Cannabis sativa. When matured, the plant is hung upside down and resins collect which are dried into hashish. One gram of hashish sells for $10 and will supply 10 to 30 “hits” or periods of being “high”. Hashish is brown, tan, or black and is usually kept in tin foil. Users of both hashish and marijuana will have bloodshot eyes while under the influence. Someone under LSD may be identified by very dilated pupils.

Peyote “buttons” are several inches in diameter and come from the peyote cactus of S.W. America. The pure form of the drug is a synthetic (white) or natural (brown) powder called mescaline. A beefed-up version of this drug was recently made available but was, as of June 1968, unnamed.

Another new drug is STP. This drug is much more powerful than even LSD. As of June 1968, STP was waning in use as people found its results too unpredictable.

One other drug worth mentioning is DMT. This drug is smoked or injected and has immediate effects which end in about an hour. It may be identified by an odour similar to moth balls and is either a white powder or soaked into a medium such as pot or tobacco.

Marijuana is basically a very mild drug which creates euphoria. Also it has the unpleasant consequence of distorting the senses of the user to the point that people on “trips” have been known to open the door of a car going 80 mph and step out “since they could walk faster”.

The remaining psychedelic drugs are much more powerful and will strongly influence a pc.

It was found in L.A. that over a period of several months (4-6) every single income slump was traced to the accidental acceptance of one or more drug (LSD, etc)

users into the Academy and/or HGC and traced as well to the spreading waves of chaos in attempts to handle their “disagreements” with the tech, demands for special handling and no case gain.

The “trips” that a drug user goes on tend to produce stuck points on the track with much fixation of attention on that area. Bad “trips” tend to act like Super Engrams collapsing the track at that point.

Users of drugs cannot as-is, do not get TA, nor do they have cognitions.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:nt.rdjh
Copyright © 1968, 1975
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED








HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 31 AUGUST 1968
Remimeo
Case Supervisor Hat



WRITTEN C/S INSTRUCTIONS



It is a High Crime for a Case Supervisor not to WRITE in a preclear’s folder what the case supervised instructions are and a High Crime for an auditor to accept verbal C/S instructions.

To commit this crime causes:

1. Extreme difficulty when doing a folder error summary as there is no background of what was ordered and why.

2. Gives the auditor leave to do anything he likes as not in writing.

3. Is open to misduplication and can cause squirrel processes to be run and so mess up a preclear with Non-Standard Tech.

Any C/Supervisor found guilty of this from this date is to be removed as this could only be considered a deliberate attempt to mess up preclears.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.ts
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 1 SEPTEMBER 1968
Remimeo
Cl VIII

SUMMARY OF HOW TO WRITE AN AUDITOR’S REPORT,
WORK SHEETS AND SUMMARY REPORT, WITH SOME
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION


AUDITOR ‘S REPORT

An Auditor’s Report should contain:

Date
Name of Auditor
Name of Pc
Condition of Pc
Length of Session
Time Session started and ended
T/A at beginning and end of Session
Rudiments
What process was run—LISTING THE EXACT COMMANDS (often forgotten by most Auditors)
Time of Start and End of Process
Whether Process is flat or not Any F/Ns

WORK SHEETS

A Work Sheet is supposed to be the complete running record of the session from beginning to end. The Auditor should not be skipping from one page to another but should just be writing page after page as the session goes along.

A Work Sheet is always foolscap, 8 x 13 inches, written on both sides and each page is numbered. Pc’s name is written on each separate sheet.

A Work Sheet may be in 2 columns depending on how big the writing is of the Auditor.

When the session is completed, the Work Sheets are put in proper sequence and stapled with the Auditor Report Form on top from beginning to end of session.

T/A and time notations should be made at regular intervals throughout the session.

When making a list on a Pc:

1. Always mark a read as it reads—F. LF. BD.

2. Always circle the reading item. Mark if indicated to the Pc with IND.

3. Always when extending a list put in a line from where it has been extended, e.g.

Item Joe
Shoes
Socks
______________________ extended
Sky
Wax
Pigs, etc, etc.

NOTE: When you repair an old auditing session you always write on the old auditing report and W/sheets in a different coloured pen with the date of the report.

When running various processes in a session, mark each F/N clearly, noting time and TA.

SUMMARY REPORT

A Summary Report is written exactly as per HCO B 14 June 1965—

Pc’s Name
Auditor’s Name
Process Run TA Time
Goals and Gains
Aspects of Running Process
Ethics
Suggestions.

Two gross goofs I have noticed since case supervising folders on the RSM is that Auditors have not been turning in Ethics cases to the MAA. In one instance, a Pc was audited by 2 Auditors in 2 different sessions, got a R/S on crimes against Scientologists and M/W/Hs and neither Auditor turned the Pc in to Ethics. This is not the only instance. The second thing is that Auditors are very evaluative of the Pc’s case as indicated by their comments on the Summary Report. This is incorrect; this report is used simply as an exact record of what happened during the session. It is not up to the Auditor to evaluate the Pc’s Case, this is the Case Supervisor’s job. The Auditor may suggest what is to be run, at which time the Case Supervisor will review the session, what was run, how the Pc went in relation to what was being run and then give his directions.

------------------------------


Auditor Report Forms or W/sheets are never re-copied. The Auditor should always read over his W/sheets before turning in folder to the Case Supervisor and, if any words or letters are missing or cannot be read, they should be written in with a different coloured pen.

If these rules are followed it will make the Case Supervisor’s job much much easier and Auditor’s Reports more valuable.

To add the obvious, it is a CRIME to give any session or assist without making an Auditor’s Report or to copy the original actual report after the session and submit a copy instead of the real report. Assist Reports that use only contact or touch assists may be written after a session and sent to Qual.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder




LRH jp.ei.ts
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 1 SEPTEMBER 1968

Class VIII


POINTS ON CASE SUPERVISION


1. Check your orders to find out if auditor did them.

2. Check to see if commands correct and if pc’s reaction was expected reaction for those commands.

3. Check any list and find out if there was mislisting.

4. Advise against a background of Standard Tech.

5. Order any errors corrected or get the case on further up the grades.

6. Beware of over-correction.

7. Beware of false, pessimistic or over-enthusiastic auditor reports. They are detected by whether the case responded to usual actions as they all do.

8. Beware of talking to the auditor or the pc.

9. Have implicit confidence in Standard Tech. If it is reported not working the auditor’s report is false or the application terrible but not reported.

10. Above all else hold a standard and NEVER listen to or use unusual solutions.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder




LRH:jp.ts
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 4 SEPTEMBER 1968
Class VIII




Don’t force a pc who is ill. The whole intention when auditing a pc who is sick is making him well.

If overts, or M/W/Hs don’t read, even though he is nattering, then they are not available to be run right then.

A preclear who is not well cannot look, his havingness is down and he must be handled permissively—always.

The mechanism of RELEASE must be well understood to make an ill person well. They plunge down the track madly on any excuse. They require much lighter auditing than they stand up to when well.


LRH:jp.ts L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1968 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED








HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 6 SEPTEMBER 1968

Class VIII

CHECKING FOR FALSE READS


When you check for earlier auditor false reads on a GF or rudiment type read:

When follow-up of the read seems to bog down, get nowhere and
when pc has no answers.

When the pc protests, seems ARC Broken by the read or seems
resigned.

When the pc starts to explain how the thing has been run before.

When there is protest or inval.


LRH:jp.ts L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1968 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 10 SEPTEMBER 1968-1
ADDITION OF 28 FEBRUARY 1975
Remimeo
Class VIII
(This is an amendment of HCO B 10 Sept 68, “Green Form, S & D, Remedy B”. NOTE: Original HCO B 10 Sept 68 is changed in distribution to Solo C/S Crse and is not cancelled as it contains vital data for the Solo C/S.)


GREEN FORM, S & D

It was found in C/Supervising aboard the RSM that the following additives had been entered and are not altogether correct.

1. “Green Form to Free Needle.” Not necessarily correct. It may or may not. Each item on the Green Form is independent of the rest. However it can be a serious blunder to continue a GF past an F/N. I have seen TAs then rise.

The only time you would ever do this (go past an F/N on a Green Form) would be when GIs were not in and the pc still felt he was in trouble. In this case the F/N is probably an ARC Brk needle and an ARC Break should be checked.

2. “S & Ds to F/N” (WSU). Not necessarily true. You stop as per listing rules.

LRH:jp.nt.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1968,1975 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED




HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 11 SEPTEMBER 1968
Class VIII

FALSE READS


False Reads are handled by checking back any that are false to when they were first “seen” by an auditor.

Sometimes a false read goes on and on, never cleans because there wasn’t anything there in the first place.

Find when and where somebody thought it read when it didn’t. Can ask, “Who said you had an______reading when you didn’t have one?”

Also check Protest, Invalidate and Suppress to clean up a false read.


LRH:jpts L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1968 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 11 SEPTEMBER 1968
Class VIII


CASE SUPERVISOR DATA


A Case Supervisor should watch for Ethics record of pcs who have been C/Sed.

If they fall on their head, get into low conditions, the folder should be reviewed.

Most probably the auditor did not do what was ordered and, if folder looks okay, chances are the auditing report is false as something is wrong or pc would not be in trouble.


LRH:jp.ts L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1968 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED




HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 17 SEPTEMBER 1968

Class IV
OVERRUN PROCESS


The Process “What has been overrun?” is used when pc has a chronically high T/A.

It is run by taking each reading item and getting the time or times it was released. Run each to clean needle or F/N.

The item is taken up as it reads and the releases in it rehabbed. Then the next item is listed and handled the same way.

More than one F/N can be attained on the list as the items are different subjects.

Each item as rehabbed is taken as far as it will go. It does not necessarily F/N. It must not be over rehabbed.

The odd phenomena of high TA “F/Ns” must be looked for and tell you when an item is rehabbed enough. Eventually after many are rehabbed a real and normal F/N will occur with TA between 2 & 3. TA action will then have ceased.


LRH:jp.rw.cden L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1968 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

[Class IV has been added to the mimeo distribution of this HCO B per HCO B 10 December 1968, Correction.]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 17 SEPTEMBER 1968R
REVISED 31 JANUARY 1975
Remimeo
Class VIII


SIX ZONES OF ACTION


There are 6 zones of action in Class VIII:

1. Auditing for Grades “obtains real case gain”.

2. Repair of misaudited Grades.

3. Setting up cases to run a Grade.

4. Case Supervising the auditing of Grades.

5. Case Supervising the repair of misaudited Grades.

6. Case Supervision of setting up cases to audit Grades.

Each of these is a separate skill and must be learned.

Each has its precise and invariable actions and these must be learned. There are no others.

A student’s reality must be able to embrace that there are no others. His grip on tech must be so exact that he doesn’t flub Standard Tech and so begin to look for unusual solutions in any of the six above actions.

A good C/S is bound by the Case Supervisor’s Code and a good C/S does not use 2 (two) or 5 (five) above as an excuse to give assists. Assists have no part in Class VIII skills which depend wholly on the grades for case advance.

A pc released at Zero will of course soon begin to have problems. He goes to the next grade, not to Review for an assist.

No one grade solves the whole case. That’s why there are grades.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:rs.nt jh
Copyright © 1968, 1975
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 17 SEPTEMBER 1968

Class VIII C/S

ETHNICS


A Case Supervisor must watch Ethnics (customs) oddities and changing fashions because one race has different mores than another and changing fashions bring in new methods of degradation, i.e. Drug Rehab was not necessary in 1950, but is vitally necessary in 1968.

Sex was not a button in Ancient Greece and is the total subject of Freudian analysis in 1894.

For the 1930 period, C/S would have to pay attention to rehabbing periods of time pc went “release” when drinking.

What you are looking for and what must be handled is euphoria caused by some external stimuli.

This not only may be but must be rehabbed in many cases before they even begin to move.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder



LRH:jp.ts
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 17 SEPTEMBER 1968
Class VIII
C/S

GROSS CASE SUPERVISION ERRORS


1. Ordering unnecessary repairs.

2. Trying to use repair processes to get case gain instead of getting the pc onto the next grade.

3. Not writing down C/S instructions, but giving them to an auditor verbally.

4. Talking to the auditor re the case.

5. Talking to pc re his case.

6. Falling to send pc to examiner if you’re unsure why his folder has been sent up


7. Being reasonable.

8. Not having enough Ethics presence to get his orders followed.

9. Issuing involved repair orders.

10. BIGGEST GC/SE for C/S is not to read through the pc folder.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder



LRH :jp.ts
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 18 SEPTEMBER 1968


Remimeo


EXAMINER’S FORM

(This is the only Examiner Form for Pc and Pre OT
Routing in SHs, AOs and SO.)

Date_______________________


Name of Pc_________________________________

Last Grade attained___________________________

Pc’s statement _________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________



TA ___________________________


STATE OF NEEDLE_________________________


EXAMINER ROUTES: To C/S___________________

To MO___________________

Back to Post___________________




______________________________________
Signature of Examiner


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.eijh
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

[This HCO PL was revised by HCO PL 30 September 1968, Issue II, Examiner’s Form, which added blanks for the following text: “Qual Div (place)”, “Time” and, after “Last Grade attained”, “(or) Grade being attested”. It also added two boxes labeled “Before Session” and “After Session”. This PL was then revised by HCO PL 9 May 1969, which was revised and replaced by HCO PL 26 January 1970, Issue III, both titled Examiner’s Form, neither of which were written by LRH. These were revised by HCO PL 8 March 1971, Examiner’s Form which is printed in Volume VII, page 193]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 19 SEPTEMBER 1968

Remimeo
L&N Chksht
Class VIII
(Reissued 8 May 72
with extended distribution)


Old lists are NOT TO BE COPIED. They are to be corrected in their original form but using a different coloured pen to show what has been done—always date new uses of these lists also using the same colour pen as used for renulling or addition to them.

When listing you always note down F, BDs, SF, LF, etc, next to the items. This is done AS YOU LIST.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:jp.nt.rd
Copyright © 1968, 1972
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [Original distribution was simply “Class VIII”.]








HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 20 SEPTEMBER 1968
Remimeo
Class VIII

REVIEW, ORDERING PEOPLE TO


Ordering people to Review for rehab or Review of grades when they are not ethics cases and no outness is found in the folder acts as an Invalidation of gains and can react seriously on a case.

It must cease.

A specific folder outness or a chronic low conditions case are the only reasons to review grades.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:jp.ts
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 20 SEPTEMBER 1968
Remimeo
Class VIII
GLEE


When you see glee on some fellow on a post, realize it’s because he doesn’t understand what he’s doing.

He’s ignorant about something and above that is confusion and above the confusion you see glee.

People who make fun of a serious needful action or duty just don’t dig it, that’s all.

There are remedies. There’s instruction or Remedy B. And these should be used.

But this glee is nevertheless a kind of insanity. Freud mentioned that people who couldn’t understand something sometimes giggled in an embarrassed kind of way. I rarely take any data from him but in this case, he was right. It was a good observation.

However, he had no cure for it.

You can get a whole area into a kind of glee when they don’t grasp what they are doing.

If you see somebody in glee, get a Remedy B run on them in Qual.

Glee is a special kind of embarrassed giggling. You’ll know it when you see it.


LRH :jp.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright ©1968 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED




HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 22 SEPTEMBER 1968
Remimeo
Class VIII
CCHs NOT GRADE I


Anyone rehabbing CCHs as a Level I process has skipped Grade I as CCHs are only preparatory.

Pcs apparently being evaluated for as how would they know they were a “problems release” on CCHs.

They really need a standard problems process.


LRH:jp.ei.cden L. RON HUBBARD
copyright © 1968 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

[This HCO B was cancelled by HCO B 17 June 1970, Issue III, Cancellation of HCO Bs that Conflict with Full Lower Grades, which was not written by LRH and has been cancelled by BTB 10 December 1974, Issue VII, Cancellation of Bulletins-1970. BTB 10 December 1974, Issue V, Cancellation of Bulletins-1963-1968, confirms the above HCO B 22 September 1968 as cancelled.]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 23 SEPTEMBER 1968
(Reissued 22 January 1972 as “Remimeo”)
Remimeo


DRUGS & TRIPPERS


Any case that won’t run or won’t rehab is probably a “tripper”, meaning somebody who has taken drugs.

Standard practice for anyone who has ever taken drugs or even alcohol is to rehabilitate the moments of releases in these.

Drugs (or alcohol) give an enforced moment or period of release. It is surrounded in mass.

LSD, marijuana (pot, hashish), peyote, opium, ether (in operations), nitrous oxide (laughing gas in dental operations), weird “biochemical” compounds used by “psychiatrists”, Benzedrine, solid alcohol (canned heat), alcohol, turpentine, gasoline, witch herbs of various kinds, and even certain rays, in this lifetime and on the back track, could have caused a moment of release.

Death does also but it’s a bit steep to rehab.

In a rehab session, or before such a this lifetime one is audited on grades, the moments of release should be rehabbed.

The C/S directs this to be done before a rehab of ARC Straight Wire.

Such releases usually need rehabbing only once.

Tough rehabbing and probably all “Black Vs” probably trace to these chemical “releases” .

They are deadly because they give the sensation of release while actually pulling in mass.

When “All black” reads on a GF one of these chemical release periods is probably in restim.

These “Chemical releases” give us a lot of trouble unless (a) detected and (b) rehabbed.

Such pcs often withhold the fact (non-acceptable or discreditable datum) quite madly and thus make detection difficult unless directly asked for on a hard to run case.

Such persons can also be a mess on III if the chemical period rehabs aren’t done.

Delusory or dub-in cases also sometimes trace to chemical “releases”.

Painkillers, tranquilizers or morphine can also be explored where no “drug taking” is traced.

All the above come under the heading of forceful exteriorization and can inhibit the act of exteriorization on V.

Such pcs are a bit blank, irresponsible or detached.

Each TYPE of chemical which produced “release” must be rehabbed and it is best to count how many times released on each type.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.mes.rd
Copyright ©1968, 1972
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [Original distribution was simply “Class VIII”.]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 23 SEPTEMBER 1968

Remimeo
All Students
Saint Hill Courses
NEW RUDIMENTS
(This HCOB cancels HCOB 3 July 65)


The Class VIII technique is floating the needle on rudiments before doing a new grade, power or rehabs.

1. “Do you have an ARC Bk?”
(If the question reads handle with ARCU and CDEI.)

2. “Do you have a present time problem?”
(If this reads handle by any quick problems process.)

3. “Has a withhold been missed?”
(If so, get it.)

Remember that on each of these questions, if they don’t blow, they can be traced back to an earlier ARC Bk, problem or withhold.

If no F/N occurs, then the auditor uses a Green Form or a List (such as L4A) to
produce one.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.ei.cden
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED







CLASS VIII COURSE LECTURES
Flagship Apollo
24 September—15 October 1968

In 1968, in order to markedly upgrade the standard of application of Scientology Technology, L. Ron Hubbard called leading auditors to Flag from around the world, and personally trained them in exact standard practical application from ARC Straightwire through to OT processes.

Thus a higher level of application of Scientology Technology was heralded in by emphasizing that exact and invariable application of Standard Tech produces results on all cases.

** 6809C24 SO Class VIII-1: Welcome to the Class VIII Course.
An Introduction to Standard Tech

** 6809C25 SO Class VIII-2: What Standard Tech Does

The list of Class VIII lectures continues on pages 260-265, 268, and 271, in chronological sequence with the written material of the time.

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 25 SEPTEMBER 1968
(Reissued broadly 5 Oct ‘72)
Remimeo
SHSBC Class Vl
Class IV
GF-40XRR CHECKSHEET


CONTINUOUS PT OVERTS



A listing question used to handle the continuous present time overt question on the Green Form is:

“What are you trying to prevent?”

This is listed and follows all listing and nulling rules and lists to one item reading.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder




LRH:jp.nt.rd
Copyright © 1968, 1972
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED



[Original distribution was simply “Class VIII, Confidential”.]




















CLASS VIII LECTURE
26 September 1968


** 6809C26 SO Class VIII-3: The Laws of Case Supervision

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 27 SEPTEMBER 1968
Issue II
Remimeo
All Dianetic
Courses

ARC STRAIGHT WIRE

(Corrects HCO B 30 June 1962 and also
in the HDA Course book. Corrects p. 102
[soft-cover edition] of Self Analysis.)
(Paste over HDA Course page 15.)
(Corrects earlier HCO B of same date & title.)


The correct commands for ARC Straight Wire, as researched and as successful in test in cracking even neurotic cases, with one command added to modernize it, were and are:

Recall a time that was really real to you.

Recall a time you were in good communication with someone.

Recall a time you really felt affinity for someone.

Recall a time you knew you understood something.

Run ONLY on a Meter.

Run ONLY to Floating Needle and NOT beyond. (Don’t abruptly cut pc’s Comm.)

A true fact is that ARC always must precede an ARC Break.

Also ARC = Understanding and Time.

A = Space and the willingness to occupy the same space of.

R = Mass or agreement.

C = Energy or Recognition.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.ei.rd
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED






CLASS VIII LECTURE
27 September 1968


** 6809C27 SO Class VIII-4: Standard Tech Defined

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 28 SEPTEMBER 1968
Remimeo
Class VIII


DIANETICS


The most incredible part of the auditing period preceding Sept 1968 was that auditors, calling themselves such, actually could forget, mislay and abandon secondary and engram running as a skill.

A secondary or engram can key out or key in at will. They don’t stay out, which makes a release a release. The very definition of Release is based on this fact. A Clear has nothing to key in again. A Release does.

When you only straight wire a secondary or engram THAT IS RECURRING (restims because of environment) you don’t get a lasting result.

This lifetime secondaries and engrams should be nun to F/N, not coaxed to F/N by a recall process.

Anybody can run a secondary or engram. It’s pie.

The only liability in running them in chains was omitted from the Dianetic Auditor’s handbook for some reason. It’s in Book One.

IF A SECONDARY OR ENGRAM GOES SOLID OR WON’T DISCHARGE, you find the earlier similar one and run it. Give it only two times through if it is going solid, then try earlier. Finally Basic will emerge and run cleanly.

Miracles are contained in this action. But a modern (pre Sept 68) auditor never thinks to check it even. They just straight wire or get it recalled to F/N. And think they’ve done it.

A recent death loss will not really resolve unless the secondary is run properly and completely.

There are 2 F/Ns available—one by key-out, one by erasure. Don’t run a keying out process to F/N and then run it. Run it in the first place if it’s a serious recent
secondary or engram.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.rd
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED




CLASS VIII LECTURES
28—29 September 1968


** 6809C28 SO Class VIII-5: The Standard Green Form and Rudiments

** 6809C29 S0 Class VIII-6: Mechanics of Techniques and Study Matter

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 30 SEPTEMBER 1968

Remimeo L&N Chksht
Class VIII
(Reissued 8 May 1972 with
extended distribution)



LISTS


When doing a correction of lists in a folder to get the correct item and clean the folder up, these rules apply—

1. Get one F/N per type of list. Example: 3 S & Ds type U are in the folder—you get the item on the first S & D and an F/N—leave the other two.

2. You can get F/Ns on S & D types WSU, Rem Bs old, new and environment. But only on each type.

3. To go for any more on one type is dangerous and should not be done.

This whole procedure should be done only if ordered by the C/S.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder




LRH:jp.nt.rd
Copyright © 1968, 1972
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


[The original mimeo distribution of this HCO B was simply “Class VIII”.]












CLASS VIII LECTURES
30 September—2 October 1968

** 6809C30 SO Class VIII-7: Case Supervisor Do’s and Don’ts—
The Total Rationale and Background of Auditing

** 6810C01 SO Class VIII-8: Certainty of Standard Tech

** 6810C02 SO Class VIII-9: Laws of Listing and Nulling

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 3 OCTOBER 1968

Remimeo
Dianetic
Course Students
Level 0 Students

NEW RUDIMENTS QUESTIONS


These questions are of interest to Dianetic and Level 0 Students. They were submitted by SO Cl VI Students while studying Level 0 materials when the New Rudiments were issued cancelling Model Session HCO B 3 July 65.

Q. Are we allowed as Level 0 Auditors to audit a pc from ARC S/W through 0 in one session?

A. Yes. ARC Straight Wire, Secondaries to Engrams and Level 0. All in one session.

Q. Do we do new ruds at beginning of ARC S/W and again at Level 0?

A. Only when a break of session has intervened.

Q. Is the current Model Session—

1. This is the session
2. New Ruds l, 2, 3
3. This is the process—clear commands
4. That’s it / F/N?


A. Yes, pretty well.

Q. What are we permitted to use as Level 0 Auditors when doing the new rudiments to handle ARC breaks, PTPs, M/W/Hs?

A. Itsa and earlier similar Itsa—only.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:jp.ei.cden
Copyright ©1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


[This HCO B was cancelled by HCO B 17 June 1970, Issue III, Cancellation of HCO Bs that Conflict with Full Lower Grades, which was not written by LRH and has been cancelled by BTB 10 December 1974, Issue VII, Cancellation of Bulletins-1970. BTB 10 December 1974, Issue V, Cancellation of Bulletins-1963-1968, confirms the above HCO B 3 October 1968 as cancelled.]



CLASS VIII LECTURE
3 October 1968

** 6810C03 SO Class VIII-10: Assists

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 4 OCTOBER 1968

Class IV

RUDS


Pcs (and students) often don't know one rudiment from another. They call PTPs ARC Brks and all sorts of weird answers. ARC Brks become PTPs, etc.

They do NOT KNOW what the question is.

Therefore on a green pc or student it is best to clear the commands.

And it is VITAL to teach what these mean and do them in clay on an VIII Course.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:jp.ts
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED





HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 7 OCTOBER 1968
Class VIII


ARC BREAK NEEDLE


If you run ARC Breaks with the pc nattery which means really, M/W/Hs, you will for sure get an ARC Break needle and Bad Indicators.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.ts
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED






CLASS VIII LECTURE
7 October 1968

** 6810C07 SO Class VIII-11: Assessments and Listing Basics
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 7 OCTOBER 1968
Class VIII
(SH, ASHO)
ASSESSMENT

Assessment means the locating on a prepared list, one item.

Listing and Nulling means the pc lists.

The laws of listing and nulling apply only to LISTING and nulling. It IS auditing.

The actions of assessment do not apply to listing and nulling and never have.

Assessment is from a prepared list. It was done around 1960. It still is used. It has its own actions.

But as the prepared lists as in Pre-have become bulky, I then developed a NEW action where the pc listed.

DO NOT apply the rules of assessment as in the E-Meter book to Listing and Nulling.

These are two different actions entirely.

The key is that a list for assessment is always from a list prepared by the auditor or from an HCO B as in “7 resistive cases”.

S & Ds, Remedy Bs, etc, are LISTED by the pc and follow the LAWS of listing and nulling.

This is assessment, a list prepared by the C/S or auditor, not the pc.

To get a clue to what happened, the C/S prepares a list:

Lions X
Big Game / X
Cats X
Felines / X
Tigers X
Bearers X
Trucks X
Elephants X
Killing F / LF BD
Camping X

Then the auditor nulls it to ONE item.

This is then prepchecked or done on an L1 as a subject.

When you list and null the pc gives the list.

Who got shot? Me X X
Joe X X
Bearers F / / X
Elephants X X
Tigers LF BD / F X

The auditor nulls this (Xes and second action noted).

TWO items are now reading so the auditor EXTENDS the list-

Ext
______________

IND The White Hunter F / LF BD
The Dog X


And then the auditor renulls the WHOLE list (second X, etc) and only one item stays in which is a complete list. That is the item. It is given to pc.


LRH :jp.ei.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1968 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

[This HCO B was revised by HCO B 20 August 1970, Two Complete Differences-Assessment Listing and Nulling, which is cancelled by BTB 20 August 1970R, Revised and Reissued 19 August 1974, same title.]



HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 8 OCTOBER 1968
Class VIII

ASSESSMENT: LX1


When an item assesses out, it is assessed on the preclear’s own definition.

You don’t look up what assesses out, except when a preclear does not understand the item on a list. Then you clean the misunderstood and REASSESS as the misunderstood cooked the list.

Looking up an assessed item from an LX1 acts as an invalidation. LX1 items must not be invalidated as LX1 uncovers a sort of invalidation chain.

However, if you have assessed an item and then find that the preclear does not understand it, then get the word defined and renull the list.

In running any item found by assessing from a prepared list, never get the preclear to define it unless he does not understand it whereupon you have to clear the word and reassess the list. If you find it and the preclear does not query its meaning, do not then get the preclear to define it. If you do get him to define it, the process being used with the item will not work too well.

In running recall on an LX1 item, it is not necessary to have the preclear run it aloud if the preclear is doing the command. Running recall in this fashion is not a comm process.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:jp.rd
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard [Original distribution was “Class VIII, Confidential”; it is no
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED longer a confidential issue.]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 8 OCTOBER 1968
Remimeo
Case Supervisor Hat


CASE SUPERVISOR—FOLDER HANDLING


Analyzing Folders

Go back in the folder to the session where the Preclear was running well and come forward from it doing a folder error summary.

Reviewing Folders

In reviewing a folder, the first thing to do is to look at the CS to see if it was done

Use the Summary Sheet to get the Auditor’s attitude.

Use the Auditor’s Report Form to get the time of processes.

Read and take all your data from Worksheets and compare it to and see that CS was complied with and ensure Standard Tech was applied.

If you can’t read the reports, send it back to have the Auditor over-print illegible words. Never try to case supervise (CS) an illegible worksheet as you’ll only run into headaches.

The After Session Examiner’s Report gives you the first clue of how suspicious you should be in examining the folder and whether or not auditing reports contain falsities.
Standard Tech

You’re never led by anything into departing from Standard Tech. The only reason it doesn’t work is that it hasn’t been applied.

The main question of a Case Supervisor is:

WAS IT APPLIED?

If you follow this exactly, you’ll never miss.


LRH:jp.ei.rd L. RON HUBBARD
copyright © 1968 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED



** 6810C08 SO Class VIII-12: More on Basics
** 6810C09 SO Class VIII-13: Ethics and Case Supervision
** 6810C10 SO Class VIII-14: Auditor Attitude and the Bank
** 6810C11 SO Class VIII-15: Auditor Additives, Lists and Case Supervising
** 6810C12 SO Class VIII-16: Standard Tech
** 6810C13 SO Class VIII-17: The Basics and Simplicities of Standard Tech

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 14 OCTOBER 1968R
REVISED 1 JANUARY 1976
Remimeo
Auditor 43
Class VIII

THE AUDITOR’S CODE


In celebration of the 100% gains attainable by Standard Tech.

I hereby promise as an Auditor to follow the Auditor’s Code.

1. I promise not to evaluate for the preclear or tell him what he should think about his case in session.

2. I promise not to invalidate the preclear’s case or gains in or out of session.

3. I promise to administer only Standard Tech to a preclear in the standard way.

4. I promise to keep all auditing appointments once made.

5. I promise not to process a preclear who has not had sufficient rest and who is physically tired.

6. I promise not to process a preclear who is improperly fed or hungry.

7. I promise not to permit a frequent change of Auditors.

8. I promise not to sympathize with a preclear but to be effective.

9. I promise not to let the preclear end session on his own determinism but to finish off those cycles I have begun.

10. I promise never to walk off from a preclear in session.

11. I promise never to get angry with a preclear in session.

12. I promise to run every major case action to a floating needle.

13. I promise never to run any one action beyond its floating needle.

14. I promise to grant beingness to the preclear in session.

15. I promise not to mix the processes of Scientology with other practices except when the preclear is physically ill and only medical means will serve.

16. I promise to maintain Communication with the preclear and not to cut his comm or permit him to overrun in session.

17. I promise not to enter comments, expressions or enturbulence into a session that distract a preclear from his case.

18. I promise to continue to give the preclear the process or auditing command when needed in the session.

19. I promise not to let a preclear run a wrongly understood command.

20. I promise not to explain, justify or make excuses in session for any Auditor mistakes whether real or imagined.

21. I promise to estimate the current case state of a preclear only by Standard Case Supervision data and not to diverge because of some imagined difference in the case.

22. I promise never to use the secrets of a preclear divulged in session for punishment or personal gain.

23. I promise to see that any fee received for processing is refunded following the policies of the Claims Verification Board, if the preclear is dissatisfied and demands it within three months after the processing, the only condition being that he may not again be processed or trained.

24. I promise not to advocate Scientology only to cure illness or only to treat the insane, knowing well it was intended for spiritual gain.

25. I promise to cooperate fully with the legal organizations of Dianetics and Scientology as developed by L. Ron Hubbard in safeguarding the ethical use and practice of the subject according to the basics of Standard Tech.

26. I promise to refuse to permit any being to be physically injured, violently damaged, operated on or killed in the name of “mental treatment”.

27. I promise not to permit sexual liberties or violation of the mentally unsound.

28. I promise to refuse to admit to the ranks of practitioners any being who is insane.



Auditor:__________________________

Date: ____________________________

Witness: Place: ___________________________


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder



LRH:nt.rd
Copyright © 1968, 1976
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

[The 1 January 1976 revision changed item 23 and added items 26, 27 and 28 which had earlier been issued as HCOPL 2 November 1968, Auditor’s Code-Add to Pol Ltr 14th October AD18.]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 14 OCTOBER 1968

Remimeo


METER POSITION


YOU MUST NEVER NEVER NEVER HAVE YOUR METER IN A POSITION WHERE THE PRECLEAR CAN READ THE TA.

To do so can cause the pc worry about his TA position and take his attention off his case.

It violates Clause 17 of the Auditor’s Code.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH :jp.ei.rd
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED



HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 14 OCTOBER 1968
Issue II
Remimeo


DEFINITION OF RECALL


The definition of Recall as given in the Scientology Dictionary is incorrect.

Recall means just that. It is for present time remembering something that happened in the past. It is not re-experiencing it, re-living it or re-running it.

Recall does not mean going back to when it happened. It simply means that you are in present time, thinking of, remembering, putting your attention on something that happened in the past-all done from PRESENT TIME.

Returning is the word used to go back and re-experience an incident.


LRH:ei.rd L. RON HUBBARD
copyright © 1968 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


** 6810C14 SO Class VIII-18: The New Auditor’s Code

** 6810C15 SO Class VIII-19: An Evaluation of Examination—
Answers and Data on Standard Tech

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 16 OCTOBER 1968

Remimeo
Supervisor’s
Course
SUPERVISOR’S DUTY


The duty of the Supervisor of a Course consists of:

The Communication of the data of Scientology to the student so as to achieve acceptance, duplication and application of the technology in a standard and effective manner.


LRH:ja.an.ls.ei.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1968 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED



HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 18 OCTOBER 1968
Remimeo
SH
ASHO
AOs
Orgs
PROCESSING SEQUENCE


The correct order in which Sub-zeros, Grades and OT Sections are administered is:

ARC Straight Wire
Secondaries
Engrams
Grade 0
Grade I
Grade II
Grade III
Grade IV
Grade V
Grade VA
Grade VI
Clearing Course
OT I
OT II
OT III
OT IV
OT V
OT VI

LRH:jp.ei.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1968 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 20 OCTOBER 1968

Class VIII

THE PURPOSE OF CLASS VIII


In Class VIII Tech no longer is hopefully applied. Auditing is no longer gauged only against result. There is no more “auditing is what you get away with” at VIII.

A flawless, invariable administration of processes with flawless TRs, using ONLY the basics, is Class VIII.

The purpose is to administer Tech without variables, using only highly standardized processes and actions, using only a flawless TR approach, all within the new Auditor’s Code.

The impact of this action produces 100% results. It produces fantastically fast results. And it produces more result than has ever before been attained.

Using the Class VIII standard C/S approach there are no bogged cases.

The first thing a student on Class VIII has to learn is that there IS an exact right way to do auditing, an exact right way to solve cases.

If he grasps this, can do this, can select the correct VIII C/S and get it exactly applied, the result can be achieved.

It is too simple for many to grasp at once.

The ultimate comedy is a student who arrives at course offering “improvements”. He is confessing that he’s never applied Scientology straight and has often failed on pcs.

The cycle of the decline of an auditor is: (a) he fails to apply the missing bit of Standard Tech, (b) he then has an “unsolvable” case before him, (c) he then dreams up some unusual solution, (d) every so often his unusual solution improves that one pc a bit, (e) he now tries to apply it to all pcs, (f) he thereafter consistently fails.

A student also has a cycle of decline: (a) he recognizes his basics, (b) someone invalidates his correct data, (c) he ceases to see what the basics are, (d) he muddles along.

In Class VIII we bring the basics back in and reinforce them until the auditor will do them and nothing else.

From this we get a “magical” high velocity case gain curve upwards on all cases.

The beginning Class VIII auditor often has the idea that the result of the session is what he will be gauged by. This is NOT true. We know what the result of Standard Tech will be when flawlessly administered. We are not “waiting to see”. We are not experimenting. There are no different or difficult pcs.

The student on VIII is gauged by the flawless handling of the session and his admin. If the pc does not arrive at the examiner in good shape then we know

(a) The auditor goofed

(b) The TRs stank

(c) The Auditor’s Code was probably not followed

(d) The auditing report is probably false

(e) The C/S was probably botched up in being given

(f) The session control was bad.

You see we know what Standard Tech does. It’s up to the auditor to learn to be UNCOMPROMISINGLY STANDARD.

When we have brought about this frame of mind and standard rendition in the auditor we have made a Class VIII. Until we do, we have not.

The purpose of the course, then, is to produce an uncompromising zealot for Standard Tech whose reality is such that he will not do or tolerate sloppy rendition.

This can be defeated by lousy beginning auditing on the course, by an incompetent Supervisor who invalidates the students’ basics or by a C/S who fails to use Standard Tech C/S on a course.

To throw a Class VIII Course out of line and defeat its purpose while supervising or C/Sing gives an automatic Treason assignment.

People who really don’t understand it are in a muddle of confusion anyway. This blows off as basics go in. You just keep putting basics in and they get unconfused.

There is something here in Standard Tech. It is the exact Auditor’s Code, the exact TRs, the exact processes, the 100% result. It can be learned, it can be done.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder




LRH :jp.ts
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 21 OCTOBER 1968
Remimeo

FLOATING NEEDLE

Floating needles (F/Ns) are the end phenomena for any process or action with the pc on two cans. It is one of the most important rediscoveries made in years. It was known but lost by auditors.

It is the idle uninfluenced movement of the needle on the dial without any patterns or reactions in it. It can be as small as 1” or as large as dial wide. It does not fall or drop to the right of the dial. It moves to the left at the same speed as it moves to the right. It is observed on a Mark V E-Meter calibrated with the TA between 2.0 and 3.0 with GIs in on the pc. It can occur after a cognition blowdown of the TA or just moves into floating. The pc may or may not voice the cognition.

It, by the nature of the E-Meter reading below the awareness of the thetan, occurs just before the pc is aware of it. So to give a “That’s it” on the occurrence of the F/N can prevent the pc from getting the cognition.

A “floating needle” occurring above 3.0 or below 2.0 on a calibrated Mark V E-Meter with the pc on 2 cans is an ARC Broken Needle. Watch for the pc’s indicators. An ARC Broken Needle can occur between 2.0 and 3.0 where bad indicators are apparent.

Pcs and pre-OTs OFTEN signal an F/N with a “POP” to the left and the needle can actually even describe a pattern much like a Rock Slam. Meters with lighter movements do “pop” to the left and R/S wildly for a moment.

One does not sit and study and be sure of an “F/N”. It swings or pops, he lets the pc cognite and then indicates the F/N to the pc preventing overrun.

When one OVERRUNS an F/N or misses one, the TA will start to climb. The thing to do is briefly rehabilitate it (rehab it) by indicating it has been by-passed and so regain it.

The F/N does not last very long in releasing. The thing to do is end the process off NOW. Don’t give another command.

It coincides with other “end phenomena” of processes but is senior to them.

An F/N can be in normal range and still be an ARC Brk Needle. The thing which determines a real F/N is Good Indicators. Bad Indicators always accompany an ARC Break Needle.

On an ARC Brk Needle, check for an ARC Brk. If the TA then climbs, it was a real F/N so you rehab it quickly.

A one hand electrode sometimes obscures an F/N and gives false TA. If used, use
higher sensitivity and get the TA from 2 cans when needed.


LRH:ja.ei.cden L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1968 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

[HCO B 7 May 1969, Issue V, Floating Needle, is a revision of this HCO B for use on the Dianetics Course only.]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 22 OCTOBER 1968R
REVISED 31 JANUARY 1975
Remimeo
Class VIII
TEACHING THE CLASS VIII

As the teaching of basic data restimulates confusions which are then dramatized by throwing the course off line, the teaching of the Class VIII as follows is hugely vital.

The teaching of the SO VIIIs is laid down on these simple principles.

1. The data on tapes and Bulletins is studied without alter-is, interpretation or addition by the SO VIII student.

2. Well done and other folders are studied by the individual student.

3. No lecturing or additional interpretation by Supervisors.

4. The student audits only when he has completely passed on 1. and 2. above. He is then given a rope and is permitted to audit. He must not audit before he has completed his checksheet at least once.

5. Things the student is weak on are done in clay.

6. The student is disciplined for bad auditing goofs. He may also be taken off auditing and made to do his checksheet again.

7. The student has to have well dones on sessions and 100% on his final in order to pass.

8. Any student question is answered by referring to the HCO B, folder or tape.

9. A rigid invariable schedule is precisely adhered to.

10. Checksheets and tapes and folders are gone through in the sequence laid down by the checksheet and not randomly out of sequence.

If this is made difficult then the programme must be cut back to the bare bones of the original above.

The teaching of standard tech must also be standard. Therefore the above MUST be adhered to completely.


LRH: rs.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright ©1968, 1975 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 28 OCTOBER 1968
Class VIII
Dianetic OT EXTERIOR
Internship

The datum is ONLY—when a pc goes exterior you cease to audit or he will go back in.

Audit again when he goes back in.


LRH :jp.ka.rd L RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1968 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 1 NOVEMBER 1968

Class IV
Class VIII

HIGH TA


There are TWO methods of taking a TA down that is HIGH. 4.0 is a high TA.

One is the routine process of “What has been overrun?”, HCOB 17 Sept ‘68. It is not used as a rudiment. It is for chronic high TAs.

There is another one also. It is quite different and is run differently. It is not a listing process.

It is the simple question “Has anything been overrun?”

It is used at session start or after a break when the TA is found to have risen mysteriously to 4.0 or above.

It requires a clever auditor. First, he notices the TA is at 4.0. Then he gets the pc to answer “Has anything been overrun?” If the pc says something and the TA comes down, that’s it. The TA may only come down to 3.5. But that’s it.

Then one puts in a rud. Unless of course the answer to “Has anything been O/R?” was “Ruds” or “Asking for ARC Brks”. One would then indicate this as BPC and the TA should come on down.

This action is just getting the TA down so one can audit.

Don’t expect ruds to pull down a 4.0 TA.

And NEVER start a main action with the TA high expecting the main action will get it down. The main action hasn’t got it up.

Overrun of the main action or of any action past F/N will cause the TA to rise. One knows why that is and simply indicates the by-pass of an F/N and down comes the TA.

Calling for “Has anything been overrun?” is VERY simple. You don’t ask “How many times, etc.” You just get it spotted and down comes the TA.

If the pc says something in answer and the TA doesn’t come down, the auditor says, “No”. The pc searches about and gives another. If it’s not that the auditor says “No”. The pc says something else and down comes the TA and the auditor says, “Good, that’s the overrun.” And then the auditor carries on with his session actions.

The commonest cause of a TA flying up in a break is the process went F/N out of session and the intention of the auditor to continue it sends it up.

Note a Real HOT Auditor who really knows his basics can float a needle on this with one shot.


LRH:jp.rw.cden L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1968 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


[In the original issue, the second sentence of the second paragraph was: “It is a formal listing process.” This has been deleted per HCO B 10 December 1968, Correction, which also states, “ ‘What has been overrun?’ is used to handle the chronically high TA and is run as per HCO B Sept 17, 1968, Overrun Process.”—LRH. The only other text in HCO B 10 December 1968 adds “Class IV” to the distribution of both the above and HCO B 17 September 1968.]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 2 NOVEMBER I 968R
REVISED 31 JANUARY 1975

Remimeo
Class VIII
CASE SUPERVISOR
CLASS VIII
THE BASIC PROCESSES


There are several processes which are unlimited. These are very valuable to the Case Supervisor.

There are many processes which are limited. These must be traced as not having been done before the C/S orders them done.


LIMITED PROCESSES

The basic Grade Processes tend to produce Overrun if repeated once done. This is very true of Power and R6EW.

Rehab of Grade Processes can be done far too often. Rehab of Grades should be limited to once just before Power and once in the OT IV Rundown. And that’s it.

S & Ds are more or less limited to one of each type.

About one Remedy B on Dianetics and Scientology and one New Style is about it.

In general a list question for listing and nulling is a one-shot affair. Lists are very fast actions requiring skilled auditing and should not be handed out carelessly.

As a rule any of the above are limited because when repeated they can drive the TA up into overrun.

UNLIMITED ACTIONS

The most unlimited action is the running of engrams. So long as one uses different subjects one has an unlimited action, the only limitation being the subject of the engrams. This should not be repeated. A Case Supervisor only has to be alert that the chain on the subject has not been run.

This is fortunate because running engrams also produces the most case gain.

Secondaries rank with engrams on this unlimited sphere except that secondaries depend for their force on the engrams underlying them and if you run too many secondaries the pc drops into engrams anyway.

Recall processes (where recall means only remembering) are unlimited, the only limitation being the subject. You can only run “recall Subject A” for each flow. Then you have to have another subject.

There are to be very exact three flows for each Recall subject, three flows for the same subject as secondaries, three flows for the same subject as engrams.

Let us take “eating” as a fictitious subject for example. Here is the practical list of obtainable F/Ns.

RECALL

1. Recall yourself eating.

2. Recall another eating.

3. Recall another (watching, making) another eat.

SECONDARY

1. Find and run a secondary or chain of being emotional about eating.

2. Find and run a secondary or chain of another being emotional about eating.

3. Find and run a secondary or chain of another being emotional about another eating.

ENGRAM

1. Find and run an engram (moment of pain and unconsciousness) or chain of being eaten.

2. Find and run an engram (moment of pain and unconsciousness) or chain of eating another.

3. Find and run an engram (moment of pain and unconsciousness) or chain of another eating another.

You could order or do all these on one pc. (Providing “eating” read well on the meter in the first place.)

But to run a new “Recall” or “Secondary” or “Engram” you would have to avoid the subject already run. You’d have to find a new subject.

These three flows and three actions are possible on any one subject that reads. Each is taken to floating needle. The TA would only rise if you overran any of the one actions or if you again tried to get it done on a new C/S action.

The use of this is interesting. We can find that the pc in some old C/S was run through his operation and still has a somatic. A skilled Case Supervisor knows he can get rid of the somatic by running the remaining flows. It is common to run the motivator engram and find the pc still has a somatic. So you run the overt on the same subject. If he still has it you can run the third flow of another doing it to another.

These lingering somatics used to be a bad thing, and were often a mystery. The engram (or recall) went to F/N but the pc still had a somatic. The answer is of course to order the other flow run. And the somatic will vanish.

The dub-in case has a wholly one-sided flow and is trying to run the other side! He will obsessively seek to run the opposite flow to the one he should be running. He can have too heavy a “motivator” and be seeking wildly to run false overts to explain having been hit so hard. So he dubs in overts.

Or he has committed some wild overt, intentional or unintentional and is trying to get false motivators. This can even go into the third flow where a person sees a man hit and tries to run being hit or hitting whereas he wasn’t a party to either.

(You solve this by assessment when you spot dub-in, or just by observing which side is dubbed. You order the other flows run or at least checked to see where the real charge lies.)

These actions, then, are limited only by subject.

This does not mean that you can’t get a high TA suddenly on them. You can accidentally order the same subject as was ordered once before.

Or wrong ownership can cause the TA to act up in a peculiar way that looks like an overrun. However, earlier incidents of a similar kind usually get this handled on down to F/N. In fact this crops up and is handled on lower grade pcs more often than you think.

The PREPCHECK is another unlimited action. Once more it is the subject that limits it.

Not in practice but in theory, on one subject you could Prepcheck, run 3 recalls, three secondaries and three engrams each to F/N. However it gets dicey in practice as the pc protests sometimes.

And it is protest of doing it too often after all that pushes the TA up.

Havingness is probably not limited.

The ruds questions if not done in the same day tend to be unlimited. The TA going up on ruds is pc protest coming from cleaned cleans or false reads. Or he gave you his ARC Brks and now you’re asking for more. Ruds, therefore are handled in moderation always. You don’t for instance “fly a rud” when the pc comes into session with an F/N. The TA will go up in protest or down in overwhelm.

If you put in all ruds to F/N, waited an hour and put in all ruds to F/N again the TA would either soar or drop below 2.0, depending on how the pc looked at it.

Assessing prepared lists is unlimited so long as the items are varied.

Doing L1C or L4BR or other such lists is unlimited SO LONG AS YOU DON’T BYPASS THE FIRST F/N ON THAT LIST IN ANY ONE SESSION.

The GREEN FORM is of this nature. You can do a large number of “GFs” on pcs providing they are each time done to the first F/N. And providing you don’t permit any listing and nulling. And providing enough time has gone by to let new data be available. 2 GFs in one day would be fatal. Two in a week risky.

The Itsa Earlier Itsa approach to ruds and GF is safe and in general Itsa Earlier Itsa is unlimited.

As soon as you let an auditor introduce any other process than Itsa Earlier Itsa on a form you get problems as he is stacking up potential overruns on limited processes. If each time an auditor had a Problem reading on a pc he ran a process, you’d soon have an overrun situation going. Itsa Earlier Itsa is unlimited.

ARCU, CDEINR appears to be unlimited for ARC Brks.

“WHO nearly found out” is unlimited for Missed W/Hs. But have a care here. In the OT sections pre-OTs often have plain withholds that have no overt connected with them, so withholds is always okay to use especially “In the last session_____” or “In Auditing_____ “.

The approach here is:

“In auditing has there been an ARC Brk?” ARCU CDEINR.
“In auditing has there been a problem?” (not “PTP”) Itsa Earlier Itsa.
“In auditing has there been a withhold?” Itsa Earlier Itsa.

Suppress and “Has anyone said you had a_____when you didn’t” are always used in Rudiments, past sessions or current.

You can only fly all ruds with the use of Suppress and False reads (“Has anybody said____”).

Auditors who have to get into GFs in “flying a rud” either don’t know an F/N when they see one or haven’t any skill in using Suppress and False.

These are all unlimited actions with the reservations as noted.

THE PROBLEM OF THE C/S

The main problem of a C/S comes about in trying to use the key law:

“Reality is proportional to the amount of charge off.”

A fat review folder, a rollercoaster case, a pc who never gets out of this life, a pc who runs stubbing his toe yesterday as an engram, a pc who dubs in, are alike overcharged cases.

To “send” one over the top requires lots of light charge off.

The worse off the case, the lighter you handle it. Older practices matched a violent case with violence and never did win at all. They wound up with murder as the “best possible solution”.

The problem is to get off lots of charge without going very deep on heavily charged cases. Then they eventually come out right.

You hold off main actions as long as you can and just work to get charge off. Then you eventually get deep enough to really shove a major action at them.

For instance, by carefully preparing a case for a “full IV rundown” with lots of preparatory actions you get an OT every time.

It seldom occurs to people that a lot of cases get the highest gains on the TRs of auditing only and the lower grade processes are far too steep and when run on them the pc on Communication Grade Zero does not stop stammering or doesn’t cease to be shy. Zero was run on him too soon.

You see a fabulous gain on some person doing TR 0. Or “just talking to an auditor to F/N”.

Study blows charge.

Some persons (the insane) would have to rest for a week or two to stand up to a mild chat.

Some other person could start at Grade IV and do just fine.

So the only variable a C/S has is how charged up is a case. The cases all react to the same things, the same actions. But they differ in the amount of “charge”.

Determining and lightening the charge is the problem of the C/S.

There are Personality, IQ and E-Meter tests that give an idea of how charged up the case may be.

The thick folder, the times in Review, the thickness of a single session report are of great use.

These things only say that some cases are more charged up than others.

So the C/S has the actually infinite variety of ways he can apply the FEW actions described above in unlimited processes.

Then he has the QUALITY of the charge he can remove. He can do 7 cases over and over so long as he removes the last one run from the new list to be assessed (as the list would F/N on the item just handled).

He can comb the area of a pc’s environ and with a synonym dictionary compile dozens of different lists. It isn’t hard to find what recurring problems a pc has. These can go into lists for assessment and Prepcheck or II or each to F/N of 3 recalls or even 3 engrams on higher level cases.

Think processes are also unlimited. And have 3 flows.

There may be other such unlimited actions.

A C/S is also limited by what his auditors can do. And is wise to stay within their training framework.

So you see what’s standard. The ACTIONS, the Auditing. The subjects used in these ways can be very wide.

All you really have to be sure of is that the subject reads on the meter and that the way it’s handled on the pc doesn’t overwhelm the pc and that’s the size of it.

The Grades are already laid out like a carpet.

You set up the case to run them.

If the case is set up for the Grades then you really get wins wins wins.

Some Case Supervisor, dazzled by the vast scope you can get from a pc being set up for OT IV overlooks the fact that he can set up pcs for wins on ARC Straight Wire that will look very dazzling to the pc.

If the auditor flunks a C/S and can’t get it going, the repair action would be (for non-rud sessions) one of the following—

1. Assess Upset, Problem, Not disclosing something, Unable to say something, Ignored, Didn’t understand. (Be careful not to get an item because pc couldn’t dig it.)

2. Handle what read with Itsa Earlier Itsa

or

1. Assess Auditors, Auditing, Dianetics, Scientology, Sessions, Organization, Books.

2. Prepcheck

or

1. Have pc explain why he doesn’t want auditing and gently slide into Itsa Earlier
Itsa

or

1. Assess 7 cases in an expanded list of each rud, omit grades or 1. Green Form to 1st F/N.

Be sure questions phrased so pc understands them.

So far as Sub-Zeroes go, you have to be very ready to send the pc to Review for the remedies. And you have to be ready to realize that each of these Sub-Zeroes is a grade and that some pcs just aren’t set up for them.

So you do your review actions before the pc gets in over his head.

This is where the Personality Analysis, IQ, and meter test are invaluable.

The worse off these come out, the more you work to set the pc up.

It even goes down as low as:

1. Pc to handle environment before auditing

or

1. Pc to eat better for a week

or

1. Pc to rest a week before first session or

1. Pc to take care of physical illness or injury before auditing followed by, some time later, 1. Notice that object to F/N, or 1. Have pc find something in room that is really real to him to F/N.

-----------

So you see that all auditing is built of the same stuff—the Code, the Actions, the smooth TRs.

Standard C/Sing is the use of these actions. Setting pc up for the Grades.

A C/S can appear very clever indeed. His cleverness is composed of just the things you find here and in the way he finds ways to use them.

He orders auditing in accordance with where the pc is on the grades. He hoards his grades until he is sure they fly the pc. And that is good C/Sing.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH: rs.rd
Copyright © 1968, 1975
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED











LRH TAPE LECTURE
1968 (specific date unknown)


** 6811C .. SPEC LECT Ron’s Journal 1968

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 9 NOVEMBER 1968
Remimeo
Academy
SHSBC
CLEARING COMMANDS
ALL LEVELS


You never let the pc off the cans in Standard Tech.

The pc can go release on the subject of the process without the process being run.

Therefore, while clearing commands never let the pc off the cans. The Auditor opens the dictionary to the correct page for the pc to read.

(This HCO B does not alter or change HCO B 14 Nov 65, “Clearing Commands”.)


LRH:ldm.ei.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1968 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

[This HCO B is amended by BTB 2 May 1972R, Revised and Reissued 10 June 1974, Clearing Commands, which gives the rules of clearing commands. ]







HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 10 DECEMBER 1968
Class IV
Class VIII
CORRECTION


HCO B 1 Nov 1968, High TA, and HCO B 17 Sept 1968, Overrun Process—Mimeo Distribution is to be corrected to read:

Class IV
Class VIII.

HCO B 1 Nov 1968, High TA, para 2, 2nd sentence “It is a formal listing process” is to be deleted.

“What has been overrun?” is used to handle the chronically high TA and is run as per HCO B 17 Sept 1968, Overrun Process.


LRH: pq.idm.rw.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1968 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 15 DECEMBER 1968

Remimeo

(Amends HCO Bulletin of 9 January 1968, “List L4A”)
(ITEM 6 CORRECTED 12 FEBRUARY 1969)



L4A
FOR ASSESSMENT OF ALL LISTING ERRORS



PC’s NAME AUDITOR DATE__________



1. DO YOU HAVE AN ARC BREAK? (ARE YOU UPSET)
(If the question reads, establish if the upset is due to a break in AFFINITY, REALITY, COMMUNICATION or UNDERSTANDING, by assessment. Indicate what read to the Pc. Take the one found and fit into the following buttons, CURIOUS ABOUT_____, DESIRED_____, ENFORCED_____INHIBITED_____. Indicate the by-passed charge to the Pc. Check ARC Break question, if reads, ask for earlier similar ARC Break.)

2. DO YOU HAVE A PRESENT TIME PROBLEM?
(If this reads, handle with Itsa earlier similar Itsa.)

3. IS A LIST INCOMPLETE?
(If reads, find out what list and complete it, give the Pc his item.)

4. HAS A LIST BEEN LISTED TOO LONG?
(If so, find what list and get the item off from it by nulling with suppress, the nulling question being: “On____has anything been suppressed?”, for each item on the overlong list. Give the Pc his item.)

5. HAVE WE TAKEN THE WRONG ITEM OFF A LIST?
(If this reads, put in Suppress and Invalidated on the list and null as in 4. above and find the right item and give to the Pc.)

6. HAS A RIGHT ITEM BEEN DENIED YOU?
(If this reads, find out what it was and clean it up with Suppress and Invalidate and give it to the Pc.)

7. HAS AN ITEM BEEN PUSHED OFF ON YOU YOU DIDN’T WANT?
(If so, find it and get in Suppress and Invalidate on it and tell Pc it wasn’t his item and continue the original action to find the correct item.)

8. HAD AN ITEM NOT BEEN GIVEN YOU?
(If reads handle as in 6.)

9. HAVE YOU INVALIDATED A CORRECT ITEM FOUND?
(If so rehab the item and find out why the Pc invalidated it or if somebody else did it, clean it up and give it to Pc again.)

10. HAVE YOU THOUGHT OF ITEMS THAT YOU DID NOT PUT ON THE LIST?
(If so, add them to the correct list. Renull the whole list and give the Pc the item.)

11. HAVE YOU BEEN LISTING TO YOURSELF OUT OF SESSION?
(If so, find out what question and try to write a list from recall and get an item and give it to the Pc.)

12. HAVE YOU BEEN GIVEN SOMEBODY ELSE’S ITEM?
(If so, indicate to the Pc this was not his item. Don’t TRY to find whose it was.)

13. HAS YOUR ITEM BEEN GIVEN TO SOMEONE ELSE?
(If so, find if possible what item it was and give it to the Pc. Don’t try to identify the “somebody else”.)

14. HAS A RELEASE POINT BEEN BY-PASSED ON LISTING?
(If so, indicate the overrun to the Pc, rehab back.)

15. HAS A RELEASE POINT BEEN BY-PASSED ON THE QUESTION ONLY?
(If so, indicate the overrun to the Pc and rehab back.)

16. HAS IT BEEN AN OVERT TO PUT AN ITEM ON A LIST?
(If so, find out what item and why.)

17. HAVE YOU WITHHELD AN ITEM FROM A LIST?
(If so, get it and add it to the list if that list is available. If not put item in the report. )

18. HAS A WITHHOLD BEEN MISSED?
(If so, get it, if descreditable ask “Who nearly found out?”)

19. HAS AN ITEM BEEN BY-PASSED?
(Locate which one.)

20. WAS A LISTING QUESTION MEANINGLESS?
(If so, find out which one and indicate to the Pc.)

21. HAS AN ITEM BEEN ABANDONED?
(If so, locate it and get it back for the Pc and give it to him.)

22. HAS AN ITEM BEEN PROTESTED?
(If so, locate it and get the protest button in on it.)

23. HAS AN ITEM BEEN ASSERTED?
(If so, locate it and get in the assert button on it.)

24. HAS AN ITEM BEEN SUGGESTED TO YOU BY ANOTHER?
(If so, get it named and the protest and refusal off.)

25. HAS AN ITEM BEEN VOLUNTEERED BY YOU AND NOT ACCEPTED?
(If so, get off the charge and give it to the Pc, or if he then changes his mind on it, go on with the listing operation.)

26. HAS THE ITEM ALREADY BEEN GIVEN?
(If so, get it back and give it again.)

27. HAS AN ITEM BEEN FOUND PREVIOUSLY?
(If so, find what it was again and give it to Pc once more.)

28. HAS AN ITEM NOT BEEN UNDERSTOOD?
(If so, work it over with buttons until Pc understands it or accepts or rejects it and go on with listing.)

29. WAS AN ITEM DIFFERENT WHEN SAID BY THE AUDITOR?
(If so, find out what the item was and give it to the Pc correctly. )

30. WAS NULLING CARRIED ON PAST THE FOUND ITEM?
(If so, go back to it and get in Suppress and Protest.)

31. HAS AN ITEM BEEN FORCED ON YOU?
(If so, get off the reject and Suppress and get the listing action completed to the right item if possible.)

32. HAS AN ITEM BEEN EVALUATED?
(If so, get off the disagreement and Protest.)

33. HAD EARLIER LISTING BEEN RESTIMULATED?
(If so, locate when and indicate the by-passed charge.)

34. HAS AN EARLIER WRONG ITEM BEEN RESTIMULATED?
(If so, find when and indicate the by-passed charge.)

35. HAS AN EARLIER ARC BREAK BEEN RESTIMULATED?
(If so, locate and indicate the fact by Itsa earlier similar Itsa.)

36. DO YOU HAVE AN ARC BREAK BECAUSE OF BEING MADE TO DO THIS?
(If so, indicate it to the Pc, check the question if reads. Get earlier similar Itsa.)

37. IS THERE SOME OTHER KIND OF BY-PASSED CHARGE?
(If so, find what and indicate it to Pc.)

38. WAS THERE NOTHING WRONG IN THE FIRST PLACE?
(If so, indicate it to Pc.)

39. HAS THE UPSET BEEN HANDLED?
(If so, indicate it to the Pc.)


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:ldm.rw.ei.cden
Copyright ©1968, 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED



[The correction of 12 February 1969 was to change the word “WRONG” to “RIGHT” in Item 6.

The above Bulletin was amended on 8 August 1970, Volume VII, page 119, and the title changed to L4B-For Assessment of All Listing Errors. This amendment changed Item 1 to “WAS THE LIST UNNECESSARY?” and Item 2 to “WAS THE ACTION DONE UNDER PROTEST?”. It also added the following: after Number 15, “ 16. HAVE YOU GONE EXTERIOR WHILE LISTING?”; after Number 36, “38. HAS THIS LIST CORRECTION BEEN OVERRUN?”; and as a last item after Number 39, “42. HAS A LIST PROCESS BEEN OVERRUN?”. The items from 16 on were renumbered to accommodate the additional items.

This List was further amended on 18 March 1971, Volume VII, page 200, with no change in the title. This amendment added an item at the beginning: “1. DID YOU FAIL TO ANSWER THE LISTING QUESTION?”. All the previous items remained unchanged except for their numbers being increased by one. The handlings for these added items were the same as is given for them in HCO B 15 December 1968 REVISED, Revised 2 June 1972, L4BR-For Assessment of All Listing Errors, which can be found in Volume VIII, page 138.

The first issue of L4 was contained in HCO B 5 July 1963, ARC Break Assessments, Volume V, page 306.]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 26 DECEMBER 1968
Remimeo


(Note: This data is turned out as an HCO B and a Pol Ltr [issued as each one] as may apply very broadly in both the OEC and Level IV or above Courses.)



THE THIRD PARTY LAW


I have for a very long time studied the causes of violence and conflict amongst individuals and nations.

If Chaldea could vanish, if Babylon turn to dust, if Egypt could become a badlands, if Sicily could have 160 prosperous cities and be a looted ruin before the year zero and a near desert ever since—and all this in SPITE of all the work and wisdom and good wishes and intent of human beings, then it must follow as the dark follows sunset that something must be unknown to Man concerning all his works and ways. And that this something must be so deadly and so pervasive as to destroy all his ambitions and his chances long before their time.

Such a thing would have to be some natural law unguessed at by himself.

And there is such a law, apparently, that answers these conditions of being deadly, unknown and embracing all activities.

The law would seem to be:

A THIRD PARTY MUST BE PRESENT AND UNKNOWN IN EVERY QUARREL FOR A CONFLICT TO EXIST.

or

FOR A QUARREL TO OCCUR, AN UNKNOWN THIRD PARTY MUST BE ACTIVE IN PRODUCING IT BETWEEN TWO POTENTIAL OPPONENTS.

or

WHILE IT IS COMMONLY BELIEVED TO TAKE TWO TO MAKE A FIGHT, A THIRD PARTY MUST EXIST AND MUST DEVELOP IT FOR ACTUAL CONFLICT TO OCCUR.

It is very easy to see that two in conflict are fighting. They are very visible. What is harder to see or suspect is that a third party existed and actively promoted the quarrel.

The usually unsuspected and “reasonable” third party, the bystander who denies any part of it is the one that brought the conflict into existence in the first place.

The hidden third party, seeming at times to be a supporter of only one side, is to be found as the instigator.

This is a useful law on many dynamics.

It is the cause of war.

-------------

One sees two fellows shouting bad names at each other, sees them come to blows. No one else is around. So they, of course, “caused the fight”. But there was a third party.

Tracing these down, one comes upon incredible data. That is the trouble. The incredible is too easily rejected. One way to hide things is to make them incredible.

Clerk A and Messenger B have been arguing. They blaze into direct conflict. Each blames the other. NEITHER ONE IS CORRECT AND SO THE QUARREL DOES NOT RESOLVE SINCE ITS TRUE CAUSE IS NOT ESTABLISHED.

One looks into such a case THOROUGHLY. He finds the incredible. The wife of Clerk A has been sleeping with Messenger B and complaining alike to both about the other.

Farmer J and Rancher K have been tearing each other to pieces for years in continual conflict. There are obvious, logical reasons for the fight. Yet it continues and does not resolve. A close search finds Banker L who, due to their losses in the fighting, is able to loan each side money, while keeping the quarrel going, and who will get their lands completely if both lose.

It goes larger. The revolutionary forces and the Russian government were in conflict in 1917. The reasons are so many the attention easily sticks on them. But only when Germany’s official state papers were captured in World War II was it revealed that Germany had promoted the revolt and financed LENIN to spark it off, even sending him into Russia in a blacked out train!

One looks over “personal” quarrels, group conflicts, national battles and one finds, if he searches, the third party, unsuspected by both combatants or if suspected at all, brushed off as “fantastic”. Yet careful documentation finally affirms it.

------------

This datum is fabulously useful.

In marital quarrels the correct approach of anyone counseling, is to get both parties to carefully search out the third party. They may come to many reasons at first. These reasons are not beings. One is looking for a third party, an actual being. When both find the third party and establish proof, that will be the end of the quarrel.

Sometimes two parties, quarreling, suddenly decide to elect a being to blame. This stops the quarrel. Sometimes it is not the right being and more quarrels thereafter occur.

Two nations at each other’s throats should each seek conference with the other to sift out and locate the actual third party. They will always find one if they look, and they can find the right one. As it will be found to exist in fact.

-------------

There are probably many technical approaches one could develop and outline in this matter.

There are many odd phenomena connected with it. An accurately spotted third party is usually not fought at all by either party but only shunned.

Marital conflicts are common. Marriages can be saved by both parties really sorting out who caused the conflicts. There may have been, in the whole history of the marriage, several, but only one at a time.

Quarrels between an individual and an organization are nearly always caused by an individual third party or a third group. The organization and the individual should

get together and isolate the third party by displaying to each other all the data they each have been fed.

Rioters and governments alike could be brought back to agreement could one get representatives of both to give each other what they have been told by whom.

SUCH CONFERENCES HAVE TENDED TO DEAL ONLY IN RECRIMINATIONS OR CONDITIONS OR ABUSES. THEY MUST DEAL IN BEINGS ONLY IN ORDER TO SUCCEED.

This theory might be thought to assert also that there are no bad conditions that cause conflict. There are. But these are usually REMEDIAL BY CONFERENCE UNLESS A THIRD PARTY IS PROMOTING CONFLICT.

In history we have a very foul opinion of the past because it is related by recriminations of two opponents and has not spotted the third party.

“Underlying causes” of war should read “hidden promoters”.

There are no conflicts which cannot be resolved unless the true promoters of them remain hidden.

------------

This is the natural law the ancients and moderns alike did not know.

And not knowing it, being led off into “reasons”, whole civilizations have died.

It is worth knowing.

It is worth working with in any situation where one is trying to bring peace.


L. RON HUBBARD


LRH:rw.rd
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 8 JANUARY 1969
Remimeo

DRUGS AND “INSANITY”
NON-COMPLIANCE AND ALTER-IS


I have been doing some research on drug cases and takers which has shed some interesting light on this and also insanity.

The basic equation is apparently:

WHEN THREATENED WITH UNMOCKING A THETAN MOCKS UP OBSESSIVELY.

Actually the datum is a small bit from OT VIII data, being part of energy creation.

It applies too well at lower levels, however, to leave it in such a stratosphere.

It explains for instance why a pc, challenged by an “auditor” who is breaking the Auditor’s Code, gets such a solid reaction in the reactive bank.

Threatened by an apparent effort to destroy him instead of letting him find the truth, the pc reacts by mocking up hard below his awareness level. This does not, of course, make him insane. It just sticks him a bit in the session.

Drugs (LSD, marijuana, alcohol, whatever) produce a threat to the body like any other poison. The threat is to the body. The thetan reacts by mocking up.

Of course what he mocks up is some engram, secondary or combination of fancy and fact. He can do this in some cases, so hard that it becomes more real (and safer) than present time.

Thus, under threat, he goes out of present time.

Now comes the next bit which is important as a new discovery:

HIS TIME TRACK IS NOT THEN BEING MADE UP WHOLLY OF PRESENT TIME EVENTS. IT IS A COMPOSITE OF PAST TRACK, IMAGINATION AND PRESENT EVENTS.

Thus, right there before your eyes he, apparently in the same room as you are, doing the same things, is really only partially there and partially in some past events.

He seems to be there. Really he isn’t “tracking” fully with present time.

What is going on to a rational observation is not what is going on to him.

Thus he does not duplicate statements made by another but tries to fit them into his composite reality. In order to fit them in, he has to alter them.

We therefore have the real basis of alter-is.

He may be sure he is helping one REPAIR the floor but in actual fact he is hindering the actual operation in progress which really consists of CLEANING the floor. So when he “helps one” mop the floor he introduces chaos into the activity. Since he is REPAIRING the floor a request to “give me the mop” has to be reinterpreted as “hand me the hammer”. But the mop handle is larger than a hammer handle so the bucket gets upset.

As a thetan can mock up an infinity of combinations, there would be an infinity of types of reactions to drugs. There would also be an infinity of types of insanity.

What is constant is that he is NOT RUNNING IN THE SAME SERIES OF EVENTS as others.

This can be slight, wherein the person is seen to make occasional mistakes. It can be as serious as total insanity where the events apparent to him are completely different than those apparent to anyone else. And it can be all grades in between.

It isn’t that he doesn’t know what’s going on. It’s that he perceives something else going on instead of the Present Time sequence of events.

Thus others appear to him to be stupid or unreasonable or insane. As they don’t agree in their actions and orders with what he plainly sees is in progress “they” aren’t sensible. Example: A group is moving furniture. To all but one they are simply moving furniture. This one perceives himself to be “moving geometric shapes into a cloud”. Thus this one “makes mistakes” “alter-ises” “non-complies”. As the group doesn’t see inside him and only sees another like themselves, they can’t figure out why he “balls things up so”.

Such persons as drug takers and the insane are thus slightly or wholly on an apparently different time track of “present time” events.

A drug may be taken to drive a person out of an unbearable PT or out of consciousness altogether.

In some persons they do not afterwards return wholly to Present Time.

A thetan can also escape an unbearable PT by dropping into the past, even without drugs.

The penalty is running into obsessive mocking up to counter the threat of being unmocked.

The answer is to erase the engrams and reactive mechanisms.

As all this out-of-PT is unknowing, it is aberrative. Things one is doing that one knows one is doing are not aberrative.

The drug taker and the insane alike have not recovered present time, to a greater or lesser degree. Thus they think they are running on a different time track than they are, which, unknowingly and out of the past, they are, to a greater or lesser degree, mocking up.

These are the underlying facts in odd human behaviour.


ENTURBULATION

Thus we get an explanation of enturbulation as well.

As what is going on according to the perception and subjective reality of such a person is varied in greater or lesser degree from the objective reality of others, such a person enturbulates the actual environment.

What is really going on is not what is going on for them.

Orders, then, are not complied with, other things happen and people around such a person have their own consecutive events disrupted. This causes enturbulation.

The non-compliance, alter-is and upsets from a person who is out of present time

and (what is new about this) who is running on a different series of events than those going on for the rest cause general enturbulation.

This is why it takes two additional staff members to handle the routine goofs of such a person. They are forcing events to run more or less normally against the counter effort of a person with a delusory time track.

We have all known such a person, many more than one, so it is not uncommon in the current civilization. The sudden non sequitur remark, out of context. The blank stare when given an order or a remark—behind these lies a whole imaginary time track which we jar into and accidentally disrupt.


EXTERIORIZATION

In OT sections we sometimes hear of a person who is “exterior” and so can’t be audited any more.

The symptoms of the person have not changed. So he still has aberrations.

The answer is to clear the word exteriorization with them. They often are exterior into a never-never non-extant universe. Or exterior in a past death.

When the word is cleared with them, they often don’t really say what was going on. They experience a strange reaction and change.

If one then runs a bit of objective havingness, they come into present time.

This applies only to exteriorized cases who can’t be audited because they are “exterior”. And yet aren’t all right casewise.

The usual course is to just handle the case by Standard Tech. They eventually come right.

DANGEROUS ENVIRONMENT

Anyone forced into a dangerous environment tends to either go fully into PT or retreat from PT.

The only ones who suffer from it afterwards are those who don’t move on up the track as life goes on but stay there, retreated from a long gone present time or stuck in a moment of the past.

This is done, of course, because of pictures mocked up obsessively under the threat of unmock.

When you understand the condition you can’t be fooled by it and think such people are there with you when they are not.

Auditing of course resolves this.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder



LRH: sdp.ei.rd
Copyright ©1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 24 JANUARY 1969
Issue II

Remimeo
Class IV
SUB-ZEROS—TRIPLE GRADES
LOWER LEVELS—TRIPLE GRADES



________________________ ________________________
Auditor Pc Name

_____________________________ _____________________________
Case Supervisor Date


Note: This HCOB is to be used ONE FOR EACH PC as a check sheet for that pc and belongs in his/her folder. IT IS DONE DURING session, not filled in after.

Triple Grades depends upon the three primary flows: Out-Flow, In-Flow, and Cross-Flow. These are designated respectively: F1, F2, and F3.

Each Grade is now followed by a Havingness process. Processing deletes unwanted mass. Havingness restores the mass “desired” and eventually brings one up to not needing it. Each grade is complete when its Havingness processes have been run to FN after all flows of all processes here listed for that grade have been run each to FN.

___________________________________________


TRIPLE RUDS RUN
in earlier session To FN_________
Auditor’s
Initials

Rud flown this session To FN_________

STRAIGHT-WIRE TRIPLE

SW F1: Recall a time that was really real to you.

Recall a time you were in good communication with someone. ) To FN_________

Recall a time you really felt affinity for someone.

Recall a time you knew you understood someone.

SW F2: Recall a time that was really real to another. )

Recall a time someone was in good communication with you. ) To FN_________

To FN Recall a time someone really felt affinity for you. )

Recall a time another knew he/she understood you.

Auditor’s Initials

SW F3: Recall a time that was really real for others. )
)
Recall a time another was in good communication with others. )
) To FN_________
Recall a time another really felt affinity for others. )
)
Recall a time another knew he understood others. )

Havingness: SWH F1: Look around here and find some
thing that is really real to you. To FN_________

SWH F2: Look around here and find some
thing that would really be real to
another. To FN_________

SWH F3: Look around here and find some
thing that would be really real to
others. To FN_________

DIANETIC SECONDARIES TRIPLE

RECALL STEP: SR F1— Recall losing something. To FN_________

SR F2— Recall another losing something. To FN_________

SR F3— Recall others losing something of
another’s. To FN_________

Havingness: (1 process) SRH Notice that________. To FN_________

INCIDENT STEPS:

IS F1: “Locate an incident where you lost something.”

1. Date the incident.

2. Move pc to the incident with the exact command “Move to (date).”

3. “What is the duration of the incident?”

4. “Move to the beginning of the incident at (date).” Wait until meter Flicks.

5. “What do you see?” (If pc’s eyes are open, tell pc first, “Close your eyes.”)

6. “Move through the incident to a point (duration) later.”

7. Ask nothing, say nothing, do nothing (except observe meter or make quiet notes) while pc is going through the incident. If the pc says anything at all, just acknowledge and let him continue, using this exact command softly “Okay, continue.”

8. When the pc reaches the end of the incident say only “What happened?” When pc has finished talking, give a final acknowledgement.

9. Repeat exactly and only 2 through 8.

10. After the second and subsequent runs through an incident check “Has the incident become more solid?” with the pc.

Auditor’s Initials
11. Continue the above until:

a. The pc spots an earlier incident, or

b. The pc gets no change on a run through the incident from the run just before, or

c. The incident becomes more solid or fails to discharge.

12. If a, b, or c above occurs: “Locate an earlier similar incident.”

13. Then 1 through 9. To FN_________

IS F2: “Locate an incident of you causing another loss and misemotion.”

1. Date the incident.

2. Move pc to the incident with the exact command “Move to (date).”

3. “What is the duration of the incident?”

4. “Move to the beginning of the incident at (date).” Wait until meter Flicks.

5. “What do you see?” (If pc’s eyes are open, tell pc first, “Close your eyes.”)

6. “Move through the incident to a point (duration) later.”

7. Ask nothing, say nothing, do nothing (except observe meter or make quiet notes) while pc is going through the incident.

If the pc says anything at all, just acknowledge and let him continue, using this exact command softly “Okay, continue.”

8. When the pc reaches the end of the incident say only “What happened?” When pc has finished talking, give a final acknowledgement.

9. Repeat exactly and only 2 through 8.

10. After the second and subsequent runs through an incident check “Has the incident become more solid?” with the pc.

11. Continue the above until:

a. The pc spots an earlier incident, or

b. The pc gets no change on a run through the incident from the run just before, or

c. The incident becomes more solid or fails to discharge.

12. If a, b, or c above occurs: “Locate an earlier similar incident.”

13. Then 1 through 9. To FN_________

IS F3: “Locate an incident of another causing others loss and misemotion. “

1. Date the incident.

2. Move pc to the incident with the exact command “Move to (date).”

3. “What is the duration of the incident?”

Auditor’s Initials

4. “Move to the beginning of the incident at (date).” Wait until meter Flicks.

5. “What do you see?” (If pc’s eyes are open, tell pc first, “Close your eyes.”)

6. “Move through the incident to a point (duration) later.”

7. Ask nothing, say nothing, do nothing (except observe meter or make quiet notes) while pc is going through the incident.

If the pc says anything at all, just acknowledge and let him continue, using this exact command softly “Okay, continue.”

8. When the pc reaches the end of the incident say only “What happened?” When pc has finished talking, give a final acknowledgement.

9. Repeat exactly and only 2 through 8.

10. After the second and subsequent runs through an incident check “Has the incident become more solid?” with the pc.

11. Continue the above until:

a. The pc spots an earlier incident, or

b. The pc gets no change on a run through the incident from the run just before, or

c. The incident becomes more solid or fails to discharge.

12. If a, b, or c above occurs: “Locate an earlier similar incident.”

13. Then 1 through 9. To FN_________

If the pc drops into the underlying engram chain on any secondary Flow being run, before FN on the chain, continue down the engram chain to FN and note the fact on this check sheet so that that engram Flow will not be run again in error. After FN on that engram chain, take up the next remaining secondary Flow.

Havingness:

ISH F1: Tell me something you could touch. To FN_________

ISH F2: Tell me something another could touch. To FN_________

ISH F3: Tell me something another could get others to touch. To FN_________

DIANETIC ENGRAMS TRIPLE

NO RECALL STEP

INCIDENT STEPS:

E F1: “Locate an incident containing pain and unconsciousness.”

1. Date the incident.

2. Move pc to the incident with the exact command “Move to (date).”

3. “What is the duration of the incident?”

4. “Move to the beginning of the incident at (date).” Wait until meter Flicks.


Auditor’s Initials

5. “What do you see?” (If pc’s eyes are open, tell pc first, “Close your eyes.”)

6. “Move through the incident to a point (duration) later.”

7. Ask nothing, say nothing, do nothing (except observe meter or make quiet notes) while pc is going through the incident.

If the pc says anything at all, just acknowledge and let him continue, using this exact command softly “Okay, continue.”

8. When the pc reaches the end of the incident say only “What happened?” When pc has finished talking, give a final acknowledgement.

9. Repeat exactly and only 2 through 8.

10. After the second and subsequent runs through an incident check “Has the incident become more solid?” with the pc.

11. Continue the above until:

a. The pc spots an earlier incident, or

b. The pc gets no change on a run through the incident from the run just before, or

c. The incident becomes more solid or fails to discharge.

12. If a, b, or c above occurs: “Locate an earlier similar incident.”

13. Then 1 through 9. To FN_________

E F2: “Locate an incident of you causing another pain and unconsciousness. “

1. Date the incident.

2. Move pc to the incident with the exact command “Move to (date).”

3. “What is the duration of the incident?”

4. “Move to the beginning of the incident at (date).” Wait until meter Flicks.

5. “What do you see?” (If pc’s eyes are open, tell pc first, “Close your eyes.”)

6. “Move through the incident to a point (duration) later.”

7. Ask nothing, say nothing, do nothing (except observe meter or make quiet notes) while pc is going through the incident.

If the pc says anything at all, just acknowledge and let him continue, using this exact command softly “Okay, continue.”

8. When the pc reaches the end of the incident say only “What happened?” When pc has finished talking, give a final acknowledgement.

9. Repeat exactly and only 2 through 8.

10. After the second and subsequent runs through an incident check “Has the incident become more solid?” with the pc.


Auditor’s Initials

11. Continue the above until:

a. The pc spots an earlier incident, or

b. The pc gets no change on a run through the incident from the run just before, or

c. The incident becomes more solid or fails to discharge.

12. If a, b, or c above occurs: “Locate an earlier similar incident.”

13. Then 1 through 9. To FN_________

E F3: “Locate an incident of another causing others pain and unconsciousness. “

1. Date the incident.

2. Move pc to the incident with the exact command “Move to (date).”

3. “What is the duration of the incident?”

4. “Move to the beginning of the incident at (date).” Wait until meter Flicks.

5. “What do you see?” (If pc’s eyes are open, tell pc first, “Close your eyes.”)

6. “Move through the incident to a point (duration) later.”

7. Ask nothing, say nothing, do nothing (except observe meter or make quiet notes) while pc is going through the incident.

If the pc says anything at all, just acknowledge and let him continue, using this exact command softly “Okay, continue.”

8. When the pc reaches the end of the incident say only “What happened?” When pc has finished talking, give a final acknowledgement.

9. Repeat exactly and only 2 through 8.

10. After the second and subsequent runs through an incident check “Has the incident become more solid?” with the pc.

11. Continue the above until:

a. The pc spots an earlier incident, or

b. The pc gets no change on a run through the incident from the run just before, or

c. The incident becomes more solid or fails to discharge.

12. If a, b, or c above occurs: “Locate an earlier similar incident.”

13. Then 1 through 9. To FN_________

Havingness:

EH F1: Look around here and find something you like. To FN_________

EH F2: Look around here and find something another
would like. To FN_________

EH F3: Look around here and find something another could get
others to like. To FN_________

Auditor’s Initials

LEVEL 0 TRIPLE

O—OF1 “What are you willing to talk to me about?” ) To FN_________

“What would you like to tell me about that?”

O—OF2 “What are you willing for another to talk to you about?” ) To FN_________

“What would you like him/her to tell you about that?”

O—OF3 “What is another willing to talk to others about?” ) To FN_________

“What would he like to tell others about that?”

OA—F1 (Auditor chooses person by asking pc who it would be
difficult to talk to.)

“If you could talk to ______ (chosen subject), what would
you talk about?” ) To FN_________

“All right, if you were talking to ______about that, what
would you say exactly?”

OA—F2 (Auditor chooses someone pc wouldn’t like to listen to.)

“If______could talk to you, what would he talk about? “ ) To FN_________

“All right, if______was talking to you about that, what
would he/she say exactly?”

OA—F3 (Auditor chooses two people antagonistic to each other.)

“If another could talk to (two antagonistic persons)
what would he/she talk about?”
) To FN_________
“All right, if another was talking to (two antagonistic
persons) about that, what would he/she say exactly?”

OB—F1 (Auditor chooses subject pc would have difficulty
talking about.)

“What are you willing to tell me about ?” ) To FN_________

“Who else could you say those things to?”

OB—F2 (Auditor chooses subject pc would find it difficult to
hear another talk about.)

“What are you willing to have someone else tell you
about ? ) To FN_________

“Who else could he or she say those things to?”

OB—F3 (Auditor chooses subject pc would have difficulty having
others discuss.)

“What are you willing to have someone tell others
about_____?” ) To FN_________

“Who else could another say those things to?”

Auditor’s Initials

Havingness:

OH F1: What solid could you understand? ) To FN_________

OH F2: What solid could another understand? ) To FN_________

OH F3: What solid could another get others to
understand? ) To FN_________


LEVEL ONE TRIPLE

1—F1 “What problem have you had with someone?” ) To FN_________

“What solutions have you had for that problem?”

1—F2 “What problem has another had with you?” ) To FN_________

“What solutions has another had for that problem?”

1-F3 “What problem has someone had with another?” ) To FN_________

“What solutions have they had for that problem?”

Havingness:

1H F1: a. Point out something desirable. To FN_________

1H F2: a. Point out something another would find
desirable. To FN_________

1H F3: a. Point out something another could get
others to desire. To FN_________


LEVEL TWO TRIPLE

HCO B 5 August 68, “Level II—Change of Commands”, is amended as these Flows will now be run separately.

2—F1 “What have you done?” To FN_________

2—F2 “What has been done to you?” To FN_________

2—F3 “What has another done to another?” To FN_________


Havingness:

2H F1: Tell me a Flow you could be interested in. To FN_________

2H F2: Tell me a Flow another would be interested in. To FN_________

2HF3: Tell me a Flow another could get others
interested in. To FN_________


LEVEL THREE TRIPLE

3—F1 1. Locate a change in life by listing to Blowdown:
“What change has happened in your life?”

2. Get it dated.

3. Get some of the data of it (don’t run as an
engram) so you know what the change was.

Auditor’s Initials

4. Find out by assessment if this was a Break in

Affinity
Reality
Communication or
Understanding

and have the pc examine that briefly.

5. Taking the one found in “4” find out by assessment if it was

Curious about _________
Desired_______________
Enforced______________
Inhibited______________ To FN_________


3—F2 1. Locate a change by listing to Blowdown:
“What change has happened in another’s life?”

2. Get it dated.

3. Get some of the data of it (don’t run as an engram)
so you know what the change was.

4. Find out by assessment if this was a Break in

Affinity
Reality
Communication or
Understanding

and have the pc examine that briefly.

5. Taking the one found in “4” find out by assessment if it was

Curious about _________
Desired_______________
Enforced______________
Inhibited______________ To FN_________


3—F3 1. Locate a change by listing to Blowdown:
“What change has happened in others’ lives?”

2. Get it dated.

3. Get some of the data of it (don’t run as an engram)
so you know what the change was.

4. Find out by assessment if this was a Break in

Affinity
Reality
Communication or
Understanding

and have the pc examine that briefly.

5. Taking the one found in “4” find out by assessment if it was

Auditor’s Initials

Curious about _________
Desired_______________
Enforced______________
Inhibited______________ To FN_________

Havingness:

3H F1: What is unknown about that (room
object )? To FN_________

3H F2: What doesn’t another know about that
(room object)? To FN_________

3H F3: What about that (room object) could some-
one make unknown to others? To FN_________


LEVEL FOUR TRIPLE

4—F1 List, “In this lifetime what do you use to make others
wrong?” Null to the Service Fac.

Run it in brackets:

“In this lifetime how would______(Service Fac)
make you right?”

“In this lifetime how would_______make others
wrong? “

“In this lifetime how would_______help you
escape domination?”

“In this lifetime how would_______help you
dominate others?”

“In this lifetime how would_______aid your
survival?”

“In this lifetime how would_______hinder the
survival of others?” To FN_________

4—F2 List, “In this lifetime what does another use to make
you wrong?” Null to Service Fac.

Run it in:

“In this lifetime how would_______make others
right? “

“In this lifetime how would_______make you
wrong?”

“In this lifetime how would_______help others
escape domination?”

“In this lifetime how would_______help others to
dominate you?”

“In this lifetime how would_______aid their
survival? “

“In this lifetime how would_______hinder your
survival?” To FN_________

Auditor’s Initials

4—F3 List, “In this lifetime what does another use to make
others wrong?” Null to Service Fac.

Run it in:

“In this lifetime how would______make another
make himself right?”

“In this lifetime how would______let another
make others wrong?”

“In this lifetime how would______help another
escape domination?”

“In this lifetime how would______help another
dominate others?”

“In this lifetime how would______aid another’s
survival? “

“In this lifetime how would______hinder the
survival of others?” To FN_________

Havingness:

4H F1: Tell me a Flow you know something about. To FN_________

4H F2: Tell me a Flow another could know some-
thing about. To FN_________

4H F3: Tell me a Flow someone could get others to
know about. To FN_________


LRH: ldm.ei.rd L. RON HUBBARD
copyright ©1969 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


[This HCO B was cancelled by HCO B 17 June 1970, Issue 111, Cancellation of HCOBs that conflict with Full Lower Grades which was not written by LRH and was cancelled by BTB 10 December 1974, Issue VII, Cancellation of Bulletins-1970. BTB 10 December 1974, Issue Vl, Cancellation of Bulletins-1969 confirms the above HCO B as cancelled.]



HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 25 JANUARY 1969

Remimeo
TARGETS & COMPUTERS


It is interesting to note that my new developments on Targets and Purposes in recent HCO Pol Ltrs are possibly adaptable to COMPUTER PROGRAMMING. Meaning they apply to and could make a new level of Computer action and usefulness.


LRH:ldm.ei.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1969 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 25 JANUARY 1969
Remimeo Issue III
Class VIIIs (Hold and send with 24 Jan 1969)
May be issued
to Lower Level
Auditors
Class IV in
Academies and
SHSBC
TRIPLE LOWER GRADES

(Corrected Issue)


Running Them

Providing certain actions are done, Triple Grades are easy to run.

Triple Grades means handling 3 of available flows, the 3 major ones, self to another, another to self, another to others.

The HCOB 24 Jan 69 is written to be used as part of the C/S and pc's folder.

It is checked off and used DURING the session. An HCOB goes in each pc's folder for use.

The main danger is auditing a pc who has no clue what auditing is and letting him get all butchered up too far up the grades before it is caught.

Therefore the pc really ought to get a brief indoctrination by attending a Comm Course for TRs and get an idea of it.

Also only Triple Ruds should be run on him AND NO MORE in the second session.

Then the C/S can see how it is going and do Triple Grades in the 3rd session.

You can even order simply the Triple Rud of an ARC Break in the second session.

You should just order 2 way comm in the first session plus White Form anyway.

YOU DON'T SIMPLY LET A GREEN PC AND GREEN AUDITOR or a green pc and a good auditor loose on triple grades in the first session.


Auditor Confusion

An auditor can get lost trying to follow triple grades (first thing I learned about auditors and triple grades). He misses flows.

Example: Pc on secondaries flow I drops into engrams. Auditor audits out engram. Now the auditor can goof by running the other two flows as engrams too. He would thus skip 2 processes—the other two secondary flows. It is correct to finish the engram he dropped into and THEN run the other two secondary flows. And then the other 2 engram flows.

MAKE THE AUDITOR USE THE HCOB for that pc on every process as he runs it. He should not be reading the Commands to the pc from it however.


Clearing Commands

Don't clear the Commands of all ruds and then run them, or of all processes and then run them. You'll miss F/Ns.

Commands of one process are cleared just before that process is run.


Don't Overrun

It can be fatal to overrun a leg of triple grades and then not clean it up before going on.
So order your auditors to stop if an overrun looks suspicious (TA going up) and check it. And then if still not sure to send it back for C/S.

Don't let the auditor go on and butcher up all the grades above the goof.


Listing

The laws of Listing are a MUST. If a list goes oddly—too long or TA rises—make the auditor check with C/S. And don't let him go on.


Out Ruds

Be sure ruds are cleanly in on Triple Grades before letting an auditor take off and run them.

Old Pcs

Any pc, or pre OT, can be run on the missing legs of the lower grades. But not Power after clear.

There is not yet Triple Power. There aren't triple OT sections. There are just Triple grades.

Tight C/Sing

Small errors must be caught by C/Ses, not let go by.

Keep a tight, exact control.


Invalidated Auditors

An auditor (or a C/S for that matter) who begins to goof has collided with a stop on his purpose to help people and set them free.

Therefore all you have to do is two way comm his earlier purpose into view and the stop usually blows.

If it doesn't, a routine patch up session remedies it.

In Triple grades there are more chances for goofs that then go on and more chances for gain.

So up your precision.


LRH:sdp.ei.cden L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1969 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

[This HCO B was cancelled by HCO B 17 June 1970, Issue III, Cancellation of HCO Bs that Conflict with Full Lower Grades, which was not written by LRH and was cancelled by BTB 10 December 1974, Issue VII, Cancellation of Bulletins 1970. BTB 10 December 1974, Issue Vl, Cancellation of Bulletins 1969, confirms the above HCO B as cancelled and gives as a reference HCO B 3 February 1969, Triple Grades-Flows, on the following page.]


6902C02 LECTURE R-Factor Talk to Registrars

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 3 FEBRUARY 1969

Remimeo

TRIPLE GRADES
FLOWS


There are a great many potential flows. These are covered in greater detail in earlier work.

In Triple Grades the following are the only flows used:


Or

In an introverted (going into) type process

1 A for Self
1 B for Another
1 C for Others

Or

A mix of the two.

As the patterns of an individual are in actual fact the same in all cases, it is the type of process rather than the type of pc which regulates the flows.

Intensity of one or more "legs" of the flow will be found to vary from pc to pc. One pc has a strong inflow, weak outflow and very weak others flow. Another has a strong outflow. Another is all wrapped up in others with no real attention to self.

The wording of the STANDARD commands of Triple Grades (Subzero and Lower Levels) takes care of these imbalances. No further attention is necessary by the auditor.

The auditor will find that all this reflects on his work sheet by different lengths of time to run different flows.

By FLOW is meant an impulse or direction of energy particles or thought or masses between terminals.

It is essentially a 3 terminal universe in actual fact. The discovery of this led to Triple Grades.

There is more data on the 3 terminal universe in material on the THIRD PARTY LAW. This is not necessarily important—either the 3rd Party Law or that it's a 3 terminal universe—to the auditor in running the processes of Triple Grades. He should however have some idea of flows. Very intricate and numerous flows can be isolated. Triple is the fundamental and what is used in normal auditing.


LRH: sdp. ei.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1969 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 3 FEBRUARY 1969
Issue II
Remimeo


TRIPLE GRADES

Firm Policy on Triple Grades
NOT to be violated


Triple Grades when released will be run on HGC pcs and Qual only by HGC and Qual Auditors under Class VIII supervision.

Triple Grades are NOT taught in the Dianetics Course. They are NOT run by Dianetic students on pcs. Triple Grades do NOT change the Dianetics Course. Dianetic Course auditors are forbidden to run Triple Grades. They change NO checksheet on Dianetics Course.

Triple Grades are NOT taught on Levels Zero, I, II or III. They are NOT run by students on these levels. Triple Grades do NOT change Level 0, I, II, III checksheets. Auditors of these classes (0, I, II, III) do not use and are forbidden to use Triple Grades on their own pcs.

CLASS IV

Triple Grades are taught and are added to the checksheet of Level IV. They may be audited by Class IV auditors on their pcs only under the direct supervision of a Class VIII auditor.

HGC auditors and Qual auditors traditionally have been understood to have a right to audit any authorized process under proper supervision. Therefore when auditing under the direct supervision of a Class VIII auditor HGC and Qual auditors briefed on Triple Grades starrate can run them.

CLASS V

A Saint Hill Level V checksheet must have all data on flows added to it and all Triple Grade data.

A Saint Hill Class V may audit, when trained on the new checksheet, Triple Grades on his own pcs or without further supervision. In an org he would of course get Class VIII supervision.

-------------

Note therefore that Lower Level auditors and Lower Level courses continue as always with single sub-zeroes and single grades both as to training and practical up to but not including Level IV.

--------------

Note that the remaining two flows of the sub-zeroes and lower grades CAN BE PUT IN on a pc before or even after Power.

You rehab the single grade (by counting times released) and then run its other two flows.

You rehab the next single grade and run its other two flows. The sequence is

rehab the grade, run its other two flows. Don't rehab all grades and then put in each other two. This also applies to sub-zeroes.

The best time to do this is BEFORE POWER.

The advantage of Triple Grades is

1. Greatly increased gain per level.

2. Enormously increased stability for the gains of lower grades.

If and when Triple Power is worked out if it is ever issued, this HCOB still applies.

The exact commands of Triple Grades and the form used on each pc for them are the subject of another HCOB.

Policy is firm that a separate Triple Grade form is used for each separate pc and included in his folder.


LRH:ldm.ei.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1969 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED



HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 28 FEBRUARY 1969
Remimeo

MEDICAL DOCTORS

LRH ED 86 INT 22/2/69

If orgs train any medical doctors they must be trained on the following basis:

1. They are NOT twinned with a layman but only with another medical doctor.

2. They are enrolled in a DIANETICS course only and told to perfect the use of that in their work.

3. They are courteously treated.

SEMINARS

In addressing any group of medical doctors keep it in the field of DIANETICS.

Discuss Dianetics from the viewpoint of Communication with body areas to assist circulation and the mental image picture as a means of continuing shocking experiences.

Any lecturer to medical doctors should do a fast review first of Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health and stick with it only.


LRH:ldm.ei.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright ©1969 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 3 MARCH 1969
Remimeo
Class VIII
Level IV CASE GAIN
Tech Sec
Qual Sec COMPLETING LEVELS


Anyone who interprets "the real gains of a case consist of going up the levels" (which is true and was stated in order to prevent over-review) as meaning that the level a case is on is not to be conclusive or put the pc into good case condition, has a tech alter-is going.

The registrar can use "You need the next level" but when Tech or Qual buy this as an excuse not to run levels right or to get gains on any given level it's time to look this fact over HARD.

ANY LEVEL IS ITSELF CAPABLE OF STABLE CASE GAIN. If a level does not THEN THE CASE IS LOUSED UP ON EARLIER LEVELS and is a standard case of someone with a lower level out! This is all covered in Class VIII.

This is true of ARC Straight Wire and OT VI alike. The rule holds.

Any level is capable of giving a stable case gain and if it does not THERE IS SOMETHING VERY WRONG with the way it or an earlier level was run.

To chase a pc on up the levels to cure an outness on earlier levels is idiocy. It is WASTING AUDITING. It is a shabby excuse for not setting a case up to be audited or auditing badly.

To solve an earlier out tech situation one does not "give the next level".

If a pc ends up at Level II (or OT II) without a stable gain attained then the set-up of the case or the handling of it is SOUR.

This is the most elementary situation in case repair.

ANY LEVEL is capable of case gain and of being stable, the pc feeling good, etc. The drive to get the next level is very natural but when it becomes obsessive to get a case gain then it isn't the next level that's needed.

ARC Straight Wire is more tech than Man ever had before. It produces a stable gain. This is true of every level on up.

We have just had a PreOT whose case at every level "was going to be solved by the next level". People kept saying he "needed the next level" to solve his case. Bull. He got all the way to OT II before I caught wind of it. He "had to have OT III" to solve his case according to the Qual Sec.

That case probably never made ARC Straight Wire! One or more earlier levels or ruds or 7 cases are out. That's the trouble with that case.

If you now let him go on to OT III he'd cop it.

The tech you are handling is capable of giving spectacular gains at every level. If it does not then the case has missed somewhere, comes under 7 resistive cases or out ruds or one or more missed or overrun levels.

This is one of those things which seems to have been going around ("needs the next level to solve his case") for some time without my finding out about it. Sure they need their next level. But do they have their levels up to where they are? If they aren't in good shape at the end of any one level then there's a miss on the case and it must be repaired by standard tech.



LRH:hk ei.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1969 FOUNDER
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 12 MARCH 1969
Remimeo
Class VIII
Class Vl
AUDITOR'S REPORT
TRIPLE GRADES

The Administration in Triple Grades does not require that one copy off all the processes onto the Auditor's Report Form.

One uses HCO B of 30 Jan 69, "Triple Ruds" and HCO B 24 Jan 69, Sub-Zeroes and Lower Levels Triple Grades. The F/N obtained on each is marked on these HCO Bs. The fact is noted on the Auditor's Report Form that one has marked on the HCO Bs. "See TG HCO B" and "Done up to ISF2".

One then puts in the comments appropriate to the Auditor's Report Form.

One makes up a Summary Sheet, usually as it applies.

During auditing one keeps his worksheet in PT as the session progresses with comments, time and TA.

One does not put the command on the W/S. One puts the number of the process as taken from the HCO Bs such as "SWF 1".

One NEVER writes up the worksheet after the session from notes. One never copies the worksheet into "more readable form" from "notes taken in session". A worksheet is the worksheet.

If the W/S has illegible words, one does two things:

1. After the session prints in in red the illegible word just above it.

2. Learns how to write more clearly faster.

Admin must not be used to stop or slow a pc.

The reason for Admin is so a Case Supervisor can read the whole session and so be able to handle or get repaired any outness, so that another auditor can pick up where the last one ended off and so that at some future time any early goof can be traced.

Be fully honest in an auditing report. Don't try to look good, by covering up goofs. You can bar a pc from repair by a false auditing report.

An evaluative auditing report is one which gives color to a session rather than facts.

Do a good informative report that can be used to C/S or review sessions.


L RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:nt.ei.rd
Copyright © 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 12 MARCH 1969
Issue II
Remimeo
Class VIII
Tech Secs
Qual Secs

PHYSICALLY ILL PCS
AND PRE OTS
(with a note on Drugs)


One can very easily go to extremes on mental illness vs physical illness.

One school says all trouble comes from physical illness.

Another says it all comes from mental illness.

The psychiatrist mixes the two and says all mental illness is physical.

It is time every auditor, particularly Class VIIIs, took a hard look at this area.

The body is capable of having physical illness, acute (momentary) or chronic (continual). Broken bones, pinched nerves, diseases can any of them occur to a body independent of any mental or spiritual action.

The mind or spirit can predispose the illness or injury. By this is meant a person can be distraught and have an accident, or decide to die and get a disease.

But the disease or injury when he's got it is a body circumstance and responds best to skilled medical (ordinary usual, put on a tourniquet, set a bone, give a shot) treatment.

On a sick or injured person, you can reduce the time of healing or recovery by removing the spiritual or mental upset, providing the person can be audited, but usually after effective physical treatment. The facts are real enough. Auditing a person with a broken leg after it is set and he is comfortable, to remove the engram of the accident or treatment and the earlier "reason" he or she was distraught or had the accident, can improve the bone knitting time by as much as 2/3rds by actual test. This would be six weeks down to two weeks.

But the bone has to be set!

A body is a biological object. It has all manner of internal communication systems and organized interrelated functions.

Now if you tried to audit a preclear when he was acutely ill, you would find him hard to audit, confused and distracted and unable to follow commands. He may become overwhelmed easily. He certainly is not likely to respond properly. Because the body is sending all sorts of pain or discomfort messages and confusions, it is very much in his way. Two things are going on at the same time—his case as a spiritual being, his body as a distracting pain or sensation object.

The pc assigns the body to his case or his case to his body.

You have to get the body out of the attention area to some degree before anything helpful usually occurs by way of auditing.

Now let us take the pc with a long term illness. He has been sick with something since the age of 8. He really doesn't know he's sick physically. He blames it all on his own case.

In a lot of cases we audit him and he has enough relief to then get physically well. For he was mentally or spiritually suppressing his body.

These successes (and they are numerous) could cause us to do an all mental concentration and lead some to insist all illness was from the mind. This makes some make the mistake of omitting physical examination and treatment in all cases. Certain schools of healing in the past got the entire field in disrepute by assuming and stating and acting on just that.

When you find a pc who does not easily respond, whether he answers up to 7 cases "Physically ill" or not, you sure better get him to the nearest clinic for a thorough physical examination including head and spine X-rays and get him examined pathologically. For you will usually find he is physically ill, in suppressed pain or discomfort. There are cures for a lot of these things now and not requiring "exploratory" operations either.

Don't throw away all the grades of auditing on him. He's sick. Physically.

That's why you do a White Form. A long history of accident and illness should prepare you to be alert and to send him to a clinic if his response to auditing is the least bit poor.

Then when you have the physical side of it in hand, audit him at assist level.

When he is well give him his grades.

Don't force auditing into physical healing. It works much of the time. Special types of auditing (running out injuries, etc) assist healing markedly. That doesn't mean you should avoid all medical treatment!

"Failed cases" are medically ill or injured cases. Without exception. So why fail. There are medical doctors and clinics. There are standard, usual treatments. You don't have to buy "exploratories" and questionable actions. These are done only when the medical doctor can't find out either. When this impasse occurs, start doing assists or look for engrams.

There are some bizarre or strange postoperative (after operation) or post injury (after injury) conditions which do surrender miraculously to auditing. A suppurating incision (operation cut that remains open and unhealing), a bone that will not heal after having a plate put on it, such things usually surrender to auditing. These facts should be used but they do not contradict that medical treatment was needed in the first place.

The psychiatrist is an example of the other extreme to spiritual healing. Instead of "all mind" he is saying "all physical".

Holding either extreme produces failures.

The psychiatrist got into his "all physical" by a sensing that insanity symptoms seemed to resemble persons in pain or delirium.

In these cases the stress of physical suffering is pouring back into and overwhelming the mind.

After considerable study on this, I realized that an error could have been made out of a statement "all insanity is physical".

This is probably the case in the large percentage of the insane. But from this one cannot then say "all mental trouble is physical" because that can be demonstrated as not true. We see it as easily as in a case of a person falling ill on the receipt of bad news, who then gets good news and gets well. The great Voltaire, on his deathbed, received news that he had been awarded the Legion of Honor, after a lifetime of being scorned by Authority. He promptly got up, put on his clothes and went down to receive the award.

In the case of insanity having physical causes, one could discover this, say it and be promptly misunderstood in this way. The sufferer is in a general agony from a nerve long ago crushed. This actual pain is distributed from its point of concentration to the whole of the nervous system. The person cannot think, looks dazed, cannot work or

act. An operation removes the pressure causing the condition. The person is then "sane" in that he can perform the actions of life.

After a few successes of this nature, the psychiatrist leaps to the conclusion all mental trouble is physical. He teaches some student saying "all mental trouble is physical". The student goes off, tries to figure it out, dreams up a special insanity virus or "genes" or a special illness called "insanity". He then resorts to all manner of odd and often brutal treatments. By cutting or shocking a nerve channel one can stop the pain messages but such actions lay in new complications which usually terminate in premature if not immediate death or injury.

This tells one why tranquilizers (psychotropic drugs) make a patient rational or at least able to function for a short while. They too have their side effects. Usually all they do is, like aspirin, reduce the pain.

Patients do not always know they hurt. They suppress the pain or sensation. It seems normal to them or "life". When they receive a distressing experience or have an accident they cease to suppress and may go "insane", which is to say, become continuously overwhelmed by pain or unwanted sensation. They cannot think or act rationally. They may even be insane only during periods of the day or month that coincide with the time of the accident. But they are in physical distress.

As they cannot eat or sleep, their condition worsens by exhaustion and they may go into various states including a deathlike motionlessness or actually die.

The CORRECT ACTION ON AN INSANE PATIENT IS A FULL SEARCHING CLINICAL EXAMINATION BY A COMPETENT MEDICAL DOCTOR.

He may find disease, fractures, concussion, tumours, or ANY COMMON ILLNESS which has escaped treatment and has become chronic (perpetual). He should keep looking until he finds it. For it is there. NOT some "insane germ" but some ordinary recognizable illness or physical malfunction.

The WRONG THING is to cut nerves or subject the person to more pain. Electricity can force a nerve channel to flow or paralyze it. That is probably why it seems to work sometimes. But it cures nothing and more often confirms the insane condition and certainly fills the patient with dread and terror, injures him and shortens life.

The problem in insanity is often how do you keep the patient from injuring himself or starving or dying before he can be examined by a competent medical doctor in a properly equipt clinic.

This is done by rest, security, feeding, under drugs if necessary.

A patient can be "built up" by various biochemical compounds, diathermy and other mild means that add to his stamina.

Treatment of what really troubles him such as continual sensation from a once broken leg which was never set, a broken spinal disc or such pathological ills as disease, can then be treated properly and corrected.

Recovered from the treatment, the patient will be found not to be "insane" any longer.

Auditing can then occur, any and all engrams (traumas) erased and the person's recovery will be greatly accelerated.

Of course the real target of auditing is the improvement of the ability to handle life, greater intelligence, reaction time and other benefits.

Like the spiritual healer of another age who said all was mind and forbade physical healing, the practitioner who says all is body and scorns mental healing is an extremist.

Each of these is at the opposite ends of "Aristotle's Pendulum". Each has seen

with his own eyes a few remarkable cures. Thus each is confirmed in his belief and will hotly argue and even attack others who do not share his or her extreme view.

The truth, as is usually found, lies in between.

There is no "insanity virus". Even heredity remains unproven since families perform similar actions, are prone to similar physical ills and they also mentally pattern or copy each other. Either physical or mental facts can similarly prove that "insanity runs in the family" when it seems to do so. Thus "hereditary insanity" is an apparency which gives rise to the folk tale.

There is the spiritual identity of man, the mind, the thetan, call it what you will.

There is the physical body of man and that, even if cellular, is still material or physical or whatever you call that.

Proponents of both extreme illnesses are likely then to go off on an erratic course of search and research as the truth includes both and when you do include both you then begin to add up successes toward the desirable 100% of the physical sciences in result.

One cannot call either extreme more than an art. And the proponent of the purely physical does not have a "science" just because sciences are also physical.

One has a science only when one can predict and attain uniform results by the application of its technology.

It was very natural for the psychiatrist to think he had a foe in Scientology as all he had to hear was "spirit" and he was off. Since that has been his opposite "foe" for a long time.

To heal Man one has to realize he is dealing with two things—the spirit and the body. When a preclear comes to us because he wishes to be physically cured of a real current illness or malfunction, we do not serve him well if when we see he does not respond to auditing we do not require a full physical clinical study of his body until a real illness is found and treated.

If we already know he is ill we should call in the doctor. And we should limit auditing to assists.

This is also a case of crossed purposes. We are trying to give him greater capability and freedom. He is only trying to stop hurting.

Go ahead, sign them up. But at the first smallest clue (like the White Form) that he is being audited only to get well, we should have in good contact a medical doctor or clinic who is friendly and does not do unusual things to people and get the preclear diagnosed to really find what is wrong with him, get it cured if it is medically feasible and then, with a physically well pc, give him his auditing.

If this is done routinely, another benefit will also occur. The preclear so audited will not again become ill easily and will retain his very real auditing gains when he has these.

We are good enough to often get by. The ability of the body to get well often asserts itself when a preclear is given auditing, since the source of perpetuation (continuance) is removed from the illness and it changes.

Letting a pc, who has a badly set continually painful bone go on up the grades is doing him a disservice. He probably will not attain or retain his gains.

The stable datum on which I operate as a case supervisor is that if a pc does not get good gains quickly I want to know (and will find) what is physically injured or ill about him before I go on letting him be audited. The X-ray machine and other clinical actions become a must. For he is in suppressed pain and each time he gets a change, he puts on full stops as it started to hurt. He won't get the same gain again and tomorrow the same process or type of process won't work. He stops the pain if it starts to hurt

and puts a new stop on his case. This is true of those cases who really have a physical illness.

Slow gain, poor result is a physically ill pc.

The exercise of these points requires judgement for a person can be given treatments which will not heal him. Where this is the case, and the treatment seems too damaging or uncertain, treat the pc on this routine:

1. Rest

2. No harassment

3. Food

4. Mild sedatives.

When the person seems well, audit him.

The truth of the above definition of "insanity" can be experienced easily with no great stress. To have a headache or toothache is sometimes quite distressing and distracting, making one gloomy or inactive. Taking an aspirin cheers one up and he can work.

That is in fact the basic mechanism. It is why tranquilizers work.

This is why old-timers thought they had to cut nerves to "cure" the insane. But that's like fixing the telephone exchange by throwing a hand grenade into the switchboard. You may get no more complaints but you sure don't have a telephone any more. Which, I suppose, is the basic way to stop all complaints. Nobody can ring up even if the house were on fire!

Drugs such as marijuana are craved only when the being "needs them" to stop undesirable physical pain or sensation. Then they backfire, causing more distress than they cure.

Some pcs, taken off marijuana for a few weeks, can be audited. Some can't. Those who then can't be audited are in pain whether they consciously realize it or not. In their "unconscious mind" (below their self-suppression) they hurt.

So those who can't be audited well when taken off some drug like marijuana should be gotten to a good clinic and given "the works". A competent medical doctor will find the broken bone, the disease, the diabetes. Give it a medical cure.

Then audit the pc by Standard Tech, checking resistive case lists, etc all over again.

Pcs don't always know they're ill.

Mental upset aggravates physical discomfort. Physical discomfort aggravates mental unrest.

So play it safe.

A slow case who doesn't respond well to very usual approaches has something else wrong with him physically.

Don't be an extremist.

Your job after all is to do the most you can for the pc.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:nt.ldm.ei.rd
Copyright © 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 17 MARCH 1969

Remimeo




POLITICS



Here is a scale taken from Excalibur from memory. Excalibur was an unpublished book written in the very late 1930s. Only fragments of it remain.

By placing it against the Tone Scale developed at the end of 1950, certain current political philosophies are better estimated. By then looking up these tone characteristics in Science of Survival much can be learned and the ideologies are thus made easier to predict or handle.

REPUBLIC 3.0

DEMOCRACY 2.5

SOCIAL DEMOCRACY 2.0

FASCISM 1.5

COMMUNISM 1.1

ANARCHISM 0.0

The cycle of a nation goes on a descending spiral down this scale.

Those two tones apart are not likely to fight. Those a tone apart fight seldom. Those a half tone apart are in continual conflict.

As this was worked out before World War II it is quite remarkable to see how true it has held. And how each one has taken something from its neighbors.

I will not go into what lies above democracy except that Man is trying with his ideologies to solve mainly the problem of succession. History has seen other government forms work far more ideally than those named but in none of these could one guarantee succession of the beneficial rule. Thus adherents to all forms of ideology can be made to agree that "benign monarchy" is an excellent form of government. But they discard it because a truly good benign monarch is not necessarily succeeded by one in the next reign.

Few governments exist in pure form. (Note there are no major governments at this writing above Social Democracy.)


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:jk.ei.rd
Copyright © 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 2 APRIL 1969
Revised 14 May 1969
Remimeo


DIANETIC ASSISTS

(Include in Medical Series)
The Use of Dianetics to the Medical Doctor



There is everything to be said for correct medical treatment in the handling of the sick and insane.

"Insanity" is most often the suppressed agony of actual physical illness and injury.

To "treat" this agony with shock and "brain operations" is a Nuremberg type offense and is indictable as mayhem or manslaughter.

The medical treatment of "insanity" requires sure awareness by the patient of his whereabouts and present time. These are usually quite unbearable so he has sunk into the past to escape the agony of the present.

The TOUCH ASSIST given to such injured persons permits healing to occur by restoring the person to the present and his whereabouts to some degree.

Healing after medical treatment might not occur rapidly if the "insane" or chronically ill person remains in the past, unable to confront the present.

Thus the touch assist speeds and often permits healing after medical treatment and sometimes in minor injuries and illness permits the doctor to accomplish healing without further treatment.

There is the TOUCH ASSIST, the CONTACT ASSIST and the AUDITING ASSIST.

The touch assist done as described elsewhere brings the patient's attention to injured or affected body areas. When attention is withdrawn from them, so is circulation, nerve flows and energy which for one thing limits nutrition to the area and for another prevents the drain of waste products. Some ancient healers attributed remarkable flows and qualities to the "laying on of hands". Probably the workable element in this was simply heightening awareness of the affected area and restoring the physical communication factors.

The CONTACT ASSIST is remarkable when it can be done. The patient is taken to the area where the injury occurred and makes the injured member gently contact it several times. A sudden pain will fly off and the injury if minor lessens or vanishes. This is again a physical communication factor. The body member seems to have withdrawn from that exact spot in the physical universe.

The restoration of awareness is often necessary before healing can occur.

The prolongation of a chronic injury occurs in the absence of physical communication with the affected area or with the location of the spot of injury in the physical universe.

The AUDITING ASSIST is done by a trained auditor using an E-Meter.

It consists of "running out" the physically painful experience the person has just undergone, accident, illness, operation or emotional shock. This erases the "psychic trauma" and speeds healing to a remarkable degree if done properly.

In addition to assists there is Dianetic auditing of an acutely ill person which handles the current and past illnesses and injuries by erasing the "physical trauma".

The last is a skilled activity. Practitioners who have the idea such things do not have causes will of course fail to locate the causes.

A sickness can be composed, let us say, of a headache, a nausea, apathy and weariness.

Such a sickness may be bizarre, without medical reason.

By first getting the patient to find and say what shock occurred when the sickness began, getting when, and getting it recounted, the "illness" will lessen, the emotional state will alter—called a "release of affect".

By then finding an earlier similar instance and getting that one dated and recounted a further release of affect may occur.

If the good indicators, smiles, etc, do not occur in the patient, one again asks for an earlier incident, dates it and gets it recounted.

The phenomena of "floating needle" on the E-Meter should not be bypassed on a physically sick person. If it occurs, regardless of when, and the patient is smiling and suddenly free from symptoms, one at once desists with further auditing on that subject and at that time.

If no floating needle and a full release of symptoms occur, one then traces back the remaining symptoms. Let us say the headache is now gone due to recounting times of emotional duress. But the patient is still slightly nauseous. One traces the nausea to earlier or other incidents. It will vanish when found and dated.

The apathy vanished somewhere along the way but weariness remains. One traces the weariness to another or other incidents.

In short one handles each manifestation of the bizarre illness until all symptoms are gone and the patient is happy and cheerful.

Needless to say all this requires a skilled auditor but the skill can be acquired in a Dianetic training course.

The important thing is not to tell the patient what caused it, but to let him tell you. Otherwise the symptom suppresses.

The approach in any of these assists is quiet, gentle, permissive, never forcing the patient, speaking only the words required to do the process.

The temporarily insane by reason of emotional shock, where no medical illness exists, should be permitted rest and should then be handled by an assist as above or normal Dianetic auditing. Most often, rest and no further harassment result in a return to sanity in a short time such as a few days, but not in a terror atmosphere such as a psychiatric asylum where the patient is in the risk of being hurt or killed. Electric shock prolongs the condition and brain surgery is of course not treatment but murder as at best it deprives the person of his coordination and at worst shortens his life. The occasional and rare brain tumour is of course an exception but this is a medical not a psychiatric matter, no matter what manifestations the person exhibits. Most medically ill people do exhibit symptoms of mental derangement at some stage of their illness.

The acceleration of healing of medical illness or injury such as broken bones or

the aftereffects of delivery or operations can be accomplished by the Dianetic auditing of the resulting trauma soon after full medical treatment or attention. The improvement factor is about 1/3 the normal time of recovery by some thousands of test cases.

Such auditing is done by a usual Dianetic procedure.

In addition to the above assists there is regular Dianetic auditing which handles chronic discomforts and prevents future illness as well as improving the state of well-being of a person.

The mechanisms of the mind revealed in Dianetics are of great use to the field of medicine.

They are easy and quick to apply.

About one month's training is all that is necessary to acquaint an otherwise educated and intelligent person with the fundamentals and skills necessary to assists.

Considerably more time of course is necessary to train a skilled Scientology auditor, but this is not the subject of this paper.

There is no conflict of interest between any healing profession and Dianetics. Dianetic materials and papers are fully available.

There is a conflict between Dianetics and political practices such as psychiatry since electric shock, brain operations and general degradation of the person may prevent the patient's recovery by Dianetics.

As answers exist now for insanity there is no reason to continue Medieval or Fascist solutions to the problem of the psychosomatically ill or the insane and we are doing everything in our power against fantastic opposition to end the torture and killing of the insane regardless of the politically "desirable" ends envisioned by some groups.

Dianetics, like any other true treatment, like aspirin or penicillin, was originally designed to handle the apparent basic cause of psychosomatic illness. The first research was intended to help allied prisoners of war degraded by the Japanese and Chinese prison camps and who after VJ day were transferred to Oak Knoll Naval Hospital. Later, in 1954, in a much more advanced state of development, Dianetics was successfully employed to eradicate the results of allied prisoners of the Korean war who had been subjected to Russian brainwashing. The subject has been improved, made easier to teach and apply and its results bettered continually over a total period of 29 years. It has in 1969 been fully updated as Standard Dianetics. It is very successful and is in very broad use over the world.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:cp.an.ei.rd
Copyright © 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 5 APRIL 1969
(Reissued and corrected 26 May 1970)
Remimeo
Dianetic Course
D of Ts
D of Ps
Class VIIIs
NEW PRECLEARS
The Workability of Scientology


The "training" of a new preclear (never before audited) has long been a subject of know-how amongst auditors but has not actually been covered previously.

The conditions of a new preclear are these:

(a) Doesn't know what is supposed to happen.

(b) May be under the stress of being embarrassed to talk to someone.

(c) May have preconceived ideas of how he is supposed to respond to the auditor (such as psychoanalytic "free association" where he just talks, etc).

(d) May be waiting for some magical effect entirely independent of his own participation (as in getting a "shot" from a doctor).

It is too much to ask of a being to:

1. Talk to another intimately about himself,

2. Fumbling with a new activity while

3. Confronting his own bank.

Possibly he has never done any of the three before and to ask him to do them all at once .........well!

All cases are started in their lowest ability level since they have not had it increased. Whereas they may be quite well off as human beings, they do not know how well off they might become.

The wrong thing to do is to enforce their improvement with a sales talk or evaluation on how well they did in the session.

And it is wrong to go on auditing them while they essentially remain in mystery.

The correct solution to all these difficulties is to assign the pc to do a PE Course if it includes TRs and to have the pc do the TRs before being audited.

We probably should have a set of poster type pictures put up in a PE area as follows:

Picture of an auditor with a meter in front of him, profile view, "This is an AUDITOR. He does not invalidate, criticize or evaluate for the preclear."

Picture of an E-Meter, "This is an E-METER. It is used to verify the preclear's gain and register when each separate auditing action is ended."

A picture of a being, a silhouette showing no features, "This is YOU, a PRECLEAR, a spiritual being who is now on the road to becoming clear, hence preclear."

Picture of an auditor with a meter and a shadowy preclear. "This is a SESSION. The auditor and the preclear locate, step by step, any mental blocks to increased ABILITY AND FREEDOM."

A picture of a down point to the left and a road going up high to the right. At the down point is SUCCUMB. At the up point is SURVIVAL. Some figures are on the line, they are the auditing session interspersed with a small figure of somebody studying. A big arrow parallels the line pointing up. "Scientology AUDITING and STUDY are the road to ABILITY and FREEDOM."

A picture of the Grade Chart simplified, modernized to show sub-zeros plainly and including OT Levels. "Freedom is reached by going up through the GRADES of auditing."

A picture of the classes of auditors all the way to Class VIII including the PE Course, etc and where taught. "Ability and gain are achieved by TRAINING."

A series of pictures of a caved-in person who gets better and better in subsequent higher pictures. "Scientology processing obtains continual IMPROVEMENT."

A picture of a body, a thetan. "You are a SPIRITUAL BEING, not a body or an animal, as you will discover in processing."

A picture representation of each of the dynamics from I to 8 including the R6 god with an arrow paralleling them on a slant upwards. "There is more to LIFE than personal suffering and trouble." The picture of the R6 god used is the "Old Man" symbol as used on the covers of various Dianetics and Scientology Publications.

A picture of a sunburst with Scientology written in its centre, "Scientology reveals the natural laws of life. You CAN know the answers."

This set prominently displayed in an org in a long panel from left to right, with a sign over it, "You have come to the right place," and a long arrow indicating the sequence, will do an awful lot to answer a preclear's questions. At the end of the panel a sign, same size, saying "See the Registrar, Room " will also direct the preclear.

The preclear should be signed up, if he is a preclear, and with the money paid, sent to a PE Course.

If this is not feasible, he at least should be first assigned to do TRs.

A preclear information sheet can also be compiled giving him data commonly asked.

A preclear's dictionary which includes all terms used in processes and their definition should also be given to him.

If the preclear seems not to be improving even as early as the TRs, a white form of case and health history should be very carefully done, including narcotics.

If he is on narcotics he must come off them and have been off them for a while (in Los Angeles they say six weeks), before resuming his auditing.

If on resuming auditing the preclear still does not gain despite 7 cases, a careful and full medical clinical examination should be ordered as the preclear is medically ill in some previously unsuspected fashion. This is covered in HCO B 12 March 1969, "Physically Ill Pcs".

Should this not prove to be the case, or if the pc does not get well then apply the HCO B of 2 April 1969, "Dianetic Assists", an auditing assist as given in that HCO B.

Above all, don't let unnecessary stops occur on this line for pcs who just sail through.

In a recent glance over the case folders of some stalled or "chronically ill" pcs I found the main sin was simply "No Auditing" occurring in the following ways:

Case 1—3 case supervision directions carefully and correctly advised but NONE OF THEM DONE. No other auditing was done either. Then a fourth case supervision direction on top ignoring the folder and advising something else but that was not done either.

Case 2—Preclear chronically doing badly. Was being "audited" but hadn't a clue. Was not up to talking to an auditor at all. (I ordered TRs and the auditor did them, the pc bloomed and went on up the grades splendidly.)

Case 3—Pc all crippled up from old injuries. In the folder I found no C/Ses there had been done as ordered. Also found the pc had sneaked his folder and done some wild self auditing before auditing could be done. (Ordered HCO B 12 March 1969, Touch Assists and then medical treatment to set a long time broken back.)

Case 4—Pc told the auditor in the session she had a secondary sitting right there and was in it. And although had bad indicators in, the auditor just ended the session.

Case 5—Pc ordered in for a Review, was given the cans, the auditor said "That's it", pc went off in mystery.

Case 6—Pc shaking and fevered but no physical illness according to doctor. Auditor A did an S & D. Pc still not well. A few weeks later illness recurred. I got hold of the pc, asked when the shaking had begun, found an engram where the pc had been withholding being cold, ran it, pc totally recovered. The incident had occurred only a day before Auditor A's session. Had Auditor A merely asked what had been going on he would have found it at once, run it and that would have been that. It was only an auditing assist that was needed which is why I wrote HCO B 2 April 1969, "Dianetic Assists". It hadn't ever occurred to me that auditors wouldn't use the principle of engram running to handle a pc who hurt.

So it adds up to the fact that just not doing auditing is a fundamental error. That's what's meant by "no auditing" in the 7 Resistive Cases of a Class VIII. Auditing just wasn't used to handle the pc. "No Auditing."

The NEW pc who hasn't a clue what auditing is is apt to get a lot of "No auditing". So you teach him what to expect by posters, a PE, TRs.

The troubled pc who is all introverted with a real physical or mental problem had jolly well better get it handled, as in the "Physically Ill Pcs" HCO B 12 March 1969 or with Dianetic Assist as per HCO B 2 April 1969. You don't just sail on up the grades and throw them away.

If you ever get an area that thinks Dianetics and Scientology don't work (which is about as silly as saying there is no gravity) then:

(a) You have an area that has been infiltrated and the tech performance perverted; or

(b) You have a person around who is terrified that it will work and others grown more powerful will now destroy him (which surrenders casewise to "Physically Ill Pcs" or the top Power Process used first followed by sub-zeros and grades); or

(c) You have a narcotic-silly area and are not making them desist before auditing or handling their past addiction by running out its engrams; or

(d) You have an area that just isn't auditing at all; or

(e) You are not handling new pcs as we used to and as recommended in this HCO B.

As a final remark, I have seen a person get "audited all the way to the top" who wasn't ever audited at all. As a comment this is pretty bad but a close check revealed that a large percent did not even know the content or action of a key grade below where they were supposed to have "arrived". They had zero indoctrination as a pc and had not ever made even the sub-zero of ARC Straight Wire.

So lay this down, Case Supervisors and auditors all, as a firm cast-in-concrete rule:

IF YOUR PC DOES NOT OBTAIN A TOTAL REALITY ON HAVING HAD GAINS BEYOND HIS EXPECTATIONS, AUDITING HAS NOT BEEN DONE IN THE FIRST PLACE OR THE PC IS ON DRUGS OR PHYSICALLY ILL.

I look at it this way, auditing is terribly simple. Turn me loose with an E-Meter and a pc and up the line he comes. If he doesn't or can't respond he's seriously ill. If he's that ill that he can't be audited he needs medical treatment. And when he's had that, back to the meter and I'll show you a shining pc.

You say, yes, that's you. You know and can do it.

Sure, sure, sure. But anyone who has studied his meter, his books and bulletins can do it just as easily. If the pc answers his questions and IF HE DOES AUDIT.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:cp.el.dz.ka.rd
Copyright © 1969, 1970
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 6 APRIL 1969
Remimeo
Dianetics Course



FUNDAMENTAL AUDITING


For some years it has not been appreciated fully that the ability to do DIANETIC AUDITING is the true fundamental background of a Scientology auditor.

For many years, 1950 onward, a Dianetic auditor was proudly capable of resolving mental and physical problems by his ability to find and run engrams and secondaries.

The Dianetic auditor had no other skill or tools than his understanding of mental image pictures, as locks, secondaries and engrams and the time track.

With these tools he produced many miracles. Broken bones healed in two weeks instead of six, withered limbs restored, burns vanished, swellings reduced visibly to nothing, lives wrecked by grief and loss recovered, women lost their aging wrinkles and sought-after abilities returned.

The percentage of win was above 50%, which is double that of former approaches.

The use of the E-Meter and my development of R-3-R increased this percentage.

Dianetic training was usually one month in length and attained a high percentage of successful graduates who could attain excellent results.

Dianetics operates at the level of the human being and is addressed mainly to the body and mind. It does not attempt and should not be confused with the end product of Scientology which is spiritual freedom. The end product of Dianetics is a well, happy, high IQ human being.

Dianetics is itself and has its place. When one can handle Dianetics so as to make people well and happy, one can then begin to think of and work on the higher aspects of Scientology.

To attempt to obtain the results of Scientology by applying only Dianetics is in fact a confusion of objectives.

The Dianetic auditor, whether the "very best people" behind governments like it or not, is the natural inheritor of all mental healing.

Working in conjunction with bona fide physical healers such as the actual practicing medical doctor, the Dianetic auditor, with only the skills taught on the Dianetic Course, could all but eradicate psychosomatic illness and mental illness on this planet. Tens of thousands of cases in Dianetics show this is no idle boast. The recent breakthrough showing most insanity is common physical illness untreated, adds up to making such an objective a fact.

The Scientology auditor is all too often balked by the fact that his preclear comes to him already ill. His preclear is below being a well human being. That is part of the gradient. If the Scientology auditor is not also a good Dianetic auditor he tends to ignore the fact that his preclear is not yet up to being a well human being.

Applying Grade Processing the Scientology auditor has already skipped a grade—a well human being. He therefore fails to understand that his preclear is simply seeking to escape as a thetan the gradient of being a well being.

The role of Dianetics, let us face it, is that of a healing science. It is the most

advanced mental science man has. It should not be skimped or scanted.

A good Dianetic auditor can handle the bulk of psychosomatic illness and speed the healing of ordinary illness or make it possible for the person to recover. Mental aberration as such can be handled in Dianetics if it works in conjunction with other valid branches of physical healing.

There is then a demarcation between Dianetics and Scientology. The Dianetic auditor's skills reach up to and include a well, happy human being. This is in excess of man's hope for any mental science.

The Scientology auditor is working for increased ability and spiritual freedom. And that is far in excess of any dream of accomplishment man has had including Buddhism.

When we get a sick human being being handled to make him spiritually free we get a confusion and are likely to fail.

The Scientology auditor who is also a good basic Dianetics auditor can make that being well enough, using Dianetics and available healing skills, to succeed with Scientology objectives.

But it has become plain, particularly in the last few months when I have been sorting out materials to communicate them better, that there is a vast difference between Dianetics and Scientology.

A Dianetic preclear is one who is being processed toward the objective of a well and happy human being. A Scientology preclear is a well, happy human being who is being processed toward total ability and spiritual freedom.

Those two definitions should be well learned. It will prevent much confusion and some failures.

When I hear of a preclear "getting his Grade IV to get rid of his headaches" I really groan.

A preclear "getting his Grade IV" obviously never got his Dianetic auditing and the auditors who audited him were mixed up.

I would never never never audit a pc on grades if I found before me a sick person. I would simply change gears, get busy with good old Dianetics and use physical healers if necessary to get a well, happy pc before me. Then I would go on with grades.

Scientology objectives are so far above anything man has any hope for that he at once thinks of them as healing activities. They are not.

Dianetics is the healing activity.

Therefore all Dianetic course materials are refined with that objective fully in view. And when a Scientology auditor finds himself with a Dianetic preclear on his hands and if that auditor learned his Dianetics well, then he will apply Dianetics and when the preclear is ready for it, only then will he apply Scientology.

Any Scientology failures are totally owing to the auditor not learning his Dianetics in the first place.

So have at it and get a hatful of healing wins as a Dianetic Auditor.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:jk.aap
Copyright © 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 6 APRIL 1969
Issue II
(Corrected and reissued)
Remimeo
Dianetics Course

DIANETICS COURSE AUDITING REQUIREMENTS


In conjunction with the expansion of its curriculum, the auditing requirements of a Dianetic student for certification are as follows:

25 hours total session time as an auditor.

This auditing must include the following:

A. Touch Assists.

B. Contact Assists.

C. Changing the life of someone who has lost a loved one by running the secondary or chain to GIs.

D. Running straight engrams of former injuries.

E. Auditing assists on ill pcs, taking and tracing down every manifested symptom to its engramic incident or chain.

F. Doing TRs with pcs and indoctrinating them as pcs.

The 25 hours must contain one or more remarkable cases demonstrating changes in the physical condition or well-being of a preclear.

Without these auditing actions and a total certainty Dianetics works as demonstrated in the cases he handles, no student enrolling on a Dianetics Course after receipt of this HCOB may be certified as a Hubbard Dianetic Auditor.

Any checksheet issued after receipt of this HCOB for the Dianetics Course must include:

1. HCO Pol Ltr of 6 April 69
2. HCOB 6 April 69
3. This HCOB (6 April 69 Issue II)
4. HCOB 28 Feb 69
5. HCOB 7 Feb 69
6. HCOB 12 Mar 69
7. HCOB 2 April 69
8. HCOB 5 April 69

These are in addition to the existing HDA checksheet.

HCOBs or Pol Ltrs after this date relating to Dianetics are to be included on new checksheets issued to students.

An HDA is requisite to Level Zero Academy enrollment.

REASONS WHY

The reason Scientology auditors occasionally fail is that they seek to use grades to make pcs well. Grades are a route to spiritual freedom and greatly increased ability. Auditing a pc on grades who has not yet attained physical well-being as a human being is an oversight only by one not trained in and uncertain about Dianetics. A Dianetic auditor would use Dianetics to handle the lack of well-being of the pc.

A Scientology auditor who is also skilled in Dianetics would not make the mistake of doing Grade or Level auditing on a temporarily or chronically ill pc. He would shift off to Dianetics, run the secondaries or engrams necessary to resolve the physical difficulty and then go on with Scientology auditing.

Sometimes a Scientology auditor who has not become adept at Dianetics goes through his whole training thinking grades will accomplish physical healing, auditing sick pcs and wondering why "Scientology does not make them well" without ever realizing he is at cross purposes. He is trying to make Scientology do with grades or remedies what is done easily with Dianetics.

A person can go all the way up the grades and into the OT sections always looking only to "get well" and miss the entire thing, whereas a remarkably little skilled application of Dianetic auditing would have long ago resolved it. Persons who "don't make OT" are only persons who didn't make Dianetics.

It is vital then to give the Dianetic auditor total certainty of his dominance in the field of making people recover and making them into well, happy human beings before he then starts them off into the upper very valuable vital areas of Scientology grades.

Most of the persons who want auditing are afflicted by discomfort and unhappiness if not illness.

Since the two subjects were for a long while researched as one, some early materials are crossed. Usually materials after 1952 apply mainly to Scientology. But during this later period (as witness R-3-R and current advances) Dianetics has also been advanced.

The skill of the Dianetic Auditor is no small thing. It is worth attaining as itself. I myself, when called on to handle the ailing, pick up my meter and go to work and in an hour or two have a miraculous recovery. When I don't, which is seldom, I get the pc examined clinically and find he or she has a broken skull or back or a gallstone or some remediable thing. After this is fixed up, I once more audit them and they finally emerge as bright, well human beings.

And I do not use in all this anything that is not contained in the Dianetics course.

My percentage is 100%. And so can yours be.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:cp.ei.rd
Copyright © 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
Remimeo
Class VIIIs HCO BULLETIN OF 16 APRIL 1969
Dianetic Auditor's
Checksheet
Tech Sec
Ds of T HEALTH FORM, USE OF
Ds of P


As one needs a guide to know what to audit on a case, the Dianetic Health Form is an essential auditing action.

Also, some cases do not know they have recovered. It is Scientology that addresses improved awareness, not Dianetics. Dianetics accomplishes an eradication of the unwanted condition and when it is gone it is gone. The pc will not again mention it in many cases and it would be an error to hammer him about being better now.

Therefore a second Health Form gives a comparison. The somatics and pains not mentioned in the second which were in the first can be considered to be gone.

A second form done later gives the auditor and (when a Case Supervisor is also on the case) the Case Supervisor an indication of the actual improvement. A few days, weeks or months can elapse between giving the form. This gives an indication of improvement. Any number of Health Forms can be given.

One of the old problems of Dianetics was that the pc recovered from his arthritis fully and then only nagged the auditor about a new symptom. It wasn't that the pc had to have an illness (only the 19th century psychologist believed that it was no use to cure anything as the patient just got something else). The fact is that the symptoms of the pc are several, not just one.

You take up and audit each symptom or complaint, one after the other.

This is a new advance in Dianetics—that a preclear's illness or upset has more than one source. His illness or upset is a composite.

You audit the most available symptom first. Then find the next one and audit it, then the next, etc.

The symptom in which the pc is most interested is the one to do first. You run its secondary or engram or chain and it vanishes.

Then do the one in which he is now interested and run its secondary or engram or

Now find the next symptom, etc.

Sooner or later the pc will have tremendous good indicators, be smiling, happy.

That's the time to quit. Right there. Until then, keep finding and fully erasing the latest symptom the pc has.

This can be done with or without a meter. The meter makes it easier. The biggest read on an item given on the Health Form is the one to audit first.

One finds "an incident which could have caused that", dates it loosely, runs it as an incident without pushing hard, gets an earlier similar incident and runs that, or even a third or fourth earlier similar (each time earlier) incident until a floating needle or the pc indicates the thing is gone.

Then one finds out what may now be bothering the pc and does the same action on it.

Sooner or later the pc will become bright, happy, symptom free.

Symptoms are pains, emotional feelings, tiredness, aches, pressures, sensations, unwanted states of the body, etc.

The only point where an auditor may get a hang-up is when he encounters an earlier wrong diagnosis. Someone told the pc he had heart trouble and the pc gives that as a symptom but doesn't really have one. When such a puzzle comes up you look for allies (other people) who had heart trouble (or whatever the thing was) or you find out from the pc and meter if it was a wrong diagnosis.

If you are auditing without a meter, you take the pc's interest as the indicator. You audit the symptom in which he is interested and cease to audit it when it is gone.

You can use whatever is given on the original Health Form that was done until the form is no longer valid or until the pc's good indicators are in. When the pc brightens up, that's the end of that Health Form. A new one must be done WHEN THE PC IS AGAIN FEELING BAD, TIRED OR WORRIED.

The purpose of any session or series of sessions is to get the pc feeling well and happy.

Sometimes the pc's condition is obvious and the engram equally obvious. The pc has just had a child. The delivery of it and any earlier similar engram is of course audited at once. Any recent experience is so handled.

If a pc wants no auditing and yet is ill or miserable, one finds out why he doesn't want to be audited by getting him to explain (when he will become auditable) or one finds and runs as secondaries, engrams or chains bad experiences with treatment.

If the pc doesn't recover at all, then the Auditor's Code has been violated or the engrams were overrun or not run long enough to erase or the pc was very ill medically and should have had a medical examination first.

But even with poor auditing it is rare for a pc not to recover.

Of course, the more skilled (follows the Auditor's Code, knows his meter, knows his Dianetics) the Auditor is, the more certain recovery becomes.

The worst crime is overwhelming the pc by telling him what's wrong, not letting him tell you.

The Health Form is of very great assistance in handling all this. The use of it is as follows:

1. The Auditor sits down with the pc (usually the pc on a meter) and explains he's going to do a Health Form and try to help the pc.

2. The Form is completed.

3. The Auditor picks out by meter or by asking the pc which symptom he has his attention on.

4. The Auditor finds an incident that had that symptom in it, dates it and runs it as an incident.

5. The incident (and symptom) erases or the Auditor finds an earlier similar incident, etc, dates it and erases it until the incidents and symptoms are gone.

6. A new symptom is located on the Health Form by meter or pc's interest.

7. Steps 4 and 5 are repeated.

8. A new symptom is located on the Health Form or by pc's complaint.

9. Steps 4 and 5 are repeated.

10. We go on doing this until the pc is suddenly well, smiling and happy and at that moment we at once desist.

11. We tell the pc that is the end of the session. Note if several sessions were required to do the above, we start each new one by telling the pc it's started and end each session by telling the pc the session is ended.

Each session is written down as it is done and preserved for future correction or use.

The basic Health Form follows as part of this HCO B. Individual copies are made
out for each pc and left in his case folder.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:ei.rd
Copyright © 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


DIANETIC HEALTH FORM
11 April 1969


______________________________ ____________________
Name of Pc Date of Form

______________________________ ____________________
Name of Auditor Place of session


This form is done by the Auditor with a Pc. It is not Metered.

1. Visible physical defects _____________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

2. Physical disabilities ________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

3. Perception difficulties_______________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

4. Past illnesses _____________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

5. Past operations____________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

6. Any current illness_________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

7. Any continual pains ________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

8. Any occasional pains _______________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

9. Any continual aches________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

10. Any occasional aches_______________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

11. Any continual unwanted sensations____________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

12. Any occasional unwanted sensations___________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

13. Tiredness—continual_______________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

14. Tiredness—occasional______________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

15. Emotional tone by pc statement _______________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

15. (a) Any fears _____________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

15. (b) Chronic worries ________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

16. Emotional tone by auditor's inspection__________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

17. Any disability payment or pension_____________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

18. Any familial history of insanity _______________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

19. Any venereal infection in the past______________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

20. Any venereal infection in the present___________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

21. Any rash_________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

22. Overweight ______________________________________________________

23. Underweight _____________________________________________________

24. Eye Colour_______________________________________________________

25. Any tint in eye whites ______________________________________________

26. Pimples _________________________________________________________

27. Glasses _________________________________________________________

28. Colour Blindness__________________________________________________

29. Hearing _________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

30. Nasal Trouble_____________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

Throat Trouble____________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

31. Sick or disabled family members______________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

32. Perception trouble in family__________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

33. Earlier allies or close friends _________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

34. Husband or wife physical troubles_____________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

35. Attitude toward illness ______________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

36. Attitude toward treatment____________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

37. Earlier physical examination discloses__________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________



L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jk.ei.rd
Copyright © 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 17 APRIL 1969
Remimeo
Dianetics Chksht
Class VIIIs
Dianetic Auditors

DIANETIC CASE SUPERVISION


Dianetics is done differently than Scientology in that its auditors are trained up to HDA only. Therefore they do not have various skills you will find in a Scientology Auditor. Even when they become a Scientology Auditor, Dianetics is still done as Dianetics.

Therefore the Case Supervisor supervising folders done by Dianetic Auditors must not expect or require any of the following:

1. RUDIMENTS, they came in long after Dianetics.
2. MODEL SESSION, this was invented 11 years after Dianetics.
3. TRIPLE FLOWS.
4. WITHHOLDS PULLED.
5. PTPs handled (Present Time Problems).
6. ARC BREAKS patched up.

In short knowledge and skill above and beyond the training received on a new Dianetics Course is not to be expected.

There are also things in Book One we no longer use such as Repeater Technique, looking for phrases to explain conditions.

We use Dianetics as it was re-worked in the early 60s and as currently being presented.
If it isn't on the checksheet of the Dianetics Course, then we don't demand it.

We do demand some skill with a meter and what a floating needle is.

If a Dianetic pc gets in trouble we send him to Qual for a review. In this review, all Scientology skills (but no grades) can be done.

In review he can get in his rudiments, etc.

It is very worthy of note that in Reviewing Dianetics or in doing Dianetic auditing ONE CAN RUN OUT BAD SESSIONS AS AN AUDITOR OR PC BY USING R-3-R ON AUDITING SESSIONS OR THERAPY.

If we keep Dianetics to Dianetics we will again achieve the miracles of which it is capable.

Dianetics has been refined greatly. But it is all there on the checksheets now. There is no hidden data line.

It is far less complex today than it was in 1953, for instance, and much more effective. But it is still Dianetics. It is a technology that runs and erases locks, secondaries and engrams and their chains.

It should be case supervised and done with that fully in mind.

An HDA is an HDA. He can do what he can do.

And it's marvellous.


LRH:jk.ei.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1969 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 17 APRIL 1969
Remimeo Issue II
Qual Secs
Class VIIIs
Dian Auditors
Tech Secs
Ds of T
Ds of P
DIANETIC CASE FAILURES


The foremost failure of Dianetics on cases, by actual inspection, is a failure to do Dianetics.

It may sound peculiar or too obvious to say that. But this fact has to be stressed since it was found to be the leading reason for non-recovery.

Even this has its degrees of error.

1st is just NO auditing. A case wasn't audited at all. No session, no auditor, no auditing. Complaint, "I'm a Scientologist I still have awful headaches." Sounds real incriminating. The FACT is in this question "Did anybody run the engram?" "No, just grades."

Dianetics wasn't used at all.

The next degree is starting in on a lock, secondary, engram or chain of them and not completing it to erasure. Running the pc through one engram once with no good Indicators or erasure and then calling it a session is really no auditing. Next session you must complete the action started.

The next degree is to get rid of one chronic somatic or sensation and then fail to carry on when the pc has others too.

The most recent discovery I made was that an illness has several sources expressed each one as a different sensation, ache, pain or emotion. EVERY ONE OF THESE IS OUT OF A MENTAL IMAGE PICTURE OR THE SERIES OF THEM CALLED A CHAIN.

The degree of omission in applying Dianetics is that one did not take up each separately stated or assessed symptom and erase its source—that particular mental image picture.

The vast majority of Dianetic cases I have case supervised now have this in common—NO AUDITING in one or more instances outlined above.

Really it's kind of "corny" as an error. It is so "corny" that people try to make more of it than simply the patient or engram didn't get audited.

"She still has her headaches."
"Did you find and audit the mental image picture of the experiences which had head injury in it?"
"No."
"Well did you give her a session?"
"Yes. "
"What did you run?"
"I did Power on her."
"Then you didn't give her a Dianetic session."
"Oh, no. Dianetics is old, we don't do that anymore. She still has her headaches. . . . ."

POW!

LRH:jc.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1969 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 22 APRIL 1969
Remimeo
Class VIIIs
Dian Auditors
Tech Secs DIANETICS vs SCIENTOLOGY
Qual Secs
Dian Checksheet


Dianetics is Dianetics and Scientology is Scientology.

They are separate subjects. They have in common certain tools like the E-Meter, TRs and auditor presence. But there it ends.

Dianetics addresses the body. Scientology addresses the thetan. While a thetan can produce illness, it is the body that is ill.

Thus Dianetics is used to knock out and erase illnesses, unwanted sensations, misemotion, somatics, pain, etc. Scientology and its grades are never used for such things.

Scientology is used to increase spiritual freedom, intelligence, ability, to produce immortality.

To mix the two has been a very bad error.

Dianetics came before Scientology. It disposed of body illness and the difficulties a thetan was having with his body. This was a Present Time Problem to the thetan. In the presence of a PTP no case gain results (an old discovery).

When a thetan has body discomfort or upset solved, he could then go on with what he really wanted which were the improvements to be found in Scientology.

Mixing the two practices in any way produced and will produce no real case gain. Scientology grades will only occasionally get rid of body ills and Dianetics will not achieve real spiritual freedom.

Used within their own areas they both each one separately achieves that for which it was intended. Dianetics can make a well body, Scientology can make a recovered thetan.

So you don't use Scientology remedies or Scientology Case Supervisor procedures to run Dianetic sessions. High Tone Arm, ARC Breaks, etc are not even considered in Dianetic Auditing.

Dianetics was researched in 1932, '38, '45, '48, '49, '50, '51, '52 to name the principal early years. It was redeveloped in 1962 and '63 when I made R-3-R discoveries and re-released. And it was finally realized as per this HCOB in 1969 after further research.

I found that Dianetics had been forgotten for a dozen years and was being given a light brush-off as a course and that auditors and pcs were trying to use Scientology grades to handle body ills such as headaches, chronic somatics and so on.

Man's usual PTP is his body. So if one gave him gold ornaments he'd try to use them to cure his aches and pains.

Thus Dianetics was forgotten and unused and Scientology was being made to attempt cures. Thus they were, both subjects, busily being made to fail to some degree.

Dianetics as it now exists is so simple, so elementary and so broadly applicable to the body that it requires a real effort to complicate it or make it unworking. Keep the two separate in both application and use.

Recognize them as two entirely distinct and separate subjects with widely different uses.


LRH:jc.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1969 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 22 APRIL 1969
Issue II
Remimeo
Usual Dn Dist
Dian Checksheet
AOs
SOMATICS AND OTS



If a preclear or pre OT has physical difficulties, bad perception trouble, illness or physical disability HE HAS NO BUSINESS GETTING GRADES POWER CLEARING OR OT LEVELS.
HE
NEEDS
DIANETICS

Once that is completely understood it will end any and all "failures".

The Dianetics he needs is fully contained in the new Dianetics checksheet.

Using Scn auditing and grades to handle common Dianetic problems is to audit a pc over a Present Time Problem.

The big PTPs a thetan has are his body.

A thetan is a thetan and he wants spiritual freedom and ability.

A body is a body.

Scientology = thetan rehabilitation.

Dianetics = body improvement.

All Dianeticists and Scientologists, all pcs and pre OTs should be informed of this.

Using Scn to help the body and Dianetics to help the thetan is a mix of practices and the misuse of both.

Even the applications are different.

In Scn you handle PTPs, ARC Breaks, Missed Withholds that occur in sessions.

In Dianetics you erase the session or incident in which they occurred.

Dianetic processing uses a Meter, R3R and assists and TRs. It also uses an understanding of what the subject is for. It erases locks, secondaries and engrams or their chains. That's exactly what it does and what is done with it. The mental image picture is the source of continued pain, somatics, bad perception or illness. This subject has to be DONE, actually used These data in this paragraph are the total essentials of Dianetics. It is taught, case supervised and used as Dianetics.

The thetan, scales, ARC, exteriorization, ability, freedom, the grades, clearing, and OT levels are the sole province of Scientology.

Earlier writings tend to overlap and intermingle the two subjects.

Because one was not permitted to heal, that being frowned on in some countries, Dianetics tended to be suppressed and was lost sight of. Scientology began to be made to try to do Dianetic work.

We can now cleanly separate the two and so obtain enormously increased case gains.


LRH:jc.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1969 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 23 APRIL 1969
Remimeo
Dn Checksheet
Class VIIIs
Qual Secs
Tech Secs
Dianetics
BASIC DEFINITIONS


ERASURE is the action of erasing, rubbing out, locks, secondaries or engrams.

A LOCK is a mental image picture of an incident where one was knowingly or unknowingly reminded of a secondary or engram. It does not itself contain a blow or a burn or impact and is not any major cause of misemotion. It does not contain unconsciousness. It may contain a feeling of pain or illness, etc, but is not itself the source of it. Example: One sees a cake, feels sick. This is a lock on an engram of being made sick by eating cake. The picture of seeing a cake and feeling sick is a lock on (is locked to) the incident (unseen at the moment) of getting sick eating cake. When one finds a lock it can be run like any other mental image picture.

A SECONDARY is a mental image picture of a moment of severe and shocking loss or threat of loss which contains misemotion such as anger, fear, grief, apathy or "deathfulness". It is a mental image recording of a time of severe mental stress. It may contain unconsciousness. When it is restimulated by a similar but lighter experience another mental image picture is recorded which becomes a lock on the secondary and serves to keep the secondary alive. A secondary is called a secondary because it itself depends upon an earlier engram with similar data but real pain, etc.

AN ENGRAM is a mental image picture which is a recording of a time of physical pain and unconsciousness. It must by definition have impact or injury as part of its content.

It is of the very greatest importance that a Dianetic auditor really grasp what these things are. Otherwise he won't know what he is doing or to what.

Now because he isn't seeing his preclear's pictures an auditor can become very careless about them and not handle them correctly.

If an auditor doesn't really know what these things are (erasure, locks, secondaries, engrams) he cannot of course hope to handle them for the preclear.

The basic Dianetic errors are just not knowing what these are and that they are there to be handled and that these and these alone cause psychosomatic ills.

Once one has a full grip on these definitions he can then and only then hope to do anything with them for the preclear.

If the auditor is going to handle the aches, pains, unwanted sensations and psychosomatic illnesses of the preclear, it requires that he fully grasp these basic definitions.

Literally millions of complications can stem from the simple fact that a preclear records experiences in mental image pictures and that these thereafter can affect HIS BODY adversely.

Once one really understands that mental image pictures are all there is in the preclear's "mind" one has understood the total of aberration. There is NOT something else there. No "id", no "ego". There are only mental image pictures.

These, if you use the exact procedures of Dianetics, can be found and erased.

When the unwanted locks, secondaries and engrams are erased the preclear will be rid of the physical disabilities of which he complains and will be well physically.

SOMATIC—means essentially body sensation, illness or pain or discomfort. "Soma" means body. Hence PSYCHO SOMATIC or pains stemming from the mind.

MISEMOTION—Anything that is unpleasant emotion such as antagonism, anger, fear, grief, apathy or a death feeling.

This is the entire breadth of Dianetics today.

In Scientology we deal with the thetan, the being who is the individual and who handles and lives in the body. This is beyond the scope of today's Dianetics.

If a preclear is well physically made so by Dianetics and any required physical medication or nutrition, he can then embark on Scientology, the increase of his abilities and spiritual freedom.

If a preclear who is being audited or has been audited on Scientology Grades becomes ill one DOES NOT TRY TO MAKE HIM WELL BY GIVING HIM NEW HIGHER GRADES. That has been an error of great magnitude. Instead ONE REVERTS TO DIANETIC AUDITING until the pc is well and only then continues with Scientology.

This is correct procedure because it works.

People "come into Scientology" to cure their headaches. Somebody starts them off on Grade auditing, several Grades later they still have their headache. It is a continual Present Time Problem to them and the auditor. It sometimes vanishes during Grade Processing. This gives an unfortunate win.

The right thing to have done was give the person DIANETIC AUDITING, until he or she no longer had headaches and then begin to audit the person on Grades so as to put them well above ever again getting headaches.

Continual headaches come from mental image pictures retained by the pc of having a head crushed or shot off or hit. That is an engram. It actually had to happen. It is NOT imaginary or delusion. The proof is that when the auditor finally erases the engram the recording of the injury is gone and the headaches will not again occur.

The preclear often is unable to confront the actual engram at once. He offers one a LOCK, a time when he had a headache. One "runs" this lock (one always runs whatever is offered, you don't force the pc) and finds after putting the preclear through it a couple of times that IT IS GETTING MORE SOLID or it simply isn't erasing. One finds an earlier recording. This possibly turns out to be a secondary. The pc had a moment of loss and cried and also had a headache.

This secondary may or may not erase. If it does one leaves it of course as finished. But if it does not erase and isn't erasing after a couple of times through it, one then asks for an earlier one.

One probably would then get the actual engram, a recording of a time when the head was actually injured.

One runs this and after a couple of times through, finds it isn't erasing and so goes earlier for another engram.

This one erases.

When it erases the whole chain of headaches ALSO erases.

And that is the end of the pc's headaches period.

One then inquires after other somatics or sensations and handles them the same

It is all done by using the technique called R-3-R without variation.

Since these recordings contain mainly other-determinedness (pictures of others doing things) the auditor always has more control over the preclear's mental image pictures than the preclear does. Thus the pictures do what the auditor says. This point too must be grasped by an auditor or he will be waiting on the preclear to act or move in time.

The TIME TRACK is the consecutive record of mental image pictures which accumulates through the preclear's life or lives. It is very exactly dated.

PLEASURE MOMENTS are mental image pictures containing pleasure sensations. They respond to R-3-R. One seldom addresses them unless the preclear is fixated on some type of "pleasure" to a point where it has become highly aberrated.

BLACK FIELD is just some part of a mental image picture where the preclear is looking at blackness. It is part of some lock, secondary or engram. In Scientology it can occur (rarely) when the pc is exterior, looking at something black. It responds to R-3-R.

INVISIBLE FIELD is just a part of some lock, secondary or engram that is "invisible". It like a black field responds to R-3-R.

PRESSURE SOMATIC is, in Dianetics, considered to be a symptom in a lock, secondary or engram, simply part of the content.

Whatever, the symptom pain sensation, whatever, it is from either the body directly (such as a broken bone, a gallstone or immediate physical cause) or is part of the content of a mental image picture—lock, secondary or engram.

The Dianetic auditor does not audit ideas or think. He is handling mental recordings. Ideas are in them. Ideas come out of them. But think is no longer part of Dianetics.

In Dianetics we handle locks, secondaries and engrams.

KEY IN is the action of recording a lock on a secondary or engram.

KEY OUT is an action of the engram or secondary dropping away without being erased.

FLOATING NEEDLES occur when a key-out occurs or when an engram is erased.

When one keys out (rather than erases) an engram, the preclear can always, in life, get a key-in of the engram again and so become ill as before. This does not mean one should overrun a floating needle. It does however point out that you can key out an engram without running it and at once key it back in again and run it.

An example is getting the date. One gets a floating needle. It is better to leave it at that. But also realize the incident that hasn't been run is still there.

MULTIPLE ILLNESS—means the preclear is physically uncomfortable or ill from several engrams of different types all restimulated. One runs one somatic chain at a time, running each new symptom that is assessed or stated by the preclear.

CHAIN means a series of recordings of similar experiences. A chain has engrams, secondaries and locks. Example—Head injury chain in the sequence encountered by an auditor and run by R-3-R—sporting goods display window seeing it (lock), losing a bat (secondary), hit in the head with a bat (engram). The engram is the earliest date, the secondary a later date, the lock the most recent.

By using somatics to trace back (meaning discomforts, complaints, sensations, aches, pains) and by staying on the chain of only one somatic (i.e. headaches) you get back down the single chain without dispersing all over the place into different chains. Thus one runs the chain of one particular somatic or discomfort or complaint down to key-out or erasure before doing the next somatic or discomfort or complaint.

AUTOMATIC BANK—When a pc gets picture after picture after picture all out of control. This occurs when one isn't following an assessed somatic or complaint or has chosen the wrong one or one which the pc is not ready to confront or by overwhelming the pc with rough TRs or going very non-standard. Some pcs turn up in their first session with automatic banks. The thing to do is carefully assess the physical complaint for longest or best read and gently handle that chain well.

BASIC—This is the FIRST experience recorded in mental image pictures of that TYPE of pain, sensation, discomfort, etc. Every chain has its basic. It is a PECULIARITY and a FACT that when one gets down to the basic on a chain (a) it erases and (b) the whole chain vanishes for good. Basic is simply earliest.

UNBURDENING—As a basic is not at once available on any chain one usually unburdens it by running later engrams, secondaries and locks. The act of unburdening would be digging off the top to get at the bottom as in moving sand. As you run off later incidents, the ability of the preclear to confront it also increases and basic is easy to run when finally contacted.

BASIC BASIC—This belongs in Scientology. It is wholly beyond the scope of Dianetics. It means the most basic basic of all basics and results in clearing. It is found on the Clearing Course. If contacted or run before the pc was brought up through the Scientology Grades, he wouldn't be able to handle it anyway as experience has shown. So this is part of Scientology, not Dianetics.

VALENCE is the form and identity of the preclear or another, the beingness. We are not much concerned with this in Dianetics today. It is handled in Scientology.

ALLY—A person from whom one had sympathy and was dependent upon.

ASSESS in Dianetics means choose, from a list or statements, which item or thing has the longest read or the pc's interest. The longest read will also have the pc's interest oddly enough.

If you know these definitions COLD so you don't have to mutter them or memorize them but just KNOW them, you will really get results with Dianetics.

The biggest failure in training auditors was their faulty grasp of what they were addressing and their additive think.

The discoveries of Dianetics were basic and vital and opened a wide new unexplored frontier.

These words were assigned to things arbitrarily. They had to be. Man had not had any notion of these things before so they had no names and had to be assigned names.

The names were chosen because they didn't also mean something else in another field of science.

The terms are therefore IMPORTANT and what they mean and the things they name must be grasped before success can attend any auditing.

Any failures of Dianetic auditors were not the failures of Dianetics. The persons attempting to audit others didn't KNOW what these things were, essentially the lock, the secondary, the engram, erasure and key-out.

So these are essential to any training or use of Dianetics.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jc.ei.rd
Copyright © 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED






HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 23 APRIL 1969
Issue II
Remimeo
Dn Checksheet
Class VIIIs DIANETICS
Qual Secs
Tech Secs ERASURE
HOW TO ATTAIN


If you run a lock, secondary or engram through TWICE and it does not erase, you ask for an earlier similar incident related to the somatic being handled.

If a mental image picture goes more solid on the second pass through, an earlier similar incident must be found.

Eventually you will find a basic incident that will erase. It will be the earliest on the chain.

Follow the somatic, not the narrative content.

If handling an assessed headache you ask for "an earlier headache or head pain".

Don't ask for narrative chains such as "an earlier fight with your mother".

The rule is invariable—IF IT ISN'T ERASING OR IS GOING MORE SOLID AFTER TWICE THROUGH GET AN EARLIER INCIDENT RELATING TO THE ASSESSED SOMATIC AND RUN IT.

This was a very essential part of R-3-R but was somehow omitted from some
descriptions of the procedure.


LRH:jc.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1969 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 23 APRIL 1969
Issue III
Remimeo
Dn Checksheet
Class VIIIs
Qual Secs
Tech Secs



PAST LIVES



The reason the first Hubbard Dianetic Research Foundation had trouble was that its board of directors attempted to stop past lives from being run.

When a group seeks to forward only what is currently acceptable it of course stalls all progress.

Further it is dishonest to suppress or fail to reveal scientific discoveries.

Disagreeing with the Law of Gravity could give one some very bad falls.

Pre-Dianetic mental studies customarily threw out anything that did not agree with their pet theories or would be "unpopular" with authorities.

Such was the dishonesty practised in the humanities that the whole field had fallen into brutal hands. Dianetics had to encounter the Dark Age atmosphere which then prevailed, complete with torture and murder of the insane.

The facts are that what the auditor believes has little to do with the preclear's reality. If a practitioner challenges or demands proof of a patient's data the patient becomes ill—that is the bald fact of it. It's part of the Auditor's Code.

As far as past lives are concerned, if you don't run mental image pictures from past lives when they come up on a chain, the preclear will not recover.

A pathetic case of this occurred in early research. A girl crippled by polio was able to throw away her crutches after my first session. And would have become entirely well except that she recalled seeing and hearing Lincoln give his Gettysburg address. Her mother condemned her for such nonsense. The girl's lameness was confirmed and perpetuated by this and by a psychotic father who raved at me for daring to suggest such things. I didn't suggest anything. In auditing the girl she suddenly came up with being at Gettysburg listening to Lincoln.

Seems a bit cruel to condemn a young girl to a lifetime of lameness just to satisfy a fixed idea.

The weird idea is that one only lives but once.

We have several times traced the graves of pcs in a special project and they usually came up correct. One pc was very upset to find his friend has failed to erect the fitting paid for tombstone, substituting a common slab, possibly to pocket the difference.

Some pcs have been so overwhelmed in the past by some great figure that they go into his valence in that life. This often throws discredit on past lives.

I recall one girl who had been every famous figure in history who when we got her in valence turned up to have been only a victim to them. The great generals and politicians of history, it must be sadly remarked, aren't easily distinguished from mass murderers.

But even famous figures are somewhere.

Past lives as a subject is made distasteful, possibly purposely, by some who, by fearing to have been a nobody and seeking status, talk loudly to others about having been Napoleon, Julius Caesar and Brutus all at the same time.

In a society which tries to hide in the current identity or seeks to mortalize everyone and make people only animals the subject of past lives can be a difficult one socially.

The truth in auditing is, IF YOU DON'T RUN THE INCIDENTS GIVEN BY THE PC HE DOESN'T GET WELL.

One spectacular recovery of an insane woman occurred when she ran an incident as a lion who ate her keeper. Freudian work hadn't been able to crack the case. The alienist at the sanitarium kept her in with trying to explain how it was all delusion (the current technique pre-Dianetics). A Dianetic Auditor found and ran it and she became sane at once and stayed so.

It is NOT the auditor's role to handle the philosophic or social aspects of incidents. To chide a pc for having an anti-social engram or a record of a crime or to challenge his data or refuse him his past life will bar his road to recovery and is itself a crime.

It will be found that Man is basically good. Only his aberrations are bad. When you run out his engrams he becomes social and reverts to being good.

Auditing is auditing. Audit what the pc has to audit. Leave the social aspects of the case to others. It's not the auditor's job.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:jc.ldm.aap
Copyright © 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 24 APRIL 1969
Remimeo
Dn Checksheet
Class VIIIs, etc


DIANETIC USE


Why Dianetics fell out of use had nothing to do with its workability. It has worked and well since 1950.

In some areas, mainly the US, it was illegal to heal or cure anything. There was even a law in California giving 25 illnesses that were against the law to cure. The "Better" Business Bureau in the US even issues pamphlets that state that "You can always tell a fake healer because he says he can cure something".

Why a civilization would make it illegal to cure illness can only be explained by some vested interest making more money out of people being sick than getting people well.

There existed a continual threat to anyone who helped their fellows.

The ability of Scientology to bring about spiritual freedom therefore received the concentration of effort by organisations.

Lately public opinion has turned heavily against these suppressive groups and the public discovery that illegal seizure, torture and murder was the hidden activity of political psychiatric groups has lost these people their support.

It was overlooked that spiritual healing of the body has not been illegal and that Dianetics used for pastoral counseling is completely legal.

It is a sobering thought that the only effective technology of psychosomatic healing—Dianetics—could be suppressed out of full usage.

One is handling the effect of the spirit on the body. Therefore even Dianetics is spiritual healing and as such is far from illegal.

Man should not be kept ill just to let a few have a monopoly.

In almost all other countries than the US there is no restriction on healing despite monopolistic efforts to make one.

Another reason Dianetics was for some time out of use was that it was believed it had been superseded by Scientology which it never was in fact. Dianetics can be done with no reference whatever to Scientology or its techniques.

People who have given up through illness are also prone to want to leave. Instead of confronting their illness it is easier to try to get away from it. Thus such people are in a hurry to be free and prefer Scientology. But if they have a sick body, it is a present time problem and inhibits attaining the spiritual freedom they seek.

The correct procedure is to make them well wherever possible with medical treatment and to handle their psychosomatic illnesses with Dianetics and then, before any further abuses by life can occur, to raise their ability and secure their freedom with Scientology. This is the correct use of Dianetics. It is the remedy for psychosomatic illness.

The basic use of Dianetics is to make a well body and to augment physical treatment.

Any injurious experience can be erased by Dianetics. It is very easy to use and if one wants people well and happy it should be used at every occasion.

A person has an operation. This should be followed soon after by the erasure of the engram of the experience by R-3-R and the usual Dianetic auditor actions. The healing time will be greatly speeded and often healing will occur where a relapse might have followed.

A woman has a child. The engram of delivery should be run out soon after. The result of doing so is very spectacular. There is no "postpartum psychosis" or dislike of the child and no permanent injury to the mother. It is in fact best to audit the mother both before and after the delivery, which gives one fast relatively painless childbirth and quick recovery.

Recovery from disease under treatment is speeded by Dianetic auditing.

Where the incident of the break is, with any chain, run out, a broken limb will heal (by X-ray evidence) in two instead of six weeks.

Some patients who are not responding to medical treatment who are then given as little as a touch assist will then be found responsive to the medical treatment. An auditor giving the person a Dianetic session will more or less ensure that the medical treatment will now work.

A person who is accident prone when audited usually loses this unwanted characteristic.

Many "insane" recover from their symptoms when given proper medical treatment, rest, no harassment and then good mild Dianetic processing. They become and remain normal people without relapse.

Chronic, which is to say, long-term illnesses cease when audited by Dianetics and then medical treatment, which was earlier ineffective.

Whole classes of "mentally retarded" children have been made more normal by teachers in London County Council schools using relatively unskilled Dianetics.

Tiredness, unwanted sensations, bizarre pains and aches, bad hearing or sight also routinely respond to Dianetic processing.

The sickness and death rate of persons who are part of Dianetic groups is only a small fraction of that of other groups.

Pilots audited with Dianetics, by a test involving a whole squadron, went without a single even minor accident for the following year.

Scientists audited with Dianetics have greatly improved intelligence. Dianetics raises IQ as a side product to usual auditing, at a rate of about one point of IQ per hour of processing.

Withered limbs, skin blotches and rashes and even blindness and deafness have all responded to Dianetics.

Possibly the point which counted most against Dianetics in the early attacks on it was that it did a vast array of things. The truth was, it actually did them. When you have the answer to the human mind as in Dianetics of course anything caused by the mind can be remedied.

It is very much easier to train a Dianetic auditor than a Scientology auditor. It requires only about a month to make a Dianetic auditor who is sufficiently conversant with the subject to get results. This too was used against Dianetics as the psychiatrist of that day claimed he himself needed twelve years of study to do psychiatry. Of course when the public found out that the product of these twelve years of study was killing the "insane" and increasing their number the argument became silly.

The spectacular personal gains which were available in Scientology were so great they tended to obscure the very real use and value of Dianetics.

Further, a Scientology executive trained and processed beyond the need of body help tended to forget that much of the public out there first had to be helped out of their physical misery before they could attempt anything like personal gain.

You use Dianetics much the way you would use any remedy.

When a fellow is burned you audit out the burn.

When a woman loses a loved one you audit out the loss.

When a young man can't finish his schooling you audit out his unhappy school experiences.

Dianetics is for USE. There is not a lot of admin about it. It isn't something you use after bowing down three times to Chicago. You just USE it.

A Dianetic auditor who sees someone sick and who doesn't get him treatment and then audit him is just not humane.

Woman going to have a baby—get out the meter and audit her into shape for it. When she's had it, run out the delivery.

Fellow burns his hand, break out the meter.

Dianetics is the answer to human suffering. USE it.

Ideas build up to halt the use of Dianetics such as "once you have a floating needle on engrams you don't run them any more—-". That's silly. An F/N on a chain can be called the end of that chain. But not of Dianetics on the case.

I am not trying to make anyone wrong by reintroducing the real use of Dianetics. I myself had not realized how separate and vital it was as a technology until recently. I was engaged for many years researching and completing Scientology. I had not noticed and had not said that Dianetics must be preserved and used in all cases of psychosomatic illness or in physical suffering.

Yet, during all this time when I had to handle illness, I did not use Scientology. I used good old Dianetics.

Now I have refined it and made a better statement of it and made it easier to use and I trust it will be used for what it was intended and that Scientology grades will be relieved of the burden of attempting to heal physical illness, a use for which it was never designed.

Scientology is a vital practice in itself. It places a person above any further illness or suffering. But he has to be made well first.

People will ask, "Deafness? Now what special process is needed in curing deafness ......?"

This is one of the modern refinements of Dianetics. One runs whatever is assessed for the preclear. He doesn't decide to cure somebody of deafness. He handles the illness that reads. Maybe it will be deafness.

You have one single procedure covering all cases and that is R-3-R and the steps of HCOB 16 Apr 69. You audit what reads when assessed. The whole of the person's complaints, if you just keep on going with HCOB 16 Apr 69, should eventually vanish.

Having gotten the pc well by medical care and Dianetic auditing, then start out with Scientology. If he gets sick again before many grades, revert to Dianetics, handle it and then when he is well, resume Scientology where you left off.

Never run a Scientology grade to make a pc well or cure something. It's a misapplication.

By using Dianetics as readily as you use shoes you can make and keep people well. You don't worry about overruns, rudiments or anything else. You just use R-3-R even to correct ARC Breaks and PTPs and bad auditing.

By then correctly using Scientology we can make the person a far better being.

We now have STANDARD DIANETICS.

We have developed Scientology STANDARD TECH.

Both are now valid as themselves.

They do not cross.

Dianetics for the body.

Scientology for the spirit.

USE BOTH.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH :jp.aa
Copyright © 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 24 APRIL 1969
Issue II
Dn Checksheet
Class VIIIs
Qual Secs
Tech Secs
DIANETIC RESULTS


Every once in a while you get a Scientology result while running Dianetics. Also, sometimes you get a Dianetic result while auditing Scientology.

This tends to keep the two distinctly different subjects confused with each other.

A preclear, after Dianetic auditing, tells the Examiner he is exterior and feeling fantastically bright. This is a Scientology result.

Sometimes a Scientology preclear after attaining a grade will state that it has healed his terror stomach. This is a Dianetic result.

There is nothing whatever wrong with this except that it gives an auditor an invitation to confuse the subjects and think they are the same.

The clue is CONSISTENCY.

Dianetics only rarely exteriorises a preclear.

Scientology only occasionally handles a terror stomach. In fact a person whose terror stomach wasn’t handled by Dianetics and its R3R can go all the way to OT VI sometimes with it. He doesn’t get rid of the terror stomach and he doesn’t (since he had a present time problem all the way) make OT VI either.

If it is a body pain, sensation, somatic, illness, disability, the subject to use is Dianetics.

If it is a gain in ability and beingness that is the purpose, the subject to use is Scientology.

After many years of handling cases this emerged as a very factual fact. Dianetics is Dianetics, Scientology is Scientology. If you mix them they attain limited results.

This is so true that when you use all the prohibitives and Never Nevers of Scientology in doing Dianetics, Dianetics also fails.

See these two subjects as clearly separate. They each have their own Case Supervision orders. You don’t use Scientology Case Supervision orders in case supervising Dianetics. And you don’t use the Dianetic rules on Scientology.

One addresses the body, the other the thetan. They both go by their own rules.

There is also STANDARD DIANETICS as rigidly taught and adhered to, so Dianetics is not sloppy Scientology either.

Dianetic results are a well body and a being happy with it.

Scientology results are a free, powerful and immortal being.

They can and do achieve their proper end results but only when used properly, separately and as themselves.


LRH:ja.ei.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1969 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 26 APRIL 1969

Remimeo
Dianetics
Checksheet etc.


SOMATICS


You must run only by somatic, not by narrative. Narrative means “Falls down stairs” “An earlier fight with brother”. By somatic is meant a pain or ache sensation and also misemotion or even unconsciousness. There are a thousand different descriptive words that could add up to a feeling. Pain, aches, dizziness, sadness—these are all FEELINGS. Awareness, pleasant or unpleasant, of a body is what we are trying to run in Dianetics.

All chains are held together by one similar feeling. That is a new discovery. Chains are not held together by narratives or personnel or locations. They are held together by FEELINGS. Thus we ASK FOR AND FOLLOW DOWN ONLY FEELINGS. Those can be aches, pains, sensations, misemotion—any FEELING.

This brings to light a further discovery. One never assesses medical terms or symptoms.

An engram contains pain and unconsciousness. All right. Then its basic would be a physical duress not a symptom resulting from that duress.

Example: The pc says “headache”. You assess headache, you try to run “headaches” and all you ever get is times a pc had a headache. Well, the headache is a symptom caused by a head injury. The engram must have contained a shot in the head or a crushed skull or some actual injury. The word “headache” would describe only how the head feels later when the engram occasionally goes into restimulation.

So you would get only locks and secondaries to audit and only by chance and an alteration by the pc of the command to find an earlier headache would you ever get to an engram in which the head was crushed or injured. “Headache” is the result of a head injury, and it doesn’t describe the injury which, in engram form, is now giving the pc headaches.

Take the medical term Arthritis. You could ask for arthritis and get only visits to the doctor or times in a wheel chair. The physical injury contained in the engram causing the arthritis is not described.

Alcoholism would present the same problem. If the pc listed and the auditor assessed “Alcoholism” we would only get times when he was drunk, not the engram causing the symptom which might contain “Feeling very dry”.

Therefore one has more than one column on a Health Form. One would give the physical disability or complaint. The second would be Pc’s Description of the FEELING. We would land the real engram every time, not only its locks or secondaries. (It is quite all right to run locks and secondaries as it is necessary to unburden the chain and increase the pc’s confront, but chains always end up in a basic engram at the bottom and if you don’t get and erase that then the chain will key in again. )

In asking for list items one puts down only what the pc says. That’s an invariable rule. But when the pc says some mere symptom like “headache” or medical term like

“arthritis” the auditor writes it down but also asks, “What is the feeling of that?” or some such question and writes what the pc then says AND ONLY ASSESSES THE FEELING STATED.

Example: Pc says a complaint is “SINUSITIS”. The auditor writes it down. But asks also for the feeling of it. The pc says, “A burning sensation in the nose.” In assessing the list the auditor does not call out “Sinusitis.” He says, “A burning sensation in the nose.” And marks down its meter read.

If the auditor took and assessed only “SINUSITIS” and then asked for incidents of sinusitis he would get only locks and secondaries—times when the engram was in restimulation. And he would rarely get the real basic and engram that causes the symptom .

This discovery opens the door to swift “cures”. But one is obviously not treating SINUSITIS. He is looking for an incident in which there was a “burning sensation in the nose”. And after a few locks and upper engrams he’d find and run the real injury in which the nose was burned.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder



LRH:jc.ldm .ei .rd
Copyright © 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 27 APRIL 1969
Remimeo
Dn Auditors
etc
R-3-R Restated
COMMANDS ON SECOND RUN ON AN INCIDENT


Until a full rundown is issued, this error in R-3-R as published is corrected.

In going through an incident the second time one DOES NOT ask for date and duration again or any description.

After the 1st time through an incident and when pc has recounted it the auditor

A. Tells pc, “Move to the beginning of the incident.”

B. “Tell me when you are there --”

C. When pc has said he is, “Scan through to the end of the incident.”

D. “Tell me what happened.”

The second, 3rd, etc run through the same incident use the above or some variation thereof.

ERASURE OR GOING SOLID

After the second time through, find out if it is erasing or going more solid. If it is erasing go through it a third time, etc until it is erased. Erasure is usually accompanied by a Floating Needle and a cognition immediately afterwards.


PC INTEREST

In doing R-3-R it is necessary that (a) one chooses things the pc is interested in and (b) one does not force a pc to run things he is protesting being run on.


ERASING LAST INCIDENT FOUND

If you ask if there is an earlier incident and the pc says “No” you do not just walk off from the one he was just running. You send the pc through it again and it will erase.


COMPLETING CHAINS

If you do sloppy R-3-R and do one thing after another without getting an F/N or an erasure, you will get the pc stuck up on the track. You complete each chain to F/N or erasure.

F/Ns vs. ERASURE

If a LOCK F/Ns you can get earlier incidents on the same chain until the pc actually runs the engram or chain of engrams.

While it is not always safe to pass an F/N and go earlier to the real engram and erase it, a pc who is only F/Ned on locks will get the engram keyed in again later. The somatic may return unless engrams are run to erasure.

ENDING SESSIONS

An R-3-R session can be safely ended on a cognition and Good Indicators such as a cheerful happy pc.

This doesn’t mean the end of all Dianetic auditing. In the next session another assessment will turn up more unwanted feelings.


ENDING DIANETICS

Dianetics is ended off only when a pc has become well and happy and remains that way.


LRH:ldm.eijh L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1969 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 27 APRIL 1969
Issue II
Remimeo
DIANETIC FAILURES

Dianetics can be made to fail by alteration of its materials from its precise workable application.

It is basically so simple it is hard to conceive that this could happen.

But it has happened several times and was a contributing cause to its lack of use in several areas for some years.

There are various ways to make Dianetics difficult. Most of these come under three headings:

1. False information as to how it doesn’t work by some vested interest acting as a third party (see HCO B 26 Dec 68 on 3rd Party Law).

2. Failure to provide or get studied the actual data and HCOBs.

3. Mis-instructing which enters an instructor’s or examiner’s opinion or invalidation or alteration of the actual technology.

A person who pays attention to 1 and 3 and who doesn’t insist on 2 is courting failure in auditing. Many many instances exist of each of these three being done and almost all failures one has in auditing can be traced to one of the three reasons given above.

The failures aren’t because of the pc or the bad intention of the auditor. Believe that. They came from either not using Dianetics at all or 1, 2 or 3 above. So don’t let yourself get caught in these errors given above.


LRH:ldm.ei.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright ©1969 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 28 APRIL 1969
Remimeo
Dianetics Cksht
HIGH TA IN DIANETICS


In Scientology a high TA is always an overrun.

In Dianetics it means AN ENGRAM TOO LATE ON THE CHAIN TO ERASE IS IN RESTIMULATION.

A Scientology auditor “rehabs” overruns.

A Dianetic auditor cures high TA by finding what engram (lock or secondary) is in restimulation (active). This will show up as a PAIN, SENSATION, MISEMOTION OR OTHER PRESENT TIME FEELING the pc has. In short, just by finding the somatic by list and assessing for longest read and running R-3-R you can cure a high TA.

You handle a TA that goes up during a session by completing the chain exactly as in R-3-R.

The same action you do for R,3-R also cures the high TA.

By running a pc through only once each time instead of twice you leave a later incident too charged for the pc to see an earlier incident.

By trying to erase the somatic only, not the picture (“pc no longer has somatic”) you can leave the picture partially there.

There can be an infinity of wrong ways but only one right way and the right way is R-3-R by the book.

A high TA (4 or above) is simply the E-Meter’s reaction to increased mass. Mental Image Pictures have mass. The mass has what is called resistance to electricity. The E-Meter measures electrical resistance. Mass resists electricity. Thus in the presence of mental mass as contained in mental image pictures, the Tone Arm of the E-Meter rises.

When you restimulate an engram, the E-Meter current flow has more trouble getting through the pc and the TA rises.

When the engram (or lock or secondary) is “keyed out” (moved away) the TA comes down and the meter needle will float.

If you find a long chain with many engrams on it and run a late engram the TA goes up. As you go earlier, and eventually find Basic, the TA comes down and when you erase the basic engram the TA will come down to between 2 and 3 and the needle will float.

Old disproved theory pre-Dianetics was that the E-Meter reacted to sweat on the hands but of course a person would have to sweat and “unsweat” to make the meter behave as it does. And the idea of “unsweating” would be ridiculous. Palms of the hand do not go wet—dry with enough rapidity to account for meter reaction up and down.

When you run several engrams through once or several somatic chains without erasing any you pile up too much mass and the TA will go high and stick.

Even if nothing is done to repair this the pc will de-stimulate (the pictures will drop away) in from 3 to 10 days.

It is a very poor show of auditing to do R-3-R other than exactly by the book. It is very easy to do it exactly right. The drill is simple. If done exactly right the result is good and invariable.


LRH:clc.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright ©1969 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 29 APRIL 1969

Remimeo
Dn Checksheet




ASSESSMENT AND INTEREST


An assessment consists simply of calling off the items the pc has given and marking down the reads that occur on the meter. The pc is not required to comment during this action and it is better if he does not.

This action is called “Assessment for Longest Read”. It is used mainly in Dianetics.

There are two Scientology assessments which are differently done. These are “Assessment by Elimination” and “Listing and Nulling”. They are not used in Dianetics. One does not mix the three types.

In Dianetic Assessment by Longest Read one uses these symbols:

X — didn’t read
Tick — small jerk of needle
sF — Small Fall (a quarter to half an inch)
F — Fall (about one to 2 inches)
LF — Long Fall (2 to 3 inches)
LFBD — Long Fall followed by a “blow down” or TA motion downward.

All falls are to the right. A “BD” is a Tone Arm motion to the left made to keep the needle on the dial.

The favoured action for an item is an LFBD and if one item on the list does so, that is it without any further assessment.

The reason one assesses is that IF AN ITEM DOES NOT READ ON THE METER WHEN ASSESSED IT IS BEYOND THE PC’S LEVEL OF AWARENESS.

It is very unwise and unsafe to try to run a somatic which has not read on the list. It will be beyond the pc’s reality and beyond his awareness and will result in overwhelming him.

That an item reads guarantees that the pc will be able to confront and erase the chain. So that an item reads well is a guarantee that the pc can handle it and will not get in too deep for him.

The exception to this is a PROTEST read. An item, possibly already run, is seen to read. The pc frowns. He is protesting and the meter is registering protest, not the item. One never runs a pc against his protest. To do so will overwhelm him and give a bad result. A protest almost never blows down the TA.

To be sure that the item is right, one usually asks the pc if he is interested in the item chosen.

If the pc says no, he doesn’t want to run it, this is a protest read.

One then picks the second best reading item on the assessment already done and checks that with the pc for interest. The pc will usually be interested in it.

The pc can almost always be counted on to be interested in any item that gives a LFBD.

One never simply asks the pc which on the list he is interested in as “an assessment” as it will be found the pc simply chooses at random and may choose a null item. The result may be a very unsuccessful session.

An auditor may sometimes be astonished by what reads. The pc, let us say, obviously has a broken leg but what reads is an earache. One runs what reads, not what the auditor knows should be run. A “know best” in an auditor can be a fatal fault.

On a second or third assessment, items which were at first null or reading poorly will be found to “come alive” and read well. The pc, by being audited, has had an increase of ability to confront and, if the auditing is standard, an increase in confidence. The result is that items beyond his reach previously (and did not read well) are now available and can be run easily.

The E-Meter measures the awareness depth of the pc. On things which do not read on assessment you would find his reality poor. Things that read well on assessment will be found to be things on which a pc has a high reality and a high interest level.

Only if pushed to audit without a meter could an auditor assess by interest only. There is no real excuse for it if one has an E-Meter.

Auditing without a meter is a chancy activity.

Good assessment by longest read is the best entrance to a successful session.

The same list will serve for the next item to be run and should be used rather than just asking the pc.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:cs.ei.rd
Copyright ©1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 30 APRIL 1969

Remimeo
Dianetics Checksheet


AUDITOR TRUST


A pc tends to be able to confront to the degree that he or she feels safe.

If the pc is being audited in an auditing environment that is unsafe or prone to interruption his or her confront is greatly lowered and the result is a reduced ability to run locks, secondaries and engrams and to erase them.

If the auditor’s TRs are rough and his manner uncertain or challenging, evaluative or invalidative, the pc’s confront is reduced to zero or worse.

This comes from a very early set of laws (Original Thesis):

Auditor plus pc is greater than the bank,

Auditor plus bank is greater than the pc,

Pc minus auditor is less than the bank.

(By “bank” is meant the mental image picture collection of the pc. It comes from computer technology where all data is in a “bank”.)

The difference between auditors is not that one has more data than another or more tricks. The difference is that one auditor will get better results than another due to his stricter adherence to procedure, better TRs, more confident manner, and closer observance of the Auditor’s Code.

No “bedside manner” is required or sympathetic expression. It’s just that an auditor who knows his procedures and has good TRs inspires more confidence. The pc doesn’t have to put his attention on or cope with the auditor and feels safer and so can confront his bank better.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:cs.ei.rd
Copyright © 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 1 MAY 1969
Remimeo
Dn Checksheet


GRINDING OUT ENGRAMS

(Including notes on OTs and Dianetics)



Now and then an auditor encounters the phenomenon called (since 1950) GRINDING.

GRINDING means going over and over and over and over a lock, secondary or engram without obtaining an actual erasure.

The sense of the word comes from the action of using an emery wheel on a hard substance. The substance doesn’t get much smaller or thinner no matter how long it is done.

The reason grinding occurs is that the incident is too late on the chain. There are earlier incidents.

It is a highly undesirable action. A Dianetic Auditor who puts the pc through an incident four or five times without erasure or appreciable reduction is encountering “grinding”. He should ask the pc to see if there isn’t something earlier with a similar somatic.

OTS AND DIANETICS

We have encountered two cases who were “OT VI” who also got into grinding without there being anything earlier. In both these cases, they did not want a session and were only going through it to be obliging. Both of these “OTs” had skipped some of their grades. The proper action would have been to review their grades, the grade known as OT III was certainly out. When a person gets above Clear, oddities can be expected to occur when you try to run Dianetics on them. If they really haven’t made all their grades, however, and are physically ill, the correct action is to do all possible to handle their case by Standard Dianetics and then rehabilitate or get done all the rest of the grades. What has happened here is that they were using Scientology to escape an uncomfortable body that should have been straightened out by Dianetics in the first place. The “out grade” is in fact Dianetics, failure to use it before going on to Scientology.

You can therefore expect some of these Scientology cases who are “OT” but haven’t really made it due to out Dianetics, to run very well on Dianetics, by the book. The action is to handle their physical complaints with Dianetics and then rehab or get done all the Scientology grades, being watchful for grades not done at all.

Some of these “OT” flubs, however, can be expected to “grind” and to fail to erase engrams. They will not have wanted a session in the first place and need a green form with particular attention to “withholds” and thereafter a complete review of all grades, particularly completely skipped “OT grades”.


NOT FOLLOWING SOMATIC

Possibly a pc who does not go down the somatic chain but who skips from one somatic to another could also get into grinding.

THROUGH ONLY ONCE

A pc not put through each incident on a chain twice before going earlier could get into grinding. The pc who is run through each incident once only before being sent earlier will certainly fail to get off enough charge to get earlier.

NO PAST LIVES

The pc who is stubbornly refusing to go into any past lives will certainly get into grinding as they seldom reach basic on any chain.


LRH:cs.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1969 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED








HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 7 MAY 1969
Issue IV

Dianetic Course
(HCO BULLETIN 21 SEPT 1965 EDITED
FOR USE ON THE DIANETIC COURSE)



THE FIVE GAEs


The five Gross Auditing Errors (GAEs) are:


1. Can’t handle and read an E-Meter.

2. Doesn’t know and can’t apply Technical data.

3. Can’t get and keep a pc in session.

4. Can’t complete an auditing cycle.

5. Can’t complete a repetitive auditing cycle.

These are the only errors one looks for in straightening up the auditing of an Auditor.

If you look for other reasons, this is itself a gross goof. There are no others.


LRH:cs.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright o1969 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 7 MAY 1969
Issue V
(Revision of HCO Bulletin of 21 October 1968.
For use on Dianetic Course only.)

Dianetic Course


FLOATING NEEDLE


A Floating Needle is the idle uninfluenced movement of the needle on the dial without any patterns or reactions in it. It can be as small as 1 “ or as large as dial wide. It does not fall or drop to the right of the dial. It moves to the left at the same speed as it moves to the right. It is observed on a Mark V E-Meter calibrated with the TA between 2.0 and 3.0 with GIs in on the pc. It can occur after a cognition blowdown of the TA or just moves into floating. The pc may or may not voice the cognition.

It, by the nature of the E-Meter reading below the awareness of the thetan, occurs just before the pc is aware of it. So to give a “That’s it” on the occurrence of the F/N can prevent the pc from getting the cognition.

Pcs and pre-OTs OFTEN signal an F/N with a “POP” to the left and the needle can actually even describe a pattern much like a Rock Slam. Meters with lighter movement do “pop” to the left and R/S wildly for a moment.

One does not sit and study and be sure of an “F/N”. It swings or pops, he lets the pc cognite and then indicates the F/N to the pc preventing overrun.

A one hand electrode sometimes obscures an F/N and gives false TA. If used, use higher sensitivity and get the TA from 2 cans when needed.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH: cs.aap
Copyright © 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 7 MAY 1969
Issue VI
Remimeo
Cl VIII
Dianetic (Revision of HCOB 1 September 1968)
Course



SUMMARY OF HOW TO WRITE AN AUDITOR’S REPORT,
WORKSHEETS AND SUMMARY REPORT, WITH SOME
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION



AUDITOR’S REPORT

An Auditor’s Report should contain:

Date
Name of Auditor
Name of Pc
Condition of Pc
Length of Session
Time Session started and ended
TA at beginning and end of Session
Rudiments
What Process was run—LISTING THE EXACT
COMMANDS (often forgotten by most auditors)
Time of Start and End of Process
Whether Process is flat or not Any F/Ns.


WORK SHEETS

A Work Sheet is supposed to be the complete running record of the session from beginning to end. The Auditor should not be skipping from one page to another but should just be writing page after page as the session goes along.

A Work Sheet is always foolscap, 8 x 13 inches, written on both sides and each page is numbered. Pc’s name is written on each separate sheet.

A Work Sheet may be in 2 columns depending on how big the writing is of the Auditor.

When the session is completed, the Work Sheets are put in proper sequence and stapled with the Auditor’s Report Form on top from beginning to end of session.

TA and time notations should be made at regular intervals throughout the session.

When making a list on a Pc:

1. Always mark a read as it reads—F. LF. BD.

2. Always circle the reading item. Mark if indicated to the Pc with IND.

3. Always when extending a list put in a line from where it has been extended, e.g.

Item Joe
Shoes
Socks
____________________ extended
Sky
Wax
Pigs, etc., etc.

NOTE: When you repair an old auditing session you always write on the old auditing report and W/sheets in a different coloured pen with the date of the-report.

When running various processes in a session, mark each F/N clearly noting time and TA.

SUMMARY REPORT

A Summary Report is written exactly as per HCOB 17 March 1969, “Summary Report”.

Two gross goofs I have noticed since case supervising folders on the RSM is that Auditors have not been turning in Ethics cases to the MAA. In one instance, a Pc was audited by 2 auditors in 2 different sessions, got a R/S on crimes against Scientologists and M/W/Hs and neither auditor turned the Pc in to Ethics. This is not the only instance. The second thing is that Auditors are very evaluative of the Pc’s case as indicated by their comments on the Summary Report. This is incorrect; this report is used simply as an exact record of what happened during the session. It is not up to the auditor to evaluate the Pc’s Case, this is the Case Supervisor’s job. The auditor may suggest what is to be run, at which time the Case Supervisor will review the session, what was run, how the Pc went in relation to what was being run and then give his directions.
-------------

Auditor Report Forms or W/sheets are never recopied. The Auditor should always read over his W/sheets before turning in folder to the Case Supervisor and, if any words or letters are missing or cannot be read, they should be written in with a different coloured pen.

If these rules are followed it will make the Case Supervisor’s job much much easier and auditors’ reports more valuable.

To add the obvious, it is a CRIME to give any session or assist without making an Auditor’s Report or to copy the original actual report after the session and submit a copy instead of the real report. Assist reports that use only contact or touch assists may be written after a session and sent to Qual.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:jp.an.cs.ei.cden
Copyright © 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 8 MAY 1969
Issue II

Remimeo
Dianetics Course


TEACHING THE DIANETICS COURSE


As the teaching of basic data restimulates confusions which are then dramatized by throwing the course off line, the teaching of the Dianetics Course as follows is hugely vital.

The teaching of Dianetics Auditors is laid down on these simple principles.

1. The data on tapes and Bulletins is studied without alter-is, interpretation or addition by the student, fellow student, instructor or supervisor.

2. Well done and other folders are studied by the individual student.

3. No lecturing or additional interpretation or evaluation by Supervisors.

4. The student audits only when he has completely passed on 1 and 2 above. He must not audit before he has completed his checksheet three times through.

5. Things the student is weak on are done in clay.

6. The student is sent to cramming at his own expense for bad auditing goofs. He may also be taken off auditing and made to do his checksheet again.

7. Any student question is answered by referring to the HCOB, folder or tape or by explaining it is beyond the scope of Dianetic auditing.

8. A rigid invariable schedule is precisely adhered to.

9. Checksheets and tapes and folders are gone through in the sequence laid down by the checksheet and not randomly out of sequence.

If this is made difficult then the programme must be cut back to the bare bones of the original above.

The teaching of standard tech must also be standard. Therefore the above MUST be adhered to completely.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH :jp.an.ei.rd
Copyright © 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 9 MAY 1969
Remimeo
Dn Checksheet



CASE SUPERVISING DIANETICS FOLDERS



All a Case Supervisor looks for in Dianetics folders to advise the next action is departure from exact Standard Dianetics procedure.

It is a very easy job providing the Case Supervisor knows his Standard Dianetics exactly and completely.

Any time there is the most minute or flagrant departure from exact assessment or exact R-3-R, there will be a breakdown of the results.

It is quite a tribute to the tech that this is true. And it is true. Doing C/S recently on a very great many Dianetic cases audited by relatively untrained auditors the following emerged in letters ten feet high.

1. Where the auditor followed the exact procedure without deviation the results were uniformly excellent.

2. Where the auditor deviated from the exact procedure the results were poor or bad.

There are many, many ways an auditor can deviate from exact procedure.

There is only one exact procedure.

As a result of doing this C/S work, I would, if I were doing Dianetic C/Sing, refuse to let an auditor audit until he had been through his checksheet 3 times. This would save nearly all the work required of a Case Supervisor.

When the auditor is in a fumbly state regarding the procedure and has not drilled it until he could do it with the house caving in, the preclear does not get good results. That is really all there is to it.

If the auditor simply observes the Auditor’s Code, handles TRs and the meter fairly well and does the assessments and R-3-R exactly as laid out, the results will be found to be astonishingly good, even miraculous.

To correct a bad session the normal action of the C/S is to order the offbeat actions done correctly.

EXAMPLE

A. Auditor assessed by interest only, not by read and the session bogged down. C/S action—Reassess by longest read.

B. Medical terms and operations were part of assessment list, one was chosen and case bogged. C/S action, order such be taken off the list and somatics, pains, sensations, emotions only be assessed.

C. Pc was put through each incident on the chain only once and finally bogged. C/S action, order the whole chain rerun so that pc has been through each one twice and the earliest one found erased.

D. A basic was found and auditor told it was erasing but sent pc earlier but pc could find nothing so left it. C/S orders the basic erased.

E. Auditor tells pc he won’t run it because it “isn’t an engram”. C/S action, order auditor to retrain on Auditor’s Code and do Invalidation and Evaluation in clay. Orders pc to an Scn Review, Green Form.

F. Pc very nattery to auditor. C/S orders pc to Scn Review “and be sure to pull all withholds”.

G. C/S finds his orders to complete a chain left undone with a high TA were not done—folder mislaid or pc not routed. Pc has become ill. Order the pc to medical treatment and the chain completed.

You see how it is. Each time the auditor violated normal simple procedure, the C/S orders that the normal simple procedure be completed either by first giving pc an Scn Green Form in Qual and then completing the Standard Dianetics action or, omitting Qual (when pc not out-rud), just getting the real Standard action done.

This is really all there is to Case Supervising Dianetic Case Folders. The more you try to do something else than the above the further the case will go wrong.

The Dianetic Auditor does not have to know how to do Green Forms or rudiments and these are NOT DONE in Standard Dianetics sessions. When they have to be done you get a Scientology Auditor to do them.

It is a serious error to mix up Dianetics and Scientology in the same session—that is to say, to do ruds, rehab overruns, etc, etc.

The potential errors of out-ruds and all the rest are present of course in any Dianetics session, but do not happen when exact Dianetic procedure is used. When they do happen you send the pc to an Scn Review Auditor.

This is Case Supervision, Dianetics. It has been fully worked out by my Case Supervising a great many Dianetic sessions to launch this new view of Dianetics. And the above is what I found.

It drives home also the necessity of training Dianetic auditors as precision technologists and the risk of letting people audit before they are fully grooved in on exactly what’s done in a Dianetic session.


L. RON HUBBARD


LRH:cs.rd
Copyright © 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 9 MAY 1969
Issue II
Remimeo
Dn Checksheet
CASE SUPERVISOR
FORMS


The two principal forms used by a Dianetics Case Supervisor are as follows:

Dn C/S I is for new, unaudited pcs or for old ones who try to be psychoanalytic cases or who don’t catch on.

Dn C/S 2 is for cases who have or have not been given a Medical Examination and who have had auditing.

SEA ORGANIZATION
STANDARD DIANETIC C/S NO. 1

________________________ _____________________
Preclear Date

1. Work with TRs on the pc until he has a good idea of auditing.
2. Explain what a meter does (“Registers interest and charge”).
3. Explain what is an F/N.
4. Define mental image pictures, locks, secondaries, engrams so he understands them.
5. Define Chains.
6. Define Erasure.
7. Return folder to me. __________________________
CASE SUPERVISOR


SEA ORGANIZATION
STANDARD DIANETIC C/S NO. 2

________________________ _____________________
Preclear Date

1. Make a list of any occasional or current illnesses, unwanted sensations, aches, pains, disabilities, tiredness feelings, emotions, fears, dislikes.
2. Assess for longest read.
3. Compare with pc’s interest (don’t audit it unless pc agrees that’s it).
4. Do R-3-R on it.
5. If it goes more solid or is not erasing after going through it twice, go earlier, asking for “an earlier incident with similar (somatic, ache, pn, etc)”.
6. Erase basic on the chain.
7. End off on that chain if you get an F/N or an erasure.
8. Reassess, repeat the R-3-R on new chain.
9. End off session only on very pronounced GIs (GOOD INDICATORS).
10. Return folder to me.
__________________________
CASE SUPERVISOR


LRH:cs.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1969 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 11 MAY 1969
Remimeo
Exec Secs
Tech Sec (Tech Div) (Qual Div)
All Tech Hats (Replaces HCO B of 27 July 1966, same name)
All Qual Hats
Dianetic Course
METER TRIM CHECK


E-Meters can go out of trim during a session because of temperature changes.

Thus even if the meter is properly calibrated and reads at 2.0 with a 5,000 ohm resistor across the leads and 3.0 with 12,500 ohms, by the end of the session a pc can be apparently reading below 2.0 because the meter is off trim.

The following meter procedure is therefore to be followed AT THE END OF EACH SESSION (AFTER GIVING “THAT’S IT”):

1. DON’T MOVE THE TRIM KNOB

2. PULL OUT THE JACK PLUG

3. MOVE THE TA UNTIL THE NEEDLE IS ON “SET” AT THE SENSITIVITY YOU WERE USING IN THE SESSION

4. RECORD THE TA POSITION AT THE BOTTOM OF THE AUDITOR’S REPORT FORM AS: “Trim Check—TA = . . .”

5. IF YOUR METER IS KNOWN TO BE OUT OF CALIBRATION (as in Para 2 above) RECORD ALSO: “Calibration error— on meter = 2.0 actual” at the bottom of the form.

LRH:lb-r.cs.an.ei.rd L. RON HUBBARD
copyright © 1969 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 11 MAY 1969
Issue II
Remimeo
Dn Checksheet
FORCING A PC


Forcing a pc to go on being audited upsets the pc and his case and will often result in low TA (below 2) and will give the pc a heavy loss.

There is no excuse for it.

It invalidates the pc’s cause.

LRH:an.ei.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1969 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 13 MAY 1969
Remimeo
Dn Checksheet


PECULIARITIES


When you run into pc peculiarities or odd pc phenomena in Dianetic auditing that get in the road of R-3-R, DO NOT try to solve it by going non-standard or getting inventive. It will be fatal.

The operating rule is end off the session and SEND THE PC TO A SCIENTOLOGY REVIEW.

If you are a Scientology as well as a Dianetic auditor, you may be tempted to at once shift into Scientology. That can also be fatal.

If no Qual Div is nearby and you are a Scientology auditor also and if no other Scientology auditor is around to give the review only then could you attempt a “Green Form” which is used in Qual Divisions in orgs. The way to do that is end the Dianetic session, take a break and begin the Scientology Review Session. But this is not good. It is best to send the pc to Qual and insist Qual actually handles.

Some odd phenomena that come under this rule follow:

Pc gets a stuck picture and can’t audit the chain he should be on because picture keeps coming in.

Pc’s pictures are constantly changing, sometimes too fast to grab onto.

Pc gets a dozen pictures at once and can’t run them or decide what to run.

Field goes black and won’t clear up.

Pc gets angry at auditor.

Pc very nattery about Dianetics or orgs.

On these or many more the Dianetic auditor should NEVER try to force pc to go on or do something odd or brilliant. He should simply say, “I am sorry. I will end this session.” And does so. And sends the pc to the nearest Qual Division.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder



LRH: an.ei .rd
Copyright © 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 14 MAY 1969
Remimeo
Dn Checksheet


SICKNESS


It will sometimes happen that a pc has a session and then three or four days later becomes physically ill.

The auditor may feel that auditing did it. It didn’t. The auditing given would have to be non-standard for this to happen, but the auditing is not to blame.

According to my friend Dr. Stanley Lief, over a century ago Hahnemann developed a healing technology known as homeopathy which administered minute doses of medicine. The original theory seems to have been that the disease or illness was still in the body and would be released. The person would be wildly ill again and then permanently recover. This is probably a poor statement of the whole subject of homeopathy and its basic techniques may have worked well but have been lost.

In any event, the phenomenon has application here.

We would say that the mental image picture of the incident was stopped at a “stuck point” and that it would “run out” of itself if it were unstabilized.

A touch assist can do this. The person may become wildly ill after one and then recover.

What apparently happens is that the chain of incidents becomes unsettled and the same incident on the chain in which the person has been stuck for a long while runs out physically. It completes itself, which is to say, it finishes its cycle of action.

At a hospital where I studied, this was part of the things I observed.

Medicine sometimes will not work on a patient. It works on others but not on a particular one.

If that particular one is given mental attention even as mild as brief Freudian analysis, it will be found that medicine will now work on the person.

This formed one of the first application discoveries I made. From it I inferred that function monitors structure and proceeded to investigate mental actions and reactions in the field of illness. From this came Dianetics some years later.

Mental therapy prior to 1945 was so ineffective, consisting only of 19th Century psychoanalysis and Russian and East European psychiatry, that no one else seems to have observed, then or now, that “mental blocks” are able to obstruct medical treatment of a real physical nature.

The proof is that when one even reduces the mental block slightly, medicines such as antibiotics or hormones will now be effective when they were previously ineffective on some patients.

It is this factor which gives purely medical treatment a somewhat random appearance. The patient is “stuck” at some point in time. Even inadequate handling of him mentally (such as a touch assist or a poorly or partially done session or even a “bad” session) “unsticks” the person from the frozen or fixed “stuck” point.

One of three things can now happen:

1. The person can be treated medically for his illness with greater effect.

2. The person in two or three days gets apparently sick or sicker but eventually recovers and is not subject to that exact sickness again—(it “ran out”).

3. No further result is noted.

------------

These data are very useful to a Dianetic auditor or a medical doctor. A person can be ill and the illness not surrendering to the usual treatment. Brief mild Dianetic auditing can be done. The medicine may now work.

An auditor who specializes in keying out locks at the first F/N will find occasionally that his preclear becomes ill in two or three days from some occasional but longstanding illness which then “runs out” and doesn’t appear again.

An auditor who gives a non-standard, very poor session may find a preclear occasionally becoming ill within the next three or four days. The auditor and others blame the auditing.

Any auditing is better than no auditing.

Standard Dianetics is much more powerful than old Dianetics and should only be done by auditors trained to do it exactly.

Sessions which are non-standard should be corrected as soon as possible, certainly within two days or you may find the preclear beginning to go through an illness cycle.

The cycle was waiting to complete itself for a long time. The auditing unsettled it. It “ran out” physically because the pc was moved in time in the incident in which he has been “stuck”.

An understanding of this phenomena is necessary. It is useful data. Audit a pc badly, audit a pc too much to F/Ns on locks only, give a pc too many touch assists and you will find now and then that the occasional pc becomes physically ill, runs a temperature, etc. Before blaming yourself too much, realize the pc has often been ill in the past, that the mental cause of it has been loosened up and manifests itself and runs out physically. It is not fatal. That illness won’t recur again as it has in the past.

However, that it is not fatal to the pc is no excuse not to do a good STANDARD job of auditing.

If Standard Dianetics is used WITH NO DEPARTURE from its technology and procedure the phenomenon will not occur and no pcs experience a physical aftermath.

STANDARD DIANETICS taught precisely, done precisely, only makes people well.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH :an.ei.rd
Copyright © 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 14 MAY 1969
Issue II
Remimeo
Dn Checksheet
F/N AND ERASURE


It will be found that when an auditor obtains a floating needle (F/N) on locks without erasing the basic on the chain that the manifestation or somatics may recur in minutes, days or years. For they have only keyed out.

It is sometimes risky to audit past an F/N on the same chain. A Scientology auditor never would audit past an F/N. A Dianetic auditor has to recognize that the pc has only run a lock and ask for an earlier incident.

A floating needle is also obtained by erasure of the basic on a chain. That is the F/N one wants in Dianetics.
TONE ARM POSITION

A floating needle is valid only between 2.0 and 3.0 Tone Arm position on a meter. Above or below that Tone Arm reading, the F/N is called an “ARC Break” needle.

A real F/N also carries with it GOOD INDICATORS. A cheerful happy pc.

When the Tone Arm is below 2.0, the incident chain has not been erased.

When the Tone Arm is above 3.0, erasure has not occurred.

When the Tone Arm is up at 4.4 the pc has made it more solid and has not erased the basic on the chain.

On the second time through, if the TA rises, you know there is an earlier incident.

OVERRUN

The Dianetic Auditor is not concerned with “rehabilitation” of the overrun. In Dianetics it only means the engram chain is in restimulation and has not been erased.

When the basic erases, the TA will fall or rise to the area between 2.0 and 3.0 and the needle will F/N. One then stops promptly on that chain. He can reassess and run another chain now.
COGNITION

COGNITION means a pc origination indicating he has “Come to realize”. It’s a “What do you know. I........” statement.

Cognitions usually occur immediately after an erasure. They sometimes occur while running the chain. But when they occur with very good indicators the chain is almost always gone.

You can expect the rapid end sequence of (I) Erasure (2) F/N (3) Cognition in a well run Standard Dianetic session.

That’s all you really need to know about it in Dianetics.


LRH - an.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1969 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


[This HCO B was replaced by HCO B 1 August 1970, which was cancelled and revised by BTB I August 1970R which was cancelled by HCO B 1 August 1970RA, Revised 21 October 1974, F/N and Erasure. This latest revision is on page 117. ]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 14 MAY 1969
Issue III
Remimeo
Dn Checksheet
CULTURAL LAG


The reason why Dianetics and Scientology were abused or even fought has to do with what is called a “cultural lag”.

This has often occurred in the history of technical developments.

An example is Dr. Semmelweis’s discovery of the cause and cure of childbed fever. For over half a century after that women still died in agony after child-bearing. Eventually the culture caught up to it and the illness which had accounted for a huge percentage of female deaths ceased to exist. Dr. Semmelweis’s discovery of its prevention was “ahead of its time”. Pathetically, scoffed and disbelieved, he even died to prove he was right.

The atomic bomb was wholly feasible more than a decade before it was “developed”. No one credited it and no one put up the cash.

The radio telephone was invented and demonstrated half a century before it was generally used.

Cultural lag occurs for many reasons.

In any field as retarded as the human sciences the emergence of Dianetics and Scientology, full and workable and complete, is startling. And thereby subject to disbelief.

This does not mean they aren’t used and useful.

It is significant that hundreds of aerospace technicians, working with satellites and rocketry, broadly used Scientology first. At the same time parliaments in some socially backward countries were busy passing laws against Scientology to protect their psychiatrists whose medieval approach was to seize people without any process of law and castrate them and saw out brains as a “cure” for mental illness.

In a world where governments are fighting to dominate men’s minds, mental technology is needed to protect the individual and to prevent the enslavement of all.

So Dianetics and Scientology may be a century ahead of their times but still they are just in time before we all go up in smoke.

Dianetics was the first practical workable easily taught science of the mind. It has endured already 19 years and is better and more used than ever before.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH: an.rd
Copyright © 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 15 MAY 1969

Remimeo
Dn Checksheet
DIRTY NEEDLE



A “dirty needle” indicates that a pc has withholds or is ARC Broken.

When a pc is to be audited on Dianetics as a student or org pc he/she usually goes to the Examiner after a Dn C/S I (training pc) is done.

If a DIRTY NEEDLE (ragged, jerky, ticking needle, not sweeping) is seen by the Examiner or the auditor the pc should have a Scientology Review before Dianetic auditing is begun with an order for “GF and pull all withholds”.


LRH: an.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1969 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED



HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 17 MAY 1969
Remimeo
Dn Checksheets

TRS AND DIRTY NEEDLES



When a student’s pc develops a dirty needle (dn) it is caused by one of three things.

1. The student’s TRs are bad.

2. The student is breaking the Auditor’s Code.

3. The pc has withholds (w/hs) he does not wish known.

The remedy for TRs is to have the student do them in clay, showing the lines and actions of each TR. And to do more TRs with a fellow student.

The remedy for Code Breaks is to have the student define and do Invalidation and Evaluation in clay. And to list examples of possible upsets caused by each line of the Code.

The remedy for the pc with withholds is to send to a Scientology Review Auditor as Scientology can handle outnesses which occur in Dianetic sessions.

It is a safe rule in any event when a “dirty needle” occurs to send the preclear to a Scientology Review Auditor.

It is also a safe rule to assume that the student whose pcs get dirty needles is deficient on TRs and the Auditor’s Code.


LRH:an.rd L. RON HUBBARD
copyright © 1969 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 18 MAY 1969
Remimeo
Dian Checksheet


ERASURE


Now and then a pc does not understand that he is supposed to be erasing a PICTURE and only goes far enough to erase the somatic. Auditor says, “Is it erasing?” Pc can’t feel somatic so he says, “It’s gone.” Auditor puzzled by no F/N but buys it.

What you want to know as an auditor is “Is the picture erasing?” You can use that line to check, but not habitually.

----------------

Erasure depends in some measure on the pc getting to the BEGINNING of the incident. Sometimes the pc keeps starting a bit late in the incident and so does NOT get an erasure.

If you assess an item like “Dizziness after an operation” and try to run it the pc will bog utterly as the whole operation precedes the somatic called for and not only won’t erase but also won’t show as a picture.

Trying to run a somatic like “my mother’s hitting me” is a narrative incident not a somatic. It won’t erase because you can’t go earlier on the somatic as it’s not named. There’s probably a whole chain on “a stinging face” and chains are connected by somatic, not narrative or the same people or incident type. FEELING makes the chain. Only chains of feelings (pains, sensations, misemotions, etc) uniformly go down to a basic that will erase.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder



LRH: an.rd
Copyright © 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 19 MAY 1969
Remimeo
Dian Checksheet
DRUG AND ALCOHOL CASES
PRIOR ASSESSING

Those cases which have been long and habitually on drugs and alcohol sometimes suffer from a “SOMATIC SHUT-OFF”. They appear anaesthetized (unfeeling) and sometimes have “nothing troubling them” whereas they are on drugs, drink and are in reality in a suppressed physical condition and cannot cease to take drugs or drink.

One can find, in such a case, a very high TA which doesn’t seem to reduce. The TA can be brought down by auditing the drug and alcohol engrams as a chain.

However, there is another approach.

Any such case took up drugs or alcohol because of unwanted pain or sensation or misemotion. You can use that as a stable datum which resolves the situation.

All it requires is a special assessment called a PRIOR ASSESSMENT. For the person looked on drugs or alcohol as a cure for unwanted feelings. One has to assess what was wrong before or prior to the cure.

You determine if the person is on drugs or alcohol habitually. If so you determine which was earlier.

Now you ask for and list the pains, sensations, emotions or feelings he or she had before taking drugs or alcohol.

In doing this assessment, you must grab the read and mark it plainly as it occurs. If you just list and then go over the list the person may be back in present time and, as these are now cut off by the masses of drug or alcohol engrams on top of them, they won’t read again. So you must catch the read as the person first mentions it.

You choose the longest read and find and run the chain by R-3R as in any other Standard Dianetic auditing.

The only difference is the assessment time period. You are listing for a time before they went on drugs or alcohol.

The running out of the chain of unwanted feelings they had before going on drugs or alcohol removes the reason they started taking drugs, smoking marijuana or drinking. The compulsion to still use drugs or drink is lessened and they can come off it.

This can also be used as a working rule to get earlier than any “curative” activity. Almost anything which comes later is a cure for something earlier. It could be said that the present time being is a compound of past cures. To handle, the action would be the same as for drugs or alcohol. List the unwanted pains or feelings before the cure and run the longest reads by R-3R.

As there will be more than one chain involved, you of course take your next longest read and run that next, just as in any assessment.

The general term for this type of assessment is PRIOR Assessing, not because it is done before auditing but to determine what the pc was suffering from before he used a harmful “cure”.



LRH:an.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1969 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 19 MAY 1969
(HCO BULLETIN OF 16 APRIL 1969)
(Revised)
Remimeo
Class VIIIs
Dian Auditor’s Chksht
Tech Sec
Ds of P
Ds of T
HEALTH FORM, USE OF
A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF AUDITING


As one needs a guide to know what to audit on a case, the Dianetic Health Form is an essential auditing action.

Also, some cases do not know they have recovered.

It is Scientology that addresses improved awareness, not Dianetics. Dianetics accomplishes an eradication of the unwanted condition and when it is gone it is gone. The pc will not again mention it in many cases and it would be an error to hammer him about being better now.

Therefore a second Health Form gives a comparison. The somatics and pains not mentioned in the second which were in the first can be considered to be gone.

A second form done later gives the auditor and (when a Case Supervisor is also on the case) the Case Supervisor an indication of the actual improvement. A few days, weeks or months can elapse between giving the form. This gives an indication of improvement. Any number of Health Forms can be given.

One of the old problems of Dianetics was that the pc recovered from his arthritis fully and then only nagged the auditor about a new symptom. It wasn’t that the pc had to have an illness (only the 19th Century psychologist believed that it was no use to cure anything as the patient just got something else). The fact is that the symptoms of the pc are several, not just one.

You take up and audit each symptom or complaint to erasure of its picture, one after the other.

This is a new advance in Dianetics—that a preclear’s illness or upset has more than one source. His illness or upset is a composite.

You audit the most available symptom first until the picture causing it is erased. Then find the next one and audit it to erasure of its picture, then the next, etc.

The symptom which has the longest read and also in which the pc is interested is the one to do first. You run its chain to erasure of basic and it vanishes.

Then do the one which has the longest read (omitting the first from the list) and in which he is interested and run its secondary or engram or chain to erasure.

Now find the next symptom, etc.

Sooner or later the pc will have a well, healthy body, health, stability and a sense of well-being.

One finds “an incident which could have caused that”, dates it loosely, runs it as an incident without pushing hard, gets an earlier similar incident and runs that, or even

a third or fourth earlier similar (each time earlier) incident until a floating needle or the pc indicates the PICTURE IS GONE (has erased).

Then one finds out what may now be bothering the pc by new assessment and does the same action on it.

You can expect each chain to end with GOOD INDICATORS, pc smiling and happy. It is not all done in one session.

You only end a session really when the pc is smiling and happy after an erasure of the basic picture on the chain.

Sooner or later the pc will become bright, happy, symptom free, stable and has a well body. Then one shifts the preclear off into Scientology auditing to bring about maximum intelligence and ability. Symptoms are pains, emotional feelings, tiredness, aches, pressures, sensations, unwanted states of the body, etc.

If you are auditing without a meter, you take the pc’s interest as the indicator. You audit the symptom in which he is interested and cease to audit it when it is gone. This however is very chancy and often fails, so an E-Meter is recommended.

You can use whatever is given on the original Health Form that was done until the form is no longer valid or until the pc’s good indicators are in. When the pc brightens up, that’s the end of the Health Form. A new one must be done WHEN THE PC IS AGAIN FEELING BAD, TIRED OR WORRIED.

The purpose of any session or series of sessions is to get the pc feeling well and happy.

Sometimes the pc’s condition is obvious and the engram equally obvious. The pc has just had a child. The delivery of it and any earlier similar engram is of course audited at once. Any recent experience is so handled.

If a pc wants no auditing and yet is ill or miserable, one finds out why he doesn’t want to be audited by getting him to explain (when he will become auditable) or one finds and runs as secondaries, engrams or chains bad experiences with treatment. The best answer to a difficult pc is to send him or her for a Scientology Review and then begin Dianetics.

If the pc doesn’t recover at all, then the Auditor’s Code has been violated or the engrams were overrun or not run long enough to erase or the pc was very ill medically and should have had a medical examination first.

But even with poor auditing it is rare for a pc not to recover.

Of course, the more skilled (follows the Auditor’s Code, knows his meter, knows his Dianetics) the Auditor is, the more certain recovery becomes.

The worst crime is overwhelming the pc by telling him what’s wrong, not letting him tell you.

The Health Form is of very great assistance in handling all this. The use of it is as follows:

1. The Auditor sits down with the pc (usually the pc on a meter) and explains he’s going to do a Health Form and try to help the pc.

2. The Form is completed.

3. The Auditor picks out by meter or by asking the pc which symptom he has his attention on.

4. The Auditor finds an incident that had that symptom in it, dates it and runs it as an incident as per R-3-R.

5. The incident picture (and symptom) erases or the auditor finds an earlier similar incident, etc until the pictures and symptoms are gone.

6. A new symptom is located on the Health Form by meter and its chain is erased. Each chain erased should leave the pc cheerful if not completely well.

7. Steps 4 and 5 are repeated.

8. A new symptom is located on the Health Form or by pc’s complaint.

9. Steps 4 and 5 are repeated.

10. We go on doing this until the pc is suddenly well, smiling and happy and at that moment we at once desist.

11. We tell the pc that is the end of the session.

Note: If several sessions were required to do the above we start each new one by telling the pc it’s started and end each session by telling the pc the session is ended.

Each session is written down as it is done and preserved for future correction or use.

The basic Health Form is available from orgs. Individual copies are made out for each pc and left in his case folder when handled.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH :jk.an.rd
Copyright © 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

PASTORAL COUNSELLING
HEALTH FORM
Revised 22 July 1969




(Part of HCO Bulletin 19 May 1969)


This form is done by an auditor. It is metered.

Don’t try to handle items as the PC gives them unless an item BDs and the PC is interested. Otherwise assess after it is done. It also should be reassessed for additional items to run.

If the PC gives you a medical term (e.g. Migraine Headache) as an illness, write it down in the first column then ask PC what the somatic is (e.g. Pain in Head), write that down in the second column and note beside it any read. There is no rote command. Get somatics (not incidents) that can be assessed and run.

If the PC gives you a somatic don’t then ask for the feeling of it. Just write it down in the second column with its read and carry on down the list. If the PC gives several somatics in response to one illness, write down each as a separate somatic. Assess only the second column. Do not assess multiple somatics (i.e. several somatics as one item) and do not assess items that are not somatics. Do not assess narrative items. Do not accept or assess considerations.

Remember that an illness has more than one somatic to be audited out before it is wholly gone.

Persons medically ill should be sent for medical exam.

Cross those off that have been run until form is completely handled.

The end product of this form is entirely to pick out what to audit.

Preclear Date ________________

Auditor Org_________________

TA position at start of Form____________________

Answer Feeling Meter Read


1. Do you have any CURRENT ILLNESS?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________


2. Have you RECENTLY had any ILLNESS?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________

3. Do you have any RECURRING ILLNESS?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________


4. Do you have any CURRENT MISEMOTION?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________


5. Have you RECENTLY had any MISEMOTION?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________


6. Do you have any RECURRING MISEMOTION?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________


7. Do you have any ACHES?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________


8. Have you RECENTLY had any ACHES?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________


9. Do you have any RECURRING ACHES?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________

10. Do you have any PAINS?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________


11. Have you RECENTLY had any PAINS?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________


12. Do you have any RECURRING PAINS?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________


13. Do you have any INJURED BODY PART?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________


14. Do you have any PRESENT DISEASE?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________


15. Do you have any RECURRING DISEASE?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________


16. Do you have any PRESENT INFECTION?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________


17. Do you have any RECURRING INFECTION?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________


18. Do you have any PRESENT VENEREAL INFECTION?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________


19. Do you have any RASH?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________


20. Do you have any RECURRING RASH?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________


21. Do you have any UNWANTED SENSATIONS?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________


22. Have you RECENTLY had any UNWANTED SENSATIONS?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________


23. Do you have any CONTINUING UNWANTED SENSATIONS?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________


24. Do you have any RECURRING UNWANTED SENSATIONS?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________


25. Do you have any TEETH TROUBLES?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________


26. Do you have any other PHYSICAL CONDITION YOU WANT TO MENTION?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________


27. Do you have any unwanted ATTITUDE?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________


28. Is there something you wanted handled which wasn’t?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________


Are these all the complaints? (If question reads get the additional complaints. Mention
such things as VD in case PC is embarrased to mention them.)
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________


Cross off what has been run. Completely handle the form.

Add new items in subsequent sessions if PC gives them.



LRH :ldm.ei.aap L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1969 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 20 MAY 1969
Remimeo
Dian Checksheet

KEEPING DIANETICS WORKING IN AN AREA

In that any Dianetics Course, starting out, has only its Course Supervisor trained, the problems of what is used for Case Supervision and Cramming Supervisor in Qual will arise.

Here more than any other points, alteration can enter.

Altering, doing something else, is a sufficiently serious problem to destroy a Course and all the benefits of Dianetics in a whole area.

Early on, during the development of the Standard Dianetics Course, we were suddenly getting case failures. These were traced by Case Supervision to wild variations from Standard Dianetic procedure. These variations were traced to an examiner who during student checkouts was giving “advice”. As soon as this was handled, case gains immediately resumed.

Over the many years of Dianetic use, I think we must have seen all possible variations of auditing. “New” phenomena were often discovered and used and eventually the whole subject wandered off into never-never land and ceased to produce uniform results.

What has happened here in Standard Dianetics is that the exact actions that produce results on all cases have been isolated and used as THE procedure.

The procedure is a thin narrow walkway through a huge field of potential alterations.

THERE ARE NO DIFFERENT CASES.

Built in to the Standard Dianetic procedure are the remedies.

For instance early Dianetics was plagued by several problems:

1. Lack of visio—an inability to see pictures. This was solved by getting date and duration.

2. Perception shut-off. Not required in total now to produce results. Sonic, ability to hear the sound in pictures, is not needed at all. Impression is sufficient.

3. Somatic shut-off. Not now required to be solved but its source (drugs and alcohol) has been discovered.

4. Rough sessions. Solved by TRs.

5. Lack of auditor judgement in diagnosis. Solved by the E-Meter.

In these years of research I have been able to wrap up these and other things.

There have been more cases run on Dianetics than could easily be counted. So the research data is very broad. This is no new subject. It has been close to 39 years under research.

Thus what you are told on the Standard Dianetics Course is the essence of all this

work and experience. There are no unsolved problems, there is only varied application where there should not be.

The whole object of the course is to train people to get good RESULTS, and train people to give a course that results in GOOD AUDITORS. That’s the whole thing.

We could also teach over 50,000,000 words about things that don’t get results or train auditors.

The essence of a brilliant subject is a simple subject.

Therefore anything that varies the data of a Standard Dianetics Course can send it out into unworkability.

I’ve seen auditors also use “peyote” (a drug), CO2 and drugs “to help auditing”. I’ve seen many different meter types used. I’ve looked over a thousand different ways to run a session. And I’ve seen all these things fail.

The four points of greatest potential failure are

1. A Course Supervisor who interprets data and alters it in order to satisfy some student’s offbeat quest.

2. An Examiner who throws curves into data by means of invalidating the right data.

3. A Case Supervisor who does not simply and only put the auditor back onto the main line and who seeks to “solve” cases by altering data.

4. An Auditor who, not knowing his data in the first place, alters the data and, because in an altered form he fails, starts off on a wilder alteration of data and fails harder.

Under Supervisor come the Course and Cramming Supervisor both.

So you see, that to get real Standard Dianetic results going in an area you have to be very alert to hold the exact data line as contained in the HCO Bs.

Where you begin to find case failures, look to 1 to 4 above and to student failure to just simply study and drill.

For the first time you have an exact subject in the field of the “humanities”. These “humanities” for all man’s history have been a mass of superstition, bad logic, propaganda, authority and brutality. An exact humanity is so new that it has a bit of a hard time. All the errors and prejudices start to “blow off” when truth enters in.

Just be sure you don’t lose the subject with the confusion.

Cope, make do, hold the line and you’ll have a successful Dianetic area. It’s worth working toward, worth achieving.

You have only one big stable datum.

IF IT ISN’T WORKING IT IS BEING VARIED.

To get it working again, find who and what is varying it and get back on the main line.

LRH:an.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1969 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 21 MAY 1969
Remimeo
Dian Checksheet


ASSESSMENT


In all the years of auditing, listing and assessing anything has been a weak spot in general auditing.

More goofy alterations can occur and more errors in this activity than any other.

In Standard Dianetics if you assess the wrong item or a wrongly worded item the case won’t run, the TA goes up or the TA goes down. HIGH TA (above 3.5) is a lot of mass coming in. LOW TA (below 2) is overwhelm.

Bad TRs can cause low TA as the auditor is overwhelming the pc. Too many times through without going earlier is the usual cause of these 4.5 to 5.5 TAs.

But both high and low TA are in some degree caused by not quite right assessment.

Pictures going off (pc gets a black or invisible field) is also caused by a wrong assessment.

The whole subject of assessment means PICK OUT THE THING THAT WILL RUN. That’s all one is trying to do.

As I have never had the faintest trouble listing and assessing anything or even finding the right somatic with no meter at all, it is hard for me to advise how to correct MISASSESSMENT or assessment errors. It just evades my reality. The whole subject is too easy. Just too awful easy.

So my belief is that students try to put too much into it. They try to get a pat-phrased question to ask like “What is the feeling?”

They stare (TR 0) at the pc when they should be looking at the meter. Try TR 0 on the meter!

An old operating definition of ASSESSMENT is:

ASSESSMENT IS DONE BY THE AUDITOR BETWEEN THE PC’S BANK AND THE METER. THERE IS NO NEED IN ASSESSING TO LOOK AT THE PC. JUST NOTE WHICH ITEM HAS THE LONGEST FALL OR BD. THE AUDITOR LOOKS AT THE METER WHILE DOING AN ASSESSMENT.

A clue to this is the continual misuse of the Azimuth meter. I keep finding them with paper pasted behind the dial. This shows they aren’t used right. One bends the stand peg to get it out of the way, and writes by looking at his pen through the glass. Then he never misses a read as the meter is between him and the item he is writing.

One is assessing for PAINS, SENSATIONS, UNWANTED EMOTIONS, ACHES. It can get so far out that the pc is made to say only feelings like “a going in feeling” and never even mention a pain.

There are so many signs and indicators that it is a wrong item when it is that I can’t see how it could be missed. On a wrong item the pc has bad indicators, the meter doesn’t read, there is no pc interest. Wow. It’s as obvious as a sinking ship.

On a right item the meter reads well when the pc says it, the pc’s good indicators come in somewhat when it’s announced, the pc is very interested in running it. It’s about as obvious as sky rockets.

So just given these two descriptions of the reaction to a wrong item and a right item I should think anybody could tell them.

Rote procedure gets heavily in the road of a Dianetic assessment. The pc gives a list, the auditor doesn’t watch the reads and note them, then the auditor commonly goes back to assess the list. By that time the charge is off. He should have watched the meter in the first place and taken that. Why all this assessing of the finished list. Of course when you already have a list done by another with no reads marked on it, you have to read it off and mark what reads. And using a list a second time you have to read it off to the pc to see what reads.

When a student demands a rote procedure for Dianetic assessment he is asking for trouble and is trying not to understand.

If the student simply understood that he was trying to find an item that read well, brought in moderate GIs and in which the pc was interested and which was usefully worded and which would run, he would have it made.

I get the feeling that Scientology listing gets all mixed up on a Dianetic Course. There are precision Scientology listing and nulling actions which must not be violated. These have NOTHING to do with Dianetics. Nothing!

A Standard Dianetics list can be so sloppily done it’s hard to believe. BUT the auditor has to watch the meter and be sure he has one with the pc’s interest, worded so as to run into an engram chain.

I’ve seen an incredibly botched up job as finding a somatic done this way. Pc listed, needle and TA all over the dial. Auditor picked out four somatics. Wrote them down and called them off. None read. The auditor then said the pc couldn’t be audited on Dianetics and should be sent for Scientology. Who is kidding who? The somatics read like mad. There was even one with a LFBD. Yet the auditor had to go into some goofy rote procedure or ritual and by it “discover” there were no somatics.

The errors in this operation of finding a somatic can be so corny and so idiotic that I have to assume the auditor doesn’t know or understand what he’s trying to do and doesn’t even look at the meter while he does it.

Honest, this action of finding the somatic to run is SO easy to do that only over-complication can block it.

The auditor wants to know what aches, pains, bad feelings, misemotions the pc complains of and out of these takes the one that reads best while the pc is saying it or it is being called off and which brings in the pc’s GIs moderately and in which the pc is interested. The somatic MUST read.

Now what’s so hard about that?

It requires one looks at his meter when the pc is giving it or it is being talked about.

There are no Scientology listing considerations in it.

Now and then the pc has a discreditable somatic and the auditor has to coax the pc to give all.

Now and then the pc says “My LUMBOSIS” and if you ran that or any medical term you’d only get him in doctors’ offices or in hospitals, as it’s a medical term, not a somatic.

Evidently the student gets in such a sweat about finding a “right item” that he goes up the spout on good sense.

In Scientology lists there’s only ONE item. On Dianetic lists there can be a dozen, for a Dianetic list isn’t really a list. It isn’t trying to isolate the mental troubles of the pc. A Dianetic list is simply the pc’s physical aches and pains. Golly, people are notorious for discussing their aches and pains. Why is it so hard to find one that reads well on a meter?

Well, you have to watch the meter.

That’s probably the outness. Students are so socially adjusted they keep looking at the pc, maybe even trying to look pleasant rather than trying to read a meter.

I feel, in trying to communicate and teach how to locate what to run, as if I am explaining where the floor is. And the people I’m explaining it to are wondering how you look at a floor, what chant you intone while looking at a floor and what mathematical equation you use to make sure it is the floor. It’s that kind of a thing. I say, “There’s the floor. If you stamp on it and it is there you will get a sound.” And guys think, “Well, maybe but how loud a sound and do you use the right foot or the left foot and if that’s the floor I can’t find the ceiling because I have no sextant.”

All I’m trying to tell you is that when you are looking for a somatic in the pc and hit it the meter reads well, the pc has moderate GIs when you tell him what it is you’ve chosen, he is interested and it will run.

And honest to Pete, that’s all there is to it. And if somebody says there’s anything else he’s trying to wreck a whole course and a lot of auditors.

I can’t say it any plainer.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder



LRH: cs.ei .rd
Copyright © 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 22 MAY 1969
Remimeo
Dian Checksheet


DIANETICS
ITS BACKGROUND


The world before Dianetics had never known a precision mental science.

Man has used mental knowledge in the past mainly for control, politics and propaganda.

The word “psychology” in the popular usage is synonymous with “getting around” somebody.

In the thousands of years before 1950 there were many philosophers and much knowledge was gathered in the field of logic, mathematics, electronics and the material sciences.

However, due to ideologies and political conflicts, little of this prior knowledge was ever applied to the field of the human mind.

The scientific idea of regarding as a truth only that which could be demonstrated with a result was never really applied to the mind.

“Researchers” in this field were not fully trained in mathematics, the scientific method or logic. They were interested mainly in their own private ideas and in political Targets.

As an example, the only “schools” of psychology taught or followed in the West were Russian and East German.

The primary school was that of Ivan Petrovitch Pavlov (1849—1936) a veterinarian. Every school child and university student was required to study Pavlov in one disguise or another. The burden of Pavlov’s work is that man is an animal and only works through “conditioning”. The Western nations overlooked the fact that this work had already destroyed several countries including Czarist Russia, that Stalin had made Pavlov write up his work in the Kremlin in 1928 in order to permit the control of men. Using the mental studies of an enemy is a very dangerous thing to do.

The West at that time was run by only the “very best people” and possibly it pleased them greatly to think that the masses they controlled were only animals after all. That this also made them animals did not occur to them.

Billions of dollars were appropriated by parliaments and congress to subsidize men to “better control” their animals.

These men had no idea of healing anyone or helping anyone. Riots and civil disorder were the only product they achieved.

Dianetics was released straight into the teeth of these heavily subsidized Barons of the Mind with their “it takes 12 years to make a psychiatrist” and “authority states” and “any effort to interrupt this monopoly must be stamped out at once”.

Psychology and psychiatry were state (government) subjects, pushed by the “very best people”.

They could not make their way on their own because they were contrary to the public morals and customs. The public actually wanted nothing to do with them.

In mental institutions torture, permanent damage and death were the order of the day, on the basis that it did not matter if one killed people as they were just animals anyway.

So the public was on the side of Dianetics (and later Scientology) and the governments were on the side of the “very best people”.

Press, controlled by governments and intelligence services and the “very best people”, lied endlessly about Dianetics (and Scientology).

Dianetics, a new valid mental science, was pitted against Russian and Eastern European teachings.

Dianetics is not only the first mental science developed in the West, it is the first mental science on the planet that uniformly produces beneficial results.

Man is being subjected to fantastic and violent efforts to lure or crush him into docility. This is the obvious end product of Russian and Eastern European technologies now heavily financed and supported, unwittingly, by Western governments.

Man’s response to this is riots and civil disorder in the universities, unions and streets. Man does not accurately trace the source of his oppression. He is violently worried.

The government response has been more millions to psychologists and psychiatrists to develop new means of control and oppression. What has not worked in the past is not likely to work in the present or the future.

Czarist Russia, the entire Balkans, Poland, Germany and many more Eastern European countries have already perished trying to use the work of Pavlov, Wundt and others. The entire West, having “bought” the same governing ideas, is now in turmoil and is perishing in its turn.

Dianetics refuses to be a revolutionary activity. It does not have to be. All it has as a mission is to get itself applied.

The basic building block of a society is the individual. From individuals groups are built. And this is the society. No society is better than its basic building blocks.

Men are not animals.

Well men are sane men.

Dianetics, if applied to individuals in the society, brings hope, well and sane beings.

These well and sane beings, sent on to Scientology, then become brilliant and very able beings.

We are evolving Man to a higher state.

In this state he can better handle his problems.

We are not trying to overthrow anyone. We are not revolting against anyone. In truth we can even make the fancied “very best people” into actual very best people.

Dianetics was first conceived in 1930 and the developments of 39 years have gone into producing Standard Dianetics.

Dianetics: The Original Thesis was published in 1949 in manuscript form. It was copied in various ways, hand to hand across the world. Dianetics: The Evolution of a Science was published in late 1949. Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health was published May 9, 1950 and has since sold millions of copies.

In the early ‘50s new discoveries concerning the spirit brought us into Scientology.

But Dianetics was never lost sight of and every little while I would push it further ahead toward a fast, easy, 100% workability.

The present release of Standard Dianetics is a near final product.

If done exactly, it produces good, permanent results in only a few hours of auditing.

One can train a Dianetic auditor in Standard Dianetics in from 10 days to a month at the most, with an average of about 2 weeks.

These are very, very worthwhile advances and Standard Dianetics is almost as great a breakthrough in 1969 as the Original Thesis in 1949. Hundreds of thousands of hours of search and research have gone into it.

Dianetics has progressed from the pre-Dianetic period of no science of the mind, to the existence of a real science of the mind, to a fast accurate science simpler than any other scientific subject and of more value to Man.

All this advance has been very hardly won, without government billions, in the teeth of avalanches of lies and opposition.

The subject owes no allegiance to anyone but itself. It has no commitments to anyone. It has no politics. It belongs to those who use it.

It is the only game in the universe where everyone wins.

Let’s keep it that way.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder



LRH: an.rd
Copyright © 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 23 MAY 1969
Remimeo
Dian Checksheet

AUDITING OUT SESSIONS
NARRATIVE VERSUS SOMATIC CHAINS


Now and then it is necessary to audit out the last session or an auditing session.

One does this by R-3-R but there is a slight change in wording when asking the pc to go earlier. One asks for an EARLIER SIMILAR INCIDENT. “Is there an earlier similar incident?” A session, when audited, does not always erase. Instead it has become part of a chain. Therefore one has to run R-3-R on it and get an earlier similar incident.

The chain may go back vast amounts of time.

Whereas the pc may only have been in Scientology 3 days, before Scientology there were other types of “sessions” such as psychoanalysis. And before that, in Rome and Greece, dream therapy in which one was “visited by a God”. And before that—well, the chain can have a very far back basic. One does not of course suggest ever what the earlier incident may be. There is no telling what the pc may confuse with a session.

If one asked the pc to “locate an earlier incident with a similar feeling” one would be on another chain entirely. Hence one asks, simply, “Is there an earlier similar