6809C29 Class VIII TAPE 6





MECHANICS OF TECHNIQUES AND SUBJECT MATTER



Thank you. And so we come to lecture number (SIX); lecture

number six. And we still count.



Very good. Twenty nine September AD 18, Class VIII Course.



There are many things which I could take up tonight. The

org students did their first auditing today. There were two

well dones, one apparent false auditing report, and three,

oh my god, how could you's. And amongst these, apparently

somebody doesn't know why a list is done.



A list is done to bring about a cognition on a question.

Well let me give it an exact order.



A cognition on the subject blowing to F/N, a realization of

the question blowing to F/N, or an item blowing to F/N, or

processed or relisted as in Remedy B. going to F/N. And

those're the only reasons you do a list. And my god, you

don't do a list to have a complete list, because as near as

I can figure from this auditing report the list was being

corrected on the basis that it was complete. I don't give a

damn about a complete list.



Now let's take how an auditing question can blow up on a

subject. The fellow says, "We're now going to do Pr Pr 4,

and the subject of this is source, Sources" Boombol F/N.

"By golly I did realize, that, that, that, that's, is

wrong. Yes, it's been wrong. I haven't really been

recognizing that." And the auditor says, if the auditor is

one of these ones that you drop a six pence in, or a penny

in, or depending what country you're in, he goes on and

says, "Uh, I haven't done my job." And the knucklehead will

then try to clear the questions, try to run the session,

and the TA will go up, up, up, up, up. There is such a case

folder right in your case folder collection. It blew up on

the subject of Pr Pr 4. And then the auditor tried to clear

the commands, and tried to run it, and he ran it for an

hour and a half, and the tone arm was going out through the

roof, and then, by simply rehabbing the F/N it went (snap).

Right back to the fact that the guy had cognited at the

moment that the subject of the process was given to him.



Now if that could happen on a process therefore it can

happen on a list. But very often one doesn't announce the

list, but the PC all of a sudden can get what the auditor

is at. "Are you connected to a suppressive person?" or some

such question is asked, and the PC says, "What a brand new

idea." You know? Wow. And the auditor then says, "Alright.

We're going to do the WSU." Well Christ, he's got an F/N

right in front of his face. And all he's gonna get out of

that is a rising tone arm.



Now another instance, given the subject for what's going to

go on, a little bit of an R factor, no lecture on the

subject, but "We're gonna run so and so, and the question

is so and so, now what do you understand with this

question?" And at that moment something goes boom! You see?

F/N.



Now I have seen something that's so completely insane, so

utterly insane, that the person actually, if he wound up in

the hands of a psychoanalyst, I wouldn't say a word. And

that is, he has the PC put down the cans while we look it

up in the dictionary. Jesus Christ almighty, god! You mean

you let a PC off the cans from the moment the session

starts to the end of the set? Bull! Never! You say, "Well

how's he gonna turn the pages of the dictionary?" Well what

the hell's he doing turning the pages of the dictionary,

the auditor got a broken arm? A PC isn't let off the cans

ever during a session because an F/N can occur at any time

in the session. And every now and then I'll see in old

reports, "Took the PC off the cans so he could look up the

word, and then the tone arm starts up, up, up, up, up, up,

up, up, up. 4.25, the auditor going on, and bla bla bla,

and bla bla bla, and the next item, or the next bla bla

bla, and bla bla bla, and the next item or the next

question, and the tone arm going up, 4.25, 4.5, all the way

up, "Well where could the floating needle have been?" It

was when he took the PC off the cans.



The PC looked it up in the dictionary and cognited. Because

that is a point where it can go. It can go on the command,

the clearing of the command. It can go on the first

auditing question asked without it being answered. Or it

can go on the first answer, second answer, and actually

most often goes on the first answer on lists. The first

item. And these god-awful painful lists which you see that

go eighty nine pages, or something of this sort, are either

listing a dead horse, or the item was the first item. So you 

don't let the PC off cans. Because those are the sequences 

of F/N I've just given you. And it happens on a list, and it 

happens on a process, and it can happen at any time. It can 

happen at any time, any time. So don't let the PC off the 

cans for any reason under the sun, moon or stars.



Now I will tell you another kooky one. I'll give you

another kooky circumstance with regard to all of this. And

that is this. Electronics men think an E-meter works

because hands sweat. And I haven't been around orgs to

shoot the electronics men who say this, and as a net result

of all of this they remain unshot, and they do talk. And in

this great, advanced, modern society in which we live, they

think that a galvanometer works because of hand sweat. Now

the fellow, you can just see the fellow sweating and

unsweating. He sweats a read, and he unsweats a read. And

he sweats a read, and he unsweats a read. And he sweats a

read, and he unsweats a read. And that is mirrored in the

fact of "PC wiped his hands and tone arm rose." Now I

imagine some low TA case figured this out, that if the PC

wiped his hands and then you got a higher TA read, then

immediately and directly, and instantly; it was the sweat

which gave him the low TA read. I'll tell you what gives a

low TA read. Three. B-thetans. That is a low TA.



The whole of low TA. The whole subject of low TA is

contained in that. "PC has attested three, tone arm 1.2."

Now that is something which comes from male cows. When you

see a TA dive, guy's got B-thetans. Now there'd be eight

thousand, seven hundred and sixty five additional reasons

why a person doesn't have a this, or doesn't have a that.

And we could have an infinity of wrongnesses. There is no

reason of my harping on certain sets of wrongnesses.



I'm just showing you what goofy-nesses can come up.



Now listen very carefully. When the PC puts down the cans

and moves his hands and arms, the body density mass of the

B-thetan beefs up. So that when he goes back on the cans

again, the TA is reading higher. I'm afraid you cannot

avoid these horribly, factual facts! That a PC who gets a

low TA is an unflat three.



Now we had an auditor here today very, very puzzled, very

puzzled as to how his meter, beautifully trimmed at the

beginning of session went out of trim during the session,

at the end of session was found marvelously out of trim.

And this he was being very mystified about. He doesn't know

this fact. It takes a while for a meter and a can to warm

up. So, the PC grabs hold of the cans, or the meter is

turned on, and if you instantly trim it at that precise

instant that it's turned on, you are turning on a cold

circuit. And you're trimming a cold circuit. It takes a

minute or two for the circuit to warm up and your trim will

change. And this is not true of all E-meters.



Some of them heat up faster than others. But it's a safe

bet, that if you're going to do a trim check on a meter,

you do it at the end of session, not at the beginning of

session. And what's your meter doing so far out of trim, do

you carry it around by the trim knob? My meters from one

month's end to the next just stay where they're supposed to

stay. So I don't know why other people's meters don't,

unless they uses the trim knob to scratch their heads, or

something.



But the point I'm making here, is there are certain data.

Now when you see people trying to avoid this data they

have, they feel the data is discreditable to themselves, or

somebody to whom it is discreditable is trying to argue

them out of it. Now you can have this kind of a fire fight

develop up the line someplace, there is no such thing as a

service facsimile. There is no such thing as a service

facsimile. It's very amusing, because that will be the

guy's service facsimile.



Now this is this bad. You can get somebody who is in a

foul, foul condition in his life as far as casualties,

accidents, that sort of thing is concerned, and he gets to

three and he can't find any.



He can't find any at all. And the idea's upsetting to him.

Now if his grades are out and he has not come up well

through his grades, his level of reality will not be

adequate to embrace three, anyway. And so you have people

going around, every now and then you will find somebody

going around and saying, "Well, idea of body thetans, na

na, ah ha ha ha ha ha, yeah, yeah." Not true.



Now, he considers it discreditable. He himself wants to

invalidate it for some reason or another. So he starts

spreading it about so as to discredit the information. And

this blocks the way for an awful lot of people. So

therefore, you've got to have a grip on your standard data

which is sufficient to stand up to all of this

cockeyed-ness. This is wild stuff that comes around. Crazy,

crazy stuff.



There is one going in Los Angeles, I think it is, right

this minute, that it won't be possible to become clear or

OT. It's not possible to make these grades. Out of seventy

people polled, twenty of them thought it was impossible and

they wouldn't be able to make it, and they didn't have much

reality on it. Who's been at work there? One of the first

things you see is the invalidation of the state of clear.



Reality is a fascinating thing. Reality is proportional to

the amount of charge off a case. If you took Clearing

Course materials and handed 'em over to some wog he would

look them over and scratch his head, maybe come down with a

cold or something. If he tried to run them, if you tried to

run them on him, your possibility of doing so is so

microscopically remote, and most of 'em wouldn't even upset

him. That's how far they are from clear. Because there is

this stable datum - the amount of charge off a case is

proportional to the reality. Also, proportional to the

awareness.



So you have somebody walking down the street and there are

four elephants, and these four elephants are walking down

in squad formation, and each one of them's carrying green

banners. And you say to this fellow, "What the hell. Four

elephants walking down the middle of the streets" And he

says, "What elephants?" Just that. Just, what elephants?

So, it is very fascinating. People are unaware to the

degree that they haven't got much reality anyway. Now you

let one ofthese monkeys come along and tell you what

reality is. Do you follow? It's one of these incredible,

nonsense propositions.



The whole subject of reality is mixed up in the subject of

perception, the subject of recognition, the subject of

truth. You wonder how in the name of god the people of this

planet could be lied to. 'Cause brother, can they be lied

to. Look at the newspapers they buy. Now if you want to

know how much truth is in the newspapers, all you have to

do is read the report about Scientology. Now you know

that's for the birds. What about the story at the right and

left of the one about Scientology? Did you ever think of

that? They're just as lying as the one about Scientology.

See? The newspapers at this certain level of action here at

this particular time are not particularly kicking back at

us. They, as a matter of fact, their last report at least,

they were doing very well indeed. But the level of truth,

the level of truth isn't there. And yet these are the

people who are keeping people informed. Well, think of the

people who are keeping them informed, and think of the

people who are quote, "being informed", unquote. See?

Unreality.



One of your basic protests is unreality. But unreality is

proportional to the amount of charge on the case. " these

guys are pretty charged up, aren't they? So they're in a

figure-figure, boggle-woggle, snuggle-luggled, hanging

around. There's an old comic strip character, Joe

Bliffelstick, something like that, and he always went

around with a little rain cloud over his head, you know?

That's the boy. That's your standard issue humanoid today.

See? He's got too much storm going on right in his

immediate vicinity to see very much out there.



Now the quality of the charge taken off the case is very

important. If you take charge off on the main line of the

grades, as they go up, why, it is basic charge which then

blows a lot of side charge. Now if you just took charge off

on mass, without any judgement as to whether or not it was

main line, just take charge off, just get the E-meter to

read. Put a person on the cans, get the E-meter to read.

Probably at the and of fifty, sixty years of auditing,

something like that, there'd be a great oddity would occur.

His reality would come up to OT. Do you follow? Now what

we've got is a way to go right through the fiddle of the

charge line to remove those central charges which then

discharge all the side charges. Now a PC usually feels

better in some way or another, but an auditor who badly

audits, that is who audits very poorly, can actually 

put as much charge on the case as he takes off. He

can invalidate the case. The PC says "Why? You know, I feel

better, I, I, didn't I have a floating needle, or

something?" And the auditor says, "Ha ha ha ha. Case like

yours, no sir!" Well you do the same thing. You say , "Who

or what has unmocked you?" Or something. And, question

didn't read. Person isn't PTS. Now you've given him the

evaluation that he's suppressed. Because you're going to

now list the list. So the list lists out to a dead horse,

but the PC seems charged up.



Alright, I'll give you another example of it. The list is

charged, it does read, and you give him the wrong item.

Alright, when you give him the wrong item, you'll hang him

with that little pocket of charge because that isn't the

item. So it didn't discharge the list. So you've got the

charge of the list hung up in the fact that he's now got a

wrong item. So that after a listing action is done, or

after a listing action session, if the TA is high it was a

wrong item. That's; it's very elementary. TA's high, wrong

item.



You're busy listing away, listing away madly on a case,

getting up to your hundred and fifty fifth page, or

something like this, and you notice the TA is starting up.

Well you're putting charge on the case. Do you see that

your tone arm, the tore arm, is, in actual fact, the

measure of accumulation of charge? The needle surges are

just gradients of the tone arm. You can get a tone arm

actually behaving like a needle. And a tone arm over a long

period of time, does behave like a needle. A tone arm

measures the amount of charge-up on the case at that

particular time. When you get into the higher OT sections

you will find something else very peculiar happens. You can

find that your PC will lean on something, and drive his TA

up. And you can do your nut as a review auditor, trying to

get this TA down on some guy who is up around six, seven,

eight levels, and his TA is up, boy. It's up. 4.75, or

something like that. And you suddenly sort it out and you

find out he's leaning on something. Well at that level he

can lean on something so much harder than anybody ever

thought of, that, of course, you are reading the side of a

building. Or you are reading the density of the ridge he is

making against his body. And you can fish it around,

actually, to find out what he is doing, and all of a

sudden, why, he says, "Well you; what am I doing? I, well,

pushing on the ceiling." Slllll. Down she come.



Now you can actually reverse this when he is OT8. You can

reverse this, and as far as a meter is concerned you can

put him on the meter, have him connected with the body, and

then have him lean on the wall. Just lean on the wall, not

go through any energy body grips and so forth.



After all, the guy isn't the body. Have him lean on the

wall, and you'll watch your TA come right on up. Unlean off

the wall and it goes down. In other words, at high levels

your TA starts to behave like a needle. Which is quite,

quite interesting. But your needle, you see, is just a sort

of a, of a small, easily read TA. They are connected.



So, you put more charge on the case. Down at a lower level

the guy isn't leaning on anything, but the guy's got a lot

of body thetans, or something like that, and remember that

from three down you are auditing somebody with body

thetans. So very peculiar things can happen. And you can

audit him incorrectly, do an incorrect action, and have the

TA go up. You can incorrectly list him, you can overrun

him, and so on. You've got something leaning against

something. Something making more mass than it did before.

So you haven't taken charge off the case, you've put charge

on the case.



So if your TA is higher at session end than it was at the

beginning, the case is more charged up at the end than it

was at the beginning. Elementary.



Do you follow? I mean, these, these, these, this is, this

is very easy. This is very easy. The auditor, through

incorrect actions put more water in the bucket than he took

out, and of course the tone arm measuring the amount of

water in the bucket will, of course, measure more water in

the bucket. It's, it's, it's just that elementary. It, it's

not a very esoteric datum.



We're dealing, in actual fact, with a creature who can make

mass, and who does make mass.



And the mass which he makes below three, or actually below

seven, the mass he makes, and so on, is normally, bank

mass. Now, if he is given an item which isn't his item, he

then has been given something which he then grips, and which 

stays with him. And it's a very funny phenomenon that a wrong

item will be remembered very, very easily by the PC.



Now there's a piece of rehabbing which is, at this stage of

the game, being done wrong. I don't know why you guys keep

asking for a service facsimile. I notice a lot of PCs can

give you their service facsimile. What the hell's he doing

remembering his service facsimile? Now it isn't true that

because he can remember his service facsimile it wasn't his

service facsimile, but you're asking a PC to do a rather

considerable feat. You're asking him to remember something

that has probably been erased. And instead of rehabbing it,

you're keying it back in again. So I don't know why you

keep asking him for the wording. I saw a folder here the

other day, it came in from an org. and it said it wasn't

his service facsimile because he couldn't remember it.



And it's probably the one valid service facsimile that's

passed through the lines. It's whether or not it rehabs.

Whether or not it goes F/N. That, that's, that's the whole

test. Does it go F/N? Alright, that's it.



Now the other thing, the other thing which you must get

very straight as far as E-meter reactions and processes and

so on, that you must get very straight, is that where an

item, or a process, brought about a state of release there

is an F/N there to rehab. And if it doesn't rehab he didn't

go release at that point.



Well you say, "Well how many times can you rehab this

things" I don't know. Infinity. So you say, "Alright, let's

rehab this fellows' grades." And you could make this

mistake as a C/S, as a case supervisor. Say, "Let's rehab

this fellows' grades. Tell him rehab the grades.' And this

auditor obediently tries to rehab ARC Straightwire. Tone

arm rose, you give him hell because he rehabbed it wrong.

Or you say it's been rehabbed too many times. I saw a

remark in a case summary here today. There's a complete

error. The person has been overrun on Ruds. Now a person

couldn't be overrun on Ruds. Not possible to be overrun on

Ruds. It is possible to overrun one particular ARC break,

but it is not possible to overrun the whole subject of ARC

breaks. So when you see this, you tried to rehab ARC

Straightwire and it didn't rehab, and the tone arm went up,

and you fish around trying to find the point of rehab, and

it didn't exist, why naturally at that stage of the game

you're going to get a rising tone arm. It's as easy as

that. So what do you do about this? You say, "Well I

couldn't possibly do this. It's obviously been overrun."

Well you gotta make up your mind. It's either been overrun

or not run at all.



One of the ways to do this is to run it. And you say, "God,

that's adventurous." Yeah it is .



Yes, but what the hell's this guy doing being a, being a

grade three without his ARC Straightwire in? See? So you

run it. Blows down, it F/Ns. That's the first time it was

ever run, I assure you. Supposing, as you tried to run it,

it just really shot up. Well at that time you could

indicate that it was overrun and try to fish around and

find out what in the name of common sense happened to it.



One of the things just would be to date the session in

which it was supposed to have been rehabbed, supposed to

have been run, and get the buttons in on that session.

Because there might have been a crashing invalidation on

the session, of something that swallowed up the F/N in some

weird fashion. It couldn't have been an F/N which appeared

below the invalidation. Don't get that sort of thing. There

was an F/N but the auditor wound up on the guy and told him

that wasn't it, that it was no good, or something, and the

guy can't remember this session because it was sort of

painful. Something bad happened in the session. Well you

could, you could rehabilitate the session and get the F/N.



So, obviously, obviously your right procedure would be,

you're getting somebody, you wanna rehab ARC Straightwire.

Well, the fellow might be protesting it being rehabbed,

because this is the hundred and fifth time, and he's tired

of the whole thing, so you got protest on it. Something

like that doesn't rehab, see? It doesn't rehab. The tone

arm starts up.



Well now it could be protested. Not over-rehabbed, but

certainly protested the rehabbing of it.



It could have been that the session is too painful in which

it was run. The later part of the session was very painful

but the early part of the session was all right, something

goofy like this. So one of the things would be to date the

thing. Do just a standard dating on your meter.



Date the session and get in some buttons on the session and

see if anything happens. Then you're liable to get yourself

an F/N.



Now if that action didn't occur, this is, this is rather

working very hard at it, see? And this is how to be very

safe, but if that action didn't occur, it didn't ever F/N.

It didn't ever F/N.



That's it. Somebody was telling a lie.



But your tone arm, the tone arm only means overrun when it

goes up on something you are running. A high tone arm means

a generality of overruns in life. You can have a person

with a high tone arm, that oh boys Does he got overruns in

life. It's quite remarkable how many overruns there can be

in life. And one of your standard actions is to get the

life overruns off of the case. And boy, does that cool off

TAs. Wow!



Now let me show you what kind of errors can creep in, just

as, so you're safe guarded against your tech being shot to

hell. Somebody says that you must only get life overruns in

this lifetime because the PC liable to get back, and bad

things are liable to happen, and whole track doesn't exist

anyway. Somebody is trying to invalidate whole track, so he

says you mustn't ever try to, try to get a hold of life

overruns earlier than this lifetime because it's liable to

get the PC upset.



Well it's very, very interesting. There have been crude

versions of engram running on the whole track. They

apparently didn't have meters. Then commands, god knows

what they were. But somebody on the whole track here and

there has tried to run engrams. And they inevitably have

overrun them. So you're liable to find an engram overrun of

eighty one million years ago.



This guy says; you're running this process, "What has been

overrun?", you're running this process, and the guy says;

what's been overrun, and it occurs to him; engrams. Good.

And you try; now you limited by asking what session, you

see, and pin his attention up here in PT somewhere you

know? In what foundation? You see, you could limit your

question so that he could never rehab it. But it's

obviously been overrun because it reads as overrun, but you

can't get an F/N. Well, now if you know the tools of your

trade this won't baffle you.



Do you remember what I told you about the incredible? The

PCs data, man, is not something that you, as a case

supervisor or an auditor have a god damned thing to do

with. Any time auditing may be run on the, only on those

things which conform to current opinion, any time that

phenomenon occurs, and it's liable to occur at any time

because the, actually the first foundation, the Dianetic

Foundation, really blew up on just this one point. The

Board of Directors was so upset over the commotion past

lives would cause that they tried to pass a resolution

saying that no more research must be done into the field of

past lives. Well, we had a parting of the ways.



Anyway, because obviously, to wrap up the subject one had

to research what was there. Now let's get somebody

researching under the Bide-a-wee College faculty. There's

this guy with a high choke collar and very prim, tremendous

number of missed withholds, second dynamic overts of

various kinds, but a respectable citizen. And all of a

sudden somebody says that he's going to do a little

research in this line, or they're gonna practice this and

that, why he permits Scientology to be run in that

university only so long as nobody...  Just fill in the

missing lines.



See? You could fill in; "As long as nobody tries to pull

missed withholds." See? "As long as we never go into past

lives." "As long as the subject religion is not touched."

"As long... " Do you get the idea? You could fill it in,

see, so you get a limitation. Now that is limitation of the

preclear's data. Auditing has nothing to do with data. It

has to do with technique.



So the PC tells you there's eighteen elephants walking on

the ceiling, boy, it's not up to you to correct him. He can

take a snoot full of some outrageous drug or gasoline or

something. And it's marvelous. We have people who have gone

wing ding on gasoline. I, well, I guess they were in the

valence of a car. (laughter) And he's trying to run out

this incident, see? And this incident has pink elephants

walking upside down on the ceiling. It has black bats

flying in and out of his ears.



Now psychiatry, when they found data like that, instantly

and at once invalidated the person.



And then they might put it down in their report, but their

idea of making the thing come out straight was telling the

person what the truth was. Now that is a whole failed line.

It is totally failed. It is fighting its' last ditch fight 

as I speak to you now. It's going to go over Niagara Falls 

with no barrel, boy. Because, one of the tricks it uses is 

when it interferes with somebody or implants somebody, is to 

put an incredible perception in the implant so if the person 

says anything about it, it will sound so incredible he can then

be pronounced insane. So you haven't got anything to do

with the PCs data. What he tells you is what he tells you.



So you do a list. Now let's get what just exactly what I

mean. We do a list. And we're doing this list and he puts

down "Pink elephants", and "Who or what has suppressed

you?", and he puts down "Pink elephants, catterwacks,

martians, a dog biscuit , and there's this hellish fall.



And he sits up and...  (laughter) And the damned thing goes

F/N. You don't even have a chance to null the list. There

it is. Of course you say "Dog biscuits and it reads, and

you say "That's your item", and he says, "Yeah, that sure

is." You say, "Alright. Dog biscuits. That's your item.



You see, one of the things that gets wrong with the time

track is it has incredibles on it. And therefore, an

incredible is something that won't as-is because it's not

credible. The item is dog biscuits, he's been suppressed

with dog biscuits. Some times you practically do your nut

trying to figure out how the hell did he get loused up on

the subject of dog biscuits. But actually, if you went back

into it, inquired deeply, which you shouldn't do, but if

you went back in to it; sometimes the PC explains this to

you. It all sounds logical. But you're interested in the

mechanics of it. Just the mechanics of it. Did it blow

down? Was it the item on the list? Your action then is to

verify and give it to the PC as his item. Those are the

things which you're supposed to do. Not worry about whether

or not it's dog biscuits.



Do you see? You're not interested in the, in, in, in this

data. Do you get the, you get the different orientation on

this thing? It has nothing to do with you. If you followed

the exact mechanical steps necessary to resolve it, why

there you are. You're interested in the reaction of the PC,

not his data.



The PC says, "Oh yes, boy, do I have an ARC break, boy. Are

they on to me," and so on, "They're all pretty bad, you

know. They've been jumping all over me with wicked people,

wicked people," and so on. "Well, that's good." By all

means try to clean up this thing as an ARC break at the

moment, and in the process of cleaning it up say, ask him

casually, but not evaluatively if he has a withhold. And

that reads, and you pull it. And then you check the ARC

break, and it all of a sudden doesn't read and the whole

thing has cooled off. Reaction. The PC was critical, that

means, always, invariably, missed withhold. See? It's that

kind of thing you're interested in as an auditor. Not what

the ARC break was about, but that he was ARC broken. Not

what the missed withhold was about, but that he did have

one. Do you get the differences?



Now the subject of each one of the grades, which is to say

ARC breaks, withholds, problems, you name it, but the

subject of any grade, the subject of any grade is timeless

and endless. It can always be run forever. But not the

commands of the grade.



Supposing we tried to run Pr Pr 1 AA every time the PC

looked worried and had a problem.



Man, we would really wrap him around a telegraph pole. He

would become overrun on that process, right? He never

becomes overrun on problems. You, you get the vast

difference there? He never, he's never overrun on problems.

He is overrun on a problems process. He can be overrun, for

instance, on problems of comparable magnitude. Problems of

comparable magnitude. Problems of comparable magnitude.

Problems of comparable magnitude. And you, in trying to put

in the Ruds, had better well, damn well not run any process

at all. ARC break is ARCU, CDEI, which is just the trying

to find out what the ARC break is. Itsa, or earlier itsa.



You do rudiments by itsa or earlier incident itsa on. A

totality. And they never become overrun.



But if you insisted on running a problem of comparable

magnitude for every time you found a PC with a PTP, you

would very soon have this one wrapped around a telegraph

pole. So the basic stable datum that you should know is

that a process can be overrun, but the subject of grades,

the subject of grades can never be overrun. For instance

you can't overrun Pr Pr you, you can't overrun Pr Pr 6 with 

regard to this. You're asking the PC how life is. Well after 

all you're asking him some version of this as condition, 

aren't you? But you start asking him about conditions, vroooom, 

booms Do you see? You could ask him how life is. Alright. That 

also might seem to overrun Pr Pr 4 too, or Pr Pr 5, right? This

could, this could, all of these.



So the basic background subject of it. You can ask somebody

what engram he is stuck in. Well you're trying to get a

revivification on Pr Pr 6 and usually do get one, even

thought it flicks through like that. You could still find

out what incident he's stuck in, but you don't have to run

the process Pr Pr 6. Do you follow? So the subject of being

stuck in incidents, inexhaustible.



Every once in a while you guys are talking about a stuck

picture. The PC had a stuck picture.



So the PC had a stuck pictures It's not very interesting.

Pets have stuck pictures. Now supposing you run Pr Pr 6

every time the PC had a stuck picture. I don't know how

much mass you would accumulate, but boy, you would soon

have to move the PC with a crane and a truck.



Now supposing, after he's clear, he has a stuck picture.

And you tried to run it with Power.



Well in the first place it inevitably is somebody else's

picture and he is not sufficiently permeating now into the

other thetans around. The only thing you can run it out of

is a body thetan. And you prematurely beef up Pr Pr 3. And

that's why you mustn't even rehab Power.



You can't run Power after he's clear. The guy went clear

without running Power. God almighty, never run Power! Don't

ever rehab Power after the guy's clear. But if the guy

isn't clear, but just on the Clearing Course and he can't

seem to make it, and he gets no reality on it, you go back

and find out he hasn't been run on Power, well run Power.

Because he isn't clear.



It's elementary. In actual fact there is not; it's not a

very complicated subject, beyond this. The only Power

that's available on a clear is that you would get out of a

body thetan. And he is being run with his pictures

Disowned, which wraps it all around a telegraph pole. You

can run basic track, you can run R-6 out of body thetans

because that's where most of them are stuck anyhow.



Alright. Now what, what's this amount to? What's this

amount to? We just take this datum as a thoroughly stable

thing. But the subject, the subject which you have to know

on this, see, the subject of any grade...  You can run basic

track, you can run R-6 on a body thetan because that's

where most of them are stuck anyhow.



Alright, now what, what's this amount to? What's this

amount to? We just take this datum as a thoroughly, as a

thoroughly stable thing. But the subject, the subject which

you have to know on this thing, the subject of any grade

can be run at any time, forever. Correct.



Along about OT8 you're gonna have a hell of a time trying

to run one of them, but you couldn't any more overrun the

guy on, than, it would neither run nor overrun. Do you see?

But the process, the process, the technique, that process,

can be overrun, because it is addressed to a specific point

of contact with the mind and with life, and it snaps that,

and if you overrun it, it puts it back again.



So engrams man, engrams can be run from wog to angel.

Secondaries can be run all over the damn track at any grade

you ever heard of. On any grade you could run a secondary.



Straightwire, but not the commands of straightwire, but the

whole idea of straightwire. What the hell do you think

you're doing when you put in Ruds? "Do you have an ARC

break?", you're asking the guy to recall. Do you see? You

ran a straightwire all the way.



Communication. What are you doing in an auditing session?

His ARC breaks are mostly involved with the fact that his

comm is cut or something like that. Problems. Although

you've disconnected him from the large mass of problems and

he now doesn't have all his vast number of problems that he

had - , and the whole subject of problems is not

overwhelming, he can still have a problem. You get the

idea? It goes right on up the line. And what do you know,

you can have a guy at five, he all of a sudden has a flea

hit him in the teeth about his. A body thetan hits him. A

body thetan with no home.



He wakes up one fine morning and finds out he has a whole

bunch of R6 pictures. Where the hell did this come from' I

thought I ran all that out. Yeah, he ran all that out. But

he's not up to a point yet where he has turned off all of

his attractiveness as a thetan. He hasn't yet found out

that he's the one that grabs hold of body thetans. They

really don't grab hold of him. They basically don't have

enough reach. (laughter) But until a guy is so clear that

you hit him on the left ear and it rings for hours; as a

thetan, as a being, he's not got any little trick pieces of

mass that are incredible and so he hasn't bothered to

notice that he is mocking them up, all these little patch

up points. "Poor old body thetan around with no home. Can't

find a hospital address." Something like that. Caroms, hits

the guy, and probably would leave, but finds himself stuck.



So, you run, you could shoot a body thetan off, and by the

way they react very well to negative, negative

exteriorization commands. "Try not to be ten thousand feet

above the city." (laughter)



But the net gain of all of this is that you undoubtedly

could not run a body thetan out of a wog.



You couldn't possibly. I don't think it could be done with

a pistol. Because you see they're him, he to them. He is

this composite being. He is a being, but he is influencers

by a lot of composite beings. He is not a cluster. Somebody

has originated this thing, "I am a cluster", "you are a

cluster'. No, a guy is never a cluster, brother. He is

himself with some body thetans plastered on him. But he's

too, not enough charge off.



Now, when, if the guys get up to the Clearing Course you

get another phenomena occurring.



And it's an interesting phenomenon when you get up into

Clearing Course. If you just let people audit the Clearing

Course materials, a certain percentage of them will write

in and tell you that there are these black objects, and

they seem to be other beings, and they start flying off

when they start auditing, and what are these things. The

guy is already prematurely encountered 3. A certain number

of cases will do this. Also, oddly enough, you could start

a certain very small percentage of cases, and it's a very

small percentage, at OT; you could start them out at Grade

four, service facsimile. And they would go on up. But the

percentage is too small to pay much attention to this.



Now if the person arrives at OT3 and he can't perceive

these, you must recognize that there is insufficient charge

off his case. Now what's the, what's the solution to that?

Well, you've taken the charge off of the main grade line

you've, you can rehab the main grade line. Make sure that

it is run. You'll normally find out it hasn't been, it's

been skimped somehow or another. Or more charge has been

put on than has taken off and then somebody turned in a

false report, or something like this. Something weird

happened. Or you can turn around at that stage of the game

and run him on down through the actual reason they get all

smashed together, which is accidents, impacts and injuries.

Then you can start auditing him down that line and they,

it'll loosen up, and all of a sudden it all comes straight.



But what is that? That's running an engram which is way

down in the Dianetics area. Now the process of running an

engram is the only one I know of that does not overrun. If

the process of running an engram is to go to the beginning,

date the thing, go to the beginning of the incident, what

is it's duration, go through it to the end, tell me what's

there, that won't overrun. It's not much of a, 'cause you

see the subject matter to which it is introduced, and so

forth. Now you go back and try to audit the engrams which

have already been audited, you're not going to get anyplace

because, you see, the reason why that one works that way is

because engrams and secondaries are erased. They're not

released. There's a difference of definition. They aren't

something -  the engrams, secondaries and bank masses and

implants, and all the rest of this sort of thing - they just

don't fly off or the guy just unpins them or ceases to mock

them up and waits 'till tomorrow when they get keyed in and

starts mocking them up again. See? That's a release phenomenon.



No, you erase it. There is a hole in the bank where that

was, and it is not likely to key in again.



So of course there isn't anything to overrun. You get the

difference? So the one unlimited process there is, is

engram running or secondary running. Totally unlimited.

With this proviso.



Don't try to run an incident which has already been erased.

Because now you're going back and trying to put the

incident there when it's not there, and the person is trying 

to put the incident there, and you can get, and it reacts to, 

the question "overrun". It will react to it. The engram has

been overrun. You can get a read on this, 'cause it

interprets that way to his head.



The truth of the matter is, is "you are making me put it

back there again" would be the right, the actual action

which is occurring on an overrun. So one chain, or one

incident; the chain blew, see? Now you, "Care to run this

chain?" He can't run the chain you're asking him something.



He's got to put the chain there in order to run it again.

That's overrun. That's the overrun. It isn't the command

overrun. It's the fact that it's gone. And it really has

gone. It hasn't released. He's, he's now got to put one

there in order to have one. He hasn't got the skill to do

it, and he becomes very upset and very baffled. His

knowingness about what he's doing is not adequate to

knowing that he is trying to put one there. Don't you see?

But he really doesn't know how to put one there yet. And he

can get all flabblebabbled up.



Every once in a while you'll, you will get a read on 3,

overrun. Wise up, auditor. Wise up.



That is one body thetan who is run one too many times

through incident one. All you just do is indicate it to

him, he's been run through it after it was gone, and so

forth, and he blows. And then on it suddenly he finds out

that there's a lot more body thetans. 3 wasn't overrun. But

the PC will read on 3 being overrun. One body thetan has

been overrun on one engram, is what 3 overrun reads on your

meter. "Has 3 been overrun?" (woosh) "Very good. Which

body thetan was run too often through the incident?" Pull

that one. (woosh) "That's good. Alright." Indicate that it

has been over; he has been overrun on incident one, or

incident two, as the case may be. Very good.



We had a case here the other day practically fall apart.

Apparently the auditor/PC, in doing 3, did nothing but

overrun everybody that he had. He's one of these thorough

cases. (laughter) And the review auditor running overruns,

just the subject of overruns, in trying to rehab overruns,

of course got up to a prep check on 3, and was busy

rehabbing this and that. And my god, the case just fell to

pieces. It went off in all directions. The guy simply

plastered himself with overrun body thetans. By the same

mechanism, he was asking them to go through the one, the

two, three more times. But there wasn't anything there for

the guy to go through. And then probably running them

verbally. Verbalization. "Go to the beginning", or

something like this, some generality that could stick kick

every body thetan down the track. The guys are still trying

to go to the beginning, there is nothing there, there now

is no beginning, then they get very confused.



Guys that run OT3 verbalized anyhow are rather bonkers. You

get the funny picture of the guy pulling an empty chair up

across from his auditing desk and saying to the empty

chair, "Do you have an incident one? That didn't read.

Good. I'll go attest 3." It's actually run telepathically.



And you don't have lots of commands, and so forth. If you

get up to that point without being able to think a guy back

to the where, the beginning of the incident and thinking

him through the thing you ought to quit anyway.



So this is the way the; no, you, you shouldn't quit. You

ought to get to work and finish your 3. Anyway. I'll make

it very tactful.



Now do you differentiate between the idea of the subject

and the process? These are two different things. So as the

case supervisor, don't make the mistake of believing that

the person has been on the subject. "Well this person has

just had too many ARC breaks run." See, "Just don't run any

more ARC breaks on this PC." That'd be the end of him, boy.

You could say, "Don't again run list four, the main change

in your life, and waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle,

waffle, waffle. See? So that's...  So how would you overrun

an ARC break then? Well you would overrun, you don't

overrun ARC breaks, but you could overrun an ARC break.



And you do it this way. "Do you have an ARC break? Good.

That reads. What was it?" "So and so and so and so."

"Alright. When was that?" "So and so and so and so." "Good.

C, D, E, I, pardon me, A, R, C, U, C, D, E, I. Good."

Indicate it to the PC. "Good. Do you have an ARC break?"

"No, no." "Well, I have a read here." "No." "Well, do you

have an ARC break? Yep, it read. What is the ARC break?"

"Oh, I don't know." You're asking him to run the ARC break

which he's just run, which then invalidates his ability to

as-is. And you hang it up, and the TA will go up.



Alright, that's one way to do it. Another way to do it is,

"Do you have an ARC break?" "Yes.



My husband so on and so on. Yesterday, and itsa...  "Well,

A, R. C, U. Alright. I'd like to indicate to you that it

was understanding. It was break in under... " Floating

needle. See? OK? And the auditor doesn't indicate that. And

the PC said, "Yeah. That's... " Perfectly allowable for the

PC to say "Yeah, that's a break in understanding. He's

not - he didn't understand what the hell I was talking

about." "Alright. Good." Floating needle. See? C, D, E, I.

C reads. Also D. "You're curious about and desired understanding?

Was that; that was the by-passed charge. Good." - "Uh, yes."

"Good. Now how do you feel about that ARC break now?"

"Well, let's see." Now he has to put it there, don't you

see, in order to answer this question.



And he gets a bonkers mess that would occur. See? It's

gone, and now you're telling him it's still there, and is

in essence, an auditor evaluation. So he, being an obedient

PC, tries; you can handle his bank better than he. He just

assumes that it must still be there, so he tries to put

something there, but he can't find anything to put there,

so the TA goes up and you leave him in a mystery. You play

the same gag on him as, "Look at the elephant", only there

isn't any elephant. You see? So he looks around, and then

you, from altitude say, "Well you damn fool, can't you see

this elephant? Can't you see this elephant anyplace,

anyplace? Can't you see this elephant?" And the guy says,

"I can't see any elephant." "Oh, well." (drums fingers on

table) "Guess we'll have to send you to the psychiatrist."



Well a guy in a protest like this will sort of, try to

satisfy, "Oh, yeah, yeah. I, I, I can get the dim outline

of an elephant. Yeah." That's why the auditors' code is the

auditors code. You say it read when it didn't read, you say

it didn't read when it read. We just had a PC wrapped

around a telegraph pole, he let himself go all the way

through the session with a missed withhold. Well it didn't

read when it went by, so I didn't say anything about it.

And the auditor sat there and watched him get kind of gray

faced, and so on as the session went on, and didn't say

anything about it either. Yes he didn't get a read, but the

PC had missed withhold reactions, and he didn't get in

suppress on it.



Now you could be a damned fool, and every clean read that

you see get in suppress on it. Do you see where, where rote

auditing becomes impossible? You could, you could wind a

session up to a whole bunch of inspections before the fact,

and so on. So, you make up for this by being yourself

acquainted totally, fully and utterly with the standard

data you are handling. You don't have to stop and think

that a critical PC has a missed withhold. You don't have to

stop and think when you see somebody coming into session

very sad and hang-dog, that he has an ARC break of long

duration. You see these you'd know. You're not all

fumblebumbling around, "I wonder how Scientology compares

to Freudian god." Or, "Is Freud god? Was Freud a religion,

yes. Freud was god. Yes. Wonder how it compares to that... 

I wonder how this has to do with my case... " And you

haven't got any time to do that. No time at all, boy.



PC comes into session, and he looks; his eyes are pretty

heavy. And the auditor doesn't know his auditors' code

right down through the middle, does not say "You get any

sleep?" No, he's so busy trying to find out which is the

trim button and which is the plug in, that he can't notice

anything about the PC. PC looks sort of gaunt, the PC

doesn't look well at the beginning of the session, looks

sort of gaunt. The auditor doesn't in a conversational tone

of voice ask him if he's had enough sleep, if he's had

anything to eat. Are you physically ill? Doesn't ask

himself anything like that. No he waits 'till he's gone an

hour and a half deep in the session, the PCs fallen on his

head, if he doesn't know his auditors code.



The auditors' code is the auditors' code. It isn't

something that is put there for no reason. For instance,

eat and sleep are the only two things PCs have ever spun

on. Back in the bad old days of the Dianetics Foundations

we used to get every loony PC that could walk down the line.



They weren't even PCs. They'd just let them out of

institutions, and they'd walk in and they'd get audited.

And a common denominator of those who were spinny in

session, or who spun and then had to be rescued in some

way, and heroic actions; I, we made a common denominator.

What was in common to every one of these PCs? They hadn't

eaten and they hadn't slept. And you, as an auditor, go and

let somebody who has had insufficient sleep, which you

don't know too much about as a case, are sooner or later

going to wrap somebody around a telegraph pole. And he's

going to spin for three or four days in a screaming state,

man. Sooner or later this horrible experience will occur.

That's why the auditors' code is the auditors' code. It has

data like this in it.



So when a guy goes into session, he sits down, "Oh, oh,"

yawns. "Good to sit down." "Have you had any sleep?" "Well,

come to think about it, no, I haven't slept for a couple of

days." "Very good. Thank you very much. You go get some

sleep and then we will have a session when you are

sufficiently rested. And I'm very sorry that this has

prevented you from finishing the cycle of action of a

session at this time." Indicating the by-passed charge at

the same time.



So you don't have to take it up in the next session.



You say you know your data so well that you know the guy is

going to have by-passed charge by not being able to

complete the cycle of action. So you take care of that

then. In other words, you know your business. It's right on

your finger tips all the time. You don't have to think,

"What if you were riding a bicycle, thinking every thought

necessary to balance the bicycle and steer it at the same

time." You'll go into a ditch, man. Well, you go into a

ditch with auditing, just like that, if you don't know

these things, pang, pang, pang, pang. These are the things

you watch.



Now, you, all of you know, you know, you know this data,

you know it colds You know your auditors code, banger. See?

You don't have to think. "Let me see, what did it say in

the auditors' code when the ..." To hell with that. You

shouldn't even be wandering around, "I wonder what Ron

meant when he wrote that part of the auditors' code, it had

something to do with it. Now let's see. There's something

in the bit of it had something to do with that." No

kidding. I've heard things like this. The veda. Oh, come

now. Look at India. That's known as invidious comparison.

The word invidious means disgraceful or bad. Anyway,

standard tech is just main line tech. These are the

subjects, you take them up. These are the only subjects you

handle in standard tech. They are the subjects of the

grades. There aren't fifty processes and actions in the

entirety of Scientology. Now that isn't asking anybody very

much to know, and know them so cold that he says, "Well,

gonna do a rehab. Brrrrrrr", bow wow bub zee zee, barb barb

ding ding. Pow, pow, pow. And the PC says, "So and so,

exactly therefore, bow, bang." Floating needle. "Thank you

very much."



What's he rehabbing? He's rehabbing something completely

catastrophic. You look over the list and horrors that this

case is such an irreparable, resistive case, and so on. Do

you get the relationship, now, do you get the relationship?

Do you get what data you have to have? What data you have

to have. What understanding you have to have. The grip you

have to have on it.



Nobody's asking you to know very much. But boy, what you do

know, maaaaaanl You sure had better have a grip that is

like steel bands!



PC sits down in the session, and right that moment, just

with one casual glance, you've got it sorted out. He isn't

even talking yet. You know, you're going to get in the Ruds

and fly the needle, and so forth. You ought to just know

where it probably is. It's just as easy as that. And you

say, "There he is. That's what's wrong with him." There's

nothing mystic about it. The guy will have an ARC break, or

a PTP, or a missed withhold, or an overt, motivator. Now

you're starting to get faint. See? It's getting less and

less likely. And then you've got a whole bunch of things

that, if it didn't go; if it didn't fly on that, if it

didn't fly on that, then you go through a green form 'till

it flies. 'Cause the person's hung up on something. He's

PTS, he's doing something. And you normally will find out

on your green form line.



Now you know the guy's been audited. He's been audited

badly. And so on. Well, it's a lead pipe cinch. You do the

same thing that you would do in any other way. Fly the

needle, and take the general assessment form or an L4A,

something like this. Whatever it was that you picked up the

tool. You pick up the tool, you know the tool would be

there. 



But, you're far better off if all of your auditing

is against case supervision. You were either the case

supervisor or you were the auditor. When the auditor is

both the case supervisor and the auditor, he's sticking his

neck out four hundred and eighty five miles 'cause he's

violating it. He knows both the auditor and the PC. And if

he knows the auditor and the PC, variables can enter into

the problem. Do you follow? He knows the auditor, he knows

the PC. Hah! He's violated two basic principles of case

supervision. You never talk to the auditor about the case,

you never talk to the PC about his case. As close as you

come to talking to the auditor is the auditing report. As

close as you come to talking to the PC is the examiners'

report. And I can tell you now that you're a fool not

to have both before you. When you case supervise you should

have before you the auditing report in its' entirety, and

you should have before you as well, the examiners' report

on the PC. You say, "Well how you going to get that?" Well

the PC always goes through the examiner, of course. Well

how could you set this up if you were in private practice,

if you'd be asked this question. Well, I don't know, I

guess you'd have to appoint the next door neighbor or your

wife or something as the examiner, and you'd have to train

up somebody else to audit if you're going to be the case

supervisor. 'Cause I can guarantee that if you're also

doing the case supervision as well as the auditing you will

wrap it around a telegraph pole sooner or later.



Sounds weird, doesn't it? But the auditor and the PC always

influence the case supervisor whenever they're vis-a-vis

with him, and personal chatter on the subject of the PCs

case, and personal chatter with regard to the auditor with

regard to the PC case, are the only two points I have ever

found that wrapped my case supervision around a telegraph pole.



Now there's another way my case supervision can be

misrouted and upset, and so on, is by the PC not going

through the examiner. The PC leaves the auditing session

and leaves review through the examiner. Now this has the

liability that the examiner is liable to be a sourpuss, and

the PC says, "Oh, greats Boy, just made it! Wows" You know?

And the examiner says, "Hm. Take hold of the cans." "Boy, that's 

the greatest session I ever had in my life. "Yeah, that's what 

they always say. Yeah, good." And that would actually be after 

the fact of the examination, wouldn't it? So you could mysteriously

have the PC cave in by a down curve from the examiner. But

that'd be the only point left. 



The main liability of the case supervisor, the main liability of 

a case supervisor is a false auditing report. And he should protect 

himself every way he possibly can from a false auditing report. 

But he shouldn't go around talking to the PC. He shouldn't go

find the PC, and look the PC up, and all this sort of

thing. 'Cause his opinion on the thing is the case

supervisors' point of view. And you can figure all you want

to about why it is. It's an empirical datum. One that has

been derived from experience. I have already cast up the

number of cases on which case supervision errors have been

made. They have been made by a case supervisor having seen

the PC, and talked to the PC about the session. The error

of errors are talking to the auditor about the session. And

in, when those two points have occurred in case

supervision, case supervision has erred. They color it.

Perhaps it's a cold blooded proposition. But, the case

supervisor can be given a false report.



He can be given an evaluative report of one kind or

another. "Oh, the PC was in marvelous conditions" Pc's

barely able to crawl out of the auditing room. That's why

you want the examiners.



Now what you want from the examiners, simply, is the tone

arm, the state of the needle, and what the PC says. Not in

response to some examiners' question. Some examiner's going

to say to you, "Now what do you ask the PC?" And your

answer to that is, "Shut up. Don't ask him nothing."

There's a sign on the desk, and it says "Examiner". The

mere fact that he's given the PC the cans and checking the

meter, he's got the PCs folder there, you see. That's enough.



The pc'll say something. And the examiner writes it down,

and then the examiner must always say, "Thank you very

much." And that is the limit of his communication, because

if you let them talk they'll start auditing the PC. So you

cut that talk to a minimum. You're liable to see little

forms being made up someplace, "What gains have you had in

this session?" "Well I got a floating needle on this, and I

had a cognition on that, now I...  And there's a little

thing that I thought was a little bit point there, and I

wasn't quite sure what happened there, and so on. But I did

get a floating needle on this thing. But I wasn't quite

sure about the thing," and so on. And here the floating

needle is busy packing up. And the examiner is a sure

invitation to overrun, if the examiner is liable, is

allowed to talk. The examiner's liable to talk. So the

examiner can't talk. A little tiny bit. I can just see it

now. There will be a form there, an examiners' form. And it

has questions on it. Like, "Was your auditor nice to you in

the session? Did he invalidate your gains? Did you really

make your grade?" And that can kill, because it's too fast,

too fast after the session. Somebody who is still part of

the organization and part of, apparently, part of the line

up, and a blood brother to the auditor sort of. And the

orgs line is actually challenging him. He isn't challenging

him. So, just the sign there, and it says "Examiner", and

folder, meter, give him the cans. He comes out, he can say

"hello", give him the cans when he comes out. "OK, ta ta.

Thank you. Thank you very much." And he can point which

direction he's supposed to go. That's the end.



Now, the case supervisor has an independent tone arm,

needle state, PC statement. And he can add these things up.

The auditor says at the end of the session, that the pc's

TA was at 2.75, and the examiner report, right on top of it

says 3.75. There was no F/N at the end of session. It is a

false report. Saves you an awful lot of trouble. You simply

make out your next one, and say "Correct so and so, and do

not send them to... ", whatever the auditors' name was. Some

other auditor. "Correct session so and so. Something went

wrong" And then you get better.



Because a false report has a tendency to be followed by a

false report.



So we're getting down to something now that's very

interesting, is that really only an organization can

process. Successfully, and over continued long period of

time, only an organization can process. And the individual

practitioner may make a lot of bucks. Here and there you

have a phenomenon of a guy who is tremendously successful

as in individual auditor. He seems to be doing just great

as an individual auditor. You follow their curves, they

fall on their heads in a couple of years. It's an

organization action. It takes the organization backup.

Franchises fall on their heads by not having enough staff

to perform all the actions of the organization. And they

actually are totally dependent on organizations to perform

a great many services. I couldn't even begin to list how

many services an organization has to perform.



Therefore, apparently, apparently the individual auditor

makes a great deal of money, and so forth. But it's usually

for a limited time. Got to be backed up. A franchise got to

be backed up by an organization. And the franchise is

seldom sufficiently organized to stand by itself if it

weren't for an organization someplace.



So this is, this is the thing. Now I want to call to your

attention that the era of medicine was long and hard won,

and so on. That the era of psychiatry is brief. But these

practitioners, organizing themselves on a union basis,

doing this, doing that, but practicing individually, they

really don't do well. And they're not going to do well

professionally over a long period of time. Because, outfits

like us can suddenly move in sideways.



Right now they, they're worried about us, frantic, because

we're getting all the business.



There's a lot of cream stuff coming out of that field. They

don't get that anymore. They're worried. They're worried

about their appropriations. So it's an organizational action.



Now let's look at this as an organization, function. You've

got a case supervisor. There's an auditor. There's an

examiner. There's somebody that schedules sessions, even

though that is also the review chief. See? You're already

dealing with a minimum number. Now you can run one

god-awful number of sessions through this line up. But if

the auditor has to do all of his admin, the auditor has to

do all of his opinionation, the auditor has to do this, and

do that, he won't hit a hundred. He won't hit a hundred,

because one day he's tired, or one day he's this, or he

slips, and he doesn't catch his slips. And he gets

optimistic about it. And he gets opinions, and side data

starts hitting him. He wobbles, because he's talking to a

PC all the way down the line, you see? A case supervisor's

always got to have another auditor to send the PC to. When

he gets a false report in, what the hell else he gonna do?

So you see the minimum size and shape and design of such an

activity.



Now, the auditor's business is simply handling the PC. It

shouldn't be on anything else. And his business in handling

the PC is just running very standard actions on the PC, and

nothing adventurous. Running the PC rapidly to the highest

possible gain level that he possibly can.



Shooting him through the line. It's really a very simple

action. But it's one of these simplicities that you have to

be very, very brilliant to grasp. I say brilliant to the

degree that you have to be brilliant enough not to be

complicated. It's actually a very simple activity. But it

is just about as complex as the lines that a certain number

of functions and actions which have to be taken handling

the PC, there's Just a certain number of functions and

actions. You start leaving some of these organizational

setups out in the handling of a PC and something'll go

astray. Similarly in the tech itself, something goes astray

if you start leaving thing out, like "We never run present

time problems anymore. No, the PC was released on problems,

so he can't possibly have a problem. We don't know why the

case is not changing at OT2." Anyway, the false report is

about the only enemy that a case supervisor has, just

getting back to that subject.



Because it makes him think that standard tech isn't

working, and is a wide open invitation to do something

else. The thing that isn't working is the auditors' report.



Normally you would have started out in your career, and

continued to do nothing but the very standard actions, if

you had not also seen false reports, standard reports, have

PCs evaluating for you as to what you ought to be doing for

their case, trying to please people, trying to do this,

trying to do that, having case supervision work given to

you with which you did not agree. All these other thing

come along and they finally wind you up in a ball so you

don't know what the hell you're doing. Now what you're

doing here is I'm straightening you all out straight and as

narrow, and I hope you stay that way. Thank you very much.



**************************************************