A Freezone Bible Supporter Here is a complete Level 0 Academy pack from the 1970s being posted in 11 parts. Contents below following the FZ Bible mission statement. Much Love, Tech Lover ************************************************** FREEZONE BIBLE MISSION STATEMENT Our purpose is to promote religious freedom and the Scientology Religion by spreading the Scientology Tech across the internet. The Cof$ abusively suppresses the practice and use of Scientology Tech by FreeZone Scientologists. It misuses the copyright laws as part of its suppression of religious freedom. They think that all freezoner's are "squirrels" who should be stamped out as heritics. By their standards, all Christians, Moslems, Mormons, and even non-Hassidic Jews would be considered to be squirrels of the Jewish Religion. The writings of LRH form our Old Testament just as the writings of Judiasm form the Old Testament of Christianity. We might not be good and obedient Scientologists according to the definitions of the Cof$ whom we are in protest against. But even though the Christians are not good and obedient Jews, the rules of religious freedom allow them to have their old testament regardless of any Jewish opinion. We ask for the same rights, namely to practice our religion as we see fit and to have access to our holy scriptures without fear of the Cof$ copyright terrorists. We ask for others to help in our fight. Even if you do not believe in Scientology or the Scientology Tech, we hope that you do believe in religious freedom and will choose to aid us for that reason. Thank You, The FZ Bible Association ************************************************** ******** LEVEL ZERO ACADEMY COURSE PACK ******** Level 0 Academy Course Packs (2) circa 1974 and 1976, Almost identical [Ed Note: differences noted like this] Dark blue soft cardboard cover 8 1/2 by 14 inch 4 hole punched & held together by double retainer clips. As issued by Pubs US. This is complete including book excerpts but does not include the complete book "Self Analysis" which is also part of the level (it was posted to the internet last year). This does not include transcripts of the level 0 tapes, but we are working on those and will post them eventually. Note that in the 1970s, HCOBs not written by Ron were converted to BTBs (Board Technical Bulletins), resulting in the freequent "reissued as BTB" designation. Note that bulletins have a "distribution" near the top stating where they are to be used. A common distribution is "remimeo" which means that the orgs may run copies on their mimeo machines. Another, older, designation is "CenOcon" which means "Central Orgs Continental". Others such as "D of T" (director of training) refer to posts in the Scientology organization. ******** CONTENTS: part 1 01. BPL 26 JAN 72R SCIENTOLOGY LEVEL 0 STANDARD ACADEMY CHECKSHEET 02. HCOPL 7 FEB 65 reiss. 15 JUN 70 Keeping Scientology Working 03. HCOPL 17 JUN 70 Technical Degrades 04. HCOB 11 JUN 64 New Student Data 05. HCOB 25 JUN 71R rev. 25 NOV 74 Barriers To Study 06. HCOPL 31 MAY 68 Auditors 07. BPL 17 MAY 71RA r.13 NOV 72 r.10 JUN 74 Study Points and Conditions 08. HCOPL 27 MAY 65 Processing part 2 09. HCOPL 15 DEC 65 Student's Guide To Acceptable Behavior 10. HCOPL 14 FEB 65 Safeguarding Technology 11. HCOB 27 SEP 66 The Anti-Social Personality 12. HCOPL 22 NOV 67 Rev. 18 JUL 70 Out Tech 13. HCOPL 8 JUN 70 Student Auditing 14. BPL 25 JUN 70RA Expanded Lower Grades 15. HCOB 25 SEP 71RA rev 4 APR 74 Tone Scale In Full 16. BTB 20 JUL 74 Basic Auditing Drills 17. HCOPL 14 OCT 68R rev 1 JAN 76 The Auditor's Code part 3 18. BTB 6 NOV 72R rev 25 JUL 74 Admin 14R The Worksheets 19. BTB 6 NOV 72R rev 27 AUG 74 Admin 13R The Auditor Report Form 20. BTB 6 NOV 72R rev 28 JUL 74 Admin 12R The Summary Report Form 21. BTB 20 JUN 70 reiss 21 JUL 74 Summary Report 22. BTB 6 NOV 72RA rev 20 NOV 74 Admin 11RA The Exam Report 23. HCOPL 8 MAR 71 Examiner's Form 24. BTB 5 NOV 72R rev 9 SEP 74 Admin 7R The Folder Summary 25. BTB 24 APR 69R rev 8 SEP 74 Preclear Assessment Sheet 26. HCOPL 23 APR 68 Parent or Guardian Assent Forms 27. HCOB 16 AUG 71 Training Drills Modernized part 4 28. HCOB 24 OCT 71 False TA 29. HCOB 24 OCT 71 False TA Addition 30. HCOB 15 FEB 72 False TA Addition 2 31. HCOB 18 FEB 72 False TA Addition 3 32. HCOB 29 FEB 72R rev 23 NOV 73 False TA Checklist 33. HCOB 23 NOV 73 Dry and Wet Hands Make False TA 34. HCOB 21 OCT 68 Floating Needle 35. HCOB 11 FEB 66 Free Needles, How To Get Them On a PC 36. HCOB 21 SEP 66 ARC Break Needle 37. HCOB 20 FEB 70 Floating Needles and End Phenomena 38. HCOB 8 OCT 70 C/S Ser 20 Persistent F/N 39. HCOB 21 MAR 74 End Phenomena 40. HCOB 14 MAR 71R r. 25 JUL 73 F/N Everything 41. HCOB 14 OCT 68 Meter Position 42. BTB 14 JAN 63 Rings Causing "Rock Slams" 43. HCOB 18 MAR 74 E-Meter Sensitivity Errors 44. BTB 16 JUN 71R r. 22 JUL 74 Advanced E-Meter Drills 45. HCOB 11 MAY 69 Meter Trim Check 46. HCOB 23 MAY 71 aud ser 11 Metering 47. HCOB 10 DEC 65 E-Meter Drill Coaching part 5 48. HCOB 7 APR 64 Q And A 49. HCOB 3 AUG 65 Auditing Goofs Blowdown Interruption 50. HCOB 5 FEB 66 Letting The PC Itsa 51. HCOB 7 MAY 69 The Five GAEs 52. HCOB 17 MAY 69 TRs and Dirty Needles 53. BTB 4 JUL 69 r. 6 JUL 74 Auditing of OT 3 Preclears 54. BTB 17 JUL 69 r. 28 JUN 74 Flagrant Auditing Errors 55. HCOB 29 JUL 64 Good Indicators At Lower Levels 56. BTB 26 APR 69 r. 7 JUL 64 Bad Indicators 57. HCOPL 4 APR 72 rev. 7 APR 72 Ethics And Study Tech 58. HCOB 14 NOV 65 Clearing Commands 59. BTB 2 MAY 72R r. 10 JUN 74 Clearing Commands 60. BTB 18 NOV 68R r. 9 JUN 74 Model Session 61. HCOB 12 AUG 69 Flying Ruds 62. HCOB 23 AUG 71 (24 May 70 rev) Auditors Rights 63. HCOB 6 NOV 64 Styles of Auditing part 6 64. HCOB 30 APR 71 Auditing Comm Cycle 65. HCOB 23 MAY 71 aud ser 2R The Two Parts Of Auditing 66. HCOB 23 MAY 71 aud ser 3 Three Important Comm Lines 67. HCOB 23 MAY 71R aud ser 4R Comm Cycles Within the Auditing Cycle 68. HCOB 23 MAY 71R aud ser 5R The Comm Cycles In Auditing part 7 69. HCOB 12 JAN 59 Tone of Voice - Acknowledgement 70. HCOB 23 MAY 71 aud ser 6 Auditor Failure To Understand 71. HCOB 23 MAY 71 aud ser 7 Premature Acknowledgements 72. HCOPL 1 JUL 65 Comm Cycle Additives 73. HCOB 29 SEP 65 Cyclical and Non-Cyclical Processes 74. HCOB 17 MAR 74 TWC, Using Wrong Questions 75. BOOK Dianetics 55 Chapter 12 The 6 Basic Processes part 8 76. HCOB 16 FEB 59 Staff Auditor's Conference part 9 77. HCOB 20 OCT 59 An Experimental Process 78. HCOB 16 FEB 59 HGC Processes for those trained in Engram Running 79. HCOB 8 APR 58 A Pair Of Processes 80. HCOB 9 MAR 60 Expansion of OT-3A Procedure, Step Two 81. HCOB 20 APR 60 Processes 82. HCOB 27 SEP 68 ARC Straight Wire 83. BTB 9 OCT 71RA r. 28 JUN 74 ARC Straightwire Drills 84. BTB 15 NOV 76 ARC Straightwire Quads 85. BOOK Creation of Human Ability R2-31 86. PAB 8 JUL 55 PAB 56 Axiom 51 and Comm Processing part 10 87. PAB 18 JUN 55 PAB 54 Reality Level of Preclear 88. HCOB 17 MAR 60 Standardized Sessions 89. HCOB 4 MAY 59 An Affinity Process 90. HCOB 2 MAR 61 New Pre-Hav Command 91. HCOB 25 SEP 59 HAS Co-Audit 92. HCOB 21 JUL 59 HGC Allowed Processes 93. BOOK Creation of Human Ability R2-60 94. HCOB 13 OCT 59 D.E.I. Expanded Scale 95. HCOB 7 MAY 59 New Process Theory 96. BOOK Scn 8-8008 6 Levels of Processing Issue 5 97. HCOB 11 DEC 64 Scientology 0 Processes 98. HCOB 26 DEC 64 Routine 0-A Expanded part 11 99. BTB 9 OCT 71RA r. 29 JUL 74 Level 0 Drills 100. BTB 15 NOV 76 Grade Zero Processes - Quads ******** 87. PAB 18 JUN 55 PAB 54 Reality Level of Preclear P.A.B. No. 54 PROFESSIONAL AUDITOR'S BULLETIN From L. RON HUBBARD Via Hubbard Communications Office 163 Holland Park Avenue, London W.11 ____________________________________ 10 June 1955 REALITY LEVEL OF PRECLEAR Find the reality of the preclear. This is the watchword of processing. Although communication, as completely outlined in Dianetics, 1955! is a universal solvent, remember that there are also two other comers to the triangle, and that one of these corners is Reality. That R corner of the triangle is very important to you as an auditor because you, having very great certainties on this and on that, are very prone to forget that your Realities are greater than those of your preclear. The reality level of the preclear is dependent on how much he is "not-ising" his environment. If he is not-ising it, he must believe that it is dangerous, and must believe that he himself does not have the power to make anything in it disappear or vanish for himself. Therefore, his reality level is as great as he is strong, and it is as poor as he is weak. Do you know that you are processing preclears who do not believe that thought has anything to do with action? You are processing preclears who believe that thinking a thought will influence nothing. You are processing preclears who believe that thinkingness is one thing and actingness is an entirely different thing, and that no amount of thinkingness is going to influence any amount of actingness. This is apathy, indeed, and along with that goes an unreality which would appall you. Yes, these preclears can get mock-ups. They can get concepts. They can be very obedient. They can even be run with SOP 8-C and somehow or another muddle through it, but the joker here is that the auditor is actually monitoring the body of the preclear, and of course a body can respond to orders, and will respond probably faster to the auditor's orders than to the thetan the auditor is processing. Thus a preclear can be put through any number of contortions and convolutions in processing without getting anywhere at all. The auditor is simply doing it. Find the reality level of your preclear. Unless you find the reality level of the preclear you are not going to reach the preclear, because the preclear is as alive as things are real. Now, if this is so important, then let us see how far south we would have to go to reach some preclears. Mechanical two-way communication might very well be much too tough for 75% of the preclears you will process. Just ordinary conversation is actually over their heads. People that we are trying to reach do not know the auditor is acknowledging them when he says "Okay." Let us look at this acknowledgment of the preclear, and let us discover that the auditor, in order to acknowledge the preclear, must also make the preclear aware that he is being acknowledged. Thus, when an auditor says "Okay," or "All right," or "That's fine," the other part of the statement is to make the preclear aware that an acknowledgment has been delivered. Thus, a "Did you hear me?" is quite often beneficial. When the preclear finally admits that he did hear the "Okay," and when the auditor makes sure that he time after time hears the "Okay," you will notice that the communication, on the acknowledgment level, starts to work with the preclear. But it won't work as long as the preclear is oblivious of the "Okays" the auditor is giving. Of course, you must give the preclear an "Okay" for every action or completed thought he performs. You must acknowledge what he has said or done, but you must also be very sure that he receives that acknowledgment. It is not out of order to face him squarely and hold up one finger and say, "Wait a minute, did you hear me say ‘Okay'?" Now there are two processes which are at once the most basic of processes and which are very low on the Reality Scale as well as high on it. A person processed on these processes should not believe that the auditor believes his reality level is low. Quite the contrary. Such a process as this one happens to be very good anywhere on the tone scale. And this process is, "Think a thought," "Receive a thought." You are in essence processing thinkingness. I wonder how long and how often you have processed preclears who could not clearly or differentiatively understand that they were thinking a thought? The auditing command is simply, "Think a thought." The preclear is given this command time and time again, and he vocalizes the thought back to the auditor, and the auditor acknowledges the fact that he has received that thought, aloud. And the preclear is run until the preclear knows, absolutely, that he himself, not some machine, not some energy mass, not his toe, or his hat, is thinking the thought. The preclear will start out thinking thoughts which are actually handed to him from some mysterious source. When the communication lag on this is entirely flat, and when the preclear knows that he himself is thinking the thought, the auditor can then run the other side of the process. "Receive a thought" is run with the following auditing command: "Tell me a thought you would be willing to receive." This is then run until it, as a process, is entirely flat: when it is no longer producing any result or comm lag. Part of the "Think a thought" process is to have the preclear place the thought in various locations after he has thought it. Have his shoe think a thought, have his hat think a thought, have a lamp think the thought, have a rug think the thought. This gets the preclear into the practice of placing the thought somewhere. Thus, thoughts are less likely to appear suddenly and magically out of his machinery. Very curious phenomena result from "Think a thought" and "Receive a thought." It will be found sometimes that it is easier for the preclear to think a thought for another universe than for himself to think a thought. Let us take for example a preclear who is entirely interiorized into the universe of his mother. It would, therefore, evidently be much easier for him to have his mother think a thought than for the preclear himself to think a thought. As a matter of fact it might be an enormous struggle, resulting in rebellion, for the preclear himself to think a thought, but it would be very easy for the preclear to have his mother think a thought. The way to go about this would be to take an E-Meter, or simply estimate, by finding out who the preclear most resembles, the probable universe into which the preclear is interiorized. Having established this (and you would only do this if the preclear were rebellious about thinking a thought himself) you would then have this likely universe think a thought, with the auditing command (having established that he is interiorized into his mother's or his father's universe): "Have your mother (father) think a thought." This would then be carried out until the preclear was absolutely sure that he was making his mother or his father think a thought. This would betoken an initial division of the universe. Slicing up universes with communication processes is a very easy thing to do. All one has to do is use the process: "What could you say to your father?" and have the preclear say it, and get an Okay from his father. And when this was flat, "What could your father say to you?", and when the preclear has vocalized this, the auditor would say, "Now give your father an ‘Okay' to this." However, this workable process which splits universes (in old-time parlance "valences") is yet much too high for a preclear who is very low on reality, and would take a very long time to do. It would be a process into which you would eventually move the preclear who had been thinking a thought for his mother, but remember that thinking a thought for his mother would be only a start into communication processing, and would be an elementary process, run until the preclear is entirely certain that he is thinking a thought that his mother would think or that he can make his mother think a thought—the latter being the most desirable condition. You should be aware of the fact that you are processing thinkingness. You are not processing spaces, you are not processing masses at this day and state of development of Dianetics and Scientology. You are processing thinkingness. A man is as well as he thinks. The more masses and spaces, phrases and engrams you process, the less you are validating the fact that you are actually processing a thinkingness: a thinkingness that we call a thetan. To process this directly is, of course, the most indicated process there could be, and sure enough, we are producing good results with it. But the remarkable thing about the process is that it works on people who heretofore have had very, very poor reality. Now there is a process which is a little bit lower than this "Think a thought" process, and this is the process of finding something real in the room. Recently I have had some very excellent results with "Find something in this room that is comfortably real." This is a variation on the initial auditing command as given in the early SOPs. It is apparently better. A preclear who is not-ising everything in sight will find things real, he says, but actually he is not comfortable about it, and if you ask him to find something that is comfortably real, it may take him a long time to discover anything that he would tolerate to continue existence, and once you have begun this process of toleration you would be able to do a great deal for his case. "Find something comfortably real" is not necessarily a low-toned process. It will work in varying degrees on anyone. It is not recommended for any particular case level. If a preclear utterly bogs on "Think a thought" (which isn't likely), then you should have him "Find something in this room that is comfortably real to you." I am reminded of an auditor recently processing a very bad arthritic, who processed him as an exteriorized case for some little time without any apparent gain in the case before it occurred to this auditor that something must be wrong. Actually, a great amount of time was invested. The auditor asked Nibs, my boy who was then instructing the ACC course in the United States, and who is at this writing in England, teaching the BScn course there, what could possibly be wrong with this hung-fire preclear. Nibs looked him over and discovered that the auditor had never yet gotten the preclear into any kind of a situation which was even vaguely real to the preclear. The auditor in one chair and the preclear in the other chair was not a real situation to this preclear, and yet the auditor was running him as an exteriorized case. Of course he was exteriorized, but with such a low level of reality that very little benefit of course was resulting from the processing. Processing is as beneficial as it is real and factual to the preclear, and if you cannot raise the preclear's reality level by the use of Affinity and Communication, then you are letting the whole triangle hang fire. This triangle of ARC may have suddenly gotten very important on the C corner, but it is still foremost in the tool-kit of the auditor. Now you will want to know why you should use "Think a thought" when what is obviously wrong with the preclear you have in mind is a withered leg. Let me assure you that if you process directly this withered leg, you are processing something and somebody who probably has a very low level of reality. He wouldn't have a withered leg if he had a high level of reality. Where you have anybody who is neurologically, physically, or psychosomatically ill, unless it be from an acute infection or an accident, you have somebody who has been trying to not-is his body. When an individual is not-ising his body, making his legs wither, or his stomach get ulcers, or his head get migraine headaches, or his teeth fall out, you have somebody who is trying to not-is the environment. He is already going in the direction of succumb. The one thing that would make him very happy would be the entire disappearance of the physical universe. Well, with modern processing you can make this happen, too, and maybe this is something you should have happen for him in order to demonstrate that it could happen. Of course, if you did this you would have to go through a modern BScn course at least, for this is a very tricky procedure. In view of the fact that unreality is the action of realizing things are there and then saying they aren't there (not-ising them; see Creation of Human Ability and the Axioms of Scientology) you are dealing with a protest against reality which results in unreality. A person will let things be as real as he is willing to let them exist. When an individual isn't willing to let a leg or a tree, or this universe exist, then things are not real to him. One of the best ways you could get him to raise his level of reality would be to give him some reality on thinkingness. It isn't actingness, it isn't getting tired, it isn't being unable to work, it isn't the second dynamic that impedes your preclear—it is his thinkingness. All you have to do is to get him to change his mind. If you could get anyone to change his mind enough he could then command anything that was bothering him. But a preclear who is not-ising things is trying to use force and pressure of one kind or another against physical objects and spaces in order to push them out of existence. This will never win, let me assure you. Energy will never destroy energy, I don't care how many atomic bombs the peanut whistly brigade builds, they will never destroy any space or energy with them. Your preclear who finds things unreal has stopped trying to do anything with thought and is trying to do something with force. He no longer conceives that thought can generate or handle or give existence or life to space and energy. Now you take this to heart, and take a good, hard look at some of these preclears you have been processing on very fancy and frilly processes, and you take a think back over all of these preclears who, after you processed them, didn't think anything had happened. When the preclear didn't think anything had happened, nothing happened. What was in error? You were processing him above his level of reality. If you could get him to think a thought and know he thought it, and receive a thought and know he had received it, even though he put it there to receive it, which is what he does, you would then be directly addressing the very thing that is doing unreality and reality. An individual who has a compulsive outflow is simply unwilling to receive a thought. An individual who is silent simply can't think of anything. Thus, if an individual had control of his thoughts he would have control of the universe. We can prove this now in a process. And don't think you are going to finish this process, either side of it, in a half-hour or forty-five minutes. Some of these glib preclears you process will "fall in" on this process and begin to comm-lag an hour or two after you start processing them on it. The main errors which have been made with this process so far have been failing to run it long enough to have the preclear really know and really understand that he, himself, has thought the thought and that he, himself, has received the thought, or is willing to receive the thought. "Find the reality level of the preclear" is one of those bywords that you can't use too often or look at enough. ******** 88. HCOB 17 MAR 60 Standardized Sessions HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex Fran Hldrs HCO BULLETIN OF 17 MARCH 1960 STANDARDIZED SESSIONS There are many reasons why sessions should be standardized and held in pattern. First of these is confidence. The auditor, going over practised ground, feels more confident and, startled by some sudden action or new development, does not lose session control by seeming incapable to the pc. The preclear, accustomed to repetitive session pattern, feels a security when all his sessions are predictable as to pattern of address. And if he changes auditors he is still able to feel confident that he is getting real auditing. A second reason is duplication: Just as old repeater technique done by the auditor to the pc will run out a phrase or charged word, so do session patterns, well followed, tend to run out earlier sessions. Duplication does not make all things seem alike. Duplication of a session adds communication to the session and speeds up the willingness of the pc to communicate to the auditor. The basic freeing action of auditing depends upon the separation of thought from form, matter, energy, space and time and other life. We see in "science" as currently practised a nearly total identification by the "scientist" of mass with thought. "Man from mud" is a natural conclusion by anyone who has all his thought bound up in mass. The reason a clear's needle is so free (and you've seen, certainly, how an E-Meter needle gets sticky, then freer and freer) is that his thought is separated from a matter, energy, space, time consequence. The "deadin-'is-'ead" case is totally associating all thought with mass. Thus he reads peculiarly on the meter. As he is audited he frees his thinkingness so that he can think without mass connotations. What auditing is doing is making the preclear think key thoughts until they can be thought without creating or disturbing matter, energy, space and time. As most pcs associate themselves with thought, only when they can think a thought without ploughing anew into mass can they exteriorize. Difficult exteriorization or exteriorization with bad consequences is all caused by a person's considerations of thought being matter, self being matter, etc, etc. The basic overt act is making somebody else want mest. This recoils so that self wants mest. Thus we have the "necessity for havingness". Running havingness restores the pc at cause over matter, permits him to be separate from matter to some degree. Thinking, then, is separated from mest by repetitive thinking on the exact points that pin a particular person to mest. If a person is aberrated, say, on the subject of women, the shortest cut to de-aberration (barring havingness difficulties—see below) would be the repeated command "Think of a woman." At last he would no longer have pictures or masses just because he thought that thought and you would then find he could think about women as opposed to reacting about women. This naturally leads to an obvious basic process, "Think about matter" "Think about energy" "Think about space" "Think about time" "Think about a thetan." In theory each one could be run flat in turn and then all run again. In actual practice this is pretty steep for most cases and would not be real to many. A more complex approach containing more significance is more real to the pc. The pc's mind is trapped into forms of mest and life, rather than merely mest and life. Thus, what falls on the E-Meter needle shows what form of mest and life his attention is fixed upon. Havingness is a complicated subject when viewed in a pc's mind. Familiarity, which is to say, predictability, is strongly connected with his ability to have or own. When he receives shocks or surprises, his ability to predict is invalidated and he can't have. The reason a thetan "dies" is his loss of the familiar by the introduction of the unpredictable. Rapidity of change of state, unpredicted, would be a definition of surprise, also of death and forgetfulness. The more change he is subjected to, that he did not predict, the less he can have. Thus when he is given a "rough session", the pc's havingness goes down. Not predicting the shifts and changes of the auditor, the pc ceases to be able to have the session or its appurtenances—the auditor, the room, etc. The smoother the auditing the better the pc's havingness stays up. The model session is designed to avoid unpredictable changes. Thus it is designed to retain havingness by retaining pattern, which is to say, retaining predictability by the pc. Auditing, done smoothly, duplicatively session by session as to session pattern, runs itself out, even if the pc has a constantly changing bank. A pc began to use pictures when he changed lives and sometimes, therefore, language, but only after he had already adopted language for thought. So an ultimate step in processing could concern itself with separating the pc from the significance of words. Some such process as "Think of a word," followed by "Think of a meaning," would in theory, if it could be run (but has not been tested and would violate havingness), discharge the pc of his dependence on language for thought and would find him less fixated on having pictures (which of course bridge the language barrier). Appearing in a form composed of matter, running on energy, existing in space and keeping pace with others in time is a favour pcs do one another (or an overt act depending on how cynical you may feel when you consider it). The games condition of havingness is have for self, can't have for others. Appearing in a form violates this games condition. Also, giving another words violates it. Thus actors and writers tend to go downhill by violating their own games condition if they are in one. A games condition evolves from separateness. Running some form of separateness can then result in exteriorization not from willingness to lose the mass of the body but by curing the games condition. Separateness is of course handled on lower cases by running out obsessive connectedness. But separateness itself can be run. Any auditing is a solution: Solutions are ordinarily an alter-is of problems. Thus getting people to confront problems or even solutions can resolve not only case but auditing where auditing itself has now and then, in absence of smooth analysis and session handling, become a problem to the preclear. A fine process for this is "Tell me a problem that auditing would be a solution to," and for that matter, this also applies to any psychosomatic illness. A person with a bad leg would experience relief if audited on "Tell me a problem a bad leg would be a solution to," as a repetitive process. Similarly, it might work if one asked "Tell me a solution to a bad leg you could confront," or "What problem about a leg could you confront?" which last is very good as a process. The separation of thinkingness from a problem, from particular forms, and from Life and Mest are the primary targets of auditing. And just as the repetitive auditing command runs out not only the connection with a mass but itself, so does a repetitive session design eventually free the pc from not only his aberrations but auditing itself. A person gets as able as he regains confidence—and he gets as free as his auditing is a constant not itself a wild variable. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:js.rd Copyright c 1960 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ******** 89. HCOB 4 MAY 59 An Affinity Process HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 HCO BULLETIN OF 4 MAY 1959 AN AFFINITY PROCESS We have a fundamental Reality process in Overt-Withhold Straight Wire and, at a higher level, "What can you confront?" Variations suggest themselves but what with Administration, Congresses, HPA Courses, ACCs and heavy promotion, I have not had time to test them. The above form, startlingly enough, does work. It apparently cracks lower cases than "What can you confront?" There is some evidence it raises havingness. A basic communication process is "Recall a time you communicated." There have been few successful Affinity processes. However, as unlikely as it first appears, the following is nearly a pure Affinity process. "What would you like to confront?" L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mp.rd Copyright c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ******** 90. HCOB 2 MAR 61 New Pre-Hav Command HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 2 MARCH 1961 Ds of P All HGC Personnel All Auditors Auditing Staff All 22nd American ACC students All 3rd S.A. ACC students NEW PRE-HAV COMMAND Here is a new command for Communication on the Pre-Hav Scale. It comes as a surprise to me to find a new Comm process after Comm being in prominence 11 years, but that's what's happened. Also this process is foreshadowed by the Code of Honor. It replaces the Pre-Hav Command in HCO Bulletin of February 2, 1961 (dated March 9, 1961 from Saint Hill). The basic command from which the others are derived is: "RECALL NOT WANTING TO COMMUNICATE." The full commands that can be run in sequence are: "Recall not wanting to communicate." "Recall another not wanting to communicate." "Recall not wanting another to communicate." "Recall another not wanting you to communicate." "Recall another not wanting others to communicate." "Recall a communication." "Recall a no-communication." "Recall a communication." "Recall a no-communication." "Recall a communication." "Recall a no-communication." The command structure, having so many possibilities, has only been partially sorted out. The first five commands of the above or the last six commands of the above or all of the above may be run. The last six, of course, handle loss incidents. It just may be that the first line as a process underlies all withholds and gives later withholds power. This may then, just as a process, considerably ease the task set in getting off withholds on secretive cases. Using all the first five lines in sequence is probably easiest on the pc, afterwards flattening the last six commands. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:ph.rd Copyright c 1961 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ******** 91. HCOB 25 SEP 59 HAS Co-Audit HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 25 SEPTEMBER 1959 HAS CO-AUDIT Here are some hints on how to run Comm Processes on assessment: The instructor asks the preclear if he is sick or well. If the pc says he is ill then the instructor says, "What part of the body would you say is ill?" Whatever the pc answers, this is then run on "From where could you communicate to a ... (generalized terminal) body part." If the pc answers that he is well, the instructor says, "Have you ever been ill?" The pc will in general say yes. The instructor then says, "What part of your body was ill?" and runs the Comm Process on whatever the pc says. Giving you advance scoop on a new research win it seems that the most effective and rapid clearing could take place with what we will call Universal Processes. This means running a Comm Process on Universe as follows: "From where could you communicate to the physical Universe." "From where could you communicate to a body." "From where could you communicate to a mind." "From where could you communicate to a Thetan." This is all experimental at this stage but it would be a separation process from all universes the thetan is anxious about and should be quite successful in general use. However I give you this not to use but to show you that we would probably win further and better if we began to steam people up on the subject of being clear and then slammed right in on whatever universe they could handle on Co-audit. I would then run Co-audit as follows: Do the actions described above on body part and when the pc has come through that go at once on to the physical universe and then graduate him on to any body part that bangs on the meter and finally when various parts are flat get him into running the body as a general terminal. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:iet.rd Copyright c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ******** 92. HCOB 21 JUL 59 HGC Allowed Processes HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 21 JULY 1959 CenOCon HGC ALLOWED PROCESSES The following rundown is to be used in all HGCs. For use on unconscious and fixedly psychotic persons unwilling to be audited: "You make that body sit on that chair (or lie on that bed)", and CCH 1, 2, 3, 4. For use on persons unwilling to be audited at any time: Two way help bracket "How could you help me?" "How could I help you?" Get each question answered. Use lots of two way comm. Don't Q and A with reasons. For use on persons unwilling to be audited by reason of session errors: TR 5N, which is: "What have I done wrong?" "What have you done wrong?" with two way comm. For persons who are acutely ill: Ask them what part of their body they think is ill. Use that as the terminal. Run: "From where could you communicate to a ?" (body part named). For use on persons who complain that auditing has no effect on them or who make very slow gains, or who are going for OT. Run: Process S2: "From where could you communicate to a victim?" This is flat when pc can confront calmly a victim. For use on persons in general. If this has been handled in an HAS Co-audit well, don't handle it again: Overt-Withhold Straight Wire after careful assessment and used on various buttons, Dynamic Straight Wire, Know to Mystery Straight Wire, are all more or less same processes but are different ways of assessment. Always run terminals, never conditions. For use on persons who have a p.t. problem. Get them to name the terminals associated with the problem. Run: "From where could you communicate to a ?" (general form of terminal). For use on persons in general, always to some extent when they enter HGC: S-C-S. For use on auditors in for auditing. Run until fully flat: Process S2: "From where could you communicate to a victim?' For use on people going to theta clear. Use liberally and long: Assess case with E-Meter. Spot terminals needing clearing. Use: "From where could you communicate to a ?" on each terminal. For use on people going to theta clear: Find engram necessary to resolve the case each time. Check out all terminals present in it. Make a list. Run: "From where could you communicate to a___ ?" (e a c h terminal in incident by general name). Don't run off from incident that is being run. Pc will go up and down the track but when one terminal is flat, choose the next from the same incident we started with. Remember to resurvey incident for new terminals when several are flat. For finishing off cases to level of theta clear: "From where could you communicate to a ?" (male, female bodies, bodies, mest). For easing off any case into comfort or completion of an intensive: Get person to say what is wrong. Get them to name the terminal they think is the trouble, run: "From where could you communicate to a ?" (terminal name). HAS CO-AUDIT Comm processes may be used in HAS Co-audit. Assess by asking person: "Are you sick or well?" If he says "ill", ask, "What part of your body do you think is ill?" Run: "From where could you communicate to a ?" (body part person said). If person says "well", then say, "What person or thing have you been most sorry for?" (meaning pity). Whatever person says, run it as a terminal, "From where could you communicate to a ?" (generalized form of whatever he or she said). This gets people up to talking and you get the "word of mouth advertising" you should have, plus a lot of better people. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:brb.rd Copyright c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ******** 93. BOOK Creation of Human Ability R2-60 R2-60: THE HIDDEN COMMUNICATION Exerpted from the Book: Creation of Human Ability 'Spot some hidden knowingness', is an auditing command which, pursued properly, opens the gates to freedom. In 'Scientology 8-80' and 'Scientology 8-8008' you will find a scale which begins at its lowest rung with 'hidden'. Above that is 'protection'. Above that is 'ownership'. I have recently discovered that the DEI cycle and the above low scale join to make the scale read: CURIOSITY DESIRE ENFORCEMENT INHIBITION OWNERSHIP PROTECTION HIDDEN and I have discovered that the road upward through this scale is communication. Knowingness condenses. Trying to know becomes the first level of communication. This ‘looking to know' condenses into ‘emoting to know', which condenses into ‘effort to know', which in turn becomes ‘thinking to know', which then condenses into ‘symbols to know' which, and this is the astonishing thing, becomes ‘eating to know', which becomes ‘sexual activity to know', which then turns into oblivion of knowing or ‘mystery'. An energy particle is a condensed knowingness. Trying to discover or move one is an action with the goal of knowingness. Gravity, grim thought, becomes in the mind, and is, the effort to know, to pull in knowingness. Other-determinism is only other knowingness. The aspects of know are the common denominators of any scale in Scientology. When knowingness is done by communication, we get emotion and effort particles changing position. This struggle to know is not just me and thee working on Scientology and gone mad in the process, it is life and all its manifestations including space, energy, matter and time. Each is only a barrier to knowingness. A barrier is a barrier only in that it impedes knowingness. Barriers do not exist for complete knowingness. And what is there to know? Only that knowingness can vary. One has to invent things to know for there is only knowingness, and knowingness has no data since a datum is an invented, not a true, knowingness. The motto of any particle below knowingness is ‘Only energy can tell you'. We handle R2-60 HIDDEN KNOWINGNESS in this wise: ‘Spot some hidden communications', ‘And now spot some more hidden communications', and so forth. We may have to direct the preclear closely with, ‘Point to the spot', ‘How far away does it seem?', ‘Are you spotting a hidden communication there?' and such questions, meanwhile keeping good ARC. He could be asked to spot specific kinds of hidden communications as with this command: ‘Spot some hidden disease communications', ‘Some hidden poisonous communications', or ‘Spot some hidden, but uninteresting communications'. But use the question to flatten all communication lags before you change it. If he goes into the past, let him. He'll come back to the present. He'll find his chronic somatic and do many interesting things, including, perhaps, the data in the text of R2-60 here. It is curious that the above ‘Spot some hidden communications' does not seem to require a remedy of havingness. But it will turn on many heavy ridges and somatics. Having thoroughly worked ‘hidden communications' you can now use this command: ‘Spot some protected communications', and when that is null, ‘Spot some owned communications', and after that has no communication lag, ‘Spot some inhibited (stopped) communications'. Then: ‘Spot some enforced communications', and then, ‘Spot some desired communications'. Now when all that is done, proceed as follows: ‘Spot some hidden knowingness', ‘Are you spotting it in the physical universe? If so all right, point to it', ‘How far away does it seem?', ‘Spot some more hidden knowingness', and so on until after an hour or two (or six) this command is comm-lag-flat. Now start upscale as follows, making the preclear point and give the distance to the spot (even when trillions of miles away): ‘Spot some protected knowingness'. And after many times of that, then: ‘Spot some protected knowingness', many times. Then: ‘Spot some owned knowingness', many times. Then: ‘Spot some inhibited knowingness'. Then: ‘Spot some enforced knowingness'. Then: ‘Spot some desired knowingness'. Then: ‘Spot some knowingness that people could be curious about'. In R2-60 HIDDEN KNOWINGNESS, we can use the Know - Mystery scale: ‘Spot some mysteries' ‘Spot some hidden sex' ‘Spot some hidden eating' ‘Spot some hidden symbols' ‘Spot some hidden thinking' ‘Spot some hidden efforts' ‘Spot some hidden emotions' ‘Spot some hidden looking' ‘Spot some hidden knowing' Then: ‘Spot some protected mysteries', ‘Spot some protected sex', and so on. You can, using the principles of hidden knowing and communication, combine any other part of Scientology with them, and discover an excellent process. However, the first commands given in R2-60 are the easiest to communicate and to use. ******** 94. HCOB 13 OCT 59 D.E.I. Expanded Scale HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex Franchise Holders HCO BULLETIN OF 13 OCTOBER 1959 D.E.I. EXPANDED SCALE (With a Note on Salesmen) The original scale 4.0 Desire 1.5 Enforce .5 Inhibit was expanded in 1952 to Curiosity Desire Enforce Inhibit. In 1959 I have found another vital point on this scale which gives us a new case entrance point. Curiosity Desire Enforce Inhibit Unknown I suspect also that "Wait" fits between Unknown and Inhibit. To make these agree in intention, they would become Interest Desire Enforce Inhibit Unknow. This scale also inverts, I find, similar to the Dynamics and below sanity on any subject. Unknow Inhibit Enforce Desire Interest These points, particularly on the inverted scale, going down, are lowered by failure. Each lower step is an explanation to justify having failed with the upper level. One seeks to not know something and fails. One then seeks to inhibit it and fails. Therefore one seeks to enforce it and fails. Thus one explains by desiring it and fails. And not really being able to have it, shows thereafter an obsessive interest in it. The above inversion is of course all reactive. Reactive selling (of interest to us in a salesman campaign) would be accomplished thusly (and this is the basic scale of selling): The salesman refuses to let the customer forget the product; The salesman then inhibits all efforts by the customer to refuse the product; The salesman enforces the product on the customer; The salesman now finds the customer desires the product; And the customer will remain interested. There is an interplay here whereby the salesman reverses the scale: Source of Sales Failure Salesman Customer Interest Unknow Desire Inhibit Enforce Enforce Inhibit Desire Unknow Interest Salesmen, bringing about an inverted scale, can go downscale themselves as they do it. They seek to interest and meet forgetfulness. They want to sell and meet opposition. They high pressure the customer and get pressured back. And about the time the customer wants the product the salesman is reactively inhibiting the sale. And as the customer's interest is at its highest the salesman forgets all about him. SALESMAN SUCCESS All a salesman has to do is continue to try to interest the customer and the reactive inversion will take place. ----------------- It is interesting that this scale, more importantly, gives us new case entrances. A series of Comm Processes on any terminal, say "bodies", could be run. From where could you communicate to an unknown body an unwanted body a necessary body a desirable body an interesting body This would pick the case off the bottom and run it to the top on any terminal that has gone totally reactive. By the way, don't take my remarks on salesmen as being "all for the best". The basic overt act is making people want useless objects and spaces, and unfortunately for him that's often part of the business of the salesman. He, unlike us, sometimes isn't fishing people out of the mud. He's often more likely pushing them in. Therefore he needs our help to get square with the world. As his income depends on making people want things and buy things (even though sometimes they need them), we haven't much choice but to show him the mechanics of selling, to the end of getting him to help pull others out of the mud. Making somebody want something they really need is no crime, but the salesman is on very shaky ground. What do people really need? We had best not try to get involved in the ethics of all this, or to persuade them to sell only needed items. The whole economic structure needs the salesman; he is the key of the whole structure. But we can leaven the flow of even useless goods by letting an invitation to freedom trickle in the same channel. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dd.rd Copyright c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ******** 95. HCOB 7 MAY 59 New Process Theory HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 HCO BULLETIN OF 7 MAY 1959 NEW PROCESS THEORY It never snows but it avalanches! Possessing now tremendous processes at lowest levels, we need a new understanding of processing and assessment. The broad tone scale is divided into three general parts. Highest is Pan Determinism. Mid-range is Self-Determinism. Low range is Other-Determinism. The fundamental difficulty is that something has so thoroughly overwhelmed the pc that he is it. This is Other-Determinism become the person. Mild locks use this route to further overwhelm him. A person doesn't really find anything in this lifetime that would have overwhelmed him enough to aberrate him. It took great doing. Things like prenatals and operations and shocks just use the existing overwhelm channel. The picture of aberration is this. The person causes an effect, time and time again. Usually this is not aberrative. But one day he causes an unintended effect. He didn't mean to. It was wrong. This is the true overt act—an unintended bad effect. It is not deserved by the recipient. It is a wrong, unintended, undeserved effect. The person now tends to limit his effects or withhold his effects. Having been wrong once, he now becomes cautious. Next thing he knows he has assisted himself to be overwhelmed. He now has an inflow channel over which other things, all locks, can now overwhelm him. Eventually he becomes an "other-determinism". This, of course, can get nothing done, doesn't outflow, etc., etc., which adds up to all the faults we find in an aberrated person. For example, if the pc has been overwhelmed by money, he, in money matters, is now money. If you took some money and threw it on the bed it wouldn't do a thing. It wouldn't stack itself up or add up accounts. Money doesn't do anything. Therefore, the pc, as an other-determinism, does nothing really about money—and this we find annoying in him. It is his aberration. Clearly all one need do as an auditor is to reverse this flow and put the pc at cause over the button, money, to have the other-determinism (and the overwhelmingness) fade away. Using Problems of Comparable Magnitude or Overt-Withhold Straight Wire or simple reaching, the effect is turned to cause and the pc comes out of it. Assessment is only discovering what has overwhelmed the pc. Auditing is the reversing of other-determined flows by gradient scales, putting the pc at cause again. THE BASIC ERROR The question was asked me, and a fine question it was, "Why does a thetan make his postulate fail to stick in the first place? Why would he say, 'I can get my postulates all messed up and so cause an overt act'?" Obviously all aberration is third dynamic. The entrance into self-determinism requires that a thetan conceive the idea of other beings. Also he must then conceive that there are zones of privacy from which he must not communicate. This error leads to obsessive or fixed channels on which one can be overwhelmed, since he "may not" take the position of cause on this channel. Avoidance of the places he must not communicate from leads into all manner of difficulties, since this is inhibited communication. A person, therefore, becomes as aberrated as he cannot communicate, as aberrated as he is overwhelmed by Other-Determinisms, as aberrated as he himself dare not assume cause points. A NEW PROCESS This leads to a new process, for use "in individual sessions". The final phrasing is not established at this time. "From where could you communicate?" or "Find a place from which you could communicate," or "Recall a place from which you have communicated." My first tests show this to be very strong but workable. I have not established the depth this reaches nor the complete effectiveness up scale. But it does reverse Other-Determinism heavily. (This, of course, does not supplant Selected Person Overt-Withhold Straight Wire as fundamental and is not for use in HAS Co-auditing, where Selected Persons Overt-Withhold Straight Wire is the tested allowed process.) This new process may open a faster route to theta clear, even though that route is already very fast. Note: Apparently this process, LOCATIONAL COMMUNICATION, relieves the face pressures and terror stomachs (after turning them on) which have proved reluctant. Terror stomachs we have a specific for. Face pressures, we do not have totally taped. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mp.rd Copyright c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ******** 96. BOOK Scn 8-8008 6 Levels of Processing Issue 5 SIX LEVELS OF PROCESSING -- ISSUE 5 November, 1955 Exerpted from the Book: Scientology 8-8008 NOTE: Issue Five of the Six Levels of Processing is not the final issue of this operating procedure and is subject to change, especially in the matter of command wording. However, the processes here reproduced have been evolved into a workable state and have been run with success with the commands given. Issue 5 of SLP is released at this time because it is better material, not because it is the final form of SLP. With SLP is introduced a method of auditing and a new auditing atmosphere which articulates the attitudes best calculated to maintain continuing stable gains in a case. The auditing atmosphere is A-R-C with gain marked by continuing rises in A-R-C. With SLP a somatic or boil-off means reduced A-R-C and are indications of auditing breaks in A-R-C. With SLP comes the COMMUNICATION BRIDGE, restarting sessions, maintenance of high Reality, and liberal use of processing outside an auditing room. All assist type processes are outside SLP except for the present time problem. The emphasis of SLP is on bettering the preclear's reality and power of choice. Level One RUDIMENTS These must be established at the beginning of every session. They must be re-established each time the preclear tends to go out of session: (a) Find the auditor (b) Find the preclear (c) Find the session environment (d) Establish that a session is in progress (e) Accept any communication the preclear originates (f) Acknowledge every command execution by the preclear (g) Agree upon the process and the command form before using and do not confuse it (h) Use two-way communication liberally (i) Follow the Auditor's Code (j) Deal with the present time problem which may be present at the beginning or arise during or recur during a session (k) Use a Communication Bridge at every process or area change (l) Establish goals by two-way communication and the command "Assign an intention to _______" (auditor indicating object) (m) Run opening procedure of 8-C as given in The Creation of Human Ability until the preclear is certainly obeying the auditing commands and is under control. Level Two LOCATIONAL AND NOT-KNOW PROCESSES Run in populated places, ambulant. (a) Energy Sources: Have preclear spot acceptable energy sources. Do not permit him to spot statics unless he is ready for it. Run until preclear can empower terminals. Commands: "Spot an acceptable energy source." (b) Spotting Objects: Have preclear spot objects in a place with ample space and objects. Commands: "Spot an object." (c) Spotting people: Have preclear spot people in populated places. Command: "Spot a person." (d) Separateness from Objects: Have preclear spot objects he is separate from, then objects separate from him. Commands: "Locate an object from which you are separate." "Locate an object which is separate from you." (e) Separateness from People: Have preclear spot people he is separate from, then have him spot people separate from him. Commands: "Locate a person from whom you are separate." "Locate a person who is separate from you." (f) Waterloo Station: Have preclear spot people about whom he can Not-Know something and then have him spot people he is willing to have Not-Know things about him. (Auditor selects persons.) Commands: "Tell me something you wouldn't mind not-knowing about that person." "Tell me something you wouldn't mind that person not-knowing about you. Level Three DECISIONAL PROCESSING Run in quiet places or auditing rooms. (a) Think a Placed Thought: The object is to train the preclear to think thoughts exterior to his head and thetan bank to obviate the "cave-in phenomena of Axiom 51." Commands: (auditor indicating object or position) "Think a thought in (on) that _______ " Alternate command: "Do you see that (object)? Think a thought in (on) it. Did the thought appear where it is?" (b) Choice Rehabilitation: Using the ability acquired in Level Three (a) have the preclear make choices between two objects indicated by auditor. Command: "From (indicated point) make a choice between (indicated positions or objects)." (c) Directed Decision Rehabilitation: Using the ability acquired in (a) and (b) exercise the preclear on decisions. Command: "Putting the decision on (in) that (indicated object) make a decision about it." (d) Permissive Decision Rehabilitation: Using the abilities acquired in (a), (b) and (c) turn preclear loose on decisions. Decisions must be outside head and bank. Command: "Decide something." Level Four OPENING PROCEDURE BY DUPLICATION (Not-Know Version) Done in an auditing room with a book and a bottle. Commands: "Do you see that book?" "Walk over to it." "Pick it up." "Not-know something about its color." "Not-know something about its temperature." "Not-know something about its weight." "Put it in exactly the same place." "Do you see that bottle?" "Walk over to it." "Pick it up." "Not know something about its color." "Not know something about its temperature." "Not know something about its weight." "Put it in exactly the same place." "Do you see that book?" Level Five REMEDY OF COMMUNICATION SCARCITY The object of this step is to restore abundance on any and all communication possibilities. Done in an auditing room. (a) Create confusion: Commands: "Mock up a confusion." Alternate command: "What confusion could you create?" (b) Creating Terminals: The preclear may have to be coached into mocking up unknown confused black terminals and thus into good terminal mock ups. Commands: "Mock up a communication terminal." "Mock up another communication terminal." (c) What wouldn't you mind communicating with: Duplicate the auditing command exactly. Don't red-herring (go chasing after facsimiles). Command: "What wouldn't you mind communicating with?" (d) Creating family terminals: Have preclear mock up until he has abundance of any and all persons he has ever used as anchor points. Commands: "Mock up your (father, wife, mother, husband). "Mock him (her) up again." Level Six REMEDY OF HAVINGNESS AND SPOTTING SPOTS IN SPACE Route One An exteriorized step done as given in the Creation of Human Ability. ******** 97. HCOB 11 DEC 64 Scientology 0 Processes HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 11 DECEMBER 1964 Remimeo Franchise Sthil Students Sthil Co audit SCIENTOLOGY 0 PROCESSES The whole case gain to be expected from a pc at Level 0 is an increase of ability to talk to others. At Level 0 we do not expect or lead people to expect any sudden miracle of physical or mental recovery. Rather, we emphasize that we are getting their feet on the ladder and as they progress up through levels they will achieve all they ever hoped for and more. Jumping to higher levels leaves the lower level disabilities untouched and while trying to audit somebody at, say, Level III, we will find ourselves struggling with things that should have been handled at Level 0. Further, this target is the one that beginning pcs make the most gains on in my experience. I recall one near miracle on a girl who couldn't bring herself to talk to her parents and all I did was get her to tell me what she'd say to them if she could talk to them. Recalling is too steep for a starting pc. They can't recall well really until about Level IV when they can be cleaned up on their ARC Breaks with Life. Here we have the whole design of Level 0: "Recover the pc's ability to talk to others freely." If you realize that a pc can't be in session unless he is willing to talk to his auditor, you will also realize that he can't be in life until he is able to communicate freely with others. Thus any process that does not forward this end is not for Level 0, no matter how frantic the case may be to become clear yesterday. The more hysterical a pc is about getting advanced processes or a case gain, the less strenuous the process administered must be. The psychiatrist erred on this one point and it wiped him out as a social benefactor. The more desperate the case, the more desperate were his measures. He was just echoing his patients. It is very important for an auditor to realize this one datum for it is the second guiding rule of Level 0. It is a very senior datum. One must not become desperate and use desperate measures just because the pc is desperate or the family or society is desperate about the pc. The worse off the pc, the lighter the approach to that pc must be. Psychotics (real, gibbering ones) are below auditing treatment in sessions. The measure used for them should be just rest and isolation from their former environments. And the first process used should be just getting the person to realize you are safe and safe to talk to. So, although a few cases are psychotic, this still holds good. The auditor must get the pc to realize he is safe—won't punish, scold, reprimand or betray confidences—and that the auditor will listen. It doesn't give the auditor a withhold to not speak of another's withholds. One can only withhold what one oneself has done. What the pc did or said isn't even subject for a session on the auditor for withholding it had no aberrative value. Even when we're Class IV, we still start all our pcs at the pc's level, which is, for a beginning pc, Level 0. So what we are trying to do with our pcs at Level 0 is the following: 1. Recover the pc's ability to talk to others freely; 2. Teach the pc by example the auditor is safe to talk to and won't scold, reprimand, punish or betray, and 3. Refuse to engage in desperate measures just because the pc is desperate; and therefore get a real, lasting gain for the pc. ROUTINES A routine is a standard process, designed for the best steady gain of the pc at that level. The remedy is different. It is an auditing process which is designed to handle a non-routine situation. The only real remedy at Level 0 is patching up having failed to hear or understand the pc. The rest is all done by routine. The Case Remedies are at Level II and while we all realize that every Level 0 case needs a lot of Level II remedies, we also know that no remedy will work well until the pc is able to talk to others. When you run into trouble at Level 0, there are only 3 reasons possible: 1. The pc was not run in a direction or on a process to improve his or her ability to communicate to others; 2. The auditor failed to understand the pc's statements, either words or meanings; or 3. The auditor engaged in desperate measures, changed processes, or scolded or did something to lower the pc's feeling of security in the session. That's all. As you go on up through the levels, you will find many other ways a pc can get upset. But at Level 0, the pc is not close enough to reality on his own case to even be touched by these at first. The pc is a long way off when he first starts getting audited. He can only approach his own case by degrees. So a pc, no matter how wildly he or she dramatizes at Level 0, is really only capable of a reality of the smallest kind about self. And such a pc must be able to talk before anything else can happen. Pcs can be ruined by someone who doesn't grasp that simple fact. Psychiatrists, failing to grasp it, murdered several million people—so it's no light matter. It's an important one. A pc at Level 0 usually can't even conceive of an overt (a harmful act) done by himself. When they can, they go religiously guilty and seek to atone or some such thing. Become a monk. Or commit suicide. The reason 33 1/3 percent of all psycho-analytic patients are said to have committed suicide in their first three months of treatment is not that they "came too late" but that a lot of wild data was thrown at them to get at their "source of guilt" and they went head on into the reactive bank, sought to demonstrate their "guilt" by making others guilty and killing themselves. You don't want anything out of the pc but an increased ability to talk relaxedly to others without fear, embarrassment, suspicion or guilt. So all processes at Level 0 are arranged accordingly. WORDINGS To give all possible wordings of routines that will accomplish the above is completely beyond need. Once you have the idea of it straight, you can invent them by the dozens. One doesn't even have to think of a particular pc. All Level 0 processes are good only when they apply to all pcs. ROUTINE 0-0 (Zero-Zero) The starting routine is the most basic of all auditing routines. It is simply "What are you willing to talk to me about?" Pc answers. "What would you like to tell me about that?" At Level II, the first question alone becomes a remedy. Here the two questions make a routine—and a very effective one it is! ROUTINE 0-A This is how the auditor puts together Routine 0-A: 1. Make a list of people or things one can't generally talk to easily! That includes parents, policemen, govemments and God. But it's a far longer list. The auditor must do this. It must never be published as a "canned" list. 2. Using any one of the listed items: "If you could talk to____(listed item) what would you say?" All right, that's all there is to finding the commands for Routine 0-A. One doesn't get the pc to do the list. The list isn't done in session. The auditor does it himself on his own time. And each auditor must do his own list for his pcs and add to it from time to time as he thinks of new ones. The pc isn't necessarily given any choice of items. The auditor picks one he thinks may fit. That's easy to do after one session. The pc keeps complaining about parents. OK. Run 0-A on parents. And flatten it! By flatten is meant to use that one subject until the pc is darned sure he or she could now talk to the item chosen. If the pc still wants to abuse the item, it isn't flat. If the pc still wants to do something about the item, it is not flat. When the pc is cheerful about the item or no longer fascinated with it, it's flat. Remember, there's no need to find out what the pc can't talk to. In fact, most cases you're better off just to take an item of your own for 0-A and use it. May seem strange, but you'll have a smoother time of it with the pc. Further you'll not restimulate (churn up) the pc's bank so hard. ROUTINE 0-B The second routine consists of things to talk about. One puts the routine together this way: 1. The auditor makes a list (not from the pc but himself) of everything he can think of that is banned for any reason from conversation or is not generally considered acceptable for social communication. This includes non-social subjects like sexual experiences, W.C. details, embarrassing experiences, thefts one has done, etc. Things nobody would calmly discuss in mixed company. 2. An item from the list is included in the auditing command, "What would you be willing to tell me about _____?" Add the item you choose. 3. When they have "run down" (as in clocks) ask them, "Who else could you say those things to?" 4. Rechoose a subject on the list. 5. Repeat 3. 6. Continue to repeat 4. and 5. Above all, don't be critical of the pc. And very calmly hear and seek to understand what the pc said. (You never, by the way, seek to find out why the pc reacted or responded in some way. A real blunder at Level 0 is "Why did you feel that way?" Or "Why do you think you can't say that?" You're not after the causes of things at Level 0. You will find out why at Level VI!) At Level 0, just keep them talking while you listen. And you use only the subject chosen to keep them talking. ROUTINE 0-C Routine 0-C is, of course, old R-1-C renamed. It is done without a meter and it has any subject under the sun included in its command. It is elsewhere covered. In all the above routines it is vital not to alter the commands given above. ------------- There are many more possible routines. But to be a Level Zero Routine it must have as its goal only freeing up the ability of the pc to talk freely to others. This is not a level to be regarded with a brush-off. It takes a lot of skill to restore a pc's ability to communicate freely. When an auditor has that skill he will succeed at all higher levels. When a pc has that skill regained, his world will look to him to be a far, far better place. So it is very important to get over this first hurdle. And very important not to dodge it and try to climb the hill anyway. It will become an awfully steep hill. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:jw.cden Copyright c 1964 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ******** 98. HCOB 26 DEC 64 Routine 0-A Expanded HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 26 DECEMBER 1964 Remimeo Franchise Sthil Students Sthil Co-audit SCIENTOLOGY ZERO (Corrections to HCO Bulletin of 11 December 1964, "Processes", and to HCO Bulletin of 10 December 1964, "Listen Style Auditing") ROUTINE 0-A (EXPANDED) An additional command increases the usefulness of this routine. It is therefore rewritten as follows: The auditor makes a list of things people generally can't talk to easily. That includes parents, policemen, governments and God. But it's a far longer list. The auditor must compile this list himself or herself out of session. It may be added to by the auditor from time to time. It must never be published as a "canned list". Scientology Instructors and Scientology Personnel should not be listed on it as it leads to upset in sessions. STEP 1. The auditor chooses one of the subjects off the list and uses it in Steps 2 and 3 below until the pc is comfortable about it. Subjects from the list can be chosen in sequence or at random. A chosen subject is not left until the pc is comfortable about it. By this is meant, the pc would not feel disturbed talking to the subject chosen. The auditor does not ask the pc which subject or if it is all right to choose that subject as the pc at the moment of selection is not likely to feel comfortable about any of the listed subjects and so will just reject. No, the auditor just chooses one and starts on it. STEP 2. The auditor asks, "If you could talk to______(chosen subject), what would you talk about?" Pc answers one or more things at greater or shorter length. STEP 3. When the pc seems satisfied the question has been answered, the auditor then says, "All right, if you were talking to______(chosen subject in 1 ) about that what would you say, exactly?" The pc is expected to speak as though talking to the subject chosen in l. STEP 4. The auditor notes whether pc is comfortable about the subject chosen in Step 1, yet without asking pc. This is done by noting the voice tone or text of what the pc would say. If it is shy, diffident, or if it is belligerent or annoyed, the same subject is retained for a new go with Steps 2 and 3. If the pc seems bright and cheerful, a new subject is chosen from the list for a working over with Steps 2 and 3. If the subject in 1 is retained, the auditor again does Steps 2 and 3 above over and over until the pc is cheerful. A subject chosen in 1 is not left until the pc really can respond cheerfully. When this is accomplished, a new subject is chosen as Step 1 and the process is continued with Steps 2 and 3 using the new subject. The whole of Routine 0-A is flat when the pc feels far more comfortable about talking to specific items and isn't shying off from items on the list. It is flat, therefore, when an ability is regained on specific items on the list and the list items aren't producing big new changes in the pc's communication ability. LISTEN STYLE CO-AUDIT It is expected that by the time an auditor is permitted to do the Zero Routines, Individual Listen Style will have been entered upon. Until the class seems able to run individual sessions, old "R-1-C" can be used by the auditing supervisor on a group basis using Listen Style Co-audit until the group has the idea of sessions. Routines work best on Individual Listen Style. The pc is always wondering, in Listen Style Co-audit, if the auditing supervisor is listening to him personally. The auditor is not the receipt point of the pc's comm in many instances. Old R-1-C is the best training mechanism to get auditors to run sessions. In this process the auditing supervisor just chooses something for all the pcs to talk to the auditors about, like a dynamic or a common social problem. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:jw.rd Copyright c 1964 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ********