Type = 11 iDate=1/1/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=2 rDate=20/11/74 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  LIX HI-LO TA LIST REVISED  Type = 12 iDate=1/1/72 Issue=0 Rev=1 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0 Type = 11 iDate=17/2/71 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0 Type = 11 iDate=22/2/71 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0 Type = 11 iDate=25/2/71 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0 Type = 11 iDate=3/3/71 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0 Type = 11 iDate=13/3/71 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0 Type = 11 iDate=1/1/72 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Remimeo Auditors Class III and above  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 1 JANUARY 1972RA REVISED & REISSUED AS HCO B 20 NOVEMBER 1974 Remimeo Auditors CANCELS Class III BTB OF 1 JANUARY 1972R and above SAME TITLE LIX HI-LO TA LIST REVISED (Cancels earlier list HCO Bs 17 Feb 71 and 22 Feb 71 and 25 Feb 71 and 3 March 71 and 13 March 71 and 1 Jan 72.) This assessment has been developed to detect all the reasons for high and low TA. There is nothing unusual about the processes necessary to handle these points. This is the full list and is used when a C/S Series 53RI has been done and the high or low TA persists. Interiorization or a flubbed Interiorization R/D that must be run with WENT IN is the usual reason. Listing errors and out rudiments are another reason. The list is assessed Method 5. Handle the reads in the order given on HCO B 10 June 71, C/S Series 44R. Any reading questions must be carried to F/N by major action or 2-Way Comm. Can be taken to full F/Ning list. Must be done by an Auditor who can make a list read with Cramming on TR 1 and Cramming on HCO Bs 28 Feb 71 C/S Series 24, 9 June 71 C/S Series 41, 20 Dec 71 C/S Series 72, 15 June 72 C/S Series 80, 15 Oct 73 C/S Series 87, 20 Nov 73 C/S Series 89, 6 Dec 73 C/S Series 90 and BTB 16 June 71R, Issue I (formerly HCO B 16 June 71 R, Issue II). HI-LO TA ASSESSMENT 1A. IS YOUR INT R/D UNFLAT? _______ If the pc has had an Int R/D, do an Int R/D Correction List and handle the reads. (HCO B 29 Oct 71, Revised 14 May 74.) If the pc has never had an Int R/D, then give him a standard Int R/D providing you have checked out on the Int-Ext pack and have drilled the procedure. 2A. WAS YOUR INT R/D MESSED UP? _______ Int R/D Correction List. 3A. IS YOUR INT R/D OVERRUN? _______ Int R/D Correction List. 4A. HAVE YOU BEEN AUDITED OVER EXTERIOR? _______ Int R/D Correction List or Int R/D. 5A. ARE YOU TRAPPED? _______ Int R/D Correction List or Int R/D. 6A. YOU WENT IN. _______ Int R/D Correction List or Int R/D. 7A. GO IN. _______ Int R/D Correction List or Int R/D. 1 8A. ARE YOU OUT AND CAN'T GET IN? _______ Int R/D Correction List or Int R/D. 9A. ARE YOU IN AND CAN'T GET OUT? _______ Int R/D Correction List or Int R/D. 10A. ARE YOU URGENTLY TRYING TO LEAVE? _______ Int R/D Correction List or Int R/D. 11A. DO YOU WANT TO GET OUT? _______ Int R/D Correction List or Int R/D. 12A. WERE YOU KICKED OUT OF SPACES? _______ Int R/D Correction List or Int R/D. 13A. YOU CAN'T GO. _______ Int R/D Correction List or Int R/D. 1B. IS THERE A LIST ERROR? _______ Do an L4BR on the earliest lists you can find that have not been corrected. Lacking these, do an L4BR in general. You can go over an L4BR several times handling each read to F/N until the whole L4BR gives nothing but F/Ns. 2B. HAS A LIST BEEN OVERLISTED? _______ Find out which and handle with an L4BR. 3B. WERE YOU GIVEN A WRONG ITEM? _______ L4BR and handle. 4B. ARE YOU UPSET WITH GIVING ITEMS TO THE AUDITOR? _______ L4BR and handle. 5B. WERE YOU GIVEN A WRONG INDICATION? _______ L4BR and handle. 6B. WERE YOU GIVEN A WRONG WHY? _______ L4BR on the Why Finding. Get the correct Why. 7B. HAVE YOU BEEN GIVEN A WRONG PTS ITEM? _______ L4BR on that PTS Interview. Watch for earlier out PTS Interviews and if they exist, L4BR the earliest one. Watch for earlier S&Ds and if out, correct the earliest of each kind with an L4BR. 8B. ARE YOU NOT SATISFIED WITH AN ITEM FOUND ON THE LIST? _______ L4BR. Correct the List. 9B. HAVE READING ITEMS BEEN LEFT CHARGED UP? _______ L4BR and handle if L&N lists otherwise spot them and clean them by taking to F/N. 1C. DO YOU HAVE SOME SORT OF WITHHOLD? _______ Pull it (them) E/S to F/N. Use "Who" if discreditable. 2C. ARE YOU WITHHOLDING SOMETHING? _______ Get what. 2wc E/S to F/N. Use "Who" if discreditable. 2 3C. IS ANOTHER WITHHOLDING SOMETHING FROM YOU? _______ Get what. 2wc E/S to F/N. 4C. ARE OTHERS WITHHOLDING SOMETHING FROM OTHERS? _______ Get what. 2wc E/S to F/N. 5C. HAS ANOTHER COMMITTED OVERTS ON YOU? _______ Get what. 2wc E/S to F/N. 6C. HAVE YOU COMMITTED ANY OVERTS? _______ Get what. 2wc E/S to F/N. 7C. HAVE OTHERS COMMITTED OVERTS ON OTHERS? _______ Get what. 2wc E/S to F/N. 8C. ARE YOU NOT-ISING OVERTS? _______ Get what. 2wc E/S to F/N. 9C. YOU'RE NOT SAYING? _______ Get what. 2wc E/S to F/N. 10C. HAVE YOU COMMITTED CRIMES? _______ Get what. 2wc E/S to F/N. 11C. ARE YOU COMMITTING CRIMES IN PT? _______ Get what. 2wc E/S to F/N. 12C. ARE YOU PROTESTING? _______ Get what. 2wc E/S to F/N. 13C. ARE YOU HIDING? _______ 2wc E/S to F/N. 14C. YOU DON'T LIKE IT. _______ Get what. 2wc E/S to F/N. 15C. ARE THERE UNDISCLOSED PROBLEMS? _______ Get what. 2wc E/S to F/N. 16C. IS THERE A LIE? _______ Get what. 2wc E/S to F/N. 17C. ARE THERE CONSIDERATIONS NOT MENTIONED? _______ Get what. 2wc E/S to F/N. 18C. DO YOU HAVE OPINIONS YOU DON'T DARE SAY? _______ Get what. 2wc E/S to F/N. 19C. ARE YOU HERE FOR UNDISCLOSED REASONS? _______ Get what. 2wc E/S to F/N. 20C. ARE YOU NOT TELLING YOUR AUDITOR YOUR COGNITIONS? _______ Get what. 2wc E/S to F/N. 21C. ARE YOU WITHHOLDING YOUR ACTUAL CASE STATE? _______ 2wc E/S to F/N. 22C. ARE YOU UNWILLING TO TALK TO THE AUDITOR? _______ 2wc on things he can't say E/S to F/N. 3 23C. ARE THERE DISAGREEMENTS? _______ Run 2wc E/S to F/N: F1. Tell me about others' disagreements with you. F2. Tell me about your disagreements with others. F3. Tell me about others' disagreements with others. 24C. HAVE YOU BEEN AUDITED OVER AN ARC BREAK? _______ PROBLEM? _______ WITHHOLD? _______ Indicate it and handle E/S to F/N. 25C. DO YOU FEEL SAD? _______ Handle the ARC Break as an ARC Break of Long Duration. 26C. DO YOU HAVE AN ARC BREAK? _______ Handle the ARC Break. 27C. DO YOU FEEL UPSET? _______ Handle the ARC Break. 28C. DO YOU FEEL RUSHED? _______ 2wc E/S to F/N. 29C. DO YOU FEEL TIRED? _______ 2wc E/S to F/N. 30C. YOU CAN'T GET IT. _______ Find out what and 2wc E/S to F/N. 1D. ARE YOU TAKING OR SMOKING DRUGS? _______ 2wc to F/N. Rehab releases on each "Drug" taken to F/N. If pc has had a Drug R/D, do L3RD on it and handle. Program the pc for a Drug R/D or verification of it if it is incomplete or there are "No Interest" items. 2D. DID YOU ONCE TAKE DRUGS? _______ 2wc to F/N. Rehab releases on each drug to F/N. L3RD on Drug R/D if he had one. Program for Drug R/D or verification if incomplete. 3D. HAVE YOU TAKEN LSD? _______ 2wc to F/N. Drug Rehabs. L3RD on Drug R/D if he had one. Program for full Drug R/D or verification if unflat. 4D. HAVE YOU DRUNK ALCOHOL? _______ 2wc to F/N. Drug/Alcohol Rehabs. L3RD on Drug R/D if he had one. Program for full Drug R/D or verification if unflat. 5D. HAVE YOU SMOKED POT? _______ 2wc to F/N. Drug Rehabs. L3RD on Drug R/D if he had one. Program for full Drug R/D or verification if unflat. 6D. ARE YOU TAKING MEDICINE? _______ 2wc to F/N. Drug/Medicine Rehabs. L3RD on Drug R/D if he had one. Program for full Drug R/D or verification if unflat. 7D. DID YOU ONCE TAKE MEDICINE? _______ 2wc to F/N. Drug/Medicine Rehabs. L3RD on Drug R/D if he had one. Program for full Drug R/D or verification if unflat. 4 1E. IS THERE AN ENGRAM IN RESTIMULATION? _______ Find out which and do L3RD and handle per its instructions. 2E. ARE THERE UNFLAT CHAINS? _______ Find out what chains and L3RD on each. 3E. DO YOU HAVE A STUCK PICTURE? _______ Indicate it. Do an L3RD on it. You can also unstick it by having him recall a time before it and recall a time after it. D/L if necessary. C/S can order Pictures and Masses Remedy Dn done after this list is handled -- if necessary. 4E. DO YOU HAVE PICTURES IN RESTIMULATION? _______ L3RD and handle. Pictures and Masses Remedy Dn. 5E. DO YOU HAVE MASSES IN RESTIMULATION? _______ L3RD and handle. Pictures and Masses Remedy Dn. 6E. HAS THE SAME ENGRAM BEEN RUN TWICE? _______ L3RD and handle. 7E. YOU CAN'T SEE ENGRAMS TOO WELL. _______ Do L3RD Method 5 and handle. Program for L3RD Rundown if necessary. 8E. IS IT INVISIBLE? _______ Spot the invisible field or picture. L3RD on it and handle. 9E. IS IT ALL BLACK? _______ Spot the black field or picture. L3RD on it and handle. 10E. HAS THERE BEEN A LOSS? _______ Do L3RD on it and handle. Run it out R3R Triple if not run out and still not handled. 11E. HAVE YOU LOST ANYTHING? _______ Do L3RD on it and handle. If not yet run out and still unhandled run R3R Triple. 1F. HAS THE SAME THING BEEN RUN TWICE? _______ Clean up any protest and inval and rehab to F/N. 2F. HAS THE SAME ACTION BEEN DONE BY ANOTHER AUDITOR? _______ Clean up any protest and inval and rehab to F/N. 1G. ARE YOU DOING SOMETHING WITH THE MIND BETWEEN SESSIONS? _______ Find out what it is. If Yoga or Mystic exercises or some such, 2wc E/S to first time done, find out what upset had occurred before that and if TA now down, do L1C on trial period of pc's life. 2G. ARE YOU INVOLVED IN SOME OTHER PRACTICE? _______ Find out what it is. If Yoga or Mystic exercises or some such, 2wc E/S to first time done, L1C on the prior upset or period of pc's life just before that. 5 1H. ARE THERE WORD CLEARING ERRORS? _______ Do a Word Clearing Correction List, handle all reads. 2H. ARE THERE STUDY ERRORS? _______ 2wc E/S to F/N and add a Student Rehabilitation List (HCO B 15 Nov 74) or full Study Correction List (BTB 4 Feb 72RC) to the pc's Program. 1I. HAVE YOU EVER HAD TROUBLE WITH YOUR TA OR F/Ns? _______ Use HCO Bs 24 Oct 71, 12 Nov 71, 18 Feb 72, 29 Feb 72, 23 Nov 73, all on False TA. Then clean up the bypassed charge with 1) Assess for best read a) TA worries b) F/N worries. 2) Then 2wc times he has worried about (item) E/S to F/N. 3) Rehab any overruns due to False TA obscuring F/Ns. 2I. HAVE YOU HAD A FALSE TA? _______ Handle as in 1I. 3I. ARE YOU USING THE WRONG SIZED CANS? _______ Handle as in 1I. 4I. DO YOUR HANDS GET TIRED IN AUDITING? _______ Handle as in 1I. 5I. ARE YOUR HANDS DRY? _______ Handle as in 1I. 6I. ARE YOUR FEET DRY? _______ Handle as in 1I. 7I. ARE YOUR HANDS WET? _______ Handle as in 1I. 8I. ARE YOUR FEET WET? _______ Handle as in 1I. 9I. DO YOU LOOSEN YOUR GRIP ON THE CANS? _______ Handle as in 1I. 10I. ARE YOU USING THE WRONG HAND CREAM? _______ Handle as in 1I. 1J. HAVE YOU BEEN SELF AUDITING? _______ 2wc to first time. L1C on the prior upset or if prior upset was in auditing use the appropriate correction list and an L1C on that time. 2J. WAS A WRONG OVERRUN FOUND? _______ Correct it to F/N by indication and rehabbing the right overrun. 3J. HAS THERE BEEN AN OVERRUN IN LIFE? _______ Locate, indicate, rehab to F/N. 4J. HAS THERE BEEN AN OVERRUN IN AUDITING? _______ Locate, indicate, rehab to F/N. 5J. HAS THERE BEEN SOMETHING WRONG WITH F/Ns? _______ Indicate. 2wc E/S to F/N. Rehab if necessary. 6 6J. HAVE F/Ns BEEN OVERRUN? _______ Indicate. 2wc E/S to F/N. Rehab if necessary. 7J. HAVE F/Ns NOT BEEN INDICATED? _______ Indicate. 2wc E/S to F/N. Rehab if necessary. 8J. HAVE F/Ns BEEN MISSED? _______ Indicate. 2wc E/S to F/N. Rehab if necessary. 9J. HAVE AUDITING QUESTIONS NOT BEEN UNDERSTOOD? _______ 2wc, get them properly understood with Word Clearing, E/S if needed to F/N. 10J. HAVE ITEMS NOT REALLY READ? _______ 2wc E/S to F/N. 11J. DID YOU SAY SOMETHING MUST HAVE READ? _______ 2wc E/S to F/N. 12J. WERE YOU STILL UPSET WHEN SOMEBODY THOUGHT IT WAS HANDLED? _______ Find and handle to F/N. 13J. HAVE YOU HAD BAD AUDITING? _______ 2wc E/S to F/N. 14J. ARE THERE INCOMPLETE ACTIONS? _______ 2wc E/S to F/N. 15J. HAS THERE BEEN ANY INVALIDATION? _______ 2wc E/S to F/N. 16J. HAS THERE BEEN ANY EVALUATION? _______ 2wc E/S to F/N. 17J. COULDN'T YOU GET AUDITING? _______ 2wc E/S to F/N. 18J. HAVE THERE BEEN INTERRUPTIONS? _______ 2wc E/S to F/N. 19J. DOES YOUR AUDITOR OVERWHELM YOU? _______ 2wc E/S to F/N. 20J. DO YOU FEEL ATTACKED? _______ 2wc E/S to F/N. 21J. ARE YOU SCARED OF WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN IN AUDITING? _______ 2wc E/S to F/N. 22J. ARE YOU TALKING TO OTHERS ABOUT YOUR CASE? _______ 2wc E/S to F/N. 23J. ARE YOU LISTENING TO OTHERS TALK ABOUT THEIR CASES? _______ 2wc E/S to F/N. 24J. HAVE YOU BEEN LOOKING AT OR LISTENING TO TECH MATERIALS YOU SHOULDN'T? _______ 2wc E/S to F/N. 7 25J. ARE YOU WAITING FOR SOMETHING TO HAPPEN? _______ 2wc E/S to F/N. 1K. SOME SORT OF CAN'T HAVE? _______ Find correct Havingness process and remedy. 2K. IS YOUR HAVINGNESS LOW? _______ Find correct Havingness process and remedy. 1L. IS SOMEONE OR SOMETHING HOSTILE TO YOU? _______ Check for SP with a PTS Interview or get a full PTS R/D programmed. 2L. ARE YOU PTS? _______ PTS Interview or get a full PTS R/D programmed. 3L. ARE YOU CONNECTED TO SOMEONE HOSTILE TO DIANETICS OR SCIENTOLOGY? _______ PTS Interview or get a full PTS R/D programmed. 4L. DO YOU FEEL SUPPRESSED? _______ PTS Interview or get a full PTS R/D programmed. 1M. HAS SOMETHING GONE ON TOO LONG? _______ Find out what. Clean up any protest. Rehab to F/N on each (or date to blow, locate to blow if qualified). 2M. YOU WENT ON BY A RELEASE POINT? _______ Find out what. Clean up any protest. Rehab to F/N or D/L. 3M. HAS SOMETHING BEEN OVERRUN? _______ Find out what. Clean up any protest. Rehab to F/N or D/L. 4M. THE AUDITOR KEPT ON GOING. _______ Find out what. Clean up any protest. Rehab to F/N or D/L. 5M. HAS THERE BEEN ANY OVER-REPAIR? _______ Find out what. Clean up any protest. Rehab to F/N or D/L. 6M. ARE YOU PUZZLED ABOUT WHY THE AUDITOR KEEPS ON? _______ Find out what. Clean up any protest. Rehab to F/N or D/L. 7M. ARE THERE STOPS? _______ Find out what. Clean up any protest. Rehab to F/N or D/L. 1N. HAVE YOU SEPARATED OUT? _______ 2wc E/S to F/N. Then Triple Expanded Grade Two or L10 on Advance Program. 2N. ARE YOU SOMEBODY ELSE? _______ 2wc E/S to F/N. Program for LX Lists. 8 3N. DO YOU THINK SOMETHING ELSE IS WRONG? _______ 2wc to find what. Note BD item. If BD item is covered by one of the other questions on the list, handle per instructions. Otherwise, GF M5 and handle. 4N. ARE YOU PHYSICALLY ILL? _______ 2wc to find what. Note BD item. 2wc to F/N and get further C/S instructions for handling if necessary. 1O. ARE WE REPAIRING A TA THAT ISN'T HIGH? _______ Get pc to tell you about it briefly. If correct, then indicate to F/N. Go E/S and indicate it if no F/N on first. If False TA, handle per 1I above. 2O. ARE WE REPAIRING A TA THAT ISN'T LOW? _______ Get pc to tell you about it briefly. If correct, then indicate to F/N. Go E/S and indicate it if no F/N on first. If False TA, handle per 1I above. 3O. IS THE METER FAULTY? _______ Get pc to tell you about it briefly. If correct, then indicate to F/N. Go E/S and indicate it if no F/N on first. 4O. IS THERE NOTHING WRONG? _______ Get pc to tell you about it briefly. If correct, then indicate to F/N. Go E/S and indicate it if no F/N on first. 1P. WAS THERE A FALSE EXAM REPORT? _______ Indicate and 2wc to F/N. 2P. HAVE YOU HAD TO WAIT AT THE EXAMINER? _______ Indicate and 2wc to F/N. 3P. HAVE YOU BEEN UPSET BY THE EXAMINER? _______ Indicate and 2wc to F/N. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.rd Copyright $c 1972, 1974 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 9  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=2/1/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Word Clearing Series 30 WC1 COMES FIRST   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 2 JANUARY 1972 Remimeo Word Clearing Series 30 WC1 COMES FIRST Don't try to Word Clear Materials by Word Clearing Method 2 before the person has had a Word Clear Method 1. Actual experience shows that doing WC2 without WC1 restimulates earlier charge on words that have been misunderstood in the past. When a person has not had Word Clear Method 1 and tries to do Word Clear Method 2 on materials, it can go very slowly, the student (due to earlier charge on words) can become quite misemotional. Using Method 3 (going back to find the misunderstood word) is all right. And using common ordinary "Look up, don't go past a misunderstood word" is all right. METHOD 2 EP The End Phenomena (what occurs at the end) of Word Clearing Method 2 is a continuing F/N on the materials. When the person is constantly F/Ning on the materials being word cleared Method 2, that is the time to end off. The "EP" has been reached. When the word clearer forces the student to go on beyond this, the reads gotten are often false or are from protest. Reads that are false come from cognitions (realizations) on the material. Protest reads come from just plain annoyance with having to go on. When the EP of 2 is reached on a specific set of materials, the student is then permitted to go on by himself, looking up words he doesn't know or going back to find one that was missed. A person who enters a new subject or a new branch of a subject should be given WC2 on it. A person who begins a higher level of a subject should be given WC2 on it. If thereafter there is any bog or failure to understand or apply or pass an exam on the subject, a WC Correction List can be done on it and the bog found and handled. This EP is only valid if the person has had WC Method 1 before the WC Method 2 was begun. The EP of Method 2 can be many times repeated on different subjects or branches of subjects. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.rd Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 10  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=3/1/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  C/S Series 69 ADDITION C/SING CHECKLIST   Remimeo Auditors Interns C/Ses (If a copy of C/S Series 69 is posted on the wall, also post this.)  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 3 JANUARY 1972 Remimeo Auditors Interns C/Ses C/S Series 69 ADDITION C/SING CHECKLIST (If a copy of C/S Series 69 is posted on the wall, also post this.) Nothing in this checklist for C/Sing relieves the auditor or C/S from full knowledge of the entire C/S Series. Nothing in the C/S Series is changed by this checklist. ADDITION No. 10. Add. The time-honored way of seeing what has to be repaired in a Case not running well is: GO BACK IN THE FOLDER TO WHERE THE CASE WAS RUNNING WELL AND COME FORWARD. The major error or departure is in the very next session after that. The bugs after the high point should be repaired as the fast action to set the case going again. The repair and handling of bogged cases is the finest skill of a C/S. Really it is why he is there. To do this he has to know the C/S Series thoroughly, know all the materials of all levels he is C/Sing better than the auditor. The use of prepared lists, WC Correction List, Green Form, C/S 53, Hi-Lo TA, GF 40 RR, Int-Ext Corr List, L1C and others, including "Have Examiner ask the pc what happened in session" are used to get information and correct as well as folder studies. KNOW BEFORE YOU GO. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.rd Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 11  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=7/1/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  TRAINING AND INTERNING STAFF AUDITORS   Remimeo C/Os EDs HAS Dept 1 Qual Secs Interne Supers Ds of P Cramming Officers C/Ses  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex Remimeo HCO BULLETIN OF 7 JANUARY 1972 C/Os EDs HAS Dept 1 Qual Secs Interne Supers Ds of P Cramming Officers C/Ses TRAINING AND INTERNING STAFF AUDITORS First and foremost WHEN YOU START OUT TO TRAIN AN AUDITOR REALLY HONESTLY DO IT. Don't monkey about with it, or half do it, or brush it off. Actually GET IT DONE. Get a finished capable able to audit in high volume with high quality AUDITOR. Each auditor is an individual. You can't train a mass of auditors. You can train individual auditors. This has to be kept in sight despite having a lot of students in a class. In other words you take this person and push him on through and get the job of training DONE. HCO To begin a staff auditor trainee is selected because he wants to be an auditor, has a fair study record, has NO serious Ethics history and NO psychiatric background. If you violate these points you will not get an auditor and if you select one with an actual insane history you will be violating the Auditor's Code. HCO Dept 1 is the recruiting point for auditors. If HCO fails, it's up to the D of P or even the Executive Director to get auditor trainees. In recruiting staff auditors it is done 1 for 1 with Admin hirings. Usually already existing staff and Dianetic Course or Academy students are the personnel pools for auditor trainees. When field auditors are brought into the org who have never done org interneships they go this same route, regardless of their class. If already classed, such as VIII, they are simply faster to make into staff auditors. INTERNE SUPERVISOR The moment someone is designated as a staff auditor trainee he comes under the Interne Supervisor. He remains under the control of the Interne Supervisor throughout his entire span as long as he is in the org and until he has his final HGC okay to audit for the class of that org. If the org sends him off for higher classes, he is again under the Interne Supervisor. The Interne Supervisor is in Qual Division V. In a small org it is combined with Cramming Officer. In a tiny org it is combined with Cramming Officer and Qual Sec. But if this last is done there must also be a word clearer-programmer in Qual. PROGRAMMED The moment the trainee comes under the Interne Super he is PROGRAMMED. The Programming is standard. It is varied only to take account of what the trainee 12 has already done in the way of Basic Staff Hat, Staff Status, word clearing and formal courses in auditing. All trainees into an org begin at the bottom regardless of class. A typical standard program would be: WC1. WC2 earliest materials read or heard. Staff Status I. Basic Staff Hat (Vol 0 OEC). SS II Tech Div. Problems Of Work WC2 star rate and clay demo. This HCOB. Interne HCOBs and P/Ls. Student Hat. HDC in the Dianetics Course (no auditing required for provisional cert for a staff trainee). HDC Interne Pack in Interneship for preliminary okay to audit Dianetics. Dianetic Auditing as an Interne under D of P and/or C/S. High Hour Flubless Record achieved on Dianetics resulting in final HGC okay to audit Dianetics -- a fully validated Dianetic Cert. Academy 0 to IV study to Provisional Class IV full time on Academy. 0-IV Interne Pack study. 0-IV preliminary HGC okay to audit. Auditing under D of P and/or C/S. High Hour Flubless Record achieved on 0-IV resulting in final HGC okay to audit and fully validated HGC Class IV. In a Class IV org the program would be just as above. AUTHORITY All this time, the trainee's top boss is the Interne Supervisor. This does not diminish the authority of a Course Super over the trainee when he is on a course or the Cramming Officer when he is in Cramming. When he has his final HGC okay for Dianetics he could be off the Interneship if he were just to go on with Dianetics. But in an org this has its limitations. A C/S has trouble getting a program done where an auditor cannot fly ruds or do a correction list so it is best to carry on to Class IV HGC final okay to audit. UPPER ORGS In a Saint Hill or an Advanced Org the standard program goes right on up as follows. In a Class IV org where a staff auditor is sent to a higher org, he comes again under his own org Interne Supervisor even though he is gone. It used to be that the Staff Training Officer kept track of students gone to a higher org for training but this has not worked. It is best that the Interne Super carries on and keeps track of him and gets him DONE and back. Before a trainee is sent at org expense he has to sign a five-year contract beginning the five years after he returns. He is liable for full cost personally if contract broken plus penalty charges. Class V in the SHSBC. Class VI in the SHSBC. 13 Class VII SHSBC. His previous org Interneship is credited and he goes into Power auditing. If no previous Interneship he does the whole trip as above up to this point. Class V, VI, VII Interne Pack under upper org Interne Super. Class V, VI, VII Interne auditing under D of P of upper org. High Hour Flubless auditing resulting in final HGC ok to audit in upper org and validated cert. Class VIII Course. Class IX Course. Class VIII and IX Interneship Pack under Interne Super of the Class VIII org. Class VIII and IX Auditing under D of P of higher org. High Hour Flubless auditing resulting in an HGC okay to audit and fully validated Class IX certificate. Special C/S Course including AO lines. C/S Interneship in the higher org. Flubless C/Sing resulting in an HGC okay to C/S. Class X Course. Class X Interne Pack. Class X Auditing under D of P. High Hour Flubless Class X auditing resulting in a Class X HGC okay to audit and a fully validated certificate. Class XI and XII Course. Class XI and XII Interne Pack. Class XI and XII Auditing under D of P. High Hour Flubless Class XI and XII auditing resulting in an HGC okay to audit Class XI and XII and fully validated cert. Flag Class XII and Solo C/S Course. Flag Programming and repair of all omissions under Interne Super. Flubless C/Sing on all lines. HIGHER ORG Where a trainee for an org goes to a higher org he is under the Interne Super of the higher org to whom the Interne Super of the lower org can write. This line is to speed up such trainees. ADMIN To get such points DONE, accurate admin is vital. A checklist of all points in the above program is made up with the trainee's name on it and is kept up, with dates by the Interne Supervisor. This is kept in an Auditor Interne File, which files are kept by the Interne Supervisor. Thus at any time he can catch up any fall-off-the-lines and get the trainee going again. A vertical Auditor Trainee Progress Board is kept by the Interne Supervisor. This has a space under each of the headings, left to right. Boxes along the top, left to right, serve to indicate the exact action the trainee is doing. 14 The trainee's name is on a tab that is pinned to the space. The name tab is newly dated each time it is moved to the right. Thus the Interne Super can chase up any faltering student. Various bugs occur -- the student is held in the HGC as an auditor because of HGC hours stat. The course gets flubby and 3 weeks becomes 4. Or somebody has illegally put the student on a special project and he's off the course. HCO begins to use the students as a personnel pool, etc, etc. Or the student bogs for lack of cramming or case repair. The Interne Super's stat is COMPLETIONS of steps on the board. One point for each left to right move of a trainee's name. Thus the Interne Super has a vested interest in recruiting trainees or his stats will collapse. PAID STUDENTS It is wise to greatly prefer that students pay for their training before being recruited. Purely for free services have a bad history in orgs. As this Interneship is ALSO the same Interneship for paying students only a portion should be staff trainees as such. The difference is that the staff trainee must be contracted to the org and must continue on in the HGC. Only the very best, most ethical fast study trainees should ever be sent to a higher org. The percentage of losses is too high otherwise. It is too hard on the org's income otherwise. If somebody else just must go to a higher org, let him pay his own way. Don't make your org a subject of freeloading. It hurts your own pay. PART TIME Part-time study, by which an HGC auditor part-time studies the next level while still auditing IS A COMPLETE FAILURE. By actual record they just never make it. Do the steps fully with full attention on each while it is being done. Don't have the trainee finishing the last one and doing the next one. You'll rarely get a product. Sharply and efficiently and crisply get each step of the horizontal board full and industriously DONE each in turn. And you'll make splendid auditors and make them fast. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:ne.rd Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 15  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=14/1/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  STUDY CORRECTION LIST   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 14 JANUARY 1972 (CANCELLED -- see BTB 4 Feb 72RD Volume IX -- 329) Remimeo STUDY CORRECTION LIST Ref: HCO B 9 Nov 67 Revision of Remedy A, Remedy B and S and Ds HCO B 14 Aug 68 Remedy B -- Environment and "New Style" HCO B 23 Nov 69 Student Rescue Intensive HCO B 30 June 71 W/C Series 8RR HCO B 12 Oct 71 Method No. 2 Word Clearing form HCO B 21 July 71R Word Clearing Correction List HCO B 1 Dec 71 Rising Scale Processing Issue III HCO B 1 Dec 71 Effort Processing Issue IV HCO B 9 Dec 71 PTS Rundown HCO B 1 Aug 68 The Laws of Listing and Nulling HCO B 19 Mar 71 List-1-C HCO B 1 Dec 71 Triple Ruds Long Duration Issue II HCO B 19 Jan 66 Danger Conditions -- Technical Data for Review Auditors 1. Has there been an upset about study? _______ Fly all ruds triple, "In study has there been _______?" 2. Has there been a Misunderstood Word? _______ Find it, get it looked up and correct it. 3. Have there been upsets in getting Words Cleared up? _______ WC Corr List and handle. 4. Have there been misunderstood subjects? _______ Give person Word Clear 1 or get the Word Clear 1 already done redone with the missing subjects added to the WC 1 Standard C/S. 5. Have you ever been punished because you wouldn't learn? _______ R3R Narrative Triple. 6. Have you been taught by someone you didn't like or hated? _______ PTS Rundown with an additional S&D in step (a); L&N "Who has tried to teach you that you didn't like?" + L&N "Who have you taught that you didn't like?" Use remaining PTS steps on the names. 7. Have you ever gotten in trouble because you knew something? _______ R3R Triple. 16 8. Would knowledge make you too powerful? _______ Run (1) "What have you done with knowledge?" (2) "What have you withheld?" Alternate repetitive. (By an upper level auditor, Evil Purpose RD or L9S as case may R/S.) 9. Have you studied the same subject more than once? _______ "Why did you have to study the same subject more than once?" 2wc E/S to F/N. 10. Have you failed to complete courses you took? _______ 2wc "What courses have you failed to complete?" E/S to F/N. Followed by WC 1 Actions on courses named. 11. Have you continued to study a subject you had already grasped? _______ Find the point of win. Rehab it. (Upper level auditor, date locate point of win.) 12. Do you try to get out of classrooms or schools? _______ R3R Triple on F1 "Locate a time when you were made to go to school or class." F2 "Locate a time when you made someone go to school or class." F3 "Locate a time when another made others go to school or class." R3R. (Quad would be F0, "Locate a time when you made yourself go to school or class." -- F0 not necessary.) 13. Are you trying to do something else with study? _______ L&N to BD F/N item, "What are you trying to do with study?" (Upper level auditor, date to blow locate to blow item.) 14. Have you pretended to have studied things you hadn't? _______ 2wc E/S to F/N. 15. Have you pretended to have qualifications you did not actually attain? _______ 2wc E/S to F/N. 16. Have you ever lied to a teacher? _______ 2wc E/S to F/N. 17. Have you ever cheated on an exam? _______ 2wc E/S to F/N. 18. Have you ever committed overts on students? _______ 2wc E/S to F/N. 19. Have you ever damaged study materials or books? _______ 2wc E/S to F/N. 20. Have you ever failed to apply what you learned? _______ 2wc E/S to F/N. 17 21. Have there been upsets in study? _______ L1C "On study _______" each reading item to F/N. 22. Are you trying to solve some Mystery? _______ L&N "What Mystery are you trying to solve?" to BD - F/N item. (Upper level auditor date to blow locate to blow.) 23. Has anyone ever considered that you were stupid? _______ PTS RD. Step (a) add L&N "Who has considered you stupid or mentally retarded?" L&N "Whom have you considered stupid?" L&N "Whom have others considered stupid?" Then handle as in PTS RD: 24. Do you have bad eyesight or eyestrain? _______ Effort Processing and Rising Scale. (Upper level auditors, if this persists, L10.) 25. Are you trying to forget something? _______ L&N "What are you trying to forget?" to BD F/N item. (Upper level auditors then date to blow, locate to blow.) 26. Would someone else win if you did become educated? _______ 2wc to F/N. (In extreme cases showing misemotion on this add to PTS RD (a).) 27. Do you have disagreements in study? _______ 2wc E/S to F/N then "What do you agree with in study?" 2wc E/S to F/N. 28. Do you invalidate yourself in study? _______ 2wc to F/N followed by "What confusion came before that?" 2wc E/S to F/N. 29. There is some other reason not given? _______ 2wc to F/N. 30. There was really nothing wrong with study in the first place? _______ Indicate to pc. 31. Repairing study was an unnecessary action. _______ Indicate to pc. Rehab when he felt okay about study. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:nt.jh Founder Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [This HCO B was cancelled by HCO B 4 February 1972, Study Correction List Revised, which was revised four times, the most recent revision being BTB 4 February 1972RD, Study Correction List Revised, which may be found as number 7 in the Study Series, Volume IX, Page 329.] 18  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=20/1/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  PTS RD ADDITION   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 20 JANUARY 1972 Remimeo PTS RD ADDITION (Refers to PTS RD HCOB 9 Dec 71) The only reasons a PTS RD does not work are: C/S Error: 1. Not doing one at all. C/S Error: 2. Doing one in the middle of another RD. C/S Error: 3. Doing one without set-up. C/S Error: 4. The person was not PTS -- which is to say was not chronically ill or roller coaster and the items didn't read. Auditor Error: 5. The RD was badly run auditor-wise. R3R was bad, metering poor, ruds not correctly or fully done. Auditor & C/S Error: 6. The RD was quickie, only doing step (a) and brushing it off. C/S Error: 7. Even though the whole RD was done fully, there remained on the case an undetected additional person or thing to which the pc was PTS. The rules of PTS are A PERSON WHO ROLLER COASTERS IS ALWAYS PTS. A PERSON WHO IS CHRONICALLY ILL ALWAYS IS PTS. A PTS RUNDOWN THAT DOES NOT WORK HAS NOT BEEN DONE AS PER 1 TO 7 ABOVE. The remedies to the above are 1. Do it. 2. Pgm it in correct sequence. 3. Set the case up properly so it is running well and past errors handled. 4. Establish how well the person holds his gains before Pgming one. If any Q at all, do the RD. 5. Cram the auditor on TRs, Metering, R3R drills and ruds. Do L4B, GF Method 5 Handle, L3B on the pc and redo Accordingly. 6. Complete the RD. 7. 2wc "What is your attention on?" to F/N. On PTS RD fly all ruds single; L&N "On the PTS Rundown what being or thing was missed?"; R3R Triple on it; fly all ruds and overts on it triple; if all not very okay now 2wc "What other subject or people might have been overlooked on the PTS RD?" Handle with R3R Triple and Ruds Triple plus overts. A PTS RD always works. If it works with a relapse there is an error in it as in the numbered paras above. THIS IS VITAL TECH TO THE PC. IT MAKES THE MOST DIFFICULT CASES FLY IF IT IS DONE RIGHT. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mes.bh Founder Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 19  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=3/2/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  R6EW - OT III NO INTERFERENCE AREA   IMPORTANT Remimeo Franchise All Orgs Registrars BPI Advance Mag  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 3 FEBRUARY 1972 Remimeo Franchise All Orgs IMPORTANT Registrars BPI Advance Mag R6EW - OT III NO INTERFERENCE AREA Note: (The following HCO B is broadly released despite the fact that it contains technical terms and upper level tech programs. A person who is taking this route has a right to know where he should go and where he shouldn't. The amount of improvement a person can receive is so great that it takes a long series of actions to do it. As for "handling bad mental conditions" this is too simple and is not the business we are in. Just by handling the current upsets, problems, overts and withholds of a person in an hour's session, Scientology can make more case advance than was possible in any past century. So there is a vast difference between handling disturbed people and obtaining all the advance of which a person is capable of obtaining. The data in this HCO B is issued to straighten out a current error being made in routing some cases.) A long series of tests and many case results have for some time demonstrated that there is a NO INTERFERENCE AREA between R6EW and OT III. A study of many cases and their results demonstrated conclusively that one does NOT audit Dianetics or Lower Scientology Grades on a pre-clear or pre- OT (Operating Thetan) AFTER he his begin Solo VI (the 1st Solo step) or BEFORE he has reached OT III (a higher Solo step per grade chart). Upsets of varying degree were found in ALL cases tampered with in the NO INTERFERENCE AREA. Repair actions to repair errors made by the Solo Auditor are all that can be beneficially audited on a person between R6EW and OT III. Even the powerful L10, when done between R6EW and OT III will fail. Above and below the No Interference Area L10 is fantastically successful. Nothing is superior to the Solo Grades. THEREFORE, it is vital that a case be fully set up before beginning actual Solo Auditing. For information, the following list, taken from HCO B 8 Jan 72, Issue II, is what constitutes a "set-up". 1. C/S Series 54 (former injuries, illnesses, etc., run out by Dianetics) completed? 2. GF40XRR (Resistive Cases List) assessed? Engrams of it handled? 3. Dianetics Full Flow Table run? To Dn Completion? 4. Full Drug, Alcohol, medicine handling done? 5. Dianetics ran well? To End Phenomena? 6. All Grades run, singe, triple or Expanded? 20 7. Green Form (case repair) items handled? 8. Attained End Phenomena of each grade? 9. Interiorization Rundown done? INT is okay? 10. C/S Series 53 (any abnormal Tone Arm positions) handled? 11. Power to End Phenomena. Singe? Triple? Power Plus? 12. Tone Arm Range okay? 13. Power, no illness after? 14. Power, no ethics troubles after? 15. Success stories okay? 16. Director of Processing Interview okay? Pc not wanting something handled? 17. Graph of Oxford Capacity Analysis Personality Test (or American personality Analysis Test) with no point below middle of graph? A. Pc set up and okay to go to R6EW Solo? B. Pc needs further set-up and repair before Solo? The above is a checklist used by Solo Course Case Supervisors. (It is NOT the program sequence by which the case is handled. This is given in the Grade Chart.) These are the points checked. Once onto Solo, whether these points are in or not, that's it, HANDS OFF. Once on Solo the pc is into the Non Interference Area. He may not have Dianetics or Grades. He may only have the lists and repairs given to Solo Auditors. Of all these actions a full thorough drug-medicine-alcohol rundown is the most important. People who have been on heavy drugs, pot, etc or who have been alcoholics get things turned on in their banks and sometimes become terrified of them not Solo. They are unable to confront their pictures. The remedy is to have a thorough drug-alcohol-medicine rundown. The ONLY people who can't Solo are these poor devils who got onto these psychiatric type drugs. These can be handled by a competent drug rundown. The ideal program appears on the Grade Chart, displayed in most orgs and often sent out. The chart has many symbols on it. A full glossary of these symbols and terms exists in HCO B 20 Aug 71, Issue II, "Classification and Gradation Chart, Abbreviations Explained", which should be posted alongside the chart. A fast summary of the steps would be C/S 54 (handling illnesses, accidents, injuries) Dianetics ARC Straightwire OBJECTIVE Processes Grades 0-IV POWER POWER PLUS. 21 Into this program can be placed the engram handling GF40RR for resistive cases, past practices, etc. A Drug Rundown would occur in the area of Dianetics. An Interiorization-Exteriorization Rundown would be given after the pc exteriorized. This usually occurs early on in processing and has to be handled. A C/S 53 (for TA misbehavior) could be given anywhere. The actual program run on the pc varies according to what the Case Supervisor requires, but it follows the Grade Chart. TEST The Oxford Capacity Analysis (OCA) or the American Personality Analysis (APA) is a graph which shows desirable and undesirable characteristics in a case. The points on the graph are moved up by processing. And Dianetics and Scientology processes below R6EW are very capable of moving these points into desirable range. Above R6EW, the first Solo step, the graph can change but the person is moving out of the normal range of humanity and the Solo grades are not designed to change a human test graph and in fact these tests do not measure the OT band of abilities. The test graph should be in normal range before Solo is begun. Auditing below Solo is quite capable of handling the graph points and bringing them up to desirable range. SOLO PROGRAM The Ideal Solo Program is as follows: 1. Set-up done and all items on the checklist okay. 2. Good training as a Solo Auditor. Can include the Professional Route of Class VI. Or the Social Counselor Course plus Solo. Or (at this time) the Solo Course only. One Solo Audits as well as he is trained and no better. 3. R6EW Solo Auditing to End Phenomena and attest. 4. Clearing Course Solo to CLEAR. 5. Operating Thetan I to attest. 6. Operating Thetan II to attest. 7. Operating Thetan III to attest. 8. Operating Thetan VII (audited by an auditor level) to attest. 9. OT III Expanded to attest. 10. OT IV. 11. OT V. 12. OT VI. 13. OT VIII as released. After 7 above (OT III) or after 9 above (OT III Expanded) one can run more Dianetics, Expanded Grades, GF40, the famous L10 or do any other case action. One cannot profitably do these actions between Solo R6 and OT III. That's just the way the bank is. 22 You will note that "OT VII" is apparently out of sequence. It originally went OT III, OT IV, OT V, OT VI, OT VII. Then it was found that there was a level OT III Expanded. So it can go OT III, OT VII, OT IIIX, OT IV, OT V, OT VI or it can go OT III, OT IV, OT V, OT VI, OT VII, OT IIIX. One gets the most out of it by taking VII after OT III and then OT IV, OT V and OT VI really bite. Many persons were too nervous of OT III to do it well until a drug rundown and OT VII were done. Others thought OT III was endless and OT VII handled that. The actual materials of these levels are held under tight security at Advanced Orgs because when they are shown to persons who haven't moved up the grades, they usually cave in. Thus the materials are only available in Advanced Orgs. AVAILABILITY Auditing at levels below Power is available from field auditors, Franchises and Scientology Orgs. Power is available at Saint Hill Orgs in LA, Saint Hill UK, and Denmark. All Solo levels are only available at Advanced Organizations. A person goes from Field Auditor to Franchise to Scientology Org to a Saint Hill Org to an Advanced Org to obtain auditing of the whole Grade Chart. Going from Clear back to lower grades -- or from an Advanced Org back to a Franchise within the No Interference band -- is liable to upset his case as it is being run out of sequence. He could go to a Franchise or a Scientology Org after OT III for Dianetics, Drug Rundown or other actions but not between R6 and OT III. Processing and the mind is a technical subject. In Dianetics and Scientology, the answers have been found. Like all technical material, you can't apply it poorly or backwards and expect results. I try -- and very successfully in most cases -- to hold the lines straight and keep the materials purely and workably applied. In the past year alone, fantastic tech advances have been made and are available in terms of refined application within the existing framework of the Grade Chart. But the fundamentals do not change, the progress of the person up the Grade Chart must be regular and on course. Otherwise he will not receive full benefits. It is my job to do all I can to make sure that full benefit is received. This is not always easy to do on a rather aberrated planet. But if it weren't so aberrated we wouldn't be here doing something about it. Right? L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:ne.rd Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 23  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=15/2/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  FALSE TA ADDITION 2   Remimeo All Tech Qual Terminals  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 15 FEBRUARY 1972 Remimeo All Tech Qual Terminals FALSE TA ADDITION 2 Reference: HCO B 24 Oct 71 False TA HCO B 12 Nov 71 False TA Addition C/S Series 53 HI-LO TA Assessment Int Ext Correction List There is an infinity of wrong ways to get a pc to read between 2.0 and 3.0 on an E-Meter. One method would be to shoot him. Dead bodies read between 2.0 and 3.0. Another way is to throw the trim knob off. Yet another wrong way is to use HAND CREAM to make the TA go lower and call "F/Ns" at 4.0 on an actual read. An auditor who is not very expert is apt to find strange ways to do things because the usual is beyond his skill. A GOOD auditor handles low and high TAs with HCO B 24 Oct 71 and Addition 12 Nov 71 and this HCO B "False TA", C/S Series 53 and the Hi-Lo TA Assessment. ORIZATION RD and too big or too small cans. The commonest sources of low TA are overwhelming auditor TRs or wet sweaty hands. Subject is not open to experimentation. If a pc's TA is low or high and you don't correct it with the usual remedies mentioned above, the pc goes into the soup. GOOD AUDITORS KNOW THEIR TECH AND USE IT TO REMEDY HIGH AND LOW TAs. GOOD AUDITORS DO HONEST WORKSHEETS AND HONEST AUDITING. BE A GOOD AUDITOR. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:ne.rd Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 24  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=16/2/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  C/S Series 74 TALKING THE TA DOWN MODIFIED   Remimeo All Tech Terminals All Auditors Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 16 FEBRUARY 1972 Remimeo All Tech Terminals C/S Series 74 All Auditors Franchise TALKING THE TA DOWN MODIFIED The expertise of talking the TA down should be preserved. It is a skill. But we have had high and low TAs solved for nearly a year and don't have to talk them down anymore as a constant action. Auditors SHOULD know how to do it, and then use it as a rare action. The right way to handle a high TA is to: Do HCO B 24 Oct 71, HCO B 12 Nov 71, HCO B 15 Feb 72, each named FALSE TA if it has not been done by the auditor on the pc. THEN if TA is high don't talk it down or do unusual solutions, do a C/S Series 53 or a Hi-Lo TA Assessment and handle. The Int-Ext Correction List is done as indicated and so is the Word Clearing Correction List. As far as a C/S is concerned, when the pc's TA is seen to be high at session start, he should order as follows: "Check as per False TA HCO Bs" then when that is done he orders "C/S Series 53 Assess and return to me". Or "Hi-Lo TA Assessment and return to me". He then rapidly C/Ses the required actions. He should have a standing order with all his auditors: IF TA IS HIGH OR LOW AT SESSION START DO NOT CONTINUE THE SESSION BUT SEND FOR A C/S. An auditor should not in fact talk a TA down, we know now, as he may be auditing over an Out Interiorization Rundown, either not done or botched. It therefore saves time if other auditing is not done when the TA is high. In general practice it will now be considered standard for an auditor, Dianetic or upper class, to not start a session over a high TA but to call for a C/S. And where there is no C/S it will be considered standard for an auditor, seeing a high TA, to at once do a C/S 53 Method 5 (assessing it all), and then handling. THERE ARE EXACT REASONS FOR A TA BEING HIGH AND THESE TODAY ARE EASILY HANDLED. There is no need to talk a TA down. It is faster to directly locate the reason it is up. Smoothly handling such situations is the mark of an expert. LRH:ne.bh L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1972 Founder by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 25  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=18/2/72 Volnum=0 Issue=1 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  FALSE TA ADDITION 3   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 18 FEBRUARY 1972 Issue I Remimeo FALSE TA ADDITION 3 (There are now four false TA HCO Bs including this one. These were issued as more data was uncovered.) HCO B 24 Oct 71 False TA HCO B 12 Nov 71 False TA Addition HCO B 15 Feb 72 False TA Addition 2 and this one HCO B 18 Feb 72 False TA Addition 3 A meter is a meter. Meters are used to measure water, natural gas, and many other things. An E meter is used to measure a pc. If you rig a meter up so as to falsify its reads you get a wrong result. You could rig up a water meter so it read that twice as much water had flowed and then sit around and wonder all week why the swimming pool never filled up. The ACCURACY of a meter depends upon its being honestly set up and honestly used. The HONESTY of the auditor determines his results. The whole field of psychotherapy was dishonest from the days of witch doctors to psychiatry. Falsified data came from lack of knowledge of the mind. This made its practitioners DISHONEST. We do not and must not follow that fatal road. The technology we have WORKS to definite positive predictable results. Results are obtained if the auditor has honestly studied and understood his materials and honestly applies them. Falsifying study leads to falsifying meters and this gives bad results on pcs. HONEST use of the materials and the meter gives an honest result. One who does not know his materials and who cannot do his drills then thinks he has to make a meter cheat. HONEST use of the meter by an HONEST auditor is the route to GOOD RESULTS. LOW TAs A bad practice has arisen to "beat" the low TA. This is to have the pc wipe his hands every few minutes to get the TA up above 2.0. 26 Not only does this distract the pc and yank him out of session, but it is by inference putting his attention on the meter, a thing a good auditor does NOT do in a formal session. The pc's attention must be on his own case in a session, not on the meter or his hands. An answer to low TA because of wet hands is foot plates. But the best answer is to get the pc up scale so he doesn't have perspiring hands. Overwhelming TRs is the commonest reason for low TAs. Not all the hand wiping in the world will cure poor TRs. Some auditors "spook" (leap off the road like a horse frightened by something blowing along) at the very thought of high or low TAs. This is because they haven't got the TRs to handle a low TA nor the tech to handle a high one. Making a meter read falsely low with cream or falsely high with talcum powder or wiping hands continually will not handle the pc's CASE. That is what the auditor is there to do, not make his session look good! The funniest one I have ever heard was a Solo auditor who had high TA trouble. So he used to fill up a bathtub with scalding water, fill the bathroom full of clouds of steam and then sit in the bath, holding onto his electrodes "Solo auditing". It gave him a lower TA but it sure didn't give him any case result. We maybe ought to have a contest as to who can come up with the most comical actual instances of falsifying meter reads. One "auditor" "solved it" by just calling F/Ns whenever she got tired of the pc regardless of TA position. After a year or more of this she saw the light and put herself in Ethics. The funny part is that her co-auditor had been doing the same thing on her! HONEST TA IS THE BEST POLICY. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:ne.rd Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 27  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=22/2/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Word Clearing Series 32R WORD CLEARING METHOD 4   URGENT -- IMPORTANT -- URGENT Vital for all Supervisors, Est-Os and Cramming Officers Remimeo All Supervisors Student's Hat HPCSC Mini Crse Super Crse Word Clearing Crse Est Off Crse Dept 13 Personnel  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 22 FEBRUARY 1972 (REVISED -- see HCO B 22 Feb 72RA Volume VIII -- 301) Remimeo (Revised 26 March 1972 All Supervisors Changes in this type style) Student's Hat HPCSC Word Clearing Series 32R Mini Crse Super Crse URGENT -- IMPORTANT -- URGENT Word Clearing Crse Vital for all Supervisors, Est Off Crse Est-Os and Cramming Officers Dept 13 Personnel WORD CLEARING METHOD 4 Tech and Admin Cramming Officers, Word Clearers and Course Supervisors use Method 4 Word Clearing when fishing for a misunderstood word. E.g. Cramming Officers use it to fish for misunderstood words concerning what the person is being crammed on. Word Clearers use it on Interns when the Intern needs a retrain or retread or even if the Intern is sent to Cramming. Course Supervisors use it in the Classroom CONTINUOUSLY ON Non-F/N STUDENTS or queries. The whole idea is the person requiring the Method 4 Word Clearing has a Cramming Order or is not an F/Ning student because of confusion as a result of a misunderstood word, as per Word Clearing Series 16R or omitted materials. Method 4 fishes for the misunderstood word, finds it, clears it, looks for another in the area until there are no more, at which point one should get F/N VGIs, then moves to another area, handles that -- eventually the misunderstoods that resulted in the Cramming Order or non-F/N student are handled. It requires no C/S OK for it to be done. Method 1 is not a prerequisite to Method 4. E-Meter Drill No. 21 is the E-Meter Drill to be drilled on Method 4. It's the method of fishing for a cognition. Requires proper application of TRs and metering. All Supervisors, Est-Os, and Dept 13 personnel to check out on, drill, and apply this tech AS IT IS VITAL STUDY TECH. METHOD 4 WORD CLEARING 1. Give person the cans, state, "I am not auditing you." 2. Ask while watching the meter: "Is there any part of what you're studying you did not fully get?" Trace the read. Use "fishing for a cog" drill (per HCO B 25 June 70, Iss III) if needed. If no read the question may be varied, e.g. "Is there any part of the materials you're studying you disagree with?" or "Is there any part of what you're studying you feel you could not apply?" or "In (material being checked) is there anything you didn't understand?" Let the student tell you briefly, Do NOT tell him the data. Verify that his study Pack is complete as the data might have been omitted. Also he might never have read the pack at all. If the data was missing do not go on to Step 3. See that he gets the complete pack and reads it. Then repeat Method 4. If the person just has not read the materials do not go on to 3 but get him to read the materials. Then repeat Method 4. 28 3. Get what it is then ask: "What word was misunderstood just before that?" Meter reads, Word Clearer finds the word, never accepting a confusion but finds the word giving the read (SF, F, LF, BD), gets it looked up in a dictionary and used in sentences until it can be seen from the sentences that the student now understands the word. This enables Method 4 to be done on a high or low TA as the word found doesn't have to be taken to F/N, just cleared to where it's obvious understanding has been attained on the word. If you did get an F/N on clearing the word, that's fine; now look for another. 4. Repeat 2 & 3 until the materials are fully cleared up and any and all misunderstoods or confusions handled. 5. If the action bogs when used in the classroom the student must be sent to Qual for handling and Supervisor to Cramming on TRs and metering and drilling on this procedure. The correct action is a WC CORRECTION LIST DONE ON THE STUDENT AND HANDLED. Of course if the above Question F/Ns on asking, there would be no misunderstoods on the material being checked, but the person is in Cramming, not an F/Ning student or whatever, so there obviously are misunderstood words to be found and handled. Look at HCO PL 16 Feb 72 "The Purpose of the Dept of Personnel Enhancement". It says this Dept "reaches and looks for business all over the org and brings it in". So someone with stats down -- student or post stats, confusion about what to do, overloaded, can't seem to handle it, how do you do this, etc, etc, are all indicators of misunderstood words as the person is saying confusion, confusion. Well, underneath the confusion is a misunderstood word just as Word Clearing 16R says. Method 4 Word Clearing is what is used in doing and achieving the purpose of the Dept of Personnel Enhancement, HCO PL 16 Feb 72. One of the ways the Word Clearers in this Dept do the job is using Method 4 Word Clearing. METHOD 4 IS USED BY COURSE SUPERVISORS TO HANDLE ALL STUDENT QUERIES ABOUT CONTENTS OF COURSE MATERIALS. The reason students ask questions about "What is meant" is because of omitted pack materials from their checksheet, failure to read what they have OR BECAUSE OF A MISUNDERSTOOD WORD JUST BEFORE THEY GOT CONFUSED. The Super has to know only where the materials are and BE SMART ENOUGH TO DO METHOD 4 INSTEAD OF GIVING THE STUDENT ALTER-ISED ANSWERS THAT STOP SCIENTOLOGY WORKING. Word Clearing, especially Method 4, is how to get in HIGH CRIME HCO PL 7 Feb 1965, Reissued 15 June 70, "KEEPING SCIENTOLOGY WORKING". SUCCESSFUL COURSE SUPERVISION AND SUCCESSFUL CRAMMING REQUIRE THIS ACTION BE FULLY KNOWN AND U - S - E - D. **K*E*E*P** **S*C*I*E*N*T*O*L*O*G*Y** **W*O*R*K*I*N*G** LRH:sb.bh Copyright $c 1972 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard Founder ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 29  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=24/2/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  C/S Series 71A WORD CLEARING OCAs   Remimeo Div 6 Personnel Tech Personnel Qual Personnel  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 24 FEBRUARY 1972 Remimeo Div 6 Personnel Tech Personnel C/S Series 71A Qual Personnel WORD CLEARING OCAs An illegal practice has been uncovered in which the words on the Oxford Capacity Analysis, American Personality Analysis and other tests have been word cleared by testers and Directors of Processing. Example: Pc does an OCA (or any test) that shows a state of case in July. He gets auditing. He takes another test that shows what the auditing did by August. If somewhere along this line a test I/C or D of P word clears him on the test, the test will change. Entering this variable wipes out any possibility of establishing what the auditing did for the case. Example: If a child is measured as to height and then fed certain foods to see if he will grow and then someone changes or stretches the tape by which he was measured, you can't find out if the food did any good. In science this is known as holding a constant. We don't give a hoot in hell if the pc understands the test or not. The next time he takes it he'll probably have the same misunderstoods but he'll have a change of opinion or even have a new cleverness or better memory and the test will change. Therefore none of these things may ever be done: 1. Never tell the pc the right answers to a test. 2. Never tell a pc to look up words on a test he doesn't understand. 3. Never word clear the question sheet for a pc on any test. 4. Never answer a pc's question as to what a question means. DO THESE THINGS A. Be sure any test person grasps this HCO B fully so he knows what a test is and why we test people. B. Never let a person who falsely reports routinely near a test line. C. Safeguard test answer sheets from being known or seen by unauthorized personnel. D. Use 2nd test and 3rd test question sheets, each different from the 1st one. (Tests are issued this way.) E. Give other tests (Aptitude or OTIS etc) to compare with the second or third OCA or APA if it is in doubt to see if the OCA has been "word cleared" or falsified. F. Groove in Examiners: Give a meter check on ALL ATTESTS at the Examiner. "Do you have any doubts or reservations concerning attesting to (whatever the attest is)?" Note any INSTANT read (a latent surge can occur as a protest). This question is asked before the question asking him if he wants to attest. E.g. "Do 30 you have any doubts or reservations concerning attesting to Word Clearing Method 1 complete?" No instant read. Then ask the attest question "Would you like to attest to _______?" Never let an Examiner permit any attest or pass to even be asked for if the meter tone arm is high or low or not F/Ning. If an INSTANT read is gotten on the first question above, the Examiner does not ask the second question, and sends the folder back to the C/S. G. Require a meter check at Success with the TA position and needle behavior noted on the Success form. Those with high or low TA and/or not F/Ning are not valid success stories. The success person makes the meter check after the story is written, notes it without pc seeing it and smiles and acks. He does not refuse the story as it will ARC Break the pc. But he must call it to the attention of the Dist Sec and Qual Sec that a false attestation and poor result came from Div IV and it must be taken off Div IV's stat. H. Both Examiner and Success must know of the False TA HCO Bs so they don't put the pc on wrong cans or use cans when the auditor used footplates. This safeguards our test line. The test line is a check on C/S and auditing quality. We are not trying to find out if Dianetics and Scientology work. We know that. We are trying to find out by test, Examiner and Success if it is being properly taught and applied in Div IV and Dept of Pers Enhancement. HONESTY is a primary requirement on test lines. PR types that falsify to attain status or seem good fellows need not apply for these posts and shouldn't be on them. THE PC OR STUDENT DEEP DOWN KNOWS WHETHER HE HAS MADE IT OR NOT. If you or tests tell him he's made it when he hasn't he will get a false opinion of you and doubt you. If you tell him he hasn't made it when he has he will get a false opinion of you. He will think you don't know your business and blow. SANITY is basically HONESTY and TRUTH. When false data or altered data is entered this is ABERRATION. So be honest and run a sane D of P, Examiner, Success and TEST line. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:ne.rd Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 31  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=26/2/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Word Clearing Series 15R  Type = 11 iDate=21/8/71 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 26 FEBRUARY 1972 Remimeo Word Clearing Series 15R (Cancels HCO B 21 Aug 71, the original WC Series 15 by a Testing personnel) Reference HCO B 19 Dec 71, C/S Series 71, "D of P Operates by OCAs" HCO B 24 Feb 72, C/S Series 71 Additional WORD CLEARING ANY WORDS ON ANY TEST AT ANY TIME IS A HIGH CRIME. It suppresses tech results and obscures them. The whole of HCO B 24 Feb 72, C/S Series 71A, explains fully why one never word clears tests or even tells a person being tested to use a dictionary. FOREIGN LANGUAGE PERSONS When testing persons who speak a different language than that in which the test is written, GET A TRANSLATED TEST INTO THEIR LANGUAGE OR TRANSLATE THE TEST WITHOUT ANY WORD CLEARING. MIS Us ON TESTS Where a person has a misunderstood word on a test, it usually remains misunderstood on the second test. Thus the test remains VALID as nothing has changed in it. If the person's IQ rises during processing he may very well also figure out the misunderstood word now on the second test and improve the graph. But that is a valid PROCESSING result, not a false one introduced by clearing test words. SUMMARY Auditing works when properly done and it does not need a side action of word clearing a test to better the graph. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:ne.rd Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 32  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=29/2/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=1 rDate=23/11/73 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  FALSE TA CHECKLIST   Remimeo Tech & Qual All Levels All Auditors All Tech Checksheets  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 29 FEBRUARY 1972R (REVISED -- see HCO B 29 Feb 72RA Volume VIII -- 417) Remimeo REVISED 23 NOVEMBER 1973 Tech & Qual All Levels All Auditors All Tech Checksheets FALSE TA CHECKLIST Ref: HCO B 24 Oct 71 False TA HCO B 12 Nov 71 False TA Addition HCO B 15 Feb 72 False TA Addition 2 HCO B 18 Feb 72 False TA Addition 3 HCO B 24 Jan 73 II Examiner and False TA HCO B 24 Nov 73 C/S 53RF HCO B 23 Nov 73 Dry and Wet Hands Make False TA The following are the items to be checked by an auditor on any pc. It need only be done once unless the check itself is suspected false, or if conditions of the pc's hands, etc change. The checklist is kept in the pc folder and is entered on the folder summary as an action done. The value of operating with correct can size should not be underestimated, the reference HCO Bs state why. The auditor signs and answers the following points on the checklist, and gets answers from the pc where needed. R-Factor to pc: "We are going to check the cans and adjust them to get the best accuracy." 1. Is the meter charged fully? _______ 2. Is the meter trimmed correctly? _______ 3. Are the leads connected to the meter and cans? _______ 4. Are the cans rusty? _______ 5. Are pc's hands excessively dry requiring vanishing cream? _______ 6. Are the pc's hands excessively wet requiring powder? _______ 7. The pc is NOT being told continually to wipe his hands? _______ 8. The pc's grip on the cans is NOT being continually checked by the auditor in a way that interrupts the pc? _______ 9. TA position on large cans? Size approx 4 7/8 inches by 2 5/8 inches or 12 1/2 cm by 7 cm _______ 10. TA position on medium cans? Size approx 3 3/4 inches by 2 1/8 inches or 9 cm by 5 cm _______ 34 11. TA position on small cans? Size approx 2 inches by 1 3/16 inches or 5 cm by 3 cm _______ 12. Are the cans too large for pc? _______ 13. Are the cans too small for pc? _______ 14. Are the cans just right in size? _______ 15. Are the cans cold? _______ 16. Are the pc's hands dry or calloused? _______ 17. Does the pc have arthritic hands? _______ 18. TA position on foot plates? _______ (Foot plates are used and TA checked on them when the answer to 16 & 17 is affirmative.) 19. Are the pc's feet calloused or excessively wet or dry? _______ 20. Does the pc loosen his grip on the cans? _______ 21. Check the pc's grip, does he hold the cans correctly? (See E-Meter Drill 5.) _______ 22a. Is the pc well slept? _______ 23. Is the pc cold? _______ 23a. Is the pc hungry? _______ 24. Is it too late at night? _______ 25. Is auditing being done not in the pc's normal regular awake hours? _______ 26. Are there rings on the pc's hands? _______ 27. Is the pc wearing tight shoes? _______ 28. Is the pc wearing tight clothes? _______ 29. Is it actually chronic High or Low TA case condition? _______ 30. Has the pc gone into despair over his TA? _______ The handling of high or low TA after checking these points is by C/S 53RF, Short Hi-Lo TA Assessment C/S. The way to be sure of a C/S 53RF or Hi-Lo TA list is by continued assessment and handling of these lists until an F/N on assessment is gotten. So standard tech handles the high and low TA. The C/S Series gives more data on the subject. Compiled by Flag XIIs for Training & Services Bureau LRH:BL:JW:clb.rd Copyright $c 1972, 1973 Revised by by L. Ron Hubbard L. RON HUBBARD ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Founder 35  Compiled by Flag XIIs for Training & Services Bureau Revised by L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 21 iDate=13/3/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Establishment Officer Series 5 PRODUCTION AND ESTABLISHMENT ORDERS AND PRODUCTS   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 13 MARCH 1972 Remimeo Establishment Officer Series 5 PRODUCTION AND ESTABLISHMENT ORDERS AND PRODUCTS The situation one often finds in an org, after one has, to some degree, conquered Dev-T, is that PEOPLE REQUIRE ORDERS. For years I wondered why this was so. Well, I found it. WHEN PEOPLE DO NOT CLEARLY KNOW WHAT THEIR PRODUCTS ARE THEY REQUIRE CONSTANT ORDERS. To the Establishment Officer, this reflects most visibly in trying to get Program targets DONE. Some people have to be ordered and ordered and ordered and threatened and howled at. Then, in a bewildered way, they do a target, sometimes half, sometimes nearly all. Behind this apparent blankness lies an omitted datum. When they're like that they don't know what their product is or what it adds up to. Or they think it's something else or should be. That blankness can invite overts. It is very seldom that malice or resentment or refusal to work lies behind the inaction. People are seldom that way. They usually just don't understand what's wanted or why. Because they don't know what a PRODUCT is! A whole Ad Council of a downstat org was unable even to define the word. They had required orders, orders, orders and even then didn't carry them out. HAT SURVEY FOR ORDERS A staff member who requires orders may also think that any order is a policy and lasts forever. If you look into hats you will even find casual "close the door" type of orders, given on one occasion to fit one circumstance, are converted over into STANDING (continual) ORDERS that forever keep a certain door closed. An Est O surveying the hats of a unit may very well find all manner of such oddities. It is a standard Est O action to survey hats. In hats you will find despatches giving specific orders or quoted remarks preserved instead of notes on what one has to know to produce a product. In auditors' hats, directions for 1 specific pc in 1960, never published and from no tape or correct source, held onto like death like it was to be applied to every pc in the world! A dishwashing hat may have orders in it but not how to wash dishes rapidly and well. This is all a symptom of a unit or activity that does not know what its products are. 37 DISESTABLISHMENT Where you find lots of orders kicking around, you will also find disestablishment by by-pass, command channels not held and staff members like to take their orders from anyone but those in authority -- any passerby could give them orders. This is rampant where an executive has not been well on post. By counting such orders up and seeing who they are from one can determine the unhattedness of staff, their org bd weaknesses and principally their lack of knowledge of their products. HATTING FOR PRODUCT If an Est O is to hat so as to get the staff member to get his product out, then the Est O has to know how to clear up "products". Now an Est O is an Establishment Officer? There are product officers. The Product of an Est O is the Establishment. Then what is he doing with Products? Well, if he doesn't hat so staff members get out Products then the org will be a turmoil, unhappy and downstat. Production is the basis of morale. Hattedness is a basic of 3rd Dynamic sanity. But if you don't HAT SO AS TO GET THE STAFF MEMBER YOU ARE HATTING PRODUCING YOU WILL HAT AND HAT AND IT WILL ALL BE IN VAIN. The person won't stay hatted unless he is hatted so as to be able to produce. The Product Officer should be working to get the products out. So if you don't hat for the product then the staff member will be torn between two sets of orders, the Est O's and the Product Officer's. Only when you hat to get product will you get agreement with product officers. If you are in disagreement with product officers, then the Est O is not hatting to get production. RIGHT WAY TO There is a right direction to hat. All others are incorrect. 1. CLEAR UP WHAT THE PRODUCT IS FOR THE POST. AND HAT FROM THERE. 2. HAT FROM THE TOP OF THE DIVISION (OR ORG) DOWN. These are the two right directions. All other directions are wrong. These two data are so important that the failure of an Est O can often be traced to violation of them. You can have a senior Exec going almost livid, resisting being hatted unless you hat by 1st establishing what the product is. If PRODUCT is first addressed and cleaned up then you can also hat from the top down. If this is not done, the staff will not know where they are going or why and you will get silly unusual situations like "All right. So you're the Establishment Officer. Well, I give up. The division can have 2 1/2 hours a day Establishment time and then get the hell out of here so some work can be done... !" "Man, you got these people all tied up, stats are down! Can't you understand...." Well, if you don't do one and two above you'll run into the most unusual messes and "solutions" you ever heard of, go sailing off policy and as an Est O wind up at your desk doing Admin instead of getting your job done in the Division. And an Est O who is not on his feet working in the Division is worth very little to anyone. So see where the basic errors lead and Hat on Product before doing anything else and Hat from the top down. 38 STEPS TO CLEAR "PRODUCT" This is a general rundown of the sequence by which Product is cleared and re-cleared and re-cleared again. This can be checklisted for any Exec or staff member and should be with name and date and kept in the person's " Est O file folder" for eventual handing to his new Est O when the Person is transferred out of the division or in Personnel Files if he goes elsewhere. 1. Clear the word PRODUCT. _______ 2. Get what the Product or Products of the Post should be. Get it or any number of Products he has fully fully stated, not brushed off. _______ 3. Clear up the subject of Exchange. (See HCO PL 27 Nov 71 Exec Series 3 and HCO PL 3 Dec 71 Exec Series 4.) _______ 4. Exchange of the Product Internal in the org. For what valuable? _______ 5. Exchange External of the valuable with another group or public. For what valuable? (Person must come to F/N VGIs on these above actions before Proceeding or he goes to an auditor to get his mis Us and out ruds very fully handled.) _______ 6. Does he want the product? Clean this up fully to F/N VGIs or yourself get E/S to F/N or get an auditor to unsnarl this. _______ 7. Can he get the products (in 2 above) out? How will he? What's he need to know? Get him fully settled on this point. _______ 8. Will it be in volume? What volume? Is that enough to bother with or will it have to be a greater volume? Or is he being optimistic? What's real? What's viable? _______ 9. What quality is necessary? What would he have to do to attain that? To attain it in volume? _______ 10. Can he get others to want the product or products (as in 2 above)? What would he have to do to do this? _______ 11. How do his products fit into the unit or section or department or division or the org? Get this all traced. _______ 12. Now trace the blocks or barriers he may believe are on this line. Get what HE can do about these. _______ 13. What does he have to have to get his product out? (Alert for unreasonable have to have before he can do blocks.) _______ 14. Now doed he feel he can get his product or products out? _______ Signature of Est O or Clearer. NOW he really can be hatted. BRUSH-OFF Quickie handling is a very very bad fault. "Quickie" means a brush-off "lick and a promise" like wiping the windshield on the driver's side when really one would have to work at it to get a whole clean car. So don't "quickie" Product. If this is poorly done on them there goes the old balloon. Hatting won't be possible. Orders will have to be poured in on this terminal. Dev-T will generate. Overt products will occur, not good ones. And it won't be worthwhile. 39 DISAGREEMENT There can be a lot of disagreement amongst Product Officers and Est Os on what Products are to be hammered out. In such a case, or in any case, one can get a Disagreements Check done in Dept of Personnel Enhancement (who should look up how to do one). This is a somewhat extreme way to settle an argument and should only be a "when all else fails". It is best to take the whole product pattern of the org apart with the person, STARTING FROM THE BIGGEST PRODUCT OF THE ORG AND WORKING BACK TO THE PERSON'S PRODUCT. Almost always there will be an outpoint in reasoning. An Exec who only wants GI can be a trial as he is violating EXCHANGE. As an org is paid usually before it delivers, it is easy to get the org in trouble by backlogs or bad repute for non-delivery. An org that has credit payments due it that aren't paid maybe didn't deliver. But Div III may soften up collections for some reason like that and then where would the org be? Vol 0 of the OEC Course gives an excellent background of how a basic org works. As one goes to higher orgs, lower orgs are depended upon to continue to flow upward to them. (See HCO PL 9 Mar 72, Issue I, Finance Series II, "Income Flows and Pools".) A study of Vol 0 OEC and a full understanding of its basic flows and adapting these to higher orgs will unsnarl a lot of odd ideas about product. The Est O has to be very clear on these points or he could mis-hat a person. Usually however this is very obvious. PRODUCT OFFICERS Heads of Orgs and divisions have had to organize so long they get stuck in it. They will try to order the Est O. This comes about because they do not know their products or the Est O is not following 1 and 2 above and does not know his own product. The Product Officer may try to treat the Est O as a sort of "organizing officer" or a "program officer" if A. The Est O is not hatting to get production. B. The Product Officer is not cleared on Product. So it comes back to the 1 and 2 first mentioned. You can look over it now and see that if one is not doing these two things, Dev-T, non-viability and orders will occur. So where you have Dev-T, down stats and orders flying around you know one thing that will resolve it: SOMETHING WILL HAVE TO BE IRONED OUT ABOUT PRODUCT. When it all looks impossible, go to this point and get to work on 1 & 2. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:ne.rd Founder Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [This HCO PL is modified by HCO PL 9 May 1974, Prod-Org, Esto and Older Systems Reconciled, which is in the Management Series 1970-1974, Page 438.] 40  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 21 iDate=16/3/72 Volnum=0 Issue=5 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  WHAT IS A COURSE HIGH CRIME   HIGH CRIME Remimeo Cse Supers Cse Super Checksheets LRH Comm to Enforce  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 16 MARCH 1972 Issue V Remimeo Cse Supers Cse Super Checksheets HIGH CRIME LRH Comm to Enforce WHAT IS A COURSE HIGH CRIME The amendment HCO PL 26 Jan 72 What is a Course PL is CANCELLED. The Original WHAT IS A COURSE PL, HCO PL 16 Mar 71, is restored AS WRITTEN. The added script line in the 26 Jan 72 revision is cancelled as not written by myself and is a false datum. The incorrect line states "to be on the ball one should be oneself fully trained on the level one is supervising. It is by far preferable to be a Class VIII with full grasp of Standard Tech." This is an alter-is of Study Tech. Careful investigation has found that WHEN SUPERVISORS FAIL THEY FAIL BECAUSE OF IGNORANCE OF SCN STUDY TECH AND FAILURE TO USE IT. In Course Supervision it is OUT TECH to fail to know and USE Study Tech. If an auditor were to say, "I have to know all about minds but I don't have to know anything about TRs, Meters or processes," you would think he was as crazy as a psychiatrist! He would become so involved with the figure-figure of the patient he WOULD NOT KNOW HOW TO HANDLE HIM. A Super who does not know or use Study Tech as a tech and does not heavily apply it to get the student through is an OUT TECH Super. The real WHY of any failed or blowing students or students who cannot or do not apply the data is WHY: THE COURSE SUPERVISOR DOES NOT KNOW OR USE STUDY TECH BUT THINKS HE HAS TO KNOW THE SUBJECT TAUGHT SO HE CAN TEACH IT. Example: A Course Super standing staring at his Class. One half his students not using demo kits, one student listening to a tape and reading an HCO B at the same time but doping off, one third of the students boiling off. Challenged about this states, "But I don't know the materials they are studying." If a railway engineer were to say, "I have to know all the tech of building a railroad and not how to run this train," you'd think he was batty. If a housewife said, "I can't run my house because I have never taken a course on how to run my husband's business," you'd think she was crazy. 41 A Course Super who does not respect, know and USE Study Tech on his students is guilty of practicing OUT TECH. If an auditor did not know how to start and stop a session, how to read a meter, his TRs, his processes or handle a session he would have nothing but failed preclears. IN THE SAME FRAME OF REFERENCE, A COURSE SUPER WHO DOES NOT KNOW HOW TO START AND STOP A STUDENT, CLEAR WORDS, ENFORCE DEMOS AND DOES NOT GET STUDY TECH APPLIED CONTINUALLY WILL HAVE FAILED STUDENTS. A Course Super's primary tech is Study Tech and its application to a student. If he can keep that student on the rails and F/Ning and rapidly covering his materials he is doing the WHOLE JOB OF SUPERVISING. It is therefore a High Crime for a person to Supervise a Course who does not know, apply and continually use his Study Tech on every individual student. It is also a HIGH CRIME for a Director of Training or a Tech Sec or an Est O to have anyone supervising without FULL USE OF STUDY TECH. Just as it's a HIGH CRIME to continue to use HGC auditors who smash up pcs through non-use of Auditing Tech, it is a HIGH CRIME to continue to use Course Supervisors who do not know that Study Tech exists, that it is a tech and that it is the "tools of his trade" and who does not use it and thus smashes up students. The society knows nothing about Study Tech. It thinks a teacher "teaches the subject and must know the subject!" Thus it alter-ises the subject, almost never makes a competent person and routine school teaching is looked upon by Industry as a huge failure. All manner of unusual solutions are in progress in every country to remedy this inability of students to learn. WE MUST NOT CONTINUE TO INHERIT THE IDIOCY THAT A TEACHER ONLY HAS TO KNOW THE SUBJECT AND KNOW NOTHING ABOUT STUDY TECH. It is Study Tech that gets the student of any subject through. The thing that breaks the Super down is ignorance of just ONE point: A STUDENT WITH A MISUNDERSTOOD WORD WILL POUR OUT A TORRENT OF QUERIES ABOUT THE SUBJECT! The Super is a complete ignorant fool if he answers one of these questions. The Super's knowledge of the subject is not what is needed! If the Super knew and practiced Misunderstood Word tech he'd know that student has misunderstood words and he would find and handle. HE WOULD NOT ANSWER OR EVEN TRY TO ANSWER THOSE QUERIES. It would do NO good if he did. This query-happy student has passed by a Mis-U word! Such a student can get misemotional. He is upset. He thinks data is being denied him. He wants to blow. What kind of a Super is it that doesn't grab a meter and find the word? An SP? Or What? Just like an "auditor" is not an auditor who lets pcs blow without handling so is a Super no Super at all who cannot handle a student with Study Tech. So let's knock off the wog world inheritance and get on the ball and REALIZE STUDY TECH IS THE TECH A SUPER KNOWS AND USES. 42 Just because a Super was himself mistaught by old Mrs. Zilch in the third grade -- who knew arithmetic but not how to teach a subject -- is no reason he has to go on laying an egg in a Scientology classroom. A Course Super is a technician, a specialist in Study Tech. And just to help it out, IT IS A HIGH CRIME TO FAIL TO USE STUDY TECH IN A CLASSROOM. Any time a student blows or later fails to be able to apply his data, the Super who taught him will be Comm Eved for OUT TECH. We must have no blows and no failures. The product of a Super is a Graduate from his course who knows and can successfully apply the subject that was taught. This is his true stat. Points measure only quantity. The record of the individual student measures quality. The Exchange value of the student after a course (not his fee) measures viability. It may be a crazy planet. Course Supers don't have to teach crazy courses where Study Tech is not used. WHAT IS A COURSE is answered by one where the elements of the original HCO PL 16 Mar 71 are in use AND: Where Study Tech is in full and continual application to every student in that course! L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.rd Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 43  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 21 iDate=23/3/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Establishment Officer Series 11 FULL PRODUCT CLEARING LONG FORM   MUST BE DONE ON AN EST O BEFORE HE DOES IT ON STAFF. Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 23 MARCH 1972 Remimeo Establishment Officer Series 11 FULL PRODUCT CLEARING LONG FORM (Reference HCO P/L 13 Mar 72 Est O Series No. 5) MUST BE DONE ON AN EST O BEFORE HE DOES IT ON STAFF. If you ask some people what their product is, you usually get a DOINGNESS. There are three conditions of existence. They are BE, DO and HAVE. All products fall under HAVE. The oddities you will get instead of a proper product are many. Thus it is possible to "clear products" without any real result. PRODUCT CLEARING FORM ___________________________ ___________________________ Org Person's Name ___________________________ Date ___________________________ Post The 14 Points of Est O Series 5 are done in this fashion, with a meter used to check words. STEP ONE DO NOT TAKE FOR GRANTED THAT THE PERSON KNOWS WHAT "PRODUCT" MEANS. GET IT AND EVERY WORD IN THE DEFINITION LOOKED UP. (a) Clear the Word PRODUCT. Dictionaries give a variety of definitions. Make sure you get a useable definition that the person understands AND WHICH HE UNDERSTANDS ALL THE WORDS IN. He can be hung up on "that" or "is" in the definition itself believe it or not. _______ (b) Have the person USE the word PRODUCT 10 times in sentences of his own invention and use it correctly each time. _______ (c) Now clear up BE, DO, HAVE, the Conditions of Existence. People often think a BE is a product or a DO. It is always something someone can HAVE. Clear the words BE, DO, HAVE by dictionary, especially HAVE. _______ (d) Write these on a sheet of paper BE DO HAVE. Tell the person to name a product out in the world (a car, a book, a cured dog, etc). Put an arrow into the word DO if he gives you a "do", into BE if he 44 gives you a "be" instead of a HAVE. Mark HAVE with an arrow each time he gives a right HAVE product. When he can rapidly name a product that is something that one can HAVE, without a comm lag, go on to next step. _______ (e) Clear up this question on a meter Method 4 (see HCO B 22 Feb 72, Word Clearing Series 32, "Word Clearing Method 4"): "Have I used any word so far you did not understand?" Get it clean. _______ (f) Now give the person a copy of HCO P/L 29 October 70 Org Series 10. Have him read the policy letter. _______ (g) Clear by Method 4 Word Clearing this question: "Are there any words in the policy letter you did not understand?" Get it cleaned up. If there were any, have him reread the policy letter until he says he has it. _______ (h) Drill the pc on Products 1, 2, 3 and 4. Write: Product 1 Product 2 Product 3 Product 4 on a sheet of paper. Let him retain and consult the HCO P/L 29 Oct 70 Org Series 10. Put the point of your pen on one of the products (Product 1 or 2 or 3 or 4) and say, "Name a Product 1." "Name a Product 3." "Name a Product 4." "Name a Product 2." Do this until pc has it. Now take the P/L away from him and repeat the drill. When your Product 1, etc is all blacked up with ball-point spots and the person is quick at it, thank him. Tell him he has it and go on to next step. _______ STEP TWO (a) Look up the hat and org board of the post of the person being product cleared and get some idea of what the post's product would have to be to fit in with the rest of the scene. It won't necessarily be in former hat write-ups. What the post produces must be worked out. Write down what it possibly may be. _______ (b) Get the person to tell you what his post produces. Have him work the wording around until it is totally satisfactory to him and is not incorrect by Step 2 (a). Be very careful indeed that you don't get a wrong product or you could throw the whole line-up of the org out. Beware of "a high stat" or "a bonus" or "GI" as these are items received in Exchange, not the person's produced product. Once more resort to BE DO HAVE to be sure he is not giving a doingness. And point this out until he actually has a HAVE. Write down the product on the worksheet. _______ (c) Ask if there are any more products to the post. If the person is wearing several hats, he would have a product for each hat. List each hat and get the product of each hat written after it. _______ 45 (d) Now take the principal product of the post and see if it is really three products of different degrees or kinds. (Example: an auditor has [A] A well pc [one who has been gotten over a psychosomatic illness] [B] A person who is physically active and well and will continue to be well, and [C] A being with greatly increased abilities. A Super has [A] A trained student, [B] A Course graduate, [C] A person who successfully applies the skills taught.) (Note: The above are rough wordings.) The A, B, C you will notice fit roughly into (A) BE, (B) DO, (C) HAVE. If the person has trouble with this, write BE, DO, HAVE on the worksheet. _______ (e) Find out if the person has had these confused one with another or if he is trying for A when his product was C, or any other mix-up. See if he has to first get a BE, then a DO to finally achieve a HAVE. When he has all this straight he should cognite on what product he is going for on his post, with VGIs. _______ (f) Tell the person that's it for the step and verify the products with a Product Officer. (Be sure it's a Product Officer who has had his Product Clearing. If this is THE Product Officer of the org, see if it compares to the Valuable Final Products of an Org [see HCO P/L 8 Nov 73RA, revised 9 Mar 74, "The VFPs and GDSs of the Divisions of an Org"].) If the products are not all right check the person on a Meter for Mis Us and do steps 1 and 2 again. If okay, proceed to Step 3. _______ STEP THREE (a) Give the person HCO P/L 27 Nov 71, Executive Series No. 3 and HCO P/L 3 Dec 71 Executive Series 4. Have him read them. _______ (b) Return and do Method 4 on the P/Ls and clean up any Misunderstood Word. If these are found and looked up and used, then have the person read the P/Ls again. _______ (c) Now that the person has it, exchange objects with him. Have him now explain exchange until he sees clearly what it is. _______ STEP FOUR (a) Now write his product on the left-hand side of your worksheet and draw an arrow from it to the right: His Product -------------------------------> And one to the left below it <------------------------------- Have him tell you what, internally in the org, he could get in exchange for producing his product and getting it out. Have him clear up why he might not get that. _______ (b) Have him look at a worksheet picture: Overt Act ---------------------> Injury Injury <--------------------- Overt Act SELF No Product ---------------------> OTHERS Nothing <--------------------- Nothing as a cycle. Be sure he grasps that. _______ (c) Have him look at a worksheet picture: Overt Product ---------------------> Upset Upset <--------------------- Overt 46 And have him grasp that cycle. _______ (d) Now have him draw various such cycles having to do with the products he has been getting out. Such as: Bad product ---------------------> Dissatisfied Bad feelings <--------------------- Ethics But using various versions of products. Do this until he has it untangled and feels good. _______ (e) Have him write down his product on the left, arrow to the right, what comes back on the right and what occurs on the left. If he has this now, tell him that's fine. _______ STEP FIVE (All in Big Clay Demos) (a) Have him work out what theft is in terms of Exchange, and arrows. _______ (b) Have him show how his product contributes to the org's product. _______ (c) Have him work out how the org's product as relates to his division is then exchanged with society outside the org and Scn and what society exchanges back to the org. _______ (d) Have him work out how his product contributes to org's product outward and outside the org and Scn and then from the society outside back to the org and org back to him. This may have more than two vias each way. _______ (e) Have him work out the combined staff products into an org product and then out into the society and then the exchange back into the org and to CLOs and upper management and to org staff. _______ (f) When the Demos are all okay and BIG tell him that's fine and go on to next step. _______ STEP SIX (Metered) (a) Find out if person wants his product? (not the Exchange). If not find out who might suppress it? and E/S times. Who might invalidate it? and earlier times. 2wc it to F/N Cog VGIs. _______ (b) Establish now if the person wants his product. _______ (If bogs turn over to a C/S and auditor for ruds and completion.) STEP SEVEN (Metered) (a) Can the person get his product out? _______ (b) Handle by 2wc E/S to F/N. _______ STEP EIGHT (Metered) (a) What will his product be in volume? Is that enough to bother about or will it have to be in greater volume? What would be viable as to volume? 47 Clean up RUSHED or Failures. To F/N Cog VGIs. _______ STEP NINE (Metered) (a) What quality would be necessary? Get various degrees of quality stated. What would he have to do to attain that quality? What volume could he attain? What would he have to do to attain that? To F/N Cog VGIs. _______ STEP TEN (Metered) (a) Can he get others to want the products he put out? What would he have to do to attain this? _______ STEP ELEVEN (In BIG Clay) (This is a progressive Clay Demo added to at each step,) (a) How does his product or products fit into the framework of his section? Requires he work out the section product if his is not it. Then fit his to it. _______ (b) How does his product fit into the Department? Requires he work out the Department's product and fit his to it if his is not the Dept's product. _______ (c) How does his product fit into the Division's products? He will have to work out the Div's product or consult HCO P/L 8 Nov 73RA, revised 9 Mar 74, "The VFPs and GDSs of the Divisions of an Org". _______ (d) How does the Division's Product exchange with the Public? And for what? _______ (e) What happens to the org on this exchange? _______ STEP TWELVE (In Big Clay) (a) What blocks might he encounter in getting out his product? _______ (b) What can HE do about these? _______ STEP THIRTEEN (2 wc) (a) What does he have to have to get his product out? (Beware of too much have before he can do. Get him to cut it back so he is more causative.) _______ STEP FOURTEEN (Written by Pc) (a) What is his product on the 1st Dynamic -- self? How does it fit in with what he is doing? _______ 48 (b) What is his product on the 2nd Dynamic -- family and sex? How does it fit in with what he is doing? _______ (c) What is his product on the 3rd Dynamic -- Groups? How does it fit in with what he is doing? _______ (d) What is his product on the 4th Dynamic -- Mankind? How does it fit in with what he is doing? _______ (e) What is his product on the 5th Dynamic -- animal and vegetable kingdom? How does it fit in with what he is doing? _______ (f) What is his product on the 6th Dynamic -- the Universe of Matter, Energy, Space and Time? How does it fit in with what he is doing? _______ (g) What is his product on the 7th Dynamic -- beings as spirits -- thetans? How does it fit in with what he is doing? _______ (h) What is his product on the 8th Dynamic -- God or the Infinite or religion? How does it fit in with what he is doing? _______ (i) What is his post Product? _______ (j) Can he get it out now? _______ Est O or Product Clearer Note this long form has to be run on leading executives and eventually on all staff. The short form in Est O Series 5, 14 points, serves as a rapid action. Where there is any hang-up on the short form, send the person to an auditor. Where there is a hang-up on the long form, send the person to an auditor. The auditing action is to fly ruds on the RD and assess any key words the pc is upset about and do an 18 button prepcheck carrying each prepcheck button to F/N. TA Where the TA is already high do not attempt the short or long form. Where the person turns on a rockslam check for rings on the hands. If so, remove rings. Note if R/S continues. In either case the person should be programmed for TA trouble with C/S 53RRR and handled, and then given a GF40RR Method 3 (F/Ning each Question that reads) and then running the engrams with drugs run first. Product Clearing is best done after Word Clearing No. 1 is successfully done. An Est O who can use a meter and Method 4 WCing and knows Clay Demoing can do it. HCO Bulletins are planned to be issued on this RD to handle it on rough ones or repair it as needed in the hands of an expert auditor. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mes.rd Founder Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [This HCO PL is modified by HCO PL 9 May 1974, Prod-Org, Esto and Older Systems Reconciled, which is in the Management Series 1970-1974, Page 438.] 49  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=20/11/71 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=24/3/72 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  HAS SPECIALIST AND ESTABLISHMENT OFFICER AUDITING PROGRAM (Revised) (This Program has been revised to improve results and stability.)   Remimeo Div IV HGC Div V Dept 13  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 20 NOVEMBER 1971 (Revises HCO BULLETIN OF 20 AUGUST 1971 ISSUE I) Remimeo Div IV HGC Div V Dept 13 Revised 24 MARCH 1972 (With W/Clearing Corrn List and Study Corrn List Added) HAS SPECIALIST AND ESTABLISHMENT OFFICER AUDITING PROGRAM (Revised) (Reference HCO PL 20 Aug 71, Issue I, "HAS TROUBLES") (This Program has been revised to improve results and stability.) The HAS (HCO Area Secretary), any HCO Executive Secretary, HCO Cope Officer, HCO Org Officer, Tech Establishment Officer, any HAS Deputy OR any Executive or Divisional Head or staff member who shows a tendency to transfer or unstabilize staff members or who fails to hat others, must be processed especially in order to be totally stable on post. The HAS and Establishment Officers are peculiarly subject to efforts to unstabilize them. These require the Program to be done in any case whether stable or not. Executives or staff members who show signs of obsessive transfer of the staff or org are also greatly benefited. The HAS Specialist Rundown consists of processes which increase the ability to hold a position. THE RUNDOWN MAY ONLY BE DONE WHEN NO EXISTING AUDITING PROGRAM IS ONLY PARTIALLY DONE. COMPLETE THE EXISTING CYCLE FIRST. HAS RUNDOWN Action 1. C/S Series 53RRR Handle _______ Action 2. Word Clearing Corrn List Handle _______ Action 3. Study Corrn List Handle _______ Action 4. GFM5 Handle _______ Action 5. TR Course to Full EP _______ Action 6. Admin TRs or Upper Indoc if Admin TRs not available _______ Action 7. GF40XRR Method 3 _______ Action 8. C/S Series 54 and Handle (Includes GF 40 Engrams) _______ 50 Action 9. L3B on Early Dn 1-80 to F/N List _______ Action 10. PTS RD Steps A, B, C, D WARNING: RUN ONLY IF REQUIRED PER READS IN 3 OR 7 ABOVE. _______ Action 11. CCHs (Run or verify and rehab) _______ Action 12. Hold It Still. (HCO B 23 July 71, Page 2 Version B.) (Run or verify and rehab.) _______ Action 13. Start-Change-Stop (SCS) on an object. (Run or verify and rehab.) _______ Action 14. Start-Change-Stop. (Run or verify and rehab.) _______ Action 15. Op Pro By Dup (Book and Bottle). (Run or verify and rehab.) _______ Action 16. Effort Processing. _______ Action 17. Rising Scale. _______ Action 18. Verify Int RD, run if not run in No. 1 or date to blow locate to blow if not done. _______ Action 19. Fly all ruds and overts recently. _______ Action 20. Program for further auditing in own org on Grade Chart. _______ Caution: Do not repeat Processes already done on the pc. PACK: HCO B 20 Nov 71 (Revising HCO B 20 Aug 71, Issue II, Checklist) is auditor's checksheet for the above, giving all materials. It is done by Tr and Serv Aide. Packs can be locally assembled or procured from CLO A/CS-2. Most of these materials occur in Level I PABs SHSBC. L. RUN HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.sb.mes.rd Copyright $c 1971, 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [The 24 March 1972 revision added Actions 2, 3, 9 and 10, and added "and Establishment Officer" to the title.] 51  L. RUN HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=27/3/72 Volnum=0 Issue=2 Rev=1 rDate=3/12/74 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  COURSE SUPERVISOR CORRECTION LIST STUDY CORR LIST 2R   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 27 MARCH 1972R Issue II REVISED 3 DECEMBER 1974 Remimeo COURSE SUPERVISOR CORRECTION LIST STUDY CORR LIST 2R (Reference LRH ED 174 INT) The Supervisor Correction List is designed to help locate the individual reasons a supervisor has for not fully applying the study tech in supervision. The list is normally done in Qual but may also be done by a D/T on his supervisors. It merely assists a D/T or Qual Personnel in finding why the supervisor is not using study tech. The list is assessed Method Five and handled as indicated. A second bracket in the handling shows the further actions to be done after the list has been F/Ned on all reading items. NAME: ____________________________________ DATE: ______________________________ AUDITOR: _________________________________ 0. DID YOU GO THROUGH EACH STUDY TAPE ONCE CLEARING EVERY DEFINITION OF EACH WORD AND THIRD TIME IF THERE WERE ANY MISUNDERSTOOD WORDS ON THE SECOND AND DID YOU DO THE SAME ON THE STUDENT HAT? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) (Pgm for PRD or PRD retread.) 00. DO YOU HAVE A REASON YOU ARE NOT USING THE STUDY TECH? _______ (L&N "What reason do you have for not using study tech?") (Pgm for PRD retread or PRD after Cramming on the Why.) 000. HAS A WRONG WHY BEEN FOUND FOR YOUR NOT USING STUDY TECH? _______ (L4BR and handle. Find the right Why.) (Pgm for PRD retread or PRD after Cramming on the Why.) 0000. HAVE YOU DONE ALL THESE THINGS ALREADY AND STILL HAVE TROUBLE WITH STUDY? _______ (Do Student Rehabilitation List HCO B 15 Nov 74.) 00000. HASN'T A WORD CLEARING CORRECTION LIST BEEN DONE? _______ (Get it done.) 1. DO YOU HAVE AN ARC BREAK ON COURSE? _______ (Find what, ARCU CDEINR E/S to F/N.) 2. DO YOU HAVE PROBLEMS WITH SUPERVISION? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 52 3. DO YOU HAVE OVERTS ON STUDENTS? _______ (Get them, E/S to F/N.) 4. DO YOU HAVE OVERTS ON STUDY? _______ (Get them, E/S to F/N.) 5. ARE YOU SUPERVISING OVER WITHHOLDS? _______ (Pull them, E/S to F/N.) 6. ARE YOU AFRAID OF BEING FOUND OUT? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 7. DID YOU FALSIFY YOUR STATS? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) (Get them corrected.) 8. HAVE YOU NEVER DONE A SUPERVISOR'S COURSE? _______ (Get the W/H off to F/N.) (Get person onto supervisor course.) 9. HAVE YOU NEVER STUDIED THE STUDY TECH? _______ (Get the W/H off to F/N.) (Get it studied.) 10. HAVE YOU NEVER LISTENED TO THE STUDY TAPES? _______ (Get the W/H off to F/N.) (Get them studied.) 11. DO YOU HAVE MISUNDERSTOODS ON THE STUDY MATERIALS? _______ (Method 4 word clear.) (And retread.) 12. DON'T YOU KNOW HOW TO SUPERVISE? _______ (Find out what areas he doesn't know. WC Method 4.) (And retread.) 13. DOING OTHER WORK IN CLASS TIME? _______ (Get the W/H off E/S to F/N.) 14. ARE YOU AFRAID OF CONSEQUENCES? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 15. ARE YOU AFRAID OF TEACHING THEM WRONG? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 16. HAS THE STUDY TECH NOT WORKED ON YOU? _______ (Find what didn't work, correct it to F/N and a win.) 17. DON'T YOU KNOW IF THE SUPERVISOR TECH WORKS? _______ (Find misunderstoods and handle.) 18. DO YOU THINK YOU SHOULD KNOW THE MATERIALS INSTEAD OF STUDY TECH? _______ (2wc E/S considerations to F/N.) (Find what study tech he didn't understand, word clear Method 4.) 19. ARE YOU UNABLE TO REFER STUDENTS TO THEIR MATERIALS? _______ (Find why and handle. E.g. no materials, materials out of order, thinks he has to know the materials instead of the study tech.) 20. ARE YOU GIVING VERBAL TECH? _______ (Get off the W/H E/S to F/N. Find out why he felt he had to do it and clean it up.) (Forbid it and make it an Ethics Offense.) 53 21. ARE YOU INTERPRETING BULLETINS? _______ (Get off the W/H E/S to F/N. Find out why he felt he had to do it and clean it up.) (Forbid it and make it an Ethics offense.) 22. DO YOU FAIL TO MAKE MATERIALS AVAILABLE? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) (Pgm for Vital Info R/D.) 23. DON'T YOU HAVE THE COURSE MATERIALS? _______ (Find out what he could do about that, 2wc to F/N.) 24. DON'T YOU KNOW HOW TO GET THE MATERIALS? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) (Hat on relevant materials.) 25. DON'T KNOW WORD CLEARING TECH? _______ (Get the W/H off to F/N.) (Find out if ever studied it in the first place. If not get it studied, if so clean up misunderstoods.) 26. NEVER USING M9? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 27. CAN'T USE A METER? _______ (Get the W/H off to F/N.) (Cram and drill on metering.) 28. USING NO STUDY LISTS? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 29. AFRAID OF DOING IT WRONG? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 30. TRs NOT GOOD ENOUGH? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) (Method 4 TRs HCO B, TRs including Admin TRs.) 31. INTERRUPTING STUDENTS WHO ARE F/Ning. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N. 3-way Help/3-way Failed Help.) 32. CAN'T CONFRONT STUDENTS? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) (2 hrs confronting full classroom of students.) 33. CAN'T CONFRONT A CLASSROOM? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) (2 hrs confronting classroom, reach and withdraw from a classroom.) 34. DON'T LIKE PEOPLE? _______ (O/W on people.) 35. DON'T LIKE STUDENTS? _______ (O/W on students.) 36. USING DURESS ON STUDENTS? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N. Find Why by L&N.) 37. HAD LOSSES ON HELPING STUDENTS? _______ (3-way Help, 3-way Failed Help.) 38. DON'T BELIEVE STUDENTS CAN BE HELPED? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 39. CONSIDER IT IS WRONG TO CONTROL STUDENTS? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) (Objective processes especially SCS.) 54 40. 3RD PARTYING STUDENTS? _______ (Handle as an overt E/S to F/N.) 41. OVERWHELMED BY LOTS OF STUDENTS? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) (2 hrs confront on classroom full of students.) 42. AFRAID THAT IF STUDENTS GRADUATED WOULD HAVE NO MORE STUDENTS? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 43. AFRAID STUDENTS WILL KNOW MORE THAN YOU DO? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 44. DON'T FEEL THE SUBJECT BEING SUPERVISED IS IMPORTANT? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 45. NEGLECTING STUDENTS WHO ARE BOGGED? _______ (2wc to find out why. Handle the out rud or confusion to F/N.) 46. THINKING CERTAIN STUDENTS ARE DOG STUDENTS AND SO NOT HELPING? _______ (Triple Ruds and Overts on students. 3 May PL if he hasn't had one. WC M4 on super materials.) 47. HAVE OUTNESSES IN OWN STUDY? _______ (Student Rehabilitation List.) 48. HAVE MISUNDERSTOODS ON STUDY TECH? _______ (Method 4.) (And retread.) 49. HAVE MISUNDERSTOODS ON SUPERVISOR MATERIALS? _______ (Method 4.) (And retread.) 50. DON'T KNOW THE PRODUCT OF A SUPERVISOR? _______ (Product R/D.) 51. WORKING FOR SOME OTHER PRODUCT? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 52. DON'T KNOW THE PRODUCT OF THE COURSE? _______ (Product R/D.) 53. DON'T KNOW HOW TO TELL WHEN THE PRODUCT IS ATTAINED? _______ (Product R/D.) 54. WORD CLEARING TECH DIDN'T WORK ON YOU? _______ (Word Clearing Correction List.) 55. DO YOU HAVE SOME OTHER IDEAS ON WHAT A SUPERVISOR SHOULD DO? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 56. WOULD YOU HAVE TO BE SOMEONE ELSE IN ORDER TO SUPERVISE? _______ (L&N Who else would you have to be to supervise?) 57. DO YOU HAVE FIXED IDEAS ON HOW TO SUPERVISE? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 55 58. SHOULD YOU REALLY BE DOING SOMETHING ELSE? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 59. DO YOU HAVE DISAGREEMENTS WITH THE STUDY TECH? _______ (Method 4 Word Clearing Tech.) 60. DO YOU HAVE DISAGREEMENTS WITH COURSE SUPERVISOR POLICY? _______ (2wc disagreements with course supervisor policy. 2wc agreements with course supervisor policy.) 61. ARE YOU TRYING TO BE SOMETHING ELSE? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 62. DON'T YOU REALLY WANT TO BE A SUPERVISOR? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 63. ARE YOU ON STAFF TO GET YOUR CASE HANDLED? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 64. SHOULDN'T YOU BE HERE? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 65. ARE YOU PHYSICALLY UNWELL? _______ (Find what wrong, 2wc E/S to F/N.) (Medical, etc.) 66. DO YOU GET UPSET BY STUDENT MISEMOTION? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) (Also TRs.) 67. DO YOU CONSIDER STUDENTS HAVE TO BE FORCED TO STUDY? _______ (2wc E/S considerations to F/N.) 68. HAVE YOU HAD LOSSES AS A SUPERVISOR? _______ (Find what supervisor couldn't handle, Method 4 word clear relevant materials.) 69. DO YOU LACK PATIENCE? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 70. DO YOU CONSIDER STUDENT'S ABILITY IS NATIVE AND CANNOT BE REGULATED BY STUDY TECH? _______ (2wc E/S considerations to F/N.) 71. DON'T YOU KNOW HOW TO HANDLE STUDENTS' QUESTIONS? _______ (Method 4 WC Series 32R.) (And drill.) 72. ARE YOU SUPERVISING FOR SOME OTHER PURPOSE? _______ (L&N What purpose do you have for supervising? R3R Triple if an E. Purp.) 73. CAN'T TELL WHEN STUDENT IS BOGGED OR NOT F/Ning? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) (TRs and obnosis drills and Tone Scale drills.) 74. CAN'T FIND WHY STUDENTS BOG? _______ (Method 4.) (And restudy study tapes, demo each reason for student bog with supervisor handling, drill.) 56 75. SOMEBODY SAID YOU DON'T KNOW HOW TO SUPERVISE? _______ (PTS Interview. Inval and Eval.) 76. HAVE YOU ENCOUNTERED A SUPPRESSIVE STUDENT? _______ (PTS Interview.) 77. IS SOMEBODY PREVENTING YOU FROM SUPERVISING? _______ (L&N Who is preventing you from supervising? Triple Ruds and Overts on the terminal.) 78. DO YOU HAVE TOO MANY STUDENTS TO SUPERVISE FULLY? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) (Also handle with Est-O if true.) 79. ARE YOU DOUBLE HATTED WITH ANOTHER POST? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) (Also handle with Tech O/O.) 80. ARE YOU GETTING CROSS ORDERS? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) (Handle with Tech O/O if true.) 81. ARE YOU EXPERIMENTING WITH STUDY METHODS? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 82. ARE SOME STUDENTS NOT WORTH SUPERVISING? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 83. DOES IT GIVE YOU MORE STATUS IF YOU ANSWER THE STUDENTS' QUESTIONS? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 84. ARE YOU TRYING TO BE IMPORTANT? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 85. ARE YOU TRYING TO BE INTERESTING? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 86. ARE YOU BEING TOLD TO DO SOMETHING ELSE? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) (Also hatting actions.) 87. ARE YOU TOO TIRED TO SUPERVISE? _______ (Find out why. 2wc E/S to F/N.) (Get person to get enough sleep.) 88. DON'T YOU BELIEVE THE STUDENT WILL MAKE IT? _______ (2wc E/S considerations to F/N.) 89. ARE SOME STUDENTS BOUND TO FAIL ANYWAY? _______ (2wc E/S considerations to F/N.) 90. IS IT AN OVERT TO MAKE SOMEBODY MORE KNOWLEDGEABLE? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) (Pgm for Vital Info R/D.) 91. WOULD IT MAKE YOU LESS POWERFUL IF OTHERS KNEW MORE? _______ (How? 2wc E/S to F/N.) (Pgm for EX Dn.) 92. DOES THE STUDY TECH CONFLICT WITH WHAT YOU ALREADY KNOW ABOUT TEACHING? _______ (Find out what other ideas person has about teaching E/S to F/N. Student Rehab List on his early studies.) 93. DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND THE USE OF DEMOS? _______ (Word clear demo materials.) (Then get it used to a win.) 57 94. ARE YOU NOT REALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE COMPETENCE OF THE STUDENT AFTER HE GRADUATES? _______ (Product R/D.) 95. ARE YOU REALLY TRYING TO TEACH SOMETHING ELSE? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 96. HAVE YOU NOT REALLY STARTED ON POST? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) (Get person instant hatted and onto post.) 97. ARE YOU LEAVING POST? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 98. ARE YOU ON DRUGS? _______ (Find what -- rehab.) 99. ARE YOU BEING AGREEABLE TO THE STUDENTS? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 100. ARE YOU TRYING TO BE POPULAR? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 101. ARE YOU TRYING TO MAKE YOURSELF RIGHT? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 102. ARE YOU TRYING TO PROVE THAT STUDENTS DON'T KNOW? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 103. ARE YOU WORKING FOR A STATISTIC RATHER THAN FOR A PRODUCT? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 104. HAVE YOU NOT STUDIED NEW ISSUES ON COURSE SUPERVISION? _______ (Get the W/H off to F/N.) (Get checked out on all neglected issues.) (Get Qual high crime policy in.) 105. DON'T YOU HAVE ANY SUPERVISOR MATERIALS TO REFER TO? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) (Handle through D of T.) 106. MATERIALS WERE MISSING FROM COURSE SUPERVISOR COURSE? _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) (Find what was missing and get it studied.) 107. HAVE YOU BEEN CONFRONTED WITH SITUATIONS NOT COVERED BY STUDY TECH? _______ (Find out what situations, Method 4 word clear tech on relevant materials as something was missed.) 108. IS THERE SOME OTHER REASON YOU CAN'T APPLY STUDY TECH? _______ (Find out what. Student Rehab List if not done.) (Word clear and drill relevant materials.) Handle each reading item to F/N as noted. Then fill in attached form for further actions to be done. LRH:nt.rd Copyright $c 1972, 1974 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard Founder ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 58 HCO B 27 March 72R, Issue II Attachment COURSE SUPERVISOR CORRECTION FORM ADDITIONAL ACTIONS REQUIRED TO: DIR CORRECTION Date: ___________________________ PART A: The following additional training actions are to be done on this supervisor. 1. Done_______ 2. Done_______ 3. Done_______ 4. Done_______ 5. Done_______ PART B: The following corrective actions must also be done regarding course outnesses found. 1. Done_______ 2. Done_______ 3. Done_______ 4. Done_______ 5. Done_______ _________________________________ Auditor Handling completed: _________________________________ Dir Correction L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.rd Copyright $c 1972, 1974 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 59  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=27/3/72 Volnum=0 Issue=3 Rev=2 rDate=17/12/74 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Study Corr List 3RA AUDITOR CORRECTION LIST AUDITOR RECOVERY  Type = 12 iDate=27/3/72 Issue=3 Rev=1 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 27 MARCH 1972RA Issue III REVISED & REISSUED 17 DECEMBER 1974 Remimeo CANCELS BTB OF 27 MARCH 1972R Issue III SAME TITLE Study Corr List 3RA AUDITOR CORRECTION LIST AUDITOR RECOVERY Reference: LRH ED 257 INT "DELIVERY REPAIR LISTS" The list is assessed Method Five and handled as indicated. A second bracket in the handling shows the further actions to be done after the list has been F/Ned on all reading items. NAME: _________________________________________ DATE: ________________________ AUDITOR: ______________________________________ 1. AS AN AUDITOR HAVE YOU HAD AN ARC BREAK. _______ (ARCU CDEINR E/S to F/N.) 2. AS AN AUDITOR HAVE YOU HAD A PROBLEM. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 3. AS AN AUDITOR, HAS A W/H BEEN MISSED. _______ (Pull it, 2wc E/S to F/N.) 4. GIVEN A WRONG WHY. _______ (L4BR & Handle.) 5. GIVEN A WRONG WHY FOR AUDITING FAILURES. _______ (L4BR & Handle.) 6. CRAMMING GAVE A WRONG WHY. _______ (L4BR & Handle.) 7. GIVEN A WRONG ETHICS CONDITION. _______ (L4BR & Handle.) 8. PROBLEMS WITH PCS. _______ (Do C/S Series 50, HCO B 15 July 71.) 9. W/Hs ABOUT PCS. _______ (Pull them, 2wc E/S to F/N.) 10. NEVER AUDITED. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 11. OVERTS ON PCS. _______ (Pull them, 2wc E/S to F/N.) 12. NO HELP FROM A D OF P. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 13. TROUBLE WITH TECH SERVICES. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 60 14. UPSET WITH A C/S. _______ TECH SEC. _______ SENIOR EXEC. _______ (ARCU CDEINR E/S to F/N.) 15. PTS TO SOMEONE IN THE ENVIRONMENT. _______ (L4BR & Handle.) 16. TOLD YOU WERE PTS AND YOU WEREN'T. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N. L4BR if any trouble.) 17. AUDITING WITHOUT STUDYING THE FOLDER AND UNDERSTANDING THE PC'S CASE. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 18. AUDITING WITHOUT AN FES. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 19. BREAKING THE AUDITOR'S CODE. _______ (2wc what E/S to F/N.) 20. AUDITING A WRONG C/S. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 21. AUDITING A WRONG PROGRAM. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 22. HAD SOME SORT OF OUT ETHICS. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 23. DISCUSSING PCS' CASES. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 24. LOSSES ON PCS. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 25. WERE YOU TAKEN OFF AUDITING. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 26. A PC YOU FAILED TO HELP. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) (3-Way Help/3-Way Failed Help.) 27. AUDITING AN NCG. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 28. COULDN'T HELP A PC. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) (3-Way Help/3-Way Failed Help.) 29. AN EARLIER TIME YOU FAILED TO HELP. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 30. COULDN'T SOLVE IT. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 31. AUDITING A PC OVER AN: ARC BREAK. _______ (ARCU CDEINR E/S to F/N.) PROBLEM. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) W/H. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) OVERT. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) OUT ETHICS. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 32. DIDN'T GET ALL OF THE WITHHOLDS. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 33. AUDITED UNSESSIONABLE PCS. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 34. CAN'T GET A PC IN SESSION. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 35. MISUNDERSTOOD WORDS IN AUDITING. _______ (Find & clear them, each to F/N.) 61 36. MISUNDERSTOOD WORDS IN DIANETICS & SCIENTOLOGY. _______ (Find & clear them, each to F/N.) 37. COULDN'T UNDERSTAND THE TECHNICAL TERMS. _______ (Find & clear them, each to F/N.) 38. AN EARLIER SIMILAR SUBJECT WAS MISUNDERSTOOD. _______ (2wc, find what word in the subject was Mis-U & clear it up. Clear each word to F/N.) 39. WAS YOUR TRAINING INADEQUATE. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N & STUDENT REHAB LIST.) 40. RUSHED THROUGH COURSES. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N & STUDENT REHAB LIST.) 41. SEEKING STATUS. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 42. YOU HAD DISAGREEMENTS. _______ (Find out what, find the Mis-U words & clear to F/N.) 43. EARLIER PRACTICE IN YOUR ROAD. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) (Pgm for GF40 Handling.) 44. OUT 2D. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N, handle as a W/H.) 45. OUT 2D WITH PCS. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N, handle as a W/H.) 46. EVALUATION. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 47. INVALIDATION. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 48. AFRAID OF AUDITING SOMEONE. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) (Fear of People RD.) 49. FORCED A PC TO RUN A PROCESS. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 50. TROUBLE WITH: TR 0. _______ TR 1. _______ TR 2. _______ TR 3. _______ TR 4. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 51. YOUR TRS WERE INVALIDATED. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N. Rehab any win.) 52. COULDN'T GET YOUR QUESTION ANSWERED. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 53. DISINTERESTED. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N, handle any out ruds.) 54. FALSELY PASSED TRS. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 55. FLUBBED COMMANDS. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 56. NOT AUDITING FOR THE PC. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 57. DIDN'T WRITE IT DOWN ON THE W/S. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N, handle as a W/H.) 58. FALSIFIED A W/S. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N, handle as a W/H.) 59. AUDITING FOR SPECIAL FAVORS. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N, handle as a W/H.) 62 60. COLLECTED FALSE BONUSES. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N, handle as a W/H.) 61. COULDN'T GET PAID. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 62. COULDN'T MASTER AN E-METER. _______ (2wc, find out what he didn't understand about it and clean up to F/N.) 63. METER IN THE WRONG PLACE. _______ (2wc, find out what was wrong and correct to F/N.) 64. DIDN'T STARRATE PROCESSES. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 65. NOT ENOUGH DRILLING ON PROCESSES. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 66. DIDN'T WANT THE LIST TO READ. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N, handle as a W/H.) 67. COULDN'T GET READS. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 68. WEREN'T SURE OF E-METER READS. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 69. CAN'T TELL AN F/N. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 70. WORRIED ABOUT TA. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 71. CALLED F/Ns ABOVE 3. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 72. CALLED F/Ns BELOW 2. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 73. COULDN'T F/N A LIST. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 74. SAID THE LIST F/NED WHEN IT DIDN'T. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 75. COULDN'T TELL AN R/S. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 76. TROUBLE WITH ASSESSMENT. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 77. TROUBLE WITH L&N. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 78. NOBODY TO AUDIT. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 79. PREVENTED FROM AUDITING. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 80. FORCED TO AUDIT UNDER BAD CIRCUMSTANCES. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 81. DOG CASES. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N. Pull all W/Hs.) 82. RABBITED. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 83. GOT DESPERATE. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 84. SQUIRRELING. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N, handle as a W/H.) 85. TRIED UNUSUAL SOLUTIONS. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N, handle as a W/H.) 63 86. AUDITING WITHOUT A METER. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N, handle as a W/H.) 87. COFFEE SHOP AUDITING. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N, handle as a W/H.) 88. USING NON-STANDARD PROCESSES. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N, handle as a W/H.) 89. USING CONFIDENTIAL PROCESSES ON LOWER LEVEL PCS. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N, handle as a W/H.) 90. MOONLIGHTING. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 91. AUDITING ORG PCS OUTSIDE THE ORG. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N, handle as a W/H.) 92. C/SING IN THE CHAIR. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N, handle as a W/H.) 93. AUDITING WITHOUT A C/S. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N, handle as a W/H.) 94. NOT GETTING ANY CRAMMING. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 95. AVOIDING CRAMMING. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 96. SHOULD BE RETRAINED. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N. STUDENT REHAB LIST.) 97. WAS TOLD TO RETRAIN WHEN IT WASN'T WARRANTED. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) 98. TECH DOESN'T WORK FOR YOU. _______ (2wc E/S to F/N.) (Note for further handling by Qual.) 99. TECH DOESN'T WORK ON YOU. _______ (C/S 53RI. GF M5 and handle.) 100. SOMETHING WRONG WITH YOUR EYESIGHT. _______ (2wc what E/S to F/N.) 101. RESTIM. _______ (C/S 53RI.) 102. TROUBLE WITH YOUR OWN CASE. _______ (C/S 53RI.) 103. SOMETHING ELSE WRONG. _______ (2wc what & if no joy GF M5 & handle.) L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:clb.nt.rd Copyright $c 1972, 1974 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 64  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=30/3/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Study Series 5 PRIMARY CORRECTION RUNDOWN FIRST CRAMMING CORRECTION   IMPORTANT Dept of Personnel Enhancement Remimeo Qual Secs  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 30 MARCH 1972 (REVISED -- see HCO B 30 Mar 72R Volume VIII -- 133) Remimeo Study Series 5 Qual Secs IMPORTANT Dept of Personnel Enhancement PRIMARY CORRECTION RUNDOWN FIRST CRAMMING CORRECTION As it is obviously a waste of Cramming time to cram an auditor, student or staff member who has not known how to study (see LRH ED 174 Int 29 Mar 72 for data on this), it is vital that HIS FIRST CRAMMING ACTION is done in the Dept of Personnel Enhancement. This department must be staffed and set up to do (a) Programming, (b) Word Clearing No. 1, (c) Word Clearing No. 2, (d) Word Clearing No. 4, (e) Word Clearing Correction Lists, (f) Int Ext Correction Lists, (g) Tape Word Clearing with footpedal operated tape players, (h) Good quality Study Tape sets, (i) Student Packs, (j) Demo Kits, (k) Clay table large size, (l) Product Clearing, (m) Post Purpose Clearing, (n) Product and Student Corrections. All the staff of this Dept MUST do this complete rundown rapidly on themselves. Otherwise their actions will be flubby as they probably will not be able to grasp their own special rundowns unless this program has been followed by themselves. BUT THIS ACTION MAY NOT BE USED TO PREVENT ACTIVE PRODUCTION BY D OF PE staff on doing this Rundown. PRIMARY CORRECTION RUNDOWN 1. Case repair to handle high or low TAs or upsets. THIS STEP IS NOT DONE IF THE TA IS USUALLY BETWEEN 2 and 3 in auditing. This would consist of a C/S 53RRR and handle, a GF Method 5 and handle, a GF40RR Method 3 and handle, plus any special actions to complete an incomplete auditing cycle or repair it. At this stage any auditing should be done only on thoroughly cleared commands (each word no matter how small) and assessment lists should be done only after clearing each word on the prepared list (but not spoken as a full question). 2. WORD CLEARING NUMBER 1 to full EP, using the WC Correction List at any sign of somatics or bad Exam report after a word clearing session. 3. FIND THE WHY he did not use the Study Tech in the first place. There will be an individual WHY. (See Data Series P/Ls.) It is seldom only Misunderstood words. (See LRH ED 174 Int for some examples.) Handle this WHY. It may require processing. AUDITING INTERLUDE 4. The WHY is HANDLED in auditing sessions as indicated. May require objective Processes or hidden standards. The Handling of the Why is directly related to the WHY that was found. 65 5. THE STUDY CORRECTION LIST is handled. This is HCO B 4 Feb 72 (revising HCO B 14 Jan 72). This prepared list is assessed Method 5 (all lines assessed) and then the reads are handled from the best to the least. THE END PRODUCT AT THIS STAGE IS A PERSON WHOSE CASE AND PAST ARE NOT IN THE ROAD OF HIS STUDYING. STUDY TECH SECTION 6. STUDY TAPES. (a) One time through picking up and looking up every word even faintly in doubt of or when not understanding, going back to find the word that was missed. (b) Then going through the Study Tapes for content with Method 4 at the End of each tape. If it reads on any misunderstood clear it up, then replay the tape. In this way get the Study Tapes fully known without Misunderstood ideas or words. (c) Check M4 at the end of this action and if there is any misunderstood idea or query of any kind then handle it per M4 and have the person do all the tapes again. The End product of this action is fully known Study Tapes with F/N VGIs. 7. STUDENT HAT. (a) Have the person go through each P/L or HCO B in the Student Hat with this cycle: Each time a misunderstood word is found even in the middle of the page, do the whole P/L again. Complete the whole hat in this way. (b) Then go through the whole hat again starrate checked out and using Demo Kit. At each point where a new misunderstood idea or word turns up do the whole P/L. If any misunderstoods show up on this second run through, the whole Hat must be done again. (c) Have the student do a BIG proper Clay Demo of some study materials. (d) Check if the student can now use a Demo Kit while he is doing his own studies and get any WHY he cannot and Handle. The End product here is a STUDENT WHO CAN AND WILL USE STUDY TECH IN STUDYING AND WHO WILL STUDY AND STUDY PROPERLY. 8. Verify the WHY found in 3 above and see if it is all okay now. If not find new WHY and rehandle. 9. WORD CLEAR 2 first Dianetic or Scientology materials ever heard or read. (a) Find which it was. (b) WC2 it. 10. Find what queries and questions the person has about Admin or Tech. Do WC M4 on each one. 11. Send the person to Cramming to get the specific Cramming order, Tech or Admin, carried out. 12. Report the Course Super and D of T who "trained him" to the Ethics Officer for action. It is obviously senseless to Cram someone (and proven by actual experience) whose Study Tech is out and whose misunderstood words and omitted study will not let him retain anything anyway. He will just go on goofing. That has been amply proven. Cramming can assess a Student Correction List HCO B 27 Mar 72, Issue I, or a Supervisor Correction List HCO B 27 Mar 72, Issue II, or an Auditor Correction List HCO B 27 Mar 72, Issue III, or a C/S Correction List HCO B 27 Mar 72, Issue IV, or an Executive Correction List HCO B 27 Mar 72, Issue V, and these will catch any Personnel Enhancement flub and other classroom reasons. Things found on such lists should be reported to the Ethics Officer for handling. Qual is after all the CORRECTION DIVISION. And correction usually cannot be accomplished without Ethics back-up. 66 At first glance this is a lot to do for a student or staff member. BUT IF IT IS NOT DONE YOU DO NOT HAVE A STUDENT OR A STAFF MEMBER. Students and staff members must be charged for all this, the staff member usually on just a debit invoice but which comes due and owing on his departure, the student for cash through the Registrar. Do not fail to make these charges as you are rewarding a downstat who should have done it right in the first place and who didn't. So don't run up a big Dept of Pers Enhancement Payroll that is never used to get the exchange. Also DO NOT BACKLOG or you can tie up a whole org and keep its stats in the basement BY NOT RAPIDLY DOING THESE ACTIONS TO TOTAL END PRODUCT. If you don't get the End Product all the work is wasted. The Commonest Error in word clearing or auditing is a FAILURE TO USE CORRECTION LISTS. WC Corr List, WC Series 35, has been the most needed and most neglected list in orgs. As Study Tech is the material which tells HOW to study, the technique of study is not applied to IT. Thus it becomes unknown easily and goes out very easily. Without it, I assure you, an org will get nowhere. Thus this action of the Dept of PE is a vital action and done well it will keep the org alive. BE SURE TO DO THIS WELL AND GET A CASH EXCHANGE FOR THIS VITAL SERVICE! L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:mes.rd Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [The above HCO B has been corrected Per HCO B 3 April 1972, Issue III, Re.: Study Series 5, the entire text of which says, "'HCO B of 30 March 1972, IMPORTANT, Dept of Personnel Enhancement, Primary Correction Rundown First Cramming Correction' is STUDY SERIES 5. Correct your copy to read 'Study Series 5'."] 67  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=31/3/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Expanded Dianetics Series I   Remimeo Central Orgs Academies London Washington Los Angeles Johannesburg Denmark Sydney  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 31 MARCH 1972 (REVISED -- see HCO B 15 Apr 72 Volume VIII -- 87) Remimeo Central Orgs Academies London Washington Los Angeles Johannesburg Denmark Expanded Dianetics Series I Sydney EXPANDED DIANETICS is that branch of Dianetics which uses Dianetics in special ways for specific purposes. It is not HSDC Dianetics. Its position on the Grade Chart would be regulated by the use to which it is put. It could be below Standard Dianetics, just above Standard Dianetics or above OT III in the OT Scales. It uses Dianetics to change an Oxford Capacity Analysis (or an American Personality Analysis) and is run directly against these analysis graphs and the "Science of Survival Hubbard Chart of Human Evaluation". EXPANDED DIANETICS IS NOT THE SAME AS STANDARD DIANETICS. The HSDC is qualified to run Standard Dianetics. He is not authorized to run EXPANDED DIANETICS without special training. DO NOT MIX EXPANDED DIANETICS INTO STANDARD DIANETICS. It often happens that one technology's skills are mingled with another's. The result is that neither then work. Standard Dianetics will go right on producing results. The main difference between these two branches is that Standard Dianetics is very general in application. Expanded Dianetics is very specifically adjusted to the pc. Some pcs, particularly heavy drug cases, or who have been given injurious psychiatric treatment or who are physically disabled or who are chronically ill or who have had trouble running engrams (to name a few) require a specially adapted technology. A very good Dianetic or Dianetic and Class IV auditor preferably HSDC & Class VI can be specially trained to run Dianetics against the OCA or the Chart of Human Evaluation. STUDY (Subject to Change) This training would consist of: 1. HSDC 2. STANDARD DIANETIC INTERNE HGC OK TO AUDIT 3. PRIMARY RD HCOB 30 Mar 72 4. Social Counselor Cse or Ruds Flying or Class IV 5. Full Word Clearer Rating 6. FESing 68 7. Programming 8. Expanded Dianetic Tapes and HCOBs 9. C/S Folder Study 10. Active Auditing on the skills taught 11. C/Sing Expanded Dianetics. CERTIFICATE The Certificate would be HUBBARD GRADUATE DIANETIC SPECIALIST. The Certificate Level is above Standard Dianetics HSDC and if the person is a Class IV is just above Class IV. It would be greatly preferable if the person were an HSDC and a Class IV as word clearing and rudiments would be easier to learn but Class IV is not required at this time. CHARGES Hours of Expanded Dianetics, because of the skills required, should be at least half again or double as much as Standard Dianetic Auditing. The cost of the Course would be the same as the HSDC Course and additional to it plus Interne fees. PREREQUISITE HSDC and Dianetic Interneship minimum with a successful period of Standard Dianetic Auditing as an auditor. Optimum is also a Class IV or VI. Case gain as a Dianetic pc. DEVELOPMENT This Course is under development as this is written and neither the Course nor Expanded Dianetic Auditing may be sold by an org unless it has an Expanded Dianetic Specialist, to be specific, an HGDS. WHEN RELEASED THE COURSE WILL BE TAUGHT IN CENTRAL ORGS (LONDON, WASHINGTON, LOS ANGELES, JOHANNESBURG, DENMARK AND SYDNEY AND SHs). IT IS THE SPECIAL COURSE THE CONTINENTAL CENTRAL ORG TEACHES. The HCOBs relating to Expanded Dianetics will be released as a part of this series so that orgs will have them when it comes time for them to acquire the tapes and teach this course. In the meanwhile these orgs should be making HSDCs and Class IVs. PERSONS NOT TRAINED ON IT MAY NOT RUN IT OR USE IT REGARDLESS OF CLASS. To repeat, Expanded Dianetics does not replace Standard Dianetics or any other Class and is itself and is used for its own specific purposes on special cases. LRH:nt.rd Copyright $c 1972 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard Founder ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 69  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=2/4/72 Volnum=0 Issue=2 Rev=3 rDate=17/3/74 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Expanded Dianetics Series 3RB L3 EXD RB EXPANDED DIANETICS REPAIR LIST   IMPORTANT Remimeo Ex Dn Chkshts  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 2 APRIL 1972RB Issue II (REVISED 17 MARCH 1974) Remimeo Ex Dn Chkshts IMPORTANT Expanded Dianetics Series 3RB L3 EXD RB EXPANDED DIANETICS REPAIR LIST This list includes the most frequent Exp Dianetic & R3R errors. A high or low TA and a bogged case can result from failures to erase a chain of incidents. DO NOT ATTEMPT TO REPAIR A CHAIN OR ENGRAM WITHOUT USING THIS LIST as it can have different or several errors. REMEMBER TO CLEAR EACH WORD ON THIS LIST. IF A QUESTION READS AND THE PC SAYS HE DOESN'T UNDERSTAND IT, CLEAR IT AND REASSESS (don't explain it and take it as it read on a misunderstood not on a fact). RUNNING PCS ON EXP DIANETICS WITHOUT A FULL AND COMPLETE DN C/S 1 INDOCTRINATION IS A FOOLISH ACTION. TAKE ANY READ FOUND TO F/N BY FULL REPAIR OF IT PER THE INSTRUCTIONS. 1. There was an Earlier Similar incident. _______ Indicate it, flatten the chain. 2. There was no Earlier Similar incident. _______ Indicate it. Determine if the chain is flat or if the last incident needs to be run through again. Complete the chain to F/N by indication or D/L if needed, or by flattening it. 3. There was an earlier beginning. _______ Indicate it. Handle with R3R and complete the chain. 4. There was no earlier beginning. _______ Indicate it. Complete the chain with R3R ABCD on last incident if unflat. 5. An F/N was indicated too soon. _______ Indicate it. Flatten the last incident. 6. An F/N was indicated too late. _______ Indicate it. Spot the flat point, indicate the overrun, D/L if necessary. 7. An F/N was not indicated at all. _______ Indicate it. Spot the flat point, indicate the overrun, D/L if necessary. 70 8. There was no charge on an item in the first place. _______ Indicate it, and that it shouldn't have been run, D/L if necessary. 9. Jumped chains _______ Indicate it. Reorient to the original chain, spot flat point and indicate the overrun, D/L if necessary, or flatten the chain. 10. Flubbed commands. _______ Indicate it, E/S to F/N. 11. Didn't have a command. _______ Indicate it, E/S to F/N. 12. Misunderstood on the command. _______ Find it and clear it. 13. Incident should be run through one more time. _______ Indicate it. ABCD on the incident, flatten the chain. 14. Too late on the chain. _______ Indicate it. Get the Earlier Similar incident and complete the chain with R3R. 14A. Wrong Flow. _______ Indicate it. Run it the way pc feels it should be run. 15. Incident gone more solid. _______ Indicate it. Check for earlier incident or earlier beginning and complete the chain. 16. Stopped running an incident that was erasing. _______ Indicate it. ABCD on the incident and erase it. 17. Went past basic on a chain. _______ Indicate it, D/L if necessary. 18. An earlier misrun incident restimulated. _______ Indicate it. Find out what it was and do an L-3RD on it. 19. Two or more incidents got confused. _______ Indicate it, sort it out with an L-3RD on it. 20. An implant was restimulated. _______ Indicate it, if no joy do an L-3RD on the time of the restimulation. 21. The incident was really an implant. _______ Indicate it, D/L if necessary or L-3RD on it. 22. Wrong Item. _______ Indicate it was a wrong item and that all other actions connected with it were wrong. If it is from an L&N list or if any question or difficulty, L-4BR. 22A. It was really your attitudes to it that should have been run. _______ Indicate it. List the attitudes, R3R triple and exhaust the list. 71 22B. It was really the emotions connected with it that should have been run. _______ Indicate it. List the emotions, R3R triple and exhaust the list. 22C. It was really your intentions that should have been run. _______ Indicate it. List the intentions, R3R triple and exhaust the list. 23. Not your item. _______ Indicate it, E/S to F/N. 24. Not your incident. _______ Indicate it, E/S to F/N. L-3RD if any trouble. 25. Same thing run twice. _______ Indicate it. Spot the first flat point, indicate the overrun, D/L if necessary, or run out the session. 26. There was a wrong date. _______ Indicate it. Get the correct date and flatten the incident if unflat. 27. There was no date for the incident. _______ Indicate it. Get the date and flatten the incident if unflat. 28. It was a false date. _______ Indicate it. Get the correct date and flatten the incident if unflat. 29. There was an incorrect duration. _______ Indicate it. Get the correct duration and flatten the incident if unflat. 30. No duration was found for the incident. _______ Indicate it. Get the duration and flatten the incident if unflat. 31. There was a false duration. _______ Indicate it. Get the correct duration and flatten the incident if unflat. 32. An earlier Dianetic upset was restimulated. _______ Locate what it was, indicate it. Sort it out with an L-3RD if necessary. 33. An earlier ARC Break on engrams was restimulated. _______ Indicate it. Sort it out with an L-3RD, ARCU CDEINR or an L-1C as applicable, or run out the session. 34. There was an ARC Break in the incident. _______ Indicate it. Flatten the incident if unflat. ARCU CDEINR at that time if necessary. 34A. Destructive impulse been missed. _______ Get it. It should BD F/N. If this turns into a listing action complete the list to BD F/N item. 35. You were protesting. _______ Indicate it, clean it up E/S to F/N. 72 36. Auditor demanded more than you could see. _______ Indicate it, E/S to F/N. L-1C if necessary, or run out the session. 37. Auditor refused to accept what you were saying. _______ Indicate it, E/S to F/N. L-1C if necessary, or run out the session. 38. You were prevented from running an incident. _______ Indicate it, E/S to F/N. Flatten the incident if unflat. L-1C if necessary, or run out the session. 39. You were distracted while running an incident. _______ Indicate it, E/S to F/N. Flatten the incident if unflat. L-1C if necessary, or run out the session. 40. Audited over an ARC Brk _______ Problem _______ Withhold _______ Indicate it and handle the out rud. Do not pull W/Hs before the engram or chain is repaired or it will mush engrams. 41. An item was suppressed. _______ Indicate it. Get the suppress off E/S to F/N, then run or flatten the item. 42. An item was invalidated. _______ Indicate it. Get the inval off E/S to F/N, then run or flatten the item. 43. An item was abandoned. _______ Indicate it, get the item back and run or flatten it. 44. The wording of the item was changed. _______ Indicate it. Get the correct wording and give it to him. Flatten it if unflat. 45. Stuck picture. _______ Indicate it. Do an L-3RD on it. You can also unstick it by having him recall a time before it and recall a time after it. D/L if necessary. 46. All black. _______ Spot the black field or picture. Get the correct duration. If no go, L-3RD on it. 47. Invisible. _______ Spot the invisible field or picture. L-3RD on it. 48. Constantly changing pictures. _______ Indicate there was a misassessment and a wrong item was taken off the list. Get the correct item and run it, or L-3RD on Sat session. 49. There was a persistent mass. _______ L-3RD on it, or D/L. 73 50. There was trouble with a pressure item or pressure on an item. _______ L-3RD on it, or D/L. 51. You went exterior. _______ Indicate it, D/L if necessary or rehab. If TA high as a result of this do an Int RD Correction List or send to the C/S if pc hasn't had Int RD. 52. Your Int RD was messed up. _______ Indicate it, Int RD Corr List if TA high. If TA OK, 2wc "going into things" or clear up any misunderstoods on Int, Ext, etc. 53. Audited over Drugs or Medicine. _______ Indicate it. L-3RD on that time, then verify all chains to ensure they erased. 54. A past death restimulated. _______ Indicate it, if it doesn't blow run it out. 55. There was nothing wrong in the first place. _______ Indicate it. Continue the action you were on. 56. The real reason was missed. _______ Indicate it. Locate the real reason and handle or do a GF. 57. Something else wrong. _______ Locate what it is and sort it out or do a GF M5 and handle. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:ntm.jh Copyright $c 1972, 1974 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 74  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=3/4/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Study Series 6 PRIMARY RUNDOWN NOTE   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 3 APRIL 1972 Remimeo Study Series 6 PRIMARY RUNDOWN NOTE Reference HCO B 30 Mar 72 LRH ED 174 Int In going through the Study Tapes the first time, the student looks up every word. On this first time he does not study for the sense of what is being said. He only listens to words. In this and in Method 4 word clearing, when being checked he is asked "What is the definition of _______ (word)?" He is NOT asked "Do you know the meaning of _______ (word)?" To this he could answer "Yes" and believe he did. But when asked for the definition that he must then give, it is a different story entirely. This is also the right way to handle any defining of words. M2, M4. As well as Methods 1 & 3. Never let the student be unsure. Make him look it up. You will find that it is the simple word, "as", "such", "from", that really bogs reading, not technical terms. In the Study Tapes there are some photographic terms. Any photo dictionary can give these. Almost any camera store has such dictionaries. SECOND TIME The second time through the Study Tapes the student listens for the sense of the sentences. It is very revealing to do the Primary Rundown in this fashion. Some students are actually getting meaning out of something heard or read for the first time in their lives. No wonder school-children, by test, get more stupid each additional year of school. This has been established by actual test, that they do. Each year they just have a higher mountain of misunderstood words! The Primary Rundown done HONESTLY is quite an adventure in opening up one's Communication Channels with life! L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mes.rd Founder Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 75  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=4/4/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  TECH DIV PRIMARY RUNDOWN   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 4 APRIL 1972 (REVISED -- see HCO B 4 Apr 72R Volume VIII -- 135) Remimeo TECH DIV PRIMARY RUNDOWN The Primary Correction Rundown in HCO B 30 March 72 is the rundown given in the Department of Personnel Enhancement in the Qualifications Division. The PRIMARY RUNDOWN is given in the Tech Division as NORMAL DIVISIONAL ACTIVITY. PRIMARY RUNDOWN HGC 1. The student is given any needful case handling or repair if his TA is high or low in accordance with his state of case. This is only done if the person's meter is such as to make word clearing difficult or if the person is in obvious need of case handling. Aside from TA, "obvious need of case handling" includes a bad OCA or APA, Drugs and PTS. If the Student has been on drugs he must be given a Drug Rundown. If he is PTS he must be handled in Ethics and given a PTS Rundown. If the student is ill he should be handled by Dianetics. An R/Sing person should be handled by Expanded Dianetics. 2. WORD CLEARING METHOD 1 is done by normal word clearing procedures in the HGC either as part of his normal auditing or as a student checksheet. This is carried to an F/Ning list on the final assessment. The Word Clearing Correction List is used at the slightest sign of trouble. The student must have F/N throughout on the final full assessment of the WC Corr List if used and the final full WC Method 1 list and an F/N VGIs at the examiner for this step to be considered complete. DEPT OF TRAINING The student is now qualified to enter training. 3. STUDY TAPES AND STUDENT HAT. The student's first training step may be either the Study Tapes (or authorized transcript or translated tape but not notes) or the Student Hat. It will be found that course facilities may be better employed where a student is allowed to do either as the first step, so long as he does both one after the other. (a) The Study Tapes are played first for the words themselves. One may not just play the tape and list the words and then look them up. This is an exact action. The only variation of this will come when a full list of these words is issued in alphabetical order. Each is looked up the first time it appears on the tape. The word is USED in several sentences. A grammar such as "English Made Simple" should be to hand. Good BIG dictionaries should be to hand. And a photographic dictionary or glossary. 76 The tape is then played through. A Method 4 check is made. If there is any read that is a true read (not a false surge) on the question, "Was anything not fully understood?" the word is hunted down and defined. And then the whole tape has to be done again. In this way, reel by reel (or chapter by chapter when transcribed), the Study Tapes are done. An M4 Meter check is made on the whole tape series. The person is sent to the Student Examiner. If there is a flunk of the exam the student goes to Cramming. (b) The Student Hat is done like the Study Tapes. Each item (P/L, HCO B etc) in it is read through once, looking up each word the first time it appears and using it in sentences. At the end of each item the student is checked with Method 4 as on the tapes. And if he misses one word he does the whole item again. In this way he goes through the whole hat. Now he reads the whole hat for sense. Each time an ACTION is called for in an item (demo or clay demo) he must do that item correctly. He now reads the whole hat through using a Demo Kit continually as he goes along. He is again given an M4 check and if there is no read he goes to the Student Examiner. If he fails, he goes to Cramming. If he passes he may do the Study Tapes if he has not done them or he having passed those is a Product. THE PRODUCT AT THIS POINT IS A STUDENT WHO KNOWS HOW TO STUDY AND WILL BE ABLE TO USE WHAT HE STUDIES. This concludes the Primary Rundown as given in the Tech Division. The Tech Division does not repair the student. He can be ordered to Cramming however for the singe action of a Word Clearing Correction List in case errors in Method 4 or Method 3 have been made or the student has gone beyond the metering ability of a supervisor. Qual at its option in such cases may order a full Primary Correction Rundown but must give a Word Clearing Correction List first before determining this. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:mes.rd Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 77  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 21 iDate=4/4/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Establishment Officer Series 14 ETHICS   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 4 APRIL 1972 Remimeo Establishment Officer Series 14 ETHICS The normal level of an unhatted Dev-T non-producing org is out ethics. The reason you see so many heavy ethics actions occurring -- or situations where heavy ethics actions should occur if they aren't -- in such an org is that it has its EXCHANGE flows messed up. It is important to know this fact as this factor alone can sometimes be employed to handle persons in the area whose ethics are out. CRIMINALITY Unless we want to go on living in a far nowhere some of the facts of scenes have to be confronted. An inability to confront evil leads people into disregarding it or discounting it or not seeing it at all. Reversely, there can be a type of person who, like an old-time preacher, sees nothing but evil in everything and, possibly looking into his own heart for a model, believes all men are evil. Man, however (as you can read in HCO B 28 Nov 70, C/S Series 22, "Psychosis"), is basically good. When going upon some evil course he attempts to restrain himself and caves himself in. The Chart of Human Evaluation in Science of Survival was right enough. And such people also can be found by the Oxford Capacity Analysis where the graph is low and well below a center line on the right. This sort of thing can be handled of course by auditing but the Est O does not depend on that to handle his staff's problems. Criminal actions proceed from such people unless checked by more duress from without not to do an evil act than they themselves have pressure from within to do it. Criminality is in most instances restrained by just such an imbalance of pressures. If you have no ethics presence in an org, then criminality shows its head. Such people lie rather than be made to confront. They false report -- they even use "PR" which means Public Relations to cover up -- and in our slang talk "PR" means putting up a lot of false reports to serve as a smoke screen for idleness or bad actions. Unless you get Ethics in, you will never get Tech in. If you can't get Tech in you won't get Admin in. So the lack of Ethics permits the criminal impulse to go unchecked. Yes, it could be handled with Tech. But to get money you have to have Admin in. Unless there is Ethics and ways to get it in, no matter how distasteful it may seem, you will never get Tech and Admin in. Of course there is always the element of possible injustice. But this is provided against. (See HCO PL 24 Feb 72, "Injustice".) When Ethics is being applied by criminal hands (as happens in some governments) it can get pretty grim. 78 But even then Ethics serves as a restraint to just outright slaughter. Omitting to handle criminality can make one as guilty of the resulting crimes as if one committed them! So criminality as a factor has to be handled. It is standardly handled by the basic Ethics P/Ls and the Ethics Officer system. EXCHANGE The unhatted unproducing staff member, who is not really a criminal or psychotic, can be made to go criminal. This joins him to the Criminal ranks. The Ethics system also applies to him. However there is something an Est O can do about it that is truly Est O tech. This lies in the field of EXCHANGE. If you recall your Product Clearing, you will see that exchange is something for something. Criminal exchange is nothing from the criminal for something from another. Whether theft or threat or fraud is used, the criminal think is to get something without putting out anything. That is obvious. A staff member can be coaxed into this kind of thinking by PERMITTING HIM TO RECEIVE WITHOUT HIS CONTRIBUTING. This unlocks, by the way, an age-old riddle of the philosophers as to "what is right or wrong". HONESTY is the road to SANITY. You can prove that and do prove it every time you make somebody well by "pulling his withholds". The insane are just one seething mass of overt acts and withholds. And they are very physically sick people. When you let somebody be dishonest you are setting him up to become physically ill and unhappy. Traditional Sea Org Ethics labeled Non-Compliance as Liability and a False Report as Doubt. And it's true enough. When you let a person give nothing for something you are factually encouraging crime. Don't be surprised that welfare districts are full of robbery and murder. People there give nothing for something. When exchange is out the whole social balance goes out. Every full scholarship ever given by an org wound up in a messy scene. When you hire a professional pc who just sits around making do-less motions while people audit him and contribute to him DO NOT BE SURPRISED IF HE GETS SICKER AND SICKER. He is contributing nothing in return and winds up in overwhelm! Similarly if you actively prevented someone from contributing in return you could also make him ARC Broken and sick. It is EXCHANGE which maintains the inflow and outflow that gives a person space around him and keeps the bank off of him. There are numbers of ways these flows of Exchange can be unbalanced. It does not go same out as comes in. Equal amounts are no factor. Who can 79 measure good will or friendship? Who can actually calculate the value of saving a being from death in each lifetime? Who can measure the reward of pride in doing a job well or praise? For all these things are of different values to different people. In the material world the person whose Exchange Factor is out may think he "makes money". Only a government or a counterfeiter "makes money". One has to produce something to Exchange for money. Right there the Exchange Factor is out. If he gives nothing in return for what he gets the money does not belong to him. In product clearing many people it was found that some considered their food, clothing, bed and allowance were not theirs because they produced. They were theirs "just by being there". This funny "logic" covered up the fact that these people produced little or nothing on post. Yet they were the first to howl when not getting expensive (to the org) auditing or courses or tech! Thus such a person, not hatted or made to produce, will get ill. It is interesting that when a person becomes productive his morale improves. Reversely it should be rather plain to you that a person who doesn't produce becomes mentally or physically ill. For his exchange factor is out. So when you reward a downstat you not only deprive upstats, you also cave the downstat in! I don't think Welfare States have anything else in mind! The riots of the ancient city of Rome were caused by these factors. There they gave away corn and games to a populace that eventually became so savage it could only enjoy torture and gruesome death in the arena! A lot of this exchange imbalance comes from child psychology where the child is not contributing anything and is not permitted to contribute. It is this which first overwhelms him with feelings of obligation to his parents and then bursts out as total revolt in his teens. Children who are permitted to contribute (not as a cute thing to do but actually) make non-contributing children of the same age look like raving maniacs! It is the cruel sadism of modern times to destroy the next generation this way. Don't think it isn't intended. I have examined the OCAs of parents who do it! So if a person is brought up this life with the exchange all awry, the Est O has his hands full sometimes! He is dealing with trained-in criminality! WHAT HE CAN DO The remedy is rather simple. First one has to know all about EXCHANGE as covered in the Product Clearing policy letters. Then he has to specially clear this up with people who do not produce. He should get them to work on it as it relates to ALL THEIR DYNAMICS IN RELATIONSHIP TO EVERY OTHER DYNAMIC. That means he has to clear up the definitions of dynamics with care and then have the person draw a big chart (of his own) and say what he gives the 1st Dynamic and what it gives him. Then what he gives the second dynamic and what it gives him. And so on up the dynamics. Now, have him consider "his own second dynamic". What does his second dynamic give his first dynamic? What does his second dynamic give the second dynamic and what does it give him? And so on until you have a network of these exchange arrows, each both ways. 80 Somewhere along the way, if your TRs are good and you have his attention and he is willing to talk to you he will have quite a cognition! That, if it's a big one is the End Phenomena of it. And don't be surprised if you see a person now and then change his physical face shape! CONDITIONS BY DYNAMICS An Ethics type "action" can be done by giving the person the conditions formulas (pages 189, 237, 245, 247, 249 of Vol 0, Basic Staff Hat. HCO PL 14 Mar 68 -- page 247 -- gives one the table.) Method 4 the person on the Table of Conditions and pick up any other misunderstoods. Have the person study the formula of each of these Conditions in the table so that he knows what they are and what the formulas are. When he has all this now with no misunderstood words you must clear up the words related to his dynamics 1 to 8 and what they are. Now you're ready for the billion dollar question. Ask him what is his condition on the first dynamic. Have him study the formulas. Don't buy any glib PR. Don't evaluate or invalidate. When he's completely sure of what his condition really is on the first dynamic he will cognite. Now take up the second dynamic by its parts -- sex, family, children. Get a Condition for each. Similarly go on up each one of the dynamics until you have a condition for each one. Now begin with the first dynamic again. Continue to work this way. You will be amazed to find he will come out of false high down to low and back up again on each dynamic. Somewhere along the line he will start to change markedly. When you have a person in continual heavy ethics or who is out-ethics (Ethics bait, we say) and who is floundering around, you can do an S & D on him and quite often save his future for him. When you have such a person you do this one first before you do the Exchange by Dynamics. In other words, you use this on "Ethics bait" and then when he's come out of such, you do Exchange by Dynamics on him. SUMMARY When all looks black, and you are getting false reports, and the things said done were not done and what was really being done were overt products and despite all your work, the stats just won't go up, you still have three answers: 1. GET IN ETHICS ON THE ORG. 2. GET EXCHANGE DONE ON INDIVIDUALS. 3. GET IN CONDITIONS BY DYNAMICS ON THE ETHICS BAIT. And after that keep a strong just Division 1 Dept 3. You'll be amazed! L. RON HUBBARD LRH:sb.rd Founder Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [Modified by HCO PL 9 May 74, Prod-Org, Esto and Older Systems Reconciled, in the Management Series 1970-1974, Page 438.] 81  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 21 iDate=9/4/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ETHICS CORRECT DANGER CONDITION HANDLING  Type = 21 iDate=7/2/70 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 9 APRIL 1972 Remimeo ETHICS (Cancels HCO P/L of 7 Feb 70 "Danger Condition 2nd Formula") CORRECT DANGER CONDITION HANDLING When the correct formula for handling a Danger Condition is not done, an org or activity or person cannot easily get above that condition thereafter. When we had the 2nd Danger Formula apparently it was applied but the real Danger Formula wasn't. This made some orgs and people remain in or below Danger and made it very hard for them to get above that state. A prolonged state of emergency or threats to viability or survival or a prolonged single-handing will not improve unless the actual Danger Formula is applied. DANGER FORMULA The original formula follows: 1. By-pass (ignore the junior or juniors normally in charge of the activity and handle it personally). 2. Handle the situation and any danger in it. 3. Assign the area where it had to be handled a Danger Condition. 4. Handle the personnel by Ethics Investigation and Comm Ev. 5. Reorganize the activity so that the situation does not repeat. 6. Recommend any firm policy that will hereafter detect and/or prevent the condition from recurring. The senior executive present acts and acts according to the formula above. A Danger Condition is normally assigned when: 1. An emergency condition has continued too long. 2. A statistic plunges downward very steeply. 3. A senior executive suddenly finds himself or herself wearing the hat of the activity because it is in trouble. FIRST DYNAMIC FORMULA The formula is converted for the 1st dynamic to 1st 1. By-pass habits or normal routines. 1st 2. Handle the situation and any Danger in it. 1st 3. Assign self a Danger Condition. 1st 4. Get in your own personal ethics by finding what you are doing that is out-ethics and use self-discipline to correct it and get honest and straight. 1st 5. Reorganize your life so that the dangerous situation is not continually happening to you. 1st 6. Formulate and adopt firm policy that will hereafter detect and prevent the same situation from continuing to occur. JUNIOR DANGER FORMULA Where a Danger Condition is assigned to a junior, request that he or she or the entire activity write up his or her overts and withholds and any known out-ethics situation and turn them in at a certain stated time on a basis that the penalty for them will be lessened but if discovered later after the deadline it will be doubled. This done, require that the junior and the staff that had to be by-passed and whose work had to be done for them or continually corrected, each one write up and 82 fully execute the FIRST DYNAMIC DANGER FORMULA for himself personally and turn it in. ASSESSMENT If the necessity to by-pass continues or if an area or person did not comply, use a meter and assess or get assessed the following questionnaire. THE TROUBLE AREA QUESTIONNAIRE _______________________________ _________________________ __________________ Person's Name Post Date To be done on the person by one who can correctly operate a meter. The list is done by telling the person you are about to ask him some questions on a meter and then just assess this list for reads. Mark each read properly. (a) Are you doing anything dishonest? _______ (b) Are you more interested in something else than your job? _______ (c) Are you falsely reporting about anything? _______ (d) Are you doing something harmful? _______ (e) Are you doing little or nothing of value? _______ (f) Are you pretending? _______ (g) Are you in disagreement with something? _______ (h) Do you have overts? _______ (i) Are you withholding something? _______ (j) Do you know of some out-ethics around you? _______ (k) Don't you know what your post product is? _______ (l) Are the products of others around you unknown to you? _______ (m) Do you have things about your post you don't understand? _______ (n) Do you have words on your post you don't understand? _______ (o) Don't you know grammar? _______ (p) Is there some reason you are not quite on post? _______ (q) Is someone giving you orders you don't understand? _______ (r) Are you getting orders from too many places? _______ (s) Don't you have a post? _______ (t) Don't you know what your post is? _______ (u) Have you really not read your hat? _______ (v) Are you here for some other reason than you say? _______ (w) Were you planning to leave? _______ (x) Is your post temporary? _______ (y) What about your post purpose? _______ (z) Are you in any way misemotional or upset about your post? _______ (aa) Are you actually doing fine? _______ When this has been assessed on a meter one then takes the largest read or TA blowdown and handles it. This is done by writing the question letter and the person's answers. Each question that read is given two-way communication until each question that read has attained a floating needle. The form used and the worksheets are placed in the person's folder so that other handling can be programmed and done as needed. ___________________________________ Operator's Name 83 Probable WHY _________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ WHY The above questionnaire can also be used to help find a WHY (it will not directly find one as the Why has to be rephrased for each individual). A WHY should always be found for individuals in a Danger Condition. TROUBLE AREA SHORT FORM _______________________________ _________________________ __________________ Person's Name Post Date A short form can be done on someone who is an "old hand" and knows the tune. SF 1. Out-Ethics? _______ SF 2. Overts? _______ SF 3. Withholds? _______ SF 4. Disagreements? _______ SF 5. False Reports? _______ SF 6. Product Unknown? _______ SF 7. Products of others Unknown? _______ SF 8. Post purpose? _______ SF 9. Situations not understood? _______ SF 10. Misunderstood words? _______ SF 11. Misunderstood grammar? _______ SF 12. Wrong WHY? _______ SF 13. Omitted materials? _______ SF 14. Misemotional? _______ SF 15. False passes? _______ SF 16. Invalidation? _______ SF 17. Wrong Orders? _______ SF 18. Not understood? _______ SF 19. No situation? _______ SF 20. Doing fine really? _______ (Handling is the same as in the long form.) Probable WHY _________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________ Operator ENDING A DANGER CONDITION When production has again increased the Danger Condition should be formally ended and an Emergency Condition assigned and its formula should be followed. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mes.rd Founder Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 84  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=10/4/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  C/S Series 75 Solo C/S Series 13 PREOTS DON'T C/S  Type = 11 iDate=31/7/71 Issue=2 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  URGENT A/courses  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 10 APRIL 1972 A/courses (Cancels HCO B 31 July 71 Issue II Corrected "Solo C/Sing") URGENT C/S Series 75 Solo C/S Series 13 PREOTS DON'T C/S HCO B 31 July 71 Issue II Corrected required PreOTs to C/S their folders for the next session. I did not write this HCO B. Research has proven that a Solo PreOT who is required by any C/S to write a C/S for his next session can be put into that next session action. This C/Sing for himself his own next session violates the "continued session rule" wherein an auditor does not "finish" a session by telling the pc "the process will be continued in the next session". This puts the pc into continued sessions and in Solo can put the PreOT from Solo auditing to self auditing. There is a vast difference between the two. Solo auditing occurs in session with a meter. Self auditing is out of session wondering and chewing on bank. A Solo PreOT must NOT self audit. He ends the session he has done when he ends session on his worksheet. He then goes to Examiner and gets his exam. The Examiner sends the completed Exam form to Solo Admin who puts it in the folder. The Solo C/S, then, from his study of the folder, does the next C/S for the PreOT in proper C/S form. This is a diagonal 2 green stripes on the left- hand corner of the sheet, the PreOT's name and date in black. The C/S itself is in black pen. The PreOT takes this C/S and does it in his next session. In rare instances when the PreOT is going really well, the C/S permits him to do several sessions. The C/S can tell from Exam forms that all is well. This MUST carry a notice "Come in at once to the D of P if you cease to audit or run into trouble. Do this C/S in the next several sessions. Come in for a new C/S the moment you feel this C/S is complete and are ready for a new C/S." When no Exam forms come in the Solo D of P chases the pc up. If a Solo Exam form is bad the Examiner must mark it "Urgent Attn Solo C/S." IN RED. Solo Admin must alert the D of P who chases up the pc. Tab is kept on ALL Solo pcs on lines by the D of P and if one falls off lines the 85 fact must be visible to the Solo D of P who keeps a board on sessions with all PreOTs' names on it! The above is the correct C/Sing line. The worst features of a PreOT doing his own C/Sing are: 1. He is not a trained C/S. 2. Sudden ideas pop up he wants to handle instead of going on and he gets into an offline action when he should keep going. 3. A PreOT can "rabbit" (run away from the bank) by proposing a C/S that does not make him confront it. 4. And Last but far from least, a "C/S" by a PreOT is an invitation to the Solo Case Supervisor to Q and A with it. (Q and A means to just repeat whatever another says as a lazy way out.) Pc + Auditor is greater than bank. In Solo Auditing C/S + PreOT is greater than bank. PreOTs do NOT C/S their own folders! THE PREOT DOES KEEP UP HIS SESSION SUMMARY EACH SESSION. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:mes.rd Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 86  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=15/4/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Expanded Dianetics Series 1R   Remimeo Central Orgs Academics London Washington Los Angeles Johannesburg Denmark Sydney SHs  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 15 APRIL 1972 Remimeo Central Orgs Academics London Washington (Revised issue of Los Angeles HCOB 31 Mar 72) Johannesburg Denmark Sydney SHs Expanded Dianetics Series 1R EXPANDED DIANETICS is that branch of Dianetics which uses Dianetics in special ways for specific purposes. It is not HSDC Dianetics. Its position on the Grade and Class Chart would be just above Class IV. Its proper number is Class IVA. It uses Dianetics to change an Oxford Capacity Analysis (or an American Personality Analysis) and is run directly against these analysis graphs and the "Science of Survival Hubbard Chart of Human Evaluation". EXPANDED DIANETICS IS NOT THE SAME AS STANDARD DIANETICS AS IT REQUIRES SPECIAL TRAINING AND ADVANCED SKILLS. The HSDC is qualified to run Standard Dianetics. He is not authorized to run EXPANDED DIANETICS without special training. DO NOT MIX EXPANDED DIANETICS INTO STANDARD DIANETICS. It often happens that one technology's skills are mingled with another's. The result is that neither then work. Standard Dianetics will go right on producing results. The main difference between these two branches is that Standard Dianetics is very general in application. Expanded Dianetics is very specifically adjusted to the pc. Some pcs, particularly heavy drug cases, or who have been given injurious psychiatric treatment or who are physically disabled or who are chronically ill or who have had trouble running engrams (to name a few) require a specially adapted technology. A very good Dianetic and Class IV auditor (preferably HSDC & Class VI) can be specially trained to run Dianetics against the OCA or the Chart of Human Evaluation and handle other items of great value to a pc. STUDY (Subject to Change) This training would consist of 1. HSDC 2. STANDARD DIANETIC INTERNE HGC OK TO AUDIT 3. Class 0-IV Academy (or Class VI) 4. PRIMARY CORRECTION RD HCOB 30 Mar 72 if Primary RD not done 87 5. Full Word Clearer Rating 6. FESing 7. Expanded Dianetic Tapes and HCOBs 8. Programming 9. C/S Folder Study 10. Active Auditing on the skills taught 11. C/Sing Expanded Dianetics. CERTIFICATE The Certificate would be HUBBARD GRADUATE DIANETIC SPECIALIST. The Certificate Level is just above Class IV. Class IV is required. A Class VI SHSBC may be substituted for Class IV. CHARGES Hours of Expanded Dianetics, because of the skills required, should be at least half again or double as much as Standard Dianetic Auditing or Lower Grade Auditing. The cost of the Course would be the same as the HSDC Course and additional to it plus Interne fees. PREREQUISITE HSDC and Dianetic Interneship minimum with a successful period of Standard Dianetic Auditing as an auditor and is Class IV or VI. Case gain as a Dianetic pc, and all Lower Grades Triple. DEVELOPMENT Neither the Course nor Expanded Dianetic Auditing may be sold by an org unless the org has an Expanded Dianetic Specialist, to be specific, an HGDS. WHEN RELEASED THE COURSE WILL BE TAUGHT IN CENTRAL ORGS (LONDON, WASHINGTON, LOS ANGELES, JOHANNESBURG, DENMARK AND SYDNEY) AND SHs. IT IS THE SPECIAL COURSE THE CONTINENTAL CENTRAL ORG TEACHES. The HCOBs relating to Expanded Dianetics will be released as a part of this series so that orgs will have them when it comes time for them to acquire the tapes and teach this course. In the meanwhile these orgs should be making HSDCs and Class IVs. PERSONS NOT TRAINED ON IT MAY NOT RUN IT OR USE IT REGARDLESS OF CLASS. To repeat, Expanded Dianetics does not replace Standard Dianetics or any other Class and is itself and is used for its own specific purposes on special cases. LRH:nt.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1972 Founder by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 88  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=16/4/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  PTS RD CORRECTION LIST   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 16 APRIL 1972 Remimeo PTS RD CORRECTION LIST (Reference HCO B 17 Apr 72, "C/Sing the PTS Rundown", C/S Series 76) This Correction List is assessed and handled after a PTS Rundown has been done on the pc. It also serves as a checklist of expected actions with the Rundown. The handlings are given below the assessing statements in each instance. The list is Always Done Method 5 (All assessed then handled). 1. You have been physically ill after auditing. _______ (If this happened after a PTS RD the RD is not complete. 2wc to F/N then find what was incomplete.) 2. You lost the gains achieved in auditing. _______ (Same as 1 above.) 3. You are still in communication with a person or group that does not like Scientology. _______ (Have HCO handle per P/L 5 Apr 72 or if HCO does not act handle with D of P or Tech Sec.) 4. You know someone who disagrees with what you are doing. _______ (See 3 above.) 5. You handled the whole situation completely. _______ (If reads, 2wc to F/N.) 6. You only said it was handled. _______ (2wc to F/N, give pc P/L 23 Dec 65 and P/L 5 Apr 72 and Method 4 WC them and report it to the D of P for further handling.) 7. You don't understand the situation. _______ (See 6 above.) 8. You don't believe there is a situation. _______ (2wc to F/N and probably handling as 6 above. It could be there is no situation now.) 9. You didn't want to handle it and protested. _______ (2wc to F/N. See 6 above.) 10. It can't be handled anyway. _______ (2wc to F/N and see 6 above.) 11. There was something wrong with the auditing or auditor. _______ (Find what and do L1C, L3B or L4B as indicated.) 12. There was earlier bad auditing. _______ (Wasn't set up. Repair Pgm.) 13. You were given the PTS Rundown in the middle of another incomplete rundown. _______ (2wc to F/N. Complete the incomplete RD then verify the PTS RD.) 89 14. You weren't PTS in the first place. _______ (Find out if the pc was connected to SPs or an SP group in actual fact. Possibly still is but misinterpreting "PTS". If so do 6.) 15. The feelings about the people you were audited on are still there. _______ (2wc to F/N. L1C, L4B, L3B as indicated. Complete the RD.) 16. The PTS Rundown was not complete. _______ (2wc to F/N. Sort out Case on PTS RD Addition HCO B 20 Jan 72.) 17. You still feel PTS. _______ (See 16.) 18. You still can't hold onto your auditing gains. _______ (See 16.) 19. You were ill after the RD. _______ (See 16.) 20. You feel more upset than ever. _______ (See 16.) 21. There is still an additional person that wasn't detected. _______ (See 16.) 22. You were told to attest but were still PTS. _______ (See 16.) 23. You decided you were PTS when you weren't. _______ (2wc to F/N. Handle as indicated by Data pc gives.) 24. You said a person was suppressive who really wasn't. _______ (See 23.) 25. There is a situation that has not been disclosed. _______ (2wc to F/N. Get full data. C/S accordingly.) 26. There were lies told. _______ (See 25.) 27. You don't agree about all this. _______ (See 25.) 28. Your condition was really caused by something else. _______ (See 25.) 29. There were misunderstood words. _______ (See 25.) 30. Everything was all right in the first place. _______ (See 25.) 31. There were list errors. _______ (L4B.) 32. There were engram errors. _______ (L3B.) 33. There were auditor errors. _______ (L1C.) 34. You now feel okay. _______ (2wc to F/N.) LRH:mes.rd Copyright $c 1972 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard Founder ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 90  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=17/4/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  C/S Series 76 C/SING A PTS RUNDOWN   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 17 APRIL 1972 Remimeo C/S Series 76 C/SING A PTS RUNDOWN References: HCO B 9 Dec 71 PTS Rundown HCO B 20 Jan 72 PTS Rundown Addition HCO B 13 Feb 72 PTS RD Additional Issue II LRH Data HCO PL 5 Apr 72 PTS Type A Handling HCO B 16 Apr 72 PTS Correction List HCO B 17 Apr 72 C/S Series 76 C/Sing a PTS RD (this HCO B) Any subsequent issues. The whole point of a PTS Rundown is to make a person not PTS any longer. The point is not to just run some processes. It is to have a person all right now. To really understand this rundown, one would have to know what PTS is in the first place and why one was doing the rundown. This would apply to the auditor as well as the C/S. PTS means POTENTIAL TROUBLE SOURCE. It means someone connected to a person or group opposed to Scientology. It is a TECHNICAL thing. It results in illness and rollercoaster and IS the CAUSE of Illness and rollercoaster. When you do a PTS RD on a pc CORRECTLY he or she should no longer be ill or rollercoaster. BUT THIS INCLUDES THE PERSON HANDLING HIS PTS CONDITION IN THE REAL UNIVERSE NOT IN JUST HIS BANK. An auditor and C/S must see that the person is: (a) Handled properly in HCO or by the D of P if HCO isn't there so that the person handles the PTS Connection itself. (See HCO PL 5 April 72, "PTS TYPE A HANDLING".) (b) Do the RD correctly (see reference HCO Bs above). (c) D of P Interview the person AFTER the RD is "complete" to be sure the person is now all right (not PTS). (d) Watch the person's folder for any new signs of illness and rollercoaster and if these occur find out what was missed by assessing PTS RD CORRECTION LIST. (See HCO B 16 April 72.) (e) Handling the PTS RD CORR LIST. (f) Re-interviewing to be sure the person is all right now. 91 DATA Anyone handling or auditing or C/Sing PTS cases should have done the PACK "PTS, SP TECH" Pack 1 & Pack 2 which are based on HCO PL 31 May 71 which is the CHECKSHEET for available tech and policy on this subject. To this checksheet (HCO PL 31 May 71) must be added these issues: HCO B 9 Dec 71 PTS Rundown HCO B 20 Jan 72 PTS Rundown Addition HCO B 13 Feb 72 PTS RD Additional Issue II LRH Data HCO PL 5 Apr 72 PTS Type A Handling HCO B 16 Apr 72 PTS Correction List HCO B 17 Apr 72 C/S Series 76 C/Sing a PTS RD (this HCO B) Any subsequent issues. PTS SITUATIONS The hardest thing to get across about a PTS situation is that it IS the reason for continued illness and rollercoaster (loss of gains). The condition does exist. It is in fact common. We do have the auditing tech to handle now. The material has to be applied correctly just like any other material. The reason we do the rundown is not to do some sessions or sell some auditing or just explain why the person is like that. We do the rundown so the person will no longer be PTS. The (EP) End Phenomenon of the PTS RD is attained when the person is well and stable. As a C/S you MUST put a YELLOW TAB marked PTS on a PTS PC Folder that stays on until the person is NO LONGER PTS. If you do NOT do this there will be about 25% of your pcs or more that YOU WILL BE IN CONTINUAL TROUBLE WITH! Because you will be C/Sing auditing for a person who is PTS, will be ill, will rollercoaster because the person has NOT been handled to EP on being PTS. These people, by the way, will tell you, "oh, I'm not PTS." "But your father is suing the org." "Oh yes, I know, but it doesn't bother me. Besides my illness is from something I ate last year. And I rollercoaster because I don't like the Examiner. But I'm not PTS." The mystery is solved when you find they haven't a clue what the letters mean or what the condition is, so give them a copy of HCO PL 5 Apr 72 and let them read it. If they still want to know more give them HCO PL 23 Dec 65. (Remembering it has to be Word Cleared Method 4 or he won't have a clue even if he reads it.) We are on no campaign to rid the world of suppressives when we are handling a PTS pc. But facts are facts and tech is tech. In handling a PTS person as a C/S you are on a borderline of policy violation unless you make the person do what it says in HCO PL 5 April 72 first. That handles the situation itself. Then you can handle the person with the PTS Rundown. It is a great rundown. Like any other it has a standard way of going about it. LRH:mes.rd Copyright $c 1972 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard Founder ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 92  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=19/4/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  C/S Series 77 "QUICKIE" DEFINED   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 19 APRIL 1972 Remimeo C/S Series 77 "QUICKIE" DEFINED The reason an auditor can say he doesn't "quickie a rundown" (and none ever say they do) is because he has no definition for the word QUICKIE. The word has been used to designate rundowns that were not completely and fully done. It is not a slang word. In the dictionary you will find "Quickie also quicky: something done or made in a hurry. Also: a hurriedly planned and executed program (as of studies)." What happens in auditing, for instance, is a "Grade Zero Expanded" is "done" by just doing a single flow to its first F/N. That is obviously "quickie". A more subtle one is to do a "PTS Rundown" with no Ethics action to begin and no check for stability, holding gain and not ill a week or two after the RD. Only if both these actions were done would one have a "Complete PTS Rundown" as it would give a PRODUCT = A PC no longer PTS. So what makes a Quickie "completion" quickie? Is it length of time? Not necessarily. Is it fewness of processes? Not necessarily as Power can be done quickie simply by not hanging on for the EP and only going to F/N. To define COMPLETE gives us the reverse of Quickie. "COMPLETE: To make whole, entire or perfect; end after satisfying all demands or requirements." A Completion is "the act or action of completing, becoming complete or making complete". So "completing" something is not a loose term. It means an exact thing. "End after satisfying all demands or requirements" does not mean "doing as little as possible" or "doing what one can call complete without being detected". Anything that does not fully satisfy all requirements is QUICKIE. So "quickie" really means "omitting actions for whatever reason that would satisfy all demands or requirements and doing something less than could be achieved". In short a quickie is not doing all the steps and actions that could be done to make a perfect whole. Standard auditing actions required for ages that auditors cleared each word of each command. Yet when they went quickie they dropped this. When this was dropped, GAINS ON 75% OF ALL PCS LESSENED OR VANISHED. We are right 93 now achieving spectacular wins on pcs just by clearing up commands and words on all lists. We are finding that these pcs did not recover and NEVER BEFORE HAD BEEN IN SESSION even though previously "audited" hundreds of hours. By omitting an essential action of clearing commands, processing did not work because the pc never understood the auditing commands! So quickie action did not save any time, did it? It wasted hundreds of hours! Quickie Programs are those which omit essential steps like Vital lists or 2wcs to get data. FESs for past errors are often omitted. To slow down the torrent of quickie actions on clearing commands HCO P/L 4 Apr 72 Issue III "Ethics and Study Tech" has Clause 4 "An auditor failing to clear each and every word of every command or list used may be summoned before a Court of Ethics. The charge is OUT TECH." Ethics has to enter in after Quickie Tech has gotten in. Because quickie tech is a symptom of out ethics. HCO P/L 3 April 72 ( Est O Series 13) "Doing Work" and HCO P/L 4 Apr 72 ( Est O Series 14) "Ethics" are vital know-how where a C/S is faced with Quickie actions -- or flubby ones that will not cure. Essential Quickie Tech is simply dishonest. Auditors who do it have their own Ethics out in some way. To be sure their confront is down. There are numerous remedies for the quickie impulse. The above mentioned Policy Letters and plain simple TR 0 are standard remedies. TR 0 properly done and completed itself usually cures it. Quickie study in '67 and '68 almost destroyed auditing quality. LRH ED 174 Int which really pushes in Study Tech will achieve the primary reason for quickie -- the auditor didn't understand the words himself. Wherever Quickie tendencies or false stats (the quickest quickie possible) show up, the above P/Ls had better be gotten into full use fast. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:mes.rd Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 94  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=20/4/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Expanded Dianetics Series 4 SUPPRESSED PCS AND PTS TECH   (Adds C/S Series 76 to HGDS checksheet) Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 20 APRIL 1972 Remimeo Expanded Dianetics Series 4 (Adds C/S Series 76 to HGDS checksheet) SUPPRESSED PCS AND PTS TECH (PTS means Potential Trouble Source which itself means a person connected to a Suppressive Person.) As the Dianetic Specialist (HGDS) is often called upon to handle pcs who are not well, it is vital that he knows all about and can use "PTS Tech". All sick persons are PTS. All pcs who rollercoaster (regularly lose gains) are PTS. Suppressive persons are themselves PTS to themselves. If a Dianetic Specialist does not know this, have reality upon it and use it, he will have loses on pcs he need not have. There is considerable Administrative Tech connected with this subject of PTS and there is a special Rundown which handles PTS people. They get handled if the auditor knows his PTS tech, if he audits well and if he uses both the auditing and Administrative Tech to handle. The Administrative Tech requires an interview, usually by the Director of Processing or Ethics Officer and the person is required to handle the PTS situation itself before being audited. A check for stability is also made after being audited on the PTS Rundown. For this reason, HCO B 17 April 72 and all the checksheet of HCO P/L 31 May 71 must be fully known to the Dianetic Specialist. HCO B 17 April 72 is also C/S Series 76 so as to be sure that Case Supervisors handle the Admin and C/Sing correctly. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:mes.rd Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 95  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=20/4/72 Volnum=0 Issue=2 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  C/S Series 78 PRODUCT PURPOSE AND WHY AND WC ERROR CORRECTION   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 20 APRIL 1972 Issue II Remimeo C/S Series 78 PRODUCT PURPOSE AND WHY AND WC ERROR CORRECTION Where untrained Auditors are finding Whys for a Danger Formula, or post purposes or post products as called for in the Est O System you will get a certain amount of error and case disturbance. Such upsets also come from word clearing by incompetent persons. The C/S should look for these especially when such campaigns are in progress. He should suspect them as a possibility when a case bogs. A C/S must be sure all such papers and worksheets get into pc's folders. A common repair action is to 1. Do an assessment for type of charge. 2. Handle the charge found by the assessment done. 3. Fly all the reading items found on such assessments by 2wc or direct handling. 4. Suspect LISTING ERRORS on any Why or purpose or product found even though no list exists and reconstruct the list and L4B and handle it. 5. Handle word clearing of any type in or out of session with a Word Clear Correction List done in session by an Auditor. 6. When word clearing is too heavy on the pc or doesn't clean up suspect he has been thrown into implants which are mostly words or the words in some engram. As Implants are actually just engrams, handle it with an L3B. LISTING Any item found out of session or by a non-auditor is suspect of being a Listing and Nulling (L&N) error even though no list was made. TODAY A CORRECT L&N ITEM MUST BD AND F/N. So treat such items as you would list errors and try to reconstruct the list and either confirm the item or locate the real item (may have been invalidated and suppressed) or extend the list and get the real item. The real item will BD F/N. One can establish what the situation is with a post purpose, a Why or a product or any other such item by doing an L4B. SELF AUDITING The commonest reason for self auditing is a wrong or unfound L&N item. People can go around and self list or self audit trying to get at the right Why or product or purpose after an error has been made. 96 REACTION NOTHING PRODUCES AS MUCH CASE UPSET AS A WRONG LIST ITEM OR A WRONG LIST. Even, rarely, a DIANETIC LIST can produce wrong list reactions. Ask the pc for his somatics and he blows up or goes into apathy. Or blows. Or attacks the auditor. ALL of the more violent or bad reactions on the part of the pc come from out lists. Nothing else produces such a sharp deterioration in a case or even illness. OUT LISTS Therefore when one gets a sharp change in a case (like lowered tone, violence, blows, "determination to go on in spite of the supervisor", long notes from pcs, self C/Sing, etc, etc, the C/S SUSPECTS AN OUT LIST. This outness can occur in regular sessions even when the item was said to BD F/N. It can occur in "Coffee shop" (out of session auditing of someone), or by Est Os or poorly trained or untrained staff members or even in life. PTS When such actions as finding items by non-auditors are done on PTS people the situation can be bad, so one also suspects the person to be PTS to someone or something. "PTS" does not communicate well in an assessment question so one says, "Someone or something is hostile to you" and "You are connected to someone or something that doesn't agree with Dianetics or Scientology." REPAIRS The main things to know when doing such repairs are (a) that such situations as wrong lists or upset people can occur in an org where untrained people are also using meters and (b) THAT IT IS UP TO THE C/S TO SUSPECT DETECT AND GET THEM HANDLED IN REGULAR SESSION. Do not ignore the possible bad influence. As the good outweighs the bad in such cases, it is not a correct answer to forbid such actions. It is a correct answer to require all such actions and worksheets become part of the folder. One can also persuade the D of T or Qual to gen in the people doing such actions. And do not ignore the effect such actions can have on cases and do not neglect to include them in C/Ses before going on with the regular program. They can all be repaired. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.rd Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 97  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=24/4/72 Volnum=0 Issue=1 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  C/S Series 79 Expanded Dianetics Series 5 PTS INTERVIEWS   Remimeo D of P Auditors PTS Pack Ethics Officers  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 24 APRIL 1972 Issue I Remimeo D of P Auditors C/S Series 79 PTS Pack Ethics Expanded Dianetics Series 5 Officers PTS INTERVIEWS (Reference HCO B 17 April 72, C/S Series 76) Interviews to discover a PTS condition are done on a meter with all reads marked. The Interview asks (a) about persons who are hostile or antagonistic to the pc, (b) about groups that are anti-Scientology, (c) about people who have harmed the pc, (d) about things that the pc thinks are suppressive to the pc, (e) about locations that are suppressive to the pc and about past life things and beings suppressive to the pc. In doing the Interview the Interviewer must realize that a sick person is PTS. There are no sick people who are not PTS to someone or a group or something somewhere. A somewhat suppressive pc will find the good hats suppressive. This does not relieve his condition. He is PTS to SP people, groups, things or locations, no matter how SP he is. He can have been audited by someone he knew in an earlier life and who goofed the session. A few auditors have since been declared. Not because they goofed but because they were SP. However, some PTS pc will make trouble for good people because that is what PTS means (Potential Trouble Source). So do not buy all the good people he is PTS to. Further, when you do get the person or group or thing or location the PTS person will F/N VGI and begin to get well. The PTS condition is actually a problem and a mystery and a withdrawal so it is sometimes hard to find and has to be specially processed (3 S&Ds) to locate it. Usually it is quite visible. Don't have a sick, rollercoaster pc appear for Interview and then say "not PTS". It's a false report. It only means the Interviewer did not find it. The pc sometimes begins to list in such an Interview and such an Interview where a wrong item is found has to be audited to complete the list or find the right item. (See C/S Series 78, HCO B 20 Apr 72, Issue II.) So Interview worksheets are VITAL. The Interview should end on an F/N. The Interview is followed by the Ethics action of HCO PL 5 April 72 or other Ethics actions such as handling or disconnection and posting as called for in policy. An Interviewer has to use good TRs and operate his meter properly and know 2-way comm and PTS tech. 98 Some Interviewers are extremely successful. Such Interviews and handling count as auditing hours. When properly done, plus good auditing on the PTS RD, well people result. LRH:mes.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1972 Founder by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [HCO PL 5 April 1972, PTS Type A Handling, referred to on Previous Page, was revised and reissued on 20 July 1975 as BPL 5 April 1972R, PTS Type A Handling.]  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=26/4/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Study Series 8 THE GLIB STUDENT   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 26 APRIL 1972 Remimeo Study Series 8 THE GLIB STUDENT The Glib Student can confront the words and ideas. He cannot confront the physical universe or people around him and so cannot apply. He does not see Mest or people. The reason for this is that he is below non-existence on one or more dynamics and so cannot align with the others. As a spirit or being in a body he has no past or future and so is just a social machine. Getting him up the dynamics by conditions by "Conditions by Dynamics", HCO PL 4 April 72 (Establishment Officer Series 14), fourth page, having him do general confronting and do TR Courses the Hard Way and having him run on the Objective Processes cures this condition. It takes a lot of work, a lot of auditing but it can be cured. Unless it is fully handled he will never see enough more than the paper and words to be more than a glib student who cannot apply. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mes.rd Founder Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [A copy of HCO PL 4 April 1972, Ethics, Establishment Officer Series 14, is on Page 78 and "Conditions by Dynamics" is on Page 81.] 99  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 21 iDate=3/5/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Executive Series 12 ETHICS AND EXECUTIVES   IMPORTANT Remimeo Executive Hats  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 3 MAY 1972 Remimeo Executive Hats IMPORTANT Executive Series 12 ETHICS AND EXECUTIVES Any person holding an Executive Post (head of Department or above) is deemed an EXECUTIVE. Evaluation has revealed that the breakdown in many orgs is a failure on the part of Executives to wear their Ethics and Justice hats. It has been found that below Administrative Whys there is usually an Ethics situation as well which unhandled, causes the Administrative Why not to function or raise stats. In an area which is downstat, it is the duty of an Executive to investigate and find any out-ethics situation and get it corrected. Ethics is a personal thing in relation to a group. Unethical people are those who do not have Ethics in on themselves personally. It is the responsibility of the Executive to see to it that persons under his control and in his area get their personal ethics in and keep them in. Dishonesty, false reports, an out-ethics personal life, should be looked for and by persuasion, should be corrected. When an Executive sees such things he or she must do all he can to get the person to get his own Ethics in. When an area is downstat the Executive must at once suspect an out-ethics scene with one or more of the personnel and must investigate and persuade the person to be more honest and ethical and correct the out-ethics condition found. If this does not correct and if the person or area remains downstat, the Executive must declare the person or area in Danger and apply HCO PL 9 Apr 72 "CORRECT DANGER CONDITION HANDLING". The situation, if it does not correct, thereafter becomes a matter of full group justice with Courts and Comm Evs. Persons whose Ethics have remained out must be replaced. The seniors of an Executive are bound to enforce this policy and to use it on any Executives whose personal ethics are out and who fail to apply it. It will be found that those who do not apply this policy letter have themselves certain dishonesties or out-ethics situations. IT IS VITAL TO ANY ORGANIZATION, TO BE STRONG AND EFFECTIVE, TO BE ETHICAL. THE MOST IMPORTANT ZONE OF ETHICAL CONDUCT IN AN ORGANIZATION IS AT OR NEAR THE TOP. 100 Ethical failure at the top or just below it can destroy an organization and make it downstat. Historical examples are many. THEREFORE IT IS POLICY THAT AN EXECUTIVE MUST KEEP ETHICS IN ON HIMSELF AND THOSE BELOW HIM OR BE DISCIPLINED OR COMM EVED AND REMOVED FROM ANY POST OF AUTHORITY AND SOMEONE FOUND WHO IS HIMSELF ETHICAL AND CAN KEEP ETHICS IN ON THOSE UNDER HIS AUTHORITY. The Charge in any such case for a staff member or Executive is FAILURE TO UPHOLD OR SET AN EXAMPLE OF HIGH ETHICAL STANDARDS. Such offenses are composed of: 1. DISHONESTY. 2. Use of false statements to cover up a situation. 3. Representing a scene to be different than it actually is to cover up crimes and escape discipline. 4. Irregular 2D connections and practices. 5. Drug or alcoholic addiction. 6. Encouraging out-ethics. 7. Condoning or failing to effectively handle an out-ethics situation in self or others as an In Charge, Officer or Executive. TECHNICAL People with out-ethics withholds cannot see. This is proven by the brilliant return of perception of the environment in people audited effectively and at length on such processes. Such people also seek to place a false environment there and actually see a false environment. People whose Ethics are low will enturbulate and upset a group as they are seeking to justify their harmful acts against the group. And this leads to more harmful acts. Out-ethics people go rapidly into Treason against the group. A person whose Ethics have been out over a long period goes "out of valence". They are "not themselves". Happiness is only attained by those who are HONEST with themselves and others. A group prospers only when each member in it has his own personal ethics in. Even in a PTS (Potential Trouble Source) person there must have been out- ethics conduct toward the suppressive personality he or she is connected with for the person to have become PTS in the first place. People who are physically ill are PTS and are out-ethics toward the person or thing they are PTS to! Thus a group to be happy and well, and for the group to prosper and endure, its individual members must have their own Ethics in. It is up to the Executive or Officer to see that this is the case and to DO the actions necessary to make it come about and the group an Ethical group. 101 Exec or Officer's Steps for Getting In Ethics on a Staff Member STEP ONE Inform the person personally he is in Danger Condition by reason of acts or omissions, downstats, false reports or absence or 2D or whatever the circumstances are. He is in fact IN danger because somebody is going to act sooner or later to hit him. He may be involved already in some other assignment of Condition. But this is between you and him. HE IS IN DANGER BECAUSE YOU ARE HAVING TO BY-PASS HIM TO GET HIS ETHICS IN, A THING HE SHOULD DO HIMSELF. If he cooperates and completes this rundown and it comes out all right you will help him. If he doesn't cooperate you will have to use group justice procedures. This is his chance to get Ethics in on himself with your help before he really crashes. When he accepts this fact, Step 1 is done. Go to Step 2. STEP 2 Ethics is gotten in by definition on the person. GET IN THE DEFINITIONS FULLY UNDERSTOOD. The following words must be Method 4 Word Cleared on all the words and the words in their definitions on the person being handled. "ETHICS: The study of the general nature of morals (morals [plural] [noun]: The principles of right and wrong conduct) and the specific moral choices to be made by the individual in his relationship with others. "The rules or standards governing the conduct of the members of a profession." "JUSTICE: 1. Moral rightness; equity. 2. Honor; fairness. 3. Good reason. 4. Fair handling; due reward or treatment. 5. The administration and procedure of the law." "FALSE: Contrary to fact or truth; without grounds; incorrect. Without meaning or sincerity; deceiving. Not keeping faith. Treacherous. Resembling and being identified as a similar or related entity." "DISHONEST: Disposed to lie, cheat, defraud or deceive." "PRETENSE: A false reason or excuse. A mere show without reality." "BETRAY: To be disloyal or faithless to." "OUT-ETHICS: An action or situation in which an individual is involved contrary to the ideals and best interests of his group. An act or situation or relationship contrary to the ethics standards, codes or ideals of the group or other members of the group. An act of omission or commission by an individual that could or has reduced the general effectiveness of a group or its other members. An individual act of omission or commission which impedes the general well-being of a group or impedes it in achieving its goals." 102 Do not go to Step 3 of this until all the above words are cleared by Method 4 Word Clearing. STEP 3 Ask the person what out-ethics situation he or she is involved in. It may take the person some time to think of it or he may suppress it and be afraid to say it for fear of consequences. Reassure him that you are only trying to help him. He may have brought it up in a session but did not apply it as out- ethics. Coax him through this. If his conduct and actions are poor or downstat, he for sure will be able to come up with an out-ethics personal scene. Sometimes the person is secretly PTS and is connected to a suppressive or antagonistic person or group or thing. In such an instance he will rollercoaster as a case or on post or have accidents or be ill frequently. (See PTS tech for material on this and for future handling. Checksheet HCO PL 9 April 72 [Revised] "Correct Danger Condition Handling", but go on handling with these steps.) Sometimes the person just uses PR (brags it up and won't come clean). In this case, an auditing session is required. If the person gets involved in self listing get him audited on HCO B 20 Apr 72, C/S Series 78, which gives the auditing session procedure. A person can become very upset over a wrong item. It is easily repaired but it must be repaired if this happens. By your own 2wc or whatever means or repair get this Step 3 to a clear-cut out-ethics situation, clearly stated. Do not forget to go on with this eventually if there is a delay in completing it. GIs will be in if correct. STEP 4 Have the person work out how the out-ethics situation in which he or she is involved would be a betrayal of the group or make them false to the group or its ideals. Do not make the person guilty. Just get them to see it themselves. When they have seen this clearly and have cognited on it completely go to next step. STEP 5 The person is now ready to apply the FIRST DYNAMIC DANGER FORMULA to himself. Give him this formula and explain it to him. FIRST DYNAMIC FORMULA The formula is converted for the 1st dynamic to: 1st 1. By-pass habits or normal routines. 1st 2. Handle the situation and any danger in it. 1st 3. Assign self a danger condition. 1st 4. Get in your own personal ethics by finding what you are doing that is out-ethics and use self-discipline to correct it and get honest and straight. 103 1st 5. Reorganize your life so that the dangerous situation is not continually happening to you. 1st 6. Formulate and adopt firm policy that will hereafter detect and prevent the same situation from continuing to occur. Now usually the person is already involved in another group situation of downstats or overt products or bad appearance or low conditions, Courts, Comm Evs for something. It does not matter what other condition he was in. From you he is in Danger. So 1st 1 and 1st 2 above apply to the group situation he finds himself in. He has to assign himself a Danger Condition as he recognizes now he has been in danger from himself. 1st 4 has been begun by this rundown. It is up to him or her to finish off 1st 4 by applying the material in Steps 2 and 3. He or she has to use self-discipline to correct his own out- ethics scene and get it honest and straight, with himself and the group. 1st 5 is obvious. If he doesn't, he will just crash again. 1st 6. In formulating and adopting firm policy he must be sure it aligns with the group endeavor. When he has worked all this out AND DEMONSTRATED IT IN LIFE, he has completed the personal danger rundown. He can then assign himself Emergency and follow the Emergency Formula (HCO PL 23 Sept 67, Pg 189-190 Vol 0 OEC, "Emergency"). STEP 6 Review the person and his stats and appearance and personal life. Satisfy yourself that the steps above and the out-ethics found were all of it. That no wrong item has been found. That the person is not PTS. Handle what you find. But if you find that the person did not improve and gave it all a brush-off, you must now take the group's point of view and administer group justice. Your protection of the person is at end because he had his chance and is apparently one of those people who depend on others to keep his Ethics in for him and can't keep them in himself. So use group justice procedures thereafter. If the person made it and didn't fall on his head and is moving on up now AS SHOWN BY HONEST STATS AND CONDITION OF HIS POST, you have had a nice win and things will go much much better. And that's a win for everybody. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:mes.rd Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 104  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=3/5/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  HAVINGNESS   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 3 MAY 1972 Remimeo HAVINGNESS (Previously issued as PAB No. 23 on 2 April 1954 through Hubbard Communications Office, 163 Holland Park Avenue, London W. 11) Starvation for energy is the keynote of any case which maintains facsimiles in restimulation. The thetan who holds facsimiles to the body has chosen to have the energy in spite of the perceptions and significances in it. He is attempting to have the energy and not have the aberrative quality of it. Thus he is posed the problem of trying to reject the thought and accept the energy and thus he cannot do either. In Dianetics we gave him the energy by processing out the significances (perception) in it. When well exteriorized a thetan may have his energy so far reduced that he becomes unhappy. Having him create and snap in anchor points upon himself (not the body) will remedy this unhappiness. Matched terminalling, admiration processing and any other process which reduces energy, at length "starve" the thetan for energy. All these conditions are remedied by remedying the "havingness" of the thetan. As we saw in Acceptance Level Processing (PAB 15) only certain energy forms may be acceptable to the thetan. This is regulated by the screens he has erected against things. By setting up a resistance to certain energies, he creates an eventual appetite for them. He sets up screens to resist the form and the screen becomes plus for the form on the far side and negative for the form on the near side. As the screen caves in upon him (by being pounded by the unwanted form) it eventually causes an appetite (vacuum) for the form. Thus he actually starves for a form he once detested. This is the dwindling spiral of the Mest Universe. The thetan believes he has to have the form to survive. The remedy of havingness is necessary for all cases at and below Step IV of SOP 8. An auditor remedies havingness by "starting an avalanche", by making the preclear begin an automatic inflow of acceptable things, then graduates the preclear rapidly to avalanches of stars, planets, heavy masses and spaces. It is density and mass which count, not specific items. Degradation begins when the thetan is interiorized into unwanted mass. It is completed when, having developed an appetite for heavy mass, he is exteriorized from it. In this lifetime the downfall of any thetan began with his loss of some heavy mass. The heaviness of the mass was the value of the mass. For instance, an auditor wishing to trace the feeling of degradation in a preclear would look for a time when the preclear lost or was removed from a massive object. The auditor then has the preclear 105 mock up the object and change its quality better or worse until it "snaps in" automatically on the preclear. Then the auditor has the preclear mock up enough of the object to create an avalanche. The preclear must then add more and more to the inflow, then add planets, stars and black stars until the preclear can comfortably throw several dense objects away in mock-up. A reverse (outflowing) avalanche is then begun and run. Outflowing and inflowing avalanches are run on the preclear until his "hunger" is satiated. Numerous facsimiles may appear. The auditor continues with the dense masses in avalanches, not the facsimiles. The facsimile will "blow". This process, run for four or five hours, will create a Book 1 Mest Clear. Perceptions are turned on by running "acceptable" smells, lights and sounds in avalanches. Masses are more important than perceptions. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:sb.rd Copyright $c 1954, 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [The above HCO B is a reissue of PAB No. 23 which can be found in context in Volume II, Page 38.] 106  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=4/5/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  SIX BASIC PROCESSES   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 4 MAY 1972 Remimeo SIX BASIC PROCESSES (Previously issued as PAB No. 42 on 24 December 1954 through Hubbard Communications Office, 163 Holland Park Avenue, London W.11) There are six basic processes today in Dianetics and Scientology. Before we consider these processes, let us first consider the essential difference between Dianetics and Scientology. What we are doing could be called, more succinctly, "an understanding of life." Under this heading, we could call anything a science or an art and we could bring in many subdivisions. Other subdivisions which enter into this represent the difference between a study of life in general and a study of man in particular. Scientology could be called a study of life; Dianetics could be called a study of man. The first four dynamics are devoted to Dianetics. If you read again Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health, you will discover that it treats of the first four dynamics. If you examine the first shadows of what we now call Scientology, it treats all of the eight dynamics. In view of the fact that both Dianetics and Scientology operate in the field of man, it should be readily seen that the basic processes of Dianetics or Scientology as they apply to man would be the same. Just because we have used two different words is no reason man has changed. Thus we have our six basic processes and thus we discover that Dianetics and Scientology, up to the point of stable exteriorization, operate in exactly the same field with exactly the same tools. It is only after man is sufficiently exteriorized to become a spirit that we depart from the field of Dianetics; for here, considering man as a spirit, we must enter the field of religion. Thus we have our additional subdivision. Dianetics is a science which applies to man, a living organism; and Scientology is a religion. The six basic processes are as follows: 1. Two-way Communication 2. Elementary Straightwire 3. Opening Procedure of 8-C 4. Opening Procedure by Duplication 5. Remedying Havingness 6. Spotting Spots in Space. An additional breakdown of these sections demonstrates that these processes subdivide into some highly important techniques. An additional process is as follows: 1. Two-way Communication includes communication lag, scarcity of problems, the Code of a Scientologist, the Axioms of Dianetics. 2. Elementary Straightwire includes the Auditor's Code, Self Analysis, Memory and Mass and their relationship, under which we get past life loss of memory and what we generally call "next-to-the-last list of Self Analysis." 3. Opening Procedure of 8-C includes pan-determinism, orders, defenses and the theory and material pertinent to present time. 107 4. Opening Procedure by Duplication includes the communication formula, general theory of ARC and "it must-mustn't happen again." 5. The Remedy of Havingness includes the scale of substitutes, the hide-to- curiosity scale, Expanded Gita, mock-ups and engrams, overt acts and motivators, flows and terminals, the fact that two things can't occupy the same space if one is to have a universe, significances and problems and, in particular, the scarcity of problems. 6. Spotting Spots includes "space, the theory of," disinterest, importance, as-isness and the conditions of existence and separateness. Appended to these subjects is one of equal importance in that it is the prediction of human beings. This is included, and could be called part seven of these basics. Science of Survival, with its dissertations on the Theta-MEST theory, ARC, and the Chart of Human Evaluation, is, indeed, a study of the prediction of homo sapiens. It has been discovered in the field of training that an auditor has to be thoroughly versed in these seven items. He must be able to be expert in processing people using the six processes, and his understanding must be increased to the seventh item as included in the book Science of Survival. How thoroughly does one have to cover any one of these subjects in order to render an auditor conversant with it? It has been found in the Phoenix Certification Course that even auditors who have studied this material before coming to the course had to be rehearsed on it a minimum of eight times and had to be carefully supervised through each one of these at least eight times, had to audit at least ten or fifteen hours on each process under supervision, and had to have each one of these processes run on him expertly for many hours before he finally was able to practice them with such skill that he produced uniform results. This is in spite of the fact that these particular processes are simple. Indeed, they are so simple that an auditor has a tendency to look at them and use them as though they were also pliable. Their simplicity is residual in the fact that they are the exact processes necessary to produce the exact results of Dianetics and Scientology. It has been found that the simplicity of these processes was the stumbling block in their use. One instance in one HCA unit: a class went through for five weeks without entirely grasping the theory and practice of communication lag. Amongst this class was an auditor-student who was so expert at giving indirect, yet seemingly direct, answers that he had actually evaded the understanding of his fellow students. This person on had yet to give a precisely direct reply to a question asked him. An instructor sat down with this student and for forty-five minutes asked him the same simple question. At the end of that time the student gave at last a direct reply, and this reply was the first time in the course when he had answered a question straight. A precision definition of communication lag is "the length of time, whether verbal or silent, intervening between the auditor's asking of a specific question and the specific and precise answer of that question by the preclear." It would not matter then whether the preclear continued to talk about something else than the question, or simply remained silent, this would still be communication lag. The class had not entirely grasped this fact in that they assumed that an indirect or an almost answer was sufficient. Rapidly in the next two auditing periods the case of the student broke, simply because his auditor now understood exactly what this person was doing with auditing questions and now demanded precise answers to questions, at the same time retaining ARC with his preclear. The processes of Dianetics, as one can see, stress bringing a preclear into present time. In the old days we did this by running engrams, running locks and unsticking the preclear in general from various incidents in the past. Now we approach the problem far more directly. The Opening Procedure of 8-C is putting the preclear into contact with what is present time. The Remedy of Havingness will actually give the preclear enough energy masses to permit his starved condition to let go of the energy masses he is holding to him. The energy masses he is holding to him are commonly engrams with significance and content which make him very unhappy, but not as unhappy as he 108 thinks he would be if he no longer had this energy. The motto of an individual seems to be "Any energy, even with content as vicious as an engram, is better than little or no energy." Here, with this list of processes, we have before us the basic training for the Dianeticist and Scientologist. These processes have now remained stable for some eight months. In spite of all the attention and tests they have received, little or no improvement has occurred in the actual form of the processes, and the processes and the commands have remained steady and stable. In view of the fact that the thetan exterior is described fully in the second chapter of Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health, and in view of the fact that we have now with the command "Be three feet back of your head" the "one-shot clear," and in view of the fact that the instructor in London with his Advanced Clinical Course [1st London ACC] only three weeks deep had exteriorized successfully all of his students, we see we do not have any real problems in terms of processing or processes today. We can do it. An auditor who is well trained can achieve results with these basic processes which in any other age would be called miracles. There are people around who desperately need it as a process who believe and who would have you believe that the Opening Procedure by Duplication techniques are the most vicious things ever invented. Compare this with the fact that these people also feel bounden to go out and crusade amongst their fellow men to teach them how bad Dianetics and Scientology are. These two facts combined should tell you something concerning duplication. The very thought of duplication is so hideous to some people that they are utterly unwilling to face the slightest chance that they might be brought in to a willingness to duplicate. These people have had things happen to them which are bad enough to make these people postulate that certain things mustn't happen again. Duplication means that things must happen again and the process of duplication itself balances out and makes a person easy about his past. In the process of running Opening Procedure by Duplication hypnotism very often comes off of the bank. Here we have an example of unhypnotizing. The process of hypnotism is a monotony and a central fixation on some one object. Opening Procedure by Duplication, using two objects and using an alert and aware procedure, contacting and examining these two objects alternately, tends to unfix a person from points in the past. Naturally, this begins to run out hypnotism. A person run for only 15 or 20 minutes on Opening Procedure by Duplication might very well feel himself getting more and more hypnotized; by the time he has been run 45 minutes or an hour, this sensation has worn away and the person is far more alert than he was at the beginning of the session. It is quite common to run Opening Procedure by duplication for several hours, and Intensive Procedure as given at headquarters of the HASI is run precisely as given and taught upon preclears for a minimum of five hours before the HASI is content to release a preclear as in good condition. If the preclear cannot duplicate, his arrival at a state of good condition will simply be a signal for him to have a "no duplicate" fixation on feeling good. Thus the auditor would have brought him up to a level of feeling well and immediately afterwards the individual, being able to have things happen only once, would then have to feel bad. Here again is the problem of exteriorization which results soon afterwards in re-interiorization: the person has exteriorized, he has the fixation that something must happen only once, and thus he will go back into the body and will not come out again. This is all under the handling of duplication. Opening Procedure by Duplication wakes up the preclear, puts his body back into balance and gives him a brighter outlook in general and makes him fear the past must less than before it has been run on him. He is far better able to control his body and his environment than previously and remarks that incidents have far less effect upon him than before. This does not look very much like hypnotism, now, does it? With these processes a trained auditor -- and we emphasize trained -- is able to get the results which are called for and described in all the earlier books on Dianetics and Scientology. The reason one did not see these results more often was that the auditor himself could not duplicate the auditing commands, and thus anything and everything 109 was being run but a minimum of result was taking place. I was running one preclear one day who was a very old-timer and who had been run many, many hours on the techniques contained in Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health. I was running him on processes which ran out all of his earlier auditing. He broke down under this processing and began to curse, saying, "If only once -- if only just once -- I had been permitted to run a second time through an engram by my auditor; if only just once I had been able to run the secondary once more! But no! I was never given the chance to go through the engram a second time." Now those of you who know the techniques of Book One know definitely they call for a continuous running through, over and over, of the same incident so as to de-intensify it. This is the sort of complicated duplication which the preclear was asked to do which resolved at once his ability to duplicate and the fact that it mustn't happen again. Thus when auditors failed to return people through engrams and secondaries, for a second, fourth, fifth, or even tenth time if necessary, it then became impossible for these early techniques to work. In training it is very difficult to relay the theory and processes to people who are not very alert and who cannot duplicate. One can say straight to a class that such-and-so is observably true, and the class will immediately agree that something is observably true, but immediately after leaving the classroom, will believe in themselves that an entirely different statement and all sorts of oddities in the form of theory then agree with this different statement and all sorts of oddities in the form of theory and techniques become circulated. In the next Professional Auditor's Bulletin I am going to give you a rather thorough rundown on two-way communication and on the bulletins subsequent to that I am going to give you, for the first time, in written form, a considerable dissertation on these processes and the exact auditing commands and the results to be looked for. But there is one thing I am probably not going to cover again, and this is an odd fact which has shown up in our training experience here and in my handling of a great many auditors. This has to do with the case of the auditor in particular. I could write an entire series of PABs on this subject, but I am sure this statement will be enough. The case of an auditor, one who is skilled in the processes of Dianetics and Scientology, and the case of a preclear, one who has just walked in off the street without further knowledge, are entirely different cases, as both Dianeticists and Scientologists know. At one time the cases of Scientologists and Dianeticists were considered so much with horror on the part of other Scientologists and Dianeticists that one audited a fellow practitioner with considerable reluctance. Dianeticists and Scientologists were renowned to be tough cases. I have found now what made them tough cases. The preclear his an entirely different goal from the auditor. The preclear is there to get well: the auditor is there to make the preclear well. When we consider this further, we see that the ability of the auditor to control minds and mental reactions is dependent upon his getting results in preclears. The preclear's results simply stem from the preclear's gained ability to control his own mind and its reactions. Thus, of course, we have entirely different values. An auditor who does not consistently get good results is going to have his own case cave in on him. The only way an auditor can keep his case up is to get continuous and predictably excellent results upon preclears. Thus an auditor, to have his case in good order, would have to be in good order as an auditor; he would have to be able to get results upon those he processed. In view of the fact that he could get results upon other human beings, he could then, of course, know continuously that he could control human reactions and mental reactions; and so, with this confidence and this control, be completely unworried about his own case and be able to do actually anything he wished with his own mental machinery. The case of the auditor actually depends upon his successes in auditing. Thus in the Certification Course in Phoenix we stress today only the skill of an individual to audit, and we discover consequently that, as the auditor gets results upon his fellow 110 student and as he gets results on outside preclears, his own belief in his ability to handle the human mind soars to such an extent that as a case he ceases to be in the concern category. He of course is audited and without being audited he would not know the results which would happen in a preclear, but his actual case gains depend on his gains on preclears. Now with today's techniques we can guarantee those results on preclears. We can demonstrate to any auditor that he can make anybody well, if the person is even vaguely breathing, simply by using with skill and understanding, as trained, the above six processes and the seventh, which is actually an understanding. Here is the problem of the auditor's case resolved. The way to have one's case in excellent condition is to have continuing confidence in one's ability to get results on preclears. In the Certification Courses in Phoenix and London we work solely in the direction of giving an auditor confidence in his ability to handle the aberrations of others and we discover that with this gained confidence the fear of his own behavior vanishes; and thus an auditor becomes a very, very capable clear. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:sb.rd Copyright $c 1954, 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [The above HCOB is a reissue of PAB No. 42 which can be found in context in Volume II, Page 118.] 111  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=5/5/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=1 rDate=17/1/73 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  THE REMEDY OF HAVINGNESS   Remimeo Exp Dn Cse  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 5 MAY 1972R REVISED 17 JANUARY 1973 Remimeo Exp Dn Cse THE REMEDY OF HAVINGNESS (Previously issued as PAB No. 49 on 1 April 1955 through Hubbard Communications Office, 163 Holland Park Avenue, London W.11) (Addition in this type style on next page. Note that this also corrects page 20 of the "Level 1 PABs" booklet.) There is a great deal of upper-echelon theory connected with the Remedy of Havingness as a process, for here we are dealing with energy and the reasons and operations of a thetan in regard to it. Just why a thetan should get himself so completely snarled up in energy might be an entire mystery to anyone who did not realize that a thetan has to cut down his knowingness and his total presence in order to have a game. The awareness of awareness unit builds space to cut down knowingness. Space makes it necessary, then, to look at something in order to know about it. The next thing a thetan does to cut down his knowingness is to create energy and to pass it to other thetans and to bring in the energy of other thetans so as to get a duration and a time span. If the thetan is successful and obtains a game in this wise, he continues on with this modus operandi of having a game, and when he does not have a game he simply cuts his knowingness down once more. Of course, he reaches a point eventually where he does not get a game simply by cutting down his knowingness, and eventually assumes a fairly fixed, stupid, aspect. He is below the level of having games, but because he has cut down his knowingness he does not know, now, that he is below the level of having games and thinks that all that is necessary to get another game is to further cut down his knowingness. He is by this time obsessively dramatizing the lowering of knowingness. When one speaks of knowingness, one should realize that one is speaking of an embracive thing. Everything on the Know to Mystery Scale is simply a greater condensation or reduction of knowingness. At first one simply knows. Then he makes some space and some energy, and so now he has knowingness in terms of looking. By changing the position of the particles of energy thus created, and by exchanging particles with others, extant or self-created, the thetan cuts down his knowingness further, and gets time, and so gets emotion and sensation. When these become solid, he has effort particles and masses. Now, he could cut down his knowingness further by refusing to use emotion and effort, but by thinking about them thus introducing new VIAs into his line of knowingness. And, when he no longer knows entirely by thinking, he ceases to create knowingness and begins to eat, and from eating he drops into the ready- made sensation of sex instead of knowing what happens in the future. And from here he drops down into postulated mystery as something one cannot possibly know about. In other words, one gets a continued reduction of knowingness in order to have games. The greatest chess player in the world has no game, since he can predict that he will win and predict everything that opponents will do, so he will simply demonstrate how to play chess. Sooner or later, he will announce that he is "burned out" or has lost his knack for playing chess, and will go off into some other field where he can have a game. The field he will choose will be a less wisdom-demanding field than playing chess. A boxer, such as some of the very great ones of the past, will reduce his timing, which is to say his knowingness of arrival, to a point where he can at least put on a good exhibition, and from this they will further reduce their knowingness, and then not noticing how far they have gone, get themselves thoroughly and consistently beaten. There will be a period, however, when they are fairly evenly matched against their opponents. 112 To understand this with any thoroughness, one would have to recognize the intention back of all communication. Creation, Survival, and Destruction is knowingness. When somebody talks to you his intention is to continue in a parity where he can have an interchange of communication, which is to say a game. He takes knowingness from you, and gives knowingness to you, with one form of communication or another. Two soldiers fighting and shooting at each other are using a bullet to make the other man know. What is there to know in this situation? That one is dead, of course, and for the victor, that one has won. It is dangerous, alike, to a thetan, to have too many wins or too many losses. Give him too many wins, and he will correct in the direction of reducing his knowingness as represented by his dexterity, his prediction, his activity. Give him too many losses and he will seek another game, even to the point where he will die and pick up another body. Because the decision is on the basis of knowingness, the decision is always downward. One does not decide upward toward greater knowingness, actually, unless one has the full and complete intention of winning in a new game. If one discovers that there are no wins or losses either to be found in this new game, one will reduce one's own knowingness, even to the point of forgetting all of his knowledge concerning it, in order to ensure a game. As there is not an infinity of games in progress, one is apt, as he comes down seventy-four trillion years of track, to play out the available games and to put them in the category of "it must not happen again." One then becomes bored. One is only bored when there is no game possible, from his viewpoint. Actually, all he has to do is become enthusiastic about the game on his own consideration and he will begin to know more about it again. A thetan considers that some form or mass is necessary in order to have a game. He gets into the belief that he cannot create new masses, and so he begins to hold on to old masses, and here, whether he is exteriorized or in a body, we find him holding on hard to old facsimiles, old significances, old decisions, rather than taking on new decisions. The Remedy of Havingness directly addresses the problems of giving the thetan something "to play with." When he discovers that he can have new masses, he will begin to let go of old masses. It is an easily observed phenomenon while having a preclear Remedy Havingness, that old engrams go into restimulation, go into restimulation and run out, that they show up in front of his face and suddenly explode or disappear. The Remedy of Havingness actively does run out engrams. This process is used from boredom up to conservatism for its best results. This process is done by asking the preclear to mock up something and pull it in, or mock up something and throw it away. When a thetan is exteriorized, if you want to see him get very unhappy, make him change space until he begins to lose all the energy he is holding on to, and then fail to remedy his havingness. The thetan will become convinced that he is only a thought, and is therefore, by his standards, unable to have a game. Tell him to mock up eight anchor points in the form of the corners of a cube around him and pull them in upon himself. Ask him to do it several more times, and he immediately brightens up and becomes very happy. Why is this? You have reassured him that he can have a game. The cutting down of knowingness and the Remedy of Havingness have opposite vectors. The Remedy of Havingness will knock out old energy masses the thetan is holding on to, or that the body is holding on to, which tell the thetan he is stupid. The supplanting of these by new energy masses which do not have the postulate of cut-down knowingness in them of course makes the thetan brighter. When you find a theory detached from a process and not demonstrating itself in a process, there must be something wrong with the theory. Similarly, if what I say here about condensed knowingness being all other things, and the cut-down of knowingness, were not demonstrated in the process of Remedy of Havingness, then we would have to get ourselves a new theory. However, this is demonstrated very definitely. Those people who cannot remedy havingness, wherever they are on the tone scale, can be 113 brought to a point where they will remedy havingness simply by asking them what they wouldn't mind knowing. The consideration of what they are willing to know then begins to rise. If you only could see a Black Five operate you would see that his barriers are all erected toward knowing something. Of course he is very afraid of being told something bad, and so doesn't want to be told anything at all, and when the auditor gives him a command he never receives the command as given, but does something else. He has a block up against knowingness to such a degree that he will eventually permit himself to be pressed into complete inactive stupidity. What are those black screens for? Basically to keep him from. knowing. Knowing what? Then one will have to look closely at the definition of a datum. A datum is an invention which has become agreed upon and so solidified. In other words, a datum is to some degree a solidity, even if it is merely a symbol. To get into this state it has to be agreed upon. When it is thoroughly agreed upon it becomes, then, a truth. It is not at all a truth. It is an invention. What made it sure or what made it real was the fact that it was agreed upon. This opens the doors further to other processes. In order to get the preclear in good condition we would have to put him into some kind of a condition so that he could create. The first thing he is liable to be able to create in auditing is a lie. The word "lie" is simply "invention with a bad connotation." Society gives invention that connotation because of its anxiety to have a game and to agree, and so be able to communicate with one another. Thus society frowns upon the invention of facts, yet the preclear's sanity and continued happiness absolutely depend upon his ability to create new facts. The technique which remedies this is included in "The Creation of Sanity," number R2-29: "Start lying." One can vary this auditing command with "Tell me some lies about your past," and then keep the preclear at it long enough so that the preclear is able to come out of the complete blur which will follow on the heels of his taking over the function of and running of his memory machines. The invention of data is a step immediately toward the remedy of havingness. Simply asking the preclear what he wouldn't mind knowing, what he wouldn't mind having other people knowing about him will bring him into a condition where he can mock up and remedy havingness. The Remedy of Havingness is the companion process to Spotting Spots, which will be taken up in the next PAB. The Remedy of Havingness, simply as a process by itself, if worked up to by getting the preclear willing to know things, and willing for other people to know things, and run thoroughly so that whole avalanches of masses can pour into him or pour out of him, will actually run out an entire engram bank, and thus is an extremely valuable process. It has been reported by several auditors that exteriorization was accomplished on preclears by making them remedy havingness and do nothing else for eight or ten hours. The auditing commands for the Remedy of Havingness are: "Mock up something," "Pull it in," until the preclear is doing this easily. Then, "Mock up something," "Throw it away," until the preclear can do this easily. The significance of the object may be added by the auditor with "Pull in an ideal body," or some such thing, but the actual fact is that the actual significance does nothing for the preclear. It is the mass which counts. The auditor can have the preclear pull things in two at a time, six at a time. He can have the preclear mock up something, copy it a dozen times, one time after another, then pull in the whole mass, but the real reason he is doing this with the preclear should never drop from sight. The auditor is remedying havingness in order to give the preclear enough mass to permit him to discard old masses which he is holding on to and doesn't know anything about. LRH:sb.rd Copyright $c 1955, 1972, 1973 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard Founder ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ["The Creation of Sanity" referred to above is now known as The Creation of Human Ability. This HCO B is a reissue of PAB No. 49 which can be found in context in Volume II, Page 176.] 114  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=6/5/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  REMEDY OF HAVINGNESS -- THE PROCESS   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 6 MAY 1972 Remimeo REMEDY OF HAVINGNESS -- THE PROCESS (Previously issued as PAB No. 50, 15 April 1955) "When in doubt, remedy havingness." This is a motto which can well be followed by an auditor doing any process on any preclear. But, if there is a process which one should do with any other process, then that process should be understood thoroughly, for if done incorrectly it would be likely to produce confusion into all the other processes of Dianetics and Scientology. Therefore, in the first place, let us examine with rigor the name of this process. It is REMEDY OF HAVINGNESS. By "remedy" one means the correction of any aberrated condition. By "havingness" one means mass or objects. The process could also be called "Remedy of Un-Havingness." It could also be called "Remedy of Acceptingness." It could also be called "Remedy of Rejectingness." To those people who are deficient in havingness, the process is liable to mean that the auditor should increase the havingness of the preclear. Such an auditor with this misunderstanding would have the preclear put up large masses and push them into his body or himself. The auditor would neglect having the preclear throw away objects and masses. If the auditor misunderstood the process and simply assumed that it had something to do with havingness, and if his own havingness were too great, he would by likely to specialize on all preclears by having the preclear throw things away. Actually, the auditor should have the preclear push things into himself and his body and throw things away from himself and his body until the preclear can do both with equal ease. When this has been accomplished the preclear's havingness has been "remedied." What, then, does a Remedy of Havingness mean? It means the remedy of a preclear's native ability to acquire things at will and reject them at will. Amongst the havingnesses which would require remedy would be an obsessive inflow of money, sexual objects, troubles, somatics, and difficulties in general. Whenever one of these appeared in the preclear's environment it would have a tendency to inflow on the preclear. The reverse difficulty would be an obsessive out flow, whereby the preclear threw away or wasted anything which he had, such as money, clothes, cars, or living quarters. When the process "Remedy of Havingness" has been done thoroughly and completely, the preclear should be able to reject or accept, at his own discretion, anything in his environment as well as anything in his engram bank. The earliest use of this process is to be found in GITA, which is to say "Give and Take Processing," one of the early SOPs which became an SOP-8 "Expanded GITA." In Issue 16-G of the Journal of Scientology we have a long list of key items. The preclear was asked to waste, accept, and desire these items at will. This was the Desire-Enforcement-Inhibit Scale, or the DEI Scale. This process is the immediate ancestor of the Remedy of Havingness. Indeed, one could do far worse than to take the DEI Expanded GITA list as given in issue 16-G, and in the form of mock-ups use it as such upon the preclear, or more modernly employ it directly on the Remedy of Havingness on these objects. 115 If one were to employ such a list in the Remedy of Havingness, one would, of course, have to employ gradient scales. The use of the gradient scale has never been discarded, and the concept and principle of doing things by gradient scales is inherent in auditing itself, for one starts with a process which the preclear can do, and gives him some wins, and on a gradual scale gives him larger and larger wins until he is cleared. Similarly, in remedying havingness, the preclear must be started at the lowest end of the scale and advanced on up to the higher end of the scale. Quantity is one of the methods of doing this. At first one can ask a preclear to mock up one of an item and shove it into his body or throw it away, and then go, finally, when he is doing that well, to two items, three, four, five, and six, all the same, but a greater quantity of the item. An even lower gradient on this scale would be to simply get the idea that something was there, and to progress on forward with the idea into the actual mass. An expert auditor working with this from the idea on through to the object would discover that he had no preclears who could not mock up. He would have the preclear get the idea out in front of him of a ball, and get the idea of the ball being thrown away; get the idea of a ball up in front of him and get the idea of a ball coming in; he would then, when the preclear could do this excellently well, move forward into the actual mock-up of a ball. The mock-up would get better and better as the process progressed, until at last the preclear could mock up and throw away or push into his body at will, a ball. He would be able to see this ball, even feel its texture and its weight. Now, Exteriorization by Remedy of Havingness is a newer process than the old Remedy of Havingness. It is accomplished by having the preclear SHOVE or PUSH things into his body. One no longer has the preclear PULL things into his body. Simply by having the preclear mock up things and shove them into his body, mock up things and throw them away, mock up things and shove them into his body, mock up things and throw them away, a preclear who has already been run on the earlier steps of the six basic processes will, at this stage, exteriorize quite neatly after as little as fifteen or twenty minutes of the process. If he does not, then the earlier processes have been skimped and the preclear was really not ready for a full, forthright remedy of havingness. Even when doing Route 1, the preclear is told to push things into himself. This will rather take his flitter away for a moment, for he is there being one viewpoint, and in order to push something into himself he has to be a second viewpoint. In view of the fact that a thetan gets in trouble by being only one viewpoint, this remedies the viewpoint scarcity of the thetan, and he pushes himself up into two viewpoints with great rapidity. Thus we are doing duplication of the thetan at the same time that we are remedying havingness, so one even has the thetan shove things into himself, rather than pull things into himself. In short, one never has anyone pull things into his body any more. One has a person push things into his body. One has him, for instance, mock up a planet, and push it into the body; mock up a planet and throw it away; mock up a planet and push it into his body; mock up a planet and throw it away; mock up a planet and push it into his body, and then one says, "Where are you pushing it in from?" The preclear says, "Out here in front of the body." The auditor simply goes on doing the process and very shortly the preclear will, if the earlier steps have been done well -- the Six Basic Processes below Remedy of Havingness, exteriorize neatly and will be ready for Route 1. One would omit, in such an instance, running Spotting Spots as such, for Change of Space Processing and Communication Processing have a great deal to do with spotting spots already. If you were to do Remedy of Havingness forthrightly and all-out, and you were to accept this as the only process we had, we would work with its cousin process, R2-63 as given in The Creation of Human Ability, "Accept-Reject." One would ask the preclear for things he could accept, one after the other, until the communication lag was flat, and then would ask the preclear for things he could reject, one after the other, 116 until the communication lag was flat on that. One would then move into the Expanded GITA list and would have the preclear mock up and shove into his body (if interiorized) or into himself (if exteriorized) the various items on the Expanded GITA list as given in Issue 16-G of the Journal of Scientology. This would be a long process, and not entirely successful on all counts, but would nevertheless be a very effective and efficient process from the standpoint of gains. One would certainly get the preclear over a very large number of aberrations and would do a great deal for him. However, this is not the advised way of handling this process, for the process itself is not an end- all. Aberrations can be handled much more easily by communication processing. The exact use and commands of Remedy of Havingness in ordinary and routine auditing are simple and effective. One has been asking a preclear a great many questions which "as-ised" large masses of energy. One, in handling Change of Space or interiorization and exteriorization into objects while the preclear is exteriorized, has been "burning up" a great deal of energy. Any time the preclear begins to feel dopey or "boil off" he has either run too long on a flow in one direction, in which case reverse the flow, or he has simply reduced his havingness down to a point where he feels tired or sleepy. Without waiting for this manifestation to occur the good auditor simply in the course of Straight Wire or Description Processing, or many other processes, such as those contained in Route 1, remedies havingness. Having achieved something like a momentarily flat communication lag on a process, the auditor says to the preclear, "Mock up a mass out in front of you." When the preclear has done this, the auditor says, "Shove it into your body." When the preclear has done so, the auditor says, "Mock up another mass out in front of you." And when the preclear has done so, the auditor says, "Throw it away." That, as given, is for preclears who are interiorized. It is simply repeated over and over. The mass is not specified. It can be almost anything, and in fact it does not much matter what type of significance the mass has. Any mass is better than no mass, according to the thetan. If the preclear is exteriorized, the auditor already starts him on the Remedy of Havingness in the Route 1 step where the preclear is asked to copy what he is looking at (R1-5). When one is doing R1-5, one must be very careful to obey the gradient scale principle behind Remedy of Havingness. One would not make the preclear make twenty copies and then push them all into himself or the body. One would make the preclear make two or three copies and pushs them in one at a time until the Preclear could remedy his havingness with ease. The auditor would then have the preclear "Mock up a mass and shove it into yourself," and then "Mock up a mass and throw it away," and do this back and forth until the preclear could do this easily and well, at which time the auditor would tell the preclear, "Mock up two masses and shove them into yourself," and then "Mock up two masses and throw them away," until finally the auditor has the preclear mock up eight masses as though they were the corners of a cube around the preclear and "Shove them into yourself," and then "Mock up eight masses and throw them away." One must remember that in spite of the fact that he cannot duplicate mass actually as himself, having no space or mass, natively, the motto of the thetan is "anything is better than nothing." When you tear up a lot of facsimiles for a thetan and throw them away, he becomes very unhappy unless you have him reconstruct those facsimiles or remedy the mass he has lost accordingly. When you are having a thetan go into and out of MEST universe masses, a certain amount of energy is burned up, and after the thetan has been run for a short time on this step (R1-9 in The Creation of Human Ability), you must be particularly careful to remedy his havingness with eight masses shoved into himself and eight masses thrown away several times. A thetan who has been run a great deal without Remedy of Havingness comes to what is to him a horrible thought: "I am just a concept," and will sag in tone. He does not come to this state as long as havingness is consistently remedied. It may be, as one looks at Scientology, that one has come to the opinion, watching Remedy of Havingness work, that all there is to anything is the Remedy of Havingness, that it is all based on the Remedy of Havingness. If one has a preclear shove enough havingness into his body he will exteriorize in most cases. If one 117 remedies enough havingness while the thetan is chasing around the universe, as in the Grand Tour, the thetan will discover and as-is a great many communication lines which otherwise might be very detrimental. However, it is not true that havingness is the entire key to the human mind. Havingness is the "gimmick" or "weenie" for which the game is played, and having something is very much like winning. Above havingness there is doingness, and above doingness there is beingness, and above beingness there is communicatingness, and above communicatingness there is knowingness, and above knowingness there is postulatingness, and so we see we have a long way to go above havingness in order to get to the top activity of a thetan, which is making postulates, or unmaking them. One could, of course, rationalize each and every action of the thetan with regard to havingness. One could even extend havingness to space, although it normally refers to objects. One could do all manner of interesting things with havingness. One could get as specific and as significant as one likes, or as un-significant as one likes, and still find Remedy of Havingness working, but we do not have here in Remedy of Havingness the total clue, the total key. But we do have a process and an item which must not be overlooked in auditing. In the Six Basic Processes the Remedy of Havingness comes after the Opening Procedure by Duplication as a process, itself, but remember that Remedy of Havingness is done and can be done at any time during any of the processes as long as the preclear is even vaguely in communication with the auditor. It does not matter how vague the mass is that the preclear is using to remedy his havingness. Here is a place where certainty is not necessary. An unreal, vague, or flimsy mass, if this is all the preclear can get, will still remedy his havingness. A case comes to mind out of the Advanced Clinical Course where a student was unwilling, after his second day, to continue his studies. He did not believe that he could stand the "hammer and pound," as he put it, of the terrifically intense schedule. I took him into my office, asked him what he was doing in life, and he replied to me that he was a machinist. Also, it seemed to turn out that he had had something to do with a ship which had sunk under him, although his recollection of this was very unclear. I asked him what kind of a machine he had customarily run, and he told me. When I had him mock up this machine, and remedy his havingness with it. Then I had him mock up the ship and remedy his havingness with that, just as given above. I did this for about fifteen minutes, and enough change occurred in his case to entirely return his confidence in his ability to stand up to the course and to audit. Yet the mock-ups he was getting were so thin that he could barely vaguely discern them at all. Mock-ups get unreal because the thetan is not-ising existence. He is trying to destroy masses by saying that they do not exist, that they are not real. He is so bent up on this system of destruction that he is making everything unreal or black. One of the cures for this End of Cycle Processing run in the following fashion: One has the preclear mock himself up dead (no matter how unreal this mock- up is), then have the mock-up waste away to bone, and have the bones waste away to dust, and then have the preclear shove the dust into himself or, alternately, throw it away. One once more has the preclear mock himself up dead, have the mock-up waste away to bone, have the bones waste away to dust, and then have the preclear remedy his havingness with the dust. One continues this for two or three hours with the preclear if one really wishes the case to make a change. Where a preclear is getting no reality on mock-uo or blackness, he is most commonly stuck in that Para-Scientological thing, that thing horribly abhorred by psychologists who have become Dianeticists, or by people who are just plain scared: a past death. If you wanted to convince somebody that past deaths exist, you would run End of Cycle processing on them. This is a cousin process to the Remedy of Havingness. One could go a very long distance with this process and have the preclear mock up his mother dead, have her waste away to bones, and remedy havingness with the dust, or do this with the dust, or do this with the father or brothers, or grandparents, with a considerable change in the case. 118 This End of Cycle Processing, by the way, is a very fine process. It has been with us about a year and it has been successful whenever used. It has a tendency to fall into disuse because it has not until now had an exact place on the Six Basic Processes. But End of Cycle is actually an additional process to the Remedy of Havingness and is an effective way of remedying havingness. Do you remember in the old days the Dianetics "corpse case" who would lie upon the couch with his arms crossed neatly, all ready for a lily, and would always audit in this fashion? The solution to this corpse case is End of Cycle Processing, as given here. The preclear is so fixed in a death that he is trying to make everything unreal, and the only real thing, to him, would be the unreality of death. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:sb.rd Copyright $c 1955, 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [The above HCO B is basically a reissue of PAB No. 50 which can be found in context in Volume II, Page 180.] 119  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=7/5/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  EXPANDED GITA   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 7 MAY 1972 Remimeo EXPANDED GITA (Previously issued in the Journal of Scientology, Issue 16-G, published by Hubbard Association of Scientologists, Philadelphia, June 1953) (This is an extension of Give and Take processing.) Test preclear to see if he can get a mock-up he can see, no matter how vague. Then have him WASTE, ACCEPT UNDER DURESS, DESIRE and finally Be Able to take or leave alone each of the items listed below. He does this with mock-ups or ideas. He must do the sequence of waste -- etc. in the order given here for each item. He wastes it by having it at remote distances in places where it will do no good, being used or done or observed by something which cannot appreciate it. When he is able to waste it in vast quantities the auditor then has him accept it in mock- up form until he no longer is antagonistic to having to accept it even when it is unpleasant and great force is applied to make him take it. Again, with mock- ups, he must be able to bring himself to desire it even in its worst form; then, by mock-ups of it in its most desirable form he must come to be able to leave it entirely alone or take it in its worst form without caring. EXPANDED GITA remedies contra-survival abundance and scarcity. It will be found that before one can accept a very scarce (to him) thing, he has to give it away. A person with a milk allergy must be able to give away, in mock-up, enormous quantities of milk, wasting it, before he can accept any himself. The items in this list are compounded of several years of isolating what factors were more important to minds than others. The list lacks very few of the very important items, if any. Additions to or subtractions from this list should not be attempted. Viewpoint, Work and Pain should be heavily and often stressed and given priority. Waste, Have Forced Upon, Desire, Be Able to Give or Take, in that order, each of the following= (Order of items here is random.) Viewpoint, Work, Pain, Beauty, Motion, Engrams, Ugliness, Logic, Pictures, Confinement, Money, Parents, Blackness, Police, Light, Explosions, Bodies, Degradation, Male Bodies, Female Bodies, Babies, Children Male, Children Female, Strange and Peculiar Bodies, Dead Bodies, Affinity (Love), Agreement, Beautiful Bodies, People, Attention, Admiration, Force, Energy, Lightning, Unconsciousness, Problems, Antagonism, Reverence, Fear, Objects, Time, Eating Human Bodies, Sound, Grief, Beautiful Sadness, Hidden Influences, Hidden Communications, Doubts, Faces, Dimension Points, Anger, Apathy, Ideas, Enthusiasm, Disagreement, Hate, Sex, Reward, Eating Parents, Eaten by Mother, Eaten by Father, Eating Men, Eaten by Men, Eating Women, Eaten by Women, Start, Broken Communications, Written Communications, Stillness, Exhaustion, Women Stopping Motion, Men Stopping Motion, Changing Motion Women, Changing Motion Men, Changing Motion Babies, Changing Motion Children, Starting Motion Men, Starting Motion Women, Starting Motion Children, Starting Motion Objects, Starting Motion Self, Omens, Wickedness, Forgiveness, Play, Games, Sound, Machinery, Touch, Traffic, Stolen Goods, Stolen Pictures, Homes, Blasphemy, Caves, Medicine, Glass, Mirrors, Pride, Musical Instruments, Dirty Words, Space, Wild Animals, Pets, Birds, Air, Water, Food, Milk, Garbage, Gases, Excreta, Rooms, Beds, Punishment, Boredom, Confusion, Soldiers, Executioners, Doctors, Judges, Psychiatrists, Alcoholic Liquor, Drugs, Masturbation, Rewards, Heat, Cold, Forbidden Things, God, The Devil, Spirits, Bacteria, Glory, Dependence, Responsibility, Wrongness, Rightness, Insanity, Sanity, Faith, Christ, Death, Rank, Poverty, Maps, Irresponsibility, Greetings, Farewells, Credit, Loneliness, Jewels, Teeth, Genitalia, Complications, Help, Pretense, Truth, Lies, Assurance, Contempt, Predictability, Unpredictability, Vacuums, White Clouds, Black Clouds, Unattainables, Hidden Things, Worry, Revenge, Textbooks, Kisses, The Past, The Future, The Present, Arms, Stomachs, Bowels, Mouths, Cigarettes, Smoke, Urine, 120 Vomit, Convulsions, Saliva, Flowers, Semen, Blackboards, Fireworks, Toys, Vehicles, Dolls, Audiences, Doors, Walls, Weapons, Blood, Ambitions, Illusions, Betrayal, Ridicule, Hope, Happiness, Mothers, Fathers, Grandparents, Suns, Planets, Moons, Sensation, Looking, Incidents, Waiting, Silence, Talking, Knowing, Not Knowing, Doubts, Fac One, Remembering, Forgetting, Auditing, Minds, Fame, Power, Accidents, Illnesses, Approval, Tiredness, Faces, Acting, Drama, Costumes, Sleep, Holding Things Apart, Holding Things Together, Destroying Things, Sending Things Away, Making Things Go Fast, Making Things Appear, Making Things Vanish, Convictions, Stability, Changing People, Silent Men, Silent Women, Silent Children, Symbols of Weakness, Symbols of Force, Disabilities, Education, Languages, Bestiality, Homosexuality, Invisible Bodies, Invisible Acts, Invisible Scenes, Accepting Things Back, Games, Rules, Players, Restimulation, Sexual Restimulation, Space Reduction, Size Reduction, Entertainment, Cheerfulness, Freedom for Others to Talk, Act, Feel Pain, Be Sad, Thetans, Personalities, Cruelty, Organizations. TRY FIRST: Health Bodies, Strong Bodies, Good Perception, Good Recall. WARNING: Should your preclear become unstable or upset doing this process take him to STEP VI. Then return to this list. COMMENT: The mind is sufficiently complicated that it can be expected to have computations on almost all the above. Thus there is no single clearing button and search for it is at the dictate of a circuit, the mechanism of circuits being to search for something hidden. Thus, your preclear may begin to compute and philosophize and seek to find the "button" that will release all this. All this releases all the buttons so tell him to relax and go on with the process every time he starts to compute. NOTE: Running the above will bring to the surface without further attention the "computation on the case" and the service facsimile. Do not audit these. Run EXPANDED GITA. STEP V -- PRESENT TIME DIFFERENTIATION. EXTERIORIZATION BY SCENERY. Have preclear, with his body's eyes, study and see the difference between similar real objects such as the two legs of a chair, the spaces between the back, two cigarettes, two trees, two girls. He must see and study the objects. It is not enough to remember the objects. The definition of a CASE V is "no mock-ups, only blackness." Have him continue this process until he is alert. Use liberally and often. Then exteriorize by having the preclear close his eyes and move actual places on Earth under him, preferably places he has not been. Have him bring these up to him. Find two similar things in the scene and observe the difference between them. Move him over oceans and cities until he is certain that he is exteriorized. Then, preferably while exteriorized, have him do STEP I. This case has to know before he can be. His viewpoint is in the past. Give him present time viewpoints until he is a STEP I by the methods given for STEP V. (COMMENT: PRESENT TIME DIFFERENTIATION is a very good general technique and resolves chronic somatics and improves tone.) Assume other people's viewpoints as a drill -- not what they think about things, but as they look at things in the material universe. Attempt to be in the location of a leaf, blade of grass, car headlamp, etc., and view the universe. STEP VI -- A-R-C STRAIGHT WIRE using next-to-last list of Self Analysis in Scientology which asks preclear to recall something really real to him, etc. Then use the lists in Self Analysis. This level is the neurotic. It is identified by the preclear having mockups which will not persist or which won't go away. Use also PRESENT TIME DIFFERENTIATION. Then go to STEP IV. At any drop in tone, return case to STEP VI. STEP VII -- PSYCHOTIC CASES. (Whether in or out of body.) The psychotic appears to be in such desperate straits that the auditor often errs in thinking desperate 121 measures are necessary. Use the lightest possible methods. Give ease space and freedom where possible. Have psychotic imitate (not mock up) various things. Have him do PRESENT TIME DIFFERENTIATION. Get him to tell the difference between things by actual touch. Have him locate, differentiate and touch things that are really real to him (real objects or items). If inaccessible, mimic him with own body, whatever he does, until he comes into communication. Have him locate corners of the room and hold them without thinking. As soon as his communication is up go to STEP VI, but be very sure he changes any mock-up around until he knows it is a mock-up, that it exists, and that he himself made it. Do not run engrams. He is psychotic because viewpoints in present time are so scarce that he has gone into the past for viewpoints which at least he knew existed. By PRESENT TIME DIFFERENTIATION, by tactile on objects, restore his idea of an abundance of viewpoint in present time. If he has been given electric shock, do not process it or any other brutality. Work him for very brief periods, for his attention span is short. Always work psychotics with another auditor or a companion present. NOTE: All steps for all cases. If in doubt as to condition of case, test with STEP VI. NOTE: An operating thetan must also be able to manufacture particles of admiration and force in abundance. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:sb.rd Copyright $c 1953, 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [The above HCO B is taken from Journal of Scientology, Issue 16-G, June 1953, Standard Operating Procedure 8, which can be found in context in Volume I, Page 390.] 122  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=8/5/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  THE IMPORTANCE OF HAVINGNESS   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 8 MAY 1972 Remimeo THE IMPORTANCE OF HAVINGNESS (Previously issued as PAB No. 72,21 February 1956) A careful study of staff auditors' reports reveals that the only advances worthy of the name of Scientology occur when the auditor repairs or remedies havingness on the preclear. Without the repair and remedy of havingness no real gains become apparent. A preclear will not progress when his havingness is impaired. What are the symptoms of loss of havingness? Running any as-ising techniques the preclear may become anaten, slightly nervous, agitated, want a cigarette, or seem to break out of the session in some fashion. In either case, he is "down on havingness." In other words he has burned up, used up, or as-ised, too much of his physical body energy in the auditing itself. In view of the fact that every subjective technique puts a sort of hole in the middle of the electronic mass surrounding a preclear, parts of that mass then begin to cave in on the preclear. Thus running an as-ising technique on a preclear beyond the ability of the preclear to sustain the consequent loss of havingness will bring on in the preclear many new engrams which he did not have before. A technique which as-ises energy, if used without a repair or remedy of havingness, will bring about a worsening of the case of a preclear. Now exactly what is happening is very simple. A preclear starts to go anaten and the auditor keeps on running the process. He hasn't realized that he ought to interrupt a process at any time if the preclear demonstrates a loss of havingness. Anaten is such a demonstration of loss of havingness. All right, another example: the preclear becomes agitated or upset; he reaches for a cigarette; he begins to twitch; his foot begins to wobble; he begins to talk excitedly; he begins to cough while being audited. All of these things demonstrate a loss of havingness. These same conditions, by the way, can result from the preclear believing that the auditor has broken the Auditor's Code in some fashion or has overcome his power of choice. Both a repair and remedy of havingness are immediately indicated on the observation of anaten or agitation on the part of the preclear. In addition the auditor should carefully go over the session itself to find out, if anywhere, the preclear believed his power of choice was being overcome, or if the preclear believed the Auditor's Code had been broken. You understand that the auditor didn't necessarily have to overcome the preclear's power of choice or break the Auditor's Code in order that the preclear should believe that this has happened. However, this could be overlooked entirely if the auditor had been careful enough to repair or remedy the havingness of the preclear. The slightest drop of alertness on the part of the preclear, or the slightest agitation or somatic, should immediately indicate to the auditor that havingness has dropped and must be immediately repaired or remedied. A great deal of time can be spent on the subject of repair and remedy of havingness, and it is time spent with great benefit. It is better to "waste" time spent repairing and remedying havingness than to blunder on through. Now there is another thing I have noticed with regard to this. Auditors are running these days toward cognition. Very well, if they expect a preclear to cognite they should not expect him to pull in a bank upon himself. If an auditor runs a very obvious process which should bring the preclear toward cognition, runs it several auditing commands and then stops and repairs and remedies the preclear's havingness, and then after that asks him the same auditing question two more times, he will discover that he has blown a cognition into view. In other words you could remedy the havingness of a preclear while his mind was on one particular subject and bring a cognition into existence. 123 This becomes particularly important today, since a few months ago I discovered that you could remedy the havingness of anybody, and I mean just that!! You can remedy anybody's havingness and you can turn on mock-ups on anybody. The fact that the preclear who has a black field can be caused to mock up blacknesses or invisibilities and shove them into his body brings us into an era of being able to make anybody turn on mock-ups. Getting the preclear to postulate that the mocked up blackness is bad for the body will cause that blackness to snap into the body. By getting the preclear to postulate that the invisible mass he has mocked up is bad for the body it will snap into the body. Of course, after this has been done a few times, the consideration of the preclear will change. Then perhaps the blackness or invisibility will only snap in when the preclear postulates that it is good for the body. He may also have a residue left. It is very important to get rid of these repair and remedy of havingness residues. By various postulates such as that the residue is a threat to the body, it is good for the body, it is bad for the body, the residue too will snap in. Let's differentiate at once here the difference between a repair of havingness and a remedy of havingness. We used to call repair of havingness "giving him some havingness." It needs a better technical term. Therefore let us call this "Repair of Havingness." It means having the preclear mock up anything he can mock up, and in any way it can be done get him to shove (never pull) that mock-up into the body, and by similar means to get rid of the residue which went along with the mock-up. That is a repair of havingness. It is a one-way flow; it is an inflow. Now a remedy of havingness is getting him to mock up and shove into the body enough masses to bring him to a point where he can eventually throw one away. In other words repair of havingness is simply having him mock up things and having him shove them into the body, and a remedy of havingness is having him mock up and shove in and throw away the same type of mock-up. Remedy of havingness is always a superior operation to a repair of havingness. Repair of havingness is a very crude stop-gap, but can be used any time. However, a preclear who is working well, and on whom havingness can be remedied, should, at all times, have his havingness remedied, not repaired. In other words any type of mock-up should be both shoved into the body and mocked up and thrown away. This should be done in considerable quantity until the preclear is quite relaxed about that particular type of mock-up. One does this, remember, every time the attention of the preclear drops, or he becomes agitated. There is one other little point connected with this which is quite important, and that is, auditors very often audit a preclear into an area of time when the preclear exteriorized. This, on a preclear who does not exteriorize easily, brings on a considerable grief and sadness. The way to get rid of this is, of course, to remedy the preclear's havingness or only repair it, and to ask the preclear to recall times when he was not exteriorized. This will bring up at once times when he did exteriorize and where fear of exteriorization was built up considerably. I have noticed another special condition regarding this exteriorization phenomena which is quite important. A preclear will occasionally repair and remedy havingness up to a point where the body disappears for him. He doesn't quite know where to put the mass he has mocked up since he cannot find the body. This is particularly true of preclears who have a very low threshold on havingness. An auditor would be stupid indeed to simply plow along beyond that point where the preclear has already said that he couldn't find any body to push any havingness into. The moment the preclear does that the auditor should suspect that the preclear has gotten into an exteriorization type incident. It is not, however, necessary that he immediately flounder around and try to find this incident as recommended in the paragraphs just above. He can also repair and remedy havingness in this fashion, and it is very important to know this. Although it is disastrous for a preclear to be asked "What could your body have?" since he will simply strip the bank of various old facsimiles, it is a very, very good repair of havingness to ask a preclear "What is there around this room (area) which your body could have?" and then have him pick out specific objects in the environment which he says the body could have. If he does this he will come up the gradient scale of havingness, and his havingness will be repaired immediately or directly on the Sixth Dynamic. With a preclear who cannot get mock-ups and where the auditor has either 124 been too clumsy to get the preclear's mock-ups turned on or it really was impossible, more or less, the preclear's havingness can be repaired by having him do this process. So this is a very, very important process, and one that ought to go down in red letters. This whole subject of repair and remedy of havingness and its effect upon auditing, and the fact that it has not been stressed at all in training, being up there at Level Six in the old Basic Processes, brings us to SLP Issue 8. The entirety of Level One in SLP 8 will be devoted to the repair and remedy of havingness. In SLP issue 7 we have a great many phenomena associated with the remedy of the body's havingness. The reason for their position is to bring about an adjustment of the condition of the body before one goes on to other and more complicated ways of processing. Now, in issue 8, all of these various things will be retained, but they will be paralleled with a complete remedy of havingness and that particular level of SLP will be gone over. In actual experience it is better to remedy the havingness of a preclear, no matter where he is on the tone scale, and no matter by what process, than to run any significant process. Further, if a preclear cannot at least repair his havingness, to run Waterloo Station is to invite disaster, because in this particular process of Level 2 he is liable to get himself into a "down havingness" situation and of course will not be able to not-know anything. He may be chewing up too much energy while trying to not-know. Thus we would have the failures which have occasionally occurred in Waterloo Station. They were simply havingness failures, not a failure of Waterloo Station. Further there has been a new command suggested for Waterloo Station: "what would you be willing to not-know about that person?" This seems to be a better command, at least for the British isles. We also take care of the vacuums and separatenesses and everything else with repair or remedy of havingness and running it in with certain other things, such as problems, etc. When we discover by two-way communication a weak universe, we could then ask the individual preclear, "Invent a problem that person (weak universe) could be to you." Then, watching him very carefully, and repairing his havingness on the subject of that person's possessions, get a very rapid separation of universes. I have noticed that the weak universe came about when the person elected by the preclear to be a weak universe first began to put mest anchor points around the preclear. In other words, valuable presents. I am as pleased as can be to get a finger on this point and I know well that if East, West, North and South would begin to repair and remedy havingness and stop specializing in significances without repair or remedy of havingness, we are going to start shooting people up to the top of these Scientometric graphs. We can't help it. Let me call your attention specifically to the old phenomena of the emotional scale and the engram. We found out that when one engram was keyed in, it fixed the emotional tone of the individual. Then we had him run this and as he converted the engram to usable havingness, we found that his tone rose. We discover on these Scientometric charts that the "unhappy" section does not move if we don't change the mass of the preclear. SACRIFICES The latest news from the research front has to do with the fact that the GE demands and requires and has to have, evidently, sacrifices. The GE does not run on an overt act-motivator sequence, which makes one suspect he is not a thetan. A GE runs exclusively on being sacrificed to. If you have the preclear mock up sacrifices to the GE, you will find these become very readily assimilated. On a lower level the body accepts motivators; as soon as it is through this motivator band, it accepts sacrifices and finally comes up to a point where it will accept live bodies. When one considers that eating is entirely a matter of absorbing death, one sees this death hunger in processing by running Sacrifices. A person who has had bad legs should have a sacrifice of legs run on him and so forth. This is astonishing material. It is almost unbelievable that the GE will not be sacrificed to anything, but will only be 125 sacrificed to, and this phenomenon that the GE is thereby demanding death tells us at once that the atomic bomb will be used and that there are people in the world who will actually crave this sacrifice of cities and even nations. Aside from being a fantastically workable process, more of which anon, this matter of sacrifices tells us at once a great deal about the future. There will be no moral restraint where the atomic bomb is concerned. For about the highest level in some areas of the world, as to ease, is "operating GE." This tells us, too, why soldiers will go to war. This explains a great deal of conduct. The GE evidently operates on the postulate that as long as anything else is alive it can't live. However, it is becoming more and more doubtful that there is any more life in the body than the thetan puts there, and that the body is a single machine operating on some implanted postulates contained in the energy masses which are activated by the thetan somewhat on the order of the old "pole" theta trap. Many of these considerations can be changed around rather easily. Nothing changes them quite so fast as these sacrifice processes. In mocking up sacrifices the auditor should use all the skills of creative processing and ensure that the preclear is actually mocking up and is not dragging in old facsimiles from the bank and restimulating genetic line incidents. This can be obviated by having the persons in the mock-ups dressed in modern clothing; mocking up the incident as happening tomorrow; altering the mock-up in some manner, such as turning the face green or something of this nature. Any reasonable way in which you can ensure that you are dealing with mock-ups and not past track facsimiles. This gives auditors another tool with which to handle chronic somatics. There is another process which has a great deal of workability with chronic somatics. I know that some months ago and earlier than that it seemed rather fatal to us to continue to fixate the preclear's attention on the chronic somatic. But that is not a problem with us right now. It ceased to be a problem the moment I invented an auditing command exactly as follows: "Invent a problem that (leg, arm, nose, eye, body) could be to you." Running this command, which is in itself a sort of remedy of havingness, and repairing and remedying the havingness of the preclear as we go, we will discover that practically any and all phenomena associated with the service facsimile will come away and clear up, and the limb, nose or eye will get well. This can be used as a word of warning: ONLY ON ACTUAL TERMINALS. Never use this command, and I mean NEVER, on actual conditions. Never ask him to invent problems lameness could be to him. Never ask him what problem blindness could be to him. Lameness and blindness are conditions. We want to know what problems legs or eyes can be to him, since legs and eyes are terminals. In running this command we reduce havingness too rapidly whenever we are stressing conditions. Therefore we run it only on terminals. In running it use only terminals. Handled in this way we do have the answer as of this moment, to chronic somatics. With these processes in SLP and the adequate repair and remedy of havingness we can push our preclears right up through the top. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:sb.rd Copyright $c 1956, 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [The above HCO B is a reissue of PAB No. 72, 21 February 1956, which can be found in context in Volume II, Page 371.] 126  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=10/5/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ROBOTISM   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 10 MAY 1972 Remimeo ROBOTISM (Reference HCOB 28 Nov 1970, C/S Series 22, "Psychosis".) A technical advance has been made in relation to the inactivity, slowness or incompetence of human beings. This discovery proceeds from a two and a half year intense study of aberration as it affects the ability to function as a group member. The ideal group member is capable of working causatively in full cooperation with his fellows in the achievement of group goals and the realization of his own happiness. The primary human failing is an inability to function as himself or contribute to group achievements. Wars, political upsets, organizational duress, growing crime rates, increasingly heavy "justice", growing demands for excessive welfare, economic failure and other age-long and repeating conditions find a common denominator in the inability of human beings to coordinate. The current political answer, in vogue in this century and growing, is totalitarianism where the state orders the whole life of the individual. The production figures of such states are very low and their crimes against the individual are numerous. A discovery therefore of what this factor is, that makes the humanoid the victim of oppression, would be a valuable one. The opening lines of Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health comment on Man's lack of an answer for himself. The group needs such an answer in order to survive and for its individual members to be happy. SCALE Pan-determined Self-determined ----------- Robot | Other-determined | band | Oblivious ----------- Insane NEEDING ORDERS The exact mechanism of needing orders is to be found as an outgrowth of the mental condition outlined in HCOB 28 Nov 1970, "Psychosis". The individual with an evil purpose has to withhold himself because he may do destructive things. When he fails to withhold himself he commits overt acts on his fellows or other dynamics and occasionally loses control and does so. This of course makes him quite inactive. To overcome this he refuses any responsibility for his own actions. 127 Any motion he makes must be on the responsibility of others. He operates then only when given orders. Thus he must have orders to operate. Therefore one could term such a person a robot. And the malady could be called robotism. PERCEPTION Studies of perception undertaken since HCOB 28 Nov 70 reveal that sight, hearing and other channels of awareness decrease in proportion to the number of overt acts -- and therefore withholds -- which the person has committed on the whole track. By relieving these sight has been remarkably brightened. Therefore a person who is withholding himself from committing overt acts because of his own undesired purposes has very poor perception. He does not see the environment around him. Thus, combined with his unwillingness to act on his own initiative, there is a blindness to the environment. OVERT PRODUCTS (see P/L 14 Nov 70, Org Series 14) Since he does not act upon orders he is taking responsibility for, he executes orders without fully understanding them. Further he executes them in an environment he does not see. Thus when forced to produce he will produce overt products. These are called so because they are not in actual fact useful products but something no one wants and are overt acts in themselves -- such as inedible biscuits or a "repair" that is just further breakage. SLOWNESS The person is slow because he is moving on other-determinism, is carefully withholding himself and cannot see anyway. Thus he feels lost, confused or unsafe and cannot move positively. Because he produces overt products he gets slapped around or goes unthanked and so begins a decline. He cannot move swiftly and if he does has accidents. So he teaches himself to be careful and cautious. JUSTICE Group justice is of some use but all it really does is make the person withhold himself even harder and while a necessary restraint, nevertheless does not itself bring a lasting improvement. Threats and "heads on a pike" (meaning examples of discipline) do however jar the person into giving his attention and channeling his actions into a more desirable path from the group viewpoint. Justice is necessary in a society of such people but it is not a remedy for improvement. MALICE Despite the viciousness of the truly insane, there is little or no real malice in the robot. The truly insane cannot control or withhold their evil purposes and dramatize them at least covertly. 128 The insane are not always visible. But they are visible enough. And they are malicious. The robot on the other hand does control his evil impulses to a great extent. He is not malicious. His danger mainly stems from the incompetent things he does, the time of others he consumes, the waste of time and material and the brakes he puts on the general group endeavor. He does not do all these things intentionally. He does not really know he is doing them. He looks in wounded surprise at the wrath he generates when he breaks things, wrecks programs and gets in the way. He does not know he is doing these things. For he cannot see that he is. He may go along for some time doing (slowly wasteful) well and then carelessly smashes the exact thing that wrecks the whole activity. People suppose he cunningly intended to do so. He seldom does. He winds up even more convinced he can't be trusted and that he should withhold harder! FALSE REPORTS The robot gives many false reports. Unable to see, how can he know what is true? He seeks to fend off wrath and attract good will by "PR" (public relations boasts) without realizing he is giving false reports. MORALE The robot goes into morale declines easily. Since production is the basis of morale, and since he does not really produce much, left to his own devices, his morale sags heavily. PHYSICAL INERTIA The body is a physical object. It is not the being himself. As a body has mass it tends to remain motionless unless moved and tends to keep going in a certain direction unless steered. As he is not really running his body, the robot has to be moved when not moving or diverted if moving on a wrong course. Thus anyone with one or more of such beings around him tends to get exhausted with shoving them into motion or halting them when they go wrong. Exhaustion only occurs when one does not understand the robot. It is the exasperation that exhausts one. With understanding one is not exasperated because he can handle the situation. But only if he knows what it is. PTS Potential Trouble Sources are not necessarily robots. A PTS person generally is withholding himself from a Suppressive Person or group or thing. Toward that SP person or group or thing he is a robot! He takes orders from them if only in opposites. His overts on the SP person make him blind and non-self-determined. 129 BASIC WHY The basic reason behind persons who cannot function, are slow or inactive or incompetent and who do not produce is WITHHOLDING SELF FROM DOING DESTRUCTIVE THINGS, AND THUS UNWILLING TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY AND THEREFORE NEEDING ORDERS. The exact wording of this WHY must be done by the individual himself after examining and grasping this principle. If one writes this principle down on the top of a sheet and then asks the person to word it exactly as it applies to himself one will attain the individual why for inaction and incompetence. It will produce GIs and F/N at the Examiner. PROCESSING Physical work in the physical universe, general confronting, reach and withdraw, and Objective Processes go far in remedying this condition. Touch assists regularly and correctly given to proper End Phenomena will handle illnesses of such persons. Word Clearing is vital tech to open the person's comm lines, wipe out earlier misunderstoods and increase his understanding. PTS tech will handle the person's robotism toward SP individuals, groups or things. To this and the PTS Rundown can be added the WHY above as it relates to the things or beings found as suppressive as a last step. The why above can be used in Danger Formula work such as HCO P/L 9 April 72, Correct Danger Formula, and HCO P/L 3 May 72, "Ethics and Executives". Other individual whys can exist in these instances. EXPANDED DIANETICS The miracle of well done perfectly executed Expanded Dianetics eradicates both insanity and robotism. Drug handling and other actions may be necessary. END PRODUCT The end product when one has fully handled robotism is not a person who cannot follow orders or who operates solely on his own. Totalitarian states fear any relief of the condition as they foolishly actively promote and hope for such beings. But this is only a deficiency in their own causes and their lack of experience with fully self-determined beings. Yet education, advertising and amusements have been designed only for robots. Even religions existed to suppress "Man's Evil Nature". Lacking any examples or understanding many have feared to free the robot to his own control and think even with horror on it. But you see, beings are NOT basically robots. They are miserable when they are. Basically they prosper only when they are self-determined and can be pan-determined to help in the prosperity of all. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:sb.bh Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 130  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=30/6/71 Volnum=0 Issue=2 Rev=2 rDate=11/5/72 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  STANDARD C/S FOR WORD CLEARING IN SESSION METHOD I  Type = 11 iDate=30/6/71 Issue=2 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Remimeo Tech & Qual Secs C/Ses Auditors Word Clearers Only  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 30 JUNE 1971 REVISED Remimeo Issue II Tech & Qual (Revised 9 Aug 71) (Revised 11 May 72) Secs C/Ses Auditors Word Clearing Series 8RB Word Clearers (Cancels HCOB 30 June 71 Issue II, Only 8R and 8RR) STANDARD C/S FOR WORD CLEARING IN SESSION METHOD I 0. Clear the words in the Word Clearing Correction List so as to have it ready for use in case of bog. 1. Fly a rud if no F/N. If TA High or Low do not try to fly an ARC Brk. Do a C/S 53RRR instead. (See Auditor's Rights C/S Series 1 if any trouble with this pc. If errors in previous word clear sessions use HCOB 21 July 1971 REVISED to handle word clearing corrections needed.) 2. Do not clear these words before assessment. ASSESS. R Factor: We are going to go over a list of subjects to see if there is any word you didn't understand while studying these subjects. (Assess the whole list rapidly and clearly, good TR 1 and noting every read from the meter.) Religion _______ The Mind _______ Ministers _______ The Spirit _______ Church _______ Bodies _______ College _______ Sex _______ Schools _______ The Insane _______ Sacrifices _______ Psychiatry _______ Surgery _______ Psychoanalysis _______ Medicine _______ Psychology _______ Electronics _______ Rituals _______ Physics _______ Rites _______ Technical Subjects _______ Ships _______ Dianetics _______ The Sea _______ Scientology _______ Military _______ Theology _______ Armies _______ Theosophy _______ Navies _______ Philosophy _______ Stars _______ Law _______ Heavenly Bodies _______ Organization _______ The Universe _______ Government _______ Planes _______ Written Materials _______ Vehicles _______ Text Books _______ Machinery _______ Practice _______ Motors _______ Science _______ Administration _______ Music _______ Hearing _______ Arithmetic _______ Illnesses _______ Grammar _______ Spoken Words _______ The Humanities _______ TAPES _______ 131 Add items dealing with this specific Pc's life. 3. Ask the Question, "Is there any word on this list you didn't understand?" Clear it. Then do Step 5 on it before going on. (Do not reassess this list because there was a list word not understood.) 4. Take the remaining reading items from the best read on down and with E/S pull each one to F/N. Get each word you find to F/N. There can be many F/Ns per subject. End off with a win on the subject. 5. "In the subject of _______ what word has been misunderstood?" He MUST look them up, so have a good dictionary handy. Do not accept "I know the meaning" if the subject or word reads. CLEAR "GRAMMAR" or grammatical words out of a simple book of grammar, not a dictionary. It isn't an earlier time he misunderstood that word. It's an earlier word in that subject and it can be an earlier subject. Considerations about it and other questions are not touched. Overts, W/Hs, etc are neglected. They are not done on the subject of the word. They are done in the session ruds. Just do the Process and it will eventually F/N on each chain. 6. When all reads on the first assessment are handled to F/N, REASSESS the whole list. Do not take off the list items already handled. 7. Repeat Step 4. 8. Repeat Step 5. 9. Repeat Step 6, etc. 10. IN CASE OF ANY BOG OR SOMATIC USE THE WORD CLEARING CORRECTION LIST TO CORRECT THE BOG. 11. A persistent F/N should be attained on assessing the whole list as the End Phenomena of the Word Clearing sessions. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.bh Copyright $c 1971, 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 132  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=30/3/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=1 rDate=30/5/72 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Study Series 5R THE PRIMARY CORRECTION RUNDOWN REVISED   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 30 MARCH 1972 REVISED (Revised 30 May 72) Remimeo Study Series 5R THE PRIMARY CORRECTION RUNDOWN REVISED Reference: LRH ED 174 INT Study and Tech Breakthrough LRH ED 178 INT Super-Literacy of 30 May 72 HCO B 4 Apr 72 The Primary Rundown Revised 30 May 72 HCO B 25 Oct 71 The Special Drug Rundown HCO B 20 Apr 72 C/S Series 78 (Repairing Whys) HCO PL 3 May 72 Ethics & Executives HCO PL 5 Apr 72 PTS Type A Handling HCO B 4 Feb 72 Study Correction List HCOB 21 Jun 72 Method 7 Issue III HCOB 21 Jun 72 Method 8 Issue IV WHAT IT IS The Primary Correction Rundown is a rundown given (a) To a person who fails the Primary Rundown because of High or Low TA or Study Troubles. (b) To every Course Supervisor regardless of his TA. (c) To persons whose literacy level is not adequate to do the Primary Rundown. (d) To persons on drugs or who have been on drugs. (e) To auditors who go too often to Cramming. (f) Auditors whose auditing errors show up later on pcs. (g) Staff members who are not able to maintain stats. (h) Staff members who get into Ethics trouble. (i) Students with low study stats. (j) Blown students. (k) Members of the public who wish to purchase a "Study Rundown" but who are not going to be auditors and who are not on major Courses (HSDC, Academy Class IV, or above). The Rundown consists of Ethics orientation on the first dynamic, Potential Trouble Source from connections with hostile elements, drug handling, case handling, the why of not using Study Tech or study, the Study Correction List and handling, Method 7, a review of Grammar, and then back to a Primary RD consisting of Method 1 Word Clearing, Method 8 on Study Tapes and Student Hat. The Primary Correction Rundown is actually a checklist where each one of these is done. This checklist is kept in his pc folder on the inside of the left front cover and marked off. 133 ______________________________________ _____________________________________ Student's Name Date Begun _____________________________________ Org 1. C/S 53RC (HCO B 31 Dec 71 Revised to 16 May 72). Assess and Handle fully. DECLARED AT EXAMINER. _______ 2. HCO PL 3 May 72 with 2 lists Listing & Nulling on steps 3 and 4 of the PL. By an auditor. May require the repair of past Whys found by C/S 78. DECLARED AT EXAMINER. _______ 3. PTS Check by Auditor. Is he connected to anyone hostile to Dianetics or Scientology? Handle by PL 5 Apr 72. (It isn't necessary he leave to handle. A letter will do.) More extensive action can be done later when he gets a full PTS RD. Such persons can also be run as a Problem. DECLARED AT EXAMINER. _______ 4. Drug Handling. HCO B 25 Oct 71, The Special Drug Rundown. DECLARED AT EXAMINER. _______ 5. Case Handling. Pgm by C/S to cover obvious outnesses, GF Method 5, GF 40XR and other actions needful. (If chronically ill or has a psychotic history should be run on Expanded Dianetics if available, if not by objective processes and Dianetics.) (Can also be run on Triple or Expanded Grades.) DECLARED AT EXAMINER. _______ 6. The Why of not Studying if never studied before in an org or not using Study Tech. Done as a BD F/N Item. DECLARED AT EXAMINER. _______ 7. The Study Correction List HCO B 4 Feb 72. Assess Method 5 with good TRs, good Impingement, good metering. Handle in full. If PTS shows up again do full PTS RD. Handle to a full F/Ning list on final assessment. DECLARED AT EXAMINER. _______ 8. Method 7 HCO B 21 June 72 Issue III. Done by a Word Clearer. DECLARED AT EXAMINER. _______ 9. Review of Grammar by a Word Clearer M4 with student studying between checks by himself and reporting daily. Use a simple grammar such as that developed for foreign language students. Do not use an American dictionary and an English Grammar or vice versa, either both American or both English. Must check out clean on Method 4 and know about grammar. DECLARED AT EXAMINER. _______ 10. Method 1 Word Clearing HCO B 30 June 71 Revised to 11 May 72, Word Clearing Series 8RB. All the misunderstood background words of all words on the list must be cleared. The list must F/N. DECLARED AT EXAMINER. _______ 11. Method 8, HCO B 21 June 72 Issue IV, Study Tapes. DECLARED AT EXAMINER. _______ 12. Method 8, Student Hat. DECLARED AT EXAMINER. _______ WITH A FINAL CHECKOUT AT EXAMINER THE PERSON MAY BE DECLARED SUPER-LITERATE. This is the whole of the Primary Correction Rundown. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:nt.rd Founder Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 134  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=4/4/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=1 rDate=30/5/72 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  PRIMARY RUNDOWN (REVISED)   Remimeo Tech Div  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 4 APRIL 1972 Remimeo REVISED 30 MAY 1972 Tech Div PRIMARY RUNDOWN (REVISED) References: LRH ED 178 INT SUPER-LITERACY LRH ED 174 INT HIGHEST PRIORITY STUDY AND TECH BREAKTHROUGH HCO B 30 Mar 72 THE PRIMARY CORRECTION RUNDOWN Revised 30 May 72 REVISED HCO B 30 Jun 71 Word Clearing Series 8RB Revised Issue II STANDARD C/S FOR WORD CLEARING Revised 9 Aug 71 IN SESSION METHOD 1 Revised 11 May 72 HCO B 21 July 71 Word Clearing Series 35 Revised WORD CLEARING CORRECTION LIST Revised 9 Aug 71 REVISED Revised 31 Mar 72 HCO B 21 Jun 72 Word Clearing Series 41 Issue IV METHOD 8 HCO B 16 Apr 72 HANDLING OF NO INTERFERENCE AREA Issue II PERSONS ORDERED TO A PRIMARY [now cancelled] CORRECTION RUNDOWN AND DELIVERY OF TECH DIV PRIMARY RUNDOWN HCO B 25 Oct 71 THE SPECIAL DRUG RUNDOWN Issue II [now BTB] HCO PL 19 Mar 72 Word Clearing Series 34 Issue III HIGH CRIME POLICY AND WORD CLEARING HCOB 3 Apr 72 Study Series 6 PRIMARY RUNDOWN NOTE To know about the importance of the Primary Rundown read LRH ED 178 Int. The Primary Rundown consists of word clearing and Study Tech. It makes a student SUPER-LITERATE. The Primary Rundown is given in the TECH DIVISION (Div IV, Dept 11). (The TECH DIV may also give that portion of the Primary Correction Rundown which calls for Method 1 and Method 8 of the Primary Correction Rundown which is described in HCO B 30 March 72 Revised 30 May 72.) SIMPLICITY The Primary Rundown is very simple in its steps. Do NOT add things onto it. Do not do something else. HONESTY The keynote of the Rundown is Honesty. The whole rundown can be wasted and the student fail and the End Phenomena missed if the student goes dishonest or he is just pushed for student points by the Supervisor. If done dishonestly the whole future study career of the student will be not only more difficult but may fail entirely. 135 Honesty means don't skip, don't brush it off, don't say it was done when it wasn't. Later checks of auditing or administrative failures contain checks of the Primary Rundown errors and honesty. The whole rundown would have to be done again. STEPS 1. Verify if student's Tone Arm on a meter is usually between position 2 and 3. If so he may proceed. If not he at once is sent to the Primary Correction Rundown as his case needs repair or handling before he can do the Rundown as mental mass will get in his way and he may get upset. This step is checked by the Supervisor. (The Primary Correction Rundown is covered by HCO B 30 March 72 REVISED 30 May 72. It consists of auditing and study correction actions.) 2. If the Tone Arm is usually between 2 and 3 on the meter dial the person is made into a Word Clear using Method 1 Word Clearing. (HCO B 30 June 71 Revised Issue II, Revised 9 Aug 71, Revised 11 May 72, WORD CLEARING SERIES 8RB.) This is done in the HGC or Dept 13 of Qual or may be done in a student Co-Audit. Failure to do this step or do it well will make Study Tech difficult. A good job on this Method One will give back a person's education and send his Intelligence Quotient up. It is not a quickie action. The person doing Word Clearing Method 1 on a person is doing an auditing action. It has to be done well to achieve the final result of becoming a Word Clear. If any errors are made or the person does not F/N at the Examiner (where he goes after each session for a meter check), HCO B 21 July 71 Revised (Revised 9 Aug 71, 31 Mar 72), WORD CLEARING SERIES 35, the Word Clearing Correction List, is used. It can he used as often as there are upsets. This step should be done before the next step is begun as it makes the next step so much easier. HCO P/L 19 Mar 72 Issue III, Word Clearing Series 34, HIGH CRIME POLICY, also applies. 3. If in doing Method 1 the person was found to be very deficient in Grammar and vocabulary, even though Method One was finished but took a very long time or couldn't be finished due to case, the person is sent to Dept 13 for the Primary Correction Rundown. 4. If the person did all right on Method 1, he is now put on Study Tapes. This is NOT just listening to Study Tapes, heaven forbid. This is HCO B 21 June 72 Issue IV, Word Clearing Series 41, METHOD 8. This is a long and careful cycle. It is completed in full. It consists of looking up every new word on the tape in a grammar or large dictionary and then listening to the tape. The full directions are given in HCO B 21 June 72 Issue IV, Word Clearing Series 41, Method 8. 5. The Student Hat is now done Method 8. This completes the Primary Rundown. If correctly done, the person will achieve the condition of Super- Literacy. This is fully described in LRH ED 178 International of 30 May 72. 136 COURSE SUPERVISOR It is up to the Course Supervisor to hold this line in. His students will not prosper if their study is begun without a Primary Rundown. It is a high crime to omit this vital step. NO INTERFERENCE ZONE Persons who are on Solo Auditing between R6EW and OT III may not be put on a Primary Rundown or a Primary Correction Rundown. See HCO B 16 Apr 72 Issue II. They may not be given Method 1 Word Clearing. They may only be Method 4ed on Solo Instruction Materials. BUT THEY MAY NOT BE DEBARRED FROM STUDY. To all but those in the No Interference Area THE PRIMARY RUNDOWN IS THE REQUIRED FIRST STEP TO ALL STUDY. When on or after OT III, such persons must now do the Primary Rundown before any continuance of study. It now becomes Mandatory. CORRECTION RD The Primary Correction Rundown takes care of people who have trouble on the Primary Rundown. But do not lightly order the person to the Primary Correction RD. If they can get through the Primary Rundown with a bit of Supervisor time, let them go on through. But if they are nattery or upset or desperate even when given help, it is the Primary Correction Rundown which will handle. Do not just get rid of a Class to Qual. DRUGS Students who are or have been on Drugs need a Drug Rundown before tackling Method 1. Drugs fog up a student and prevent gains. And he loses the gains he gets. The answer is a full Drug Rundown. (See HCO B 25 Oct 71, "The Special Drug Rundown".) This will end off the drugs and let him live way above any plane he thought drugs put him on. We handle drug cases so easily it is foolish not to take this obvious step. The reason he went on drugs or alcohol also comes off. Then he can study and retain what he learns. OPEN DOOR The Primary Rundown is the open door to brilliance. Super-Literacy is a new state for Man, existing in the past only in a few, accidentally, who became the geniuses and great names of the race. LRH:nt.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1972 Founder by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 137  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=15/12/68 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=1 rDate=2/6/72 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  L4BR FOR ASSESSMENT OF ALL LISTING ERRORS   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 15 DECEMBER 1968 REVISED (Amends HCO Bulletin of 9 January 1968 List L4A) (ITEM 6 CORRECTED 12 FEBRUARY 1969) Remimeo (Amended 8 August 1970) (Amended 18 March 1971) (Revised 2 June 72) L4BR FOR ASSESSMENT OF ALL LISTING ERRORS ASSESS THE WHOLE LIST (METHOD 5) THEN TAKE Biggest reads or BDs and handle. Then clean up the list. PC'S NAME ________________________________________ DATE________________________ AUDITOR ________________________________________ 1. DID YOU FAIL TO ANSWER THE LISTING QUESTION? (If it reads, find out what question, clear the question noting whether it reads, if so, list it, find the item and give it to the pc.) 2. WAS THE LIST UNNECESSARY? (If it reads, indicate BPC and indicate that it was an unnecessary action.) 2A. DID THE QUESTION HAVE NO CHARGE ON IT? (Indicate.) 2B. WERE YOU ASHAMED TO CAUSE AN UPSET? (L1C after list corrected.) 2C. WERE YOU AMAZED TO REACT THAT WAY? (Same as 2B.) 2D. THE QUESTION HAD ALREADY BEEN LISTED BEFORE. (Indicate rehab.) 2E. YOU HAD NO INTEREST IN THE QUESTION? (Indicate that the auditor missed that it didn't read.) 3. WAS THE ACTION DONE UNDER PROTEST? (If it reads, handle by itsa earlier similar itsa.) 4. IS A LIST INCOMPLETE? (If reads, find out what list and complete it, give the pc his item.) 5. HAS A LIST BEEN LISTED TOO LONG? (If so, find what list and get the item off from it by nulling with suppress, the nulling question being: "on _______ has anything been suppressed?", for each item on the overlong list. Give the Pc his item.) 6. HAVE WE TAKEN THE WRONG ITEM OFF A LIST? (If this reads, put in Suppress and Invalidated on the list and null as in 5. above and find the right item and give to the pc.) 7. HAS A RIGHT ITEM BEEN DENIED YOU? (If this reads, find out what it was and clean it up with Suppress and Invalidate and give it to the pc.) 8. HAS AN ITEM BEEN PUSHED OFF ON YOU YOU DIDN'T WANT? (If so, find it and get in Suppress and Invalidate on it and tell pc it wasn't his item and continue the original action to find the correct item.) 138 9. HAD AN ITEM NOT BEEN GIVEN YOU? (If reads, handle as in 6.) 10. HAVE YOU INVALIDATED A CORRECT ITEM FOUND? (If so, rehab the item and find out why the pc invalidated it or if somebody else did it, clean it up and give it to pc again.) 11. HAVE YOU THOUGHT OF ITEMS THAT YOU DID NOT PUT ON THE LIST? (If so, add them to the correct list. Renull the whole list and give the pc the item.) 12. HAVE YOU BEEN LISTING TO YOURSELF OUT OF SESSION? (If so, find out what question and try to write a list from recall and get an item and give it to the pc.) 13. HAVE YOU BEEN GIVEN SOMEBODY ELSE'S ITEM? (If so, indicate to the pc this was not his item. Don't TRY to find whose it was.) 14. HAS YOUR ITEM BEEN GIVEN TO SOMEONE ELSE? (If so, find if possible what item it was and give it to the pc. Don't try to identify the "somebody else".) 14A. WERE EARLIER LISTING ERRORS RESTIMULATED? (Indicate and correct earlier lists then check the current.) 14B. HAD THIS LIST ALREADY BEEN HANDLED? (Indicate.) 15. HAS A RELEASE POINT BEEN BY-PASSED ON LISTING? (If so, indicate the overrun to the pc, rehab back.) 16. HAS A RELEASE POINT BEEN BY-PASSED ON THE QUESTION ONLY? (If so, indicate the overrun to the pc and rehab back.) 17. HAVE YOU GONE EXTERIOR WHILE LISTING? (If so, rehab. If Ext Rundown not given, note for C/S.) 18. HAS IT BEEN AN OVERT TO PUT AN ITEM ON A LIST? (If so, find out what item and why.) 19. HAVE YOU WITHHELD AN ITEM FROM A LIST? (If so, get it and add it to the list if that list available. If not put item in the report.) 20. HAS A WITHHOLD BEEN MISSED? (If so, get it, if discreditable ask "Who nearly found out?") 21. HAS AN ITEM BEEN BY-PASSED? (Locate which one.) 22. WAS A LISTING QUESTION MEANINGLESS? (If so, find out which one and indicate to the pc.) 23. HAS AN ITEM BEEN ABANDONED? (If so, locate it and get it back for the pc and give it to him.) 24. HAS AN ITEM BEEN PROTESTED? (If so, locate it and get the protest button in on it.) 25. HAS AN ITEM BEEN ASSERTED? (If so, locate it and get in the assert button on it.) 26. HAS AN ITEM BEEN SUGGESTED TO YOU BY ANOTHER? (If so, get it named and the protest and refusal off.) 27. HAS AN ITEM BEEN VOLUNTEERED BY YOU AND NOT ACCEPTED? (If so, get off the charge and give it to the pc, or if he then changes his mind on it, go on with the listing operation.) 28. HAS THE ITEM ALREADY BEEN GIVEN? (If so, get it back and give it again.) 139 29. HAS AN ITEM BEEN FOUND PREVIOUSLY? (If so, find what it was again and give it to pc once more.) 30. HAS AN ITEM NOT BEEN UNDERSTOOD? (If so, work it over with buttons until pc understands it or accepts or rejects it and go on with listing.) 30A. WAS THE LISTING QUESTION NOT UNDERSTOOD? (Get defined and check for read. It may be unreading. If so, indicate that an uncharged question was listed because it read on a misunderstood.) 30B. WAS A WORD IN THE QUESTION NOT UNDERSTOOD? (Same as 30A.) 31. WAS AN ITEM DIFFERENT WHEN SAID BY THE AUDITOR? (If so, find out what the item was and give it to the pc correctly.) 31A. DID THE AUDITOR SUGGEST ITEMS TO YOU THAT WERE NOT YOURS? (Indicate as illegal to do so. Correct the list removing these.) 32. WAS NULLING CARRIED ON PAST THE FOUND ITEM? (If so, go back to it and get in Suppress and Protest.) 33. HAS AN ITEM BEEN FORCED ON YOU? (If so, get off the reject and suppress and get the listing action completed to the right item if possible.) 34. HAS AN ITEM BEEN EVALUATED? (If so, get off the disagreement and protest.) 35. HAD EARLIER LISTING BEEN RESTIMULATED? (If so, locate when and indicate the by-passed charge.) 36. HAS AN EARLIER WRONG ITEM BEEN RESTIMULATED? (Of so, find when and indicate the by-passed charge.) 37. HAS AN EARLIER ARC BREAK BEEN RESTIMULATED? (If so, locate and indicate the fact by itsa earlier similar itsa.) 38. DO YOU HAVE AN ARC BREAK BECAUSE OF BEING MADE TO DO THIS? (If so, indicate it to the pc, check the question if reads. Get earlier similar itsa.) 39. HAS THE LIST CORRECTION BEEN OVERRUN? (If so, rehab.) 39A. WAS THE LIST DONE WHILE YOU ALREADY HAD AN ARC BRK, PTP, OR W/H? 39B. COULDN'T YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT WAS BEING DONE? 39C. COULDN'T YOU UNDERSTAND THE AUDITOR? 39D. DIDN'T THE AUDITOR ACKNOWLEDGE YOU? 40. IS THERE SOME OTHER KIND OF BY-PASSED CHARGE? (If so, find what and indicate it to pc.) 41. WAS THERE NOTHING WRONG IN THE FIRST PLACE? (If so, indicate it to pc.) 42. HAS THE UPSET BEEN HANDLED? (If so, indicate it to the pc.) 43. HAS A LIST PROCESS BEEN OVERRUN? (If so, find which one and rehab.) L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:ldm.rw.dz.rr.nt.bh Copyright $c 1968, 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 140  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=3/6/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=1 rDate=15/10/74 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  PTS RUNDOWN, FINAL STEP  Type = 12 iDate=24/3/73 Issue=0 Rev=1 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Remimeo Class IV and above  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 3 JUNE 1972R Remimeo REVISED 15 OCTOBER 1974 Class IV and above (Cancels BTB 24 March 1973R, "PTS RD Errors".) PTS RUNDOWN, FINAL STEP The following is an additional step to the PTS Rundown developed by me and tested at Flag. This step is run after each terminal is run, to prevent by- passing charge. THE STEPS ARE: 1. Select the terminal already run in R3R and Ruds. 2. Clear "can't have", "couldn't have" as DENIAL OF SOMETHING TO SOMEONE ELSE. Clear "enforced have" as MAKING SOMEONE ACCEPT WHAT THEY DIDN'T WANT. Have pc get the idea of these with an example or two. 3. Run on the SP items "can't have/enforced have" as motivator repetitive, then overt repetitive, the flow three terminal to others, others to terminal (four flows of two commands each). 4. After EACH item is handled with the four flows, Objective Havingness should be run. Then the next PTS-RD item is taken up, run R3R and Ruds then can't have/enforced have. THE COMMANDS: FLOW ONE: 1. What can't have did (terminal) run on you? 2. What did (terminal) force on you you didn't want? FLOW TWO: 1. What can't have did you run on (terminal)? 2. What did you try to force on (terminal) that he (she, it) didn't want? FLOW 1. What can't have did (terminal) run on others? THREE: 2. What did (terminal) force on others they didn't want? FLOW 1. What can't have did others run on (terminal)? THREE (A): 2 What did others try to force on (terminal) that he (she, it) didn't want? - OBJECTIVE HAVINGNESS - THEORY The theory is that SPs are SPs because they deny Hav and enforce unwanted Hav. They also deny do and enforce unwanted do. They also deny he and enforce unwanted be. This is why we have never before been able to run subjective Hav. It collided with SPs, Overts, and Withholds on them. A very full Rundown then would be to start with don't be, must be; go on to don't do, must do; end up with can't have, enforced have. (Not to be run at this time.) Hav alone should handle without resorting to be or do. 141 END OFF AT ONCE AND BEGIN OBJECTIVE HAVINGNESS IF THE TA SOARS OR THE PC CAVES IN. If this does not handle, then do a C/S 53RH at once and handle. PTS RD NOTES With the issue of HCO B 17 Mar 74, "TWC, Using Wrong Questions", it becomes necessary to convert the PTS RD 2wcs for items into L&N questions. Example: Who have you known this lifetime who has troubled or worried you? L&N to BD F/N item. Avoid listing the same question twice. The L&N for places and planets should be restricted to planets only on VA pcs and an L4BR used at the first sign of trouble. Additional PTS RD items can be obtained from past PTS Interviews. Done by L&N the RD is very powerful and direct. The pc must be well set up for it. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.jh Copyright $c 1972, 1974 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 142  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=9/6/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Word Clearing Series 36 GRAMMAR   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 9 JUNE 1972 Remimeo Word Clearing Series 36 GRAMMAR In all word clearing all Grammatical Words and small words SHOULD BE LOOKED UP IN A SIMPLE GRAMMAR TEXTBOOK. Very few dictionaries have full definitions for such words AND THEY HAVE NO EXAMPLES. Words like "a" "the" "and" are really parts of language construction and are more complex than they at first appear. A Word Clearing Auditor should have a simple grammar book to hand as well as dictionaries. The best Grammar textbooks are those compiled for persons foreign to a language, like immigrants. These do not contain the supposition that the student is already an English professor. Lots of EXAMPLES is the real test of a good grammar. When doing the Study Tapes or Student Hat lack of a simple grammar textbook can really throw the student off. Those "simple" words can be the huge rocks that stand on the highway to becoming a WORD CLEAR. So a Grammar is needed. If a student is VERY deficient (lacking) in grammar it is best to make him do a whole simple grammar text first before he begins to get into just words. The words won't hang together for him. It takes less time to do a short textbook in Grammar than it does to struggle with grammar all the way through. Grammar can look like a ghastly subject until one really looks at it. Then it's easy. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.rd Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 143  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=10/6/72 Volnum=0 Issue=1 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  BYPASSED CHARGE   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 10 JUNE 1972 Issue I Remimeo REISSUED 21 SEPTEMBER 1974 (Only change is signature) BYPASSED CHARGE The mechanism of BPC (By-Passed-Charge) must be known to an auditor otherwise he won't know what he's "Indicating". When one gets a lock, a lower earlier incident restimulates, THAT IS BPC. It isn't the auditor by-passing it. One handled later charge that restimmed earlier charge. THAT IS BPC (Tech of '62), and that is all that the term means. TIME TRACK PT | A xxxxxx|xxxxxx Lock | B xxxxxx|xxxxxx Engram of 30 years ago | Auditor touches on A, and B goes into restim out of pc's consciousness. This causes an irritated, ARC Breaky, upset feeling. The pc reacts very badly. He has been hit by a mystery. There is no apparent reason (to him) why he feels this way. This is what Bypassed Charge means. "Earlier Charge Restimmed and not seen" would be another name for it. One handles it by noting the fact that it happened. One tells the pc an earlier incident went into restimulation. This usually cools it off. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.rd Copyright $c 1972, 1974 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 144  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 21 iDate=12/6/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Data Series 26 Establishment Officer Series 18 LENGTH OF TIME TO EVALUATE   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 12 JUNE 1972 Remimeo Data Series 26 Establishment Officer Series 18 LENGTH OF TIME TO EVALUATE It will be found that long times required to do an Evaluation can be traced each time to AN INDIVIDUAL WHY FOR EACH EVALUATOR. These, however, can be summarized into the following classes of Whys: This list is assessed by a Scientology Auditor on a Meter. The handling directions given in each case are designations for auditing actions as done by a Scientology Auditor and are given in the symbols he would use. 1. Misunderstood Words. _______ Handled with Word Clearing (Method 1 and Method 4 of the Word Clearing Series.) 2. Inability to Study and an inability to learn the materials. _______ (Handled by a Study Correction List HCO B 4 Feb 72.) 3. Outpoints in own thinking. _______ (Handled by what is called an HC [Hubbard Consultant] List HCO B 28 August 70.) 4. Personal out-Ethics. _______ (Use P/L 3 May 72 by an auditor. Has two Listing and Nulling type lists.) 5. Doing something else. _______ (2-way communication on P/L 3 May 72 or reorganization.) 6. Impatient or bored with reading. _______ (Achieve Super-Literacy. LRH Executive Directive 178 International.) 7. Doesn't know how to read statistics so doesn't know where to begin. _______ (Learn to read stats from Management by Stat P/Ls.) 8. Doesn't know the scene. _______ (Achieve familiarity by direct observation.) 9. Reads on and on as doesn't know how to handle and is stalling. _______ (Get drilled on actual handling and become Super-Literate.) 145 10. Afraid to take responsibility for the consequences if wrong. _______ (HCO B 10 May 72, "Robotism". Apply it.) 11. Falsely reporting. _______ (Pull all withholds and harmful acts on the subject.) 12. Assumes the Why before starting. _______ (Level IV Service Facsimile Triple Auditing.) 13. Feels stupid about it. _______ (Get IQ raised by general processing.) 14. Has other intentions. _______ (Audit on L9S or Expanded Dianetics.) 15. Has other reasons not covered in above. _______ (Listing and Nulling to Blowdown F/N Item on the list.) 16. Has withholds about it. _______ (Get them off.) 17. Has had wrong reasons found. _______ (C/S Series 78.) 18. Not interested in success. _______ (P/L 3 May 72 and follow as in 14 above.) 19. Some other reason. _______ (Find it by 2-way comm.) 20. No trouble in the first place. _______ (Indicate it to person.) When this list is assessed one can easily spot Why the person is having trouble with the Data Series or applying it. When these reasons are handled, one can then get the series restudied and word cleared and restudied and it will be found that Evaluations are much easier to do and much more rapidly done. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:ne.rd Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 146  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=15/6/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  C/S Series 80 "DOG PCs"   IMPORTANT Remimeo Cramming  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 15 JUNE 1972 Remimeo Cramming IMPORTANT C/S Series 80 "DOG PCs" AN AUDITOR WHO CANNOT AUDIT, WHOSE TRs ARE OUT, WHOSE METERING IS BAD AND WHO NEVER KEEPS THE CODE ALWAYS SAYS HIS PCs ARE DOGS. When you find an auditor on this route, the remedy is: 1. Show him this HCO B and explain to him that an auditor is not likely to get any real results when he is so out of ARC with Pcs. 2. P/L 3 May 72, 2 lists L & N by an auditor. 3. Get off his overts and omissions on pcs and pull his w/hs. 4. Check out his meter position so that he can see needle, paper and pc all in the same look without eye shift and drill him to do so. 5. Educate his left thumb so that he corrects a TA on BDs and catches the F/N and doesn't leave the needle stuck to the right of the dial while the pc F/Ns and corrects only after the F/N has been O/R. 6. Make him do an Electronic attest and get his TRs up to where the pc has a chance to be in session. 7. WC M4 him on his materials so he isn't swimming in misunderstoods. 8. Tell him there are no dog pcs now and get busy and help them out. WHOLE HGC An entire HGC can go bad this way. Shortly afterwards it will disintegrate and you will have few or no auditors left. Some auditor who is covering up his overts, false bonuses or false stats begins it and it becomes "fashionable" to call various pcs dogs. Then other auditors, finding this an easy way to justify not trying hard, follow suit. Next thing you have no HGC. C/S ERROR A C/S can err by being too critical of auditors. Or worse he can err by agreeing about what dogs the pcs are. If he does HE HAS NOT REALIZED THAT HIS C/S EFFORTS ARE BEING WASTED BY THE AUDITOR'S OVERTS, FALSE REPORTS, METERING, CODE AND TR FLUBS. The way to handle this in the C/S is: 1. 3 May 72 P/L. 147 2. M4 on the C/S Series. 3. Require he listen to and okay ok to audit tapes. 4. Get him to come down on critical auditors with the above cramming action. Suddenly this C/S will begin to get wins. CASES Every "dog pc" investigated traced to incompetent programming, C/Sing, out TRs, bad metering, Code breaks and bad lists. By forcing an auditor to cool off his opinions and properly handle the pc, each one of these "dog pcs" has begun to fly. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:ne.rd Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 148  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=16/6/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=1 rDate=27/2/75 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  C/S Series 81R AUDITOR'S RIGHTS MODIFIED   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 16 JUNE 1972R REVISED 27 FEBRUARY 1975 Remimeo C/S Series 81R (Revisions in this type style on next page to make D of P and D of TS stats very clear) AUDITOR'S RIGHTS MODIFIED It occasionally (rarely) happens that an HGC's line stops and programs do not get finished and pcs go unaudited or sent to Ethics or Cramming instead of getting their programs completed. It also happens that a D of P becomes incapable of getting auditors to audit per the schedule he writes. 12 1/2 hour intensives drop out. Auditing falls back to the bit and piece game. The C/S finds all his work in programming wasted as the programs stale date or just get abandoned. Hours fall. Lines tangle. Tech Services cannot get assignments done. THE MAJOR WHY OF THIS AND MANY SUCH CONFUSIONS CAN BE TRACED TO AN ABUSE OF "AUDITORS' RIGHTS" IN PICKING AND CHOOSING PCS ON THE GROUNDS OF "FEELING THEY CANNOT HELP THE PC". This "right" is also abused by auditors seeking pcs who F/N easily at the Examiner. See HCO B 15 June 72, C/S Series 80, "Dog Pcs". The refusal to audit is in fact an admission, in most cases, of a feared inability to audit. Therefore, an auditor may only refuse to audit a pc if a direct personal relationship exists such as husband and wife or some friend's wife or familial relationship. An auditor advising others about this or that "dog case" or seeking to exclude pcs from auditing by abusing his "right to choose pcs" is SUBJECT TO COMM EV AND SUSPENSION OF CERTIFICATES UNTIL RETREADED. For the real why of it is his inability to handle TRs, meter, use the Code or apply Tech. Nearly every "Dog Pc" has out lists or incomplete chains or is not being run on what needs to be handled. In other words they are simply problems in repair which modern tech handles easily. The drug case who is audited on grades but has had no drug rundown is an example of misprogramming. The C/S can get many loses and the whole HGC go into a bedlam where you have auditors refusing to audit. Their reasons given are false. The real reasons involve fast F/Ns and bonuses or out TRs, metering, Code breaks and tech. 149 The D of P has a right, and so does Tech Services, to assign pcs to such and such auditors in the sequence listed without a lot of pick and choose by the auditors. A C/S has a right to get his programs completed. 12 1/2 hour intensive plans blow up where auditors choose their own pcs. STATS The stats of C/Ses and auditors may only be HOURS AUDITED with FES and admin hours separately noted. The D of P's stat may only be fully completed cases. When the stats are this way the C/S can get his programs done without worry. The D of P can get cases completed. The D of Tech Services has only completed cases and course completions for a stat. HONESTY Sanity is truth. Truth is sanity. The road to truth is begun with honesty. There was the story of the "man who sold his soul for a mess of pottage" (soup). We could parallel this with the Auditor who sold his case gain for a mess of false stats. An honest clean job and an honest clean line are the milestones of the road to truth. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:sb.nt.rd Copyright $c 1972, 1975 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [This HCO B is added to by BTB 28 December 1972RA, Revised and Reissued 25 July 1974, C/S Series 81-1 RA, Auditor's Rights Addition Revised, which can be found in the C/S Series Volume, Page 227.] 150  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=19/6/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Word Clearing Series 37 DINKY DICTIONARIES   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 19 JUNE 1972 Remimeo Word Clearing Series 37 DINKY DICTIONARIES (Dinky: Small, insignificant.) In learning the meaning of words small dictionaries are very often a greater liability than they are a help. The meanings they give are often circular: Like "CAT: An Animal." "ANIMAL: A Cat." They do not give enough meaning to escape the circle. The meanings given are often inadequate to get a real concept of the word. The words are too few and even common words are often missing. HUGE dictionaries can also be confusing as the words they use to define are often too big or too rare and make one chase through 20 new words to get the meaning of the original. The best dictionaries are the very large child's dictionaries like THE WORLD BOOK DICTIONARY (A Thorndike-Barnhart Dictionary published exclusively for Field Enterprises Educational Corporation, Merchandise Mart Plaza, Chicago, Illinois 60654 or Doubleday and Company. Thorndike-Barnhart has a whole series of dictionaries of which this is a special one. Field Enterprises has offices in Chicago, London, Rome, Sydney, Toronto. The World Book Dictionary is in two volumes, each 28 1/2 cm [11 1/4 inches] by 22 cm [8 5/8 inches] by 5.8 cm [21/4 inches], so it is no small dictionary!) (Also it defines Dianetics correctly and isn't determined on a course of propaganda to re-educate the public unlike Merriam Webster's dictionaries.) Little pocket book dictionaries may have their uses for traveling and reading newspapers, but they do get people in trouble. I have seen people find a word in them and then look around in total confusion. For the dinky dictionary did not give the full meaning or the second meaning they really needed. So the dinky dictionary may fit in your pocket but not in your mind. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.rd Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 151  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=21/6/72 Volnum=0 Issue=1 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Word Clearing Series 38 METHOD 5   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 21 JUNE 1972 Issue I Remimeo Word Clearing Series 38 METHOD 5 Method 5 Word Clearing is a System wherein the word clearer feeds words to the person and has him define each. It is called Material Clearing. Those the person cannot define must be looked up. This method may be done without a meter. It can also be done with a meter. The reason the Method is needed is because the person often does not know that he does not know. Therefore Method 4 has its limitations as the meter does not always read. The actions are very precise. The word clearer asks "What is the definition of _______?" The person gives it. If there is any doubt whatever of it, or if the person is the least bit hesitant, the word is looked up in a proper dictionary. This method is the method used to clear words or auditing commands or auditing lists. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.rd Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 152  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=21/6/72 Volnum=0 Issue=2 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Word Clearing Series 39 METHOD 6   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 21 JUNE 1972 Issue II Remimeo Word Clearing Series 39 METHOD 6 Method 6 Word Clearing is called KEY WORD CLEARING. It is used on posts and specific subjects. It is a heavier form than Method 5. Method 6 is used without a meter. Where a person is new on post or new to a subject or where there has just been a goof, an error or an Ethics action, these steps are done in the following manner. 1. The Word Clearer makes a list of the KEY (or most important) words relating to the person's duties or post or the new subject. This is made up as a list. The Word Clearer looks up each word in the dictionary and writes down the definitions. The list may have as few as three words or as many as twenty or thirty. (Example: A bank clerk's key words would be "bank" "clerk" "money" "cash" "drafts" "teller" "accounts" "customer" etc.) (Example: There has just been a goof resulting in an upset. The goof centered around "radio" "repairs" "operation" "operator" "electronics" etc.) 2. The Word Clearer, without showing the person the definitions, asks him to define each word. 3. The Word Clearer checks the definition on his list for general correctness -- not word for word but meaning. 4. Any slow or hesitancy or misdefinition is met with having the person look the word up and look up any word in the definition the person does not have a grasp of. 5. One completes his list. 6. By then the person has been jarred into looking further by the above actions. The Word Clearer asks "What other word relating to your post (or subject or error) didn't you understand?" 7. Each one mentioned is now defined by looking it up. 8. The person can now be Method 4ed relating to his post to be sure all is clean and there are no upsets. Note: Where the person has just had an accident or ethics action it may be necessary to delay the action until the person is calmer or not so upset as the action can be a heavy distraction if the person is hurt or frightened and will not be successful. IT WILL BE FOUND THAT LAZINESS, INACTIVITY, SLOWNESS AND ERRORS ON A POST OR IN USING A SUBJECT TRACE TO MISUNDERSTOOD KEY WORDS. THE REMEDY IS WC METHOD 6. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:nt.rd Founder Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 153  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=21/6/72 Volnum=0 Issue=3 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Word Clearing Series 40 METHOD 7   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 21 JUNE 1972 Issue III Remimeo Word Clearing Series 40 METHOD 7 Whenever one is working with children or foreign language persons or semi-literates Method 7 READING ALOUD is used. In this method the person is made to read aloud to find out what he is doing. It is a very simple method. It is done without a meter. It is used on such persons before other methods in order to get the person untanged. If a person does not seem to be progressing by studying silently, one has him read aloud. Another copy of the same text must also be followed by the Word Clearer as the person reads. Startling things can be observed. The person may omit the word "is" whenever it occurs. The person doesn't read it. He may have some strange meaning for it like "Israel" (actual occurrence). He may omit "didn't" each time it occurs and the reason traced to not knowing what the apostrophe is (actual occurrence). He may call one word quite another word such as "stop" for "happen" or "green" for "mean". He may hesitate over certain words. The procedure is 1. Have him read aloud. 2. Note each omission or word change or hesitation or frown as he reads and take it up at once. 3. Correct it by looking it up for him or explaining it to him. 4. Have him go on reading, noting the next omission, word change or hesitation or frown. 5. Repeat steps 2 to 4. By doing this a person can be brought up to literacy. His next actions would be learning how to use a dictionary and look up words. Then a simple grammar. A very backward student can be boosted up to literacy by this method. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.rd Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 154  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=21/6/72 Volnum=0 Issue=4 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Word Clearing Series 41 METHOD 8   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 21 JUNE 1972 Issue IV Remimeo Word Clearing Series 41 METHOD 8 (If a student has trouble with this Method he should do Method 7 first. Method One should also be done.) Method 8 is an action used in the "Primary Rundown" where one is studying Study Tech or where one is seeking a full grasp of a subject. Its End Product is SUPER-LITERACY. The steps are these: Usually an alphabetical list of every word or term in the text of a paper, a chapter or a recorded tape is available or provided. 1. The person looks up each word on the alphabetical list and uses each in sentences until he has the meaning conceptually. The words are looked up in a big dictionary. The grammatical words or small words are looked up in a simple grammar. If the person has too much trouble with grammar he should do the whole simple grammar text before going on. Any technical terms not in the dictionary are looked up in a technical dictionary or glossary or in bulletins on the materials, i.e. a photographic dictionary. This is not done for the whole subject, it is done for a paper or a chapter or one tape of a series. 2. One then reads or listens to the paper, chapter or tape for its sense or general meaning. 3. Method 4 is then done on the person to find any misunderstoods. 4. These are cleared up per Method 4 procedure. 5. The person reads or listens to the material again. 6. The person is again checked for any misunderstoods. 7. If there are any misunderstoods the person again does steps 4 & 5. 8. When the material is fully heard or understood as per above steps and checks, end off on that paper, chapter, tape and go on to the next one. 9. An alphabetical list is made or exists for the next paper, chapter or tape. Steps 1 to 8 are done on it. 10. Each succeeding paper or chapter or tape is done with steps 1 to 8. 155 When all the material has been done in this way, the person will be fully able to apply all the material. Usually Method 8 is reserved for the Scientology Study Tapes which contain how to study and the Student Hat. It can also be used to master a major subject. IT WILL BE FOUND THAT METHOD 8 (or Method 2 or 3 or 4 or 6) ARE VERY LENGTHY AND HARD TO DO UNLESS ONE HAS FIRST HAD A METHOD ONE WORD CLEARING. A Word Clearing Correction List is used on Method 8 whenever a student bogs heavily. This list will, when assessed on a meter properly, locate the errors and they can be corrected. When used on the Study Tech itself and Student Hat, Method 8 HONESTLY DONE makes a person SUPER-LITERATE. It is like hearing and seeing and reading for the first time! Reading a text or instruction or book is comfortable. One has it in conceptual form. One can APPLY the material learned. It is a new state. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.rd Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 156  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=20/7/72 Volnum=0 Issue=1 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  PRIMARY CORRECTION RUNDOWN HANDLING   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 20 JULY 1972 Issue I Remimeo PRIMARY CORRECTION RUNDOWN HANDLING (Refers to HCO B 30 March 72, Revised 30 May 72, "Primary Correction Rundown") Students who struggle with the Primary Rundown (HCO B 4 Apr 72, Revised 30 May 72) are given the PRIMARY CORRECTION RUNDOWN. Steps 1 to 9 of the PCRD (per HCO B 30 March 72, Revised 30 May 72) are paid for by the pc quite in addition to his Primary Rundown. IF available auditors exist on Course of a proper class and the pc is a student then these steps 1 to 9 PCRD may be done on a co-audit basis. BUT IF NOT WELL DONE OR MESSED UP OR DELAYED MUST BE DONE BY A PROFESSIONAL AUDITOR AT THE STUDENT'S OWN EXPENSE. A STAFF MEMBER stalled on the Primary Rundown is put through the PCRD in Qual or Qual and HGC for different steps. Qualifications is the Correction Division. PCRD is a Correction action. There should be word clearers in Qual. And these as Class IIIs should be competent to do steps 1 to 9 of the PCRD. The object of a PCRD is not to stall the person and keep him off the PRD. The purpose of the PCRD is to get the person through the PRD. Where people have been put off the PRD for any reason and are not industriously going through the PCRD IT IS UP TO QUAL TO MAKE SURE THEY DO GET THROUGH PCRD AND PRD. Orgs that offload pcs or students on the thinnest excuses or Qual Divisions that will not service and speed the lines have to be watched as the discovery of trouble on the PRD can be used to simply halt the student or pc. Instead of picking up the ball, a Qual has been known to just send students back to class without handling or put students to "doing their hats" or other nonsense. The idea is to complete somebody on what they are supposed to complete. FOLDER STUDY If you study the person's folder, particularly a staff member's, you will probably find that several of the steps 1 to 9 have already been done. These are checked off as done on the PCRD checklist. Any org that is worthy of the name has folder summaries in the inside left-hand cover of the current folder. It is very easy to locate what have been done. OUT LISTS It is not at all rare to find that various "whys have been found" but that the person is not doing well. This is a case of WRONG ITEMS and is handled by C/S Series 78. Thus steps 1, 2, 3 and 6 of the PCRD may consist mainly of correcting botched up lists. 157 IDLE STUDENT The problem of putting someone off the PRD onto the PCRD is that he is now "idle as a student". He cannot go forward on his studies as he has not done his PRD. In fact going on studying without the PRD is a waste of time as it's mainly misunderstood, glib and won't be applied. It is actually faster to do a PRD (or a PCRD) and then study than it is to study without the PRD or PCRD. And it is certainly far more effective. The thing to do is to get the student who is assigned to the PCRD through the PCRD. As noted above he may have several points already done. And the rest can be done easily and fast. RESISTIVE STUDENTS There are situations where you have students or even executives who will not even go to study. These are of course people who need the PCRD worst. But how to get them available even for that? In the case of a senior executive who will not study you can get a disarrangement of the study lines as they won't push and will even impede study -- for instance by not making staff go to study time or preventing them from going. Also policy and HCO Bs fall out or are not enforced and form of org is not held since reading and study are similar actions so standard actions are not known. Naturally such a thing has to be handled very fast. Because cooperation from such a student is VERY limited, time to do a whole PCRD is not possible. PRE-PCRD There is a PRE-PCRD action that handles this. It has 2 steps. A. Assess Method 5 C/S 53RC. Take the LFBD item and INDICATE it to the person. Don't handle it or the rest of 53RC. Just Indicate it to the pc. He will usually agree and cognite. The TA will come down further and the needle will float. That's it. B. Now take the Study Correction List. Assess it Method 5. Pick out the biggest LFBD you got. Indicate it to the pc. He will cognite, the TA will drop down and an F/N will occur. That's it. C. Put these 2 sheets in his pc folder for full handling of all reads by his auditor and add them to the pc's auditing program sheet inside the left front cover of the pc's folder. The result will often be magical. The person will become more agreeable about study or the Primary Correction Rundown. Of course they should now get a Primary Correction Rundown of which C/S 53RC is the first step anyway. This Pre-PCRD gets them started. And it only takes a little while. 158 EP The End Phenomena of a Primary Correction Rundown is "Can he now quickly and easily do the Primary Rundown?" If yes, and if it works out in practice that he can, that's it. Let him onto the Primary RD. But if he bogs, back to the PCRD. MORAL The moral of this HCO B is get them through the Primary Rundown. If they can't or don't go, do the PCRD. And if they're shunted to the PCRD get it DONE. And get them to the real EP which is SUPER LITERACY. The moral is, get them through. Don't idle about. Get it DONE. Then they will whizz along on fast flow study and you've got COMPLETIONS. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.rd Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 159  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=20/7/72 Volnum=0 Issue=2 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  DISTRACTIVE AND ADDITIVE QUESTIONS AND ORDERS   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 20 JULY 1972 Issue II Remimeo DISTRACTIVE AND ADDITIVE QUESTIONS AND ORDERS Recently there have come up many instances of auditors asking odd non- process questions while "doing a process" and giving odd orders. Example: While running a process an auditor also kept asking, "Is your attention on something else?" This is of course a daffy thing to do. The auditor's TRs or metering go out. Then the auditor badgers the pc with strange irrelevant questions. These are distractions, nothing more nor less. Not all the silly questions in the world substitute for lack of TRs and proper metering. A question about "What else are you doing?" does not substitute for having by-passed an F/N or running an uncharged item. Giving Orders that are not part of any process is very bad. Example: Auditor has missed a read, by-passed an F/N and goofing it generally. Pc gets dull, disinterested. Auditor says, "Come back into the room!" Evaluation fits into this set of bad tricks. Like, "You are really OT you know. You just think you're aberrated." Or "You better tell the Examiner you are really Clear." Or "You are in pretty bad shape unless you can see the whole building." These of course are suppressive Evaluations. In 1950 there was a general observation. ALL AUDITORS TALK TOO MUCH. As we seem to be in a period of additive questions and comments, the observation can be made again. MUZZLED auditing means stating only the model session patter and Commands and TRs. It ALWAYS gets the best results. Do NOT add a lot of questions or orders to a session to cover up goofs in standard tech. Standard Tech works. Use it and it only. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.rd Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 160  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=10/8/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Expanded Dianetics Series 6 C/S Series 82 DIANETIC HCO B INTEREST   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 10 AUGUST 1972 (Amended & Reissued 28 March 1974 Remimeo -- only change is Series No.) Expanded Dianetics Series 6 C/S Series 82 DIANETIC HCO B INTEREST On two certain subjects the "Interest?" question is omitted from Dianetic R3R patter. On drugs and when running Evil Purposes or Intentions one does NOT ask the pc if he is interested in running the item. The requirement on both drug items and intentions is that the item read on the meter (suppress and inval can be used) and has not been run by R3R previously. Many pcs, it has now been found, have replied "No, no interest" on a drug item, the item has not been run and the pc then continued to have trouble with drugs. Checking back pcs who returned to drugs after auditing showed "drug rundowns" that were so brief as to be nothing. One pc who had been on LSD for years had only a 1 hour quickie drug rundown. Later this person relapsed. Tracing this, in each case the "Interest?" question had been used and the pc had replied "No interest" BUT MEANT "I'M NO LONGER INTERESTED IN DRUGS." So Drug items that have read are run R3R without asking for interest. The command is simply omitted. In Expanded Dianetics the same thing has occurred in running Evil Purposes or Intentions. The Auditor asked the pc if he was interested in running the item and the pc said "No" and so it went untouched. But the pc had it confused with interest in doing the purpose and missed running it and then fell on his head later. Tracing the case back it was found that R/Ses and such had not been run due to the pc saying "No Interest". Nothing bad will happen if the item is run. C/S RESPONSIBILITY The C/S must keep telling his auditors, on drugs or Expanded Dianetics, "omit asking for interest on R3R on these (drug) (intentions). Run them if they read on the meter." REPAIR In repairing cases it is good sense to check this point on drugs and intentions to see if they were neglected in R3R due to "no interest". If so, then have them run and the case will suddenly do well. LRH:nt.ntm.jh L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1972, 1974 Founder by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 161  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=13/8/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=1 rDate=15/8/72 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  FAST FLOW TRAINING   Remimeo BPI All Students Tech Dept Qual "The Auditor" REGISTRARS  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 13 AUGUST 1972R CORRECTED AND REISSUED 15 AUGUST 1972 Remimeo Correction in this type style BPI All Students Tech Dept Qual "The Auditor" REGISTRARS FAST FLOW TRAINING References: LRH ED 178 INT of 30 May 72 SUPER-LITERACY HCO B 4 Apr 72 Revised 30 May 72 PRIMARY RUNDOWN REVISED HCO B 30 Mar 72 Revised 30 May 72 PRIMARY CORRECTION RUNDOWN HCO B 20 July 72 Issue I PCRD HANDLING HCO B 15 July 71 Issue III C/S Series 48R DRUG HANDLING HCO B 25 Oct 71 Issue II (or as revised) THE SPECIAL DRUG RUNDOWN So that there is NO question about what is meant by FAST FLOW TRAINING: ANY STUDENT WHO HONESTLY COMPLETES THE PRIMARY RUNDOWN OR PRIMARY CORRECTION RUNDOWN IS THEREAFTER DESIGNATED A "FAST FLOW STUDENT". The Fast Flow Student passes courses by attestation at Certs and Awards to the effect that he (a) has enrolled properly on the course, (b) has paid for the course, (c) has studied and understands the materials, (d) has done the drills, (e) can produce the result required in the materials. The student is given a PROVISIONAL CERTIFICATE. This looks like any other certificate but is not gold sealed and has provisional plainly on it. In the case of an Auditor, an Interneship or formal auditing experience is required. When actual honest evidence is presented to C&A that he has demonstrated that he can produce flubless results his Certificate is VALIDATED with a gold seal and is a permanent certificate. In Administrative Courses or course of any kind not having to do with auditing, the same procedure is followed and a PROVISIONAL CERTIFICATE is issued by C&A. The Person must now demonstrate that he can apply the materials studied by producing an honest, actual statistic in the materials studied. He presents this evidence to C&A and receives a VALIDATION gold seal on his Certificate. Provisional Certificates EXPIRE after one year if not Validated. The Fast Flow Student studies within his knowledge of study tech. He is assisted by Supervisors. Any Word Clearing action needed can be done on him. He can be sent to Qual and Crammed. He can be starrated and made to clay demo by the Supervisor. He does not however have to have a twin, he does not automatically starrate starrate items, he does not have to have an examination. 162 The Fast Flow System makes for very rapid training. This becomes possible due to the development of the Primary Rundown and Primary Correction Rundown. PREREQUISITES Primary Rundown or Primary Correction Rundown are required for Levels 0 to IV or above and for FEBC. They are not required for HSDC or the many other courses below these levels. NON PRDs Those students who have not had a Primary Rundown or Primary Correction Rundown must starrate, clay demo, twin and go through the materials as many times as required, using the entirety of the Student Hat. It is much faster to do the PRD or PCRD first. DRUG CASES Where a drug case cannot be gotten through Method One Word Clearing due to case, it is usual to give him the Drug Rundown first as per HCO B of 25 Oct 71 Issue II, "The Special Drug RD". The short co-audit version is contained in HCO B 15 July 71 Issue III, C/S Series 48R. Where for any reason the person cannot get the Drug Rundown HE MAY BE ENROLLED ON THE DIANETICS COURSE, BECOME A DIANETIC AUDITOR and obtain the Drug Rundown through CO-AUDIT on Course. The Dianetic Course in this instance is done with the full Student Hat requirements. DESIGNATION The FAST FLOW STUDENT should be given a blue lapel award and wear it in Class. It should say FFS on it in black letters. This gives the green light to rapid and effective completion of courses for the SUPER-LITERATE. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.sb.rd Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 163  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=16/8/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  C/S Series 84 FLUBLESS C/SING   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 16 AUGUST 1972 Remimeo C/S Series 84 FLUBLESS C/SING A C/S cannot C/S flublessly while he has ANY Auditors flubbing. The standard procedure is 1. The C/S makes sure Tech Courses are taught okay and raises hell until they are. 2. C/S makes sure Qual has a Cramming Officer and crams him until he gets flubless Cramming and can Supervise TRs, do WCing Method 7, Method 6, Method 4, can correct metering and has packs to hand for reference. 3. The C/S follows a very standard handling of auditors: A. 1 error of any kind -- instruct by reference to HCO B. B. A second error of any kind -- send to Cramming and get the Auditor crammed at once, without any loss of auditing time but before the Auditor is allowed to audit further. (This is 2 hours, not 2 days!) C. A third error of any kind -- RETREAD, wherein the Auditor's weak areas are located and the Auditor has to M7, M6, M4 and restudy the materials of that area. This takes the Auditor back to Step A. A retread under a good Super takes 4 or 5 days. Now if the Auditor again errs he goes to Step A. If he goes the route again he hits RETRAIN and is retrained fully like any other student. His PRD is done or verified and he goes through the course starting with basic books. This puts the Auditor back to A. But if he now lands at RETRAIN again he is given a full and complete RETRAIN from his earliest contacts with the subject. It is highly unlikely he will flub further but if he does, he should not be on auditing at all. FALSE REPORTS A falsified Auditing report puts the Auditor at once at retrain as he is not sufficiently aware of the potentials of the subject to know he can get results and does not have to be dishonest. TR 0 OT Zero and TR 0 are the keys to good auditing. 2 C/Ses were found in orgs who "wouldn't let the Auditors do TR 0 because of their cases". Both orgs had horrible stats and bad results and ARC Broken fields. OT Zero and TR 0 are a routine action for Auditors. They do TRs in spare time, not because they are being Crammed, just to get professional. Every Cramming Order includes TRs, especially Zero, to also be done on the auditor's own time. This gets the Auditor up to really Confronting. His errors come mainly from an inability to confront (and from faulty metering or misunderstoods or out ethics). OT Zero and TR 0 are the keys to flubless auditing. 164 ELECTRONIC ATTEST Auditors using LRH tapes and electronic attest (and with OT Zero, TR 0, metering, and Mis Us cleaned up and Ethics in) become very spectacular auditors in terms of results. Results bring pride. Auditors who get results are happy auditors. And the above is how, the standard how, to get them to get results. EASY C/SING Only if he spends some of his time TRAINING, as above, can a C/S ever get down to really C/Sing cases and getting programs DONE. SUMMARY The above is the way I C/S and handle Auditors as a C/S. I long since found that the flubby Auditors were the ones who consumed the C/S time. The ratio is 2 1/2 hours to 6 1/2 hours wherein it only takes me 2 1/2 hours to C/S piles of folders when I have the auditors auditing honestly and flublessly and it takes me 6 1/2 hours when I have some flubbers. It is neither kind nor decent to let Auditors lose. Only when I (or MSH) have not been doing the C/Sing has auditing gone wrong in any area where I was. This is traced directly to the drop-out of the above actions. So it is the above actions which give standard results and any C/S who omits them (to be a good fellow, or "these are my friends") is an Auditor killer. Auditors sometimes achieve a high status and are "above being crammed". Well watch it, watch it because they will fall on their heads with a crash. An auditor is not unlike a race horse. He needs a lot of care and handling. And he needs his periodic drills and exercises or he goes sloppy. Like a race horse, a good auditor is very, very valuable. And all good auditors are made by C/Ses! The proof is that even the best go bad when they no longer have a tight C/S rein. Experience has taught that. The exceptions are very, very few and you don't have any of them. It takes me about 3 or 4 weeks to get an auditor through his course and doing a good flubless job. The majority of Scientologists want to be auditors. So you have Auditor scarcity? That's a laugh. It's the C/S! The Course Super, the Cramming Officer. And it's done just exactly as above. Given the materials, there is no other answer. So stop dreaming of hiring or getting perfect Auditors. The ones you have are fine. Get more. And do the above!!! The auditors must not blame the pc (nor must you), the C/S must not blame the auditor. It's you, the Course Super and the Cramming Officer. And mainly you the C/S. You can and must build a corps of good auditors. Or you'll never make it as a C/S. And listen, if you don't make it as a C/S, where's the world? LRH:nt.bh L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1972 Founder by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [Added to by BTB 16 Aug 72-1, C/S Series 84-1, Volume X -- 235.] 165  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=17/8/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Word Clearing Series 42 METHOD 4 NOTES   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 17 AUGUST 1972 (REVISED -- see HCO B 17 Aug 72R Volume VIII -- 305) Remimeo Word Clearing Series 42 METHOD 4 NOTES Too generalized a question in using Method 4 defeats its use and can restimulate a person badly. Example: "Is there anything in college you didn't understand?" That of course is just plain ridiculous as a question. "Have you ever heard anything you didn't understand?" would be similarly silly. BREAK DOWN THE MATERIALS When doing Method 4 you have to break down the materials (put them into small separate units) in order to ask questions. Example: We have Papers 1 & 2, both on the same subject. The wrong question for Method 4 would be "Is there anything in Papers 1 & 2 you didn't understand?" and not even give him the papers to see! The right way to do it would be to take Paper 1 and break it down into its obvious sections, give the person Paper 1 and let him look at it. Point to its 1st section and say, "Is there anything you didn't understand in this section?" while watching the meter. Then point to next section, do the same. Finish Paper 1. Then go to Paper 2 and do it the same. A person has to know what he's being asked about and has to be thinking of it when asked the question. TAPES Just as it would be ridiculous to ask "Have you ever misunderstood anything you ever read?", it would be silly to ask, "Did you ever have a misunderstood on Tape?" The right way is to take the tape and put it on a machine and play a bit of it. And ask, "Is there anything in the first section of this tape you didn't understand?" while watching the meter. Then high speed the tape forward to another area and do the same. Thus the tape is covered. This can also be done from any tape notes, section by section. BOOKS Books are done chapter by chapter. QUICKIE M4 Method 4 is defeated utterly by 1. Bad metering 2. Too general a question 3. Not having the material to hand 4. Not getting the person's attention on parts of the material. Quickie M4 misses. It sets the person up for a lose in his studying. And we want him to actually succeed in his study, don't we? LRH:sb.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1972 Founder by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 166  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=18/8/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Word Clearing Series 43 GRAMMAR DEFINITION   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 18 AUGUST 1972 Remimeo Word Clearing Series 43 GRAMMAR DEFINITION The following Definition of Grammar was taken from the Dictionary of Contemporary American Usage by Bergen and Cornelia Evans, published by Random House, New York, in 1957. (It is not a complete Dictionary and would require another larger dictionary for full word clearing. But it gives American usages of words and phrases, which could be important as Dianetics and Scientology are written in American English.) It was sent to me by an SHSBC Student who found its definition of Grammar was very helpful to other students. This definition also tells you why some college or school texts are so ghastly hard to read -- they are not in standard English. It also tells you why, in 1950, the head of the English Department in an American University hailed Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health as marking a new era of scientific writing. One reason is that it was written by a writer, not a professor. The other was that it was written in the English that was in use. But read the definition: GRAMMAR GRAMMAR is a systematic description of the ways in which words are used in a particular language. The grammarian groups words that behave similarly into classes and then draws up rules stating how each class of words behaves. What classes are set up and how the rules are phrased is a matter of convenience. A grammarian is free to classify his material in any way that seems reasonable to him. But he is never free to say that certain forms of speech are unacceptable merely because there is no place for them in the system he has designed. THE CLASSES Most grammarians are interested in a number of languages. As a rule they set up classes that are useful in handling many languages but that may have very little meaning for a particular language. For example, the distinction between the dative him and the accusative him is important in the Indo- European languages generally. But in a grammar designed solely to teach English, this distinction does not have to be made. Similarly, there is an etymological or historical difference between the English gerund in -ing and the participle in -ing. But it is sometimes impossible to say whether a given word is a gerund or a participle; for example, in journeys end in lovers meeting. For this reason, some grammarians prefer to handle these forms together under one name, such as "participle" or "-ing". The familiar terms of classical grammar are defined in this dictionary for the convenience of persons who need to use these concepts. But a much simpler classification, based on the structure of present-day English, is employed in all the discussions of usage. THE RULES In order to say how words are used, the grammarian must examine large quantities of spoken and written English. He will find some constructions used so consistently that the exceptions have to be classed as errors. But he will also find 167 competing, and even contradictory, constructions, which appear too often to be called mistakes. He must then see whether one of these expressions is used by one kind of person and not by another or in one kind of situation and not in another. If he can find no difference of this sort he accepts the two constructions as interchangeable. In this way he assembles a body of information on how English words are used that may also show differences, such as those between one locality and another, or between spoken and written English, or between literary and illiterate speech. Studies of this kind are called "scientific" or "descriptive" grammars. This is a relatively new approach to the problems of language and the information brought to light in this way is sometimes surprising. The first English grammarians, writing in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, did not attempt to describe the English of their day. On the contrary, they were attempting to "improve" English and they demanded Latin constructions which were not characteristic of English. They objected to the expression I am mistaken, because if translated into Latin this would mean I am misunderstood. They claimed that unloose must mean tie, because un is a Latin negative. They objected to the "double negative" which was good Old English, and also good Greek, but not good Latin. These eighteenth century rules of prescriptive grammar have been repeated in school books for two hundred years. They are the rules for a curious, Latinized English that has never been spoken and is seldom used in literature, but that is now highly respected in some places, principally in scientific writing. It should be recognized that these rules were not designed to "preserve" English, or keep it "pure". They were designed to create a language which would be "better" simply because it was more like Latin. Dryden, writing in the seventeenth century, said: "I am often put to a stand in considering whether what I write be the idiom of the tongue or false grammar and nonsense, couched beneath that specious name of Anglicism, and have no other way to clear my doubts but by translating my English into Latin and thereby trying what sense the words will bear in a more stable language." One result of this double translation was that Dryden went through his earlier works and rewrote all the sentences that had originally ended in a preposition or adverb. A generation later, Swift complained that the English of his day "offends against every part of grammar". Certainly this is blaming the foot because it doesn't fit the shoe! Because some people would like to write the language of the textbooks, the entries in this dictionary not only tell what standing a given construction has in current English but also explain how the rules of the prescriptive grammarian would apply, wherever the rules and standard practice differ. But in such cases the rules are never simple, and the person who has to use this type of English may feel that it would be easier to follow Dryden's example and write in Latin first. THIS BOOK The grammar entries in this book are designed for persons who speak standard English but who may be confused about certain isolated points. The entries are arranged so that the answer to a particular problem can be found in the least possible time. But anyone who wishes to make a systematic study of English grammar, using this book, can do so by starting with the entry parts of speech and following the references to more and more detailed discussions of each concept. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.rd Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 168  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=13/9/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Expanded Dianetics Series 7 C/S Series 85 CATASTROPHES FROM AND REPAIR OF "NO INTEREST" ITEMS   DIANETICS Remimeo All Dn & Ex Dn Auditors Class VIII C/Ses  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 13 SEPTEMBER 1972 Remimeo (Amended & Reissued 28 March 1974 All Dn & Ex Dn -- only change is Series No.) Auditors Class VIII DIANETICS C/Ses Expanded Dianetics Series 7 C/S Series 85 CATASTROPHES FROM AND REPAIR OF "NO INTEREST" ITEMS I have done a review of several failed cases which blew or went bad after auditing. THE COMMON FACTOR IN EVERY ONE WAS CASE BY-PASSED DUE TO "NO INTEREST". The auditor finds a reading drug item or an evil purpose and proposes to run R3R on it. The auditor asks if the pc is interested in running it. The pc says, "No." The auditor does not run it. BANG, we have a BY-PASSED CASE. The pc will blow or go sour or not recover. One of these cases was unchanged after "a drug rundown". He had a pair of eyes that looked like blank discs. Check of folder showed all major drug items "not run due to no interest". The solution was to recover the lists, run the items that had read R3R triple and complete the case. Another one blew. His folder was examined. Every evil purpose had been left unrun! Of the items from the "Wants Handled Rundown" the intentions were mislisted. The drug rundown failed due to "no interest". Each flubbed case I am finding has had his drug items and evil purposes left unrun on R3R due to "no interest". So DON'T ASK FOR INTEREST ON INTENTIONS, EVIL PURPOSES AND DRUG ITEMS. IF THEY READ, RUN THEM! REPAIR 1. On any stumbling case that has had a "drug rundown" or Expanded Dianetics get the Folder FESed to see if reading items were left unrun on R3R Triple. List them chronologically, early to late. 2. Get the case back, with an R factor of "Incomplete". 3. Run every one of those unrun drug items, intentions and Evil Purposes. 4. If the items don't now read, then get in Suppress and Invalidate on them. 5. If the case bogs do L3RD Method 5 and Handle on that chain only. 6. Go on with the action and complete it. LRH:sb.ntm.rd Copyright $c 1972, 1974 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard Founder ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 169  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=6/11/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Word Clearing Series 44 ILLITERACY AND WORK   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 6 NOVEMBER 1972 Remimeo Word Clearing Series 44 ILLITERACY AND WORK I have been engaged in a study of applications of tech to illiteracy and illiterate or semi-literate populations and found some simple levels of approach. I investigated U.S. AID educational efforts and data to find out why they failed. For instance, in one project, the U.S. spent over one million dollars to educate 105 persons from an "underdeveloped" country of low literacy and surveyed it later to find that none of the data taught was in use and that no progress had been made by the person or the country as a result. Using their data and my own personal investigation in the same country, I evaluated the situation and found they had not consulted the existing scene before or during the program. Their training was for a sophisticated environment. The country of the program is just emerging from a nomadic level civilization into agricultural and the agriculture done is extremely primitive, erodes whole plains with non-contour plowing and doesn't even know about irrigation. To these people they taught the highly complex technology of the electronic age! The people went back home, found no computers whatever, listened to the goats and sat down and did nothing. U.S. AID had no explanation for this. But give them credit -- the students liked the U.S. and U.S. AID did honestly survey and admit the failure, a rare humility. From this point I did a local study and found that instead of computers these people needed -- guess what? TR 2! Acknowledgement. (Training Drill No. 2, How to Acknowledge a Communication.) This primitive area had never heard of TR 2! "Good", "fine", "thank you" were unknown in all their work culture. Before they saw any need of any technology, they had first to see that there was any reason to get any work done at all! Further, their cultural pattern contained dishonesty as a virtue! This is antipathetic to basic morale no matter what the culture and so they were in a cultural attitude or pattern which kept them sad, depressed and miserable! So they couldn't work. The program, then, had to (a) recover honesty to increase morale, (b) introduce acknowledgement for accomplishment, (c) establish the possibility that one could work, (d) introduce statistics so that something existed that could be acknowledged and (e) establish bonuses for statistics so that acknowledgement could be real and stay that way. These items are all very elementary and simple portions of our basic technology: 170 (a) Security checking, (b) TRs especially 2, (c) Problems of Work Course using tape and Word Clearing, (d) Statistical policies and tech, (e) Bonus policies. So in U.S. AID Programs there was a skipped gradient in culture (nomad- agrarian skipped to electronic-nuclear) and a skipped gradient in training -- Why learn when there is no reason to work? So why be literate? Or study? Any sophisticated technical layout would break down in the hands of these people -- and does. But this program would lift them up. Then they would have some reason to study. Factually, one cannot just sail into a culture blind and bash around with no data. It is costly and it accomplishes very little. A basic knowledge of Man is essential to any improvement in any area of the human race. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.rd Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 171  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=15/11/72 Volnum=0 Issue=2 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  STUDENTS WHO SUCCEED   Remimeo EDs TECH SECS Ds of T Students QUAL SEC CRAMMING OFFICER Confessional Pack  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex Remimeo HCO BULLETIN OF 15 NOVEMBER 1972 EDs Issue II TECH SECS Ds of T Students QUAL SEC CRAMMING OFFICER Confessional Pack STUDENTS WHO SUCCEED Over the past year I have done considerable research, observation, pilots and more research on the subject of making successful students. We have of course excellent study technology which is far in advance of anything Man has had. It has been developed over a period of 22 years. Sometimes the student is very slow. Sometimes he ends off study due to nonapplication. Sometimes the study tech is not used. When this happens of course the tech "didn't work" because it was not used. I have run enough pilots now in order to handle this. HONESTY In policy there has long been written the natural sequence of ethics, tech and administration. When administration is out, it is necessary to get in tech. When tech is out it is necessary to get in ethics. In other words, ethics must be in to get tech in. ETHICS is a personal thing. By definition, the word means: "The study of the general nature of morals and of the specific moral choices to be made by the individual in his relationship with others." (American Heritage Dictionary) When one is ethical or "has his ethics in" it is by his own determination and is done by himself. JUSTICE is the action of the group against the individual when he has failed to get his own ethics in. In the culture in which we live, justice is so savage and often so unreasonable that it tends to inhibit the individual from confessing minor misdemeanors and Crimes. This aberrates him because it prevents him from getting off his withholds. This leads to bad health, bad eyesight, deafness and other things as can be proven in auditing results. IT ALSO LEADS TO OUT COMMUNICATION. AND IT INHIBITS THE INDIVIDUAL FROM REACHING OUT WITH WHAT HE HAS LEARNED AND APPLYING IT. 172 The slow student, the glib student, the student who cannot apply are all students who are withholding. This is true of any Course and any materials and has always been true but no one ever worked it out since they had no real command of the subject of the mind before Dianetics and Scientology. The culture itself encourages dishonesty and therefore has not been able to solve fully the problem of study. Only an honest student really reads, really does what he is supposed to do and really applies. PILOTS There were several pilot Courses to find this material. The one which finally proved it was a Course of about 12 students. They were very slow. They were unable to apply the materials during an apprenticeship. It was then found none of them had done an honest Primary Rundown. They had "know bested" their way through it, cheating, and had falsely attested. Then further investigation showed each one of them had come to the Course with his Ethics badly out. A Confessional was then done on each of them and they were restarted to again do a full Primary Rundown, Student Hat and the materials. Only then did they succeed in their application of what was studied. This was also true of their Supervisors, each one of whom had done his Supervisor's Course with his Ethics out. So one should not blame the students only! A Case Supervisor in training could not Case Supervise well. It was found he had not even read the case history section sample programs because "he already knew" yet attested he had. Prior to all this his Ethics were out. When his withholds were handled he could then supervise cases and did well. CONFESSIONALS The technology of Confessionals has been upgraded enormously in the last year. With this vast improvement it becomes possible to remove the barriers and counter-intention to getting his Ethics in and studying in an ethical fashion and being able to reach with the materials studied and so apply them. If any student, beginning in a school or on a Course, is given a standard Confessional before beginning serious study, he will proceed much more rapidly, will study honestly, will apply study materials and, if actual study tech is used, will become a successful student of that subject and will be able to apply what he learns. Study tech used by itself will succeed somehow in a large number of cases. But when it is preceded by a well done and thorough Confessional its results are more thorough and far more rapid. When I was first working on evaluations of study in 1971 the "dishonesty factor" appeared as a very general Why. But it was not worked with at that time as there seemed no easy way to handle it. 173 By improving the technology of Confessionals on another entirely different research channel, the problem of the student also became clear. Only the honest student is a good student and a credit to his class and the subject and himself. The only reservation then is that the Confessional itself has to be done competently and honestly. But honest Confessionals breed honest Confessional auditors and this can be closely supervised as an expert action. This opens the road to improvement and wider success in the already winning and successful subject of Study Tech. Man is not happy unless he is honest. White, black, red or brown, this is true of all times and all races. And it is true of all students in all schools. The honest student is the most successful student. And the technology of the Confessional can make him so, rapidly and easily. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.rd Copyright $c 1972 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 174  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=13/12/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=1 rDate=1/11/74 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Integrity Processing Series 10R INTEGRITY PROCESSING QUESTIONS MUST BE F/Ned  Type = 12 iDate=13/12/72 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 13 DECEMBER 1972R REVISED & REISSUED 1 NOVEMBER 1974 Remimeo CANCELS BTB OF 13 DECEMBER 1972 SAME TITLE Integrity Processing Series 10R INTEGRITY PROCESSING QUESTIONS MUST BE F/Ned The main danger of Integrity Processing is not probing a person's past but failing to do so thoroughly. When you leave an Integrity Processing question "live" and go on to the next one, you set up a nasty situation that will have repercussions. The person may not immediately react. But the least that will happen is that he will be more difficult to audit in the future, and will go out of session more easily. More violently, a pc who has had an Integrity Processing question left unflat may leave the session and do himself or Scientology considerable mischief. About the most unkind thing you could do to a person would be to leave an Integrity Processing question unflat and go on to the next one. Or to fail to obtain an F/N on withholds in the rudiments and go on with the session. One girl, being audited, was left unflat on a withhold question. The Auditor blithely went on to the next question. The girl went out after session, and told everyone she knew the most vicious lies she could create about the immoral conduct of Scientologists. She wrote a stack of letters to people she knew out of town, telling gruesome tales of sexual orgies. An alert Scientologist heard the rumors, rapidly traced them back, got hold of the girl, sat her down and checked auditing and found the unflat withhold question. The withhold? Sexual misdemeanors. Once that was pulled, the girl hastily raced about correcting all her previous efforts to discredit. A man had been a stalled case for about a year. He was violent to audit. The special question was finally asked, "What withhold question was left unflat on you?" It was found and handled. After that his case progressed again. The mechanisms of this are many. The reactions of the pc are many. The summation of it is, when an Integrity Processing question is left unflat on a pc and thereafter ignored, the consequences are numerous. THE REMEDY The prevention of Integrity Processing being left unflat is easily accomplished: 1. Develop excellent TRs and Basic Auditing. 2. Know the E-Meter. 3. Work only with an approved E-Meter. 4. Know the various bulletins on Integrity Processing. 5. Get off your own withholds so that you won't avoid those in others. 6. Apply correct Integrity Processing procedure and handle each reading question to an honest F/N on that question. LRH:nt.td Copyright $c 1972, 1974 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard Founder ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 175  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=14/12/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=1 rDate=12/2/73 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Integrity Processing Series 11R GENERALITIES WON'T DO   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 14 DECEMBER 1972R REVISED 12 FEBRUARY 1973 REISSUED 1 NOVEMBER 1974 (Only change is signature.) Remimeo Integrity Processing Series 11R GENERALITIES WON'T DO The most efficient way to upset a pc is to leave an Integrity Processing question unflat. This is remedied by taking each reading question to an F/N on the question. The best way to "miss" an Integrity Processing question is to let the pc indulge in generalities or "I thought...." A withhold given as "Oh, I got mad at them lots of times," should be pulled down to when and where and the first time "you got mad" and finally, "What did you do to them just before that?" Then earlier similar if no F/N. The pc who withholds somebody else's withholds and gives them as answers is a card. But he isn't helped when the auditor lets him do it. Situation: You ask the pc for a withhold about Joe. The pc who says, "I heard that Joe...," should be asked right there, "What have you done to Joe? You. Just you." And it turns out he stole Joe's last blonde. But if the auditor had let this pc go on and on about how the pc had heard how Joe was this or that, the session would have gone on and on and the Tone Arm up and up. We have pcs who use "withholds" to spread all manner of lies. We ask this pc, "Have you ever done anything to the Org?" The pc says, "Well, I'm withholding that I heard...," or the pc says, "Well, I thought some bitter thoughts about the Org." Or the pc says, "I was critical of the Org when...," and we don't sail in and get WHAT THE PC DID, we can comfortably stretch a 5- minute item to a session or two. If the pc "heard" and the pc "thought" and the pc "said" in answer to an Integrity Processing question, the pc's reactive bank is really saying, "I've got a crashing big withhold and if I can keep on fooling around by giving critical thoughts, rumors, and what others did, you'll never get it." And if he gets away with it, the auditor has missed a withhold question. We only want to know what the pc did, when he did it, what was the first time he did it and what he did just before that, and we'll nail it every time. THE IRRESPONSIBLE PC If you want to get withholds off an "irresponsible pc" you sometimes can't ask what the pc did or withheld and get a meter reaction. This problem has bugged us for some time; I finally got very bright and realized that no matter whether the pc thought it was a crime or not, he or she will answer up on "don't know" versions as follows: Situation: "What have you done to your husband?" Pc's answer, "Nothing bad." E-Meter reaction, nul. Now we know this pc, through our noticing she is critical of her husband, has overts on him. But she can take no responsibility for her own acts. 176 But she can take responsibility for his not knowing. She is making certain of that. So we ask, "What have you done that your husband doesn't know about?" And it takes an hour for her to spill it all, the quantity is so great. For the question releases the floodgates. The Meter bangs around. And with these withholds off, her responsibility comes up and she can take responsibility on the items. This applies to any zone or area or terminal of Integrity Processing. Situation: We are getting a lot of "I thought", "I heard", "They said", "They did" in answer to a question. We take the terminal or terminals involved and put them in this blank: "What have you done that _______ (doesn't) (don't) know about?" And we can get the major overts that lay under the blanket of "How bad everyone is but me." This prevents you missing an Integrity Processing question. It's a bad crime to do so. This will shorten the labor involved in getting every question flat. And if your pc is withholdy you can insert this "Have I missed an Integrity Processing question on you?" while doing the processing. Always clear up what was missed. A pc can be very upset by reason of a missed Integrity Processing question. Keep them going up, not down. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.rd Copyright $c 1972, 1973, 1974 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 177  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=15/12/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=1 rDate=1/11/74 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Integrity Processing Series 12R WITHHOLDS, MISSED AND PARTIAL   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 15 DECEMBER 1972R REVISED 1 NOVEMBER 1974 Remimeo Integrity Processing Series 12R WITHHOLDS, MISSED AND PARTIAL I don't know exactly how to get this across to you except to ask you to be brave, squint up your eyes and plunge. I don't appeal to reason. Only to faith at the moment. When you have a reality on this, nothing will shake it and you'll no longer fail cases or fail in life. But, at the moment, it may not seem reasonable. So just try it, do it well and day will dawn at last. What are these natterings, upsets, ARC Breaks, critical tirades, lost students, ineffective motions? They are restimulated but missed or partially missed withholds. If I could just teach you that and get you to get a good reality on that in your own auditing, your activities would become smooth beyond belief. It is true that ARC Breaks, present time problems and withholds all keep a session from occurring. And we must watch them and clear them. But behind all these is another button, applicable to each, which resolves each one. And that button is the restimulated but missed or partially missed withhold. Life itself has imposed this button on us. If you know about people or are supposed to know about people, then these people expect, unreasonably, that you know them through and through. Real knowledge to the average person is only this: a knowledge of his or her withholds! That, horribly enough, is the high tide of knowledge for the man in the street. If you know his withholds, if you know his crimes and acts, then you are smart. If you know his future you are moderately wise. And so we are persuaded toward mind reading and fortune telling. All wisdom has this trap for those who would be wise. Egocentric man believes all wisdom is wound up in knowing his misdemeanors. IF any wise man represents himself as wise and fails to discover what a person has done, that person goes into an antagonism or other misemotion toward the wise man. So they hang those who restimulate and yet who do not find out about their withholds. This is an incredible piece of craziness. But it is observably true. This is the WILD ANIMAL REACTION that makes Man a cousin to the beasts. 178 A good auditor can understand this. A bad one will stay afraid of it and won't use it. "Have I missed a withhold on you?" can be used in Integrity Processing if the preclear gets upset or critical during session. Any ARC Broken pc should be asked, "What withhold have I missed on you?" Or, "What have I failed to find out about you?" Or, "What should I have known about you?" An Integrity Processing Specialist who cannot read a meter is dangerous because he or she will miss withholds and the pc may become very upset. Use this as a stable datum: If the person is upset, somebody failed to find out what that person was sure they would find out. A missed withhold is a should have known. The only reason anyone has ever left Scientology is because people failed to find out about them. This is valuable data. Get a reality on it. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.rd Copyright $c 1972, 1974 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 179  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=16/12/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Integrity Processing Series 13 HELP THE PC  Type = 12 iDate=16/12/72 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 16 DECEMBER 1972 REISSUED 7 NOVEMBER 1974 Remimeo CANCELS BTB OF 16 DECEMBER 1972 SAME TITLE Integrity Processing Series 13 HELP THE PC In general, when getting rudiments in or getting off missed withholds or invalidations, help the pc by guiding his attention against the needle. This is quite simple. The auditor asks the question, the needle instantly reacts, the pc (as he or she usually does) looks puzzled if the auditor says "It reacts." The pc thinks it over. As he or she is thinking, the auditor will see the same reaction on the needle. Softly the auditor says "That" or "There" or "What's that you're looking at?" As the pc knows what he or she is looking at at that instant, the thing can be dug up. This is auditor co-operation, not triumph. Most often the pc does not know what it is that reacts as only unknowns react. Therefore an auditor's "There" when the needle twitches again, before the pc has answered, co-ordinates with whatever the pc is looking at and thus it can be spotted and revealed by the pc. This is only done when the pc comm lags for a few seconds. Remember, the pc is always willing to reveal. He or she doesn't know What to reveal. Therein lies the difficulty. Pcs get driven out of session when asked to reveal something yet do not know what to reveal. By the auditor's saying "There" or "What's that?" quietly each time the needle reacts newly, the pc is led to discover what should be revealed. Auditors and pcs get into a games condition in Integrity Processing and rudiments only when the auditor refuses this help to the pc. New auditors routinely believe that in Integrity Processing the pc knows the answer and won't give it. This is an error. If the pc knew all the answer, it wouldn't react on the meter. Old-timers have found out that only if they steer by repeated meter reaction, giving the pc "There" or "What's that?" can the pc answer up on most rudiments questions, missed withholds and so on. But don't use steering to harass the pc, or cut his comm, or draw attention to the auditor. This is the only use of reads other than instant reads on the E-Meter. Help the pc. He doesn't know. Otherwise the needle would never react. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:nt.rd Founder Copyright $c 1972, 1974 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 180  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=17/12/72 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Integrity Processing Series 14 HAVINGNESS  Type = 12 iDate=17/12/72 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 17 DECEMBER 1972 REISSUED 7 NOVEMBER 1974 Remimeo CANCELS BTB OF 17 DECEMBER 1972 SAME TITLE Integrity Processing Series 14 HAVINGNESS All valences are circuits are valences. Circuits key out with knowingness. This is the final definition of havingness. Havingness is the concept of being able to reach. No-havingness is the concept of not being able to reach. A withhold makes one feel he or she cannot reach. Therefore withholds are what cut havingness down and made runs on havingness attain unstable gains. In the presence of withholds havingness sags. As soon as a withhold is pulled, ability to reach is potentially restored but the pc often does not discover this. It requires that havingness be run to get the benefit of having pulled most withholds. Therefore havingness may be run in conjunction with Integrity Processing but may NOT be used to hide or obscure the fact of failure to F/N an Integrity Form question. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.rd Copyright $c 1972, 1974 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 181  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=4/1/73 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Study Series 9 CONFRONT   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 4 JANUARY 1973 (Reissued 6 April 74 -- Only change made is in signature) Remimeo Study Series 9 CONFRONT There are several choices in English on the meaning of "confront". These include the right one: To face without flinching or avoiding. An example in a sentence: "The test of a free society is its capacity to confront rather than evade the vital questions of Choice." There is another meaning "To stand facing or opposing, especially in challenge, defiance or accusation." English is a pretty limited language in many ways. I imagine the thought of facing something (which is what the word came from and originally meant way back -- "fron" being "face") was so horrifying to the types who write dictionaries they knew it would be bad! In essence it is an action of being able to face. If one cannot, if he avoids, then he is not AWARE. Awareness is the ability to perceive the existence of. In the dictionary it also fails to confront that and says "Awareness: the quality or state of being aware." And Aware means: "marked by realization, perception or knowledge." So these chaps couldn't confront and so conceived awareness to be figure- figure. We are moving out of the range of language when we want to say: "He could stand up to things and wasn't always shrinking back into himself and avoiding, so he could be fully conscious of the real universe and others around him." And that's what Confront means. If one can confront he can be aware. If he is aware he can perceive and act. If he can't confront he will not be aware of things and will be withdrawn and not perceiving. Thus he is unaware of things around him. That's the tech of it. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:ntm.jh Copyright $c 1973, 1974 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 182  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=30/3/73 Volnum=0 Issue=1 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  STEP FOUR -- HANDLING ORIGINATIONS   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 30 MARCH 1973 Remimeo Issue I REISSUED 21 SEPTEMBER 1974 (Only change is signature) STEP FOUR -- HANDLING ORIGINATIONS Edited and taken from PROFESSIONAL AUDITOR'S BULLETIN NO. 151 1 January 1959 What do we mean by an origin of the preclear? He volunteers something all on his own; and do you know that is a very good index of case -- whether the person volunteers anything on his own? An old-time auditor used this as a case index. He said, "This fellow isn't getting any better. He hasn't offered up anything yet." You see, he didn't originate -- he didn't originate a communication. So remember that the preclear is as well as he can originate a communication. That means he can stand at Cause on the communication formula. And that is a desirable point for him to reach. But how about in the walk-away world -- the world that is ambulant and moving around and spinning quietly, or noisily, as the case may be? Do you ever have to handle an origin in it? Well, I dare say that every argument you have ever got into was because you did not handle an origin. Every time you have ever got into trouble with anybody, you can trace it back along the line you didn't handle. If a person walks in and says, "Whee! I've just passed with the highest mark in the whole school," and you say, "I'm awfully hungry, shouldn't we go out and eat?" -- you'll find yourself in a fight. He feels ignored. He originated a communication to have you prove to him that he was there and he was solid. Most little kiddies get frantic about their parents when their parents don't handle their originations properly. Handling an origination merely tells the person, "All right, I heard it, you're there." You might say it is a form of acknowledgment, but it's not; it is the communication formula in reverse. But the auditor is still in control if he handles the origin -- otherwise, the communication formula goes out of his control and he is at effect point, no longer at cause point. An auditor continues at cause point. So let's look this over. The handling of an origin has a great deal of use and, until recently, it was the least pat step in Scientology. How did you handle an origin? And we finally found out. I finally had a cognition myself. I tried for a long time to communicate this to people and they still blundered on it occasionally. And I finally found out something that did seem to communicate. There are three steps in handling an origin. Here is the setup: The preclear is sitting in the chair and the auditor is sitting across from the preclear, and the auditor is saying, "Do fish swim?" or "Do birds fly?" and the preclear says, "Yes." Here is the factor, now, entering: "Do fish swim?" The preclear doesn't answer Do fish swim, the preclear says, "You know -- your dress is on fire," or "I'm eight feet back of my head," or "Is it true that all cats weigh 1.8 kilograms?" You see, wog-wog -- where did this come from? Well, although it is usually circuitry or something like that at work when it's that far off beam, it is, nevertheless, an origin. How do you handle it? Well, you don't want the preclear to go out of session, and he would if you handled it wrongly, so (1) you answer it; (2) you maintain ARC (you don't spend any time at it, but you just maintain ARC); and (3) you get the preclear back on the process. One, two, three. And if you spend too much time in (2), you'll be doing wrong. 183 What is an origin? All right, he says, "I'm eight feet back of my head." It's an origin; what are you supposed to do with it? Well, you're supposed to answer it. In this particular case, you would say to him something in the order of, "You are?" (You mean something like, "I've heard the communication -- it's made an effect on me.") Now, in maintaining ARC you can skimp that second one if you handle the third one expertly enough. The least important one is the second one, but the most deadly thing you can do is utterly to neglect the second one of maintaining ARC. That's deadly. But you can skip it if you really punch it into the third one, which is to say, get him back into session. So he says, "I'm eight feet back of my head," and you say, "YOU ARE???" (What he said really hit, you know.) He's kind of wog-wog about this -- he's not sure what this is all about. You say, "You are?" and the fellow says, "Yes." "Well!" you say. "What did I say that made that happen?" "Oh, you said 'Do birds fly?' and I thought of myself as a bird and I guess that's the way it is, but I am eight feet back of my head." "Well, that's pretty routine," you say -- reassure him, maintain the ARC. "Now, what was that auditing question?" "Oh, you asked me 'Do birds fly?'" And you say, "That's right. Do birds fly?" Back in session, you see. You can't do this: You can't put it into a can and put a label on it and say "This is how you do it always," because it's always something peculiar; but you can say these three steps are followed. I will give you another example. You say, "Do birds fly?" and he says, "I have a blinding headache." "You do?" you say. "Is it bothering you (that's the ARC) too much to carry on with the session (and you've reached number three at once)?" "Oh no -- it's pretty bad though." "Well, let's go on with this, shall we?" you say. "Maybe it'll do something with it (maintaining ARC)." He says, "Well, all right," and you're right back onto it again: "Do birds fly?" One of the trickiest of these is "What in my question reminded you of that?" The fellow says, "Well, so and so," and he explains it to you and you say, "Well, good. Do birds fly?" and you're right back in session again. Three parts, and -- that is the important thing -- you have to learn how to handle these things. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.rd Copyright $c 1959, 1973, 1974 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 184  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=5/4/73 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  AXIOM 28 AMENDED   Remimeo HAS Course  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 5 APRIL 1973 REISSUED 19 SEPTEMBER 1974 (Only change is signature) Remimeo HAS Course AXIOM 28 AMENDED AXIOM 28. COMMUNICATION IS THE CONSIDERATION AND ACTION OF IMPELLING AN IMPULSE OR PARTICLE FROM SOURCE-POINT ACROSS A DISTANCE TO RECEIPT-POINT, WITH THE INTENTION OF BRINGING INTO BEING AT THE RECEIPT-POINT A DUPLICATION AND UNDERSTANDING OF THAT WHICH EMANATED FROM THE SOURCE-POINT. The formula of Communication is: Cause, Distance, Effect, with Intention, Attention and Duplication WITH UNDERSTANDING. The component parts of Communication are Consideration, Intention, Attention, Cause, Source-point, Distance, Effect, Receipt-point, Duplication, Understanding, the Velocity of the impulse or particle, Nothingness or Somethingness. A non-communication consists of Barriers. Barriers consist of Space, Interpositions (such as walls and screens of fast-moving particles), and Time. A communication by definition, does not need to be two-way. When a communication is returned, the formula is repeated, with the receipt-point now becoming a source-point and the former source-point now becoming a receipt-point. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.rd Copyright $c 1973, 1974 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 185  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=7/4/73 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=1 rDate=15/11/74 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  GRADIENTS IN TRs  Type = 12 iDate=7/4/73 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Remimeo All Supervisors All Students Cramming TR Courses  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 7 APRIL 1973R Remimeo REVISED 15 NOVEMBER 1974 All (Revisions are in this type style) Supervisors All Students CANCELS Cramming BTB OF 7 APRIL 1973 TR Courses SAME TITLE GRADIENTS IN TRs (Taken from LRH Tape of 30 June 1961, "Training on TRs -- Talk on Auditing") Time after time you're going to find somebody in an Organization trying to teach the TRs this way: Go on to TR 0 and stick there. Eight months later he'll still be doing the TR 0. You're going to find that consistently, because the element of ENDURE enters into it. That is improper. Here is the way you do the TRs. You'll find it very valuable. You do TR 0, flunking only TR 0. You go on to TR 1. The guy didn't pass TR 0. He just got accustomed to it a little bit. You do TR 1, flunking only TR 1. Don't flunk anything else. TR 2, flunking only TR 2. TR 3, flunking only TR 3. TR 4, flunking only TR 4. Now come back to TR 0. Get the guy better at TR 0. Then go through it again, flunking only the TR he is on. It's kind of like running the CCHs -- they get a little bit of a win at it and you go on to the next one. About the third run through or maybe the fifth run through, according to your judgement, you start TR 0 and you insist that it's pretty good; and you should really start cuffing him around. Flunk only the one he's on but start cuffing him around hard. Give him the business. Give him things he can't possibly confront. Try to shake him up. Now -- start in TR 0 and give him the works. TR 1 and give him the works. TR 2-3-4. Flunk only the TR that he's on, but give him the works. Don't give him a chance. Run through the TRs that way a couple of times, flunking only the TR that he's on, giving him the works, pushing his buttons. Give him something to confront for sure. And then start the business of TR 0, mess him up, TR 1, mess him up -- and flunk TR 1 AND TR 0. TR 2, mess him up, flunk TR 2, TR 1, TR 0. 186 Get him on TR 3, messing him up and flunking TR 3, TR 2, TR 1, TR 0. Get him on TR 4, messing him up and flunking TR 4, TR 3, TR 2, TR 1, TR 0. Thereafter in running the TRs always give him the works. Flunk everything in that battery of TRs. If you do that, you shorten considerably the time it takes to learn the TRs. In other words, you approach this with a gradient scale. We did learn about gradient scales many years ago and we should continue to apply that knowledge. Let them get used to each TR. You'll find out they progress much faster if you do it that way. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.rd Copyright $c 1961, 1973, 1974 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 187  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=10/6/73 Volnum=0 Issue=1 Rev=2 rDate=19/9/74 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Cramming Series 10RA CRAMMING   Remimeo Qual Secs Cramming Offs  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 10 JUNE 1973RA Remimeo Issue I Qual Secs REVISED 20 FEBRUARY 1974 Cramming REISSUED 19 SEPTEMBER 1974 Offs (Only change is signature) Cramming Series 10RA CRAMMING The datum that "Qual does not take orders" solves the Admin Cramming dilemma of the staff member crammed four times on the Dev-T Pack. It is up to Qual to handle, fully and totally. This means, not following the exact order, but finding the real Why on the person and handling it at once. Qual's function is correction. By policy Qual does not take orders on What to do to correct. Where an exec wants certain material covered, that's okay. Cover it. But find the WHY! And on a repeat order, realize it was a wrong Why and really work it over. Several staff have been crammed several times on the Dev-T Pack. Means Qual takes orders. The PRODUCT of Qual Admin Cramming is a functioning producing staff member who can produce on post. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.rd Copyright $c 1973, 1974 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 188  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=11/7/73 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ASSIST SUMMARY   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 11 JULY 1973 Remimeo ASSIST SUMMARY REFERENCE: HCO PL 7 Aug 71 Interne Okay to Audit Checksheet, Issue II Assists Pack HCO B 5 July 71 C/S Series 49, Assists HCO B 23 July 71 Assists, A Flag Expertise Subject HCO B 12 Mar 69 Physically III Pcs and Pre OTs Issue II HCO B 24 Apr 69 Dianetic Use HCO B 14 May 69 Sickness HCO B 23 May 69 Auditing out Sessions, Narrative Versus Somatic Chains HCO B 24 July 69 Seriously III Pcs HCO B 27 July 69 Antibiotics HCO B 15 Jan 70 The Uses of Auditing HCO B 1 Dec 70 Dianetics -- Triple Flow Action HCO B 5 Jan 71 Going Earlier in R3-R and Exteriorization Intensives HCO B 9 Oct 67 Assists for Injuries HCO B 22 July 70 Touch Assist HCO B 5 May 69 Touch Assists Issue I HCO B 2 Jan 71 Illegal Auditing HCO B 15 July 70 Unresolved Pains (Reissued 25 Nov 70) HCO B 7 Apr 72 Touch Assists, Correct Ones Injuries, operations, delivery of babies, severe illnesses and periods of intense emotional shock all deserve to be handled with thorough and complete assists. Medical examination and diagnosis should be sought where needed, and where treatment is routinely successful, medical treatment should be obtained. As an assist can at times cover up an actual injury or broken bone, no chances should be taken, especially if the condition does not easily respond. In other words where something is merely thought to be a slight sprain, to be on the safe side an X-ray should be obtained, particularly if it does not at once respond. An assist is not a substitute for medical treatment but is complementary to it. It is even doubtful if full healing can be accomplished by medical treatment alone and it is certain that an assist greatly speeds recovery. In short, one should realize that physical healing does not take into account the being and the repercussion on the spiritual beingness of the person. Injury and illness are PREDISPOSED by the spiritual state of the person. They are PRECIPITATED by the being himself as a manifestation of his current spiritual condition. And they are PROLONGED by any failure to fully handle the spiritual factors associated with them. The causes of PREDISPOSITION, PRECIPITATION and PROLONGATION are basically the following: 1. Postulates. 2. Engrams. 3. Secondaries. 4. ARC Breaks with the environment, situations, others or the body part. 5. Problems. 6. Overt Acts. 7. Withholds. 8. Out of communicationness. 189 The purely physical facts of injuries, illnesses and stresses are themselves incapacitating and do themselves often require physical analysis and treatment by a doctor or nutritionist. These could be briefly catalogued as: A. Physical damage to structure. B. Disease of a pathological nature. C. Inadequacies of structure. D. Excessive structure. E. Nutritional errors. F. Nutritional inadequacies. G. Vitamin and bio-compound excesses. H. Vitamin and bio-compound deficiencies. I. Mineral excesses. J. Mineral deficiencies. K. Structural malfunction. L. Erroneous examination. M. Erroneous diagnosis. N. Erroneous structural treatment. O. Erroneous medication. There is another group which belongs to both the spiritual and physical divisions. These are: i. Allergies. ii. Addictions. iii. Habits. iv. Neglect. v. Decay. Any of these things in any of the three groups can be a cause of non- optimum personal existence. We are not discussing here the full handling of any of these groups or what optimum state can be attained or maintained. But it should be obvious that there is a level below which life is not very tolerable. How well a person can be or how efficient or how active is another subject entirely. Certainly life is not very tolerable to a person who has been injured or ill, to a woman who has just delivered a baby, to a person who has just suffered a heavy emotional shock. And there is no reason a person should remain in such a low state, particularly for weeks, months or years when he or she could be remarkably ASSISTED to recover in hours, days or weeks. It is in fact a sort of practiced cruelty to insist by neglect that a person continue on in such a state when one can learn and practice and obtain relief for such a person. We are mainly concerned with the first group, 1-8. The group is not listed in the order that it is done but in the order that it has influence upon the being. The idea has grown that one handles injuries with touch assists only. This is true for someone who as an auditor has only a smattering of Scientology. It is true for someone in such pain or state of case (which would have to be pretty bad) that he cannot respond to actual auditing. But a Scientologist really has no business "having only a smattering" of auditing skills that could save his or the lives of others. And the case is very rare who cannot experience proper auditing. The actual cause of not handling such conditions is, then, to be found as iv. NEGLECT. And where there is Neglect, v. DECAY is very likely to follow. One does not have to be a medical doctor to take someone to a medical doctor. And one does not have to be a medical doctor to observe that medical treatment may not be helping the patient. And one does not have to be a medical doctor to handle things caused spiritually by the being himself. 190 Just as there are two sides to healing -- the spiritual and the structural or physical, there are also two states that can be spiritually attained. The first of these states might be classified as "humanly tolerable". Assists come under this heading. The second is spiritually improved. Grade auditing comes under this second heading. Any minister (and this has been true as long as there has been a subject called religion) is bound to relieve his fellow being of anguish. There are many ways a minister can do this. An assist is not engaging in healing. It is certainly not engaging in treatment. What it is doing is ASSISTING THE INDIVIDUAL TO HEAL HIMSELF OR BE HEALED BY ANOTHER AGENCY BY REMOVING HIS REASONS FOR PRECIPITATING, AND PROLONGING HIS CONDITION AND LESSENING HIS PREDISPOSITION TO FURTHER INJURE HIMSELF OR REMAIN IN AN INTOLERABLE CONDITION. This is entirely outside the field of "healing" as envisioned by the medical doctor and by actual records of results is very, very far beyond the capability of psychology, psychiatry and "mental treatment" as practiced by them. In short, the assist is strictly and entirely in the field of the spirit and is the traditional province of religion. A minister should realize the power which lies in his hands and his potential skills when trained. He has this to give in the presence of suffering: he can make life tolerable. He can also shorten a term of recovery and may even make recovery possible when it might not be otherwise. When a minister confronts someone who has been injured or ill, operated upon or who has suffered a grave emotional shock, he should be equipped to do and should do the following: A CONTACT ASSIST where possible and where indicated until the person has reestablished his communication with the physical universe site. To FN. A TOUCH ASSIST until the person has reestablished communication with the physical part or parts affected. To FN. HANDLE ANY ARC BREAK that might have existed at the time a) with the environment, b) with another, c) with others, d) with himself, e) with the body part or the body, and f) with any failure to recover at once. Each to FN. HANDLE ANY PROBLEM the person may have had a) at the time of illness or injury, b) subsequently due to his or her condition. Each to FN. HANDLE ANY OVERT ACT the person may feel he or she committed a) to self, b) to the body, c) to another, and d) to others. Each to FN. HANDLE ANY WITHHOLD a) the person might have had at the time, b) any subsequent withhold, and c) any having to withhold the body from work or others or the environment due to being physically unable to approach it. HANDLE ANY SECONDARY, which is to say emotional reactions, before, during or after the situation. This must be run from the first intimation something was wrong or going to happen or being told something had happened. This is by chain to FN. And then Flow 2 to FN and then Flow 3 to FN. HANDLE ANY ENGRAM of actual physical duress. Run Flow 1 by chain to FN. Then Flow 2 to FN. Then Flow 3 to FN. It is understood here that Flow One was the physical incident itself, not necessarily something done to the person but as something that happened to him or her. POSTULATE TWO-WAY COMM. This is two-way comm on the subject of "any decision to be hurt" or some such wording. This is done only if the person has not 191 already discovered that he had decisions connected to the incident. It is carried to FN. One must be careful not to invalidate the person. Where a person is injured, given a contact or touch assist and then medical examination and treatment, he is given the remainder as soon as he is able to be audited. The drug "five days" does not need to apply. But where the person has been given an assist over drugs, one must later come back to the case when he is off drugs and run the drug part out or at least make sure that nothing was submerged by the drugs. It is not uncommon for a person to be oblivious of certain parts of a treatment or operation at the time of initial auditing, only to have a missing piece of the incident pop up days, months or even years later. THIS is the reason injuries or operations occasionally seem to persist despite a full assist: a piece of it was left unhandled due to a drugged condition during the operation; such bits may come off unexpectedly in routine auditing on some other apparently disrelated chain. It can happen that a person is in the midst of some grade auditing at the time of an injury or illness or receiving an emotional shock. The question arises as to whether or not to disrupt the grade auditing to handle the situation. It is a difficult question. But certainly the person cannot go on with grade auditing while upset or ill. The usual answer is to give a full assist and repair the case to bridge it back into the grade auditing. The question however may be complicated in that some error in the grade auditing is also sitting there, not to cause the illness or accident but to complicate the assist. This question is handled fully only by study of the case by a competent Case Supervisor. The point is not to let the person go on suffering while time is consumed making a decision. SUMMARY Religion exists in no small part to handle the upsets and anguish of life. These include spiritual duress by reason of physical conditions. Ministers long before the Apostles had as a part of their duties the ministering to the spiritual anguish of their people. They have concentrated upon spiritual uplift and betterment. But where physical suffering impeded this course, they have acted. To devote themselves only to the alleviation of physical duress is of course to attest that the physical body is more important than the spiritual beingness of the person which, of course, it is not. But physical anguish can so distract a being that he deserts any aspirations of betterment and begins to seek some cessation of his suffering. The specialty of the medical doctor is the curing of physical disease or non- optimum physical conditions. In some instances he can do so. It is no invasion of his province to assist the patient to greater healing potential. And ills that are solely spiritual in nature are not medical. The "psych-iatrist" and "psych-ologist" on the other hand took their very names from religion since "psyche" means soul. They, by actual statistics, are not as successful as priests in relieving mental anguish. But they modernly seek to do so by using drugs or hypnotism or physical means. They damage more than they help. The minister has a responsibility to his people and those about him to relieve suffering. He has many ways to do this. He is quite successful in doing so and he does not need or use drugs or hypnotism or shock or surgery or violence. Until his people are at a level where they have no need of physical things, he has as a duty preventing their spiritual or physical decay by relieving where he can their suffering. His primary method of doing so is the ASSIST. As the knowledge of how to do them exists and as the skill is easily acquired, he actually has no right to neglect those for whose well-being he is responsible, as only then can he lead them to higher levels of spiritual attainment. LRH:nt.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1973 Founder by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [Added to by HCO B 6 Jan 74, Assist Summary -- Addition.] 192  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=21/7/73 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Qual Flub Catch Series 4 RECOVERING STUDENTS AND PCS   Remimeo Tours Hats ARC Brk Regs Est Os Qual Secs Dirs Validity ARC Brk Auditor  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 21 JULY 1973 Remimeo Tours Hats (HCO PL 25 June 1972 Reissued ARC Brk Regs as an HCO B without change.) Est Os Qual Secs Dirs Qual Flub Catch Series 4 Validity ARC Brk Auditor RECOVERING STUDENTS AND PCS ARC Brk Regs and Tours Personnel (as well as Ethics Officers) collide with students and pcs who have blown (run away from) the org. The recovery of these and getting them back on the line is of great interest to such personnel. In the first place, they muddy up a field. In the second place EVERY ONE OF THEM CAN BE GOTTEN BACK IN. If you leave them about they spoil prospects. And there's nothing more startling to their friends than to have these people who have been nattering around suddenly turn up (repaired) saying, "OK it's all fine now. They're great guys." Because Tech does work, this is not hard to do. Down deep they know that we do have the answer. It's an apparent refusal to apply it to them they're concerned about. Poor offbeat Supervision, poorly trained auditors, lack of cramming in an org get in your way. So you have a deep interest that tech, in both Courses and Auditing, is straight. STUDENTS Students who doped in Class, nattered or got upset have been known to blow (leave hurriedly). But also, students who are interrupted too often when F/Ning may also blow! On a "w/h of nothingness". These points -- "not helped by the Super" and "interfered with too much" -- must BOTH be checked on getting blown students back. ARC Brk Registrars and Tours people run into these blown students. They must know how to handle. There are 5 main blow reasons: 1. Misunderstood words (or no materials). 2. No help or WC Method 4 from the Supers (or no Super). 3. Interference from the Supers that stopped them from getting on. 4. Personal out-Ethics resulting in a w/h. 5. Simply booted off for reasons best known to God or Registrars (like suddenly saying "You must no buy Method 1" etc, thus violating the "deliver what we promise" rule). 193 The interference and boot-off reasons are the ones you'd least suspect. Both generate a lot of H, E & R (Human Emotion and Reaction). The reasons most pcs blow are 1. Out lists 2. No auditing 3. Invalidation of case or gains 4. Told they'd attained it and hadn't. Of these the out list (meaning overlist or wrong items) produces the most fantastic HE&R. Needs repair with an "L4B". No auditing includes being sent to Ethics or Cramming (on Solo) or just stalled. Remedy is to deliver what's promised. Invalidation of case or gains includes being made to go on past a win. This acts as an invalidation. Some pcs who made it are hung up from then on out because no one asked them to declare it. Remedy is to get it declared. When told they had attained it and hadn't they feel cut off from all further help. Remedy is to repair it by getting off the suppress and finish up the job in the org. TO HANDLE ANY OF THIS YOU MUST REALIZE THAT TECH DOES WORK IN BOTH STUDY AND AUDITING. The most gross errors have to exist before it doesn't work. Auditors can be trained to audit and can audit. But some SP in an org gets some out tech order in force like "Auditors mustn't do TR 0 in Cramming as it stirs up their cases" (which is a complete lie and which was just found as NY's reason for poor tech and down stats). ACTION When handling the blown student or pc you can assess the above points on a meter. Or just know them by heart and rattle them off and you'll get the real reason right now. The object is to put the student or pc back on the rails. The above points are all valid. A very fast way to handling auditing outnesses is to give a FREE AUDITING CHECK using HCO B 31 Dec 71, Revised 16 May 72, C/S Series 53RC. To it one adds "No Auditing" at the end under L. One has a good auditor (who has good TRs and who knows how to read a meter well) assess it on the blown or upset pc. One or more of these items will give a Long Fall Blowdown. You indicate this to the pc. You don't handle it. You just say, "The reason you were upset was (whatever read)." The pc should suddenly magically feel better. DON'T try to Audit it further on a FREE CHECK. Tell the pc to go to the org to get everything handled now. Route the assessed sheet "To the PC FOLDER OF _______ (pc's name). PUT IN FOLDER FOR F1RST AUDITING ACTION," and sign it. The above checklists can be done on students by discussion. Don't use the C/S 53RC and the pc checklist both as the pc checklist above is on the C/S 53RC. 194 The difference is C/S 53RC has to be done by an auditor. The other list can be done in 2 way comm socially. In phoning people and running into ARC Broken pcs or students the two short checklists can be used. Sea Org Missions have successfully used another approach. They say they're there to handle the org and make it a safe place. The response is very gratifying. THE PUBLIC HATES LIKE HELL TO BE DENIED DIANETICS AND SCIENTOLOGY. After all you're just handing them their future happiness on a silver platter. Don't just avoid such people. And don't bother to listen to the natter. The above actions are the reasons. Puts you right on top of the situation. That's where Tours and ARC Brk Regs and auditors should be. I recall one old fellow who blew an org staff (SH), hated everybody. Stayed away for years. A student auditor ran into him socially, grabbed a meter and put in Level III (Change and ARC Break) on him. And bang there he was writing to me about how great it all was! Bad Supervision or untrained or careless auditors or flubbing Admin personnel make a lot of trouble for us. But the vast majority of org staffs are very fine. So don't get down on the org. Get the flubbers unpopular. And get back those who have been flubbed. There are no dog pcs or bad students. ETHICS ACTION Whenever you find one of these you should make a brief report. One copy goes to the Ethics Officer of the org, as a knowledge report. The other goes to FLUB CATCH CONTROL TRAINING AND SERVICES FLAG. You have to give the when and the who and the what. Then the org itself and Flag can come down on the outness and correct it. SUMMARY Just knowing these points there are no blown students or pcs you can't get back or get signed up again. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.jh Copyright $c 1972, 1973 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 195  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=29/7/73 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Art Series 2 ART, MORE ABOUT   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 29 JULY 1973 Remimeo Art Series 2 ART, MORE ABOUT Ref: HCO B 30 Aug AD15, ART How good does a professional work of art have to be? This would include painting, music, photography, poetry, any of the arts whether fine or otherwise. It would also include presenting oneself as an art form as well as one's products. Yes, how GOOD does such a work of art have to be? Ah, you say, but that is an imponderable, a thing that can't be answered. Verily, you say, you have just asked a question fur which there are no answers except the sneers and applause of critics. Indeed, this is why we have art critics! For who can tell how good good is. Who knows? I have a surprise for you. There IS an answer. As you know, I searched for many years, as a sort of minor counterpoint to what I was hard work doing, to dredge up some of the materials which might constitute the basis of art. Art was the most uncodified and most opinionated subject on the planet -- after men's ideas about women and women's ideas about men and Man's ideas of Man. Art was anyone's guess. Masterpieces have gone unapplauded, positive freaks have gained raves. So how good does a work of art have to be to be good? The painter will point out all the tiny technical details known only to painters, the musician will put a score through the Alto horn and explain about valve clicks and lip, the poet will talk about meter types, the actor will explain how the position and wave of one hand per the instructions of one school can transform a clod into an actor. And so it goes, art by art, bit by bit. But all these people will be discussing the special intricacies and holy mysteries of technique, the tiny things only the initiate of that art would recognize. They are talking about technique. They are not really answering how good a work of art has to be. Works of art are viewed by people. They are heard by people. They are felt by people. They are not just the fodder of a close-knit group of initiates. They are the soul food of all people. One is at liberty of course to challenge that wide purpose of art. Some professors who don't want rivals tell their students "Art is for self- satisfaction" "It is a hobby." In other words, don't display or exhibit, kid, or you'll be competition! The world today is full of that figure-figure. But as none of this self-satisfaction art meets a definition of art wider than self for the sake of self, the professional is not interested in it. In any artistic production, what does one have as an audience? People. Not, heaven forbid, critics. But people. Not experts in that line of art. But people. That old Chinese poet who, after he wrote a poem, went down out of his traditional garret and read it to the flower-selling old lady on the corner had the right idea. If she understood it and thought it was great, he published. If she didn't he put it in the bamboo trash can. Not remarkably, his poems have come down the centuries awesomely praised. 196 Well, one could answer this now by just saying that art should communicate to people high and low. But that really doesn't get the sweating professional anywhere as a guide in actually putting together a piece of work and it doesn't give him a yardstick whereby he can say "That is that!" "I've done it." And go out with confidence that he has. What is technique? What is its value? Where does it fit? What is perfectionism? Where does one stop scraping off the paint and erasing notes and say "That is that"? For there is a point. Some artists don't ever find it. The Impressionists practically spun in as a group trying to develop a new way of viewing and communicating it. They made it -- or some of them did like Monet. But many of them never knew where to stop and they didn't make it. They couldn't answer the question "How good does a piece of art work have to be to be good?" In this time of century, there are many communication lines for works of art. Because a few works of art can be shown so easily to so many there may even be fewer artists. The competition is very keen and even dagger sharp. To be good one has to be very good. But in what way and how? Well, when I used to buy breakfasts for Greenwich Village artists (which they ate hungrily, only stopping between bites to deplore my commercialism and bastardizing my talents for the gold that bought their breakfasts) I used to ask this question and needless to say I received an appalling variety of responses. They avalanched me with technique or lack of it, they vaguely dwelt on inherent talent, they rushed me around to galleries to show me Picasso or to a board fence covered with abstracts. But none of them told me how good a song had to be to be a song. So I wondered about this. And a clue came when the late Hubert Mathieu, a dear friend, stamped with youth on the Left Bank of the Seine and painting dowagers at the Beaux Arts in middle age, said to me "To do any of these modern, abstract, cubist things, you have to first be able to paint!" And he enlarged the theme while I plied him in the midnight hush of Manhattan with iced sherry and he finished up the First Lady of Nantucket's somewhat swollen ball gown. Matty could PAINT. Finally he dashed me off an abstract to show me how somebody who couldn't paint would do it and how it could be done. I got his point. To really make one of these too too modern things come off, you first had to be able to paint. So I said well, hell, there's Gertrude Stein and Thomas Mann and ink splatterers like those. Let's see if it really is an art form. So I sharpened up my electric typewriter and dashed off the last chapters of a novel in way far out acid prose and put THE END at the bottom and shipped it off to an editor who promptly pushed several large loaves down the telephone wire and had me to lunch and unlike his normal blase self said, "I really got a big bang (this was decades ago, other years, other slang) out of the way that story wound up! You really put it over the plate." And it sent his circulation rating up. And this was very odd because you see the first chapters were straight since they'd been written before Matty got thirsty for sherry and called me to come over and the last chapters were an impressionistic stream of consciousness that Mann himself would have called "an advanced rather adventurous over-Finneganized departure from the ultra school." So just to see how far this sort of thing could go, for a short while I shifted around amongst various prose periods just to see what was going on. That they sold didn't prove too much because I never had any trouble with that. But that they were understood at all was surprising to me for their prose types (ranging from Shakespeare to Beowulf) were at wild variance with anything currently being published. So I showed them to Matty the next time he had a ball gown to do or three chins to paint out and was thirsty. And he looked them over and he said, "Well, you proved my point. There's no mystery to it. Basically you're a trained writer! It shows through." 197 And now we are getting somewhere, not just with me and my adventures and long dead yesterdays. As time rolled on, this is what I began to see: The fellow technician in an art hears and sees the small technical points. The artist himself is engrossed in the exact application of certain exact actions which produce, when done, his canvas, his score, his novel, his performance. The successful artist does these small things so well that he also then has attention and skill left to get out his message, he is not still fiddling about with the cerulean blue and the semiquaver. He has these zeroed in. He can repeat them and repeat them as technical actions. No ulcers. Strictly routine. And here we have three surrealist paintings. And they each have their own message. And the public wanders by and they only look with awe on one. And why is this one different than the other two? Is it a different message? No. Is it more popular? That's too vague. If you look at or listen to any work of art, there is only one thing the casual audience responds to en masse, and if this has it then you too will see it as a work of art. If it doesn't have it, you won't. So what is it? TECHNICAL EXPERTISE ITSELF ADEQUATE TO PRODUCE AN EMOTIONAL IMPACT. And that is how good a work of art has to be to be good. If you look this over from various sides, you will see that the general spectator is generally unaware of technique. That is the zone of art's creators. Were you to watch a crowd watching a magician, you would find one common denominator eliciting uniform response. If he is a good magician he is a smooth showman. He isn't showing them how he does his tricks. He is showing them a flawless flowing performance. This alone is providing the carrier wave that takes the substance of his actions to his audience. Though a far cry from fine art, perhaps, yet there is art in the way he does things. If he is good, the audience is seeing first of all, before anything else, the TECHNICAL EXPERTISE of his performance. They are also watching him do things they know they can't do. And they are watching the outcome of his presentations. He is a good magician if he gives a technically flawless performance just in terms of scenes and motions which provide the channel for what he is presenting. Not to compare Bach with a magician (though you could), all great pieces of art have this one factor in common. First of all, before one looks at the faces on the canvas or hears the meaning of the song, there is the TECHNICAL EXPERTISE there adequate to produce an emotional impact. Before one adds message or meaning, there is this TECHNICAL EXPERTISE. TECHNICAL EXPERTISE is composed of all the little and large bits of technique known to the skilled painter, musician, actor, any artist. He adds these things together in his basic presentation. He knows what he is doing. And how to do it. And then to this he adds his message. All old masters were in there nailing canvas on frames as apprentices or grinding up the lapis lazuli or cleaning paintbrushes before they arrived at the Metropolitan. But how many paintbrushes do you have to clean? Enough to know that clean paintbrushes make clean color. How many clarinet reeds do you have to replace? Enough to know which types will hit high C. 198 Back of every artist there is technique. You see them groping, finding, discarding, fooling about. What are they hunting for? A new blue? No, just a constant of blue that is an adequate quality. And you see somebody who can really paint still stumbling about looking for technique -- a total overrun. Someplace one says, "That's the TECHNICAL EXPERTISE adequate to produce an emotional impact." And that's it. Now he CAN. So he devotes himself to messages. If you get this tanged up or backwards, the art does not have a good chance of being good. If one bats out messages without a TECHNICALLY EXPERT carrier wave of art, the first standard of the many spectators seems to be violated. The nice trick is to be a technician and retain one's fire. Then one can whip out the masterpieces like chain lightning. And all the great artists seem to have managed that. And when they forked off onto a new trail they mastered the technique and then erupted with great works. It is a remarkable thing about expertise. Do you know that some artists get by on "Technical expertise adequate to produce an emotional impact" alone messages? They might not suspect that. But it is true. So the "expertise adequate" is important enough to be itself art. It is never great art. But it produces an emotional impact just from quality alone. And how masterly an expertise? Not very masterly. Merely adequate. How adequate is adequate? Well, people have been known to criticize a story because there were typographical errors in the typing. And stories by the non- adept often go pages before anyone appears or anything happens. And scores have been known to be considered dull simply because they were inexpertly chorded or clashed. And a handsome actor has been known not to have made it because he never knew what to do with his arms, for all his fiery thunderings of the Bard's words. Any art demands a certain expertise. When this is basically sound, magic! Almost anyone will look at it and say Ah! For quality alone has an emotional impact. That it is cubist or dissonant or blank verse has very little bearing on it; the type of the art form is no limitation to audience attention generally when it has, underlying it and expressed in it, the expertise adequate to produce an emotional impact. The message is what the audience thinks it sees or hears. The significance of the play, the towering clouds of sound in the symphony, the scatter-batter of the current pop group, are what the audience thinks it is perceiving and what they will describe, usually, or which they think they admire. If it comes to them with a basic expertise itself able to produce an emotional impact they will think it is great. And it will be great. The artist is thought of as enthroned in some special heaven where all is clean and there is no sweat, eyes half closed in the thrall of inspiration. Well maybe he is sometimes. But every one I've seen had ink in his hair or a towel handy to mop his brow or a throat spray in his hand to ease the voice strain of having said his lines twenty-two times to the wall or the cat. I mean the great ones. The others were loafing and hoping and talking about the producer or the unfair art gallery proprietor. The great ones always worked to achieve the technical quality necessary. When they had it they knew they had it. How did they know? Because it was technically correct. Living itself is an art form. One puts up a mock-up. It doesn't happen by accident. One has to know how to wash his nylon shirts and girls have to know what mascara runs and that too many candy bars spoil the silhouette, quite in addition to the pancreas. 199 Some people are themselves a work of art because they have mastered the small practical techniques of living that give them a quality adequate to produce an emotional impact even before anyone knows their name or what they do. Even a beard and baggy pants require a certain art if they are to be the expertise adequate to produce an emotional impact. And some products produce a bad misemotional impact without fully being viewed. And by this reverse logic, of which you can think of many examples such as a dirty room, you can then see that there might be an opposite expertise, all by itself, adequate to produce a strong but desirable emotional impact. That is how good a work of art has to be. Once one is capable of executing that technical expertise for that art form he can pour on the message. Unless the professional form is there first, the message will not transmit. A lot of artists are overstraining to obtain a quality far above that necessary to produce an emotional impact. And many more are trying to machine gun messages at the world without any expertise at all to form the vital carrier wave. So how good does a piece of art have to be? L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.jh Copyright $c 1973 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 200  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=30/7/73 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  SCIENTOLOGY, CURRENT STATE OF THE SUBJECT AND MATERIALS   BPI  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 30 JULY 1973 BPI SCIENTOLOGY, CURRENT STATE OF THE SUBJECT AND MATERIALS There is a possibility that some Scientologists have not realized the extent of technical materials which exist in Dianetics and Scientology on the subject of the spirit, mind and life. For instance, there are about 25,000,000 words on tape in archives which provide the consecutive path of discovery. When placed chronologically with books, HCOBs, HCO PLs and other issues this gives a nearly complete record of all discoveries and applications in these subjects. The total numbers of words or even the number of tapes and issues to date have not been reliably calculated. From time to time various efforts have been made to transcribe and issue all the materials. The task should be done, especially before the decay of magnetic tape, some of which was of poor quality, eradicates the material. But proper and safe equipment and trustworthy technicians who would not turn out an overt product have been lacking. A project of assembly in the 1960s was balked by inadequate record pressing material available in the society around us. A more strenuous and reliable effort should be made to place these archives into a more durable form than magnetic tape. More or less complete sets of all materials exist in many places on the planet to safeguard against destruction. It is from this tremendous archives that study packs and other materials are made up. These and their checksheets are very numerous and available. A chronological study of materials is necessary for the complete training of a truly top grade expert in these lines. He can see how the subject progressed and so is able to see which are the highest levels of development. Not the least advantage in this is the defining of words and terms, for each, when originally used, was defined, in most cases, with considerable exactitude, and one is not left with any misunderstoods. It is for this reason that the Saint Hill Briefing Course checksheet should consist only of the chronological materials, studied in chronological order, excepting only the Study Tapes (Primary Rundown) which should be done first if not previously done properly. An enormous amount of this material does exist in issuable form. While not strictly technical, HCO PLs, almost all of them, now exist in books grouped by subjects and I think will soon exist in chronological form also. It is projected that this be done with HCOBs, but these of course should be only in chronological and complete order and the points where books and tapes were part of this track should be indicated. Transcriptions and edited versions of tapes (which do not however rearrange meaning or alter data) exist for a great many tapes and it is projected that these shall also be the subject of a future issue. For instance, the "Philadelphia Lectures" have recently been transcribed and could easily be edited into volumes for issue and should be, due to their popularity. The subject of Scientology is to some degree developed in reverse order. The task was to undercut the current level of Man and this was the general target. Therefore one 201 finds the higher levels publicly spoken of most frequently in the earlier books and tapes (between '51 and '55). In seeking full application to others and attainment for them of their potentials it was necessary to codify the materials and develop processes for them. Any difficulties people were having with going Clear were handled in the mid '60s and OT levels as they exist in Advanced Orgs were completed by '68. There are perhaps 15 levels above OT VII fully developed but existing only in unissued note form, pending more people's full attainment of OT VI & VII. In the early '70s the bottom was found with the discoveries of exactly what psychosis was and the development of processes to handle it. This was outside the scope of organizations at the time and is not in general use; but it did finalize the task of undercutting low enough to include all spiritual and mental materials, then, within the subject of Scientology, in a state of applicability. Many people believe that Scientology materials contain mainly processes. They think of Scientology as processing. This is a very narrow view. It is understandable enough as processing is the way out for them. But this neglects the more considerable materials which deal with basics and fundamentals; processes are only one use of these. Other people, having gotten their smallest toe damp as an HAS then wander off to other fields looking for answers, whereas had they taken Dianetics or Scientology Grade training, to say nothing of the Saint Hill Briefing Course, they would have found more fundamentals than exist in all other subjects combined, a fact which any advanced student of Scientology can confirm. Still others think that the "newest" is of course the most advanced and are looking for new "processes" to be issued or new materials; whereas the process to resolve their case was most likely issued in earlier years. An amusing instance of this is one whole continental area where an exact set of principles was isolated and exact processes released that handle that exact national type; yet, waiting for something new because they did not know the old, they were found earlier this year to be ignoring this rundown even on new preclears and of course were having a hard time of it for those ARE the basic processes for that continent, for those people DO have that barrier. For quite a while I have had the "hat of finder of lost tech". Whole sections of knowledge drop out of view, whole arrays of processes (and administrative principles) go out of use and preclears there and the organization of the area sag; but recovery is swift the moment the "lost" knowledge is pulled out of their own file cabinets and restored. Further, people in organizations are quite often at high case levels. They have already experienced the bridging knowledge which connects the subject to the man in the street. It is not new to THEM. They sometimes err in believing it is not new to the world. Thus gaps are permitted to exist. The solution is to recover the "lost" tech. But it is also true that many in organizations work very hard to keep the knowledge bridge in. And do well in accomplishing it. Within the same civilization, many other subjects than Scientology exist. Many of these other subjects are in a very primitive state while pretending a very advanced position. Psychiatry and Psychology are a pair of these. Their pretenses, inhumanities and even cruelties muddy up the field of the spirit and mind. Because they produce negative or even damaging results and because they were "authority" before Scientology began to guide the field toward saner and more civilized levels, Scientology's task of handling the public is made far more difficult than if the public had not been so harmed and made suspicious of the field of the mind. Yet the most mind-wrenching problems Psychiatry and Psychology practitioners think they have (they have not confronted the real ones) give way before the lowest most pedestrian levels of Scientology. There is an amusing story of a Scientologist who attended a social meeting of Psychiatrists and Psychologists and listened to them for a while as they moaned 202 about their patients and their own cases and then, being compassionate, began to explain to them in a sort of technical baby talk the nature and resolution of these "vast" "unsolvable" "problems". As he took no offense at their ignorant arrogance which first greeted him and as he did seem to have a grasp of their troubles, they kept him up until four AM going over their "problems" in detail and gave him more and more absorbed attention and began to cognite. They were very tame and very respectful when he left, certain they had heard the guru of all time: and this is amusing because he was not a trained auditor in any sense of the word and had only read a few Scientology books! Yet to them he was their dean as a professional by comparative and sensible knowledge. Many Scientologists have had similar experiences. In the field of Scientology Admin tech a staff member who had not had an Org Exec Course but had been hatted in HCO went home for a vacation. His father who, like some fathers, was certain his son was stupid, permitted him, with misgivings, to reorganize the administration of his medical clinic along Scientology lines. The son trained the small staff for only a week, lines began to whizz, patients began to get handled, records went straight, income rose and the father became absolutely convinced that his son was the brightest organizational genius in the country; yet in the org they had considered he had a long way to go to be a good Ethics Officer! Gives you some comparative idea of where the lowest rudimentary levels of Scientology sit in relation to current technologies. Above such small bits of fringe information the bulk of Scientology knowledge towers into mountains. It is accessible, in the main, to those who seek it. The only barriers are usually their own lack of command of their own language and the misconceptions of study ground into them from kindergarten on. Means of solving these are also available and are daily applied to countless newcomers over the world. The actual barrier in the society is a failure to practice truth. Living lives of white lies, they find it difficult to grasp that truth actually exists. This can hang on as a habit during the first studies of a student and he can defeat himself utterly by continuing a dishonesty in his study -- skipping this, not doing that. For Scientology is the road to truth and he who would follow it must take true steps. Some, seeing out of their own ambitious eyes and as jealous of any imagined rival as any ferocious boy friend, seek to assert that Scientology is interested in healing. This is something like saying that a Cadillac engineer is interested only in window polish. For when you begin to handle the causative force in Man he often also gets well. The "proofs" of supposing Scientology is a healing activity are abundant enough if one sees the recovery lists in any org. But they were not processed to heal them, only to free them. A recent example of this occurred when a preclear broke her ankle and was given medical treatment. Naturally the org was anxious to get on with her program of processing and the ankle injury was in the way. After weeks in medical hands with the ankle getting worse, the engram of the injury was run out, the ankle got well and the person was again being routinely processed a few days later. The auditor could be said to have been engaged in healing. All he was doing was getting a body difficulty out of his road so he could get on with it. Recently, having found bottom on the mind and spirit some years ago, I have been looking into physical nutrition and biochemistry. These latter levels lie below the spirit and mind and could be loosely considered to be an undercut as they do impede spiritual gain. Many people are mainly fixated on the body and living as they do in an intensely materialistic society, they are caught between being a body in the work-a-day world and achieving spiritual freedom. This is of course paradoxical. The game of being a body is the only game they have in their eyes. Thus if something is wrong with their body they manifest having heavy problems and they are anxious at the thought of losing a body: in other words they have a hidden standard of body health as their measure of spiritual attainment which, though illogical, is where they are and what they are doing. Scientology has long pursued the firm policy of sending the sick to the medical doctor. There is no place they can send the insane as to send them to psychiatry would 203 be to condemn them to horror, and so orgs do not usually handle them at all as they are not equipt to do so even when technically able. But the sick have been another matter. The gentlemanly thing to do was to give the doctor his due and trust that he would respect the courtesy. Instead, anxious for a total monopoly of health which he is quite incapable of delivering especially in the USA, he seeks to eradicate all fancied rivals. Thus this policy will one day come to an end. It is quite legal to heal by spiritual means and even part of the law of most states and countries and, indeed, was the sole province of religion for thousands of years before the medical doctor came along. But this is no reason why Scientology would make any effort to replace the medical doctor since he has considerable value in the mechanics of bones and structural matters. The only place he falls down is in handling general illnesses, especially of a chronic nature. Medicine has been overtaken in healing by nutritionists and biochemists. They still seek to exclude these skills from their knowledge and experience. Indeed, when demanding $46,000,000 to research heart disease from a not always bright Congress in the U.S., medicine was contradicted by no less than the head of Health, Education and Welfare who stated that their "research" as planned did not include biochemistry, a rather strange omission since this is the most result-filled field. It goes without mention that the demand also excluded nutritional research. Many individual doctors are prone to attack any patients they find "on vitamins" or who timidly mention Vitamin E. And one is struck with the fact that heart disease is the largest income source, I believe, of the doctor. Thus there is a blindness in medical circles to the most productive and curative practices in the field of illness and thus, policy or not, organizations will soon have to bend to public demand and route the bill to doctors only when they have broken bones or need surgery to get the bullets or steering wheels out, and all others to the nutritionist who DOES use all the modern developments in food, vitamins, minerals and advanced biochemistry and use them intelligently. An estimation of this latter field was therefore in order and I have for some time now been engaged in an evaluation of it and a study of it. What I have found is that the field lacks coordination of its knowledge, not just from nutritionist to nutritionist but in the works of the same person. A tremendous amount of material has been brought forth in the last three decades. It is in a state of near chaos. Liquefied grass and other dietary fads have become confused into the sober routine subject of nutrition. Food fadism and nutritional knowledge are interlocked in the public mind to such a degree that some unscrupulous fellow who knows better could advise people to eat only tree bark and they accommodatingly would. For instance there are books and books and books out currently, by M.D.s and others who should have done their homework, inveighing against "cholesterol": This is a biochemical composition of animal oils and fats. They say it gets into the arteries and causes strokes and heart attacks. Well, that is all very well. But did you also know that every glandular secretion in the body, the secretions which keep one young and functioning are ALL made by the glands from cholesterol? If people do not take in cholesterol bearing foods they, by simple logic, could be seen to rapidly age and die. What's wanted is the knowledge of how to keep cholesterol controlled not how to take everyone off cholesterol. One would think the American Medical Association owned shares in undertaking parlors. A coordination of actual knowledge in these fields of nutrition and biochemistry is what is lacking. Apparently researchers are clever enough to isolate materials but are not wise enough to coordinate them fact against fact into an intelligible subject. While examining this scene I have found that nutrition and biochemistry ARE the leaders, however. The subjects are actually arts and in a rather primitive state. But illnesses still puzzling medicine are in many cases quite old hat to the nutritionist. 204 If one wanted further proof, medical organizations, especially in the US, are fighting nutrition with their usual violence where their pocket book is threatened -- black propaganda, government seizure orders and all the routine mechanisms medicine has employed in its history to "safeguard" its interests are in full play against the health food store and the vitamin counter. That is enough to prove the point that nutrition is the leader in our contemporary times where physical health body treatment is concerned. While the medical doctor and his psychiatry branch flood out the useless and destructive "tranquilizers", the nutritionist hands out a couple tablets of magnesium which actually cool a person off beautifully and far more effectively without the physical damage carried by the tranquilizer. The medical doctor and his psychiatry branch gave the world its greatest wave of drug addiction. Their friend the German-oriented psychologist, with his man-is-animal teaching of the young and destruction of orthodox religion, has given the world its greatest period of crime. They are on their way out even though they are fighting a dirty and violent read-guard action. So why bet on losers? They won't make it. Nutrition's star is rising into a blazing sun in the field of physical treatment of the body. It is also wise enough to know and repeatedly state that spiritual and mental stress MUST be handled before too much result can be obtained, which is perfectly true. Thus I have going at this particular time a project of codification and coordination of what is known in the fields of nutrition and biochemistry, not to be wiser than they, but to get some order into this field so that its potential can be more fully realized. This work is almost incidental to Scientology research. I am completing something I started in 1945, which was a survey of biochemistry potentials in order to decide a direction of research: did the mind monitor structure or structure, as medicine thought, monitor the mind? The former was in 1945 found to be the true case to an overwhelming degree. But at the same time, when people are so body fixated that they have problems of a physical nature too intense to admit of any other consideration, bringing them true power and freedom becomes difficult unless one pays some attention to where their attention is fixated. Malnutrition, deficiencies in vitamins and minerals, chronic illnesses and unhealing wounds are all needlessly distracting but they are nevertheless distracting. There apparently exist easy ways to handle these things. There is no sense in processing someone for a hundred hours only to find his only interest is curing his headache and to discover that he has a headache because he is allergic to bread and eats bread nearly as his sole diet! Or to find that the overweight fellow is just getting processed to get his body thin and after scores of hours discover he is living on candy bars and has been diabetic for years! Not when you can simply take the former off bread and wheat and give the latter some trivalent chromium and protein and put a guard on the candy store. Make no mistake -- one CAN process over the top of these things and even handle, for the spirit and mind dominate them. But why? It's far easier to parallel the mind and get the distraction handled so one can THEN get to why he got that way in the first place if he is still interested, though well. One can do things the hard way or the easy way. So nutrition and biochemistry are vital subjects and, due to medical influence, very badly neglected subjects even in the presence of positive and even vital value. My current review of these is in the nature of an assist to processing. As such, of course, they have to embrace the factors of predisposition to, precipitation and prolongation of physical illness. It has already been established, prior to present records, while I was working with the general field of life in 1945, and has been confirmed by contemporary researchers 205 in nutrition and biochemistry that Stress is the basic cause in physical illness. Thus, such nutritional research cannot supplant the handling of stress. Further, conditions can exist where nutrition and biochemistry cannot work at all until stress is relieved by processing. Therefore, in lower stages of handling there is a band where thought and physical beingness tend to merge. In this lower zone, assist type processing and nutritional or biochemical aids seem to be simultaneously necessary. In such instances one must alternate them or co-apply them. There are also a few deficiencies which produce manifestations quite similar in appearance to insanity. Where the illness or injury is acute and severe immediate physical attention is mandatory and can be assisted only by the lightest possible address to the mental factors, perhaps as light as simply being comforting or gentle. In a case such as a person in a long continued coma, where nutrition is intravenous, processing is still possible by gently causing the person's hand to make repeated contact on command with a pillow or the bed. Thus it can be seen, processing can reach a long way down. Above all this physical level material of course, the subject has been for a long time wrapped up. Persons continuing to play the body game limit themselves in various ways and by the nature of life and this civilization have their ups and downs even when well processed. If they have attained a relatively high state as a bodied person they can however be rehabilitated, usually simply by running out their overt acts and withholds and restoring their exterior perception: they are, however, despite their continued physical beingness, quite capable of easily assuming their full potentials: they usually prefer to go on with the game by imposing limitations, for instance to continue using their eyes. One rarely sees them do the stunts and tricks of the Indian fakir even where they can since they have risen above exhibitionism or the need to overwhelm or prove things and they are of course continuing to play the game of human being, since that is the main game they have available around them. There is undoubtedly a considerable amount of neating up that I could do, including making all materials more readily available, seeing to the compilation of a very extensive dictionary of terms, filling in incidental gaps where material may not have been fully recorded. These are difficulties of a minor nature compared to the research in making the result attainable. It has been difficult working in a confused and, yes, even primitive society that is starved for workable knowledge in the humanities. The very condition that made it vital to seek out and release the material also made it difficult to do the job in the first place. Scientology now has more than enough data and technology to handle even the broad problems in the humanities. The main task now is getting it fully used, and along this line there are hundreds of thousands working every day around the world. Scientology is the fastest growing Religion on the planet by actual surveys and statements by sociologists. And this is the more remarkable as in this period orthodox Religions have shrunk before the materialistic onslaught of our times. The materials of Scientology are the result of forty-three years of search, coordination and application to millions. The organizations of Scientology have been building and expanding for nineteen years (despite the fears and hates and jealousies of this civilization) on five continents and making it all the way, thanks to the magnificent people of Scientology. We are very rich in materials, in results and in the potential future. Through our hardest times we have endured. Into our brightest times we are expanding. These materials contain the full basics of the only game in the universe where everyone wins, the game of triumphant life itself. LRH:nt.jh Copyright $c 1973 by L. Ron Hubbard L. RON HUBBARD ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Founder 206  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=2/8/73 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  PEP   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 2 AUGUST 1973 Remimeo PEP I've been doing some research lately. That's mostly what I have been doing. And while this is not the main line of research I thought I might mention it in passing. Something like four centuries ago Man's diet began to undergo a radical change. What he ate before that was European, Asian. Whole grain barley, various proteins, various wheats and other foods were not necessarily abundant but they made up a radically different diet than modern Man consumes. With the discovery of the New World, for the first time there was an abundance of SUGAR. Up until then sugar came from a few scarce plants and beehives and was far too expensive for any broad general consumption. But the wealth of the West Indies was not really gold. It was the product of the sugar cane: BROWN AND WHITE SUGAR. Also the Americas gave the world many new plants such as maize (the African's "mealy meal"), the potato and other carbohydrates and today a startlingly large amount of the European and African diet consists of plants first found in America. Almost all these foods are mainly carbohydrate, which is to say, low on protein. Thus Man's diet changed. And the changes were in the direction of abundant Sugar and Carbohydrate and away from a high protein diet. And with this change, it could be said, there went Man's pep. Sugar is a deceptive thing. It appears to give one energy. But it does so by by-passing the body's production of its own sugar. Alcohol is also deceptive. It apparently by-passes the ability to make sugar which is why it messes up the liver. In other words sugar in abundance by-passed the basic energy producing mechanisms of the body. Straight sugar makes the stomach and digestive processes alkaline. This is the opposite to acid. Food needs acid to digest. Therefore, as just one part of all this scene, when one doesn't eat protein and digest his food he winds up in a state of malnutrition -- a general breakdown of body functions due to lack of adequate nourishment. Sugar, that is supposed "to produce energy" does so only at the expense of physical health for sugar does not build up a body, it only burns it up. The result of a heavy intake of sugar and carbohydrates is to feel tired all the time -- no pep. A diet of candy bars and cokes may appear to put energy there but eventually no body is left to burn it! Well, today they start little babies out on sugar and carbohydrate as an "all right diet". No protein. The result is these fat babies you see ballooning in their perambulators. They are starting life with two-and-a-half strikes on them. The rest of the third strike is added by cokes and candy bars. And there goes the old ball game. You get a civilization that is tired, no endurance. The degeneration can be reversed if one knocks off the cokes and candy bars and sugar in the coffee and tea and begins to concentrate on an intake of a good percentage of protein. After a few weeks or months, one starts to feel peppy. The old body has begun to build itself back. 207 If one is going to run a car, he has to feed it the right fuel and oil. If one is going to run a body it has to be fed the right food and that has to include protein. We have seen aboard a lot of diet fads. That's what they were. "Eat liquefied carrots and you will fly." "Chomp only Vitamin X and you will soar." Well, bad diets like that give dieting a bad name like "crazy". We've had food cranks around who only ate hazelnuts or Chinese herbs. Well, that's a different subject entirely than what I'm talking about. I think those diets shouldn't even be wished off on the birds. All I'm talking about is eating your chow instead of living off candy bars, cokes and milk and sugared coffee. By eating your hamburger and vegetables and leaving alone the candy bars and cokes, you will begin to build up a head of steam. It takes far longer for actual food to build up into energy than it does sugar. Most of the bodies around got started off on a sugar-carbohydrate baby formula and got to believing that if something tasted sweet it was good. Well, cocaine probably tastes great too, but it won't build up a body and the pep it imparts is very false indeed as it does so by ripping the body apart. Man's diet changed over the last four centuries. And he's now got a lot of welfare and sick populations. And he sure pushes the stuff which got him into that condition -- sugar and carbohydrates. America got even for being discovered and raped. She gave the world hordes of new carbohydrates and principally she gave the world abundant raw sugar. An interesting revenge. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.ts Copyright $c 1973 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 208  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=10/8/73 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  PTS HANDLING   Remimeo A/Guardians HCO Secs E/Os MAAs Tech Secs Ds of P PTS Pack  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex Remimeo HCO BULLETIN OF 10 AUGUST 1973 A/Guardians HCO Secs E/Os MAAs Tech Secs PTS HANDLING Ds of P PTS Pack (PTS = Potential Trouble Source) There are two stable data which anyone has to have, understand and KNOW ARE TRUE in order to obtain results in handling the person connected to suppressives. These data are: 1. That all illness in greater or lesser degree and all foul-ups stem directly and only from a PTS condition. 2. That getting rid of the condition requires three basic actions: A. Discover. B. Handle or disconnect. Persons called upon to handle PTS people can do so very easily, far more easily than they believe. Their basic stumbling block is thinking that there are exceptions or that there is other tech or that the two above data have modifiers or are not sweeping. The moment a person who is trying to handle PTSs gets persuaded there are other conditions or reasons or tech, he is at once lost and will lose the game and not obtain results. And this is very too bad because it is not difficult and the results are there to be obtained. To turn someone who may be PTS over to an auditor just to have him mechanically audited may not be enough. In the first place this person may not have a clue what is meant by PTS and may be missing all manner of technical data on life and may be so overwhelmed by a suppressive person or group that he is quite incoherent. Thus just mechanically doing a process may miss the whole show as it misses the person's understanding of why it is being done. A PTS person is rarely psychotic. But all psychotics are PTS if only to themselves. A PTS person may be in a state of deficiency or pathology which prevents a ready recovery, but at the same time he will not fully recover unless the PTS condition is also handled. For he became prone to deficiency or pathological illness because he was PTS. And unless the condition is relieved, no matter what medication or nutrition he may be given, he might not recover and certainly will hot recover permanently. This seems to indicate that there are "other illnesses or reasons for illness besides being PTS". To be sure there are deficiencies and illnesses just as there are accidents and injuries. But strangely enough the person himself precipitates them because being PTS predisposes him to them. In a more garbled way, the medicos and nutritionists are always talking about "stress" causing illness. Lacking full tech they yet have an inkling that this is so because they see it is somehow true. They cannot handle it. Yet they recognize it, and they state that it is a senior situation to various illnesses and accidents. Well, we have the tech of this in more ways than one. What is this thing called "stress"? It is more than the medico defines it -- he usually says it comes from operational or physical shock and in this he has too limited a view. A person under stress is actually under a suppression on one or more dynamics. If that suppression is located and the person handles or disconnects, the condition diminishes. If he also has all the engrams and ARC Breaks, problems, overts and withholds audited out triple flow and if ALL such areas of suppression are thus handled, the person would recover from anything caused by "stress". 209 Usually the person has insufficient understanding of life or any dynamic to grasp his own situation. He is confused. He believes all his illnesses are true because they occur in such heavy books! At some time he was predisposed to illness or accidents. When a serious suppression then occurred he suffered a precipitation or occurrence of the accident or illness, and then with repeated similar suppressions on the same chain, the illness or tendency to accidents became prolonged or chronic. To say then that a person is PTS to his current environment would be very limited as a diagnosis. If he continues to do or be something to which the suppressive person or group objected he may become or continue to be ill or have accidents. Actually the problem of PTS is not very complicated. Once you have grasped the two data first given, the rest of it becomes simply an analysis of how they apply to this particular person. A PTS person can be markedly helped in three ways: (a) gaining an understanding of the tech of the condition (b) discovering to what or to whom he is PTS (c) handling or disconnecting. Someone with the wish or duty to find and handle PTSs has an additional prior step: He must know how to recognize a PTS and how to handle them when recognized. Thus it is rather a waste of time to engage in this hunt unless one has been checked out on all the material on suppressives and PTSs and grasps it without misunderstoods. In other words the first step of the person is to get a grasp of the subject and its tech. This is not difficult to do; it may be a bit more difficult to learn to run an E-Meter and considerably more difficult to learn how to list for items, but there again this is possible and is much easier than trying to grope around guessing. With this step done, a person has no real trouble recognizing PTS people and can have success in handling them which is very gratifying and rewarding. Let us consider the easiest level of approach: i) Give the person the simpler HCO Bs on the subject and let him study them so that he knows the elements like "PTS" and "Suppressive". He may just cognite right there and be much better. It has happened. ii) Have him discuss the illness or accident or condition, without much prodding or probing, that he thinks now may be the result of suppression. He will usually tell you it is right here and now or was a short time ago and will be all set to explain it (without any relief) as stemming from his current environment or a recent one. If you let it go at that he would simply be a bit unhappy and not get well as he is discussing usually a late lock that has a lot of earlier material below it. iii) Ask when he recalls first having that illness or having such accidents. He will at once begin to roll this back and realize that it has happened before. You don't have to be auditing him as he is all too willing to talk about this in a most informal manner. He will get back to some early this- lifetime point usually. iv) Now ask him who it was. He will usually tell you promptly. And, as you are not really auditing him and he isn't going backtrack and you are not trying to do more than key him out, you don't probe any further. v) You will usually find that he has named a person to whom he is still connected! So you ask him whether he wants to handle or disconnect. Now as the sparks will really fly in his life if he dramatically disconnects and if he can't see how he 210 can, you persuade him to begin to handle on a gradient scale. This may consist of imposing some slight discipline on him such as requiring him to actually answer his mail or write the person a pleasant good roads good weather note or to realistically look at how he estranged them. In short what is required in the handling is a low gradient. All you are trying to do is MOVE THE PTS PERSON FROM EFFECT OVER TO SLIGHT GENTLE CAUSE. vi) Check with the person again, if he is handling, and coach him along, always at a gentle good roads and good weather level and no H E and R (Human Emotion and Reaction) if you please. That is a simple handling. You can get complexities such as a person being PTS to an unknown person in his immediate vicinity that he may have to find before he can handle or disconnect. You can find people who can't remember more than a few years back. You can find anything you can find in a case. But simple handling ends when it looks pretty complex. And that's when you call in the auditor. But this simple handling will get you quite a few stars in your crown. You will be amazed to find that while some of them don't instantly recover, medication, vitamins, minerals will now work when before they wouldn't. You may also get some instant recovers but realize that if they don't you have not failed. The auditor can do "3 S&Ds" after this with much more effect as he isn't working with a completely uninformed person. "3 S&Ds" only fail because of wrong items or because the auditor did not then put in triple rudiments on the items and then audit them out as engrams triple flow. A being is rather complex. He may have a lot of sources of suppression. And it may take a lot of very light auditing to get him up to where he can do work on suppressives since these were, after all, the source of his overwhelm. And what he did to THEM might be more important than what they did to HIM but unless you unburden HIM he may not get around to realizing that. You can run into a person who can only be handled by Expanded Dianetics. But you have made an entrance and you have stirred things up and gotten him more aware and just that way you will find he is more at cause. His illness or proneness to accidents may not be slight. You may succeed only to the point where he now has a chance, by nutrition, vitamins, minerals, medication, treatment, and above all, auditing, of getting well. Unless you jogged this condition, he had no chance at all: for becoming PTS is the first thing that happened to him on the subject of illness or accidents. Further, if the person has had a lot of auditing and yet isn't progressing too well, your simple handling may all of a sudden cause him to line up his case. So do not underestimate what you or an auditor can do for a PTS. And don't sell PTS tech short or neglect it. And don't continue to transfer or push off or even worse tolerate PTS conditions in people. You CAN do something about it. And so can they. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.rd Copyright $c 1973 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 211  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=15/10/73 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  C/S Series 87 NULLING AND F/Ning PREPARED LISTS   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 15 OCTOBER 1973 Remimeo C/S Series 87 NULLING AND F/Ning PREPARED LISTS A prepared list is one which is issued in an HCOB and is used to correct cases. There are many of these. Notable amongst them is C/S 53 and its corrections. It is customary for the auditor to be required to F/N such a list. This means on calling it that the whole list item by item is to F/N. Now and then you get the extreme oddity of a list selected to exactly remedy the case not reading but not F/Ning. Of course this might happen if the list did not apply to the case (such as an OT prepared list being used on a Grade IV, heaven forbid). In the case of lists to correct listing, and in particular the C/S 53 series, it is nearly impossible for this situation to occur. A C/S will very often see that the auditor has assessed the list on the pc, has gotten no reads, and the list did not F/N. A "reasonable" C/S (heaven forbid) lets this go by. Yet he has before him first-class evidence that the auditor 1. Has out-TRs in general, 2. Has no impingement whatever with TR-1, 3. Is placing his meter in the wrong position in the auditing session so that he cannot see it, the pc and his worksheet, 4. That the auditor's eyesight is bad. One or more of these conditions certainly exist. To do nothing about it is to ask for catastrophe after catastrophe with pcs and to have one's confidence in one's own C/Sing deteriorate badly. An amazing number of auditors cannot make a prepared list read for one of the above reasons. Putting in suppress, invalidation or misunderstood words on the list will either get a read or the list will F/N. The moral of this is that prepared lists that do not read F/N. When prepared lists that do not read do not F/N or when the auditor cannot get a prepared list to F/N, serious auditing errors are present which will defeat a C/S. In the interest of obtaining results and being merciful on pcs, the wise C/S never lets this situation go by without finding what it is all about. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:rhc.nt.rd Founder Copyright $c 1973 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 213  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=30/8/71 Volnum=0 Issue=2 Rev=4 rDate=6/2/74 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  PC COMPLETIONS -- SECOND REVISION   EFFECTIVE AFTER 1st Thursday in February 1974 Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 30 AUGUST 1971 RC Issue II (REPLACED by BTB 30 Aug 71RD) REVISED 21 OCTOBER 1973 REVISED 23 OCTOBER 1973 Remimeo REVISED 6 FEBRUARY 1974 (Only change is addition of No. 21a.) EFFECTIVE AFTER 1st Thursday in February 1974 PC COMPLETIONS -- SECOND REVISION This second revised issue cancels all earlier and any local org or continental issues assigning Paid Completion Points. To maintain uniformity any right of orgs or continental areas to assign completion points is revoked. Orgs may request additions or amendments when required but such become effective only when officially issued by Flag. For statistical purposes an audited completion must be PAID and have attested with an F/N VGIs and written a success story for the action. This does NOT mean that you would interrupt an auditing rundown to send the pc to Examiner and attest and success on each step of a rundown where completion points are awarded for separate steps (e.g. Drug RD is one attest when full RD completed. One then counts total points for the 3 sections of the RD). Any quickie or incompetent completion falsifies the statistic and is subject to fine or penalty. Changes below are in this type style. The completions list follows: 1. Interiorization Rundown -- 1. 2. Life Repair -- 1. 3. Student Rescue Intensive -- 1. 4. Progress Pgm -- 1. 5. Hubbard Consultant (HC) List (Data Series) -- 1. 6. Word Clearing Method One -- 2. 7. C/S Series 54. (Pc Assessment Form and handling) -- 2. 8. Drugs, Medicine, Alcohol Class VIII Remedy (3 way recall, secondaries, engrams) -- 1. 9. Pains, Somatics, Emotions each reading drug fully handled by R3R Triple -- 1. (E.g. 5 drugs fully handled = 5 points. Count this way to conform with majority interpretation.) 10. Prior Assmt to Drugs -- 1. 11. Dianetics Completion -- 5. 214 12. ARC Str Wire Triple Exp -- 3 (no credit singles). 13. Each Expanded Grade -- 5 (no credit single or triple). 14. HCO B 24 July 69 -- 1. 15. Touch and Dianetic Assists to fully handle injury or postoperative or post-birth, etc -- 2. 16. Auditing repair -- 1/2. 17. GF Method 5 handled if not part of a repair -- 1/2. 18. GF 40 Expanded fully handled, lists and engrams, by itself whether part of another program or not -- 3. 19. C/S Series 53 handled to F/N on all items (F/Ning assessment) whether part of another program or not -- 1. 19a. Full false TA RD successfully resolved -- 2. 20. L3B Rundown -- 2. 21. PTS Rundown (full rundown) -- 2. 21a. Introspection Rundown -- 2. 22. Study Correction List fully handled -- 2. 23. Int Rundown Correction List fully handled -- 1/2. 24. Word Clearing Correction List fully handled -- 1/2. 25. Objective Processes (full battery to get pc off or handle Drugs before Drug RD) -- 3. 26. Each Expanded Dianetics separate RD -- 1. 26a. Expanded Dianetics Rundown fully completed (in addition to single points for each part) -- 5. 27. Incidental Rundowns such as Money Process if contained in an LRH HCO B 28. 12 1/2 Hour Intensive -- 5 points for each completed within the week. PENALTY: 1 point loss for every percent below 90% F/N VGIs Examiner for the previous day. Example: 75% only F/N VGIs = 15 point loss. GAIN: Add one point for every percent above 90% F/N VGIs at Examiner. For every 9 points made 1 point may be added for staff auditing providing it is actually delivered. Items such as L-1C and L-4B are part of the session or action in which they are used, or part of an auditing repair pgm, and are covered by the points for those actions. Student Co-auditing: There are no points calculated or used for student co-auditing completions (except only as stated in the Student Completions HCO B) or for free public completions done by students or public as these can be part of student completion requirements. 215 SH 29. Power Set-up GF + 40 Method 5 and Handle -- 2. 30. POWER Singe -- 5. 31. POWER TRIPLE -- 15. 32. Complete Your Case items as per regular auditing as above. Added Bonus for case flying and fully handled -- 5. AO 33. Set-up for Solo or other advanced level: as per regular auditing above. 33a. Case truly flying and ready for R6EW auditing. Added Bonus -- 5. 33b. Successful Case Consultation -- 1. 34. R6EW Solo Auditing Completion -- 5. 35. Clearing Course Solo Auditing Completion -- 10. 36. OT I Solo Auditing Completion -- 5. 37. OT II Solo Auditing Completion -- 5. 38. OT III Solo Auditing Completion -- 10. 39. OT III Exp Solo Auditing Completion -- 5. 40. OT IV Audited Section Completion -- 5. Solo Aud Section Completion -- 5. 41. OT V Solo Auditing Completion -- 5. 42. OT VI Solo Auditing Completion -- 5. 43. OT VII Audited Section Completion -- 5. Solo Aud Section Completion -- 3. 44. OT VIII Points to be assigned when released. PENALTIES ALL ORG PENALTIES 45. For every pc in the area who is refunded after auditing (after this HCO B is in effect). MINUS 25. 46. (Excepting AOs.) For every pc in the area who does not buy and pay for further auditing to complete the grade or cycle he is on (after this HCO B is in effect). MINUS 10. 47. For every pc who is backlogged more than one week. MINUS 5. SH PENALTIES 48. For every pc who does not go on to Power after cleanup and case handling (after this HCO B is in effect). MINUS 10. 216 49. Every pc who does not successfully complete his Power including Va within three months after being enrolled on any part of it (after date of this HCO B). MINUS 25. 50. Any pc found to have been run on Power more than once. MINUS 10. 51. Any Grade Va who has not enrolled on the R6EW Course within 3 months. Retroactive to start of org and subtracted each week. MINUS 1. AO PENALTIES 52. "Nothing found" and no progress on any R6EW, Clear or OT Grade. (Means Drug RD was unflat and Pre-OT not properly set up but put on CC or OT Grades or both.) (Effective after date of this HCO B.) MINUS 25. 53. Every R6EW, Clear or Pre-OT in AO's zone or area who has not signed up for next grade within 3 months of finishing his last one up to OT VI (effective FROM DATE OF FOUNDING OF ORG AND SUBTRACTED EACH WEEK). MINUS 1. 54. Every Solo Student who does not audit for one week while assigned auditing on R6EW, Clear or on a Grade. (Effective from date of this HCO B.) MINUS 10. 55. Any R6EW, Clear or Pre-OT who leaves while on the next grade which is incomplete. (Effective from date of this HCO B.) MINUS 5. 56. Solo Auditor backlogged more than 24 hours for a Case Consultation or Review. (Effective from date of this HCO B.) MINUS 5. 57. Any evidence of an R6EW, Clear or Pre-OT being evaluated for by giving him the EP, being invalidated on his gains or assigned unjust Ethics penalty by another student or staff member. (Effective from date of this HCO B.) MINUS 50. 58. Any AO student now on SOLO Auditing who is found not to be able to fully operate a meter, run engrams or who has errors traceable to False TA HCO B not being applied. (Effective from date of this HCO B.) MINUS 25. Points for any omitted or added rundowns will have points issued on request by Training and Services Aide. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.rd.jh Copyright $c 1971, 1973, 1974 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [The original issue of the above HCO B which is in Volume VII, Page 371, was revised by staff on 16 November 1972. It was then revised by LRH on 21 October 1973, adding the penalty sections and making the changes in this type style. A further revision by LRH on 23 October 1973 added the words "and pay for" and "or cycle" to number 46 and "R6EW, Clear or" to number 52. The 6 February 1974 revision adds number 21a to the completions list.] 217  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=11/11/73 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  PRECLEAR DECLARE? PROCEDURE   Remimeo Pc Examiners  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 11 NOVEMBER 1973 Remimeo Pc Examiners PRECLEAR DECLARE? PROCEDURE (Reference: HCO PL 30 May 70, "Cutatives" HCO PL 10 May 70, "Single Declare" HCO B 24 Feb 72, C/S Series 71A, "Word Clearing OCAs".) In order to ensure the results of Scientology, it is vital that Examiner Declare? procedure is known and invariably applied. 1. Pc Examiner checks the folder to ensure that all processes run to EP correctly with NO Out Tech uncorrected. 2. When folder passed as OK, get Qual I and I to call Tech Services for the pc to be sent to the Pc Examiner. 3. Pc Examiner shows pc a written statement of the Ability Attained from the Grade Chart or HCO B for that particular Grade or completion and has the pc read it. 4. Ask pc: "Do you have any doubts or reservations concerning attesting to (whatever the attest is)?" If the Examiner gets an instant read on the question, he does not ask the attest question, and sends the folder back to the C/S. 5. If no instant read, ask the attest question, "Would you like to attest to _______?" 6. If pc F/N VGIs on the Declare, indicate the F/N and end off the cycle. Note: The presence of any Bad Indicators, or no F/N, or high or low TA or read on the "Doubts" question is the immediate signal to end off the action smoothly and quickly. Absolute honesty must be maintained by a Pc Examiner on every cycle handled. Remember: The integrity of Scientology and the hope for Beings in this Universe is entrusted to Examinations. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.jh Copyright $c 1973 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 218  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=15/11/73 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=1 rDate=4/12/73 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  FEAR OF PEOPLE LIST -- R   Remimeo Qual Tech  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 15 NOVEMBER 1973R Remimeo REVISED 4 DECEMBER 1973 Qual Tech (Revisions in this type style) FEAR OF PEOPLE LIST -- R TO BE DONE ONLY BY AUDITORS WHOSE EYESIGHT, METER POSITION AND TR 1 HAVE SEEN CHECKED OUT AND WHO CAN THEREFORE MAKE A LIST READ ON A PC, SEE THE READ AND MARK IT. This action is primarily for use in Qual to handle timid tech staff who back off from handling thetans or people or pcs or psychos or individuals. It may also be used on public and as part of Integrity Processing. ASSESSMENT LISTS TERMINALS LIST EMOTIONS LIST People _______ Blaming (item assessed) _______ Thetans _______ Failures with " _______ Pcs _______ Apathetic about " _______ Psychos _______ Neglect of " _______ Individuals _______ Hopelessness regarding " _______ Others _______ Propitiation toward " _______ Girls _______ Terrified of " _______ Women _______ Desperation about " _______ Men _______ Fear of " _______ Boys _______ Afraid of creating a bad effect on " _______ Children _______ Afraid of consequences Addicts _______ regarding " _______ PTSes _______ Fear of invalidation by " _______ SPs _______ Fear of doing something Older People _______ wrong with " _______ Seniors _______ Fear of being found out by " _______ Important People _______ Fear of failure with " _______ Afraid to take responsibility for " _______ Anxious about " _______ Pretense concerning " _______ Unwilling to help " _______ Contempt for " _______ Anger at " _______ Hatred of " _______ Suppressing " _______ 219 HANDLING STEPS 1. Assess the TERMINALS LIST. 2. Using best reading item from the TERMINALS LIST assess the EMOTIONS LIST. (Example: If "Girls" gave best read on TERMINALS LIST, then assess EMOTIONS LIST using "Girls" "Blaming Girls _______" "Failures with Girls _______" etc.) 3. Take best reading item from EMOTIONS LIST assessment. Run item R3-R triple to F/N Cog VGIs and erasure. 4. Proceed to handle (R3-R) each reading item from EMOTIONS LIST assessment in descending order of reads (largest to smallest read). 5. Repeat 2 to 4 with each reading item from the original TERMINALS assessment. 6. When all reading items from both assessments handled, reassess the TERMINALS LIST and repeat steps 2 to 5 on any items now reading. 7. This may be continued to an F/Ning Terminals List but somewhere along the line pc should have major cognition with wide F/N and statement to the effect that he no longer has any fear or back-off from people, thetans, pcs, psychos, or individuals. End off at such a point. 8. Note that the charge on a terminal could be blown on R3-R on major reading item from the Emotions List. In such a case the other reading items from the emotions assessment would F/N when taken up. This would be most likely to occur if "Fear of..." is run to good cog and then further reading "Fear" or "Afraid of" items are attempted. 9. Should the person R/S on assessment or handling just continue the action through to EP in the usual way but circle the R/S, note in front of folder and on Auditor Report for later handling. 10. Whether done in Qual or Tech the assessment sheets, worksheets and auditor report sheets must go into the pc folder and be recorded on the summary sheet. EP of the action is thetans or people or pcs or psychos or individuals, etc solved and the person gotten off of any irrational back-off. We are in the thetan and people business after all. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.rd Copyright $c 1973 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 220  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=20/11/73 Volnum=0 Issue=1 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Reissued from 21st ADVANCED CLINICAL COURSE TRAINING DRILLS   Remimeo All Levels Flag Internes LRH Comms  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 20 NOVEMBER 1973 Issue I Remimeo All Levels Flag Internes LRH Comms Reissued from 21st ADVANCED CLINICAL COURSE TRAINING DRILLS NAME: Anti-Q and A TR. COMMANDS: Basically, "Put that (object) on my knee." (A book, piece of paper, ashtray, etc can be used for object.) POSITION: Student and Coach sitting facing each other at a comfortable distance and one at which the Coach can reach the Student's knee with ease. PURPOSE: (a) To train Student in getting a Pc to carry out a command using formal communication NOT Tone 40. (b) To enable the Student to maintain his TRs while giving commands. (c) To train the Student to not get upset with a Pc under formal auditing. MECHANICS: Coach selects small object (book, ashtray, etc) and holds it in his hand. TRAINING STRESS: Student is to get the Coach to place the object that he has in his hand on the knee of the Student. The Student may vary his commands as long as he maintains the Basic Intention (not Tone 40) to get the Coach to place the object on the Student's knee. The Student is not allowed to use any physical enforcement, only verbal commands. The Coach should try and get the Student to Q and A. He may say anything he wishes to try and get him off the track of getting the command executed. The Student may say what he wishes in order to get the command done, as long as it directly applies in getting the Coach to place the object on the Student's knee. The Coach flunks for: (a) Any communication not directly concerned with getting the command executed. (b) Previous TR. (c) Any upsetness demonstrated by Student. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.rd Copyright $c 1958, 1959, 1973 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 221  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=20/11/73 Volnum=0 Issue=2 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  C/S Series 89 F/N WHAT YOU ASK OR PROGRAM   Remimeo All Levels Flag Internes  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 20 NOVEMBER 1973 Remimeo Issue II All Levels Flag Internes C/S Series 89 F/N WHAT YOU ASK OR PROGRAM Ref: HCO B 23 Dec 72 Integrity Processing Series 20 HCO B 21 Nov 73 The Cure of Q and A When an Auditor asks one question but F/Ns something else it is simply a version of Q and A. Example: AUDITOR: Do you have a problem? PC: (ramble-ramble) I was thinking of last night's dinner. AUDITOR: That F/Ns. Every few folders you pick up, if you can find examples of this: The Auditor is not trained not to Q and A. He is NOT getting answers to his questions. When the Auditor starts something (such as a question or process) he MUST F/N what he started EVEN THOUGH HE DID SOMETHING ELSE DURING IT AND GOT AN F/N ON SOMETHING ELSE. HE MUST F/N THE ORIGINAL ACTION. The result can be: (a) Missed W/H phenomena. (b) High or low TA an hour after the Pc "F/Ned at Examiner". (c) A stalled case. (d) An undone program. (e) An unhandled pc. (f) Continual need for repair programs. To get this disease out of an HGC requires that Auditors go through an Anti-Q and A handling. C/S Q AND A C/Ses can also Q and A. They simply handle whatever the pc originates to the Examiner or Auditor, over and over and on and on. The result is: A. Incomplete Programs. B. Tripled or quadrupled C/S effort as the case never seems to get solved. C. Loads of repair programs. Yet a C/S who does it will never look for it as THE primary error being committed. The remedy is to have the C/S do an Anti-Q and A program. LRH:nt.jh Copyright $c 1973 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard Founder ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [IP Series 20 has been converted to BTB 23 Dec 72R, IP Series 17R, Volume IX, Page 289.] 222  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=21/11/73 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  THE CURE OF Q AND A MAN'S DEADLIEST DISEASE   Remimeo All Auditors All Levels Flag Internes LRH Comms  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 21 NOVEMBER 1973 Remimeo All Auditors All Levels Flag Internes LRH Comms THE CURE OF Q AND A MAN'S DEADLIEST DISEASE Q and A is a dreadful malady which has to be cured before an Auditor (or an Administrator) can get results. THE DISEASE OF Q AND A Auditor: Spot that wall. Pc: My neck hurts. Auditor: Has it been hurting long? Pc: Ever since I was in the Army. Auditor: Are you in the Army now? Pc: No but my father is. Auditor: Have you been in comm with your father lately? Pc: I miss him. Auditor: That F/Ned, end of process. The Auditor has failed to note that he never got the pc to spot the wall or that he has run the pc all over the track flattening nothing, restimulating the pc. A DEADLY BACTERIA When an Auditor asks a Question and F/Ns something else he can mess a pc up badly. Auditor: Do you have a withhold? That reads. Pc: It's just a 2D perversion. What I was really thinking about was my raise I got today. Auditor: That F/Ns. Pc (later in session): You run a lousy org here. Charge too much.... Auditor in mystery, caves in. THAT IS SIMPLY Q AND A IN ANOTHER COAT. ADMINISTRATIVE DELIRIUM When an Administrator Qs and As it puts him straight down the org board and into a spin. LRH Comm: You have a target here to move the file cases. Staff Member: I didn't understand some of the words. LRH Comm: Here's a word clearing order for Qual. (Next day.) LRH Comm: Did you go to the word clearer? Staff Member: I'm on Medical Lines now. LRH Comm: How long have you been ill? Staff Member: Since the Ethics Officer was mean to me. LRH Comm: I'll go see about your ethics folder.... And there goes the old soccer game. NO TARGET DONE BECAUSE THE EXECUTIVE COULD NOT HANDLE Q AND A. C/S Q AND A Case Supervisors (blush for the thought) are often guilty of Q and A and infect their area with its bacteria. Pc to Examiner: I have a cold. C/S: Run spot spots to cure his cold. Pc to Auditor: It's really I'm PTS to my Aunt. C/S: Do PTS RD on Aunt. Pc to Examiner: It's really my foot. C/S: Do touch assist on foot.... What C/S ever got a pc's program done that way? 223 Where you find undone programs in folders you find goofing Auditors and Q and A type Case Supervisors. FUMIGATION There are definite cures for this dreadful and disgraceful malady. It must be handled as it results in a breaking out of bogged cases and blows, high and low TAs and very red faces when the Paid Completions Stat is counted. The Cure is pretty violent and very few have courage enough to go through with it as their confront at the beginning is too low, what with their no- interest items left in restim on their drug rundowns or no TRs to begin with or no Supervisor when they took the Course. The direct result of all this is a symptom known as "patty-cake". This is a child game of clapping hands and putting palms together and has meant since 1950 Dianetics NOT HANDLING CASES. The signs of patty-cake are a weak slouching posture, bags under the eyes, a bowed spine and hangdog pathetic eyes. The respiration is quick and panicky, the palms sweat and one starts at pins dropping in the next room. However for those sturdy souls who want to Clear a planet and who really want to handle things they can prop themselves up in bed and somehow get through this program: 1. This HCOB starrate. _______ 2. HCOB 24 May 62 "Q and A" starrate _______ 3. HCOB 13 Dec 61 "Varying Sec Check Questions". _______ 4. HCOB 22 Feb 62 "Withholds, Missed and Partial". _______ 5. HCOB 29 Mar 63 "Summary of Security Checking". _______ 6. HCOB 7 Apr 64 "All Levels -- Q and A". _______ 7. TRs the Hard Way. _______ 8. Upper Indoc a Rough Way. _______ 9. Handling the Auditor's, C/S's or Administrator's Not Done or No Interest item Drug RD. _______ 10. 35 hours Op Pro by Dup in Co-Audit receiving and giving. _______ 11. HCOB 29 July 63 "Saint Hill Special Briefing Course Training Drills", Section "Q and A Drill". _______ 12. HCOB 20 Nov 73 Issue I Anti-Q and A Drill. _______ 13. HCOB 20 Nov 73 Issue II "F/N What You Ask or Program". _______ 14. A final end result demonstrated that the person CAN SEE SITUATIONS AND HANDLE THEM. _______ For, of course, the reason the person Qs and As is that he can't confront -- or see the existing scene and so can't handle it. Q and A is the DISEASE OF DODGING LIFE. When such a person tries to get a question or program done and the other person 224 says or does something else, the Q and Aer goes into a sort of overwhelm or cave-in and just rides along at effect. PEOPLE WHO GET THINGS DONE ARE AT CAUSE. When they are not, they Q and A. Thus it IS a kind of illness. Chronic Overwhelm. It is NOT cured by drugs or electric shocks or brain operations. It is cured by making oneself strong enough in confront and handle to live! L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.jh Copyright $c 1973 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 225  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=23/11/73 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  DRY AND WET HANDS MAKE FALSE TA   Remimeo Tech & Qual All Levels All Auditors All Tech Checksheets  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 23 NOVEMBER 1973 (REVISED -- see HCO B 23 Nov 73 R Volume VIII -- 415) Remimeo Tech & Qual All Levels All Auditors All Tech Checksheets DRY AND WET HANDS MAKE FALSE TA A couple of years ago some auditors were solving high TA problems by putting hand cream on the pc's hands when they were calloused and talcum powder on a pc's hands when they were too wet. Since no research had been done they were censured. Research has now been done on this matter of dry and wet hands. Apparently when a person has taken certain medicines or chemicals, or uses detergent soaps or is in contact with certain chemicals (such as those in some furniture polishes) the ordinary skin oils vanish. These oils are needed to make an electrical contact with the cans. When these oils are absent, there is no adequate electrical contact and the "TA is High". When a person is deficient in certain minerals or vitamins such as magnesium or B complex, his hands can be excessively wet. Either of these two conditions in hands or feet can produce an incorrect TA position. The dry condition produces a false high TA. The overly wet condition produces a false low TA. The TA depends on normally moist hands. This does not mean the meter works on "sweat". It does mean the meter works only when there is a correct electrical contact. Too much and too greasy hand cream could produce too low a TA. Too much powder or drier could produce too high a TA. Therefore one must not go to extremes. DRY HANDS The excessively "dry" hand is seen as shiny or polished looking. It feels very dry. The correct treatment is to use a "vanishing cream" (obtainable from any cosmetics store) not a greasy hand cream. The "vanishing cream" is so called because it rubs all the way into the skin and leaves no excess grease. This restores normal electrical contact. There are many such creams. It makes no difference which is used so long as it vanishes into the skin. It is doubtful if it would have to be applied more than once -- at session start -- as it lasts for a long while. 226 This would apply to some footplate cases as well (whose hands are defective or too heavily calloused). If a cream leaves smears on a can, it is too heavily applied or too little absorbed. Vanishing type cream is usually smeared on, rubbed in and can then be thoroughly wiped off. The hands (or feet) will usually produce, then, a normal TA and meter response. WET HANDS Anti-perspirants can be applied to too wet hands. There are many brands of these, often a powder or spray. It can be wiped off after application and should work for two or three hours. It can be applied to hands or feet (for footplates). If the TA then goes too high, use vanishing cream on top of it. SUMMARY While much work could be done still, the above is enough for a practical result. WARNING Hi TAs and Lo TAs do not widely F/N. If you are getting wide persistent F/N with the TA too high (above 3) or too low (below 2) you have a pc whose hands are too dry or too wet. Using this HCO B should correct it and in future sessions you should continue the remedy on that pc. NOTHING in this HCO B excuses the misreading or falsifying of a TA. Get the TA in normal range with this HCO B before you start calling processes ended. C/S 53RF and the False TA Checklist HCO B 29 Feb 1972R, Revised 23 Nov 73, are your tools for handling too high and too low TAs. The only other conditions I know of that make an auditor mess up a pc's TA are: (a) A discharged meter (registers high). (b) An incorrectly set meter by trim button. (c) A "fleeting F/N" where the pc F/Ns so briefly the auditor misses it and overruns. (d) Bad TRs. (e) Unflat processes. (f) Overrun processes. (g) Heavy drugs or medicines. False TA often comes to light when the auditor runs out of reasons it is high or low and it dawns on him that he is dealing with false TA. In the latter case he should know all MATERIALS ON THIS SUBJECT OF FALSE TA (given on HCO B 29 Feb 1972R, Revised 23 Nov 73, as references) AND REMEDY THE FALSE TA SITUATION AND THEN RESUME NORMAL AUDITING. He must not go on calling high or low TA F/Ns just by assuming the TA is false. Given a contact the meter always tells the truth. LRH:clb.rd Copyright $c 1973 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard Founder ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 227  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=24/11/73 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  C/S Series 53RF SHORT HI-LO TA ASSESSMENT C/S  Type = 11 iDate=31/12/71 Issue=0 Rev=4 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 24 NOVEMBER 1973 (CANCELLED -- see HCO B 24 Nov 73RB Volume VIII -- 398) (Cancels HCOB 31 Dec 1971 RC) Reissued 25 Nov 73 Remimeo C/S Series 53RF SHORT HI-LO TA ASSESSMENT C/S This is the basic prepared list used by Auditors to get a TA up or down into normal range. A GF Method 5 may also be used after TA is in normal range to get pc's case handled better. _____________________________________ PC Name ____________________________ Date 1. Assess pc Method 5 on this sheet. (Go down the list calling off the items to the pc, watching the meter. Mark any Tick, SF, F, LF, LFBD [to what TA], speeded rise or Blow Up.) NOTE: A C/S 53RF should be reassessed and all reads handled until it F/Ns on assessment. A. Interiorization _______ Invisible _______ Went in _______ Black _______ Go in _______ Loss _______ Can't get in _______ F. Same thing run twice _______ Want to get out _______ Same action done by another Kicked out of spaces _______ auditor _______ B. List errors _______ G. Doing something with Overlisting _______ mind between sessions _______ Wrong items _______ Some other practice _______ Upset with giving items to auditor _______ H. Word Clearing errors _______ C. Some sort of W/H _______ Study errors _______ Are you withholding I. False TA _______ something _______ Wrong sized cans _______ Is another withholding Tired hands _______ something from you _______ Dry hands or feet _______ Are others withholding Wet hands or feet _______ something from others _______ Loosens can grip _______ Has another committed overts on you _______ J. Auditor overwhelming _______ Have you committed Feel attacked _______ any overts _______ Something wrong with Have others committed F/Ns _______ overts on others _______ Items really didn't read _______ Not saying _______ Bad auditing _______ Problems _______ Incomplete actions _______ Protest _______ Don't like it _______ K. Can't have _______ Low Havingness _______ Audited over out ruds _______ Feel sad _______ L. PTS _______ Rushed _______ Suppressed _______ Tired _______ ARC Brk _______ M. Something went on too Upset _______ long _______ Went on by a release D. Drugs _______ point _______ LSD _______ Overrun _______ Alcohol _______ Auditor kept on going _______ Pot _______ Over-repair _______ Medicine _______ Puzzled by auditor keeps on _______ E. Engram in restimulation _______ Stops _______ Same engram run twice _______ Can't see engrams too N. Something else _______ well _______ Physically ill _______ 228 O. Repairing a TA that Faulty Meter _______ isn't high _______ Nothing wrong _______ Repairing a TA that isn't low _______ 2. Use only the small falls or falls or BDs. The rises will however show where mass lies. A. If A or any of the A Group, and the pc has had an Int RD, do an Int RD Correction List, and handle the reads. (HCOB 29 Oct 71 Amended 31 Dec 71.) If pc has never had an Int RD, then give him a standard Int RD providing you have checked out on the Int-Ext pack and are good at R3R. B. If any of these read, do an L4B on the earliest lists you can find that have not been corrected. Lacking these do an L4B in general. You can go over an L4B several times handling each read to F/N until the whole L4B gives nothing but F/Ns. C. If any of these, handle with 2wc and earlier similar to F/N. If more than one reads do biggest read first and then clean up each of the others E/S to F/N. If all read on assessment you have to get an F/N for each or 17 F/Ns. On overts and withholds, get what, and E/S to F/N. On out ruds, find which rud and handle. (See GF40RR HCOB 30 June 71 Revised 13 Jan 72.) Feel sad, handle the ARC Break. (Feel sad = ARC Brk of long duration.) D. Rehab releases on each "drug" taken to F/N. Complete the Drug RD per C/S Series 48R after handling all reads on this assessment. If pc has had a Drug RD, do L3B on it, and handle. E. If any of these, do L3B and handle according to what is stated to do on L3B. F. Clean up any protest and inval and rehab to F/N. G. Find out what it is. If Yoga or Mystic exercises or some such 2wc E/S it to first time done, find out what upset had occurred before that and if TA now down do L1C on that period of pc's life. H. If Word Clearing, do a Word Clearing Correction List, handle all reads. If Study errors, 2wc E/S to F/N, and add a Study Correction List to the pc's program. I. False TA is wrong cans. Use HCOBs 24 Oct 71, 12 Nov 71, 15 Feb 72, 18 Feb 72, 29 Feb 72, HCOB 23 Nov 73, all on False TA. Then clean up the bypassed charge with (1) Assess for best read (a) TA worries (b) F/N worries. (2) Then 2wc times he was worried about (item) E/S to F/N. (3) Rehab a time he felt really keyed out to F/N. J. These are auditor errors. Low TA is generally caused by overwhelming TRs and incomplete actions. A high TA can be caused by an auditor overrunning F/Ns or failing to call them. Or trying to assess through an F/N and mistaking an F/N right swing for a read. These items are all 2wc E/S to F/N. Auditors who made them need Cramming badly or retread. K. Can't have or Hav. Find correct Havingness process and remedy. L. PTS or Suppressed. Check for SP or get a full PTS RD. M. Find out what. Clean up any protest. Rehab to F/N on each (or date to blow, locate to blow if qualified). N. 2wc to find what. Note BD item. If BD item covered by one of these categories handle per instructions. If not just 2wc to F/N and get further C/S instructions for handling if necessary. O. Get pc to tell you about it briefly. If correct then indicate to F/N. Go E/S and indicate if no F/N on first. If false TA handle per I above. General. Handle Int RD (A) if it reads at all before handling rest as nothing will go right if Int is still out. For the remainder prefer to handle any BD group if you get a BD. If in doubt about what to do, return to the C/S. LRH:BW:BL:nt.jh Copyright $c 1971, 1972, 1973 Revised by by L. Ron Hubbard L. RON HUBBARD ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Founder 229  Revised by L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=5/12/73 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  THE REASON FOR Q AND A   Remimeo All Auditors All Levels Flag Internes LRH Comms  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 5 DECEMBER 1973 Remimeo All Auditors All Levels Flag Internes LRH Comms THE REASON FOR Q AND A Q and A means "Question and Answer". When the term Q and A is used it means one did NOT get an answer to his question. It also means not getting compliance with an order but accepting something else. Example: Auditor: Do birds fly? Pc: I don't like birds. Auditor: What don't you like about birds? FLUNK. It's a Q and A. The right reply would be an answer to the question asked and the right action would be to get the original question answered. TR 4 (handling origins) can apply here. The moment TR 4 is violated (Ack and return the pc to original Question) and the original unanswered question is not again asked the Auditor just drifts along with the pc. Things get restimulated, nothing gets really handled or run. In Administration the same thing can happen. The executive gives an order, the junior says or does something else, the executive does not simply TR 4 it and get the original order done, and the result is chaos. Executive: Phone Mr. Schultz and tell him our printing order will be there this afternoon. Junior: I don't know his number. Executive: Don't you have a phone book? Junior: The phone company didn't send one this year as our bill was overdue. Executive (the fool) goes to Accounts to see what about the phone bill. Mr. Schultz never gets his call. The printing order arrives but Mr. Schultz doesn't know it.... Example: Executive: Do target 21 how. Junior: I don't have any issue files. Executive: What happened to them? Junior: Mimeo goofed. Executive: I'll go see Mimeo.... DISPERSAL Q and A is simply Postulate Aberration. Aberration is non-straight line by definition. A sick thetan who is all caved in can't direct a postulate at anything. When he tries, he lets it wobble around and go elsewhere. The difference between a Degraded Being and an OT is simply that the DB can't put out a postulate or intention in a direct line or way and make it hold good. The insane are a great example of this. They are insane because they have evil intentions. But they can't even make these stick. They may intend to burn down the house but they usually wind up watering the rug or do some other non sequitur thing. It's not that they don't mess things up. The whole point here is that they can't even properly destroy what they intend to destroy. Even their evil intentions wobble, poor things. But not all people who Q and A are insane. 230 When a person is running at effect he Qs and As. He is confronted by life, he does not confront it. He is usually a bit blind to things as his ability to look AT is turned back on him by his lack of beam power. Thus he gives the appearance of being unaware. His emotional feeling is overwhelm. His mental state is confusion. He starts for B, winds up at -- A. Other not too well intentioned people can play tricks on a Qer and Aer. When they don't want to answer or comply they artfully bring about a Q and A. Example: Bosco does not want to staple the mimeo issue. He knows his senior Qs and As. So we get this. Senior: Staple that issue with the big stapler. Bosco: I hurt my thumb. Q and A Senior: Have you been to see the Medical Officer? Bosco: He wouldn't look at it. Q and A Senior: I'll go have a word with him. (Departs) Bosco gets back to reading "Jesse James Rides Again" humming softly to himself. For HIS trouble is, he Qs and As with the Mest Universe! BODY Q AND A Some people Q and A with their bodies. The body is, after all, composed of Mest. It follows the laws of Mest. One of these laws is Newton's first law of motion: INERTIA. This is the tendency of a Mest object to remain motionless until acted upon by an exterior force. Or to continue in a line of motion until acted upon by an exterior force. Well, the main force around that is continually acting on a human body is a thetan, the being himself. The body will remain at rest (since it is a Mest Object) until acted upon by the thetan that is supposed to be running it. If that being is an aberrated non-straight line being THE BODY REACTS ON HIM MORE THAN HE REACTS ON THE BODY. Thus he remains motionless or very slow. When the body is in unwanted motion, the being does not deter the motion as the body is acting upon him far more than he is reacting on the body. As a result, one of the manifestations is Q and A. He wants to pick up a piece of paper. The body inertia has to be overcome to do so. So he does not reach for the paper, he just leaves the hand where it is. This would be no action at all. If he then weakly forces the motion, he finds himself picking up something else like a paper clip, decides he wants that anyway and settles for it. Now he has to invent why he has a paper clip in his hand. His original intention never gets executed. Some people on medical lines are just there not because of actual illness but because they are just Qing and Aing with their body. People also Q and A With themselves. They want to stop drinking and can't. They want to stop or change something about themselves or their body and then disperse off onto something else. Freud read all sorts of dire and awful things into simple Q and A. He invented intentions the person must have that made him "sublimate". All Freud succeeded in doing was making the person introspective looking for wrong whys. The right why was simple -- the person could not go in a straight line to an 231 objective and/or could not cease to do something he was compulsively doing. The very word ABERRATION contains the idea of this -- no straight line but a bent one. THE CURE FOR THIS SORT OF THING (Q and A with a body) IS OBJECTIVE PROCESSES. And a very willing and bright thetan CAN simply recognize it for what it is -- not enough push! And instead of going to the MO for a slight ache, he just pushes on through. As the ache is a recoil of body Q and A in a lot of cases, the ache itself goes away as soon as one simply pushes through. Painters and artists buy the idea they are benefited by aberration. "Be gad you are neurotic" was a trick being played by the late and unlamented psychiatrists on artists. One paints because he can push into execution what he visualizes. The best painters were the least aberrated. Greenwich Village or Left Bank artists, when they don't paint, never suspect it's because they just can't overcome hand inertia to push a paint brush! People live Q and A lives. They never become what they desire to be because they Q and A with life about it. Schopenhauer, the German philosopher of doom, even had a dirty crack about being able to do things: "Stubbornness is the will taking the place of the intellect." By this, one is "intellectual" if he Qs and As. SUMMARY People who can't get things done are simply Qing and Aing with people and life. People who CAN get things done just don't Q and A. All great truths are simple. This is a major one. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.jh Copyright $c 1973 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 232  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=6/12/73 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  C/S Series 90 THE PRIMARY FAILURE   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 6 DECEMBER 1973 Remimeo C/S Series 90 THE PRIMARY FAILURE References: HCO B 28 Feb 1971, C/S Series 24, "Metering Reading Items", and HCO B 15 Oct 1973, C/S Series 87, "Nulling and F/Ning Prepared Lists". A C/S who cannot get a result on his pcs will find the most usual biggest improvement by getting the offending Auditors' ASSESSING handled. We used to say that "the Auditor's TRs were out" as the most fundamental reason for no results. This is not specific enough. THE MOST COMMON REASON FOR FAILED SESSIONS IS THE INABILITY OF THE AUDITOR TO GET READS ON LISTS. Time after time I have checked this back as the real reason. It became evident when one could take almost any "null" (no read) list in a pc's folder, give it and the pc to an Auditor who COULD assess and get nice reads on it with consequent gain. Example: Pc has a high TA. C/S orders a C/S 53RF. List is null. Pc goes on having a high TA. C/S gets inventive, case crashes. Another C/S and another Auditor takes the same pc and the same list, gets good reads, handles. Case flies again. What was wrong was: (a) The Auditor's TR 1 was terrible. (b) The Auditor couldn't meter. REMEDY One takes the above two reference HCO Bs and gets their points fully checked on the flunking Auditor. The C/S gets the Auditor's TR 1 corrected. In doing the latter one may find a why for the out TR 1 like a notion one must be soft-spoken to stay in ARC or the Auditor is imitating some other Auditor whose TR 1 is faulty. QUAL CRAMMING It can happen that these actions are reported done in Qual and the Auditor still flubs. In this case the C/S has to straighten out Qual Cramming by doing the above reference HCO Bs on the Cramming Officer and getting the Cramming Officer's TR 1 ideas unscrewed and straight. 233 REQUIREMENTS It takes correct metering and IMPINGEMENT to make a list read. If the auditor does not have these, then drug lists, Dianetic lists, correction lists will all go for nothing. As the prepared list is the C/S's main tool for discovery and correction an auditor failure to get a list to respond or note it then defeats the C/S completely. SUMMARY THE ERROR OF AN AUDITOR BEING UNABLE TO GET A LIST TO READ ON A METER IS A PRIMARY CAUSE OF C/S FAILURE. To win, correct it! L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.jh Copyright $c 1973 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 234  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=15/12/73 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  THE CONTINUOUS MISSED W/H AND CONTINUOUS OVERT WITH DATA ON DEGRADED BEINGS AND FALSE PTS CONDITIONS   Remimeo All Levels Add Level II Checksheet Ethics Officers Masters at Arms C/Ses  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 15 DECEMBER 1973 Remimeo All Levels Add Level II Checksheet Ethics Officers THE CONTINUOUS MISSED W/H Masters at Arms AND CONTINUOUS OVERT C/Ses WITH DATA ON DEGRADED BEINGS AND FALSE PTS CONDITIONS Reference: (1) Tape List and HCO B List of Level II, Page 4 HCO P/L 26.1.72, Issue VI, concerning Withholds and Overts. (2) "Admin Know-How -- Alter-Is and Degraded Beings", HCO B 22 Mar 67. There are two special cases of withholds and overts. They do not occur in all cases by a long ways. But they do occur on a few cases. These are CONTINUOUS MISSED WITHHOLDS and CONTINUOUS OVERTS. This is not quite the same as "The Continuing Overt Act" HCO B 29 September 65. In that type the person is repeating overt acts against something usually named. THE CONTINUOUS MISSED W/H A Continuous Missed Withhold occurs when a person feels some way and anyone who sees him misses it. Example: A doctor feels very unconfident of his skill. Every patient who sees him misses the fact that he is not confident. This reacts as a missed withhold. It is of course based upon some bad incident that destroyed his confidence (usually of an engramic intensity). But as the person actively withholds this, then those seeing him miss the withhold. This could work in thousands of variations. A woman feels continuous disdain for her child but withholds it. The child therefore continuously misses a withhold. All the phenomena of the missed w/h would continuously react against the child. Probably all dishonest social conduct brings about a Continuous Missed Withhold. The politician who hates people, the minister who no longer believes in God, the mechanic who privately believes he is a jinx on machinery, these all then set up the phenomena of missed withholds on themselves and can dramatize it in their conduct. THE CONTINUOUS OVERT A person who believes he is harmful to others may also believe that many of his common ordinary actions are harmful. He may feel he is committing a Continuous Overt on others. Example: A clothing model believes she is committing a fraud on older women by displaying clothing to them in which they will look poorly. In her estimation this is a Continuous Overt Act. Of course all older women miss it on her. Appearance, just being alive, can be considered by some as an overt. Missed withhold phenomena will result. 235 DEGRADED BEINGS The Continuous Withhold and Continuous Overt are probably a basis of feeling degraded. Degraded Beings, as described in "Admin Know-How -- Alter-Is and Degraded Beings", HCO B 22 Mar 67, are that way at least in part because they have some Continuous Missed Withhold or a fancied Continuous Overt Act. This makes them feel degraded and act that way. HANDLING One can add to any program a check for a Continuous Missed Withhold or Continuous Overt as an additional version of rudiments. A master question, which could be broken down into three lists which would have to be done by the laws of L&N, would be, "When anyone looks at you what feeling (action, attitude) of yours do they miss?" Then, "When was it missed?" "Who missed it?" and "What did he do that made you believe it had been missed?" Another approach, less dangerous in that lists aren't made, would be: For Continuous Missed Withhold the question could be, "Is there some way you feel that others don't realize?" And with 2wc uncover it. Then ask, "Who misses this?" with answer, followed by, "When has someone missed it?" with E/S to an earlier time. Followed by, "What did he (or she) do that made you think he (or she) knew?" This will key it out and can change behavior. For Continuous Overt Act it would be, "Is there something you do that others do not know about?" With 2wc to cover it and get what it is. Then ask, "Who has not found out about it?" with an answer. And then, "When did someone almost find out?" "What did he (or she) do that made you think he (or she) knew?" Each of the above questions should be F/Ned. MOTION People who have Continuous Withholds or Overts tend to be very slow, flubby and impositive. They have to be very careful. And they make mistakes. Slowness or robotness are keys to the presence of Continuous Missed Withholds or Overts. PT Quite often a case is FALSELY LABELED PTS when in fact it is really a matter of Continuous Missed Withholds and Continuous Overts. When a "PTS" person does not respond to PTS handling easily then you know you are dealing with Continuous Missed Withholds and/or Continuous Overts. SUMMARY These conditions are not present in all cases. When they are you have a Degraded Being. When a "PTS" person does not respond to PTS handling, try Continuous Missed Withholds and Continuous Overts. You can prevent blows, handle much HE and R and change character in this way. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:nt.rd Founder Copyright $c 1973 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 236  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=6/1/74 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ASSIST SUMMARY ADDITION   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 6 JANUARY 1974 Remimeo ASSIST SUMMARY ADDITION TO LIST OF REFERENCES ADD: HCO B 11 July 73 ASSIST SUMMARY HCO B 6 Jan 74 ASSIST SUMMARY ADDITION ANY TAPE OR MATERIALS ON "PRIOR CONFUSION" ANY TAPE OR MATERIALS ON "POSTULATES AND INJURIES" (1952 Autumn, London Lectures, etc) HCO Bs ON MISTAKES BEING MADE IN PRESENCE OF SUPPRESSION, 1968. ADD TO PAGE 4 OF HCO B 11 July 73 after POSTULATE TWO-WAY COMM: PRIOR CONFUSION: Fixed ideas follow a period of confusion. This is also true of engrams that hang up as physical injury. Slow recovery after an engram has been run can be caused by the Prior Confusion mechanism. The engram of accident or injury can be a stable item in a confusion. By 2-way comm see if a confusion existed prior to the accident, injury or illness. If so, it may be 2wced earlier similar to F/N. MYSTERY POINT: Often there is some part of an incident which is mysterious to a preclear. The engram itself may hang up on a mystery. A thetan could be called a "mystery sandwich" in that he tends to stick in on mysteries. 2wc any mysterious aspect of the incident. 2wc it earlier similar to F/N Cog VGIs. SUPPRESSIVE PRESENCE: Mistakes or accidents or injuries occur in the presence of suppression. One wants to know if any such suppressive influence or factor existed just prior to the incident being handled. This could be the area it occurred in or persons the preclear had just spoken to. 2wc any suppressive or invalidative presence that may have caused a mistake to be made or the accident to occur. 2wc E/S to F/N Cog VGIs. AGREEMENT: Get any agreement the person may have had in or with the incident. There is usually a point where the person agrees with some part of the scene. If this point is found it will tend to unpin the pc from going on agreeing to be sick or injured. PROTEST: 2wc any protest in the incident. PREDICTION: The person is usually concerned about his recovery. Undue worry about it can extend the effects into the future. 2wc (a) how long he/she expects to take to recover. (b) Get the person to tell you any predictions others have made about it. 2wc it to an F/N Cog VGIs. Note -- avoid getting the person to predict it as a very long time by getting him to talk about that further. LOSSES: A person who has just experienced a loss may become ill. This is particularly true of colds. 2wc anything the pc may have lost to F/N. PRESENT TIME: An injured or sick person is out of present time. Thus running HAVINGNESS in every assist session is vital. This not only remedies havingness but also brings the preclear to prasent time. HIGH OR LO TA: A C/S 53 RF should be used to get the TA under control during assists if it cannot be gotten down. It must be done by an auditor who knows how to meter and can get reads. 237 ILLNESS FOLLOWING AUDITING: It can occur that a pc gets ill after being audited where the "auditing" is out tech. When this occurs or is suspected, a Green Form should be assessed only by an auditor who cam meter and whose TR 1 gets reads. The GF reads are then handled. Out Interiorization, bad lists, missed w/hs, ARC Breaks and incomplete or flubbed engrams are the commonest errors. BEFORE-AFTER: Where an injured or ill pc is so stuck that he has a fixed picture that does not move, one can jar it loose by asking him to recall a time before the incident and then asking him to recall a time after it. This will "jar the engram loose" and change the stuck point. UNCONSCIOUSNESS: A pc can be audited even if in a coma. The processes are objective, not significance processes. One process is to use his hand to reach and withdraw from an object such as a pillow or blanket. One makes the hand do it while giving the commands. One can even arrange a "signal system" where the pc is in a coma and cannot talk by holding his hand and telling him to squeeze one's hand once for yes, twice for no. It is astonishing that the pc will often respond and he can be questioned this way. TEMPERATURE ASSISTS: There is an HCO B on how to do assists that bring down the temperature. Holding objects still repetitively is the basic process. Quite often an injury or illness will miraculously clear up before one has run all the steps possible. If this is the case one should end off any further assist. All auditing of injured or ill people must be kept fairly light. Errors in TRs (such as a bad TR 4), errors in tech rebound on them very heavily. An ill or injured person can easily be audited into a mess if the processes are too heavy for him to handle and if the auditor is goofing. Very exact in-tech, good TRs, good metering sessions are all that should be tolerated in assists. An auditor has it in his power to make pcs recover spectacularly. That power is in direct proportion to his flawlessness as an auditor. Only the most exact and proper tech will produce the desired result. If you truly want to help your fellows, that exact skill and those results are very well worth having. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:nt.rd Copyright $c 1974 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 238  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=23/1/74 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  THE TECHNICAL BREAKTHROUGH OF 1973! THE INTROSPECTION RD   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 23 JANUARY 1974 (REVISED -- see HCO B 23 Jan 74RA Volume VIII -- 346) Remimeo THE TECHNICAL BREAKTHROUGH OF 1973! THE INTROSPECTION RD (Steps of list 1 to 17 are subject to possible correction.) I have made a technical breakthrough which possibly ranks with the major discoveries of the Twentieth Century. It is certainly the greatest advancement of 1973 and is now being released after a final wrap-up of research. It is called the Introspection Rundown. The purpose of the Introspection RD is to locate and correct those things which cause a person to fixate his attention inwardly, on himself or his bank. This RD extroverts the person so that he can see his environment and therefore handle and control it. RESEARCH In 1970 the actual cause of PSYCHOSIS was isolated (as given in HCO B C/S Series 22, "Psychosis", 28 November 1970). In the ensuing years this has been proven beyond doubt to be totally correct. But what is a psychotic break? Man has never been able to solve the psychotic break. In fact, human beings are actually afraid of a person in a psychotic break and in desperation turn to psychiatry to handle. Psychiatry, desperate in its turn, without effective tech, resorts to barbarities such as heavy drugs, ice picks, electric and insulin shock which half kill the person and only suppress him. The fact remains there has never been a cure for the psychotic break until now. The key is WHAT CAUSED THE PERSON TO INTROSPECT BEFORE THE PSYCHOTIC BREAK. The breakthrough was made on a person who, after a series of wrong indications, went into a full-blown psychotic break -- violence, destruction and all. The psychiatrist at this point would have sharpened up his ice pick, filled his syringes with the most powerful (and deadly) drugs he could find and turned up the volts. His "handling" would have been a final destruction of the individual. What was done was an auditor went into the room, sat the person down and corrected the last severe point of wrong indication. Subsequent times of wrong indication in his life were cleared up, the person came out of the psychotic break and into p.t. THIS MEANS THE LAST REASON TO HAVE PSYCHIATRY AROUND IS GONE. The psychotic break, the last of the "unsolvable" conditions that can trap a person, has been solved. And it's quite simple, really. 239 THEORY Def. INTROSPECTION: "(L. from introspicere, to look within) a looking into one's own mind, feelings, reactions, etc; observation and analysis of oneself." Webster's New World Dictionary. Def. INTROVERSION: "(from intro- + L. vertere, to turn) 2.... a tendency to direct one's interest upon oneself rather than upon external objects or events." Webster's New World Dictionary. The essence of the introspection RD is looking for and correcting all those things which CAUSED the person to look inward worriedly and wrestle with the mystery of some incorrectly designated error. The result is continual inward looking or self-auditing without relief or end. In a normal person this becomes a diminished activity, unhappiness or illness. In an R/Ser this becomes insanity and a psychotic break occurs at the last severe point of wrong indication. AUDITOR TRAINING Auditors selected to do this RD must have recently done a HARD TRs Course and the Anti-Q&A materials. They must be able to recognize a ROCK SLAM, which is a particular E-Meter phenomenon. They must be Class IV Expanded Dianetics auditors of proven skill on routine cases. They must not themselves be R/Sers. (The last requisite is waived in a self-salvage co-audit group where all R/S.) They need flawless TRs, no Q&A. This Rundown is very simple but cannot be flubbed, as that will compound the errors and cause further introspection in the pc. It is better not to deliver this RD than to flub any part of it. C/Ses take note. It is an Ethics Offense to attempt this Rundown without the auditor having done the prerequisite training and a further offense for an auditor to flub on it. STEPS OF THE RD (On a normal person do Steps 000, 0000, 00000 and 000000.) 0. On a person in a psychotic break isolate the person wholly with all attendants completely muzzled (no speech). _______ 00. Give Vitamins (B Complex, including niacinamide) and minerals (calcium and magnesium) to build the person up. _______ 000. Locate by study or research of the person's case or via associates or 2-way comm the latest point of introversion which will be just at the beginning of the current psychotic break. _______ 0000. Indicate the substance of it to the person to release the By-Passed Charge. _______ 00000. Indicate and handle the point of introversion and its chain. (Indication by itself can be a separate step before auditing.)_______ 000000. Continue the RD as below. _______ 1. Verify/correct all L&N lists if not already done correctly. _______ 2. Verify/correct all Why Finding, 3 May PLs, PTS Interviews, etc. (See C/S Series 78.) _______ 240 3. Word Clear the definitions of "Introspection", "Introversion" and "Extroversion". _______ 4. Trace back the chain of being told his purposes were incorrect. To F/N Cog VGIs. _______ 5. Trace back the chain of being "told" he had purposes that he didn't actually have. To F/N Cog VGIs. _______ 6. Trace back the chain of being asked for things that didn't exist. To F/N Cog VGIs. _______ 7. Trace back the chain of someone saying W/Hs existed that didn't. To F/N Cog VGIs. _______ 8. Trace back the chain of not having his withholds accepted. To F/N Cog VGIs. _______ 9. Trace back the chain of someone accusing him of something he hadn't done. To F/N Cog VGIs. _______ 10. Trace back the chain of accusing himself of things he hadn't done. To F/N Cog VGIs. _______ 11. Trace back the chain of being heavily invalidated for something he didn't do. To F/N Cog VGIs. _______ 12. Trace back the chain of being validated for something he knew was wrong. To F/N Cog VGIs. _______ 13. Trace back the chain of being told he was PTS when he wasn't. To F/N Cog VGIs. _______ 14. Trace back the chain of being interrogated for no reason. To F/N Cog VGIs. _______ 15. Trace back the chain of being told he was someone he wasn't. To F/N Cog VGIs. _______ 16. Trace back the chain of not having his actual identity believed. To F/N Cog VGIs. _______ 17. Objective Havingness to F/N. _______ At any time after Step 2 Objective Havingness should be done at session end. If one of the chains in Steps 3-15 turns out to be false the pc will introvert further. In such a case indicate the fact of it having been unnecessary and get an F/N. Then run Objective Havingness. If the TA goes high (or low) and won't come into range, assess a C/S 53RF and handle. In the case of a pc in a psychotic break, the C/S would have to locate the last severe wrong indication, indicate the fact to the pc and get it corrected (as with a wrong item) as the first action. EXTROVERSION Def. EXTROVERSION: "... Means nothing more than being able to look outward...." "An extroverted personality is one who is capable of looking around the environment...." "A person who is capable of looking at the world around him and seeing it quite real and quite bright is of course in a state of extroversion." (Problems of Work.) The end phenomena of the Introspection RD is the person extroverted, no longer looking inward worriedly in a continuous self-audit without end. 241 The EP on a person in a psychotic break is the end of the psychotic break. The RD is very simple and its results are magical in effectiveness. Flubs can wreck it so don't permit them. You have in your hands the tool to take over mental therapy in full. You need not fear the insane or the psychotic break any longer. Here also is the cure for the continual self-auditing pc who is dug into his bank. It works on all pcs in fact with rave results. Do it flawlessly and we all win. THIS PLANET IS OURS. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:ams.nt.jh Copyright $c 1974 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 242  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=27/1/74 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  DIANETICS R3R COMMANDS HAVE BACKGROUND DATA   Remimeo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 27 JANUARY 1974 Remimeo DIANETICS R3R COMMANDS HAVE BACKGROUND DATA A Cramming action has just uncovered that at least some Dianetic Auditors do not know the reason for each R3R command and, not knowing why the commands exist, miss on cases. A Cramming Officer or Supervisor can achieve a remarkable result by making an Auditor get the why of each R3R Dianetic command from the original materials. The following development and use of this Cramming technique by Mike Mauerer follows: "CASE HISTORY "George Baillie, a Flag Interne, working on his Dianetics OK to Audit, was ordered to study the 1963 Dn HCO Bs ("Time Track and Engram Running by Chains" Bulletins, Bulletins 1 and 2). He read the HCO Bs but had not studied them vigorously enough and for application. "As Interne Supervisor I worked with him covering these HCO Bs and Original Thesis. During the course of this action many confusions (primarily roteness) were handled. Among them were things like 'What is the purpose of Step 6 of R3R, "What do you see?"' He had previously thought it was to 'orient' the Pc to the incident or some such, but basically it came down to the fact he had never worked out the purpose of the command as related to the mechanics of the bank and time track. After some working he finally got the fact that Command 4 (duration) is to turn on the visio and that before moving the Pc through the incident one would have to know the Pc had visio so he could move through. Conversely, if the picture was not 'turned on' then the duration would have to be corrected. Another was the Step 3 Command (Move to that incident) on which the interne thought that by repeating the auditing command when the Pc 'couldn't get there' you would handle the time track. This of course is failure to handle an origination and failure to handle time for the Pc. He finally realized that obviously the Pc didn't have the correct date in the first place and it is the Auditor's action to find and get the correct date and thus move the somatic strip to that incident. "Each command of R3R was taken up and its purpose demo'd out against the basic definitions and mechanics of the time track. One other of the things discovered by this Interne was that Command Nine (What happened?) has a purpose of running out the Locks created in PT, in session, by virtue of the fact that you're reminding the Pc of Secondaries and Engrams right there! (This is of course covered in Original Thesis.) "Probably the most stunning and revealing thing covered was the fact that in Original Thesis Chapter 'Exhaustion of Engrams', para 3, it says, 'The principle of recounting is very simple. The preclear is merely told to go back to the beginning and to tell it all over again. He does this many times. As he does it the engram should lift in tone on each recounting. It may lose some of its data and gain other. If the Preclear is recounting in the same words time after time, it is certain that he is playing a memory record of what he has told you before. He must then be sent immediately back to the actual engram and the somatics of it restimulated. He will then be found to somewhat 243 vary his story. He must be returned to the consciousness of somatics continually until these are fully developed, begin to lighten and are then gone.' This of course totally invalidates the use of a completely rote system and requires an understanding of what is happening to the Pc, bank, etc. "Needless to say, this Interne went through many changes, now feels in comm with his Pcs and not 'stuck' to some rote procedure which truly inhibits the real gains to be gotten from Dianetics Engram Running. As evidence to this action and its resultant gains in the Interne's ability to audit, the following is a brief description of a case he audited today applying 1963 engram running and Original Thesis to these cases. "Case has run many hours of Dianetics with a hidden standard to do with his hand. Has been trying since earliest Dianetic sessions to get this handled. The somatic had been addressed by many different wordings and many chains but had never blown, yet chains had apparently gone to EP. The Auditor was C/Sed to find the actual somatic and run it out. It was found in session that the somatic had been run out to 'EP' so an L3B was done. From the L3B the Auditor found it was one incident in restim and proceeded to flatten the somatic chain connected with it. During this the Auditor on occasion had to correct three dates and two durations, but the spectacular part was Pc began on Steps 9 and D to say the same thing regarding incident each time. This being indicative of Pc running a memory record, Auditor moves Pc to the actual Engram, somatics intensify and then blow (for the first time), Pc exterior with VVGIs. Exam result is quite spectacular. "All the above serves to once again validate the results of the Dianetics materials when they are applied in full." L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:ams.nt.ts Copyright $c 1974 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 244  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=11/4/71 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=1 rDate=28/1/74 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  L3RC DIANETICS AND EXT RD REPAIR LIST   IMPORTANT Remimeo Dn Chkshts Ext Chkshts Class IV Class VI Class VII Class VIII Class IX  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 11 APRIL 1971 R (REVISED -- see HCO B 11 Apr 71RA Volume VIII -- 265) Remimeo Dn Chkshts REVISED 28 JANUARY 1974 Ext Chkshts (Changes in this type style) Class IV Class VI Class VII IMPORTANT Class VIII Class IX L3RC DIANETICS AND EXT RD REPAIR LIST (Revises 73B) This list includes the most frequent Dianetic errors. Use up to Question 28 as the usual use. Then if the situation does not solve, use the rest of the list. A high or low TA and a bogged case can result from failures to erase a chain of incidents. DO NOT ATTEMPT TO REPAIR A CHAIN OR ENGRAM WITHOUT USING THIS LIST as it can have different or several errors. REMEMBER THAT YOUR PC MAY NOT BE SUFFICIENTLY TRAINED TO UNDERSTAND ALL THESE QUESTIONS: IF ONE READS AND HE SAYS HE DOESN'T UNDERSTAND IT, CLEAR IT AND REASSESS (don't explain it and take it as it read on a misunderstood not on a fact). RUNNING PCS ON DIANETICS WITHOUT A FULL AND COMPLETE DN C/S 1 INDOCTRINATION IS A FOOLISH ACTION. TAKE ANY READ FOUND TO F/N BY INDICATION OR FULL REPAIR OF IT. 1. The Item or symptom being run had no charge on it. _______ Indicate it was a false read, spot when it was run, where it was run and get an F/N. 2. The same incident or pictures were run before. _______ Indicate that an overrun has occurred. If no F/N spot when, spot where and get an F/N. 3. A session was started on a new item while an old one was not erased. _______ TA would have been high on an old item or the Interiorization Rundown and the auditor went on anyway with a new item. Find what the old item was and repair it with a new assessment on the earlier chain. Indicate fact to the pc. 4. The item being run described just one incident. _______ (Narrative Item.) Find the somatics, emotions, attitudes of the incident and run them as chains as per Standard Dianetics. 5. The incident had an earlier beginning. _______ Move the pc to the earlier beginning and proceed as per Standard Dianetics R3R. 5a. There was an earlier misrun incident restimulated. _______ This would be an incident that was never resolved (erased) and to handle it: Find out what it was and do an L3RC on it. 6. There were earlier incidents stirred up and not erased. _______ Find what chain or item and run it to completion by R3R. This condition sometimes leaves pc with the ARC Brk effect of by-passed charge and is a basic example of by-passed charge. 245 7. Stirred up earlier unrun incidents. _______ (Same as 6.) 8. When running one item went into another instead and ran a different set of pictures. _______ Jumped chain. 9. When you said it was erased it still had a mass. _______ Auditor does ABCD again on the item one or two more times to get BD F/N. If TA goes up ask for earlier beginning or earlier similar on same incident to F/N. 10. You were protesting. _______ Find out what was being protested and handle it. 11. You were still taking drugs or medicine that had not worn off. _______ 12. You had a misunderstood on the commands. _______ Clear them up. 13. You had a misunderstood on what you were supposed to be doing. _______ Clear it up, get it done right. 14. A wrong item was given. _______ This could also be a listing error. If not sure what it is, shift to L4BR. Otherwise find it and indicate it as a wrong item and that all other actions connected with it were wrong. You can also date the session in which it occurred. And you can also find earlier similar wrong items. 15. Has an earlier Dianetic upset been restimulated? _______ Find the earlier one and straighten it out. Also it can go back 2 or 3 more earlier mix-ups. Straighten out as you go back. Then always check for "any earlier Dianetic upset" if you get no F/N. 16. There was an Incorrect date. _______ Correct it. 17. There was an Incorrect duration. _______ Correct it. 18. There was a false date. _______ Find the real date despite the false date in the incident. 19. There was a false duration. _______ Find the real duration despite the false duration in the incident. 20. Is there a stuck picture? _______ Do 1 - 19 again on the picture and handle. 21. Is there a persistent mass? _______ (Handle as in 24.) 22. Was this or an earlier action unnecessary? _______ 23. Was there nothing wrong in the first place? _______ 24. Did you have trouble with a pressure item or with pressure on an item? _______ Date it exactly by meter and find out where it occurred in the universe. If done exactly right, it will blow up and vanish and F/N. If this doesn't work, do this list 1 down to 24 on it and correct it to F/N. 25. Did you move out of your head earlier in auditing? _______ Do Ext RD. (Ref. HCO B 16 Dec 71, C/S Series 35R.) 26. Was your Exteriorization Rundown messed up? _______ Check folder on each flow and on the 2wc next day to be sure 246 each flow was run to erasure and the 2wc to F/N. Remember that an auditor report can be a false report, and if you can't find the error in the folder, then do 1 to 24 on each flow. DO NOT AUDIT A PC FURTHER UNTIL THE EXT RD IS TOTALLY CORRECTED. IF YOU DO THE TA WILL RISE, WON'T COME DOWN AND PC WILL BE UPSET OR ILL. IN CHOOSING WHICH OF THESE READING ITEMS TO HANDLE, ALWAYS HANDLE EXT RD ITEMS FIRST. THEN HANDLE THE REST. DO NOT CONTINUE AUDITING A PC WHOSE EXT RD WAS MESSED UP AND NOT CORRECTED. ANY ERROR REMAINING ON AN EXT RD IS DEADLY. 27. Were you being asked things you couldn't answer? _______ 28. Did the auditor refuse to accept what you were saying? _______ Get this and earlier similar instances until you get an F/N VGIs. FROM HERE ON ASSESS FURTHER ONLY IF PC TA OR UPSET REMAIN UNHANDLED. IF ANY OF THE FOLLOWING READ, INDICATE IT, GET AN F/N OR GET AN EARLIER SIMILAR UNTIL IT F/Ns. 29. Has an item read under protest? _______ 30. Was there no interest in running item? _______ 31. Was there no charge on item in the first place? _______ 32. Has an item been misworded? _______ 33. Were you more interested in running another item? _______ 34. Was the item suppressed? _______ 35. Was the item invalidated? _______ 36. Was more than you could see demanded? _______ 37. Were 2 or more engrams found on the same date? _______ 38. Did you skid into another incident? _______ 39. Did you move to another chain? _______ 40. Did you change the item while running it? _______ 41. Were you running an item different from that assessed? _______ 42. Was an Implant restimulated? _______ 43. Were earlier errors on engrams restimulated? _______ 44. Was important data by-passed? _______ 45. Was an incident skipped? _______ 46. Did 2 or more incidents get confused? _______ 47. Has a withhold been missed? _______ 48. Has an incident been left too heavily charged? _______ 49. Has a chain been abandoned? _______ 50. Has an incident been abandoned? _______ 51. Were you prevented from running an incident? _______ 52. Were processes changed on you? _______ 53. Has basic on a chain been by-passed? _______ 54. Has an erasure been denied you? _______ 247 55. After it was erased did you have to put it back to erase it? _______ 56. Were you running copies of the original after it had gone? _______ 57. Have you gone past erasure into another chain? _______ 58. Have several different chains been pulled in? _______ 59. Has a cognition been chopped? _______ 60. Has an F/N been indicated too soon? _______ 61. Has the somatic gone but picture still there? _______ 62. Should a basic be run through one more time? _______ 63. Have you been held up by the auditor? _______ 64. Were you distracted in session? _______ +65. Did you go exterior in an incident? _______ 66. Was an incident overrun? _______ +67. Did you go exterior in session? _______ *68. Have you not wanted to go earlier than this life? _______ 69. Has it been all black? _______ 70. Was it all invisible? _______ 71. Was the incident really a false or implanted occurrence? _______ *72. Have you had constantly changing pictures? _______ 73. Have you never had any pictures? _______ 74. Are you having to put it there to run it? _______ Get Earlier Similar times to F/N VGIs. 75. Are incidents being overrun? _______ 76. Has some major auditing action been done twice? _______ 77. Has there been an unnecessary action? _______ 78. Was there nothing wrong in the first place? _______ 79. Was the real reason missed? _______ 80. Was something else wrong? _______ (Do a Green Form.) NOTE: + If questions 65 or 67 read and the pc has not had Interiorization Rundown and the associated 2-way comm, the auditor ends off and sends folder to C/S so it can be C/Sed for Ext RD. * If questions 68 or 72 read, after indicating BPC, the auditor would end off and return folder to C/S. WARNING: Do not use any Prepcheck-type buttons during engram running or add overts to this list as they will "mush" engrams. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:ams.rd Copyright $c 1971, 1974 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 248  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 11 iDate=23/1/74 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=1 rDate=10/2/74 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  THE TECHNICAL BREAKTHROUGH OF 1973! THE INTROSPECTION RD   Remimeo Ex Dn Spclsts M7/4 *rate Clay Demo  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 23 JANUARY 1974R (REVISED -- see HCO B 23 Jan 74RA Volume VIII -- 348) Remimeo REVISED 10 FEBRUARY 1974 Ex Dn Spclsts M7/4 *rate Clay Demo THE TECHNICAL BREAKTHROUGH OF 1973! THE INTROSPECTION RD (Changes HCO B 23 Jan 1974, "The Introspection RD".) I have made a technical breakthrough which possibly ranks with the major discoveries of the Twentieth Century. It is certainly the greatest advancement of 1973 and is now being released after a final wrap-up of research. It is called the Introspection Rundown. The purpose of the Introspection RD is to locate and correct those things which cause a person to fixate his attention inwardly, on himself or his bank. This RD extroverts the person so that he can see his environment and therefore handle and control it. RESEARCH In 1970 the actual cause of PSYCHOSIS was isolated (as given in HCO B C/S Series 22, "Psychosis", 28 November 1970). In the ensuing years this has been proven beyond doubt to be totally correct. But what is a psychotic break? Man has never been able to solve the psychotic break. In fact, human beings are actually afraid of a person in a psychotic break and in desperation turn to psychiatry to handle. Psychiatry, desperate in its turn, without effective tech, resorts to barbarities such as heavy drugs, ice picks, electric and insulin shock which half kill the person and only suppress him. The fact remains there has never been a cure for the psychotic break until now. The key is WHAT CAUSED THE PERSON TO INTROSPECT BEFORE THE PSYCHOTIC BREAK. The breakthrough was made on a person who, after a series of wrong indications, went into a full-blown psychotic break -- violence, destruction and all. The psychiatrist at this point would have sharpened up his ice pick, filled his syringes with the most powerful (and deadly) drugs he could find and turned up the volts. His "handling" would have been a final destruction of the individual. What was done was an auditor went into the room, sat the person down and corrected the last severe point of wrong indication. Subsequent times of wrong indication in his life were cleared up, the person came out of the psychotic break and into p.t. THIS MEANS THE LAST REASON TO HAVE PSYCHIATRY AROUND IS GONE. The psychotic break, the last of the "unsolvable" conditions that can trap a person, has been solved. And it's quite simple, really. 249 THEORY Def. INTROSPECTION: "(L. from introspicere, to look within) a looking into one's own mind, feelings, reactions, etc.; observation and analysis of oneself." Webster's New World Dictionary. Def. INTROVERSION: "(from intro- + L. vertere, to turn) 2.... a tendency to direct one's interest upon oneself rather than upon external objects or events." Webster's New World Dictionary. The essence of the Introspection RD is looking for and correcting all those things which CAUSED the person to look inward worriedly and wrestle with the mystery of some incorrectly designated error. The result is continual inward looking or self-auditing without relief or end. In a normal person this becomes a diminished activity, unhappiness or illness. In an R/Ser this becomes insanity and a psychotic break occurs at the last severe point of wrong indication. The pc who originates to the Examiner about his case or writes notes to the C/S or auditor is introverted and should have this RD. AUDITOR TRAINING Auditors selected to do this RD must have recently done a HARD TRs Course and the Anti-Q&A materials. They must be able to recognize a ROCK SLAM, which is a particular E-Meter phenomenon. They must be Class IV Expanded Dianetics auditors of proven skill on routine cases. They must not themselves be R/Sers. (The last requisite is waived in a self-salvage co-audit group where all R/S.) They need flawless TRs, no Q&A. This Rundown is very simple but cannot be flubbed, as that will compound the errors and cause further introspection in the pc. It is better not to deliver this RD than to flub any part of it. C/Ses take note. It is an Ethics Offense to attempt this Rundown without the auditor having done the prerequisite training and a further offense for an auditor to flub on it. STEPS OF THE RD (Steps 0 and 00 are for a person in a psychotic break, not a normal person.) Put this checklist on inside front cover of folder as a pgm. 0. On a person in a psychotic break isolate the person wholly with all attendants completely muzzled (no speech). _______ 00. Give Vitamins (B Complex, including niacinamide) and minerals (calcium and magnesium) to build the person up. _______ *** 1. Locate by study or research of the person's case or via associates or 2 way comm the last severe point of introversion just prior to the current psychotic break or illness. There may be several severe points of introversion, prior or subsequent to the one that triggered the break or illness. These points are identified by their upsetting or worrisome effect on the pc. Each is noted down for handling. _______ 2. On each point, indicate the substance of it as a point of introversion to release the By-Passed Charge. Each should BD and F/N. First point indicated to F/N. _______ 2B. Second point indicated to F/N. _______ 250 2C. Third point indicated to F/N. _______ In the case of an out-list, the fact of a wrong item would be indicated and the list corrected by the Laws of L&N. 3. Get the wording of each point stated by the pc as an item (i.e. "What would you call such an incident?") and its read and handle by 2wc each flow E/Sim to F/N. First point 2wc'd F-1230 to F/N. _______ 3A. Second point 2wc'd F-1230 to F/N. _______ 3B. Third point 2wc'd F-1230 to F/N. _______ 4. Verify/Correct all L&N lists. _______ 5. Verify/Correct all Why "lists", PTS Interviews, 3 May PLs per C/S Series 78. _______ 6. R3R Quad item found in No. 3. ("Locate an incident where _______.") _______ 6A. L&N for the Intention behind the subject in No. 3. Verify Q for read before listing. _______ 6B. R3R Quad the Intention. _______ 6C. R3R Quad, L&N Intention & R3R Quad any other items found (No. 3A, 3B, etc). _______ 7. Clear the words "Introversion", "Introspection", "Extroversion". _______ 8. ARC BREAKS HANDLING. _______ 8A. 2wc Has another ARC Broken you? ARCU CDEINR E/S to F/N. _______ 8B. 2wc Have you ARC Broken another? ARCU CDEINR E/S to F/N. _______ 8C. 2wc Have others ARC Broken anyone else? ARCU CDEINR E/S to F/N. _______ 8D. 2wc Have you ARC Broken yourself? ARCU CDEINR E/S to F/N. _______ 8E. 2wc Has anyone ever made you feel you had an ARC Break when you didn't? E/S to F/N. _______ 8F. 2wc Have you ever made anyone else feel he had an ARC Break when he didn't? E/S to F/N. _______ 8G. 2wc Have others ever made anyone else feel he had an ARC Break when he didn't? E/S to F/N. _______ 8H. 2wc Have you ever made yourself feel you had an ARC Break when you didn't? E/S to F/N. _______ 8I. R3R Quad the item. _______ 8J. L&N for the Intention behind "the forcing of upsets on people who don't have them." _______ 8K. R3R Quad the Intention, in No. 8J. _______ 9. WITHHOLDS HANDLING. _______ 251 9A. 2wc Are you withholding something from anyone? E/Sim to F/N. _______ 9B. 2wc is anyone else withholding something from you? E/Sim to F/N. _______ 9C. 2wc Are others withholding something from anyone else? E/Sim to F/N. _______ 9D. 2wc Are you withholding something from yourself? E/Sim to F/N. _______ 9E. 2wc Has anyone demanded W/Hs you didn't have? E/Sim to F/N. _______ 9F. 2wc Have you demanded withholds of anyone else they didn't have? E/Sim to F/N. _______ 9G. 2wc Have others demanded withholds of anyone else they didn't have? E/Sim to F/N. _______ 9H. 2wc Have you demanded W/Hs from yourself that you didn't have? E/Sim to F/N. _______ 9I. R3R Quad "demanded non-existent W/Hs from _______." _______ 9J. L&N, Clear Q thoroughly and verify for read first, what purpose would be behind "the demanding of non-existent W/Hs from others"? _______ 9K. R3R Quad the item in No. 9J. _______ 10. PROBLEMS HANDLING. _______ 10A. 2wc Has another given you a problem? E/Sim to F/N. _______ 10B. 2wc Have you given another a problem? E/Sim to F/N. _______ 10C. 2wc Have others given a problem to anyone else? E/Sim to F/N. _______ 10D. 2wc Have you given yourself a problem? E/Sim to F/N. _______ 10E. 2wc Has anyone ever made you feel you had a problem when you didn't? E/Sim to F/N. _______ 10F. 2wc Have you ever made anyone else feel he had a problem when he didn't? E/Sim to F/N. _______ 10G. 2wc Have others ever made anyone else feel he had a problem when he didn't? E/Sim to F/N. _______ 10H. 2wc Have you ever made yourself feel you had a problem when you didn't? E/Sim to F/N. _______ 10I. R3R Quad the item. _______ 10J. L&N for the Intention behind "the giving of problems to people that don't belong to them." _______ 10K. R3R Quad the Intention, in No. 10J. _______ 11. OVERTS HANDLING. _______ 11A. 2wc Has anyone else committed overts on you? E/Sim to F/N. _______ 11B. 2wc Have you committed overts on anyone else? Get what, E/Sim to F/N. _______ 252 11C. 2wc Have others committed overts on anyone else? E/Sim to F/N. _______ 11D. 2wc Have you committed any overts on yourself? E/Sim to F/N. _______ 11E. 2wc Has anyone ever accused you of something you didn't do? E/Sim to F/N. _______ 11F. 2wc Have you ever accused anyone else of something he didn't do? E/Sim to F/N. _______ 11G. 2wc Have others ever accused anyone else of something he didn't do? E/Sim to F/N. _______ 11H. 2wc Have you ever accused yourself of something you didn't do? E/Sim to F/N. _______ 11I. R3R Quad the item. _______ 11J. L&N for the Intention behind "the accusing of someone of non-existent overts." _______ 11K. R3R Quad the Intention, in No. 11J. _______ 12. NOT SAYING. _______ 12A. 2wc Are you not saying something about someone else or something? Get what, E/Sim to F/N. _______ 12B. 2wc Is anyone not saying something about you? E/Sim to F/N. _______ 12C. 2wc Are others not saying something about anyone else? E/Sim to F/N. _______ 12D. 2wc Are you not saying something about yourself? E/Sim to F/N. _______ 12E. 2wc Has anyone not accepted your W/Hs? E/Sim to F/N. _______ 12F. 2wc Have you not accepted someone else's W/Hs? E/Sim to F/N. _______ 12G. 2wc Have others not accepted anyone else's W/Hs? E/Sim to F/N. _______ 12H. 2wc Have you not accepted your own W/Hs? E/Sim to F/N. _______ 12I. R3R Quad "W/Hs weren't accepted." _______ 12J. L&N Intention behind "the rejecting of others' W/Hs." _______ 12K. R3R Quad the Intention, in No. 12J. _______ 13. FALSE INCIDENTS HANDLING. _______ 13A. 2wc Has anyone ever asked you for things that didn't exist? E/S to F/N. _______ 13B. 2wc Have you ever asked anyone else for things that didn't exist? E/S to F/N. _______ 13C. 2wc Have others ever asked anyone else for things that didn't exist? E/S to F/N. _______ 13D. 2wc Have you ever asked yourself for things that didn't exist? E/S to F/N. _______ 253 13E. R3R Quad the item. _______ 13F. L&N for the Intention behind "the demanding of false incidents from others." _______ 13G. R3R Quad the Intention, in No. 13F. _______ 14. PTS HANDLING. _______ 14A. 2wc Has anyone given you a false assignment that you were being done in? E/S to F/N. _______ 14B. 2wc Have you given anyone a false assignment that he was being done in? E/S to F/N. _______ 14C. 2wc Have others given anyone else a false assignment that they were being done in? E/Sim to F/N. _______ 14D. 2wc Have you given yourself a false assignment that you were being done in? E/S to F/N. _______ 14E. R3R Quad the item. _______ 14F. L&N for the Intention behind "giving others a false assignment that they were being done in." _______ 14G. R3R Quad the Intention, in No. 14F. _______ 14H. 2wc Has anyone been doing you in? E/S to F/N. _______ 14I. 2wc Have you been doing anyone else in? E/S to F/N. _______ 14J. 2wc Have others been doing anyone else in? E/S to F/N. _______ 14K. 2wc Have you been doing yourself in? E/S to F/N. _______ 15. FALSE INTERROGATION HANDLING. _______ 15A. 2wc Has anyone ever interrogated you for no reason? E/S to F/N. _______ 15B. 2wc Have you ever interrogated anyone else for no reason? E/S to F/N. _______ 15C. 2wc Have others ever interrogated anyone else for no reason? E/S to F/N. _______ 15D. 2wc Have you ever had yourself interrogated for no reason? E/S to F/N. _______ 15E. R3R Quad the item. _______ 15F. L&N for the Intention behind "the false interrogating of others." _______ 15G. R3R Quad the Intention, in No. 15F. _______ 16. FALSE INVALIDATION HANDLING. _______ 16A. 2wc Has anyone ever heavily invalidated you unjustly? E/S to F/N. _______ 16B. 2wc Have you ever heavily invalidated anyone else unjustly? E/S to F/N. _______ 16C. 2wc Have others ever heavily invalidated anyone else unjustly? E/S to F/N. _______ 254 16D. 2wc Have you ever heavily invalidated yourself unjustly? E/S to F/N. _______ 16E. R3R Quad the item. _______ 16F. L&N for the Intention behind "the unjust invalidating of others." _______ 16G. R3R Quad the Intention, in No. 16F. _______ 17. FALSE VALIDATION HANDLING. _______ 17A. 2wc Has another ever validated you for something he knew was wrong? E/S to F/N. _______ 17B. 2wc Have you ever validated anyone else for something you knew was wrong? E/S to F/N. _______ 17C. 2wc Have others ever validated anyone else for something they knew was wrong? E/S to F/N. _______ 17D. 2wc Have you ever validated yourself for something you knew was wrong? E/S to F/N. _______ 17E. R3R Quad the item. _______ 17F. L&N for the Intention behind "the false validating of others." _______ 17G. R3R Quad the Intention, in No. 17F. _______ 18. "HIT" FOR NO REASON. _______ 18A. 2wc Has anyone "hit" you too hard for no reason? E/S to F/N. _______ 18B. 2wc Have you "hit" anyone else too hard for no reason? E/S to F/N. _______ 18C. 2wc Have others "hit" anyone else too hard for no reason? E/S to F/N. _______ 18D. 2wc Have you gotten yourself "hit" too hard for no reason? E/S to F/N. _______ 18E. R3R Quad the item. _______ 18F. L&N for the Intention behind "the 'hitting' of others unfairly." _______ 18G. R3R Quad the Intention, in No. 18F. _______ 19. INVALIDATED BEINGNESS HANDLING. _______ 19A. 2wc Has anyone ever challenged or questioned who you were? E/S to F/N. _______ 19B. 2wc Have you ever challenged or questioned anyone else's identity? E/S to F/N. _______ 19C. 2wc Have others ever challenged or questioned anyone else's identity? E/S to F/N. _______ 19D. 2wc Have you ever challenged or questioned your identity? E/S to F/N. _______ 19E. R3R Quad the item. _______ 19F. L&N for the Intention behind "the invalidating of others' identity." _______ 19G. R3R Quad the Intention, in No. 19F. _______ 20. INVALIDATED INTENTIONS HANDLING. _______ 255 20A. 2wc Has anyone ever challenged or questioned your intentions? E/S to F/N. _______ 20B. 2wc Have you ever challenged or questioned anyone else's intentions? E/S to F/N. _______ 20C. 2wc Have others ever challenged or questioned anyone else's intentions? E/S to F/N. _______ 20D. 2wc Have you ever challenged or questioned your own intentions? E/S to F/N. _______ 20E. R3R Quad "misinterpreted intentions. _______ 20F. L&N for the Intention behind "the invalidating of the intentions of others." _______ 20G. R3R Quad the Intention, in No. 20F. _______ 21. OBJECTIVE HAVINGNESS. _______ An HC List could be added here if the pc's "think" is still weird. NOTE: ITEMS THAT DON'T READ WON'T RUN. DON'T RUN OR LIST Q's THAT DON'T READ OR YOU'LL REINTROVERT THE PC. Frequent D of P Interview is vital whenever the case looks like it is not rapidly progressing. Also a quick assessment may be needed as a separate action to isolate possible charged areas of introspection. At any time after Step 2, Objective Havingness should be done at session end. If one of the items in Steps 3-20 turns out to be false the pc will introvert further. In such a case indicate the fact of it having been unnecessary and get an F/N. Then run Objective Havingness. If the TA goes high (or low) and won't come into range, assess a C/S 53RF and handle. In the case of a pc in a psychotic break, the C/S would have to locate the last severe wrong indication, indicate the fact to the pc and get it corrected (as with a wrong item) as the first action. EXTROVERSION Def. EXTROVERSION: "... Means nothing more than being able to look outward...." "An extroverted personality is one who is capable of looking around the environment...." "A person who is capable of looking at the world around him and seeing it quite real and quite bright is of course in a state of extroversion." (Problems Of Work.) The end phenomena of the Introspection RD is the person extroverted, no longer looking inward worriedly in a continuous self-audit without end. The EP on a person in a psychotic break is the end of the psychotic break. The RD is very simple and its results are magical in effectiveness. Flubs can wreck it so don't permit them. You have in your hands the tool to take over mental therapy in full. You need not fear the insane or the psychotic break any longer. Here also is the cure for the continual self-auditing pc who is dug into his bank. It works on all pcs in fact with rave results. Do it flawlessly and we all win. THIS PLANET IS OURS. LRH:ams.jh L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1974 Founder by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [Added to by HCO Bs 20 Feb 74, 6 Mar 74 and 20 Apr 74.]  L. RON HUBBARD Founder