Volume XI 1976-1978 - Technical Bulletins

Volume XI 1976-1978 - Technical Bulletins

Сообщение auditor » 30 ноя 2016, 05:33

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

The
Technical Bulletins
of
Dianetics and Scientology

by
L. Ron Hubbard
FOUNDER OF DIANETICS AND SCIENTOLOGY


Volume
XI
1976-1978

Download https://yadi.sk/i/hTjPI5nVzoXTZ
_____________________________________________________________________


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

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


L. RON HUBBARD
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder of Dianetics and Scientology









EDITOR’S NOTE


With Technical Volume XI, L. Ron Hubbard is giving Scientologists everywhere one of their most precious possessions—his remarkable technical achievements of the last two years. 1977-1978 have been spectacular years of Dianetics and Scientology discoveries, filled with numerous breakthroughs made by him.

Volume XI continues from where Volume VIII ended with bulletins issued through July 1976. Preceding these latest issues from August 1976 through September 20, 1978 contained herein, there are presented 35 issues (dated 1959 onward) that were not included in the earlier Technical Volumes but which can be published now. These bulletins are listed at the start of the Chronological Contents on page xvi.

As in the original Technical Volumes, if an issue has been revised, replaced, or cancelled, this has been indicated in the upper right-hand corner along with the page number of the issue which should be referred to.

The Chronological Contents shows at what point on the time track each issue in this volume was released, and the Long Contents gives you a breakdown of the subject content of each separate HCOB or issue.

In the Subject Index at the back of this volume, main entries appear in boldface type to make it easy to find any subject.

If the title of a bulletin is known but not the date of issue, the Alphabetical List of Titles may be consulted to locate the issue fast.

Lastly, the Cancellations and Revisions lists show you which issues in previous Technical Volumes have been cancelled or revised by issues presented in this present Volume XI.

The Editor

TECHNICAL BULLETINS

1976-1978


CONTENTS


1959

20 May Know to Mystery Straight Wire for Extreme Cases 1


1962

3 May R ARC Breaks—Missed Withholds (revised 5 Sept. 1978) 2
28 June R Dirty Needles—How to Smooth Out Needles (revised 5 Sept. 1978) 6
12 Sept. R Security Checks Again (revised 5 Sept. 1978) 8
8 Nov. R Somatics—How to Tell Terminals and Opposition Terminals
(revised 5 Sept. 1978) (reissued 9 Oct. 1978) 10
30 Dec. R Routines 2-12 & 2-10—Case Errors—Points of Greatest Importance
(revised 5 Sept. 1978) 14

1963

8 June R The Time Track and Engram Running by Chains—Bulletin 2—
Handling the Time Track (revised 3 Oct. 1977)
(reissued 21 Mar. 1978) 25


1964

10 Mar. Basic Auditing—Non-Reading Meters—Meter Flinch 31


1966
12 Oct. Examinations (HCO PL) 32


1968
23 Aug. Arbitraries 33
23 Aug. Workability of Tech 34
26 Aug. The Class VIII Course 35
10 Sept. Case Supervisor—Admin in Auditing 36
10 Sept. Flunks 37
10 Sept. “Standard” Tech Data 38
10 Sept. Valence Shifter (amended 20 Sept. 1968) 39
11 Sept. C/S Instructions 40
15 Sept. Pc Looking or Continually Feeling Tired 41
15 Sept. The First Thing I Learned About Teaching a Class VIII Auditor 41
16 Sept. End Phenomena 42

1968 (cont.)


22 Sept. Rehabs 43
23 Sept. Violation of the Laws of Listing and Nulling 44
26 Sept. The Study of the “Well Done” LRH C/S Folder 44
29 Sept. List Correction (amended 29 Oct. 1968) 45
4 Oct. Advance Courses 46
4 Oct. Pre-OTs 46
5 Oct. ARC Break Needle 47
21 Oct. R Floating Needle (revised 9 July 1977)
(corrected and reissued 15 July 1977) 48
1 Nov. Overt-Motivator Definitions 49
5 Dec. Unresolving Cases 50
15 Dec.RA L4BRA—For Assessment of All Listing Errors
(re-revised 11 Apr. 1977) 51


1969

2 Apr. RA Dianetic Assists (revised 28 July 1978) 55
17 Apr. R Dianetic Case Supervision (revised 25 July 1978) 58
23 Apr. RA Dianetics—Basic Definitions (re-revised 20 Sept. 1978) 59
24 Apr. RA Dianetic Use (re-revised 20 Sept. 1978) 64
24 Apr. R Dianetic Results (revised 20 July 1978) 68
26 Apr. R Somatics (revised 11 July 1978) 69
28 Apr. R High TA in Dianetics (revised 20 Sept. 1978) 71
7 May R Floating Needle (revised 15 July 1977) 72
8 May Important Study Data (reissued 23 Jan. 1977) 73
8 May R Teaching the Dianetics Course (revised 31 Mar. 1977) 74
9 May RA Case Supervising New Era Dianetics Folders
(re-revised 21 Sept. 1978) 75
11 May R Meter Trim Check (revised 8 July 1978) 77
18 May R Erasure (revised 3 Aug. 1978) 78
23 May R Auditing Out Sessions—Narrative Versus Somatic Chains
(revised 11 July 1978) 79
28 May RA How Not to Erase (re-revised 21 Sept. 1978) 80
28 June RA C/S—How to Case Supervise Dianetics Folders
(re-revised 21 Sept. 1978) 82
17 July RB New Era Dianetics Command Training Drills
(re-revised 4 Sept. 1978) 86
19 July RA Dianetics and Illness (re-revised 21 Sept. 1978) 91
21 July One-Hand Electrodes 93
22 July R Auditing Speed (revised 20 Sept. 1978) 94
24 July R Seriously Ill Pcs (revised 24 July 1978) 95
2 Aug. R “LX” Lists (revised 4 Sept. 1978) 96
3 Aug. R LX2—Emotional Assessment List (revised 22 Aug. 1978) 98

1969 (cont.)


9 Aug. R LX1 (Conditions) (revised 21 Aug. 1978) (reissued 4 Nov. 1978) 99
9 Aug.RA Case Folder Analysis, New Era Dianetics (re-revised 21 Sept. 1978) 100
17 Oct.RA Drugs, Aspirin and Tranquilizers (re-revised 20 Sept. 1978) 104
5 Nov. R LX3 (Attitudes) (revised 4 Sept. 1978) 107
15 Nov. R Case Supervision—Auditing and Results (revised 27 July 1978) 108
23 Nov.RB Student Rescue Intensive (re-revised 4 Sept. 1978) 110
21 Dec. Solo Auditing and R6EW 112


1970
27 Feb. Group Engram Process 114
11 Mar. Important Note on Group Engram Intensive 115
15 Mar. Double Folder Danger 115
25 June RA Glossary of C/S Terms (C/S Series 12RA) (revised 6 Oct. 1978) 116
30 June RA VIII Actions (C/S Series 13RA) (re-revised 9 Apr. 1977) 118
15 July R Unresolved Pains (revised 17 July 1978) 122
16 Aug. R Getting the F/N to Examiner (C/S Series 15R) (revised 7 July 1978) 124
11 Sept. Solo Assists 127
11 Sept. R Chronic Somatic, Dianetic Handling of (C/S Series 18R)
(revised 7 July 1978) 127


1971

8 Mar. R Case Actions, Off Line (C/S Series 29R) (revised 25 July 1978) 128
27 Mar.RA Dianetic Erasure (re-revised 21 Sept. 1978) 130
5 Apr. Triple and Quad Reruns (C/S Series 33RA-1) (reissued 6 Nov. 1976) 132
11 Apr.RC L3RF—Dianetics and Int RD Repair List (re-revised 21 Sept. 1978) 135
21 Apr.RC Dianetics (C/S Series 36RC) (revised 25 July 1978) 141
26 Apr. Solo Cognitions 145
9 June RA C/S Tips (C/S Series 41RA) (re-revised 28 Mar. 1977) 146
29 June RA Steps to Speed Student Product Flow (W/C Series 7RA)
(reissued 27 Sept. 1977) 149
5 July RB Assists (C/S Series 49RB) (re-revised 20 Sept. 1978) 150
17 July R Out of Valence (C/S Series 51R) (revised 6 July 1978) 152
23 July R Assists (revised 16 July 1978) 153
28 July RA Dianetics, Beginning a Pc on (C/S Series 54RA, NED Series 8R)
(re-revised 22 Sept. 1978) 155
16 Aug. R Training Drills Remodernized (revised 5 July 1978) 157
8 Sept. R Case Supervisor Actions (revised 20 May 1975) 163
14 Sept. R Dianetic List Errors (C/S Series 59R) (revised 19 July 1978) 192
25 Sept.RB Tone Scale In Full (revised 1 Apr. 1978) 193
24 Oct. R False TA (revised 26 Jan. 1977) 194
12 Nov.RA False TA Addition (revised 26 Jan. 1977) 198

1972


15 Feb. R False TA Addition 2 (revised 26 Jan. 1977) 199
18 Feb. R False TA Addition 3 (revised 26 Jan. 1977) 200
19 Mar. C/Sing or Auditing Without Folder Study (HCO PL) 202
4 Apr. R Ethics and Study Tech (HCO PL) (revised 21 June 1975) 203
24 Apr. Auditor Recovery (LRH ED 176 INT) (reissued 11 Apr. 1977) 205
3 May R Ethics and Executives (HCO PL) (Exec. Series 12)
(revised 18 Dec. 1977) 207
16 June RA Auditor’s Rights Modified (C/S Series 8 RA)
(re-revised 7 Dec. 1976) 213


1973

11 July RB Assist Summary (re-revised 21 Sept. 1978) 215
16 Nov. Study Tech & Post (HCO PL) 221
23 Nov.RA Dry and Wet Hands Make False TA (revised 26 Jan. 1977) 222



1974

28 Mar. R Expanded Dianetics Developments Since the Original Lectures—
Cancellation (Exp. Dn. Series 21R) (cancelled 9 May 1977)
(corrected 11 May 1977) 224
23 Apr.RA Expanded Dianetics Requisites (Exp. Dn. Series 22RA)
(revised 1 Oct. 1976) 225
31 Aug.RA New Grade Chart (C/S Series 93RA) (re-revised 9 Apr. 1977) 226
1 Nov.RA Rock Slams and Rock Slammers (revised 5 Sept. 1978) 229



1975

16 Jan. R Past Life Remedies (revised 6 July 1978) 232
23 Apr. R Vanishing Cream and False TA (revised 26 Jan. 1977) 235
29 Oct. Special Rundown Lectures (29 Oct.-8 Dec. 1975) 236



1976

Aug. The Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology 237
10 Aug. R R/Ses, What They Mean (revised 5 Sept. 1978) 238
Oct. The Volunteer Minister’s Handbook 243
20 Oct. PTS Data 244
20 Oct. R PTS Data (HCO PL) (revised 29 June 1977) 245
20 Oct. PTS Handling 246
23 Oct. Interneship and HGC (HCO PL)
(cancelled—see HCO PL 9 Dec. 1978 Vol. XII) 247
24 Oct. R Delivery Repair Lists (C/S Series 96R) (revised 10 Feb. 1977) 248
26 Oct. Auditing Reports, Falsifying of (C/S Series 97) 254

1976 (cont.)


28 Oct. Auditing Folders, Omissions in Completeness (C/S Series 98) 256
Dec. Modern Management Technology Defined 258
6 Dec. Illegal Pcs, Acceptance of—High Crime Bulletin 259
10 Dec.RA Scientology F/N and TA Position (C/S Series 99RA)
(re-revised 18 Sept. 1978) 260


1977

10 Jan. How to Win with Word Clearing (W/C Series 55) 263
10 Jan. Ethics and Word Clearing (HCO PL) 264
13 Jan. RA Handling a False TA (revised 5 Mar. 1977) 265
21 Jan. RA False TA Checklist (revised and reissued 7 June 1978) 267
22 Jan. In-Tech, The Only Way to Achieve It 273
24 Jan. Tech Correction Round-Up 274
26 Jan. Footplates Use Forbidden (corrected and reissued 20 Mar. 1977) 288
27 Jan. Auditor Recovery (cancelled 5 Dec. 1977) 289
30 Jan. False TA Data (corrected 19 Mar. 1977) 290
5 Feb. Jokers and Degraders (C/S Series 100) 291
17 Feb. R Course Necessities (revised 20 Feb. 1977) 293
24 Feb. Expanded Dianetics Cases (corrected and reissued 26 Feb. 1977) 294
1 Mar. Cancellation of Integrity Processing HCOBs 295
1 Mar. Confessional Forms 296
1 Mar. Formulating Confessional Questions 297
1 Mar. A Valid Confessional (reissue of circa 1965) 300
8 Mar. R Power Checklist (revised 7 Apr. 1977) 302
16 Mar. The Gambler (Exp. Dn. Series 25) 304
27 Mar. Programming of Expanded Dianetics 305
5 Apr. Expanded Grades 307
11 Apr. List Errors—Correction of 308
17 Apr. Recurring Withholds and Overts 310
7 May Long Duration Sec Checking 311
9 May Foreword of Expanded Dianetics Course 312
9 May Psychosis, More About (Exp. Dn. Series 29) 313
31 May LSD—Years After They Have “Come Off of” LSD 315
14 June Paid Completions Simplified 316
26 Sept. Art and Communication 319
Oct. Have You Lived Before This Life? 321
4 Dec. Checklist for Setting Up Sessions and an E-Meter 322


1978

6 Feb. R LSD and the Sweat Program (revised 16 Mar. 1978) 324

1978 (cont.)


6 Feb.R-1 LSD and the Sweat Program—Addition (addition of 16 Mar. 1978) 327
26 Feb. Interneships vs. Courses 328
10 Mar. HGC Pc Application Form (HCO PL) 330
18 Mar. Postulates and Engrams (cancelled—see 403) 332
19 Mar. Quickie Objectives 333
23 Mar. R Word Clearing Definitions (W/C Series 59R) (revised 12 Nov. 1978) 334
27 Mar. Ethics Penalty for Word Clearers (W/C Series 58) 335
3 Apr. TR Debug Assessment 336
8 Apr. An F/N Is a Read (cancelled—see 487) 338
30 Apr. The Sweat Program Further Data 339
1 May Tech Quality (Cramming Series 17) 342
26 May Dianetics: Urgent Command Change 343
2 June R Cramming Repair Assessment List (Cramming Series 18R)
(revised 14 June 1978) 345
15 June Urgent Important 349
18 June Routine 3-R Command Change 349
18 June R Assessment and How to Get the Item (NED Series 4R)
(revised 20 Sept. 1978) 350
19 June Objective ARC (NED Series 3) 356
20 June Identity Rundown (NED Series 15) 357
21 June New Era Dianetics Series 1 358
22 June R New Era Dianetics Full Pc Program Outline (NED Series 2R)
(revised 16 Sept. 1978) 360
23 June R Preclear Checklist (NED Series 16R) (revised 22 Sept. 1978) 365
24 June R Original Assessment Sheet (NED Series 5R) (revised 22 Sept. 1978) 367
26 June RA Routine 3RA—Engram Running by Chains (NED Series 6RA)
(re-revised 15 Sept. 1978) 380
28 June RA R3RA Commands (NED Series 7RA) (re-revised 15 Sept. 1978) 390
29 June Disability Rundown (NED Series 14) 395
1 July The Dianetic Prepared Assessment Rundown—Action Fourteen
(NED Series 13) 396
2 July Dianetic Student Rescue Intensive (NED Series 11) 399
3 July R Relief Rundown (NED Series 10R) (revised 22 Sept. 1978) 400
4 July R Second Original Assessment (NED Series 12R)
(revised 22 Sept. 1978) 401
7 July Dianetic F/Ns (cancelled—see 480) 403
9 July R Dianetic CS-1 (revised 4 Sept. 1978) 404
11 July The Preassessment List (NED Series 4-1) (reissued 11 Oct. 1978) 414
14 July R Typical Dianetic Chain (revised 15 Sept. 1978) 416
14 July R A Typical Narrative Item (revised 15 Sept. 1978) 417
15 July Scientology Auditing CS-1 418
19 July Dianetic Persistent F/Ns (NED Series 17) 427

1978 (cont.)


20 July After the Fact Items (NED Series 18) 428
21 July What Is a Floating Needle? 429
22 July Assessment TRs 430
23 July List of Perceptics (C/S Series 101) 431
24 July Dianetic Remedies 433
2 Aug. Cancellation of Issues 436
5 Aug. Instant Reads 438
7 Aug. Havingness—Finding and Running the Pc’s Havingness Process 439
9 Aug. New Era Dianetics—A Requisite for Expanded Dianetics 441
9 Aug. Clearing Commands 442
11 Aug. Rudiments—Definitions and Patter 445
11 Aug. Model Session 450
21 Aug. Running Flows That Won’t Erase 452
26 Aug. R More on Drugs (revised 5 Oct. 1978) 453
3 Sept. Definition of a Rock Slam 454
5 Sept. Anatomy of a Service Facsimile 456
6 Sept. Following Up on Dirty Needles 459
6 Sept. Service Facsimiles and Rock Slams 461
6 Sept. Routine Three SC-A—Full Service Facsimile Handling Updated
With New Era Dianetics 463
7 Sept. R Modern Repetitive Prepchecking (revised 21 Oct. 1978) 469
8 Sept. Mini List of Grade 0-IV Processes 471
10 Sept. NED High Crime 473
12 Sept. Dianetics Forbidden on Clears and OTs 473
12 Sept. Overrun by Demanding Earlier Than There Is 474
13 Sept. R3RA Engram Running by Chains and Narrative R3RA—
An Additional Difference 476
13 Sept. Clears, OTs and R/Ses 478
13 Sept. An Old Poem (HCO PL) 478
15 Sept. Confidentiality of Upper Level Rundowns (HCO PL) 479
16 Sept. Postulate Off Equals Erasure 480
19 Sept. A.D. 28—The Year of Technical Breakthroughs (LRH ED 298 INT) 482
19 Sept. The End of Endless Drug RDs (revised—see Vol. XII) 484
19 Sept. The End of Endless Drug Rundowns—Drug Rundown Repair List
(revised—see Vol. XII) 485
20 Sept. An Instant F/N Is a Read (reissued 9 Oct. 1978) 487
20 Sept. LX List Handling 489
20 Sept. NED Auditor Analysis Checklist (NED Series 19, C/S Series 103) 492
Subject Index 500
Alphabetical List of Titles 566
Cancellations and Revisions 568

CHRONOLOGICAL CONTENTS


The Chronological Contents is a full contents list showing the chronology of the issues in this volume. It lists the issues under the date when each was last revised or reissued. If the issue has never been revised or reissued then it is simply listed under its original issue date. Persons who wish to study the HCOBs in chronological sequence will find the Chronological Contents especially useful.

Note that the first 35 issues listed (from 1959 up to and including 21 June 1975) are from the time period covered by earlier Technical Volumes. You may wish to note this in the correct places in your Technical Volume set in order to maintain the chronology.

1959

20 May Know to Mystery Straight Wire for Extreme Cases 1

1964

10 Mar. Basic Auditing—Non-Reading Meters—Meter Flinch 31

1966

12 Oct. Examinations (HCO PL) 32

1968

23 Aug. Arbitraries 33
23 Aug. Workability of Tech 34
26 Aug. The Class VIII Course 35
10 Sept. Case Supervisor—Admin in Auditing 36
10 Sept. Flunks 37
10 Sept. “Standard” Tech Data 38
11 Sept. C/S Instructions 40
15 Sept. Pc Looking or Continually Feeling Tired 41
15 Sept. The First Thing I Learned About Teaching a Class VIII Auditor 41
16 Sept. End Phenomena 42
20 Sept. Valence Shifter (amendment of 10 Sept. 1968) 39
22 Sept. Rehabs 43
23 Sept. Violation of the Laws of Listing and Nulling 44
26 Sept. The Study of the “Well Done” LRH C/S Folder 44
4 Oct. Advance Courses 46
4 Oct. Pre-OTs 46
5 Oct. ARC Break Needle 47
29 Oct. List Correction (amendment of 29 Sept. 1968) 45
1 Nov. Overt-Motivator Definitions 49
5 Dec. Unresolving Cases 50

1969

21 July One-Hand Electrodes 93
21 Dec. Solo Auditing and R6EW 112

CHRONOLOGICAL CONTENTS


1970

27 Feb. Group Engram Process 114
11 Mar. Important Note on Group Engram Intensive 115
15 Mar. Double Folder Danger 115
11 Sept. Solo Assists 127

1971

26 Apr. Solo Cognitions 145

1972

19 Mar. C/Sing or Auditing Without Folder Study (HCO PL) 202

1973

16 Nov. Study Tech & Post (HCO PL) 221

1975

20 May Case Supervisor Actions (revision of 8 Sept. 1971) 163
21 June Ethics and Study Tech (HCO PL) (revision of 4 Apr. 1972) 203
29 Oct. Special Rundown Lectures (29 Oct.-8 Dec. 1975) 236

1976

Aug. The Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology 237
Oct. The VolunteerMinister’s Handbook 243
1 Oct. Expanded Dianetics Requisites (Exp. Dn. Series 22RA)
(revision of 23 Apr. 1974) 225
20 Oct. PTS Data 244
20 Oct. PTS Handling 246
23 Oct. Interneship and HGC (HCO PL)
(cancelled—see HCO PL 9 Dec. 1978 Vol. XII) 247
26 Oct. Auditing Reports, Falsifying of (C/S Series 97) 254
28 Oct. Auditing Folders, Omissions in Completeness (C/S Series 98) 256
6 Nov. Triple and Quad Reruns (C/S Series 33RA-1)
(reissue of 5 Apr. 1971) 132
Dec. Modern Management Technology Defined 258
6 Dec. Illegal Pcs, Acceptance of—High Crime Bulletin 259

7 Dec. Auditor’s Rights Modified (C/S Series 81RA)
(re-revision of 16 June 1972) 213

1977

10 Jan. How to Win with Word Clearing (W/C Series 55) 263
10 Jan. Ethics and Word Clearing (HCO PL) 264
22 Jan. In-Tech, The Only Way to Achieve It 273
23 Jan. Important Study Data (reissue of 8 May 1969) 73
24 Jan. Tech Correction Round-Up 274

CHRONOLOGICAL CONTENTS


26 Jan. False TA (revision of 24 Oct. 1971) 194
26 Jan. False TA Addition (revision of 12 Nov. 1971) 198
26 Jan. False TA Addition 2 (revision of 15 Feb. 1972) 199
26 Jan. False TA Addition 3 (revision of 18 Feb. 1972) 200
26 Jan. Dry and Wet Hands Make False TA (revision of 23 Nov. 1973) 222
26 Jan. Vanishing Cream and False TA (revision of 23 Apr. 1975) 235
5 Feb. Jokers and Degraders (C/S Series 100) 291
10 Feb. Delivery Repair Lists (C/S Series 96R) (revision of 24 Oct. 1976) 248
20 Feb. Course Necessities (revision of 17 Feb. 1977) 293
26 Feb. Expanded Dianetics Cases (correction and reissue of 24 Feb. 1977) 294
1 Mar. Cancellation of Integrity Processing HCOBs 295
1 Mar. Confessional Forms 296
1 Mar. Formulating Confessional Questions 297
1 Mar. A Valid Confessional (reissue of circa 1965) 300
5 Mar. Handling a False TA (revision of 13 Jan. 1977) 265
16 Mar. The Gambler (Exp. Dn. Series 25) 304
19 Mar. False TA Data (correction of 30 Jan. 1977) 290
20 Mar. Footplates Use Forbidden (correction and reissue of 26 Jan. 1977) 288
27 Mar. Programming of Expanded Dianetics 305
28 Mar. C/S Tips (C/S Series 41RA) (re-revision of 9 June 1971) 146
31 Mar. Teaching the Dianetics Course (revision of 8 May 1969) 74
5 Apr. Expanded Grades 307
7 Apr. Power Checklist (revision of 8 Mar. 1977) 302
9 Apr. VIII Actions (C/S Series ERA) (re-revision of 30 June 1970) 118
9 Apr. New Grade Chart (C/S Series 93RA) (re-revision of 31 Aug. 1974) 226
11 Apr. L4BRA—For Assessment of All Listing Errors
(re-revision of 15 Dec. 1968) 51
11 Apr. Auditor Recovery (LRH ED 176 INT) (reissue of 24 Apr. 1972) 205
11 Apr. List Errors—Correction of 308
17 Apr. Recurring Withholds and Overts 310
7 May Long Duration Sec Checking 311
9 May Foreword of Expanded Dianetics Course 312
9 May Psychosis, More About (Exp. Dn. Series 29) 313

11 May Expanded Dianetics Developments Since the Original Lectures—
Cancellation (Exp. Dn. Series 21R) (corrected cancellation of
28 Mar. 1974) 224
31 May LSD—Years After They Have “Come Off of” LSD 315
14 June Paid Completions Simplified 316
29 June PTS Data (HCO PL) (revision of 20 Oct. 1976) 245
15 July Floating Needle (correction and reissue of 21 Oct. 1968 revised
9 July 1977) 48

CHRONOLOGICAL CONTENTS


15 July Floating Needle (revision of 7 May 1969) 72
26 Sept. Art and Communication 319
27 Sept. Steps to Speed Student Product Flow (W/C Series 7RA)
(reissue of 29 June 1971 revised 14 July 1977) 149
Oct. Have You Lived Before ThisLife? 321
4 Dec. Checklist for Setting Up Sessions and an E-Meter 322
5 Dec. Auditor Recovery (cancellation of 27 Jan. 1977) 289
18 Dec. Ethics and Executives (HCO PL) (Exec Series 12)
(revision of 3 May 1972) 207

1978

26 Feb. Interneships vs. Courses 328
10 Mar. HGC Pc Application Form (HCO PL) 330
16 Mar. LSD and the Sweat Program (revision of 6 Feb. 1978) 324
16 Mar. LSD and the Sweat Program—Addition (addition to 6 Feb. 1978) 327
18 Mar. Postulates and Engrams (cancelled—see 403) 332
19 Mar. Quickie Objectives 333
21 Mar. The Time Track and Engram Running by Chains—Bulletin 2—
Handling the Time Track (reissue of 8 June 1963 revised 3 Oct. 1977) 25
27 Mar. Ethics Penalty for Word Clearers (W/C Series 58) 335
1 Apr. Tone Scale In Full (revision of 25 Sept. 1971) 193
3 Apr. TR Debug Assessment 336
8 Apr. An F/N Is a Read (cancelled—see 487) 338
30 Apr. The Sweat Program Further Data 339
1 May Tech Quality (Cramming Series 17) 342
26 May Dianetics: Urgent Command Change 343
7 June False TA Checklist (revision and reissue of 21 Jan. 1977) 267
14 June Cramming Repair Assessment List (Cramming Series 18R)
(revision of 2 June 1978) 345
15 June Urgent Important 349
18 June Routine 3-R Command Change 349
19 June Objective ARC (NED Series 3) 356
20 June Identity Rundown (NED Series 15) 357
21 June New Era Dianetics Series 1 358
29 June Disability Rundown (NED Series 14) 395

1 July The Dianetic Prepared Assessment Rundown—Action Fourteen
(NED Series 13) 396
2 July Dianetic Student Rescue Intensive (NED Series 11) 399
5 July Training Drills Remodernized (revision of 16 Aug. 1971) 157
6 July Out of Valence (C/S Series SIR) (revision of 17 July 1971) 152
6 July Past Life Remedies (revision of 16 Jan. 1975) 232

CHRONOLOGICAL CONTENTS


7 July Getting the F/N to Examiner (C/S Series 15R) (revision of
16 Aug. 1970) 124
7 July Chronic Somatic, Dianetic Handling of (C/S Series 18R)
(revision of 11 Sept. 1970) 127
7 July Dianetic F/Ns (cancelled—see 480) 403
8 July Meter Trim Check (revision of 11 May 1969) 77
11 July Somatics (revision of 26 Apr. 1969) 69
11 July Auditing Out Sessions—Narrative Versus Somatic Chains
(revision of 23 May 1969) 79
15 July Scientology Auditing CS-1 418
16 July Assists (revision of 23 July 1971) 153
17 July Unresolved Pains (revision of 15 July 1970) 122
19 July Dianetic List Errors (C/S Series 59R) (revision of 14 Sept. 1971) 192
19 July Dianetic Persistent F/Ns (NED Series 17) 427
20 July Dianetic Results (revision of 24 Apr. 1969) 68
20 July After the Fact Items (NED Series 18) 428
21 July What Is a Floating Needle? 429
22 July Assessment TRs 430
23 July List of Perceptics (C/S Series 101) (revision of 10 Mar. 1970) 431
24 July Seriously Ill Pcs (revision of 24 July 1969) 95
24 July Dianetic Remedies 433
25 July Dianetic Case Supervision (revision of 17 Apr. 1969) 58
25 July Case Actions, Off Line (C/S Series 29R) (revision of 8 Mar. 1971) 128
25 July Dianetics (C/S Series 36RC) (revision of 21 Apr. 1971) 141
27 July Case Supervision—Auditing and Results (revision of 15 Nov. 1969) 108
28 July Dianetic Assists (revision of 2 Apr. 1969) 55
2 Aug. Cancellation of Issues 436
3 Aug. Erasure (revision of 18 May 1969) 78
5 Aug. Instant Reads 438
7 Aug. Havingness—Finding and Running the Pc’s Havingness Process 439
9 Aug. New Era Dianetics—A Requisite for Expanded Dianetics 441
9 Aug. Clearing Commands 442
11 Aug. Rudiments—Definitions and Patter 445
11 Aug. Model Session 450
21 Aug. Running Flows That Won’t Erase 452
22 Aug. LX2—Emotional Assessment List (revision of 3 Aug. 1969) 98
3 Sept. Definition of a Rock Slam 454
4 Sept. New Era Dianetics Command Training Drills (re-revision of
17 July 1969) 86
4 Sept. “LX” Lists (revision of 2 Aug. 1969) 96
4 Sept. LX3 (Attitudes) (revision of 5 Nov. 1969) 107

CHRONOLOGICAL CONTENTS


4 Sept. Student Rescue Intensive (re-revision of 23 Nov. 1969) 110
4 Sept. Dianetic CS-1 (revision of 9 July 1978) 404
5 Sept. ARC Breaks—Missed Withholds (revision of 3 May 1962) 2
5 Sept. Dirty Needles—How to Smooth Out Needles (revision of
28 June 1962) 6
5 Sept. Security Checks Again (revision of 12 Sept. 1962) 8
5 Sept. Routines 2-12 & 2-10—Case Errors—Points of Greatest Importance
(revision of 30 Dec. 1962) 14
5 Sept. Rock Slams and Rock Slammers (revision of 1 Nov. 1974) 229
5 Sept. R/Ses, What They Mean (revision of 10 Aug. 1976) 238
5 Sept. Anatomy of a Service Facsimile 456
6 Sept. Following Up on Dirty Needles 459
6 Sept. Service Facsimiles and Rock Slams 461
6 Sept. Routine Three SC-A—Full Senice Facsimile Handling Updated
With New Era Dianetics 463
8 Sept. Mini List of Grade 0-IV Processes 471
10 Sept. NED High Crime 473
12 Sept. Dianetics Forbidden on Clears and OTs 473
12 Sept. Overrun by Demanding Earlier Than There Is 474
13 Sept. R3RA Engram Running by Chains and Narrative R3RA—
An Additional Difference 476
13 Sept. Clears, OTs and R/Ses 478
13 Sept. An Old Poem (HCO PL) 478
15 Sept. Routine 3RA—Engram Running by Chains (NED Series 6RA)
(re-revision of 26 June 1978) 380
15 Sept. R3RA Commands (NED Series 7RA) (re-revision of 28 June 1978) 390
15 Sept. Typical Dianetic Chain (revision of 14 July 1978) 416
15 Sept. A Typical Narrative Item (revision of 14 July 1978) 417
15 Sept. Confidentiality of Upper Level Rundowns (HCO PL) 479
16 Sept. New Era Dianetics Full Pc Program Outline (NED Series 2R)
(revision of 22 June 1978) 360
16 Sept. Postulate Off Equals Erasure 480
18 Sept. Scientology F/N and TA Position (C/S Series 99RA)
(re-revision of 10 Dec. 1976) 260
19 Sept. A.D.28—The Year of Technical Breakthroughs (LRH ED 298 INT) 482
19 Sept. The End of Endless Drug RDs (revised—see Vol. XIl) 484
19 Sept. The End of Endless Drug Rundowns—Drug Rundown Repair List
(revised—see Vol. XII) 485
20 Sept. Dianetics—Basic Definitions (re-revision of 23 Apr. 1969) 59
20 Sept. Dianetic Use (re-revision of 24 Apr. 1969) 64
20 Sept. High TA in Dianetics (revision of 28 Apr. 1969) 71
20 Sept. Auditing Speed (revision of 22 July 1969) 94
20 Sept. Drugs, Aspirin and Tranquilizers (re-revision of 17 Oct. 1969) 104

CHRONOLOGICAL CONTENTS


20 Sept. Assists (C/S Series 49RB) (re-revision of 5 July 1971) 150
20 Sept. Assessment and How to Get the Item (NED Series 4R)
(revision of 18 June 1978) 350
20 Sept. LX List Handling 489
20 Sept. NED Auditor Analysis Checklist (NED Series 19, C/S Series 103) 492
21 Sept. Case Supenising New Era Dianetics Folders (re-revision of
9 May 1969) 75
21 Sept. How Not to Erase (re-revision of 28 May 1969) 80
21 Sept. C/S—How to Case Supervise Dianetics Folders (re-revision of
28 June 1969) 82
21 Sept. Dianetics and Illness (re-revision of 19 July 1969) 91
21 Sept. Case Folder Analysis, New Era Dianetics (re-revision of 9 Aug. 1969) 100
21 Sept. Dianetic Erasure (re-revision of 27 Mar. 1971) 130
21 Sept. L3RF—Dianetics and Int RD Repair List (re-revision of
11 Apr. 1971) 135
21 Sept. Assist Summary (re-revision of 11 July 1973) 215
22 Sept. Dianetics, Beginning a Pc on (C/S Series 54RA, NED Series 8R)
(re-revision of 28 July 1971) 155
22 Sept. Preclear Checklist (NED Series 16R) (revision of 23 June 1978) 365
22 Sept. Original Assessment Sheet (NED Series 5R) (revision of
24 June 1978) 367
22 Sept. Relief Rundown (NED Series 10R) (revision of 3 July 1978) 400
22 Sept. Second Original Assessment (NED Series 12R) (revision of
4 July 1978) 401
5 Oct. More On Drugs (revision of 26 Aug. 1978) 453
6 Oct. Glossary of C/S Terms (C/S Series 12RA) (revision of 25 June 1970) 116
9 Oct. Somatics—How to Tell Terminals and Opposition Terminals
(reissue of 8 Nov. 1962 revised 5 Sept. 1978) 10
9 Oct. An Instant F/N Is a Read (reissue of 20 Sept. 1978) 487
11 Oct. The Preassessment List (NED Series 4-1) (reissue of 11 July 1978) 414
21 Oct. Modern Repetitive Prepchecking (revision of 7 Sept. 1978) 469
4 Nov. LXI (Conditions) (reissue of 9 Aug. 1969 revised 21 Aug. 1978) 99
12 Nov. Word Clearing Definitions (W/C Series 59R) (revision of
23 Mar. 1978) 334
Subject Index 500
Alphabetical List of Titles 566
Cancellations and Revisions 568

LONG CONTENTS


HCO B 20 May 1959 KNOW TO MYSTERY STRAIGHT WIRE FOR EXTREME CASES, 1

Know to Mystery Scale expanded, 1

HCO B 3 May 1962R ARC BREAKS—MISSED WITHHOLDS, 2

All ARC breaks stem from missed withholds, 2
Picking up missed withholds keeps pc in session, 2
Pc manifestations cured by asking for missed withholds, 3
Missed withhold commands, 4

HCO B 28 June 1962R DIRTY NEEDLES—HOW TO SMOOTH OUT NEEDLES, 6

Reasons for dirty needles, 6

HCO B 12 Sept. 1962R SECURITY CHECKS AGAIN, 8

Security Check by rock slam, 8

HCO B 8 Nov. 1962R SOMATICS—HOW TO TELL TERMINALS AND OPPOSITION TERMINALS, 10

Definitions of important terms, 10
Testing for the character of an item, 12
Ways of asking for terminal and opposition terminal, 12
Using Tiger Drill buttons, 12
The line plot, 13

HCO B 30 Dec. 1962R ROUTINES 2-12 & 2-10—CASE ERRORS—POINTS OF GREATEST IMPORTANCE, 14

Auditing errors, 14
The errors of Routine Two, 15
Auditor responsibility, 16
Duration of process, 16
No auditing, 16
Failure to save records, 17
Failing to find R/Ses on List One, 17
Representing an R/Sing item, 18
Oppose RIs, 18
Incomplete lists, 19
Wrong way oppose, test for, 20
Lists that won’t complete, 20
Long long lists, 21
Case remedy, 23

HCO B 8 June 1963R THE TIME TRACK AND ENGRAM RUNNING BY
CHAINS—BULLETIN 2—HANDLING THE TIME TRACK, 25

Reasons why some cannot run engrams on pcs, 25
Three ways to move a time track, 25
Charge and the time track, 27
State of Case Scale, 27
Charge, 28
Auditing theory of charge erasure, 29

HCO B 10 Mar. 1964 BASIC AUDITING—NON-READING METERS—
METER FLINCH, 31

Reasons a pc does not read on a meter, 31
Invalidation read of a GPM, 32
Pc who is consistently flinching, 32

HCO PL 12 Oct. 1966 EXAMINATIONS, 32

Students are not to discuss examinations with other students, 32
Line for student complaints concerning an examination, 32

HCO B 23 Aug. 1968 ARBITRARIES, 33

Effect of entering any arbitrary into any line, 33
What you know when the needle on an E-Meter read, 33
Standard tech has absolutely no arbitraries, 33

HCO B 23 Aug. 1968 WORKABILITY OF TECH, 34

Quality of technology, 34
Percentage of successes using standard tech actions, 34

HCO B 26 Aug. 1968 THE CLASS VIII COURSE, 35

What the Class VIII Course will teach, 35
What the course will include, 35

HCO B 10 Sept. 1968 CASE SUPERVISOR—ADMIN IN AUDITING, 36

Case Supenisor being presented with lousy admin, 36
No report gets liability, 36
Case Supenisor does not see the pc, 36
Case Supenisor does not talk to the auditor, 36

HCO B 10 Sept. 1968 FLUNKS, 37

Most common goofs made by auditors, 37

HCO B 10 Sept. 1968 “STANDARD” TECH DATA, 38

Green Form is done by handling every read, 38
Random auditing should not be done, 38
Ruds and reads, 38 False reads in ruds, 38

HCO B 10 Sept. 1968 VALENCE SHIFTER, 39

List question, 39
“Detached” lower grade case, 39

HCO B 11 Sept. 1968 C/S INSTRUCTIONS, 40

Standard action for an old-timer, 40
Standard one-time action for a Section III OT, 40

HCO B 15 Sept. 1968 PC LOOKING OR CONTINUALLY FEELING TIRED, 41

M/W/H gives a nattery critical aspect, 41
Handling a pc who feels tired, 41

HCO B 15 Sept. 1968 THE FIRST THING I LEARNED ABOUT TEACHING A
CLASS VIII AUDITOR, 41

Auditor who thinks he can fly before he can even creep, 41

HCO B 16 Sept. 1968 END PHENOMENA, 42

Phenomena of pc occurs after phenomena of meter, 42
Precise instant to tell the pc it’s an F/N, 42
Cutting the pc’s comm, 42

HCO B 22 Sept. 1968 REHABS, 43

Rehabbing no longer used processes, 43
Count the number of times released, 43

HCO B 23 Sept. 1968 VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OF LISTING AND NULLING, 44

Rudiments are usually not necessary in correcting a list, 44
How to correct a list, 44
Four basic reasons for a wrong list, 44

HCO B 26 Sept. 1968 THE STUDY OF THE “WELL DONE” LRH C/S
FOLDER, 44

Difference between making auditors and not making auditors, 44

HCO B 29 Sept. 1968 LIST CORRECTION, 45

Questions for correcting a recently done list, 45

HCO B 4 Oct. 1968 ADVANCE COURSES, 46

Issuing an Advance Course to anyone requires C/S OK, 46
Running Advance Courses on people with out ruds, 46

HCO B 4 Oct. 1968 PRE-OTS, 46

Putting in Suppress and false reads on each rud, 46

HCO B 5 Oct. 1968 ARC BREAK NEEDLE, 47

F/N with bad indicators is an ARC break needle, 47
Real F/N has one or more GIs, 47

HCO B 21 Oct. 1968R FLOATING NEEDLE, 48

Floating needle defined, 48
Indicating floating needle, 48
ARC break needle, 48

HCO B 1 Nov. 1968 OVERT-MOTIVATOR DEFINITIONS, 49

Definitions of overt, motivator and overt of omission, 49
False motivators, 49
False overts, 49
Cases that go into imaginary cause, 49

HCO B 5 Dec. 1968 UNRESOLVING CASES, 50

Mechanism of PTS, 50
Why the PTS case does not respond to processing, 50

HCO B 15 Dec. 1968RA L4BRA—FOR ASSESSMENT OF ALL LISTING ERRORS, 51

HCO B 2 Apr. 1969RA DIANETIC ASSISTS, 55

Medical treatment of “insanity,” 55
Touch Assist, 55
Contact Assist, 55
Auditing Assist, 55
Handling of illness, 56
Physically sick persons divide into two classes, 56
Dianetic auditing speeds up healing from illness or injury, 57
First research on Dianetics, 57

HCO B 17 Apr. 1969R DIANETIC CASE SUPERVISION, 58

Dianetics is done differently than Scientology, 58
Keep Dianetics to Dianetics, 58


HCO B 23 Apr. 1969RA DIANETICS—BASIC DEFINITIONS, 59

Erasure, lock, secondary and engram defined, 59
Cause of psychosomatic ills, 59
Somatic and misemotion defined, 60
Pc who is ill needs Dianetics, 60
Run what is offered, don’t force the pc, 60
Time track, pleasure moment, black field and invisible field defined, 61
Key-out vs. erasure, 61
EP of a chain and calling F/Ns in Dianetics, 62
Multiple illness, 62
Chain, automatic bank, basic, unburdening, basic basic, valence and ally defined, 62
What assess means in Dianetics, 63

HCO B 24 Apr. 1969RA DIANETIC USE, 64

Illegal to cure illness, 64
Dianetics used for pastoral counseling is completely legal, 64
Correct procedure for ill pcs wanting auditing, 65
Examples of use of Dianetics, 65
Dianetics and Scientology, 66

HCO B 24 Apr. 1969R DIANETIC RESULTS, 68

Dianetics vs. Scientology, 68
Dianetic results are a well body and a being happy with it, 68
Scientology results are a free, powerful and immortal being, 68

HCO B 26 Apr. 1969R SOMATICS, 69

Chains are held together by one similar awareness, 69
Never assess medical terms or symptoms, 69
Landing the real engram every time using preassessment procedure, 70

HCO B 28 Apr. 1969R HIGH TA IN DIANETICS, 71

High TA in Dianetics means an engram too late on the chain to erase is in restimulation, 71
TA behavior on engram chains, 71

HCO B 7 May 1969R FLOATING NEEDLE, 72

Floating needle defined, 72
Indicating floating needle, 72

HCO B 8 May 1969 IMPORTANT STUDY DATA, 73

Number of times over the materials equals certainty and results, 73

HCO B 8 May 1969R TEACHING THE DIANETICS COURSE, 74

Principles of teaching Dianetics auditors, 74

HCO B 9 May 1969RA CASE SUPERVISING NEW ERA DIANETICS
FOLDERS, 75

R3RA exactly followed gives uniform results, 75
Dianetic auditor requirements, 75
Dianetic errors, 76

HCO B 11 May 1969R METER TRIM CHECK, 77

Meter trim check procedure, 77

HCO B 18 May 1969R ERASURE, 78

Erase a picture, not only the somatic, 78
What erasure depends on, 78

HCO B 23 May 1969R AUDITING OUT SESSIONS—NARRATIVE VERSUS
SOMATIC CHAINS, 79

Running a session out using Narrative R3RA, 79

HCO B 28 May 1969RA HOW NOT TO ERASE, 80

Grinding in Dianetics, 80
Forcing the pc to go earlier than basic on the chain, 80
Basic facts concerning erasure, 80
Asking “solid or erasing,” 80
Blowing an engram by inspection, 81
There’s no substitution for actually understanding what’s going on, 81
Earlier beginning, 81

HCO B 28 June 1969RA C/S—HOW TO CASE SUPERVISE DIANETICS FOLDERS, 82

Four possible actions for a New Era Dianetics C/S to take, 82
Two types of cases, 83
Dianetic “oddity” case, 83
Roller-coaster after Dianetic auditing, 84
Sick pcs are sent directly to a medico, 84
Handling the “insane” pc, 84
C/S procedure on a New Era Dianetics folder, 84
Auditing result is the result of a team, 85

HCO B 17 July 1969RB NEW ERA DIANETICS COMMAND TRAINING
DRILLS, 86

TR 100: Preassessment Procedure on a Doll, 87
TR 100-A: Preassessing a Doll Coached, 87
TR 101: R3RA to a Wall, 88
TR 102: Auditing a Doll, 88
TR 103: Auditing on a Doll Coached, 89
TR 104: R3RA Coached and Bullbaited, 89

HCO B 19 July 1969RA DIANETICS AND ILLNESS, 91

Dianetics forbidden on Clears and OTs, 91
Illnesses can be physical; if so medical action is the first action, 91
Illness is a composite somatic, 92
Handling a continual or recurring illness, 92

HCO B 21 July 1969 ONE-HAND ELECTRODES, 93

One-hand electrode hides floating needles, 93

HCO B 22 July 1969R AUDITING SPEED, 94

Failed sessions caused by lack of speed, 94
Fast pcs require fast auditors, 94

HCO B 24 Jub 1969R SERIOUSLY ILL PCS, 95

Medical examination, 95
Medical care, 95
Dianetic auditing, 95

HCO B 2 Aug. 1969R “LX” LISTS, 96

The three “LX” Lists, 96
End phenomena, 96
Use of lists, 97

HCO B 3 Aug. 1969R LX2—EMOTIONAL ASSESSMENT LIST, 98

HCO B 9 Aug. 1969R LX1 (CONDITIONS), 99

HCO B 9 Aug. 1969RA CASE FOLDER ANALYSIS, NEW ERA
DIANETICS, 100

The nine things that can go wrong in a New Era Dianetics session, 100
Pc repair, 101
Out ruds, 101
Handling of physically ill pcs, 102
Special cases, 102
Original Assessment Form, 102
Pcs who go exterior in Dianetics, 103

HCO B 17 Oct. 1969RA DRUGS, ASPIRIN AND TRANQUILIZERS, 104

Actions of aspirin and other pain depressants, 104
Drugs make auditing very difficult, 105
Cycle of drug restimulation of pictures, 105
Drugs chemically inhibit the creation of mental image pictures but inhibit as well the erasure, 105
Drug taker applying for auditing, 105
What a full drug handling program includes, 106

HCO B 5 Nov. 1969R LX3 (ATTITUDES), 107

HCO B 15 Nov. 1969R CASE SUPERVISION—AUDITING AND RESULTS, 108

New Era Dianetics results, 108
Major errors of New Era Dianetics, 108
New Era Dianetics auditing is so simple that it demonstrates cleanly whether the person can audit or not, 108
Value of being a proven Dianetic auditor, 108

HCO B 23 Nov. 1969RB STUDENT RESCUE INTENSIVE, 110

Student Rescue Intensive steps, 110
Dianetic Student Rescue Intensive steps, 111
Promoting Student Rescue Intensives, 111
When a Student Rescue Intensive is run, 111

HCO B 21 Dec. 1969 SOLO AUDITING AND R6EW, 112

Troubles on Solo courses, 112
Solo Course R6EW requisites, 113

HCO B 27 Feb. 1970 GROUP ENGRAM PROCESS, 114

Steps of Group Engram Process, 114

HCO B 11 Mar. 1970 IMPORTANT NOTE ON GROUP ENGRAM
INTENSIVE, 115

Complete an auditing cycle once begun, 115

HCO B 15 Mar. 1970 DOUBLE FOLDER DANGER, 115

Solo and auditing folder must be to hand when C/Sing, 115
C/S only with all folders to hand, 115

C/S Series 12RA
HCO B 25 June 1970RA GLOSSARY OF C/S TERMS, 116

Recovery Program, 116
Progress Program, 116
Advance Program, 116
Expanded Lower Grades, 116
Dianetic Clear, 117
Classification Chart, 117
Quickie Grades, 117
Dianetic pcs, 117

C/S Series 13RA
HCO B 30 June 1970RA VIII ACTIONS, 118

“Old” processes are not cancelled by new ones, 118
Basics are not cancelled by later developments, 118
VIII auditing, 119
Resistive cases, 119
When to use GF 40, 120
Purpose and validity of OT IV Rundown, 120
Case Supervisor actions, 121

HCO B 15 July 1970R UNRESOLVED PAINS, 122

Two reasons for pain not resolved on Dianetics, 122
The answer to a persistent or recurring somatic, 122
Toothache, 123

C/S Series 15R
HCO B 16 Aug. 1970R GETTING THE F/N TO EXAMINER, 124

Unflat engram chains and high TA, 124
Causes and solutions for high TA at Exam after F/N in session, 124
How to program a pc who has a chronic somatic, 125
Dianetic pc pattern at Examiner, 125
High TA and illness, 126
Low TA and exams, 126

HCO B 11 Sept. 1970 SOLO ASSISTS, 127

Actions a Solo auditor may not do, 127
Progress and advance actions may not be done Solo, 127

C/S Series 18R
HCO B 11 Sept. 1970R CHRONIC SOMATIC, DIANETIC HANDLING OF, 127

Dianetic handling of chronic somatic is given in C/S Series 15, 127

C/S Series 29R
HCO B 8 Mar. 1971R CASE ACTIONS, OFF LINE, 128

Life knocking ruds out faster than they can be audited in, 128
Pc physically ill before next session, 128
Self-auditing, 128
Coffee shop auditing, 128
Touch and Contact Assists interrupting a general course of auditing, often to no F/N, 128
Study rundowns, 129
Illegal patch-ups, 129
People talking about their cases, 129
Advanced Course material insecurity, 129
Illegal drug use, 129

HCO B 27 Mar. 1971RA DIANETIC ERASURE, 130

Dianetic errors that prevent erasure, 130
Running a non-reading item, 130
How to handle high TA at session start, 130
Running a narrative item, 130
Handling a pc who has exteriorized but hasn’t had an Interiorization RD, 130
Failing to ask for DEF again when the pc says “It’s erased” but TA is still high, 130
Not asking for an earlier incident, 130
Auditing a pc under protest will cause the TA to stay up and no F/N and erasure, 131
Ending off a chain or engram at the first sight of an F/N, 131

C/S Series 33RA-1
HCO B 5 Apr. 1971 TRIPLE AND QUAD RERUNS, 132

Bypassed flows and mass, 132
The source of high TA, 132

Liability of rehabs, 132
Massy thetans, 132
Getting in all flows, 133
High TA, 133
Pc not in trouble, 133
Pc in trouble, 134
Running Zero Flows, 134
Getting in Zero Flows—rehab or run, 134
Results of All Flows Rundown, 134

HCO B 11 Apr. 1971RC L3RF—DIANETICS AND INT RD REPAIR LIST, 135

C/S Series 36RC
HCO B 21 Apr. 1971RC DIANETICS, 141

Why the TRs exist, 141
TRs are for use in the session itself, 141
How to rehab a Dianetic chain, 141
Handling flubbed chains, 142
Using the new L3RE, 142
Erased chains can be overrun, 143
Firefights between auditor and pc, 143
Use Quads on new, never audited before pcs, 143
C/S responsibility, 144
Putting a pc at risk, 144
Introducing Full Flow Dianetics, 144

HCO B 26 Apr. 1971 SOLO COGNITIONS, 145

What cognitions in Solo auditing depend upon, 145

C/S Series 41RA
HCO B 9 June 1971RA C/S TIPS, 146

Out lists handled before ruds, 146
No read auditors, 146
Cramming on flubs, 146
Correct use of R-Factors, 147
Mixing starts of sessions, 147
High TA and ARC breaks, 147
Low TA quits, 147
Exam F/Ns after flubs, 147
C/S is handling cases on the via of an auditor, 148
Higher levels do not solve lower level failures, 148
C/S expertise, 148

Word Clearing Series ERA
HCO B 29 June 1971RA STEPS TO SPEED STUDENT PRODUCT FLOW, 149

Supervising at a below F/N level, 149
Steps for handling non-F/Ning students, 149

C/S Series 49RB
HCO B 5 July 1971RB ASSISTS, 150

Three types of assists, 150
Contact Assist, 150
Dianetic Assist, 150
Touch Assist, 151
How to audit an unconscious pc, 151
Assist rules, 151

C/S Series 51R
HCO B 17 July 1971R OUT OF VALENCE, 152

OCA/APA graph drops explained, 152
How to handle an out of valence pc, 152

HCO B 23 Jub 1971R ASSISTS, 153

Assist EP, 153
Injury Rundown, 153
Pc running a temperature, 153
Temperature Assist: Version A, 153
Temperature Assist: Version B. 154

C/S Series 54RA
New Era Dianetics Series 8R
HCO B 28 July 1971RA DIANETICS, BEGINNING A PC ON, 155

Begin Dianetics with the Original Assessment Sheet, 155
What Dianetics handles and how to handle it with Dianetics, 155

HCO B 16 Aug. 1971R TRAINING DRILLS REMODERNIZED, 157

Importance of TRs, 157
OT TR 0: Operating Thetan Confronting, 157
TR 0: Confronting Preclear, 158
TR 0: Bullbait, Confronting Bullbaited, 158
TR 1: Dear Alice, 159
TR 2: Acknowledgements, 159
TR 2t/2: Half Acks, 160
TR3: Duplicative Questions, 160
TR 4: Preclear Originations, 162

HCOB 8 Sept. 1971R CASE SUPERVISOR ACTIONS, 163

Class VIII Case Supervisor actions, 163

C/S Series 59R
HCOB 14 Sept. 1971R DIANETIC LIST ERRORS, 192

Dianetic list of somatics, pains, emotions, and attitudes can act as a list under the meaning of the Laws of Listing and Nulling, 192
List errors are corrected by L4BRA, 192
Points a C/S must be alert to regarding listing, 192

HCO B 25 Sept. 1971RB TONE SCALE IN FULL, 193

Tone Scale expanded, 193
Know to Mystery Scale, 193

HCO B 24 Oct. 1971R FALSE TA, 194

Consequences of false TA, 194
E-Meter improperly trimmed gives a false TA position, 194
E-Meter discharged gives false TA, 195
One-hand electrode, 195
Moist hands give low TA, 195
Dry hands give high TA, 196
Arthritic hands give high TA, 196
Slack grip, 196
Can size, 196
Cold pc, 196
Late at night a pc’s TA may be very high, 197
Rings on the pc’s hands must always be removed, 197
Floating TA, 197
Rusty corroded cans, 197
Tight shoes, 197

HCO B 12 Nov. 1971RA FALSE TA ADDITION, 198

Cold cans, 198
Footplates, 198
Pcs who falsify TA, 198


HCO B 15 Feb. 1972R FALSE TA ADDITION 2, 199

Wrong ways to get a pc to read between 2.0 and 3.0 on an E-Meter, 199
Commonest sources of low and high TA, 199

HCO B 18 Feb. 1972R FALSE TA ADDITION 3, 200

The honesty of the auditor determines his results, 200
Low TAs, 200

HCO PL 19 Mar. 1972 C/SING OR AUDITING WITHOUT FOLDER STUDY, 202

C/S and auditor penalties, 202
Payment of bonuses to C/Ses and auditors, 202

HCO PL 4 Apr. 1972R ETHICS AND STUDY TECH, 203

Basic Why of the majority of cases of post non-performance, 203
Ethics actions for violations of study tech and Word Clearing tech, 203
Axiom 28 (amended), 204

LRH ED 176 INT AUDITOR RECOVERY, 205

Recovering auditors who have left but are still in the area, 205
Handling auditors who want to leave the org, 205
Handling auditors who are not getting out their hours, 205

Executive Series 12
HCO PL 3 May 1972R ETHICS AND EXECUTIVES, 207

Danger Rundown, 3 May PL, 207
Definition of executive, 207
Responsibility of executives to handle out-ethics, 207
Ethics and organizations, 207
Examples of ethics offenses, 208
Technical aspect of out-ethics, 208
Danger Rundown steps, 209

C/S Series 81RA
HCO B 16June 1972RA AUDITOR’S RIGHTS MODIFIED, 213

Major Why of falling hours, incomplete programs and other confusions, 213
Auditor’s right to choose pcs modified, 213
“Dog pcs” are problems in repair, 213
Stats of C/Ses and auditors, D of P and Dir of Tech Services, 214
The road to truth is begun with honesty, 214

HCO B 11 July 1973RB ASSIST SUMMARY, 215

Giving assists to Clears, OTs and Dianetic Clears, 215
Medical examination and treatment and assists, 216
Causes of predisposition, precipitation and prolongation of injury and illness, 216
Physical facts of injuries, illnesses and stresses, 216
Don’t neglect giving assists, 217
Don’t handle injuries with Touch Assists only, 217
Actions of ministers, 217
Assist summary steps, 217
Drug “five days” rule need not apply to assists, 218
Assist given over drugs, how to handle later, 218
Pc illness during grade auditing, 218
There is no conflict between minister and medical doctor, 220

HCO PL 16 Nov. 1973 STUDY TECH & POST, 221

Penalties for violations of study tech, 221

HCO B 23 Nov. 1973RA DRY AND WET HANDS MAKE FALSE TA, 222

TA depends on normally moist hands, 222
Use of hand cream for dry hands, 222
Use of anti-perspirants for wet hands, 223
F/N and false TA, 223
Conditions that make an auditor mess up a pc’s TA, 223

Expanded Dianetics Series 21R
HCO B 28 Mar. 1974R EXPANDED DIANETICS DEVELOPMENTS SINCE
THE ORIGINAL LECTURES—CANCELLATION, 224

Expanded Dianetics Series 22RA
HCO B 23 Apr. 1974RA EXPANDED DIANETICS REQUISITES, 225

Ex Dn set-up checklist, 225

C/S Series 93RA
HCO B 31 Aug. 1974RA NEW GRADE CHART, 226

Changes in the Grade Chart, 226
Drug Rundown and Life Repair, 226
Quad vs. Expanded Grades, 226
Expanded Dianetics, 226
Grade II, 227
Solo set-ups, 227
The full list of grades showing where the various RDs now offered fit, 227
The Grade Chart and programming, 228

HCO B 1 Nov. 1974RA ROCK SLAMS AND ROCK SLAMMERS, 229

Definition of rock slam, 229
Rock slammers, 229
Checklist to assist identification of R/Sers, 230
Pcs who R/S, 231
Rock slammer is different from someone with a rock slam, 231

HCO B 16 Jan. 1975R PAST LIFE REMEDIES, 232

Imaginary incidents, 232
Another Past Life Remedy, 232
Drugs can prevent going backtrack, 233
Pc in recent shock of having died won’t go backtrack, 233
Remedy for invalidation of past lives, 233
Children as cases, 233
Unburdening cases of children, 234
How to handle pc stuck in upsetting incidents from movies or books, 234
Scientology Review action to make pc go backtrack, 234

HCO B 23 Apr. 1975R VANISHING CREAM AND FALSE TA, 235

Vanishing cream doesn’t work, 235
Hand creams for dry hands, 235
A note on footplates, 235
False TA handling, 235
False TA must be handled before session, 235

HCO B 10 Aug. 1976R R/SES, WHAT THEY MEAN, 238

Definition of rock slam, 238
“Rock slam” can be caused by rings on the pc’s fingers, 238
Always report a rock slam in the auditing report, 239
Recognizing a rock slam, 239
Two things underlie insanity, 240
One rock slam doesn’t make a psychotic, 240
When R/Ses most easily turn on, 240
How you can turn off an R/S and mistakenly think it is handled, 241
What does handle an R/S, 241
Expanded Dianetics handling of R/Ses, 241
What to do when you see an R/S, 242

HCO B 20 Oct. 1976 PTS DATA, 244

What complete PTS handling would consist of, 244

HCO PL 20 Oct. 1976R PTS DATA, 245

What complete PTS handling would consist of, 245

HCO B 20 Oct. 1976 PTS HANDLING, 246

PTS handlings that “didn’t work” or “still PTS,” 246
First pilot, 246
Second pilot, 246
False PTSness, 247

HCO PL 23 Oct. 1976 INTERNESHIP AND HGC, 247
[CANCELLED]

HGC auditor must have done the interneships for his class, 247

C/S Series 96R
HCO B 24 Oct. 1976R DELIVERY REPAIR LISTS, 248

The “prepared lists” system, 248
The only reason for prepared lists not working, 248
Qual “OK to Audit” Checksheets, 248
A C/S must know what lists to use, 249
Prepared lists for preclears, 249
Prepared lists for students, 250
Prepared lists for staffs, 251
Confidential and AO lists, 251
Repair List for Prepared Lists, 252
Word lists for prepared lists, 252
Translated lists for non-English speaking orgs, 252

C/S Series 97
HCO B 26 Oct. 1976 AUDITING REPORTS, FALSIFYING OF, 254

Ways of falsifying an auditing report, 254
Spotting falsified auditing reports, 254
Penalty for knowingly falsifying an auditing report, 255

C/S Series 98
HCO B 28 Oct. 1976 AUDITING FOLDERS, OMISSIONS IN
COMPLETENESS, 256

Commonest omissions from folders, 256
Committee of Evidence for loss of a pc’s folder and omissions from a pc’s folder, 257

HCO B 6 Dec. 1976 ILLEGAL PCS, ACCEPTANCE OF—HIGH CRIME
BULLETIN, 259

Committee of Evidence for C/Sing or accepting for processing an illegal pc, 259
Who is an illegal pc, 259
Special petition may be made to the Guardian Office, 259

C/S Series 99RA
HCO B 10 Dec. 1976RA SCIENTOLOGY F/N AND TA POSITION, 260

Correct procedure for out of range F/Ns, 260
Sample clean up C/S for pcs who have had F/Ns disregarded or bypassed, 261
Dianetic F/Ns, 262
Power F/Ns, 262

Word Clearing Series 55
HCO B 10 Jan. 1977 HOW TO WIN WITH WORD CLEARING, 263

TRs and metering apply to Word Clearing, 263

The only times Word Clearing would seem to fail, 263
Remedy for being word cleared on an area without a resolution of the original difficulty, 263

HCO PL 10 Jan. 1977 ETHICS AND WORD CLEARING, 264

Court of Ethics for faulty Word Clearing, 264

HCO B 13 Jan. 1977RA HANDLING A FALSE TA, 265

Examples of auditors mishandling false TA, 265
False TA is in the physical universe not the pc’s think or bank, 266
Basics behind finding a false TA and remedying it, 266

HCO B 21 Jan. 1977RA FALSE TA CHECKLIST, 267

HCO B 22 Jan. 1977 IN-TECH, THE ONLY WAY TO ACHIEVE IT, 273

The dominating factor of tech being in, 273

HCO B 24 Jan. 1977 TECH CORRECTION ROUND-UP, 274

Issues by others that alter-ised tech, 274
List of incorrect procedures or data found to have been issued, 274
When OT VIII will be released, 287

HCO B 26 Jan. 1977 FOOTPLATES USE FORBIDDEN, 288

Use of footplates is forbidden, 288
Issues that cover how to handle a false TA, 288

HCO B 27 Jan. 1977 AUDITOR RECOVERY, 289

HCO B 27 Jan. 1977 Auditor Recovery is cancelled, 289

HCO B 30 Jan. 1977 FALSE TA DATA, 290

List of references on false TA handling, 290

C/S Series 100
HCO B 5 Feb. 1977 JOKERS AND DEGRADERS, 291

People who do not understand something occasionally make fun of it, 291
Categories jokers or degraders fall into, 291
The joker is advertising his symptoms, 292

HCO B 17 Feb. 1977R COURSE NECESSITIES, 293

List of materials added to checksheets, 293

HCO B 24 Feb. 1977 EXPANDED DIANETICS CASES, 294

One does fully and completely complete Expanded Dianetics cases, 294

HCO B 1 Mar. 1977 CANCELLATION OF INTEGRITY PROCESSING
HCOBs, 295

List of cancelled Integrity Processing HCOBs, 295

HCO B 1 Mar. 1977 CONFESSIONAL FORMS, 296

Never subtract anything from a Confessional, 296
Writing up an additional list, 296

HCO B 1 Mar. 1977 FORMULATING CONFESSIONAL QUESTIONS, 297

What withholds add up to, 297
Straightening out somebody on a moral code, 297
Formula for making up a Confessional, 298
Rule for finding a fruitful area for a Confessional, 299

HCO B 1 Mar. 1977 A VALID CONFESSIONAL, 300

Reissue of a circa 1965 Confessional, 300

HCO B 8 Mar. 1977R POWER CHECKLIST, 302

C/S checklist on folders of preclears onto Power, 302
Grade Chart points for giving Ex Dn, 303
Expanded Grades is not a requisite for Power, 303

Expanded Dianetics Series 25
HCO B 16 Mar. 1977 THE GAMBLER, 304

An obsessive gambler is a psychotic, 304
Life isn’t real to a psychotic gambler, 304

HCO B 27 Mar. 1977 PROGRAMMING OF EXPANDED DIANETICS, 305

Expanded Dianetics audits the pc at cause, 305
PTS handling and Expanded Dianetics, 305
Expanded Dianetics should be a fully completed cycle of action and not bit and piece, 305

HCO B 5 Apr. 1977 EXPANDED GRADES, 307

When Expanded Grades can be done, 307
A typical and ideal program for a pc, 307
Expanded Grades is not a requisite for Power but Quad Grades are, 307

HCO B 11 Apr. 1977 LIST ERRORS—CORRECTION OF, 308

Verifying a list, 308
Nulling a list, 308
Reconstructing a list, 308
Self-listing, 308
List correction blow-up, 308
Lists not reading, 309
Use of L4BRA, 309
Handling an L4BRA, 309
Do it right, 309

HCO B 17 Apr. 1977 RECURRING WITHHOLDS AND OVERTS, 310

Definition of recurring withhold or overt, 310
Handling recurring withholds and overts, 310

HCO B 7 May 1977 LONG DURATION SEC CHECKING, 311

The person giving off very shallow overts, 311
The soft-spoken quiet “inoffensive” person, 311

HCO B 9 May 1977 FOREWORD OF EXPANDED DIANETICS COURSE, 312

Types of cases Expanded Dianetics handles, 312
Corrections to Expanded Dianetics, 312
DMSMH and Expanded Dianetics, 312

Expanded Dianetics Series 29
HCO B 9 May 1977 PSYCHOSIS, MORE ABOUT, 313

Below all psychotic conduct lies an evil purpose, 313
A true psychotic can be brilliant or stupid, 313
Man is basically good, 313
15% to 25% of living human beings are psychotic, 314

HCO B 31 May 1977 LSD—YEARS AFTER THEY HAVE “COME OFF OF”
LSD, 315

Characteristics of persons who have been on LSD, 315
The LSD apparently stays in the system, 315
Dealing with an LSD case, 315

HCO B 14 June 1977 PAID COMPLETIONS SIMPLIFIED, 316

Points for a major training service, 316
Points for a major processing service, 316
Points for minor (Division 6) services, 317
Bonus points, 317
Points for package sales, 317
Penalties, 317
Verification of paid comps and bonus computations, 318

HCO B 26 Sept. 1977 ART AND COMMUNICATION, 319

Two-way communication and art, 319
True art always elicits a contribution from those who view or hear or experience it, 319
Innovation and originality, 319
Invalidative criticism, 320
Constructive criticism, 320
“Authorities” and art, 320

HCO B 4 Dec. 1977 CHECKLIST FOR SETTING UP SESSIONS AND AN E-METER, 322

HCO B 6 Feb. 1978R LSD AND THE SWEAT PROGRAM, 324

Who is an LSD case, 324
Theory of the Sweat Program, 324
Vitamins and minerals, 325
Diet, 325
Exercise, 325
The Sweat Program steps, 325
Results of the Sweat Program, 326

HCO B 6 Feb. 1978R-1 LSD AND THE SWEAT PROGRAM—ADDITION, 327

Auditing of the pc while on the LSD Sweat Program, 327
Lack of a Sweat Program doesn’t stop other auditing actions, 327
Sweat Program can also be done before a DRD, 327

HCO B 26 Feb. 1978 INTERNESHIPS VS. COURSES, 328

Courses and interneships are two separate and distinct activities, 328
Fast courses, 328
Fast interneships, 328
Interneships are not used to teach the course again, 328
Preventing interneships from becoming a long haul, 329

HCO PL 10 Mar. 1978 HGC PC APPLICATION FORM, 330

HCO B 18 Mar. 1978 POSTULATES AND ENGRAMS, 332
[CANCELLED]

What a full Dianetic EP consists of, 332
Asking the pc if he postulated anything in the basic incident, 332

HCO B 19 Mar. 1978 QUICKIE OBJECTIVES, 333

Tendency to quickie Objectives, 333
The only valid handling of Objectives, 333
Handling auditors who quickie Objectives, 333

Word Clearing Series 59R
HCO B 23 Mar. 1978R WORD CLEARING DEFINITIONS, 334

What you clear when clearing a definition of a word, 334

You want the definition which applies to the text you have been reading, 334
Definition of a cleared word, 334

Word Clearing Series 58
HCO B 27 Mar. 1978 ETHICS PENALTY FOR WORD CLEARERS, 335

The reason Word Clearers cease to be Word Clearers, 335
The reason Word Clearing drops out in orgy 335
Penalty for a Word Clearer accumulating misunderstood words, 335

HCO B 3 Apr. 1978 TR DEBUG ASSESSMENT, 336

List to find the cause of a student’s bog on doing TRs, 336

HCO B 8 Apr. 1978 AN F/N IS A READ, 338
[CANCELLED]

When an F/N is a read, 338
You can get four F/Ns off the same item, 338
An F/Ning assessment does not mean that the assessment is now all reading, 338

HCO B 30 Apr. 1978 THE SWEAT PROGRAM FURTHER DATA, 339

Overweight, underweight and normal weight people, 339
Handling if a person is having trips during the program, 339
The best type of shoes to use for jogging, 340
Calcium and magnesium supplements can be taken, 340
Green vegetables are okay during the program, 340
Predigested protein is not the only protein that need be taken, 340
Salt and potassium, 340
Doing this program gradiently is very important, 341
Program oddity, 341
EP of the Sweat Program, 341

Cramming Series 17
HCO B 1 May 1978 TECH QUALITY, 342

Cramming should exist in every org, 342
TRs and metering will go a long ways to improve tech quality, 342

HCO B 26 May 1978 DIANETICS: URGENT COMMAND CHANGE, 343

Dianetics is being run using the wrong commands, 343
Moving through the incident, 343
Returning the pc to the incident, 343
Getting the postulates in the basic incident, 343
Narrative handling of incidents, 344
Emphasis on the proper running of Dianetics, 344

Cramming Series 18R
HCO B 2 June 1978R CRAMMING REPAIR ASSESSMENT LIST, 345

History of the Cramming Repair List, 345
Theory and use of the Cramming Repair List, 345
Assessment questions, 346

HCO B 15 June 1978 URGENT IMPORTANT, 349

The key to Expanded Dianetics, 349
Getting down to the basic evil purposes of the case, 349

HCO B 18 June 1978 ROUTINE 3-R COMMAND CHANGE, 349

Flow One, Step One command change, 349

New Era Dianetics Series 4R
HCO B 18 June 1978R ASSESSMENT AND HOW TO GET THE ITEM, 350

The New Era Dianetics original assessment items, 350
Original item, 350
Preassessment, 350
Listing for running items, 351
Preassessment steps, 352
Preassessment item, 352
Running item, 353
Finding the next running item, 353
Commands for the Original Assessment Sheet, 353
Handling somatics, 353
Handling narratives, 354
Running narratives, 354
Narrative assessment commands, 354
Assessing by asking the question as a question, 355

New Era Dianetics Series 3
HCO B 19 June 1978 OBJECTIVE ARC, 356

Commands of Objective ARC, 356
End phenomena of Objective ARC, 356

New Era Dianetics Series 15
HCO B 20 June 1978 IDENTITY RUNDOWN, 357

Getting a pc into valence, 357
Procedure of Identity Rundown, 357
End phenomena of Identity Rundown, 357

New Era Dianetics Series 1
HCO B 21 June 1978 NEW ERA DIANETICS SERIES 1, 358

What New Era Dianetics is, 358
Student requirements for New Era Dianetics, 358

New Era Dianetics Series 2R
HCO B 22 June 1978R NEW ERA DIANETICS FULL PC PROGRAM
OUTLINE, 360

How Dianetics achieves its results, 360
End phenomena of Dianetic auditing, 360
New Era Dianetics full program outline, 360

New Era Dianetics Series 16R
HCO B 23 June 1978R PRECLEAR CHECKLIST, 365

Preclear Checklist is a Dianetic pc’s advanced program, 365
Preclear Checklist form, 365

New Era Dianetics Series 5R
HCO B 24 June 1978R ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT SHEET, 367

When is the Original Assessment Sheet done, 367
Who does the Original Assessment Sheet, 367
Purpose of Original Assessment Sheet, 367
How is the Original Assessment Sheet done, 367
Neatness of Original Assessment Sheet, 367
Where does the Original Assessment Sheet go when completed, 367
Original Assessment Sheet, 368

New Era Dianetics Series 6RA
HCO B 26 June 1978RA ROUTINE 3RA—ENGRAM RUNNING BY CHAINS, 380

Lessons on engram running, 380
Early engram running, 381
R3RA revised by steps, 381
R3RA commands, 382
Postulate off equals erasure, 384
Going earlier, 384
Bouncxers, 384
Flows 2, 3 and 0, 385
Narrative- R3RA, 385
Secondaries, 387
Auditor knowledge of commands, 387
Speed of commands, 388
Pc interest, 388
Last incident found, 388
Completing chains, 388
F/Ns, 388
Blowing by inspection, 388
Ending session, 389
Ending Dianetics, 389
Special New Era Dianetics Rundown for OTs, 389

New Era Dianetics Series BRA
HCO B 28 June 1978RA R3RA COMMANDS, 390

Short list on R3RA commands, 390
Postulate off equals erasure, 391
Going earlier, 392
Bouncers, 392
Flow 2, 3 and 0 commands, 392
Secondaries are run with the same commands as R3RA, 394

New Era Dianetics Series 14
HCO B 29 June 1978 DISABILITY RUNDOWN, 395

Procedure for Disability Rundown, 395
When the rundown is complete, 395

New Era Dianetics Series 13
HCO B 1 July 1978 THE DIANETIC PREPARED ASSESSMENT RUNDOWN—
ACTION FOURTEEN, 396

Locating items that can be run R3RA, 396
Early assessment procedures, 396
Steps of the Dianetic Prepared Assessment Rundown, 396

New Era Dianetics Series 11
HCO B 2 July 1978 DIANETIC STUDENT RESCUE INTENSIVE, 399

Steps of the Dianetic Student Rescue Intensive, 399
When the intensive should be concluded, 399

New Era Dianetics Series lOR
HCO B 3 July 1978R RELIEF RUNDOWN, 400

Procedure of the Relief Rundown, 400

New Era Dianetics Series 12R
HCO B 4 July 1978R SECOND ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT, 401

When the Second Original Assessment Sheet is done, 401
Theory and use of the Second Original Assessment Sheet, 401
Handling the items on the Second Original Assessment Sheet, 402

HCO B 7 July 1978 DIANETIC F/Ns, 403
[CANCELLED]

Calling F/Ns in R3RA, 403
EP of a chain in Dianetics, 403
F/Ns are disregarded in Power, 403

HCO B 9 July 1978R DIANETIC CS-1, 404

Theory and use of the Dianetic CS-1, 404
Dianetic CS- 1 procedure, 405
Some of the references the auditor should be very familiar with, 407
Definitions sheet, 408
Dianetic CS-1 Word List, 412

New Era Dianetics Series 4-1
HCO B 11 July 1978 THE PREASSESSMENT LIST, 414

HCO B 14 July 1978R TYPICAL DIANETIC CHAIN, 416

Example of how a typical Dianetic chain might run, 416

HCO B 14 July 1978R A TYPICAL NARRATIVE ITEM, 417

Example of how a typical narrative item might run, 417

HCO B 15 July 1978 SCIENTOLOGY AUDITING CS-1, 418

Theory and use of the Scientology CS-1, 418
Scientology CS-1 procedure, 419
Clearing commands, 421
Clearing words on correction lists, 421
Definitions sheet, 422

New Era Dianetics Series 17
HCO B 19 July 1978 DIANETIC PERSISTENT F/Ns, 427

What you can do in the case of Dianetic persistent F/Ns, 427

New Era Dianetics Series 18
HCO B 20 July 1978 AFTER THE FACT ITEMS, 428

Definition of “after the fact” running item, 428
Example of an “after the fact” running item, 428
How to handle “after the fact” running items, 428

HCO B 21 July 1978 WHAT IS A FLOATING NEEDLE? 429

Definition of a floating needle, 429

HCO B 22 July 1978 ASSESSMENT TRs, 430

The right way to do an assessment, 430
Assessing with a statement’s tone of voice, 430

C/S Series 101
HCO B 23 July 1978 LIST OF PERCEPTICS, 431

The 57 human perceptions, 431

HCO B 24 July 1978 DIANETIC REMEDIES, 433

Getting the pc to understand the commands and procedures of R3RA, 433
Pictures and Masses Remedy, 433
Automaticity of pictures, 434
Assessing for overts when pc goes anaten in session but there is no evidence of unflat chains, 435
Imaginary incidents, 435

HCO B 2 Aug. 1978 CANCELLATION OF ISSUES, 436

List of cancelled Dianetic HCOBs with references to where correct data can be obtained, 436

HCO B 5 Aug. 1978 INSTANT READS, 438

Correct definition of instant read, 438

HCO B 7 Aug. 1978 HAVINGNESS—FINDING AND RUNNING THE PC’S
HAVINGNESS PROCESS, 439
Final definition of Havingness, 439
What the position of a being on the Tone Scale is determined by, 439
Finding and running the pc’s Havingness Process, 440

HCO B 9 Aug. 1978 NEW ERA DIANETICS—A REQUISITE FOR EXPANDED DIANETICS, 441

New Era Dianetics full pc program must come before Expanded Dianetics, 441

HCO B 9 Aug. 1978 CLEARING COMMANDS, 442

Rules of clearing commands, 442
Violation of full and correct clearing of commands or assessment questions is an ethics offense, 444

HCO B 11 Aug. 1978 RUDIMENTS—DEFINITIONS AND PATTER, 445

What a rudiment is used for, 445
Getting the F/N, 445
Handling ARC breaks, 446
Handling present time problems, 447
Handling missed withholds, 448
Use of Suppress button in ruds, 449
Use of False button in ruds, 449
End phenomena, 449
High or low TA, 449
References to further data on rudiments, 449

HCOB 11 Aug. 1978 MODEL SESSION, 450

Setting up for the session, 450
Start of session, 450
Rudiments, 450
Major action of the session, 450
Havingness, 451
End of session, 451

HCOB 21 Aug. 1978 RUNNING FLOWS THAT WON’T ERASE, 452

Handling when a flow won’t erase in R3RA, 452

HCO B 26 Aug. 1978R MORE ON DRUGS, 453

The idea drug users are apparently sitting on, 453
Why Objectives work, 453
Effects of drugs, 453

HCO B 3 Sept. 1978 DEFINITION OF A ROCK SLAM, 454

The only valid definition of an R/S, 454
Definition of a dirty needle, 454
The difference between a rock slam and a dirty needle, 455

HCO B 5 Sept. 1978 ANATOMY OF A SERVICE FACSIMILE, 456

Definition of service facsimile, 456
How the service facsimile becomes fixed, 457
Right/wrong, dominate and survive, 457

HCO B 6 Sept. 1978 FOLLOWING UP ON DIRTY NEEDLES, 459

Definition of a dirty needle, 459
Causes of dirty needles, 459
Dirty needles and rock slams, 459
Don’t ignore dirty needles, 459

HCO B 6 Sept. 1978 SERVICE FACSIMILES AND ROCK SLAMS, 461

Service facsimile is a brother to R/Ses and evil intentions, 461
It isn’t actually a facsimile at all, 461
Rock slams and service facsimiles, 461
More than one service fac per pc, 462
Finding service facs, 462

HCO B 6 Sept. 1978 ROUTINE THREE SC-A—FULL SERVICE FACSIMILE HANDLING UPDATED WITH NEW ERA DIANETICS, 463

New echelon of service facsimile running, 463
Service facsimile handling revised by steps, 464
Full service facsimile procedure, 464
When listing for the service facsimile, 466
When running off the automaticity, 467
When to prepcheck, 467
Completing service facsimile handling with R3RA, 468
Ending service fac running, 468

HCO B 7 Sept. 1978R MODERN REPETITIVE PREPCHECKING, 469

Order of the 20 Prepcheck buttons, 469
Use of the buttons, 469
The only time Prepchecking cannot be done, 469
Prepcheck procedure, 470

HCO B 8 Sept. 1978 MINI LIST OF GRADE 0-IV PROCESSES, 471

Mini list of Grade 0-IV processes with references to what issues they appear in, 471

HCO B 10 Sept. 1978 NED HIGH CRIME, 473

Persons must be certificate trained on NED to run it, 473

HCO B 12 Sept. 1978 DIANETICS FORBIDDEN ON CLEARS AND OTS, 473

NED or any Dianetics is not run on Clears or above or on Dianetic Clears, 473
EP of the special NED Rundown for OTs, 473

HCO B 12 Sept. 1978 OVERRUN BY DEMANDING EARLIER THAN THERE
IS, 474

Overrun of basic, 474
Overrun of non-basic, 474
Dianetic auditor is not concerned with the amount of TA that he gets, 474
Effects of a lousy job of assessment, 475

HCO B 13 Sept. 1978 R3RA ENGRAM RUNNING BY CHAINS AND NARRATIVE R3RA—AN ADDITIONAL DIFFERENCE, 476

Asking for earlier beginning or earlier incident, 476
R3RA engram running by chains, 476
R3RA narrative running, 477

HCO B 13 Sept. 1978 CLEARS, OTS AND R/SES, 478

Clears or OTs who are R/Sing are not R/Sers, 478
NED Rundown for OTs can only be delivered at AOs and at Flag, 478

HCO PL 13 Sept. 1978 AN OLD POEM, 478

An old poem which has been newly adapted as policy, 478

HCO PL 15 Sept. 1978 CONFIDENTIALITY OF UPPER LEVEL
RUNDOWNS, 479

Rules to safeguard the materials of confidential rundowns and levels and to prevent their unauthorized use or misuse, 479

HCO B 16 Sept. 1978 POSTULATE OFF EQUALS ERASURE, 480

EP of a Dianetic chain is the postulate coming off, 480
Learn to recognize a postulate when you hear one, 480

LRH ED 298 INT A.D.28—THE YEAR OF TECHNICAL BREAKTHROUGHS, 482

NED vs. NED for OTs, 482
OT VIII, 482
End of Endless Drug Rundowns, 482
Training—fast courses, 483

HCO B 19 Sept. 1978 THE END OF ENDLESS DRUG RDS, 484
[REVISED]

Reason a Drug RD can not be run flat, 484
You can always find more drugs on the track, 484
Drug RD Repair List, 484

HCO B 19 Sept. 1978 THE END OF ENDLESS DRUG RUNDOWNS—DRUG
[REVISED] RUNDOWN REPAIR LIST, 485

HCO B 20 Sept. 1978 AN INSTANT F/N IS A READ, 487

Definition of instant F/N, 487
What a read means, 487
What an instant F/N on an item means, 487
The use of an F/N as a read, 488

HCO B 20 Sept. 1978 LX LIST HANDLING, 489

End phenomena of the LX Lists, 489
Procedure, 489
LX3 Attitudes, 489
LX2 Emotions, 490
LX1 Conditions, 490
220H, 490

New Era Dianetics Series 19
C/S Series 103
HCO B 20 Sept. 1978 NED AUDITOR ANALYSIS CHECKLIST, 492

Use of the NED Auditor Analysis Checklist, 492
When the C/S should order an auditor to have one, 492
How the checklist is done, 492
Parts of the checklist, 493























HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Washington, D.C.

HCO BULLETIN OF MAY 20, 1959
(Cancels bulletins of March 31, 1959, and April 17, 1959)

KNOW TO MYSTERY STRAIGHT WIRE FOR EXTREME CASES

The Know to Mystery Scale expanded:

Not Know
Know
Look
Emotion
Effort
Think
Symbols
Eat
Sex
Mystery
Wait
Unconsciousness

To assess a case on the lower rungs of processing, ask pc, against an E-Meter, what terminal could represent each of above, select that terminal (object or person, never a condition) which changes needle action most and run Overt-Withhold Straight Wire on it.

L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:mp

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 3 MAY 1962R
REVISED 5 SEPTEMBER 1978
Remimeo
(This Bulletin has been revised to correct
the definition of dirty needle.
Revision in this type style.)


ARC BREAKS

MISSED WITHHOLDS


(HOW TO USE THIS BULLETIN:

WHEN AN AUDITOR OR STUDENT HAS TROUBLE WITH AN “ARC BREAKY PC” OR NO GAIN, OR WHEN AN AUDITOR IS FOUND TO BE USING FREAK CONTROL METHODS OR PROCESSES TO “KEEP A PC IN SESSION,” THE HCO SEC, D OF T OR D OF P SHOULD JUST HAND A COPY OF THIS BULLETIN TO THE AUDITOR AND MAKE HIM OR HER STUDY IT AND TAKE AN HCO EXAM ON IT.)

After some months of careful observation and tests, I can state conclusively that:

ALL ARC BREAKS STEM FROM MISSED WITHHOLDS.

This is vital technology, vital to the auditor and to anyone who wants to live.

Conversely:

THERE ARE NO ARC BREAKS WHEN MISSED WITHHOLDS HAVE BEEN CLEANED UP.

By WITHHOLD is meant AN UNDISCLOSED CONTRA-SURVIVAL ACT.

By MISSED WITHHOLD is meant AN UNDISCLOSED CONTRA-SURVIVAL ACT WHICH HAS BEEN RESTIMULATED BY ANOTHER BUT NOT DISCLOSED.

This is FAR more important in an auditing session than most auditors have yet realized. Even when some auditors are told about this and shown it they still seem to miss its importance and fail to use it. Instead they continue to use strange methods of controlling the pc and oddball processes on ARC breaks.

This is so bad that one auditor let a pc die rather than pick up the missed withholds! So allergy to picking up missed withholds can be so great that an auditor has been known to fail utterly rather than do so. Only constant hammering can drive this point home. When it is driven home, only then can auditing begin to happen across the world; the datum is that important.

An auditing session is 50% technology and 50% application. I am responsible for the technology. The auditor is wholly responsible for the application. Only when an auditor realizes this can he or she begin to obtain uniformly marvellous results everywhere.

No auditor now needs “something else,” some odd mechanism to keep pcs in session.

PICKING UP MISSED WITHHOLDS KEEPS PCS IN SESSION.

There is no need for a rough, angry ARC breaky session. If there is one it is not the fault of the pc. It is the fault of the auditor. The auditor has failed to pick up missed withholds.

As of now it is not the pc that sets the tone of the session. It is the auditor. And the auditor who has a difficult session (providing he or she has used standard technology,
Model Session, and can run an E-Meter), has one only because he or she failed to ask for missed withholds.

What is called a dirty needle (an erratic agitation of the needle—not limited in size—which is ragged, jerky, ticking, not sweeping and tends to be persistent) is caused by missed withholds, not withholds.

Technology today is so powerful that it must be flawlessly applied. One does his CCHs in excellent 2-way comm with the pc. One has his TRs, Model Session and E-Meter operation completely perfect. And one follows exact technology. And one keeps the missed withholds picked up.

There is an exact and precise auditor action and response for every auditing situation, and for every case. We are not today beset by variable approaches. The less variable the auditor’s actions and responses, the greater gain in the pc. It is terribly precise. There is no room for flubs.

Further, every pc action has an exact auditor response. And each of these has its own drill by which it can be learned.

Auditing today is not an art, either in technology or procedure. It is an exact science. This removes Scientology from every one of the past practices of the mind.

Medicine advanced only to the degree that its responses by the practitioner were standardized and the practitioner had a professional attitude toward the public.

Scientology is far ahead of that today.

What a joy it is to a preclear to receive a completely standard session. To receive a textbook session. And what gains the pc makes! And how easy it is on the auditor!

It isn’t how interesting or clever the auditor is that makes the session. It’s how standard the auditor is. Therein lies pc confidence.

Part of that standard technology is asking for missed withholds any time the pc starts to give any trouble. This is, to a pc, a totally acceptable control factor. And it totally smooths the session.

You have no need for and must not use any ARC break process. Just ask for missed withholds.

Here are some of the manifestations cured by asking for missed withholds.

1. Pc failing to make progress.
2. Pc critical of or angry at auditor.
3. Pc refusing to talk to auditor.
4. Pc attempting to leave session.
S. Pc not desirous of being audited (or anybody not desirous of being audited).
6. Pc boiling off.
7. Pc exhausted.
8. Pc feeling foggy at session end.
9. Dropped havingness.
10. Pc telling others the auditor is no good.
11. Pc demanding redress of wrongs.
12. Pc critical of organizations or people of Scientology.
13. People critical of Scientology.
14. Lack of auditing results.
15. Dissemination failures.


Now I think you will agree that in the above list we have every ill we suffer from in the activities of auditing.

Now PLEASE believe me when I tell you there is ONE CURE for the lot and ONLY that one. There are no other cures.

The cure is contained in the simple question or its variations “Have I missed a withhold on you”

THE COMMANDS

In case of any of the conditions 1 to 15 above ask the pc one of the following commands and CLEAN THE NEEDLE OF ALL INSTANT READ. Ask the exact question you asked the first time as a final test. The needle must be clean of all instant reaction before you can go on to anything else. It helps the pc if each time the needle twitches, the auditor says, “That” or “There” quietly but only to help the pc see what is twitching. One doesn’t interrupt the pc if he or she is already giving it. This prompting is the only use of latent reads in Scientology—to help the pc spot what reacted in the first place.

The commonest questions:

“In this session, have I missed a withhold on you?”

“In this session have I failed to find out something?”

“In this session is there something I don’t know about you?”

The best beginning rudiments withhold question:

“Since the last session is there something you have done that I don’t know about?”

Prepcheck Zero Questions follow:

“Has somebody failed to find out about you who should have?”

“Has anyone ever failed to find out something about you?”

“Is there something I failed to find out about you?”

“Have you ever successfully hidden something from an auditor?”

“Have you ever done something somebody failed to discover?”

“Have you ever evaded discovery in this lifetime?”

“Have you ever hidden successfully?”

“Has anyone ever failed to locate you?”

(These Zeros do not produce “What” questions until the auditor has located a specific overt.)

When Prepchecking, when running any process but the CCHs, if any one of the auditing circumstances in 1 to 15 above occurs, ask for missed withholds. Before leaving any chain of overts in Prepchecking, or during Prepchecking, ask frequently for missed withholds, “Have I missed any withhold on you?” or as above.

Do not conclude intensives on any process without cleaning up missed withholds.

Asking for missed withholds does not upset the dictum of using no O/W processes in rudiments.

Most missed withholds clean up at once on two-way comm providing the auditor doesn’t ask leading questions about what the pc is saying. Two-way comm consists of asking for what the meter showed, acknowledging what the pc said and checking the meter again with the missed withhold question. If pc says, “I was mad at my wife,” as an answer, just
ack and check the meter with the missed withhold question. Don’t say, “What was she doing?”

In cleaning missed withholds do not use the Prepcheck system unless you are Prepchecking. And even in Prepchecking, if the Zero is not a missed withhold question and you are only checking for missed withholds amid other activities, do it simply as above, by two-way comm, not by the Prepcheck system.

To get auditing into a state of perfection, to get clearing general, all we have to do is:

1. Know our basics (Axioms, scales, codes, the fundamental theory about the thetan and the mind);

2. Know our practical (TRs, Model Session, E-Meter, CCHs, Prepchecking and clearing routines).

In actual fact this is not much to ask. For the return is smooth results and a far, far better world. An HPA/HCA can learn the data in 1 above and all but clearing routines in the material in 2. An HPA/HCA should know these things to perfection. They are not hard to learn. Additives and interpretations are hard to get around. Not the actual data and performance.
__________

Knowing these things, one also needs to know that all one has to do is clean the E-Meter of missed withholds to make any pc sit up and get audited smoothly, and all is as happy as a summer dream.
__________

We are making all our own trouble. Our trouble is lack of precise application of Scientology. We fail to apply it in our lives or sessions and try something bizarre and then we fail too. And with our TRs, Model Session and meters we are most of all failing to pick up and clean up MISSED WITHHOLDS.
__________

We don’t have to clean up all the withholds if we keep the missed withholds cleaned up.

Give a new auditor the order to clean up “missed withholds” and he or she invariably will start asking the pc for withholds. That’s a mistake. You ask the pc for missed withholds. Why stir up new ones to be missed when you haven’t cleaned up those already missed? Instead of putting out the fire we pour on gunpowder. Why find more you can then miss when you haven’t found those that have been missed.

Don’t be so confounded reasonable about the pc’s complaints. Sure, they may all be true BUT he’s complaining only because withholds have been missed. Only then does the pc complain bitterly.
__________

Whatever else you learn, learn and understand this please. Your auditing future hangs on it. The fate of Scientology hangs on it. Ask for missed withholds when sessions go wrong. Get the missed withholds when life goes wrong. Pick up the missed withholds when staffs go wrong. Only then can we win and grow. We’re waiting for you to become technically perfect with TRs, Model Session and the E-Meter, to be able to do CCHs and Prepchecking and clearing techniques, and to learn to spot and pick up missed withholds.

If pcs, organizations and even Scientology vanish from Man’s view it will be because you did not learn and use these things.



LRH:jw.rd.mf L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright (©) 1962, 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 28 JUNE 1962R
REVISED 5 SEPTEMBER 1978
Remimeo
(Revisions in this type style,
ellipsis indicates deletion)

DIRTY NEEDLES
How to Smooth Out Needles


Quite often a pc is found whose needle is jerky, random, gives many prior and latent reads and goes into small scratchy patterns....

Such a needle is hard to read—and such a pc is a long way out of session a lot of the time.

An auditor, seeing such a needle, and faced with the task of reading the instant read through all these prior and latents and scratchy patterns, tends to think in terms of heroic measures. It is “obvious” that this pc has W/Hs, missed W/Hs, overts and secrets to end all reactive banks and that the thing one ought to do is pick each one of these random needle reactions up as soon as possible. BUT when you try to do this you find the needle gets even more confused. It reads something all the time!

An extreme case of a dirty, random needle is not solved by any “fish and fumble” or heroic measures.

The pc’s needle reacts that way because of no confidence, which induces a sort of auto-control in session which induces a dirty needle. Ability to predict equals confidence.

The thing to do is give this pc about 3 sessions of rudiments and havingness— just Model Session severely with no Q and A or added chitchat. The sessions should be each one about one hour long.

All one does is do Model Session, getting the rudiments in carefully exactly by the textbook. Use Model Session, HCO Bulletin 23 June 1962. Use instant reads only as per HCO Bulletin 25th May 1962. And avoid any Q and A as per HCO Bulletin 24 May 1962, section on “Double Questioning.”

Use middle rudiments somewhere during the havingness session.

By doing this perfect, predictable textbook auditing session three times on the pc, most of these prior and latent reads will drop out and. the needle will look much cleaner. Why? Because the pc is off auto or in session.

You can make a pc’s needle get dirty and react to many odd thoughts by the pc by doing the following:

1. Try to clean off prior reads and avoid instant reads in getting ruds in (going against HCO Bulletin 25 May 1962).

2. Use a scruffy and ragged session pattern (going against HCO Bulletin 23 June 1962).

3. Double question any rudiments question (as per HCO Bulletin 24 May 1962).

The pc’s needle, even if very clean at the start and loose, will tighten up, develop patterns and dirt if an auditor fails to use a textbook session. This includes raw meat
that never heard of a textbook session. Raw meat particularly requires a severely textbook session. Don’t think because they’re new they won’t know. And too much coffee shop type auditing can rough a needle.

A pc who has become unwilling to be audited is best cured by three textbook flawless sessions of havingness as above. Don’t plunge for what is wrong. Just establish a standard of excellence the pc can predict. And up will come the pc’s confidence.

After the three sessions you can prepcheck or fish and fumble and get things really clean. And providing you continue to use a textbook session, the pc will get better and better.

If a pc still has a dirty needle with many prior reads after an auditor has audited that pc three sessions, then we can conclude that that auditor:

1. Is not using HCO Bulletin 25 May 1962 in reading a meter,

2. Is not handling questions as per HCO Bulletin 24 May 1962, and

3. Is not using Model Session HCO Bulletin 23 June 1962.

There are no difficult pcs now. There are only auditors who do not give textbook sessions.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:mdf
Copyright © 1962, 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
1812 19th Street, N.W., Washington 9, D.C.

HCO BULLETIN OF 12 SEPTEMBER AD12R
REVISED 5 SEPTEMBER 1978
Remimeo
(Revisions in this type style)
(Only revision is the correction of the definition of a
Rock Slam, and Dirty Needle)


SECURITY CHECKS AGAIN


With the advent of Dynamic Assessment a new method of Security Checking, far better than any previous Security Checking, has emerged.

Nothing in this bulletin of course detracts in any way from the value of missed withholds, pulling missed withholds or handling missed withholds on preclears or other persons in the organization.

If the following questions are asked of a person on a meter it can be at once established whether or not this person will inadvertently, covertly, or unknowingly attempt to ruin, wreck, stop and otherwise interfere with an organization, Scientology, or an auditor. The questions are as follows:

Consider committing overts against Scientology. Consider committing overts against Ron. Consider committing overts against the organization. Consider committing overts against me (the auditor).

It will be found that such a person has a goal which the person considers to be impossible to achieve so long as any one of the above four exist, therefore destructive actions will at all times be manifested no matter how “constructive” they appear.

The rock slam produced must be decisive. By rock slam is meant the crazy, irregular, left-right slashing motion of the needle on the E-Meter dial. R/Ses repeat left and right slashes unevenly and savagely, faster than the eye easily follows. The needle is frantic. The width of an R/S depends largely on sensitivity setting. It goes from one-fourth inch to whole dial. But it slams back and forth.

The action which should be taken if this condition is found to exist is to suspend the person or otherwise put the person away from communication lines until such time as the person’s dynamic, item, and goal are found. Sometimes it is almost enough merely to find the item, as the foolishness of the conclusion that Scientology stands immediately and directly in their road will appear to the preclear at that time.

By “A goal which is an overt against Scientology” is meant something which the pc considers to be a goal which is an overt against. When you finally see such goals appear they will not be apparent to the auditor as overts. However, the pc so interprets them. For instance a pc may have a fixed idea against any spiritual activity, interpreting it as a harsh activity which forbids dancing, and the pc may have a goal to dance. However the person’s item lying above the goal to dance will be found to be a spiritual group and this of course would make Scientology appear to the person to be highly antipathetic to the goal to dance.

I cannot too strongly urge the fact that when the above occurs no possible good will result until the dynamic, item, and goal are found. Therefore this should be expedited. All care should be taken not to punish the person unduly, but to carry on because often the person is unaware of the destructiveness of his or her own actions.

In a marriage, if the husband were to place the wife on an E-Meter and ask the question “Consider committing overts against me” and find a wide rock slam imme
diately results, he will be then in total possession of what has been wrong with his marriage. Similarly, a wife finding this manifestation on a husband would also be informed.

The remedy in such a case is not to sack somebody, to shoot somebody, to divorce somebody or take some drastic final action, because we now have all the answer we need to resolve this and it will be found that as soon as the person’s goal has been found the condition of hostility will cease.

The rock slam produced must be at sensitivity 16 on the meter. If a dirty needle occurs it is necessary to pull the person’s missed withholds because these obviously exist. This should not be neglected. By dirty needle is meant an erratic agitation of the needle which is ragged, jerky, ticking, not sweeping, and tends to be persistent. It is not limited in size.

This is the new security programme. Any person responsible for maintaining security in an organization or a home should perform the above tests and take the remedial action.

I cannot too strongly urge that while this is absolute, or near as it can be, and positive in its diagnosis, it is not permanent because we can now clear, and clearing consists of doing away with the rock slam and not the offending person.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:jb .cden .mdf
Copyright © 1962. 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 8 NOVEMBER AD12R
REVISED 5 SEPTEMBER 1978
REISSUED 9 OCTOBER 1978
Remimeo
(Revisions in this type style)
(Reissued to correct typos)


SOMATICS
HOW TO TELL TERMINALS AND
OPPOSITION TERMINALS


It is important that a clearing auditor be able to distinguish pain from sensation, terminals from opposition terminals, and to have the data at the level of instant knowledge. To understand it less is to invite serious errors in clearing. Failure to sort terminals from opposition terminals can confuse the pc or even degrade the case. All a pc’s somatics, deformities and distortions proceed from terminals, opposition terminals and combination terminals. Thus they are of vast importance to the pc and the auditor.

DEFINITIONS

SOMATICS = This is a general word for uncomfortable physical perceptions coming from the reactive mind. Its genus is early Dianetics and it is a general, common package word, used by Scientologists to denote “pain” or “sensation” with no difference made between them. To understand the source of these feelings, one should have a knowledge of engrams, ridges and other parts of the reactive bank. To the Scientologist anything is a SOMATIC if it emanates from the various parts of the reactive mind and produces an awareness of reactivity. Symbol SOM.

PAIN = Pain is composed of heat, cold, electrical, and the combined effect of sharp hurting. If one stuck a fork in his arm, he would experience pain. When one uses PAIN in connection with clearing one means awareness of heat, cold, electrical or hurting stemming from the reactive mind. A, cording to experiments done at Harvard, if one were to make a grid with heated tubes going vertical and chilled tubes going horizontal and were to place a small current of electricity through the lot, the device, touched to a body, would produce the feeling of PAIN. It need not be composed of anything very hot or cold or of any high voltage to produce a very intense feeling of pain. Therefore what we call PAIN is itself, heat, cold and electrical. If a pc experiences one or more of these from his reactive mind, we say he is experiencing PAIN.

“Electrical” is the bridge between sensation and PAIN and is difficult to classify as either PAIN or sensation when it exists alone. Symbol PN.

SENSATION = All other uncomfortable perceptions stemming from the reactive mind are called SENSATION. These are basically “pressure,” “motion,” “dizziness,” “sexual sensation,” and “emotion and misemotion.” There are others, definite in themselves but definable in these five general categories. If one took the fork in the pain definition above and pressed it against the arm, that would be “pressure.” “Motion” is just that, a feeling of being in motion when one is not. “Motion” includes the “winds of space,” a feeling of being blown upon, especially from in front of the face. “Dizziness” is a feeling of disorientation and includes a spinniness, as well as an out-of-balance feeling. “Sexual sensation” means any feeling, pleasant or unpleasant, commonly experienced during sexual restimulation or action. “Emotion and misemotion” include all levels of the complete Tone Scale except “pain”; emotion and misemotion are closely allied to “motion,” being only a finer particle action. A bank solidity is a form of “pressure,” and when the sensation of increasing solidity of masses in the mind occurs, we say “the bank is beefing up.” All these are classified as SENSATION. Symbol SEN.

TERMINAL = An item or identity the pc has actually been sometime in the past (or present) is called a TERMINAL. It is “the pc’s own valence” at that time. In the Goals Problem Mass (the black masses of the reactive mind) those identities which, when contacted, produce pain, tell us at once that they are TERMINALS. The person could feel
pain only as himself (thetan plus body) and therefore identities he has been produce pain when their mental residues (black masses) are recontacted in processing. Symbol TERM.

OPPOSITION TERMINAL = An item or identity the pc has actually opposed (fought, been an enemy of) sometime in the past (or present) is called an OPPOSITION TERMINAL. As the person identified himself as not it he could experience from it only sensation. An OPPOSITION TERMINAL, when its mental residues (black masses) are recontacted in processing, produces only sensation, never pain. Symbol OPPTERM.

COMBINED TERMINAL = An item or identity the pc has both been and opposed produces therefore both pain and sensation when it is “late on the track,” which is to say, after the fact of many terminals and opposition terminals. The combination terminal is the closure between terminal and opposition terminal lines which possesses attributes of both and the clarity of neither. It signifies a period toward the end of a game. It is found most commonly when the pc’s case is only shallowly entered. They exist on all cases but are fewer than terminals and opposition terminals. Symbol COTERM.

ITEM = Any terminal, opposition terminal, combination terminal, significance or idea (but not a doingness, which is called “a level”) appearing on a list derived from the pc. Symbol It.

RELIABLE ITEM = Any item that rock slams well on being found and at session end and which was the last item still in after assessing the list. Can be a terminal, an opposition terminal, a combination terminal or a significance, provided only that it was the item found on a list and rock slammed. Symbol RI.

ROCK SLAM = The crazy, irregular, left-right slashing motion of the needle on the E-Meter dial. R/Ses repeat left and right slashes unevenly and savagely, faster than the eye easily follows. The needle is frantic. The width of an R/S depends largely on sensitivity setting. It goes from one-fourth inch to whole dial. But it slams back and forth.

A rock slam is the response of an E-Meter to the conflict between terminals and opposition terminals. It indicates a fight, an effort to individuate, an extreme games condition which in the absence of auditing would seek unsuccessfully to separate while attacking. A rock slam means a hidden evil intention on the subject or question under auditing or discussion.

As the pc’s attention is guided to the items involved the games condition activates and is expressed on the meter as a ragged, frantic response. The wider the response the more recognizable (to the pc) is the reality of the games condition and the violence of the conflict.

The rock slam channel is that hypothetical course between a series of pairs consisting of terminals and opposition terminals.

If the conflict is too great for the pc’s reality no rock slam results. Later in auditing as the pc’s confronting rises, items which did not react earlier in auditing now begin to be real and so express themselves on a meter as a rock slam. The pc with the lowest reality level is the hardest to attain a rock slam on, but in contradiction a pc who has the least control over himself in certain zones of life has the largest rock slams.

The rock slam vanishes under Suppression and activates on Invalidate or Withhold or on other Prehav Levels.

This is the most difficult needle response to find or attain or preserve. And it is the most valuable in clearing.

All rock slams result from a pair of items in opposition, one of which is a terminal, the other being an opposition terminal.

It can exist in present time where the pc is the terminal and what the pc is faced with is the opposition terminal. Symbol R/S.

INSTANT ROCK SLAM = That rock slam which begins at the end of the major thought of any item. Symbol IRS. (Valid R/Ses are not always instant reads. An R/S can read prior or latently.)

DIRTY NEEDLE = An erratic agitation of the needle which is ragged, jerky, ticking, not sweeping, and tends to be persistent. /t is not limited in size. Symbol DN.

DIRTY READ = An instant agitation of the needle in response to a major thought. It is ragged, jerky, ticking, not sweeping, and is not limited in size. Unlike the dirty needle, it does not persist. Symbol DR.

TESTING

The method of testing for the character of an item whether term, oppterm or coterm is extremely simple.

If the item, when said to the pc in any way, turns on PAIN in the pc’s body it is a TERMINAL.

If the item, when said to the pc in any way, turns on SENSATION around or in the pc’s body it is an OPPOSITION TERMINAL.

If the item, when said to the pc in any way, turns on both PAIN and SENSATION in or around the pets body it is a COMBINATION TERMINAL.

WAYS OF ASKING

The rule is, “Give the terminal cause, the opposition terminal effect in any listing, working or use.”

The simplest form is, of course, just chanting the item at the pc a few times. This is not always workable.

The simplest but not always workable form is:

For a terminal—”Would a ________ commit overts.”

For an opposition terminal—”Consider committing overts against _________.”
Using PH Level.

Instead of “Committing Overts” the Prehav Level by which the reliable item was found is normally used:

For a terminal—”Would a _____ (item) _____ (PH Level)” or
“Consider a _____ (item) _____ ing (PH Level).”

For an opposition terminal—”Consider _____ ing (PH Level) a _____(item) .”


USING TD BUTTONS

The above sentences may also be used, or their rough approximation, with a Tiger Drill or Prepcheck button, and if a rock slam is present, it may develop.

__________

No matter what method is being used in saying the item being tested to find out if it is a terminal, opposition terminal or combination terminal, the rules of sensation and pain apply. Sensation means oppterm. Pain means terminal.

__________

It is important to know if an item is a term, oppterm or coterm, as its character as one of the three determines the listing question.

The same rule for testing applies in listing. If it is a terminal, it (Prehav Levels). If it is an opposition terminal it is (Prehav Leveled).

Example: For a terminal, A Waterbuck, Prehav Level Snort. Proper listing question: “Who or what would a waterbuck snort at?”

Example: For an oppterm, A Tiger, Prehav Level Snort. “Who or what would snort at a tiger?”

Of course the reverse can be listed but is rarely necessary except to get a longer list when the pc stalls.

THE LINE PLOT

A line plot must be made up for any pc for his 3GAXX or the Listing the Goal steps of Routine 3-21 (steps 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 of 21 steps).

This consists of a heavy blue 13” (foolscap or legal) sheet of paper, kept in the pc’s folder and kept up to date every time a reliable item (or even last item in) is found.

On this line plot one column, the left-hand one, is reserved for oppterms. The right-hand column is reserved for terms and lines indicate whenever terms or oppterms are derived from each other.

A reliable item is designated as such on this line plot with the symbol RI. Nonreliable items are not designated.

The date each line plot item was found is added after the item so it can be found again in the Auditor’s Reports without a scramble.

The full behaviour and character of any item found is written into the Auditor’s Report of that session in which it was found. The width of the instant rock slam in inches, whether the slam turned on every time the item was read, what wording turned it on, and whether it would still R/S by session end are all made part of the Auditor’s Report.

__________

About 20% or 25% of the cases that appear for clearing can have reliable items found on them at once by exploring the words “Scientology,” “A Scientology Organization,” “An auditor,” “Me (the auditor),” “Ron,” or the head of the local Scientology organization by name. These are considered to be oppterms by any pc whose realization of his goal would be interfered with, he or she feels, by Scientology. It does not matter what wording (see above) turns on the R/S so long as it can be consistently turned on for a bit. If it is at first only a dirty read, it is Tiger Drilled to try to make it rock slam. Only in this peculiar instance is the person called a rock slammer or is considered a security risk. Everyone alive R/Ses on something. In any event, if items such as those in this paragraph turn on a rock slam, they are put on the line plot as reliable items and used in handling the case.

The above material is in actual fact a partial anatomy of the Goals Problems Mass, its identification in auditing and the behaviour of an E-Meter towards it.

As it has never before been viewed by any practice, mental science or religion, it has to have special terminology.

The terminology has been stably in use for quite some time in Scientology. I have made the definitions more precise in this HCO Bulletin.

Anyone working in clearing should have this HCO Bulletin data at his instant call without referral to the HCO Bulletin.

With very few additions, this is the track one walks in clearing and going Clear.

Know it.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:gl.rd.mdf
Copyright © 1962, 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 30 DECEMBER AD12R
REVISED 5 SEPTEMBER 1978
Remimeo
(Revisions in this type style)
(Revised to correct the definition of Dirty Needle)

URGENT
IMPORTANT
ROUTINES 2-12 & 2-10
CASE ERRORS
POINTS OF GREATEST IMPORTANCE


The errors in doing Routine 2-10 and Routine 2-12 are divided into two broad divisions:

(a) Those of auditing itself;

(b) Those deriving from errors in doing the exact skills of Routines 2-10 and 2-12.

AUDITING ERRORS

This bulletin touches only briefly on the errors of (a) auditing errors. These consist of sloppy form, bad TRs, inability to read a meter, Auditor Code breaks, Q and A-ing, missing missed W/Hs, doing bad mid ruds or Tiger Drilling and using auditing form to hold up results.

One remedies bad auditing (as different from bad 2-10 or 2-12) by following this prescription:

The poorer the auditor, the more a supervisor or instructor takes away from him the tools of auditing. In short, if an auditor makes bad auditing errors, one simplifies the auditing to prevent the errors. Don’t let him or her do 2-12. Make such an auditor use only 2-10. Then, as the auditor’s skill in basic auditing improves, the more he or she can be trusted with 2-12.

Do NOT let an auditor who can’t do any kind of a job of basic auditing do 2-12. Let such an auditor do only 2-10. And then as that auditor’s case improves on 2-10 or 2-12, and as training drills are passed, let the auditor graduate up to 2-12.

Remember this: 2-12 works all by itself with no auditing niceties. And it can be prevented from working (but only to some degree) by bad auditing form or intention.

Strip off Model Session, mid ruds, Tiger Drilling, and two-way comm, demand it be run muzzled, muzzled, muzzled, use the meter only to find rock slams, and modern Routine 2 works like a dream, a dream, a dream even for an auditor whose auditing skill is terrible.

Let a Q and A artist clean cleans on a meter, muck up the mid ruds, yap at the pc, and Routine 2 won’t work because it never gets done.

So the training stress and the use stress of Routine 2 is just on Routine 2, its rules and how it’s done, and when the auditor has case gains and wins, auditing form is then entered upon.

The backwards way is to insist on a good hard study of form before training on Routine 2. Always hammer Routine 2 home first and get it done, not fooled with by the Mixed-up Kid from Mid Rud Gulch.

Your main trouble will come from not teaching Routine 2 hard just as itself before entering upon the niceties of auditing. You have to show the wild man it’s a house before you teach him to serve French Pastry a la Partie.

Of course nothing in this HCO Bulletin should be used to degrade the value of good auditing form.

Good metering, a smooth command of the TRs, a grip on the basics and a fine knowledge of fundamentals are vital in an auditor.

You can’t get all there is to get out of Routine 2-12 with rough auditing.

Auditing skill is not just something to acquire. It’s the only thing that gets real auditing done. And good auditors are scarce and I appreciate them. I’ve had my share of rough auditing and I know the diamonds and gold of a smooth, flawless auditor.

But Routine 2, at the time of this writing, and for always in some area of the world as we expand, will be handled with rough auditor skill. Therefore, for the purposes of this HCO Bulletin, we will consider the auditing skill to be rough and show what Routines 2-10 and 2-12 can do in unpolished hands.

And never fear, when their cases are better and the training can be stepped up, they’ll become polished, never fear. And appreciate being so. It’s my brag I can get a pc out of anything with just auditing skill. That makes me pretty brave as an auditor. But this “Bring on your lions” attitude is born out of auditing skills, taught, not “native.” I use the same pattern and patter as you do if you audit textbook. But I don’t clean cleans often or miss reads ever and I don’t Q and A. You can audit just as well as I can with practice and study. Why do I know this? Well, auditing is not my main forte, not even close to my appointments and goals.

We’re probably all rock slammers somewhere on List One and this is Man pulling himself out of the mud indeed.

So don’t run down pure auditing skill. It’s more precious than anything in this universe.

But you can acquire it as you do Routine 2 and after.

Meanwhile don’t overrate the power of Routine 2 to work with rough auditing so long as the Routine 2 is done right.


THE ERRORS OF ROUTINE 2

Routine 2 (by which is meant 2-10 & 2-12) has its own rules and these must be learned first and learned well.

Routine 2 today is a powerful process. And if it can straighten up a pc so fast, it can also cave him in fast. However such cave-ins, while dramatic, are very easy to remedy even though they must be remedied with accuracy. (The remedies are all contained in this HCO Bulletin.)

Remember, in doing Routine 2, the primary pc upset is from badly done Routine 2, not badly done auditing. To repair a car don’t look for paint scratches when somebody has removed the engine. Auditing form is paint scratches. The removed engine is flubbed Routine 2.

Routine 2 must be taught hard, not just as a version of auditing but as itself. It is its own technical package and it doesn’t even infringe on the basics of auditing.


AUDITOR RESPONSIBILITY

Routine 2 has several hills to climb. One of them is auditor responsibility. This process has the peculiarity of handing all responsibility for case gain or worsening to the auditor.

You will hear people who haven’t a clue on Routine 2 crying about bad pcs, bad D of P-ing, bad Ron and blaming everyone but themselves. Investigate and you’ll find only an auditor flub on Routine 2.

All Routine 2 auditor flubs consist of:

(a) Not knowing Routine 2.

(b) Not doing Routine 2.

There are no other Routine 2 auditor flubs.

In Routine 2 all gain or lack of gain is assignable directly and only to the auditor.

Frightening isn’t it?

But encouraging too. For it puts the auditor at cause, wholly and completely, over the pc’s case. You might have known that would happen with the first all-case fast gain process.

DURATION OF PROCESS

Routine 2 is here to stay. You’ve been used to the changing face of processing.

That discouraged learning any process very well and setting up to get it done by one and all. Well, Routine 2 is here to stay. It isn’t going to change. You can invest a great amount of time and effort on learning it.

It’s here to stay because where it doesn’t get results, the auditor didn’t know it or didn’t do it, and we can always remedy that.

It only produces mediocre or worsening results when it either isn’t known or isn’t done.

Further, it is quite easy to do.

And it produces fast, stable results. very startling to even raw meat. There is more miracle in 50 hours of well done Routine 2 than in the entire history of the Church .

Further it has to be done on every case before a goal can easily or reliably be found, or even if found, before it can be run.

So there it is. Learn it.

NO AUDITING

The first and greatest error of Routine 2 is no auditing.

Yes, the auditor may be sitting there like a one-man band, busy as free beer at the boiler works and yet not be auditing Routine 2.

Example: Eat up two-thirds of every session with needless beginning, middle and end rudiments.

Example: Spend two hours Prepchecking the mid ruds and then find the reason the needle is dirty is an incomplete list.

Example: Spend three sessions full of general O/W trying to calm an ARC breaky pc when in actual fact the auditor has been opposing an item off an incomplete list.

It’s not just audit the pc in front of you. That’s vital enough. But audit the pc in front of you with correct Routine 2.

Auditors have been known to spend hours, days, running old processes to get the pc “up to running 2-12” when five minutes of 2-12 would have had the pc sailing.

NO AUDITING means “While seeming to deliver auditing, actually get nothing done.” It’s the greatest crime in Routine 2 or Routine 3. NO AUDITING can be reduced to the finest art. Doing a wrong list, re-doing a dead horse, these aren’t no auditing. Auditing may have been wasted or may be slow, but it’s still auditing. No, NO AUDITING means going through endless, useless motions, perhaps in top form, perhaps perfectly, none of which are calculated to advance the pc’s case one inch. Doing havingness every half page, endlessly Tiger Drilling, doing mid ruds just because it’s “good form,” all these and a thousand more add up to NO AUDITING. Absolute essentials, bare bone, and bounteous correct 2- 12 are AUDITING.

Mid ruds, Tiger Drilling are necessary to good auditing but using them an inch beyond necessity is NO AUDITING.


FAILURE TO SAVE RECORDS

Almost the only way to completely bar the door on the pc is to lose his case folder or fail to put all lists and reports in it.

Every sheet of every list must have on it the pc’s name, date of the list and the question from which the list comes.

This is the biggest MUST in Routine 2: Preserve the records and make them identifiable and usable.


FAILING TO FIND R/SES ON LIST ONE

Failing to find and utilize an R/S on List One is the most common (but not the most destructive to the pc’s health) error in Routine 2.

Example: Auditor has three dead horses. Abandons case. Another auditor assesses List One, Tiger Drills the R/Ses out, represents a tick. Gets another dead horse. Abandons case. Pc now known as a “tough pc.” A third auditor gets cunning, looks over the original assessment, sees “auditor” R/Sed once long ago. It doesn’t now, having been Tiger Drilled to death. Opposes it. Gets a beautiful R/Sing list. Case starts to fly.

This error has been done over, and over and over and is the source of all dead horses.

RULE: Oppose every R/S found on List One or IA or a “PT consists of” list. Oppose them even when they only R/Sed on Tiger Drill buttons. Take the R/Sing item most intimate to the actual session as the first one to use. If in further doubt take the R/Sing item closest to the session the pc is interested in.

List One, 1A or “PT consists of” lists do not have to be RIs to be opposed. They are locks on RIs. They only need to briefly R/S, or to have been seen to R/S at some time, to be opposed. If they R/Sed at any time they must be opposed according to whether they are terms or oppterms.

I have seen a case fail to give more than dead horses until somebody recalled that on a Sec Check test a year before the case had R/Sed on “Scientology Orgs” (now not even a tick). When that was opposed, a dial wide R/S turned on for 55 consecutive pages of items, a high record.

One remedy is to Tiger Drill “On List One ,” but it isn’t infallible.


REPRESENTING AN R/Sing ITEM

One of the three most destructive actions to the pc is representing an R/Sing item. (The other two are opposing an R/Sing item taken from an incomplete list, both included below.)

Representing an R/Sing item puts a terrible strain on the pc’s attention. The list may even R/S, probably will. But the opposing item, now hidden, wreaks havoc on the pc all the time its companion is being listed on a represent list. A real calm pc can turn into a screamer if an R/Sing item is listed with a represent list, whether it has been opposed or not.

(Note: This is contrary to a 3GAXX action which could be done only because a detested person wasn’t a vital oppterm. It should not be done even in 3GAXX.)

RULE: Only do opposition lists on R/Sing items. Never represent them.


OPPOSE RIs

Always oppose an RI and continue to oppose RIs until you get a satisfactory package. Never leave a BYPASSED item.

To do so is destructive to the preclear. This is not the greatest source of destructiveness and not every RI bypassed will ruin the preclear. But once out of three times the pc will be upset.

Example: “Scientology” R/Ses. A reliable item “a slavemaster” is found on the opposition list. It is not then itself opposed. Pc is upset by presence of a hidden item that opposes “a slavemaster.” Pc stays upset until “a slavemaster” is opposed and its RI companion item “a freedom fighter” is found. “Slavery” shows up on the “Opp Scientology” list as the thing that actually fronted up to “Scientology” when the whole thing was packaged.

RULE: When a First List R/Sing item is opposed and an RI is found, then Routine 2 steps are incomplete until the found RI is itself opposed.

It goes represent—oppose—oppose or Oppose, Oppose.

It will be seen that First List R/Sing items are usually locks into PT on actual RIs. It will also be seen that the rock slams on the First List, the first opposing RI and the RI that opposes that all match. They have the same width and speed and pattern. They seldom all R/S at the same time but in sequence of when first found.

RULE: All items found must be completely packaged.

RULE: All R/Ses in a package must match in character and vanish when fully packaged.

Leaving a bypassed item is also possible because of incomplete lists. (See below.)

INCOMPLETE LISTS

If, after nulling, you have several rock slamming items remaining, your list is always incomplete.

Bonus packages vanish as soon as spotted. They occur once in a while. They can be ignored in this rule:

RULE: If you find more than one R/S in nulling a list that list is incomplete and must be completed.

Example: “Preclear (pn)” once R/Sed so it is opposed. The “Who or what would a preclear oppose” list is listed and a dozen R/Ses were seen on listing (OK so far). The list tested without reaction on the question. The auditor starts to null the list. Some of the items that R/Sed while being listed, R/S now on nulling. List is nulled down to 3 (!) R/Sing items. Auditor chooses one. It R/Ses nicely. This is “a control device (sen).” Auditor now lists “Who or what would oppose a control device?” List R/Ses well. However, masses tend to close in on pc. Havingness drops. Pc possibly ARC breaky. Auditor continues on listing. And on. And on. Finally gets to nulling. Very hard job. Pc cutting up. Auditor tries to pull missed withholds. After much blood auditor finds four R/Sing items left on list, chooses “a wild man” and tries to package. Pc glum. Very little cognition. TWO items have been bypassed. How? Auditing supervisor sees that several items on the “Who or what would a pc oppose” list R/Sed on nulling. Assumes rightly list was incomplete. Directs it to be completed. Pc smiles brightly and with a suddenly clean needle lists 80 more items (several of which R/S on listing). Masses fall away from pc again. No ARC breaks. This time only one item R/Sed on nulling. “A controller (sen).” (Only new list is nulled of course. You never re-null in 2-12.) R/S has mysteriously (and correctly) vanished off every other R/Sing item on that list. The list “Who or what would oppose a control device?” is wholly scrubbed, being wrong. The auditor now lists “Who or what would oppose a controller?” The pc happily lists 2Q0 items (many R/Sing). The needle goes clean. The auditor starts nulling. Finds he has two items on the first three pages that R/S. Has learned his lesson and, leaving off nulling for the moment, gets pc to add 50 items. Auditor goes on nulling. Nulls down to one R/Sing item, “an insane idiot.” The R/S on “a preclear,” “a controller” and “an insane idiot” all matched when seen each in turn (but “a preclear” doesn’t R/S any more). Pc cogniting like mad. Very happy. Masses all moved off and havingness up.

RULE: If in nulling more than one R/S is seen on list, that list is incomplete and must be completed.

There are no exceptions to this rule. Bonus packages blow off on a completed list.

Also, to clarify, keep in mind this rule:

RULE: If a list does not R/S now and then or at least once when being listed, it will become a dead horse.

That some list items R/Sed when the pc said them during listing is natural.

If, with Suppress clean, more than one of them R/Ses during nulling, that list is incomplete.

Also, in passing, don’t finish nulling a list before adding to it as a general practice. Add to it when the pc’s needle is dirty or when you see more than one R/S on it during nulling. The pc ARC breaks if you keep completing the nulling of the existing list and then adding.

WRONG WAY OPPOSE

Pcs are not always right when telling you it’s a terminal (pn) or oppterm (sen). They even sometimes lie to try to save their face (to keep from looking bad in an auditor’s eyes or the world, or to seem even more villainous than they are).

The only real test of a right way oppose is whether or not the list lists easily with IMPROVED SKIN TONE in the pc and improved cheerfulness, and if it produces one R/Sing item that packages later.

If you just can’t tell which way to oppose, oppose both ways and then decide on pc’s appearance which way was right and continue it.

Wrong way opposition is not usual. Usually the pc tells the truth and all is well. But when a list is listed wrong way to on opposition it’s long, horrible and deadly.

The pc goes faintly grey, green yellow or blackish, looks worse, and the list gets endless. A wrong way list will R/S. So it’s only pc appearance that tells the story. Routine 2 is beneficial. Pcs that are listed with right way opposition look brighter, younger, with a more translucent skin tone. You won’t make a mistake if you can tell the difference between a young boy and an old man, it’s that distinct. (Remember, a pc will also look worse as above if you took an item from an incomplete list or committed any of the other R2 errors in this HCO Bulletin.)


LISTS THAT WON’T COMPLETE

The only reasons a list will not complete are:

(a) Wrong Source

(b) Wrong Way To Oppose.

In either case there is something wrong with the source of the list.

That a list is listing R/Ses is no guarantee of rightness of source. A wrong way to list will R/S. Some lists taken from a wrong source cycle R/S, DR, clean needle, R/S, DR, clean needle.

Wrong sources are:

1. A First List item is opposed that didn’t ever R/S.

2. An “RI” grabbed off an incomplete list that must be completed,

3. An item that was a terminal being opposed as though it were an oppterm and vice versa,

4. On a represent list, the item being represented actually was an R/Sing item,

5. On a represent list the item being represented was badly chosen and of no interest to the pc.

There are no other wrong sources and thus no other R2 way to get a list that won’t complete. But when you do get a list that won’t complete, be very careful to look over the above 5 reasons and pick out the right one. You may have to complete an earlier list first and scrub the one you’re on.

Incompleting lists are usually abandoned without further patch-up.

How long is an incomplete list? How long is a piece of string?

LONG LONG LISTS

Don’t ever be afraid to have a long list, only be afraid of short ones. But when a list is running up toward thousands, something is wrong.

Endless lists stem basically from wrong source as above or from the auditor’s failure to understand what indicates a complete list.

If, on close study of the case folder and pc, Routine 2 errors seem to be absent— the source is right and not something taken from another list itself incomplete, if the oppose is right way to, then look for the following:

(a) Pc is not answering auditing question or

(b) Pc has decided something was his item and is representing it or is otherwise operating on a decision.

The remedies are to get Decide in well and to make sure, without upsetting him, that the pc is answering the auditing question.

And if that is all OK, then it’s just a long list, so complete it.

RULE: A list is complete when it can be nulled and when it produces just one RI that R/Ses on Tiger Drilling and stays in.

A list can be nulled only when a needle is clean (except in 2-10).

The definition of a CLEAN NEEDLE is one which flows, producing no pattern or erratic motions of the smallest kind with the auditor sitting looking at it and doing nothing. A CLEAN NEEDLE is not just something that doesn’t react to a particular question. It’s a lovely slow flow, usually a rise, most beautifully expressed on a Mark V at 64 sensitivity.

A list has to be listed until this needle flow is observed (with no mid ruds put in). But ruds or no ruds, a CLEAN NEEDLE always appears when a list is complete.

A DIRTY NEEDLE is an erratic agitation of the needle which is ragged, jerky, ticking, not sweeping, and tends to be persistent. It is not limited in size.

There are the auditing methods of converting a dirty needle to a clean needle, both as defined above. These are all the skills of auditing used with big mid rud buttons.

Now entirely and distinctly separate from auditing skills for cleaning a needle, there are the Routine 2 methods for converting a dirty needle to a clean needle.

Usually both auditing and Routine 2 methods are used to clean a needle so that one can null, the former briefly, the latter abundantly.

However, do not overlook the demonstrable fact that Routine 2 methods for cleaning a needle are very beneficial and lasting in results, whereas purely auditing methods (like mid ruds) have value only for the moment and, even though auditing methods are desirable in this operation, when the Routine 2 is in error, the clean needle is really impossible to achieve longer than seconds with auditing methods.

The obvious solution to cleaning a needle is to first have Routine 2 as perfect as possible (the errors outlined in this HCO Bulletin uncommitted or being rapidly corrected) and then use auditing methods.

Try it in reverse (auditing methods first and then using corrections of Routine 2) and you will not only fail to get a needle clean longer than seconds, you may also waste the better part of an intensive trying to do it.

So spend hours straightening up Routine 2 errors and doing it right and brief minutes with auditing methods when necessary.

And don’t revile a pc for having a dirty needle. It’s the auditor who dirties it up with incorrect or inaccurate Routine 2, not the pc,

Now a clean needle is vital in order to null a list. Don’t ever try to null a list with the needle dirty. If the Routine 2 is right, the needle will clean up with two minutes’ work of big mid ruds. If Routine 2 errors (wrong list source, list incomplete, wrong way oppose, etc. as per this HCO Bulletin) exist and Routine 2 is being done wrong, then two hours’ worth of big mid ruds will not clean a dirty needle.

Any of the Routine 2 errors taken up in this HCO Bulletin will create a dirty needle and keep it dirty and leave the auditor sweating over mid ruds and the pc going mad trying to answer the questions. Yes, the mid ruds are out. But why? Because one or more serious Routine 2 errors as described in this HCO Bulletin are present.

So see the light. If you sweat on mid ruds as an auditor, curse them as a pc or see a co-auditor dripping exasperation over mid ruds and the needle won’t stay clean, look at the Routine 2, not the difficulty with mid ruds. Look for the errors here described. Check them off on the case, one by one, and don’t even be satisfied that it’s only “no auditing.” Check all the errors off, section by section. You’ll be startled.

So in general, difficult mid ruds and dirty needle indicate wrong Routine 2, not bad auditing. Somebody has flubbed the Routine 2 before the auditing was flubbed. Once the Routine 2 is in error, auditing becomes impossible.

This gives no excuse for bad metering, cleaning cleans, trying to look like an auditor but ignoring results. Auditing errors do exist. And can be serious, but a pc running on right Routine 2 would forgive the Pope for having a forked tail. You almost can’t muddy up a pc running on right Routine 2.

Here’s a trick. Don’t try to null a list until you’ve seen a clean flowing needle for a lot of items, maybe 50. Then get in fast mid ruds on the list and do it without cleaning any cleans. Then start nulling. If the needle dirties up after 30-40 items, skip mid ruds, just show the pc the page and have him spot any big thoughts he had on it. Then immediately get back to nulling. If the needle is dirty still, resume listing until it’s clean. Just do those actions and (given error-free Routine 2 as per this HCO Bulletin) you’ll have a smooth, smooth happy time of it in nulling.

Do anything you don’t have to do in auditing Routine 2 and you’re in trouble in the auditing department. Bang out almost total Routine 2 and you’re in clover. Give 1/10th of the session over to goals, mid ruds and other auditing actions and 9/10ths of the session to pure Routine 2 actions and you’ll really win. And that 1/10th includes any mid ruds on the list as well. Give half the session to auditing and half to Routine 2 and you’ll be in continuous trouble.

The righter the Routine 2, the less auditing you’ll have to do.

So how long is a list? Can you null it with a needle that requires only a pc inspection of a page to keep it clean? Are all but one of the R/Ses that happened in auditing dead when you nulled? Are your pages long streams of Xs? Did you have to use Suppress only once per page (fast check) to keep it clean?

Wells that’s a complete list. If it gave you an RI. Just one.

So how long is a list?

But if all the above is true and a pc’s lists are still very long, another thing can be wrong.

That wrongness usually is the pc’s confronting ability being driven down by auditor unconfrontability. (But also can be caused by a wrong RI or other errors gone before it as covered in this HCO Bulletin.)

The auditor Qs and As, yap, yaps, nags the pc, blames, gets in endless mid ruds, cleans cleans, misses reads or does something else.

The length of an auditor’s pc’s lists is to some degree proportional to the rough auditing or no auditing done by the auditor. (And also by a failure to use mid ruds and TD in the right places when necessary.)

We have known since ‘55 that rough auditing reduces havingness. Here’s why: Rough auditing lowers the pc’s ability to confront in the session. The pc’s havingness is proportional to his ability to confront in the session. If a pc’s havingness by can squeeze test is lower at session end than at beginning on Routine 2, then there’s something wrong with the auditing or with the way Routine 2 is being applied (one of the above Routine 2 errors is being made).

The remedy for the bad auditing is to make the auditor only acknowledge anything and everything the pc says or put it on the list. Tear out all rudiments, Tiger Drills, two-way comm, and forbid any chance to comment or act on an origin by the pc, and get only Routine 2 done.

The remedy for Routine 2 errors (and the errors themselves) are given above in this HCO Bulletin.

CONCLUSION

Routine 2 does not have an endless parade of DO-NOTS. They are basically just those above.

Simple, really.

And I’ve not seen one session on Routine 2 that was going really wrong, go wrong on auditing errors alone. Routine 2 sessions go wrong on bad Routine 2. The auditing form and meter errors start to pile up after Routine 2 has been balled up. One or more of the above Routine 2 errors has been done and overlooked.

The reason why Routine 2 errors are more deadly than purely auditing errors is that Routine 2 is handling the pc by batches of lifetimes. All the stress and gore and agony of generations exist on the lists of any one package. An auditing error can be gross and get by unless it is sitting on a Routine 2 error. Then the tiniest auditing flub can produce a reaction like an earthquake. The charge is all coming from Routine 2 mishandling and is evident on the surface only by the auditing error.


CASE REMEDY

Routine 2 case patch-up is elementary, done with a knowledge of the above errors. Just find out which one of the above sections is being violated. And get it done. The error will only be one of the above to cause case non-progress or worsening.

The sections are given in order of importance.

I will shortly work up a series of actual case history case repairs. So save the records and you save all.

SUMMARY

Routine 2-10 and 2-12 are their own technology and must be learned as such.

Routine 2 errors are more shaking to a case than errors in form and meter (except where the auditor can’t even see a rock slam!) and where a case is not winning on

Routine 2 auditing it is the Routine 2 that must be reviewed—and fast. The elements to be reviewed are all listed above by sections in order of importance. Of course many other smaller fantastic errors can be done and will be invented but they will be junior in value to those listed above and will be reported when found.

Routine 2 will be with us a long, long time and it is worth learning well. It takes the toughest case apart and is the only process that can start the actual clearing of 80% or more of all cases.

I have done or reviewed thousands of hours of auditing in forming and organizing and testing Routine 2.

It is the most gratifying (and sometimes hair-raising) auditing I have ever done or viewed. You can’t oversell Routine 2. You just can’t. For it is the first gateway to light, life and liberty for all Mankind at last.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:dr.rd.dr
Copyright © 1962, 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 8 JUNE AD13R
REVISED 3 OCTOBER 1977
Central Orgs
Franchise
(Revision in this type style page 25,
paragraph .)

(Reissued 21 March 1978 to correct a typo in paragraph 7, page 29.)

THE TIME TRACK
AND
ENGRAM RUNNING BY CHAINS
BULLETIN 2
HANDLING THE TIME TRACK


Although finding and curtailing the development of the time track at genus is not improbable, the ability of the preclear to attain it early on is questionable without reducing the charge on the existing track. Therefore, any system which reduces the charged condition of the time track without reducing but increasing the awareness and decisionability of the preclear is valid processing. Any system which seeks to handle the charge but reduces the preclear’s awareness and decisionability is not valid processing but is degrading.

According to early axioms, the single source of aberration is time. Therefore any system which further confuses or overwhelms the preclear’s sense of time will not be beneficial.

Thus the first task of the student of engram running is to master the handling of time on the preclear’s time track. It must be handled without question, uncertainty or confusion.

Failing to handle the time in the pc’s time track with confidence, certainty and without error will result in grouping or denying the time track to the pc.

The prime source of ARC break in engram running sessions is bypassing charge by time mishandling by the auditor. As a subhead under this, taking and trying to run incidents which are not basic on a chain constitute an error in time and react on the pc like bypassed RIs or GPMs.

An ARC break-less session requires gentle accurate time scouting, the selection of the earliest timed incident available and the accurate time handling of the incident as it is run.

There are only a few reasons why some cannot run engrams on pcs. These are:

1. Q and A with the pain and unconsciousness of incidents;

2. Failing to handle the time track of the pc for the pc;

3. Failure to understand and handle time.

2 and 3 are much the same. However, there are three ways to move a time track about:

(a) By Significance (the moment something was considered);

(b) By Location (the moment the pc was located somewhere);

(c) By Time alone (the date or years before an event or years ago).

You will see all three have time in common. “The moment when you thought______” “The moment you were on the cliff “ “Two years before you put your foot on the bottom step of the scaffold” are all dependent on time. Each designates an instant on the time track of which there can be no mistake by either auditor or pc.

The whole handling of the time track can be done by any one of these three methods, Significance, Location, Time.

Therefore all projectionist work is done by the Time of Significance, the Time of Location or Time alone.

The track responds. Those auditors who have trouble cannot grasp the totality and accuracy and speed of that response. The idiotic and wonderful precision of the time track defeats the sloppy and careless. They wonder if it went. They question the pc’s being there. They fumble about until they destroy their command over the time track.

“Go to 47,983,678,283,736 years 2 months, 4 days I hour and six minutes ago.” Well, a clear statement of it, unfumbled, will cause just that to happen. The tiniest quiver of doubt, a fumble over the millions and nothing happens.

Fumbled dating gets no dates. One must date boldly with no throat catches or hesitations. “More than 40,000? Less than 40,000?” Get it the first read. Don’t go on peering myopically at the meter asking the same question the rest of the session. Accurate, bold, rapid. Those are the watchwords of dating and time track handling.

In moving a time track about, move only the track. Don’t mix it and also move the pc. You can say “Move to .” You don’t have to say (but you can) “The somatic strip will move to .” But never say “You will move to .” And this also applies to present time. The pc won’t come to present time. He’s here. But the time track will move to the date of present time unless the pc is really stuck. In getting a pc to present time (unimportant in modern engram running) say “Move to (date month and year of PT).”

In scouting you always use To. “Move To .” In running an engram or whatever, you always use THROUGH. “Move through the incident .”

If an auditor hasn’t a ruddy clue about the time track and its composition, he or she won’t ever be able to run engrams. So, obviously, the first thing to teach and have passed in engram running is time track composition. When the auditor learns that, he or she will be able to run engrams. If the auditor does not know the subject of the time track well, then he or she can’t be taught to run engrams, for no rote commands that cover all cases can exist. You couldn’t teach the handling of a motion picture projector by rote commands if the operator had never imagined the existence of film. An auditor sitting there thinking the pc is doing this or that and being in a general fuddle about it will soon have film all over the floor and wrapped about his ears. His plea for a rote command will just tangle up more film so long as he doesn’t know it is film and that he, not the preclear, is handling it.

If an auditor can learn this, he will then be able to learn to run those small parts of the time track called engrams. If an auditor can’t run a pc through some pleasant time track flawlessly, he or she sure can’t run a pc through the living lightning parts of that track called engrams.

An auditor who cannot handle the time track smoothly can scarcely call himself an auditor as that’s all there is to audit besides postulates, no matter what process you are using, no matter what process you invent and even if you tried what is laughingly called a “biochemical approach” to the mind. There’s only a time track for the bios to affect.

There’s a thetan, there’s a time track. The thetan gets caught in the time track. The job of the auditor is to free the theta n by digging him out of his time track. So if you can’t handle what you’re digging a thetan out of, you’re going to have an awful lot of landslides and a lot of auditing loses for both you and preclears.

Invent games, devices, charts and training aids galore and teach with them and you’ll have auditors who can handle the time track and run engrams.


CHARGE AND THE TIME TRACK

Charge, the stored quantities of energy in the time track, is the sole thing that is being relieved or removed by the auditor from the time track.

When this charge is present in huge amounts the time track overwhelms the pc and the pc is thrust below observation of the actual track.

This is the State of Case Scale. (All levels given are major levels. Minor levels exist between them.)

Level (1) NO TRACK — No charge
Level (2) FULL VISIBLE TIME TRACK — Some charge
Level (3) SPORADIC VISIBILITY OF
TRACK — Some heavily charged areas.
Level (4) INVISIBLE TRACK — Very heavily charged areas
(Black or Invisible Field.) exist.
Level (5) DUB-IN — Some areas of track so heav
ily charged pc is below
consciousness in them.
Level (6) DUB-IN OF DUB-IN — Many areas of track so
heavily charged, the dub-in
is submerged.
Level (7) ONLY AWARE OF OWN — Track too heavily charged
EVALUATIONS to be viewed at all.
Level (8) UNAWARE — Pc dull, often in a coma.

On this new scale the very good, easy to run cases are at Level (3). Skilled engram running can handle down to Level (4). Engram running is useless from Level (4) down. Level (4) is questionable.

Level (1) is of course an OT. Level (2) is the clearest Clear anybody ever heard of. Level (3) can run engrams. Level (4) can run early track engrams if the running is skilled. (Level (4) includes the Black V case.) Level (5) has to be run on general ARC processes. Level (6) has to be run carefully on special ARC processes with lots of havingness. Level (7) responds to the CCHs. Level (8) responds only to reach and withdraw CCHs.

Pre-Dianetic and Pre-Scientology mental studies were observations from Level (7) which considered Levels (5) and (6) and (8) the only states of case and oddly enough overlooked Level (7) entirely, all states of case were considered either neurotic or insane, with sanity either slightly glimpsed or decried.

In actuality on some portion of every time track in every case you will find each of the levels except (I) momentarily expressed. The above scale is devoted to chronic case level and is useful in programming a case. But any case for brief moments or
longer will hit these levels in being processed. This is the temporary case level found only in sessions on chronically higher level cases when they go through a tough bit.

Thus engram running can be seen to be limited to higher level cases. Other processing, notably modern ARC processes, moves the case up to engram running.

Now what makes these levels of case?

It is entirely charge. The more heavily charged the case, the lower it falls on the above scale. It is charge that prevents the pc from confronting the time track and submerges the time track from view.

Charge is stored energy or stored or recreatable potentials of energy.

The E-Meter registers charge. A very high or low tone arm, a sticky or dirty needle, all are registrations of this charge. The “chronic meter of a case” is an index of chronic charge. The fluctuations of a meter during a session are registering relative charge in different portions of the pc’s time track.

More valuably the meter registers released charge. You can see it blowing on the meter. The disintegrating RR, the blowing down of the TA, the heavy falls, the loosening needle all show charge being released.

The meter registers charge found and then charge released. It registers charge found but not yet released by the needle getting tight, by DN, by a climbing TA or a TA going far below the clear read. Then as this cleans up, the charge is seen to “blow.”

Charge that is restimulated but not released causes the case to “charge up,” in that charge already on the time track is triggered but is not yet viewed by the pc. The whole cycle of restimulated charge that is then blown gives us the action of auditing. When PRIOR charge is restimulated but not located so that it can be blown, we get “ARC breaks.”

The State of Case, the chronic level, as given on the above scale, is the totality of charge on the case. Level (1) has no charge on it. Level (8) is total charge. The day to day condition of a case, its temper, reaction to things, brightness, depends upon two factors, (a) the totality of charge on the case and (b) the amount of charge in restimulation. Thus a case being processed varies in tone by (a) the totality of charge remaining on the case (b) the amount of charge in restimulation and © the amount of charge blown by processing.

Charge is held in place by the basic on a chain. When only later than basic incidents are run charge can be restimulated and then bottled up again with a very small amount blown. This is known as “grinding out” an incident. An engram is getting run, but as it is not basic on a chain, no adequate amount of charge is being released.

Later than basic incidents are run either (a) to uncover more basic (earlier) incidents or (b) to clean up the chain after basic has been found and erased.

No full erasure of incidents later than basic is possible, but charge can be removed from them providing they are not ground out but only run lightly a time or two and then an earlier incident on the chain found and similarly run. When the basic is found it is erased by many passes over it. Basic is the only one which can be run many times. The later the incident is (the further from basic) the more lightly it is run .

There is no difference in the technology required to run a basic or a later incident. It is only the number of times THROUGH that differs. Basic is run through many times. A somewhat later engram is run through a couple of times. An engram very late on the chain is gone through once. Otherwise all engrams whether basic or not are run exactly the same.

Engrams are run to release charge from a ease. Charge is not released to cure the body or to cure anything physical and the meter cures nothing. Charge is released entirely to return to a thetan his causation over the time track, to restore his power of choice, and to free him of his most intimate trap, his own time track. You cannot have decent, honest or capable beings as long as they are trapped and overwhelmed. While this philosophy may be contrary to the intentions of a slavemaster or a degrader it is nevertheless demonstrably true. The universe is not itself a trap capable only of degradation. But beings exist who, beaten and overwhelmed themselves, can utilize this universe to degrade others.

The mission of engram running is to free the charge which has accumulated in a being and so restore that being to appreciated life.

All eases, sooner or later, have to be run on engrams, no matter what else has to be done. For it is in engrams that the bulk of the charge on the time track lies. And it is therefore those parts of the time track called engrams which overwhelm the thetan. These contain pain and unconsciousness and are therefore the record of moments when a thetan was most at effect and least at cause. In these moments then the thetan is least able to confront or to be causative.

The engram also contains moments when it was necessary to have moved and most degrading to have held a position in space.

And the engram contains the heaviest ARC break with a thetan’s environment and other beings.

And all these things add up to charge, an impulse to withdraw from that which can’t be withdrawn from or to approach that which can’t be approached, and this, like a two pole battery, generates current. This constantly generated current is chronic charge. The principal actions are:

(a) When the attention of the thetan is directed broadly in the direction of such a track record the current increases.

(b) When the attention is more closely (but not forcefully) and accurately directed, the current is discharged.

(c) When the basic on the chain is found and erased, that which composes the poles themselves is erased and later incidents eased, for no further generation is possible by that chain and it becomes incapable of producing further charge to be restimulated. The above are the actions which occur during auditing. If these actions do not occur despite auditing, then there is no case betterment, so it is the auditor’s responsibility to make sure they do occur.

As the time track is created by an involuntary response of the thetan, it is and exists as a real thing, composed of space, matter, energy, time and significance. On a Level (8) Case the time track is completely submerged by charge even down to a total unawareness of thought itself. At Level (7) awareness of the track is confined by extant charge to opinions about it. At Level (6) charge on the track is such that pictures of pictures of the track are gratuitously furnished, causing delusive copies of inaccurate copies of the track. At Level (5) charge is sufficient to cause only inaccurate copies of the track to be viewable. At Level (4) charge is sufficient to obscure the track. At Level (3) charge is sufficient to wipe out portions of the track. At Level (2) there is only enough charge to maintain the existence of the track. At Level (1) there is no charge and no track to create it. All charge from Level (1) and up into higher states that is generated is knowingly generated by the thetan, whose ability to hold locations in space and poles apart results in charge as needful.

This would degenerate again as he put such matters on automatic or began once more to make a time track, but these actions alone are not capable of aberrating a thetan until he encounters further violent degradation and entrapment in the form of implants.
Aberration itself must be calculated to occur. The existence of a time track only makes it possible for it to occur and be retained.

Thus a thetan’s first real mistake is to consider his own pictures and their recorded events important, and his second mistake is in not obliterating entrapment activities in such a way as not to become entrapped or aberrated in doing so, all of which can be done and should be.

Engram running is a step necessary to get at the more fundamental causes of a time track and handle them.

So it is a skill which must be done and done well.


L. RON HUBBARD

Revision assisted by
Jill Steinberg
Editor “Dianetics Today”


LRH:JS:pat.dr
Copyright © 1963, 1977, 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF MARCH 10, 1964
Class VI Students
Central Orgs
for info
SCIENTOLOGY VI


BASIC AUDITING
NON-READING METERS
METER FLINCH


There are various reasons a pc does not read on a meter. Amongst these are:

1) ARC broken (where only the ARC break’s bypassed charge will read)
2) Antipathy to meter
3) Antipathy to auditor
4) Antipathy to something in the session environment
5) Suppress button out (but Suppress itself will read)
6) Invalidate button out (but Invalidate will read)
7) Meter somewhere not connected to pc
8) Meter battery flat
9) Auditor on the wrong track (probably the commonest source of a dead looking
meter that won’t RR or fall hard)
10) Meter locked up on a wrong goal (happens mostly on running items in a wrong
goal)
11) Overlisting a goal or item list
12) Getting into a GPM in an earlier series.

But of all the reasons the one least suspected is (13) pc flinch.

After a pc has been knocked around with creaks or pain by actual GPMs, the pc decides a lot of things like “go easy on it” and “just sit here” and “keep away from it” and even “I can’t take it.” And bang, no checkout reads.

“Are you flinching” is a question that will RR on a flat meter if the pc is. Don’t overuse it. Usually you’re just on a wrong track.

You may even waste time with a new Prepcheck on the meter only to find your first Prepcheck on it is flat. The truth is, the pc is rabbiting.

Don’t blame the pc too much. The pain can be horrible from GPMs.

But remember this—the only things that turn on pain are:

(a) Invalidating or suppressing a RIGHT GOAL. A wrong goal can have its but tons out a mile and just make the pc a little dizzy. Only a RIGHT goal can make the pc HURT or turn on a chronic-looking somatic.

(b) A RIGHT goal in the wrong series, which is to say a skip of GPMs.

Only (a) and (b) can make the pc hurt.

So if the pc hurts ask (a) or (b). If it’s (a) get the Suppress, Invalidate buttons in fast. If (b) get the right goal series, or find what’s skipped.

(a) and (b) can be in combination.

And then get off any of the considerations a pc may have had about not going near GPMs and you’ll avoid future flinch.

The Invalidation read of a GPM can be dated and the invalidated GPM can be looked up or otherwise relocated. Only right goals handled wrong hurt and only this makes a pc flinch.

By the way, if the pain of a suppressed or invalidated GPM doesn’t vanish when the buttons are put in, then there’s another right goal suppressed or invalidated also! Or maybe more!

A pc who is consistently flinching needs the subjects of goals, etc., cleaned up.


LRH:dr L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1964
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 12 OCTOBER 1966
Issue IV
Remimeo
Tech Hats
Qual Hats
Students
EXAMINATIONS


A student must not discuss any examination with anyone outside the Qualifications Division. To give examination information to other students in order to assist them shows a misguided understanding of help. A student should pass an examination on the basis that he does know and can apply the data, not on the basis that he knows and can pass the examination. Only by being able to know and apply the data can a student be an accomplished auditor at any level.

Therefore, students are not to discuss examinations with other students for whatever reason.

Further, students who fail examinations or any question thereon are not to discuss such failure or reasons for such with anyone other than the personnel of the Qualifications Division. This regulation includes not only other students, but Course Supervisors. Data as to examination failures is supplied from the Qualifications Division to the Technical Division, and a student, not knowing the data sufficiently well, can cause Dev-T by reporting false data to a Course Supervisor as to why the examination was failed.

Any student who feels that he has been incorrectly failed on an examination can report the matter to Ethics. This is the proper line for any complaint the student may have concerning an examination, if such still seems incorrect after taking it up with the Qualifications Division.


LRH:rd.sb L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1966 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 23 AUGUST 1968
Class VIII

ARBITRARIES


Any arbitrary entered into any line is a way to stop that line.

An auditor doing a job of auditing suddenly enters an arbitrary such as “The pc now has a grief charge so he must have a withhold as I’ve just cleaned up ARC breaks.” Or any such wild think. This arbitrary would stop that pc’s case right now.

You get all there is to know about tech from HCOBs, tapes, books.

This is all.

Here’s one—when the needle on an E-Meter read in the response to an auditor’s question, all you know is that the needle on the E-Meter read. That’s all you know. Now in the next few seconds you will prove out, as to whether the read was to the question or to something else like a protest. To assume anything else in regard to meter reads is an arbitrary and will close up that pc with a bang.

That’s the data. Knock off all the arbitraries NOW.

Punch in hard standard tech. Standard tech is that tech which has absolutely no arbitraries.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:jp.ja.pc
Copyright © 1968
By L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 23 AUGUST 1968
Class VIII

WORKABILITY OF TECH


The quality of technology is to the degree it increases percentages of cures it obtains within the framework of the society in which it operates. 22 1/2% will change for the better or “get well” on sugar pills. 33% will make it regardless of how the tech is applied. The percentages from these on up are determined by the formula.

Early Dianetics with a raw book auditor run well over 50%.

Then into Scientology shot the percentages up to 97%, 3% here being those heavily PTS and so on. Even these are being handled with standard tech eventually.

These percentages are all inclusive of all possible tech errors because we do get the percentages finally.

This then shows that Scientology technology, when applied by standard tech action, will give a fantastic percentage of successes to the auditor who does only standard tech actions.

The older practices have a very hard time showing 10% even though 22 1/2% recover on sugar pills.

The quality of Scientology technology is in the percentages, provable and observable.

The workability of Scientology can be shown. Do so. Older practices can’t.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 26 AUGUST 1968
Class VIII

THE CLASS VIII COURSE


The Class VIII Course will teach the entire subject of Scientology in its exact standard practical applications from ARC Straightwire to OTs.

The course will be exactly taught as per HCOBs, tapes, books.

The course will include—

Qs Logics—Prelogics, Axioms
Auditor’s Code
Code of a Scientologist
F/N data
TRs
E-Meter Essentials
Book of Case Remedies
All about the E-Meter
Case supervision
Review folders
How to run ARC Straightwire
How to run locks on secondaries
How to run secondaries
How to run locks on engrams
How to run engrams
How to run Level 0 and process of that level
How to run Level 1, PTPs
How to run Level 2, O/Ws, M/W/H, Sec Check
Listing and nulling data—S & D, L4A, Rem A & B
Level 3, ARC breaks, L-1
Level 4, hidden standards
Power, Level 5
Level 6
Clear
OT I
OT II
OT III
OT IV
OT V
OT VI
OT VII
OT VIII.

How to handle exact data of the levels will be taught and data necessary to the level, as not doing standard actions are all that hang a case up, no matter what level a case is from—Straightwire to OT VIII.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 10 SEPTEMBER 1968
Class VIII

CASE SUPERVISOR

ADMIN IN AUDITING


A Case Supervisor cannot do a decent job of C/S when he is presented with lousy admin such as—no Auditor Report Forms, not handling Gr Form reads as they occur, not writing in F/Ns, not making a ring around the item found, not indicating where a list was extended. Also illegible writing, failure to go over a report when done and make obscure words plain in print is a NO REPORT and gets liability.

When you run into a snag you can’t handle, DON’T start inventing tech and doing something else other than the C/S instructions.

End off the session and send it to the Case Supervisor.

It is, I am told, the wild fashion in Quals and HGCs around the world that if one hits a snag, the auditor rushes out and asks the D of P who gives him an unusual solution without even looking at a folder. If I catch or hear of anyone doing that, it’s the Deep 6.

The CORRECT action and the ONLY correct action is to end the session and get folder and session paper to a Case Supervisor, who (I) does not see the pc and (2) does not talk to the auditor.

Case Super is folder ONLY. Then there’s a chance of standard tech.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH :jp
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 10 SEPTEMBER 1968
Class VIII

FLUNKS


These are the most common goofs found made by auditors in case supervising over a hundred folders.

(1) Pc audited with no instructions from C/S.

(2) Audited on squirrel process.

(3) False Auditor Report—FLUNK FLUNK.

(4) Audited past F/N.

(5) Auditing a pc while on medication.

(6) Auditing a pc while ill.

(7) Leaving pc with a problem.

(8) Auditing a pc on no sleep.

(9) Nulling an L1 to largest read.

(10) Not giving pc his item.

(11) Not tracing an ARC break, M/W/H or PTP down to basic when it doesn’t blow.

(12) Not handling reading GF items as they occur.

(13) Failure to use ruds on even (;F when TA rises between session before starting major action of session.

(14) Not following C/S instructions.

(15) Taking frequent breaks.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.wa
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manors East Grinstead. Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 10 SEPTEMBER 1968
Class VIII
“STANDARD” TECH DATA


“Standard” in standard tech auditing is a precise activity, done with good TRs, exact grade processes and exact actions.

A Green Form is done by handling every read, not by “uhuh” or nulling it, or doing it after the GF is all done.

Observe the Auditor’s Code in every line and do the usual and solve the case.

Standard action in handling Green Form ARC Brks PTP and M/W/H (a) Itsa (b) If not cleared on Itsa get the basic on the chain. All GF and L and ruds follow this rule. A process is not used except ARC break ARCU CDEI.

Always do a list like L1, L4 or GF, etc., by handling each read as it’s found.

Random auditing on pcs and pre-OTs should not be done. Knock off these arbitrary “Somebody else thinks he needs a_____.” This is evaluative and a break of the Auditor’s Code. Pcs can be stopped by over-repairs they just need to get on with it.

Do standard GF and remedy actions and let pc or pre-OT get on with the next cycle of section or grade.

It’s the grade processes and OT levels that improve cases. The process the pc should be on is always the next grade.

If TA rises between sessions. get it down with ruds and if that doesn’t get it down, a Green Form. This is a standing order. TAs that won’t come down with routine rudiments come down with GF.

True of ALL rehabbing actions is you don’t rehab on a high TA at session start. Only when it is just then overrun. Then you rehab it back to F/N.

In ruds, all you know when you see a read is that the meter read and the question you asked. The meter read is not uniformly what you asked and can be a protest or a REPEATING FALSE READ. Usually one goes right along auditing but when pc shows any sign of protest or bafflement on a rud read, you routinely trace it for an earlier false read, find and clean it.

If an R/S won’t clean up on a pc, clean up “Have you ever been accused of things you haven’t done” as a process as the R/S may be from invalidation. Can also clean up protest.

R/S on a child may be:

(A) Don’t tell. Somebody told him not to.

(B) Crime.

(C) Accusation—said you did something you didn’t do.

You set up a case with F/N before you undertake major new actions. Always set up a case to be run. End off an action at F/N.

It’s not safe to begin a session without an ARC Br check when there’s been a time between sessions.

With pcs in sad effect, you should always check ARC break of long duration.

You treble time in session every time you take any breaks. To economize in auditing time (session time) you should cut out breaks as they get the pc in trouble when he’s out of the room, then you have to clean it up and so time is lost.

No TA on a Sec Check means pc tends to be out of valence. Anybody has a few.
TA goes high and low when a pc is going into and to PT from a heavy past life.

Never tell a pc he will have another session in session as it continues the session and doesn’t end it. An old old old rule.

You never let pc off cans in standard tech.

A persistent item that doesn’t blow is usually a wrong item. Other symptoms could proceed from a wrong item.

A Prepcheck in nearly every case turns on and uncovers old ARC breaks. In doing a Prepcheck be alert for BIs, and ask ARC Br question.

L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:jp. ja
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED










HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 10 SEPTEMBER 1968
(Amended 20 Sept 68)
Class VIII

VALENCE SHIFTER


The list question, “What valence (identity) would be safe” is based on tech theory and is used for pre-OTs with high OT sections that do not change non-optimum behaviour.

It is also (rarely) used on a lower grade case who is “detached” which is to say chronically out of valence to the point of no case gain.

It is very dynamite—be exact in listing it.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:jp
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 11 SEPTEMBER 1968
Class VIII

C/S INSTRUCTIONS


Standard action for an old-timer who has been run on thousands of hours on all types of processes:

(1) Do GF.

(2) Do an S & D

(3) List “What has been overrun,” handling and indicating each item as it reads.

(4) Rehab all grades, Sub-Zeroes, 0-14 (omit Power).

(5) Rehab R6EW, Clearing Course, OT I, OT II.

(6) Prepcheck III. Watch for ARC breaks during Prepcheck and handle as they arise.

(7) Rehab IV, V and VI if done.

(8) Do a Valence Shifter.

A standard one-time action for a Section III OT:

(1) Get in ruds so TA is in decent range (2 to 3). If TA doesn’t come down and F/N on ruds, do a GF.

(2) Rehab or run ARC Straightwire to IV (omit Power always after Clear).

(3) Rehab F/Ns R6EW, Clear, OT I, OT II.

(4) Prepcheck Section III.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH: jp
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 15 SEPTEMBER 1968
Class VIII


Pc looking or continually feeling tired = blunted purpose, evaluation and invalidation .

M/W/H gives a nattery critical aspect, not “Pc looks tired” as one auditor thought.

Pc feels tired. Do a purpose list as follows:

What purpose has been blunted? (You can also use “abandoned” if it reads better.) Find an item. If no F/N, Prepcheck it to F/N.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:jp
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 15 SEPTEMBER 1968

Class VIII


The first thing I learned about teaching a Class VIII auditor is he thinks he can fly before he can even creep.

Such is the power of standard tech, it can go to his head as an auditor and as a Case Supervisor before he learns even the barest essentials.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:jp
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 16 SEPTEMBER 1968
Class VIII

END PHENOMENA


An auditor must be able to relate all of the end phenomena of a process to an F/N in clay. This must be compared also to a cycle of action.

The object of the exercise is to tell when not to and when to cut a preclear’s comm with regard to an F/N.

Phenomena of pc occurs after phenomena of meter.

Skill to be learnt by the Class VIII auditor is the precise instant to tell the pc it’s an F/N.

Criticism of auditor’s TRs actually stemmed from the auditor’s inability to see when a cycle of action is complete and cut the pc’s comm off at precisely the right instant so it doesn’t cut the pc’s cycle of action and so it doesn’t turn off the F/N.

If the pc’s comm is cut wrong the pc tries to conclude it to everyone they meet and so overruns the process, that is why pcs don’t come back into session with an F/N.

This is a vitally important datum because it has slown cases down to total recovery when violated.

This has been an unforeseen factor in C/S of Class VIII auditing.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:jp
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 22 SEPTEMBER 1968
Class VIII

REHABS


Old no longer used processes such as “3GXX” “R2-12” have to be added to C/S ordered rehabs, particularly if the pc talks of them which means they were overrun.,

All these early ones were overrun. Clear (meaning Release) was lost in 1950, recovered in about ‘58, lost again until my C/Sing of the first Power noted the phenomena of overrun.

Overrun was therefore the order of the day. But these processes did bring about genuine releases.

It is best to count the number of times released on each process and rehab each different one.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:jp
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 23 SEPTEMBER 1968

Class VIII

VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OF LISTING AND NULLING


Rudiments (ARC Bks, PTPs, M/W/Hs) are usually not necessary in correcting a list as a wrong list usually is the ARC Bk and PTP.

To correct a list ask the pc or pre-OT

(1) “Is it an incomplete list?” If it is, extend it and find the item.

(2) “Was it the first item on the list?” If so, indicate item to pc or pre-OT.

(3) “Was it an unnecessary action?” (dead horse). If so, indicate it.

(4) “Had you not answered the listing question?” If so, re-clear question and if it reads list it.

The 4 basic reasons for a wrong list are here

(1) It was the first item.

(2) It is not a complete list.

(3) The question didn’t read (which causes a dead horse).

(4) The pc didn’t answer the question.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH: jp
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED



HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 26 SEPTEMBER 1968
Class VIII


The study of the “Well Done” LRH C/S Folder—the actual sessions themselves, makes the difference between a probable six months or 3-week course.

This is the difference between making auditors and not making auditors and anyone who removes them from the line will be shot.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 29 SEPTEMBER 1968
(Amended 29/10/68)
Class VIII

LIST CORRECTION
(Only valid for a list recently done)


1. Was it the first item on the list?

2. Was list incomplete?

3. Was the item bypassed?

4. Was the item suppressed?

5. Was the item invalidated?

6. Was the question meaningless?

7. Was the list overlisted?

8. Were items thought of that weren’t put down?

9. Was it listed out of session?

10. Was the item different when said by the auditor?

11. Was the item not given to you?

12. Was the action unnecessary?

13. Was a Release point bypassed, on the question only?

14. Was a Release point bypassed on listing?


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:jp
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 4 OCTOBER 1968
AOs
Class VIII

ADVANCE COURSES



YOU MUST NEVER ISSUE AN ADVANCE COURSE TO ANYONE WITHOUT CASE SUPERVISOR OKAY.

These pre-OTs are often in Review, often not ready and ALWAYS must be okayed by the C/S both to have it and then after study, to fly the ruds.

To not do this means you’re running Advance Courses on people with OUT RUDS. You’ll wreck cases this way!


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:jp
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED














HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 4 OCTOBER 1968
Class VIII


Pre-OTs who have been audited for a long time over out ruds will not respond to the OT IV Rundown unless every rud is gotten in.

When putting in the ruds on such pcs, you put in suppress and false reads on each one, each to F/N.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 5 OCTOBER 1968
Class VIII

ARC BRK NEEDLE


An ARC Brk needle (and a Stage 4 “float”) are EASILY DETECTED.

An “F/N” with bad indicators is an ARC Brk needle. These can include propitiation.

A Class VIII must know the Bad Indicator List and know that when these accompany an “F/N” it is an ARC Brk needle.

When this happens, one checks for SESSION ARC BREAKS, then for MISSED ARC BREAK, then for falsely called ARC Brks or suppressed ARC Brks. If this doesn’t clean it, then ask for an ARC Brk long duration.

What has happened is that the pc has gone into a secondary or an engram.

It is not a job for rudiments to run it. It is only to be keyed-out.

It is a Q and A to date and run a secondary in rudiments because of an ARC Brk needle. The auditor is to key it out by session or life. Itsa and earlier similar incident with itsa, each ARC break with ARCU CDEI.

The C/S can have it run as a secondary. It will be TOO HEAVY to run if it is not keyed-out first. It is handled by key-out in rudiments.

It is quite usual that a pc has just mentioned grief when the ARC: Br needle turns on. Or some gloomy idea. A real F/N means the pc is out the top, an ARC Br needle means he’s out the bottom. He ceases to mock up, through grief.

It is a very serious thing for a pc to get audited over an ARC Br needle. It must be spotted and handled (keyed-out) when it occurs.

It occurs most often with a TA below 2.0.

A real F/N has one or more GIs.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH: ja
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 21 OCTOBER 1968R
REVISED 9 JULY 1977
Remimeo
Corrected & Reissued 15 July 1977
to correct typo, para 3.
(Deletes reference to needle “R/Sing” before an F/N.)


FLOATING NEEDLE


Floating needles (F/Ns) are the end phenomena for any process or action with the pc on two cans. It is one of the most important rediscoveries made in years. It was known but lost by auditors.

It is the idle uninfluenced movement of the needle on the dial without any patterns or reactions in it. It can be as small as 1” or as large as dial wide. It does not fall or drop to the right of the dial. It moves to the left at the same speed as it moves to the right. It is observed on a Mark V E-Meter calibrated with the TA between 2.0 and 3.0 with GIs in on the pc. It can occur after a cognition blowdown of the TA or just moves into floating. The pc may or may not voice the cognition.

It, by the nature of the E-Meter reading below the awareness of the thetan, occurs just before the pc is aware of it. So to give a “That’s it” on the occurrence of the F/N can prevent the pc from getting the cognition.

A “floating needle” occurring above 3.0 or below 2.0 on a calibrated Mark V E-Meter with the pc on 2 cans is an ARC broken needle. Watch for the pc’s indicators. An ARC broken needle can occur between 2.0 and 3.0 where bad indicators are apparent.

Pcs and pre-OTs OFTEN signal an F/N with a “POP” to the left and the needle can actually even describe a pattern much like a rock slam. Meters with lighter movements do “pop” to the left.

One does not sit and study and be sure of an “F/N.” It swings or pops, he lets the pc cognite and then indicates the F/N to the pc preventing overrun.

When one OVERRUNS an F/N or misses one, the TA will start to climb. The thing to do is briefly rehabilitate it (rehab it) by indicating it has been bypassed and so regains it.

The F/N does not last very long in releasing. The thing to do is end the process off NOW. Don’t give another command.

It coincides with other “end phenomena” of processes but is senior to them.

An F/N can be in normal range and still be an ARC break needle. The thing which determines a real F/N is good indicators. Bad indicators always accompany an ARC break needle.

On an ARC break needle, check for an ARC break. If the TA then climbs, it was a real F/N so you rehab it quickly.

A one-hand electrode sometimes obscures an F/N and gives false TA. If used, use higher sensitivity and get the TA from 2 cans when needed.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Revised by
CS-4/5
LRH:JE;ja;If
Copyright © 1968, 1977 As ordered by
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED L. RON HUBBARD

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 1 NOVEMBER 1968
Issue II
Class VIII
OVERT-MOTIVATOR
DEFINITIONS


These are problems in FLOWS.

They exist with or without intention.

One can add “intentional” or “unintentional” to the definitions.

An OVERT—An act by the person or individual leading to the injury, reduction or degradation of another, others or their beingness, persons, possessions, associations or dynamics.

A MOTIVATOR is an act received by the person or individual causing injury, reduction or degradation of his beingness, person, associations or dynamics.

An overt of omission—a failure to act resulting in the injury, reduction or degradation of another or others or their beingness, persons, possessions or dynamics.

A motivator is called a “motivator” because it tends to prompt an overt. It gives a person a motive or reason or justification for an overt.

When a person commits an overt or overt of omission with no motivator he tends to believe or pretends that he has received a motivator which does not in fact exist. This is a FALSE MOTIVATOR.

Beings suffering from this are said to have “motivator hunger” and are often aggrieved over nothing.

Cases which “cave in hard” suffer from false motivators and resolve on being asked for overts done for no reason.

Cases which do not resolve on actual motivators have overts that have to be handled.

There is also the case with FALSE OVERTS. The person has been hit hard for no reason. So they dream up reasons they were hit.

Cases that go into imaginary cause (imagining they do or cause things bad or good) are suffering from false overt . They resolve on “When were you hit (punished, hurt, etc.) for no reason?”


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:jp
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manors East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 5 DECEMBER 1968
Class VIII

UNRESOLVING CASES


The mechanism of PTS is environmental menace that keeps something continually keyed-in. This can be a constant recurring somatic or continual, recurring pressure or a mass. The menace in the environment is NOT imaginary in such extreme cases.

The action can be taken to key it out. But if the environmental menace is actual and persists it will just key-in again. This gives recurring pressure unrelieved by usual processing.

In this event one can compare the environmental menace (by finding it, listing, 2-way comm etc.) and one will then find the incident or incidents being keyed-in are exactly similar in all respects or are thought so. These can be run out as secondaries or engrams.

Theoretically an environmental continual overt would do the same thing. In which case the secondary or engram would match it. This is in fact the only engrams that will run and erase on a PTS case.

Personal roller-coaster has this as its source.

The person does not see or associate the two.

This is why the PTS case does not respond to processing and gives a way for it to respond. This is also why the sick and insane do not respond. It is the same mechanism.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:bw
Copyright © 1968
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 15 DECEMBER 1968RA
(Amends HCO Bulletin of 9 January 1968 List L4A)
Remimeo (ITEM 6 CORRECTED 12 FEBRUARY 1969)
(Amended 8 August 1970)
(Amended 18 March 1971)
(Revised 2 June 72)
(Re-Revised 11 April 1977)
(Revisions in this type style)

L4BRA

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__________________________________

0. WAS IT THE FIRST ITEM ON THE LIST?
(Indicate and give pc his item.)

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 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. HAS THE WRONG ITEM BEEN TAKEN 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.)

9. HAD AN ITEM NOT BEEN GIVEN YOU?
(if reads, handle as in 7.)

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 BYPASSED ON LISTING?
(If so, indicate the overrun to the pc, rehab back.)

16. HAS A RELEASE POINT BEEN BYPASSED 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 BYPASSED?
(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.)

29. HAS AN ITEM BEEN FOUND PREVIOUSLY?
(If so, find what it was again and give it to the 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 bypassed charge. Find and correct the earlier out list. )

36. HAS AN EARLIER WRONG ITEM BEEN RESTIMULATED?
(If so, find when and indicate the bypassed charge. Find and correct the earlier out list.)

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. Handle the ARC break. Correct the list if it’s a list ARC break.)

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 BYPASSED 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

Assisted by CS-4/5

LRH:JE:ldm.rw.dz..rr.nt.dr
Copyright © 1968, 1972, 1976, 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 2 APRIL 1969RA
REVISED 28 JULY 1978
Remimeo
(Revisions in this type style)


DIANETIC ASSISTS
(Include in Medical Series)
The Use of Dianetics to the Medical Doctor


There is everything to be said for correct medical treatment in the handling of the sick and insane.

“Insanity” is most often the suppressed agony of actual physical illness and injury.

To “treat” this agony with shock and “brain operations” is a Nuremberg type offense and is indictable as mayhem or manslaughter.

The medical treatment of “insanity” requires sure awareness by the patient of his whereabouts and present time. These are usually quite unbearable so he has sunk into the past to escape the agony of the present.

The TOUCH ASSIST given to such injured persons permits healing to occur by restoring the person to the present and his whereabouts to some degree.

Healing after medical treatment might not occur rapidly if the “insane” or chronically ill person remains in the past, unable to confront the present.

Thus the Touch Assist speeds and often permits healing after medical treatment and sometimes in minor injuries and illness permits the doctor to accomplish healing without further treatment.

There is the TOUCH ASSIST, the CONTACT ASSIST and the AUDITING ASSIST.

The Touch Assist done as described elsewhere brings the patient’s attention to injured or affected body areas. When attention is withdrawn from them, so is circulation, nerve flows and energy which for one thing limits nutrition to the area and for another prevents the drain of waste products. Some ancient healers attributed remarkable flows and qualities to the “laying on of hands.” Probably the workable element in this was simply heightening awareness of the affected area and restoring the physical communication factors.

The CONTACT ASSIST is remarkable when it can be done. The patient is taken to the area where the injury occurred and makes the injured member gently contact it several times. A sudden pain will fly off and the injury if minor lessens or vanishes. This is again a physical communication factor. The body member seems to have withdrawn from that exact spot in the physical universe.

The restoration of awareness is often necessary before healing can occur.

The prolongation of a chronic injury occurs in the absence of physical communication with the affected area or with the location of the spot of injury in the physical universe.

The AUDITING ASSIST is done by a trained auditor using an E-Meter.

It consists of “running out” the physically painful experience the person has just undergone, accident, illness, operation or emotional shock. This erases the “psychic trauma” and speeds healing to a remarkable degree if done properly.

In addition to assists there is Dianetic auditing of an acutely ill person which handles the current and past illnesses and injuries by erasing the “physical trauma.”

The last is a skilled activity. Practitioners who have the idea such things do not have causes will of course fail to locate the causes.

A sickness can be composed, let us say, of a headache, a nausea, apathy and weariness.

Such a sickness may be bizarre, without medical reason.

By first getting the patient to find and say what shock occurred when the sickness began, getting when, and getting it recounted, the “illness” will lessen, the emotional state will alter—called a “release of affect.”

By then, finding an earlier similar instance and getting that one dated and recounted a further release of affect may occur.

If the good indicators, smiles, etc. do not occur in the patient, one again asks for an earlier incident, dates it and gets it recounted.

Physically sick persons divide into two classes: “acutely ill” and “chronically ill.” A person who is acutely ill is temporarily or momentarily ill and a person who is chronically ill is simply ill all the time.

You do not run heavy engram processes on an acutely ill pa. You do Touch Assists and get a Scientology auditor to deliver processes given in C/S Series 9, HCOB 21 June 1970, fourth section “Sick Pcs,” Tech Bulletin Volume VII, page 89.

You try not to run heavy engram chains on acutely ill pus as they are physically not up to it, cannot stand sessions long enough to get anywhere with a chain and usually all that happens is, the pa feels spinny and left in a restimmed condition. You can run Touch Assists and light Objective Processes.

On a chronically ill pa you can begin exactly as you would with an acutely ill pa, with the difference that when he improves you can run out the physically painful experience the person has just undergone with Narrative R3RA. After this you can proceed with regular New Era Dianetics.

Needless to say all this requires a skilled auditor but the skill can be acquired in a Dianetic training course.

The important thing is not to tell the patient what caused it, but to let him tell you. Otherwise the symptom suppresses.

The approach in any of these assists is quiet, gentle, permissive, never forcing the patient, speaking only the words required to do the process.

The temporarily insane by reason of emotional shock, where no medical illness exists, should be permitted rest and should then be handled by an assist as above or normal Dianetic auditing. Most often, rest and no further harassment result in a return to sanity in a short time such as a few days, but not in a terror atmosphere such as a psychiatric asylum where the patient is in the risk of being hurt or killed. Electric shock prolongs the condition and brain surgery is of course not treatment but murder as at best it deprives the person of his coordination and at worst shortens his life. The occasional and rare brain tumor is of course an exception but this is a medical not a psychiatric matter, no matter what manifestations the person exhibits.

Most medically ill people do exhibit symptoms of mental derangement at some stage of their illness.

The acceleration of healing of medical illness or injury such as broken bones or the after effects of delivery or operations can be accomplished by the Dianetic auditing of the resulting trauma soon after full medical treatment or attention. The improvement factor is about 1/3 the normal time of recovery by some thousands of test cases.

Such auditing is done by a usual Dianetic procedure.

In addition to the above assists there is regular Dianetic auditing which handles chronic discomforts and prevents future illness as well as improving the state of well-being of a person.

The mechanisms of the mind revealed in Dianetics are of great use to the field of medicine.

They are easy and quick to apply.

About one month’s training is all that is necessary to acquaint an otherwise educated and intelligent person with the fundamentals and skills necessary to assists.

Considerably more time of course is necessary to train a skilled Scientology auditor, but this is not the subject of this paper.

There is no conflict of interest between any healing profession and Dianetics. Dianetic materials and papers are fully available.

There is a conflict between Dianetics and political practices such as psychiatry since electric shock, brain operations and general degradation of the person may prevent the patient’s recovery by Dianetics.

As answers exist now for insanity there is no reason to continue medieval or Fascist solutions to the problem of the psychosomatically ill or the insane and we are doing everything in our power against fantastic opposition to end the torture and killing of the insane regardless of the politically “desirable” ends envisioned by some groups.

Dianetics, like any other true treatment, like aspirin or penicillin, was originally designed to handle the apparent basic cause of psychosomatic illness. The first research was intended to help allied prisoners of war degraded by the Japanese and Chinese prison camps and who after V-J day were transferred to Oak Knoll Naval Hospital. Later, in 1954, in a much more advanced state of development, Dianetics was successfully employed to eradicate the results of allied prisoners of the Korean War who had been subjected to Russian brainwashing. The subject has been improved, made easier to teach and apply and its results bettered continually over a total period of 29 years. It was in 1969... fully updated as Standard Dianetics. In 1978 it has again been upgraded as New Era Dianetics. It is very successful and is in very broad use over the world.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:cib
Copyright © 1969. 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 17 APRIL 1969R
REVISED 25 JULY 1978
Remimeo
Dianetics Checksheet
Class VIIIs (Revisions in this type style)
Dianetic Auditors (Ellipsis indicates deletion)

DIANETIC CASE SUPERVISION

Dianetics is done differently than Scientology in that its auditors are trained up to New Era Dianetics Graduate only. Therefore they do not have various skills you will find in a Scientology auditor. Even when they become a Scientology auditor, Dianetics is still done as Dianetics.

Therefore knowledge and skill above and beyond the training level of the New Era Dianetics Course is not to be expected of the New Era Dianetics auditor.

There are also things in Book One we no longer use such as Repeater Technique, looking for phrases to explain conditions.

We use Dianetics as it was re-worked in the early 60s and as currently being presented in the New Era Dianetics Series.

If it isn’t on the checksheet of the Dianetics Course, then we don’t demand it.

We do demand some skill with a meter and what a floating needle is.

If a Dianetic pc gets in trouble we send him to a Scientology auditor for a review. In this review, all Scientology skills (but no grades) can be done.

In review he can get in his rudiments, etc.

It is very worthy of note that in reviewing Dianetics or in doing Dianetic auditing ONE CAN RUN OUT BAD SESSIONS AS AN AUDITOR OR PC BY USING R3RA ON AUDITING SESSIONS OR THERAPY.

If we keep Dianetics to Dianetics we will again achieve the miracles of which it is capable.

Dianetics has been refined greatly. But it is all there on the checksheets now. There is no hidden data line.

It is far less complex today than it was in 1953, for instance, and much more effective. But it is still Dianetics. It is a technology that runs and erases locks, secondaries and engrams and their chains.

It should be case supervised and done with that fully in mind.

A New Era Dianetics auditor is a New Era Dianetics auditor. He can do what he can do.

And it’s marvellous.


LRH:dr L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1969. 1978 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 23 APRIL 1969RA
Remimeo REVISED 7 JULY 1978
Dn Checksheet RE-REVISED 20 SEPTEMBER 1978
Class VIIIs
Tech Secs
(Revisions in this type style)


DIANETICS
BASIC DEFINITIONS


ERASURE is the action of erasing, rubbing out, locks, secondaries or engrams. It occurs when the postulate made during the basic incident on the chain is gotten off.

A LOCK is a mental image picture of an incident where one was knowingly or unknowingly reminded of a secondary or engram. It does not itself contain a blow or a burn or impact and is not any major cause of misemotion. It does not contain unconsciousness. It may contain a feeling of pain or illness, etc., but is not itself the source of it. Example: one sees a cake, feels sick. This is a lock on an engram of being made sick by eating cake. The picture of seeing a cake and feeling sick is a lock on (is locked to) the incident (unseen at the moment) of getting sick eating cake. When one finds a lock it can be run like any other mental image picture.

A SECONDARY is a mental image picture of a moment of severe and shocking loss or threat of loss which contains misemotion such as anger, fear, grief, apathy or “deathfulness.” It is a mental image recording of a time of severe mental stress. It may contain unconsciousness. When it is restimulated by a similar but lighter experience another mental image picture is recorded which becomes a lock on the secondary and serves to keep the secondary alive. A secondary is called a secondary because it itself depends upon an earlier engram with similar data but real pain, etc.

AN ENGRAM is a mental image picture which is a recording of a time of physical pain and unconsciousness. It must by definition have impact or injury as part of its content.

It is of the very greatest importance that a Dianetic auditor really grasp what these things are. Otherwise he won’t know what he is doing or to what.

Now because he isn’t seeing his preclear’s pictures an auditor can become very careless about them and not handle them correctly.

If an auditor doesn’t really know what these things are (erasure, locks, secondaries, engrams) he cannot of course hope to handle them for the preclear.

The basic Dianetic errors are just not knowing what these are and that they are there to be handled and that these and these alone cause psychosomatic ills.

Once one has a full grip on these definitions he can then and only then hope to do anything with them for the preclear.

If the auditor is going to handle the aches, pains, unwanted sensations and psychosomatic illnesses of the preclear, it requires that he fully grasp these basic definitions.

Literally millions of complications can stem from the simple fact that a preclear records experiences in mental image pictures and that these thereafter can affect HIS BODY adversely.

Once one really understands that mental image pictures are all there is in the preclear’s “mind” one has understood the total of aberration. There is NOT something else there. No “id,” no “ego.” There are only mental image pictures.

These, if you use the exact procedures of Dianetics, can be found and erased.

When the unwanted locks, secondaries and engrams are erased the preclear will be rid of the physical disabilities of which he complains and will be well physically.

SOMATIC—means essentially body sensation, illness or pain or discomfort. “Soma” means body. Hence PSYCHO SOMATIC or pains stemming from the mind.

MISEMOTION—anything that is unpleasant emotion such as antagonism, anger, fear, grief, apathy or a death feeling.

This is the entire breadth of Dianetics today.

In Scientology we deal with the thetan, the being who is the individual and who handles and lives in the body. This is beyond the scope of today’s Dianetics.

If a preclear is well physically made so by Dianetics and any required physical medication or nutrition, he can then embark on Scientology, the increase of his abilities and spiritual freedom.

If a preclear who is being audited or has been audited on Scientology grades becomes ill one DOES NOT TRY TO MAKE HIM WELL BY GIVING HIM NEW HIGHER GRADES. That has been an error of great magnitude. Instead ONE REVERTS TO DIANETIC AUDITING until the pc is well and only then continues with Scientology.

This is correct procedure because it works.

People “come into Scientology” to cure their headaches. Somebody starts them off on grade auditing, several grades later they still have their headache. It is a continual present time problem to them and the auditor. It sometimes vanishes during grade processing. This gives an unfortunate win.

The right thing to have done was give the person DIANETIC AUDITING, until he or she no longer had headaches and then begin to audit the person on grades so as to put them well above ever again getting headaches.

Continual headaches come from mental image pictures retained by the pc of having a head crushed or shot off or hit. That is an engram. It actually had to happen. It is NOT imaginary or delusion. The proof is that when the auditor finally erases the engram the recording of the injury is gone and the headaches will not again occur.

The preclear often is unable to confront the actual engram at once. He offers one a LOCK, a time when he had a headache. One “runs” this lock (one always runs whatever is offered, you don’t force the pc) and finds after putting the preclear through it a couple of times that IT IS GETTING MORE SOLID or it simply isn’t erasing. One finds an earlier recording. This possibly turns out to be a secondary. The pc had a moment of loss and cried and also had a headache.

This secondary may or may not erase. If it does one leaves it of course as finished. But if it goes more solid (shown by TA rising at the end of a run through the incident—or if the pa says it is going more solid) one then asks for an earlier incident.

One probably would then get the actual engram. a recording of a time when the head was actually injured. The auditor runs this through and as soon as he has completed a run through the incident and discovered (from the rising TA or the pc) that the incident is going more solid, he asks for an earlier incident.


This one erases.

When it erases the whole chain of headaches ALSO erases.

And that is the end of the pc’s headaches period.

One then inquires after other somatics or sensations and handles them the same way.

It is all done by using the technique called R3RA without variation.

Since these recordings contain mainly other-determinedness (pictures of others doing things) the auditor always has more control over the preclear’s mental image pictures than the preclear does. Thus the pictures do what the auditor says. This point too must be grasped by an auditor or he will be waiting on the preclear to act or move in time.

The TIME TRACK is the consecutive record of mental image pictures which accumulates through the preclear’s life or lives. It is very exactly dated.

PLEASURE MOMENTS are mental image pictures containing pleasure sensations. They respond to R3RA. One seldom addresses them unless the preclear is fixated on some type of “pleasure” to a point where it has become highly aberrated.

BLACK FIELD is just some part of a mental image picture where the preclear is looking at blackness. It is part of some lock, secondary or engram. In Scientology it can occur (rarely) when the pc is exterior, looking at something black. It responds to R3RA.

INVISIBLE FIELD is just a part of some lock, secondary or engram that is “invisible.” It like a black field responds to R3RA.

PRESSURE SOMATIC is, in Dianetics, considered to be a symptom in a lock, secondary or engram, simply part of the content.

Whatever, the symptom pain sensation, whatever, it is from either the body directly (such as a broken bone, a gallstone or immediate physical cause) or is part of the content of a mental image picture—lock, secondary or engram.

The Dianetic auditor does not audit ideas or think. He is handling mental recordings. Ideas are in them. Ideas come out of them. But think is no longer part of Dianetics.

In Dianetics we handle locks, secondaries and engrams.

KEY-IN is the action of recording a lock on a secondary or engram.

KEY-OUT is an action of the engram or secondary dropping away without being erased.

DIANETIC F/Ns ARE HANDLED DIFFERENTLY THAN SCIENTOLOGY F/Ns.

An F/N seen by the auditor in running R3RA is not called until the full Dianetic EP is reached.

An auditor running R3RA is not looking for F/Ns. He is looking for the postulate which is sitting at the bottom of the chain he is running.

The EP of a Dianetic chain is always always always the postulate coming off. The postulate is what holds the chain in its place. Release the postulate and the chain blows. That’s it.

The auditor must recognize the postulate when the pa gives it, note the VGIs, call the F/N and end off auditing that chain.

An F/N seen as the incident is erasing is not called.

The pa does not have to state that the incident has erased. Once he has given up the postulate the erasure has occurred. The auditor will see an F/N and VGIs. Now the F/N is called. F/Ns are not indicated until the EP of postulate off, F/N and VGIs is reached.

It’s the postulate—not the F/N that we are going for in New Era Dianetics.

MULTIPLE ILLNESS—means the preclear is physically uncomfortable or ill from several engrams of different types all restimulated. One runs one somatic chain at a time, running each new symptom that is assessed or stated by the preclear.

CHAIN means a series of recordings of similar experiences. A chain has engrams, secondaries and locks. Example—head injury chain in the sequence encountered by an auditor and run by R3RA—sporting goods display window seeing it (lock), losing a bat (secondary), hit in the head with a bat (engram). The engram is the earliest date, the secondary a later date, the lock the most recent.

By using somatics to trace back (meaning discomforts, complaints, sensations, aches, pains) and by staying on the chain of only one somatic (i.e. headaches) you get back down the single chain without dispersing all over the place into different chains. Thus one runs the chain of one particular somatic or discomfort or complaint down to key-out or erasure before doing the next somatic or discomfort or complaint.

AUTOMATIC BANK—when a pc gets picture after picture after picture all out of control. This occurs when one isn’t following an assessed somatic or complaint or has chosen the wrong one or one which the pc is not ready to confront or by overwhelming the pc with rough TRs or going very non-standard. Some pcs turn up in their first session with automatic banks. The thing to do is carefully assess the physical complaint for longest or best read and gently handle that chain well.

BASIC—this is the FIRST experience recorded in mental image pictures of the TYPE of pain, sensation, discomfort, etc. Every chain has its basic. It is a PECULIARITY and a FACT that when one gets down to the basic on a chain (a) the postulate made at the time of the incident comes off and (b) the whole chain vanishes for good. Basic is simply earliest.

UNBURDENING—as a basic is not at once available on any chain one usually unburdens it by running later engrams, secondaries and locks. The act of unburdening would be digging off the top to get at the bottom as in moving sand. As you run off later incidents, the ability of the preclear to confront it also increases and basic is easy to run when finally contacted.

BASIC BASIC—this belongs in Scientology. It is wholly beyond the scope of Dianetics. It means the most basic basic of all basics and results in clearing. It is found on the Clearing Course. If contacted or run before the pc was brought up through the Scientology grades, he wouldn’t be able to handle it anyway as experience has shown. So this is part of Scientology, not Dianetics.

VALENCE is the form and identity of the preclear or another, the beingness.

ALLY—a person from whom one had sympathy and was dependent upon.

ASSESS in Dianetics means choose, from a list or statements, which item or thing has the longest read or the pc’s interest. The longest read will also have the pc’s interest oddly enough.

If you know these definitions COLD so you don’t have to mutter them or memo
rize them but just KNOW them, you will really get results with Dianetics.

The biggest failure in training auditors was their faulty grasp of what they were addressing and their additive think.

The discoveries of Dianetics were basic and vital and opened a wide new unexplored frontier.

These words were assigned to things arbitrarily. They had to be. Man had not had any notion of these things before so they had no names and had to be assigned names.

The names were chosen because they didn’t also mean something else in another field of science.

The terms are therefore IMPORTANT and what they mean and the things they name must be grasped before success can attend any auditing.

Any failures of Dianetic auditors were not the failures of Dianetics. The persons attempting to audit others didn’t KNOW what these things were, essentially the lock, the secondary, the engram, erasure and key-out.

So these are essential to any training or use of Dianetics.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH: jc.ei.rd.rb.lfg.nc.kjm
Copyright © 1969. 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 24 APRIL 1969RA
REVISED 20 JULY 1978
Remimeo RE-REVISED 20 SEPTEMBER 1978
Dn Checksheet
Class VIIIs
(Revisions in this type style)

DIANETIC USE

Ref: New Era Dianetics Series Bulletins, particularly:
HCOB 28 Jul 71 RA New Era Dianetics Series 8R
Rev. 25.6.78 DIANETICS, BEGINNING A PC ON
Re-Rev. 22.9.78
HCOB 26 Jun 78RA New Era Dianetics Series 6RA
ROUTINE 3RA, ENGRAM RUNNING
BY CHAINS
HCOB 18 Jun 78R New Era Dianetics Series 4R
ASSESSMENT AND HOW TO GET THE ITEM
HCOB 22 Jun 78R New Era Dianetics Series 2R
NEW ERA DIANETICS FULL PC PROGRAM
OUTLINE
and HCOB 11 Jul 73RB ASSIST SUMMARY
Rev. 15.7.78
Re-Rev. 21 Sep 78

Why Dianetics fell out of use had nothing to do with its workability. It has worked and well since 1950.

In some areas, mainly the U.S., it was illegal to heal or cure anything. There was even a law in California giving 25 illnesses that were against the law to cure. The “Better” Business Bureau in the U.S. even issues pamphlets that state that “You can always tell a fake healer because he says he can cure something.”

Why a civilization would make it illegal to cure illness can only be explained by some vested interest making more money out of people being sick than getting people well.

There existed a continual threat to anyone who helped their fellows.

The ability of Scientology to bring about spiritual freedom therefore received the concentration of effort by organizations.

Lately public opinion has turned heavily against these suppressive groups and the public discovery that illegal seizure, torture and murder was the hidden activity of political psychiatric groups has lost these people their support.

It was overlooked that spiritual healing of the body has not been illegal and that Dianetics used for pastoral counseling is completely legal.

It is a sobering thought that the only effective technology of psychosomatic healing—Dianetics—could be suppressed out of full usage.

One is handling the effect of the spirit on the body. Therefore even Dianetics is spiritual healing and as such is far from illegal.

Man should not be kept ill just to let a few have a monopoly.

In almost all other countries than the U.S. there is no restriction on healing despite monopolistic efforts to make one.

Another reason Dianetics was for some time out of use was that it was believed it had been superseded by Scientology which it never was in fact. Dianetics can be done with no reference whatever to Scientology or its techniques.

People who have given up through illness are also prone to want to leave. Instead of confronting their illness it is easier to try to get away from it. Thus such people are in a hurry to be free and prefer Scientology. But if they have a sick body, it is a present time problem and inhibits attaining the spiritual freedom they seek.

The correct procedure is to make them well wherever possible with medical treatment and to handle their psychosomatic illnesses with Dianetics and then, before any further abuses by life can occur, to raise their ability and secure their freedom with Scientology. This is the correct use of Dianetics. It is the remedy for psychosomatic illness.

The basic use of Dianetics is to make a well body and to augment physical treatment.

Any injurious experience can be erased by Dianetics. It is very easy to use and if one wants people well and happy it should be used at every occasion.

A person has an operation. This should be followed soon after by Touch Assists and other handlings from the Full Assist Checklist 28 May 1974RA revised 1I July 1978, including erasure of the engram of the experience by Narrative R3RA Quad. The engrams and secondaries related to the incident can then be run using preassessment procedure and R3RA Quad. The healing time will be greatly speeded and often healing will occur where a relapse might have followed.

A woman has a child. The engram of delivery should be run out soon after. The result of doing so is very spectacular. There is no “postpartum psychosis” or dislike of the child and no permanent injury to the mother. It is in fact best to audit the mother both before and after the delivery, which gives one fast relatively painless childbirth and quick recovery.

Recovery from disease under treatment is speeded by Dianetic auditing.

Where the incident of the break is, with any chain, run out, a broken limb will heal (by X-ray evidence) in two instead of six weeks.

Some patients who are not responding to medical treatment who are then given as little as a Touch Assist will then be found responsive to the medical treatment. An auditor giving the person a Dianetic session will more or less ensure that the medical treatment will now work.

A person who is accident prone when audited usually loses this unwanted characteristic.

Many “insane” recover from their symptoms when given proper medical treatment, rest, no harassment and then good mild Dianetic processing. They become and remain normal people without relapse.

Chronic, which is to say, long-term illnesses cease when audited by Dianetics and then medical treatment, which was earlier ineffective.

Whole classes of “mentally retarded” children have been made more normal by teachers in London County Council schools using relatively unskilled Dianetics.

Tiredness, unwanted sensations, bizarre pains and aches, bad hearing or sight also routinely respond to Dianetic processing.

The sickness and death rate of persons who are part of Dianetic groups is only a small fraction of that of other groups.

Pilots audited with Dianetics, by a test involving a whole squadron, went without a single even minor accident for the following year.

Scientists audited with Dianetics have greatly improved intelligence. Dianetics raises IQ as a side product to usual auditing, at a rate of about one point of IQ per hour of processing.

Withered limbs, skin blotches and rashes and even blindness and deafness have all responded to Dianetics.

Possibly the point which counted most against Dianetics in the early attacks on it was that it did a vast array of things. The truth was, it actually did them. When you have the answer to the human mind as in Dianetics of course anything caused by the mind can be remedied.

It is very much easier to train a Dianetic auditor than a Scientology auditor. It requires only about a month to make a Dianetic auditor who is sufficiently conversant with the subject to get results. This too was used against Dianetics as the psychiatrist of that day claimed he himself needed twelve years of study to do psychiatry. Of course when the public found out that the product of these twelve years of study was killing the “insane” and increasing their number the argument became silly.

The spectacular personal gains which were available in Scientology were so great they tended to obscure the very real use and value of Dianetics.

Further, a Scientology executive trained and processed beyond the need of body help tended to forget that much of the public out there first had to be helped out of their physical misery before they could attempt anything like personal gain.

You use Dianetics much the way you would use any remedy.

When a fellow is burned you audit out the burn.

When a woman loses a loved one you audit out the loss.

When a young man can’t finish his schooling you audit out his unhappy school experiences.

Dianetics is for USE. There is not a lot of admin about it. It isn’t something you use after bowing down three times to Chicago. You just USE it.

A Dianetic auditor who sees someone sick and who doesn’t get him treatment and then audit him is just not humane.

Woman going to have a baby—get out the meter and audit her into shape for it. When she’s had it, run out the delivery.

Fellow burns his hand, break out the meter.

Dianetics is the answer to human suffering. USE it.

Ideas build up which halt the use of Dianetics, such as “Once you have a floating needle on engrams you don’t run them anymore.” That’s silly. The Dianetic end phenomena is postulate off, F/N and VGIs. This means that the chain has blown. That full EP can then be called the end of that chain. But not the end of Dianetics on the case. (Ref: HCOB 16 Sep 78 POSTULATE OFF EQUALS ERASURE.)

I am not trying to make anyone wrong by reintroducing the real use of Dianetics. I myself had not realized how separate and vital it was as a technology until recently.

I was engaged for many years researching and completing Scientology. I had not noticed and had not said that Dianetics must be preserved and used in all cases of
psychosomatic illness or in physical suffering.

Yet, during all this time when I had to handle illness, I did not use Scientology. I used good old Dianetics.

Now I have refined it and made a better statement of it and made it easier to use and I trust it will be used for what it was intended and that Scientology grades will be relieved of the burden of attempting to heal physical illness, a use for which it was never designed.

Scientology is a vital practice in itself. It places a person above any further illness or suffering. But he has to be made well first.

People will ask, “Deafness? Now what special process is needed in curing deafness.... ?”

This is one of the modern refinements of Dianetics. One runs whatever is assessed on the preclear. with preclear interest. He doesn’t decide to cure somebody of deafness. He handles the illness or disability the pc offers up that reads on the meter and has pc interest. Maybe it will be deafness.

You have one single body of tech covering all cases and that is now New Era Dianetics and the steps of HCOB 22 June 1978R, New Era Dianetics Series 2R, NEW ERA DIANETICS FULL PC PROGRAM OUTLINE. The whole of the person’s complaints should eventually vanish if you just keep on going with the Full Pc Program Outline applying New Era Dianetics standardly and fully completing each part of the program.

Having gotten the pc well by medical care and Dianetic auditing, then start out with Scientology. If he gets sick again before many grades, revert to Dianetics, handle it and then when he is well, resume Scientology where you left off.

Never run a Scientology grade to make a pc well or cure something. It’s a misapplication.

By using Dianetics as readily as you use shoes you can make and keep people well. You don’t worry about overruns, rudiments or anything else. You just use R3RA even to correct ARC breaks and PTPs and bad auditing.

By then correctly using Scientology we can make the person a far better being.

We have had Standard Dianetics for some time. We now have even further improved Dianetic technology with the New Era Dianetics Series.

We have developed Scientology STANDARD TECH.

Both are now valid as themselves.

They do not cross.

Dianetics for the body.

Scientology for the spirit.

USE BOTH.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:jp.aap.lfg.dr
Copyright © 1969. 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 24 APRIL 1969R
Remimeo Issue II
Dn Checksheet REVISED 20 JULY 1978
Class Vials
Qual Secs (Revisions in this type style)
Tech Secs
DIANETIC RESULTS

Every once in a while you get a Scientology result while running Dianetics. Also, sometimes you get a Dianetic result while auditing Scientology.

This tends to keep the two distinctly different subjects confused with each other.

A preclear. after Dianetic auditing, tells the Examiner he is exterior and feeling fantastically bright. This is a Scientology result.

Sometimes a Scientology preclear after attaining a grade will state that it has healed his terror stomach. This is a Dianetic result.

There is nothing whatever wrong with this except that it gives an auditor an invitation to confuse the subjects and think they are the same.

The clue is CONSISTENCY.

Dianetics only rarely exteriorizes a preclear.

Scientology only occasionally handles a terror stomach. In fact a person whose terror stomach wasn’t handled by Dianetics and its R3RA can go all the way to OT VI sometimes with it. He doesn’t get rid of the terror stomach and he doesn’t (since he had a present time problem all the way) make OT VI either.

If it is a body pain, sensation, somatic, illness, disability, the subject to use is Dianetics.

If it is a gain in ability and beingness that is the purpose, the subject to use is Scientology.

After many years of handling cases this emerged as a very factual fact. Dianetics is Dianetics, Scientology is Scientology. If you mix them they attain limited results.

This is so true that when you use all the prohibitives and never nevers of Scientology in doing Dianetics, Dianetics also fails.

See these two subjects as clearly separate. They each have their own case supervision orders. You don’t use Scientology case supervision orders in case supervising Dianetics. And you don’t use the Dianetic rules on Scientology.

One addresses the body, the other the thetan. They both go by their own rules.

There is also NEW ERA DIANETICS the rules of which are rigidly adhered to, so Dianetics is not a Scientology downgrade either.

Dianetic results are a well body and a being happy with it.

Scientology results are a free, powerful and immortal being.

They can and do achieve their proper end results but only when used properly, separately and as themselves.


LRH:ja.ei.rd lfg L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1969, 1978 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 26 APRIL 1969R
REVISED 11 JULY 1978
Remimeo
Dianetics Checksheet
(Revisions in this type style)
(Ellipses indicate deletions)

SOMATICS

Note: This Bulletin has been revised to align with
New Era Dianetics Series tech. See:
HCOB 24 June 78 New Era Dianetics Series 5
ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT SHEET
HCOB 18 June 78 New Era Dianetics Series 4
ASSESSMENT AND HOW TO GET THE ITEM
HCOB 26 June 78 New Era Dianetics Series 6
Issue II ROUTINE 3RA, ENGRAM RUNNING BY CHAINS


All chains are held together by one similar AWARENESS. That is a new discovery. Chains are not held together by narratives or personnel or locations. They are held together by AWARENESSES. Thus when running R3RA (not Narrative R3RA) we ASK FOR AND FOLLOW DOWN ONLY AWARENESSES CONTAINED IN THE PREASSESSMENT LIST....

There are a thousand different descriptive words that could add up to an awareness. Pains, aches, dizziness, sadness, these are all awarenesses. Awareness, pleasant or unpleasant, of a thetan plus body is what we are trying to run in Dianetics.

This brings to light a further discovery. One never assesses medical terms or symptoms.

An engram contains pain and unconsciousness. All right. Then its basic would be a physical duress not a symptom resulting from that duress.

Example: The pc says “headache.” You assess headache, you try to run “headaches” and all you ever get is times a pc had a headache. Well, the headache is a symptom caused by a head injury. The engram must have contained a shot in the head or a crushed skull or some actual injury. The word “headache” would describe only how the head feels later when the engram occasionally goes into restimulation.

So you would get only locks and secondaries to audit and only by chance and an alteration by the pc of the command to find an earlier headache would you ever get to an engram in which the head was crushed or injured. “Headache” is the result of a head injury, and it doesn’t describe the injury which, in engram form, is now giving the pc headaches.

Take the medical term arthritis. You could ask for arthritis and get only visits to the doctor or times in a wheel chair. The physical injury contained in the engram causing the arthritis is not described.

Alcoholism would present the same problem. If the pc listed and the auditor assessed “alcoholism” we would only get times when he was drunk, not the engram causing the symptom which might contain “Feeling very dry.”

Therefore we have the preassessment procedure of New Era Dianetics. After getting from the pa the original item (the drug, alcohol, condition, illness, etc.) to be handled, we preassess to get the AWARENESSES connected to it.

... And we will land the real engram every time, not only its locks or secondaries. (It is quite all right to run locks and secondaries as it is necessary to unburden the chain and increase the pc’s confront, but chains always end up in a basic engram at the bottom and if you don’t get and erase that then the chain will key in again.)

In asking for list items one puts down only what the pc says. That’s an invariable rule. But when the pc says some... symptom like “headache” or medical term like “arthritis” the auditor writes it down; if it reads and has pa interest he first runs it Narrative to full EP (Narrative R3RA Quad); THEN he does a preassessment on arthritis to get all the somatics connected with the item.

Example: Pc says... complaint is “SINUSITIS.” The auditor writes it down, and if it has read and pc is interested he runs it Narrative R3RA Quad. He then does a preassessment on it, lists from the preassessment item found and ends up with a running item “A burning sensation in the nose,” and runs it R3RA Quad to full EP. Sinusitis can of course be preassessed many times and the items run.

If the auditor took and assessed only “SINUSITIS” and then asked for incidents of sinusitis he would get only locks and secondaries—times when the engram was in restimulation. And he would rarely get the real basic and engram that causes the symptom.

This discovery opens the door to swift “cures.” But one is obviously not treating SINUSITIS. He is looking for an incident in which there was a “burning sensation in the nose.” And after a few locks and upper engrams he’d find and run the real injury in which the nose was burned.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:jc.ldm.ei.rd.lfg
Copyright © 1969. 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 28 APRIL 1969R
REVISED 20 SEPTEMBER 1978
Remimeo
New Era
Dianetics (Revisions in this type style)
Checksheet
HIGH TA IN DIANETICS

In Scientology a high TA is always an overrun.

In Dianetics it means AN ENGRAM TOO LATE ON THE CHAIN TO ERASE IS IN RESTIMULATION.

A Scientology auditor “rehabs” overruns.

A Dianetic auditor cures high TA by finding what engram (lock or secondary) is in restimulation (active). This will show up as a PAIN, SENSATION, MISEMOTION OR OTHER PRESENT TIME FEELING the pc has. In short, just by finding the somatic by list and assessing for longest read and running R3RA you can cure a high TA.

You handle a TA that goes up during a session by completing the chain exactly as in R3RA.

The same action you do for R3RA also cures the high TA.

By running a pa on an incident late on the chain without going earlier you drive the TA high.

By ending off before the pc has given the postulate he made at the time of the incident (hence not getting a complete erasure), you can leave the picture partially there and capable of affecting the pc.

There can be an infinity of wrong ways but only one right way and the right way is R3RA by the book.

A high TA (4 or above) is simply the E-Meter’s reaction to increased mass. Mental image pictures have mass. The mass has what is called resistance to electricity. The E-Meter measures electrical resistance. Mass resists electricity. Thus in the presence of mental mass as contained in mental image pictures, the tone arm of the E-Meter rises.

When you restimulate an engram, the E-Meter current flow has more trouble getting through the pc and the TA rises.

When the engram (or lock or secondary) is “keyed-out” (moved away) the TA comes down and the meter needle will float.

If you find a long chain with many engrams on it and run a late engram the TA goes up. As you go earlier, and eventually find basic, the TA comes down and when you get the postulate and erase the basic engram the TA will come down to between 2 and 3 and the needle will float.

Old disproved theory pre-Dianetics was that the E-Meter reacted to sweat on the hands but of course a person would have to sweat and “unsweat” to make the meter behave as it does. And the idea of “unsweating” would be ridiculous. Palms of the hand do not go wet—dry with enough rapidity to account for meter reaction up and down.

When you run several engrams through once or several somatic chains without erasing any you pile up too much mass and the TA will go high and stick.

Even if nothing is done to repair this the pc will destimulate (the pictures will drop away) in from 3 to 10 days.

It is a very poor show of auditing to do R3RA other than exactly by the book. It is very easy to do it exactly right. The drill is simple. If done exactly right the result is good and invariable.

LRH:cic.rd.kjm L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1969, 1978 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED





HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 7 MAY 1969R
Remimeo Issue V
Dianetic Course REVISED 15 JULY 1977

(Revision of HCO Bulletin of 21 October 1968R.
For use on Dianetic Course only.)
(Deletes reference to needle “R/Sing” before an F/N.)

FLOATING NEEDLE

A floating needle is the idle uninfluenced movement of the needle on the dial without any patterns or reactions in it. It can be as small as 1” or as large as dial wide. It does not fall or drop to the right of the dial. It moves to the left at the same speed as it moves to the right. It is observed on a Mark V E-Meter calibrated with the TA between 2.0 and 3.0 with GIs in on the pc. It can occur after a cognition blowdown of the TA or just moves into floating. The pc may or may not voice the cognition.

It, by the nature of the E-Meter reading below the awareness of the thetan occurs just before the pc is aware of it. So to give a “That’s it” on the occurrence of the F/N can prevent the pa from getting the cognition.

Pcs and pre-OTs OFTEN signal an F/N with a “POP” to the left and the needle can actually even describe a pattern much like a rock slam. Meters with lighter movement do “pop” to the left.

One does not sit and study and be sure of an “F/N.” It swings or pops, he lets the pc cognite and then indicates the F/N to the pc preventing overrun.

A one-hand electrode sometimes obscures an F/N and gives false TA. If used, use higher sensitivity and get the TA from 2 cans when needed.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:JE:cs.lf Revised by
Copyright © 1969. 1977 CS-4/5
by L. Ron Hubbard As ordered by
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED L. RON HUBBARD

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manors East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 8 MAY 1969
REISSUED 23 JANUARY 1977
Remimeo

IMPORTANT STUDY DATA

NUMBER OF TIMES OVER THE MATERIAL EQUALS CERTAINTY AND RESULTS.

RESULTS IN THE STUDENT’S OWN CASE IS A GUARANTEE OF SUCCESSFUL APPLICATION BY THE STUDENT.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:nt
Copyright © 1969, 1977
By L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 8 MAY 1969R
Issue II
REVISED 31 MARCH 1977
(Revision in this type style)
Remimeo
Dianetics Course

TEACHING THE DIANETICS COURSE


As the teaching of basic data restimulates confusions which are then dramatized by throwing the course off line, the teaching of the Dianetics Course as follows is hugely vital.

The teaching of Dianetics auditors is laid down on these simple principles.

1. The data on tapes and bulletins is studied without alter-is, interpretation or addition by the student, fellow student, instructor or supervisor.

2. Well done and other folders are studied by the individual student.

3. No lecturing or additional interpretation or evaluation by supervisors.

4. The student audits only when he has completely passed on 1. and 2. above. He must not audit before he has completed his checksheet once through.

5. Things the student is weak on are done in clay.

6. The student is sent to Cramming at his own expense for bad auditing goofs. He may also be taken off auditing and made to do his checksheet again.

7. Any student question is answered by referring to the HCOB, folder or tape or by explaining it is beyond the scope of Dianetic auditing.

8. A rigid invariable schedule is precisely adhered to.

9. Checksheets and tapes and folders are gone through in the sequence laid down by the checksheet and not randomly out of sequence.

If this is made difficult then the programme must be cut back to the bare bones of the original above.

The teaching of standard tech must also be standard. Therefore the above MUST
be adhered to completely.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Revision assisted by

Rick Sheehy,
FMO 1709 I/C


LRH:RS:jp.an.nt
Copyright © 1969, 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 9 MAY 1969RA
REVISED 25 JULY 1978
RE-REVISED 21 SEPTEMBER 1978

Remimeo
NED Grad
Checksheet
(Revisions in this type style)
(Ellipsis indicates deletion)



CASE SUPERVISING

NEW ERA DIANETICS FOLDERS



All a Case Supervisor looks for in Dianetics folders to advise the next action is departure from exact New Era Dianetics procedure.

It is a very easy job providing the Case Supervisor knows his New Era Dianetics exactly and completely.

Any time there is the most minute or flagrant departure from exact assessment or exact R3RA, there will be a breakdown of the results.

It is quite a tribute to the tech that this is true. And it is true. Doing C/Sing recently on a very great many Dianetic cases audited by relatively untrained auditors the following emerged in letters ten feet high.

1. Where the auditor followed the exact procedure without deviation the results were uniformly excellent.

2. Where the auditor deviated from the exact procedure the results were poor or bad.

There are many, many ways an auditor can deviate from exact procedure.

There is only one exact procedure.

As a result of doing this C/S work, I would, if I were doing Dianetic C/Sing, refuse to let an auditor audit until he could attest with absolute certainty to each point of the Student Attest on the Hubbard New Era Dianetics Course Checksheet. This would save nearly all work required of a Case Supervisor.

When the auditor is in a fumbly state regarding the procedure and has not drilled it until he could do it with the house caving in, the preclear does not get good results. That is really all there is to it.

If the auditor simply observes the Auditor’s Code, handles TRs and the meter fairly well and does the assessments and R3RA exactly as laid out, the results will be found to be astonishingly good, even miraculous.

__________

To correct a bad session the normal action of the C/S is to order the offbeat actions done correctly.

EXAMPLE

A. Auditor assessed by interest only, not by read and the session bogged down. C/S action—reassess by longest read.

B. Medical terms were put on the running item list; one was chosen and case bogged. C/S action, order such be taken off list and proper preassessment procedure applied to it to get running items.

C. A basic was found and auditor told it was erasing but sent pc earlier but pc could find nothing so left it. C/S orders the last incident found fully erased.

D. Auditor tells pc he won’t run it because it “isn’t an engram.” C/S action, order auditor to retrain on Auditor’s Code and do Invalidation and Evaluation in clay. Orders pc to a Scientology auditor, Green Form.

E. Pc very nattery to auditor. C/S orders pc to Scientology auditor, “and be sure to pull all withholds.”

F. C/S finds his orders to complete a chain left undone with a high TA were not done—folder mislaid or pc not routed. Pc has become ill. Order the pc to medical treatment and the chain completed and the auditor to Ethics.

You see how it is. Each time the auditor violated normal simple procedure, the C/S orders that the normal simple procedure be completed either by first giving pc a Scientology Green Form and then completing the New Era Dianetics action or, omitting GF (when pc not out rud), just getting the real standard action done.

This is really all there is to case supervising New Era Dianetics case folders. The more you try to do something else than the above the further the case will go wrong.

The Hubbard New Era Dianetics auditor does not have to know how to do Green Forms or rudiments. When they have to be done you get a Scientology auditor to do them.

It is a serious error to mix up Dianetics and Scientology.

The potential errors of out ruds and all the rest are present of course in any New Era Dianetics session, but do not usually happen when exact New Era Dianetics procedure is used. When they do happen you send the pc to a Scientology auditor.

This is case supervision, New Era Dianetics. It has been fully worked out by my case supervising a great many Dianetic sessions to launch this new view of Dianetics. And the above is what I found.

It drives home also the necessity of training New Era Dianetics auditors as precision technologists and the risk of letting people audit before they are fully grooved in on exactly what’s done in a New Era Dianetics session.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:cs.rd.lfg.kjm
Copyright © 1969, 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 11 MAY 1969R
REVISED 8 JULY 1978
(Revisions in this type style)
Remimeo
All Orgs
Exec Secs
Tech Sec (Replaces HCOB of 27 July 1966
All Tech Hats same name.)
All Qual Hats
Dianetic Course (Tech Div) (Qual Div)


METER TRIM CHECK


E-Meters can go out of trim during a session because of temperature changes.

Thus even if the meter is properly calibrated and reads at 2.0 with a 5,000 ohm resistor across the leads and 3.0 with 12,500 ohms, by the end of the session a pc can be apparently reading below 2.0 because the meter is off trim.

The following meter procedure is therefore to be followed AT THE END OF EACH SESSION (AFTER GIVING “END OF SESSION.”):

1. DON’T MOVE THE TRIM KNOB

2. PULL OUT THE JACK PLUG

3. MOVE THE TA UNTIL THE NEEDLE IS ON ‘SET’ AT THE SENSITIVITY YOU WERE USING IN THE SESSION

4. RECORD THE TA POSITION AT THE BOTTOM OF THE AUDITOR’S REPORT FORM AS:

“Trim check - TA =....”

5. IF YOUR METER IS KNOWN TO BE OUT OF CALIBRATION (as in para 2 above) RECORD ALSO: “Calibration error - on meter = 2.0 actual” at the bottom of the form.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:lb-r.cs.an.ei.cden.nc
Copyright © 1969, 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 18 MAY 1969R
REVISED 3 AUGUST 1978
Remimeo
Dianetic (Revisions in this type style)
Auditors (Ellipses indicate deletions)
Dianetic
C/Ses
(This Bulletin has been revised to align with New Era Dianetics
tech. Data on running narrative incidents has been deleted.
This is now covered by HCOB 26 Jun 78 Issue II, New Era
Dianetics Series 6, URGENT IMPORTANT ROUTINE 3RA
ENGRAM RUNNING BY CHAINS.)


ERASURE


Now and then a pc does not understand that he is supposed to be erasing a PICTURE and only goes far enough to erase the somatic. Auditor says, “Is it erasing?” Pc can’t feel somatic so he says, “It’s gone.” Auditor puzzled by no full end phenomena but buys it.

What you want to know as an auditor is “Is the picture erasing?” You can use that line to check, but not habitually.

Erasure depends... on the pc getting to the BEGINNING of the incident. Sometimes the pc keeps starting a bit late in the incident and so does not get an erasure.

If you assess an item like “Dizziness after an operation” and try to run it the pc will bog utterly as the whole operation precedes the somatic called for and not only won’t erase but also won’t show as a picture. (Ref: HCOB 20 Jul 78 New Era Dianetics Series 18 AFTER THE FACT ITEMS)


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:dr
Copyright © 1969, 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 23 MAY 1969R
REVISED 11 JULY 1978
Remimeo
Dn Chksht (Revisions in this type style)
(Ellipses indicate deletions)

AUDITING OUT SESSIONS
NARRATIVE VERSUS SOMATIC CHAINS
(Ref: New Era Dianetics Series Bulletins.)

Now and then it is necessary to audit out the last session or an auditing session.

One does this by using Narrative R3RA... wording when asking the pc to go earlier. One asks for an EARLIER SIMILAR INCIDENT. “Is there an earlier similar incident?” A session, when audited, does not always erase. Instead it has become part of a chain. Therefore one has to run Narrative R3RA on it and get an earlier similar incident.

The chain may go back vast amounts of time.

Whereas the pc may only have been in Scientology 3 days, before Scientology there were other types of “sessions” such as psychoanalysis. And before that, in Rome and Greece, dream therapy in which one was “visited by a god.” And before that—well, the chain can have a very far back basic. One does not of course suggest ever what the earlier incident may be. There is no telling what the pc may confuse with a session.

If one asked the pc to “locate an earlier incident with a similar feeling” one would be on another chain entirely. Hence one asks, simply, “Is there an earlier similar incident?” when running a session out.

Running a session out has the liability that one is running a NARRATIVE CHAIN, a similar experience rather than a similar somatic.

One of the major 1969 breakthroughs was that chains are held together mainly by somatics. The body condition or somatic is what keeps the chain in association.

One does of course run “narrative incidents” by which one means similar EXPERIENCES. (See HCOB 25 June 78, New Era Dianetics Series 8, DIANETICS, BEGINNING A PC ON.) “Locate an earlier time your mother spanked you.” “Locate an earlier wreck.” These will run and erase but they must be done properly. This is by running the incident over and over to erasure, asking after each run through for earlier beginning, and only going earlier similar if it starts to grind badly. Running only narrative incidents is what made early Dianetics run up such fabulous numbers of hours in processing.

The commands for running narrative incidents and further data on running narratives are to be found in HCOB 26 June 1978 Issue II, New Era Dianetics Series 6, ROUTINE 3RA ENGRAM RUNNING BY CHAINS.

Somatic chains go quickly to basic and are the important chains.

Thus when we erase a chain of sessions we sometimes run into a very long session. Sometimes the TA goes up to 4 or 5 (particularly if the auditor grinds). Using a wrong go-earlier command is a primary reason for trouble.

Usually if you ask simply for an earlier beginning or an earlier similar incident the pc goes back to something that will erase and it blows.

But remember, asking for similar types of experience can... get very long and erasure may not occur for some time.

Running out sessions can be a worthwhile action,... but the best thing to do is goof no assessments or sessions in the first place.

LRH:an.rd.ldv L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1969, 1978 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 28 MAY 1969RA
Remimeo REVISED 25 JULY 1978
Dianetic RE-REVISED 21 SEPTEMBER 1978
Checksheet
(Revisions in this type style)

HOW NOT TO ERASE

(Reference: New Era Dianetics Series Bulletins and
HCOB 16 Sept 1978, POSTULATE OFF
EQUALS ERASURE)

There are two extremes a Dianetic student can go to on the subject of erasure.

A. He can grind and grind and grind (DEF, DEF, DEF, DEF, on and on) with the TA going up, up, up and never once tell the pc to go earlier.

B. He can watch the TA come down to between 2 and 3 and go loose on the last incident run, ask the pc “erase or solid,” get a noncommittal answer and send the pc earlier. He can keep sending the pc earlier and earlier on another chain without ever noticing he’s finished the first chain.

These are the two extreme cases. In Case A it is OBVIOUS from TA rise that the chain has an earlier incident or the incident being run has an earlier beginning. In Case B it is obvious from the TA that the chain erased.

In A the student is preventing the pc from going earlier when he should.

In B the student is forcing the pc to go earlier when he shouldn’t.

In both cases the student hasn’t a clue of what an engram chain is.

It is marvelous how students demand “the exact phrase” to use as an effort to avoid having to really understand what they are doing in auditing.

If a student hasn’t a clue about what he is doing then a thousand goofy outnesses will keep cropping up, each one requiring (a supervisor thinks) a special instruction. After a while you get a course text weighing one ton, and all because the student didn’t grab the basic definitions in the first place.

A student who will do either A or B above has not grasped the most basic facts concerning erasure.

1. An engram chain is held in place by the basic for that chain and the postulate made at the time of that incident.

2. The basic is the FIRST TIME.

3. The clue to erasure is unburdening down to the first time and getting the postulate made at the time of the incident.

4. That all picture chains are there because the first time and the postulate made at that time are there.

The student assumes one ALWAYS asks “solid or erasing.” Or that one always does only what the pa says. Or some such consideration.

I would damned well never ask “solid or erasing” if I saw the TA start to climb. I would know the TA measured mental mass and that it was accumulating and wouldn’t erase. I would immediately send the pa earlier as soon as he had completed his pass through the incident.

Honest, it’s awful easy.

A very odd outness a student will encounter when he is so dedicated to the exact words is the fast pc who erases before he can tell about it. Along about No. 3 of R3RA the TA blows down and the needle F/Ns.

A student who knew his business by understanding would ask, “Did it erase?” of course. The pc would say, “It vanished,” and VGIs would come in.

A fast running pc on a light chain can occasionally blow an engram by inspection. If it was basic for that chain, one would be committing the crime described in B above. The pc is likely to go into another chain or a heavy protest.

So you see, there’s no substitution for actually understanding what’s going on.

There’s the pc, there’s the bank, there’s the meter needle, there’s the meter tone arm and there’s the auditor, there’s the procedure, there’s the report. That’s all the parts there are to a session.

When one understands each one, one can audit. When one doesn’t understand some part of any of the above, he will require unusual solutions.

Anything truly powerful is truly simple.

So a student who goofs is being complex and hasn’t understood something about one of the major parts named above.

I just saw a goofed-up session that went like this:

Pc: It (the engram) happened every day for three days.

Auditor: DEF.

Flunk. The auditor was so deficient in knowing about chains and first time that he didn’t tell the pc to go to the first day’s engram but let the poor pc flounder in day 3! And so the chain did not erase and the pc hung up in it.

If the rule of first time is really understood, one would realize a lot of things, even that the pc was beginning an incident halfway through it and hadn’t begun to run the beginning of it so of course, no erasure. If this happened on basic” There’s no earlier incident” (TA high).

“Is there an earlier beginning to this incident?”

“Hey, yes there is.”

“Go to the new beginning of that incident and tell me when you are there.”

Yoicks, an erasure!

This is no invitation to depart from procedure. It’s an invitation to see procedure as an action, very precise, capable of being understood and done, not a rote chant.

I’m sure some students are ex-medicine men who did their spells with exactly worded chants. It’s time they understood the brew in the pot!

That’s the procedure—not do the commands rhyme!



L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:an.ei.rd.lfg.nc.kjm
Copyright t 1969, 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 28 JUNE 1969RA
REVISED 26 JULY 1978
RE-REVISED 21 SEPTEMBER 1978
Remimeo
Class VIII
Checksheet
Dianetics (Revisions in this type style)
Grad (Ellipses Indicate deletions)
Checksheet
C/S
HOW TO CASE SUPERVISE
DIANETICS FOLDERS


It is very easy to case supervise a New Era Dianetics folder and pcs being handled by New Era Dianetics.

The full program to follow is covered in New Era Dianetics Series 2R HCOB 22 June 78R, NEW ERA DIANETICS FULL PC PROGRAM OUTLINE. One just follows it!

There is very little to New Era Dianetics C/S work.

The Case Supervisor MUST be a Hubbard New Era Dianetics Graduate. There is no substitute for that. One who isn’t would hopelessly snarl up real New Era Dianetics auditors or students aspiring to that cert.

The New Era Dianetics C/S should really be a New Era Dianetics Graduate and a Class VIII. Even so he has to keep these techs completely separate.

One NEVER asks a New Era Dianetics auditor in a Dianetic session to do anything except New Era Dianetics. There are no other actions.

The C/S, in correcting an auditor should do it positively and refer to the Dianetic HCOB. Negative criticism I have found, undermines auditors. One can as easily say the same thing in a positive way. Instead of “You broke the Auditor’s Code” one can as easily say “Pcs must be rested before session. See Auditor’s Code.”

One NEVER gets inventive in doing a New Era Dianetics C/S. It is all very straightforward.

The C/S point of view in New Era Dianetics C/Sing is that one is trying to get New Era Dianetics done. One isn’t, in New Era Dianetics C/Sing, torturously laboring to solve some difficult case.

Therefore there are only four possible actions for a New Era Dianetics C/S to take:

A. THE CASE THAT MAKES GAINS IS GIVEN MORE NEW ERA DIANETICS.

B. THE CASE THAT HAS HAD ALL POSSIBLE NEW ERA DIANETICS GAIN (and that is considerable) IS SENT ON TO SCIENTOLOGY.

C. THE CASE THAT MAKES NO GAIN DUE TO CASE “ODDITY” IS SENT TO A SCIENTOLOGY AUDITOR.

D. THE SESSION THAT IS NON-STANDARD IN AUDITING REQUIRES THE PC BE SENT TO A SCIENTOLOGY AUDITOR.

It is the fantastic fact that the pc will ONLY get Dianetic wins when receiving standard New Era Dianetics. Non-standardness only once in a hundred will give a case gain and that is a fluke. The Case Supervisor must have good subjective and objective reality on this fact. He must therefore be the ultimate in dictatorial martinet precision in requiring standard auditing and assigning standard C/Ses.

There are two types of cases only that come up.

1. The case as in A above who just goes on getting wins.

2. The case (who in life is usually chronically ill even if “up and about”) that requires a C/S to play adept Scientology auditing against New Era Dianetics auditing. Such a case is “solved” by now being sent to a Scientology auditor, now being sent to Dianetics, back and forth.

In D above, the pc who gets a non-standard session and is bogged at the Examiner’s is simply given a Scientology Green Form to F/N. He/she is then returned to New Era Dianetics auditing. This is a very usual, easy action.

In C above, the “oddity” case is easily recognizable in the folder. The oddity consists mainly of getting New Era Dianetics auditing, getting sick. Or in getting auditing but not being able to follow good standard commands.

Such a case also has a history of being ill. This case also can’t make any real headway in study and messes up pcs as an auditor and can’t seem to do standard auditing.

This C case, at first glance, seems to be hopelessly difficult and invites many to squirrel.

The case is more prevalent than one would think. It runs as high as 50°70 of voluntary pcs.

It could run much higher in the wog world. One spots the case ONLY BY THE CASE’S REACTION TO GOOD New Era Dianetics auditing, not by any opinion or test.

But this case isn’t any real challenge to the C/S or Scientology auditor.

Underlying all this illness and inability to concentrate or study or audit or hold case gains there is a heavily burdened chain that makes things seem very different than they are.

There is no trick to resolving the C case.

The C/S, having seen that the person roller-coasters after New Era Dianetics auditing, or can’t study or can’t audit, orders the person to a Scientology session for:

“GF to F/N. “Assess ExGF 40RD and handle.”

The Scientology auditor in Review does this. ExGF 40RD is the “7 Resistive Cases.”

Then the C/S sends the pc back to New Era Dianetics auditing for routine assessments and R3RA.

It is a saddening event to a C/S when the Scientology auditor lets him down. So an accomplished Class VIII on that spot is worth his weight in blessings. Lucky is the C/S who has a fine Class VIII. When he doesn’t have he orders only one action done between C/Ses and watches like a hawk. Reviewing reviews is a horrible waste of time, even though it has to be done when necessary.

This C type pc will now sail along for awhile in New Era Dianetics. But don’t be amazed to have the pc roller-coaster again.

When the C type pc does you simply order again a Scientology session and GF to F/N and ExGF 40 RD and handle. And it will all come out differently this time. And then the pc is sent back for more New Era Dianetics.

This is what is meant by interplaying New Era Dianetics with Scientology reviews for a C type case.

You will just be amazed at the eventual result in the pc. Really a cracked case, man!

Very sick pcs are sent directly to a medico of course. And New Era Dianetics auditing is given along with medical treatment to get the pc off stuck points. This is all covered in HCOBs on medical uses of Dianetics and includes Touch Assists.

The “insane” pc is given absolute rest, a secure environment and any needful medical treatment (but never shock or surgery of the brain or nerves, of course, since that’s only depersonalization treatment).

When in better physical health the “insane” pc is given just routine New Era Dianetics. But the sessions must be flubless and thoroughly within the Auditor’s Code as the “insane” can’t stand up to any goofs or overwhelm.

These “insane” pcs are most often simple cases of medically ill people—gallstones, malnutrition, deficiencies in certain vitamins, broken backs—the usual.

To undertake to audit an “insane” pc to sanity without complete attention to the above paragraphs is adventurous in our experience. But with these things given attention, the “insane” pc often responds amazingly. But do not be surprised to find that the “insane” pc turns into a C type as he comes up the scale.

The main trouble with the “insane” is that too many people around them are completely devoted to making them even more insane and they almost never respond to any treatment, medical or Dianetic, while kept in their same environment associating with the same people.

Also we could say that “Hell hath no fury to match that of a cured psychotic’s associates.” Usually the real crazy one is an associate, not the “insane” one.


C/S PROCEDURE

In doing a C/S on a New Era Dianetics folder, I usually inspect the following in the following order:

1. The Examiner’s Report to see if the pc thought it was okay and if the Examiner’s TA, needle and indicator observation is all right.

2. The presession C/S to see what was previously ordered done.

3. The session to see if the C/S was done.

4. The 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 sequence and A-EYE to see if it is standard. I seldom read text if the session was okay at Examiner’s unless the session did not go well.

5. The F/N,... postulate and GIs or VGIs (erasure of the chain) and GIs at session end.

If all that is okay I give it a “well done.”

If it isn’t all okay I look for the 1, 2, 3 etc. that was not followed by an ABC but by a new 1, 2, 3, 4 etc. instead.

I try to find where the session went off standard and point out the standard actions that should have been done.

If the pc came out of it okay, I order more New Era Dianetics auditing.

If the pc didn’t, I send the pc to a Scientology auditor.

If it had lots of DEFs and ground to a high TA session end I check to see if the auditor asked for an earlier beginning.

If the Dianetics folder is getting fat and the session was unsuccessful I look for a possible C type pc and handle accordingly.

If the pc is reported ill, I order medical, an assist and treat the pc thereafter as a C type.

The value of a C/S, whether New Era Dianetics or Scientology, depends on his unfailing adherence to standard actions.

A C/S that dreams things up to try to “solve a case” by squirrel processes is worse than no Case Supervisor at all.

The gain of cases depends on the standard, unswerving adherence to New Era Dianetics, to C/Sing in complete standardness and a Scientology auditor who really is a flawless standard tech man.

The result is the result of a TEAM. To that team one also adds the admin team of the rest of the group doing their jobs.

Given all that, one can straighten up whole population areas and activities and get the job done on the goal lines of well and happy human beings and a well and happy society both with greatly increased survival potential.

C/Sing is a happy job itself. And blessed is a C/S who has good standard New Era Dianetics auditors and good Scientology auditors on his lines and a good New Era Dianetics Course Supervisor making new good New Era Dianetics auditors and a good AO somewhere making good new VIIIs, all backed with orgs whose staffs know their Org Exec Course and policy.

The C/S’s job only becomes unhappy and impossible when the auditors are nonstandard or the admin people never heard of lines or policy and he himself departs from the straight and narrow of New Era Dianetics and standard tech.

The purpose of New Era Dianetics can be accomplished smoothly and easily only if the above are taken into account.

These C/S data are as thoroughly researched in practical application of tech itself and are derived from hard won practical experience.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder



LRH:ldm.cs.lfg.kjm
Copyright © 1969, 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 17 JULY 1969RB
REVISED 11 JULY 1978
Remimeo RE-REVISED 4 SEPTEMBER 1978
Dn Course
HDG Course
(See also HCOB 31 March 1970
Urgent - Dianetic TR Note)
(Revisions in this type style)

NEW ERA DIANETICS COMMAND TRAINING DRILLS

Upon a recent investigation it was found that the Dianetic Training Drills (101, 102, 103 & 104) as originally developed by me in 1969 had been dropped from use on the Dianetics Course.

Therefore, these drills are reissued here for full use, and the following list of HCOBs and BTBs is hereby cancelled.

BTB 10 DECEMBER 1974 ISSUE VI CANCELLATION OF BULLETINS 1969 cancels BTB 17 July 1969 Dianetic Command Training Drills 101 & 102, it also cancels BTB 21 August 1969 TR 104 Note—these cancellations are correct.

Additionally the following BTBs are now cancelled:

BTB 17 July 1969R Revised 19 Feb 1974, Reissued 3 December 1976 cancels & revises HCO BULLETIN OF 17 JULY 1969 Dianetic Command Training Drills 101 & 102.

BTB 20 May 1970 (Issued 28 March 1974 as BTB) cancels HCO BULLETIN OF 20 MAY 1970 (cancels HCOB 21 Aug 1969 and 15 Jan 1970 and 31 March 1970).

NOTE: HCOB 20 May 1970 “103, 104 RUNDOWN” remains cancelled.

HCOB 21 Aug 1969 “TR 104 NOTE” remains cancelled.

HCOB 15 Jan 1970 Issue III “TR 104” remains cancelled.

HCOB 31 March 1970 “URGENT - DIANETIC TR NOTE” is not cancelled. This HCOB was issued by myself.

TRs 101, 102, 103 & 104

The most common errors being made by student auditors are forgetting the commands during session and misusing command sequence or procedure or doing odd things because they get nervous. The following drills are added to the New Era Dianetics Course to handle this. The drills must be thoroughly done.

TR 100 AND TR 100-A

Preassessment is a vital step of the New Era Dianetics procedure.

The benefits available from New Era Dianetics require that the auditor be able to do faultless preassessments of original items from New Era Dianetics assessment sheets and rundowns.

TR 100 and TR 100-A are made part of the New Era Dianetics Course to ensure that the student can apply the preassessment procedure in... TR 104 and in his auditing.

TR 100:

NAME: Preassessment Procedure On A Doll

COMMANDS: All commands of the procedure per New Era Dianetics Series 4, “Assessment and How to Get The Item,” and New Era Dianetics Series 4-1, “The Preassessment List.”

POSITION: Student seated at a table with E-Meter and the Preassessment List. In the chair opposite the student is a doll, occupying the position of the pc.

PURPOSE: To familiarize the student with the delivery and use of the Preassess ment List.

TRAINING This drill is not coached. The student sets up the E-Meter and Preasses
STRESS: sment List exactly as in a session. He starts the assessment and
delivers a complete preassessment on the doll, keeping full admin and
using all standard procedures of NED Series 4 to get items for
running.

Student uses nonsense terms or harmless ones for the original item.
He then delivers a preassessment on that.

Student then selects the preassessment item from the Preassessment
List and asks:

“What ______(preassessment item) are connected with (the original item)?”

The drill is passed when the student can do the drill flawlessly with good assessment TRs, correct procedure and commands, without comm lags or confusion, and can maintain proper assessment admin.

TR 100-A

NAME: Preassessing A Doll Coached

COMMANDS: Same as TR 100

POSITION: Same as TR 100, with coach holding the E-Meter cans, and seated beside the student. Coach provides nonsense and harmless items for the student and squeezes the can to simulate E-Meter reads.

PURPOSE: To train the student to deliver and use the preassessment procedure.

TRAINING Coach provides a list of original items as from one of the New Era
STRESS: Dianetics rundowns or assessment sheets. The student must choose
the best reading original item and deliver the Preassessment List to
the doll on that item. All reads on the preassessment must be cor
rectly noted and marked. Student must then select out the correct
preassessment item to list for a running item and ask the correct
question.

As the coach gives running items the student must get these down accurately with their reads. Then he must select which he would run on R3RA Quad and in what order.

The student must reassess and extend the list of running items and use Suppress and Invalidate buttons as needed until the list is exhausted.

The student must then reassess the Preassessment List, find the next preassessment item and handle.

Flunks are given for any out TRs on the doll, any incorrectly marked reads, any missed or altered item given and any incorrect selection of an item.

Stress is on the student’s ability to make a distinction between an item which requires a preassessment and one that does not. Student must not try to run drugs, medicines, medical terms or multiple somatics.

Drill is passed when the student can do the full preassessment procedure with good TRs, proper commands, without comm lags or confusions, can maintain proper assessment admin.

TR 101

NAME: R3RA To A Wall

COMMANDS: R3RA commands including earlier incident and earlier similar commands.

Included in this drilling are the handling of bouncers, checking for erasure, and checking for postulate command actions, as well as are the handling of narrative incident commands.

POSITION: Student seated facing a wall.

PURPOSE: To get the student able to give all R3RA commands accurately, in correct order without hesitation or having to think what the next command should be.

TRAINING This drill is not coached. The student sits facing a wall with a copy
STRESS: of the R3RA bulletin in his lap. The student gives the commands, in
order, to the wall maintaining good TR 0 and TR 1. When the
student falters or is uncertain of the next command he re-reads the
commands from the bulletin then continues to give the commands to
the wall. When the student can confidently give all the possible
R3RA commands accurately without any slightest comm lag, he has passed this drill.

TR 102

NAME: Auditing A Doll

COMMANDS: All R3RA commands and New Era Dianetics procedures except preassessment procedure.

POSITION: Student seated at a table with E-Meter and Auditor Report sheets. In the chair opposite the student is a doll occupying the position of the pc.

PURPOSE: To familiarize the student with the materials of auditing and coordinate and apply the commands and procedures of New Era Dianetics in an auditing session.

TRAINING This drill is not coached. The student sets up the E-Meter and work
STRESS: sheets exactly as in a session. He starts the session and runs a com
plete New Era Dianetics session on the doll keeping full session admin and using all standard procedures of New Era Dianetics.

This drill is passed when the student can do the drill flawlessly with good TRs 0-4, correct procedure and commands, without comm lags or confusion and can maintain proper session admin, including worksheets, Auditor’s Report Form and Summary Report.

All the R3RA commands used in TR 101 are again used here. Admin must communicate adequately which command is being used.

TR 103

NAME: Auditing On A Doll Coached

COMMANDS: All R3RA commands, situations and procedures of New Era Dianetics except the preassessment procedure.

POSITION: Same as in TR 102 except that a coach sits beside student calling out command numbers and situations and the student following them and keeping admin and his meter.

PURPOSE: To give the student total certainty in the use of R3RA commands despite any distraction.

TRAINING Coach calls for commands at random by stating the letter or number
STRESS: of the command or the situation by saying “solid,” “erasing”” “solid
but nothing earlier.” The student addresses the right command or
action to the doll, handles meter and admin. The coach also uses pc
responses such as “That’s all,” “I can’t find one,” etc. These are
called for in quick succession and in any order. Coach starts in on a
gradient gradually getting the drill faster and becoming sharper on
flunks for any comm lags, uncertainties, groping for commands or
breaks in TR 0-4. If the student becomes too confused the coach
has probably proceeded with too steep a gradient and given the
student too many losses. In such instances have the student go through the commands in proper sequence a few times and then continue with random commands building up the drill on a gradient.
The use of the correct command (including those for handling boun
cers, checking for erasure, and checking for postulates, as well as
correct narrative procedure) is required at the appropriate point.

TR 104

NAME: R3RA Coached And Bullbaited

COMMANDS: All R3RA commands and procedures.

POSITION: As for auditing on a doll (TR 102) with coach seated beside student and a bullbaiter as “pc” across from the student instead of a doll.

PURPOSE: To train the student to deliver a standard session with correct commands and procedure and without session additives of any kind despite distractions.

TRAINING The drill is the same as for auditing on a doll except that the “pc”
STRESS: coach bullbaits the student auditor during the session in an attempt
to throw the student off session while the second coach calls the
numbers as on TR 103. Flunks are given for any improper com
mands, procedure, comm lags, breaks in TRs or improper session
admin. The second coach does the “Start,” the flunking or “That’s
it.” If the student is not making the grade he is returned to the
earlier TR that is out. This drill is coached tough and only passed when the student is totally competent, exact and correct in all com
mands, procedures, auditing actions and session admin with excellent TRs and no slightest variation from or additives to New Era Dianetics.

Coach ensures the student has total certainty on the application of all R3RA commands and sequences including handling bouncers, checking for erasure, checking for postulates, and handling narrative incidents.

Preassessment procedure must also be correctly applied exactly as in a session.

These drills were developed by me in July 1969 when it was found that all failed sessions resulted from non-standard auditing, the main goofs being auditors’ failure to give the next command, forgetting the commands in session or giving a wrong command.

New drills were added and existing drills were revised to include drilling for the utilization of the discoveries of New Era Dianetics in 1978.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:rb.dr
Copyright © 1969. 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 19 JULY 1969RA
REVISED 13 JULY 1978
RE-REVISED 21 SEPTEMBER 1978
Remimeo
New Era Dianetics
Grad Checksheet
Class VIII
Case Supers (Revisions in this type style)
Registrars
Public Officers (Ellipsis indicates deletion)


DIANETICS AND ILLNESS

IMPORTANT NOTE: It is now forbidden to run Clears, OTs or Dianetic Clears on Dianetic Auditing Assists, secondaries, engrams or narrative incidents. The only permitted Dianetic actions are Contact Assists and Touch Assists. Clears and OTs may now receive New Era Dianetics for OTs at AOs and Flag. (Ref: BTB 17 Sept 78 BREAKTHROUGH and HCOB 12 Sept 78 DIANETICS FORBIDDEN ON CLEARS AND OTs.)

Although mention of this is made elsewhere in the Dianetics Course, the facts about ILLNESS do not seem, in practice, to reach the Case Supervisors or Dianetic auditors.

The idea that one can always get rid of an illness by auditing ONE chain to basic is false. Man dreams about “one shot” cures to a point where he could be accused of being impotent!

Here is an example: A preclear “has always wanted to get his bronchitis handled.” In Dianetics a list is made for chest or lung pains or sensations. One is chosen and erased. The “bronchitis” is now better or even absent for a few days. Then we have the preclear back again saying “It didn’t cure my bronchitis.”

Enough cases are handled successfully by running one chain on a somatic that people get stuck in the win.

Here is another example: The pc says he has migraine headaches. The auditor assesses a “head pain” quite correctly and then runs out the chain. The migraine does not occur for a week after. Then here’s the pc again saying “I’ve still got a headache.”

All this is invalidative of the tech and the auditing. A registrar or Public Division hearing this tends to lose faith in the powers of the tech.

The FACT is that the illness was not properly handled or C/Sed or audited.

In the first place a pc trying to get cured of bronchitis or migraine—or any one of a dozen other illnesses—should be sent for a medical examination. How do you know the bronchitis isn’t tuberculosis? Or the migraine headache isn’t a fractured skull?

A “continual side pain” may be a gallstone.

In short, something which continually hurts or disables may be structural or physical.

So, when you omit the first action (medical) in handling an illness, you set up an auditor for a possible failure.

Many of these things can be cured medically without too much heroic action.

If it is medical and can be cured medically without destructive consequences, then it should be.

Also it should be audited. This lets the medical treatment work. Many “incurable” illnesses become curable medically when they are also audited.

The second thing that gets overlooked is that AN ILLNESS IS A COMPOSITE (composed of many) SOMATIC.

The correct auditing action on “bronchitis” or “chest trouble” or “migraine headache” or any other continual worrisome illness is to be found on:

HCOB 28 Jul 71RA New Era Dianetics Series 8R
C/S Series 54RA DIANETICS, BEGINNING A PC ON
HCOB 18 Jun 78R New Era Dianetics Series 4R
ASSESSMENT AND HOW TO GET THE ITEM
HCOB 26 Jun 78RA II New Era Dianetics Series 6RA
ROUTINE 3RA, ENGRAM RUNNING BY CHAINS

This includes running the item by narrative incident, and then using preassessment full procedure to find all the somatics, sensations, feelings, emotions or even attitudes in the area affected, getting exact feelings from these—as “running items” and running their chains to full Dianetic EP.

It takes more than one chain of engrams to build up an ill area.

Having found and run the “deflated feeling” of bronchitis, which was the first best read, the C/S should order and the auditor find and run the NEXT somatic, sensation, feeling, emotion or attitude in that area.

It is sometimes necessary to add to the list for that area of the body.

Seeing a continual or recurring illness on the Original Assessment Sheet (or subsequent assessments of it), the C/S and auditor should dig out of that area every somatic, sensation, feeling, emotion, attitude, etc. that can be made to read, using the preassessment procedure. And run those chains, each one to basic and erasure. (See New Era Dianetics Series.)

THAT is the way you handle any illness, whether continual or temporary.

The maxim is that IT TAKES MORE THAN ONE CHAIN OF ENGRAMS TO MAKE A BODY ILL.

Continual reassessing and adding to general lists will get there eventually providing it is done long enough. But this general approach will find a certain number of pcs saying to registrars, Public Officers and friends, “I’ve still got my.”

It is in fact a false report. They didn’t still have all of it. It is one chain less and therefore better.

But auditing gives gains by deletion. A pc does not suffer from what has been erased. He suffers only from that which has not yet been handled. With New Era Dianetics tech you handle all the chains that are making the body ill.

Some persons tried years ago to get their trouble handled, somebody or some practice failed and after that they don’t mention it at all. They don’t support the technology anymore either.

So, in handling illness, give the handling of the structural disease side of it to the medical doctor, and thoroughly handle all the mental side of it with auditing and everyone wins.


Any registrar or Public Division personnel colliding with “My lumbosis was not handled” should call this HCOB to the attention of the person, the Case Supervisor and the auditors.

Only then can you have 100% tech.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:nt.ei.rd.lfg.kjm
Copyright (C 1969, 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED










HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 21 JULY 1969
Issue II
Level VI
Solo Course
ONE-HAND ELECTRODES


A one-hand electrode shows as much as one TA div high and hides floating needles. Some Solo students go mad trying to get their TA down when they already have an F/N. The Solo auditor uses a one-hand electrode but should have two cans handy to check and compare TA position and needle phenomena.




L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:nt.ei
Copyright © 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 22 JULY 1969R
REVISED 20 SEPTEMBER 1978
Remimeo
NED Checksheet
(Revisions in this type style)
(Ellipses indicate deletions)
(This bulletin has been revised to delete references
to pre-OTs as they are not now audited on New Era
Dianetics, but receive instead the New Era Dianetics
Special Rundown for OTs.)

IMPORTANT

AUDITING SPEED

Almost any failure you have ever had with an auditor or in auditing came from auditor comm lags or errors.

This is a vital datum. It came to light from applying the rule—ask the pc what the auditor did after any failed session and get it corrected in the auditor.

SPEED is the main factor behind the mystery of a failed session.

The better an auditor knows his TRs, his processes, his meter and admin the faster he can operate.

If you train auditors only up to slow, comm laggy handling of a session you will get a lot of mysteriously “failed sessions,” ending with the TA high and the pc very low!

A somewhat slow auditor auditing a new pc may be fast enough to get away with it.

Put him on a person whose Dianetics is finished and some grades in, he begins to have a few “case failures.”

The remedy is to speed the auditor up with TRs 101, 102, 103, 104.

In assigning auditors you only dare assign fast ones to fast pcs.

For 19 years this hidden speed factor has lain behind the vast majority of our “failed sessions.” As it never appeared on the session reports (except as excessive admin for which the pc must have had to wait) anyone doing D of P work or C/S work was in mystery and tended to get desperate and even squirrel (change and invent processes).

The only other source of failure was the physically ill aspect. This has just been verified in a series of over one hundred cases. Dianetics combined with Scientology reviews progressed splendidly on all but about seven and these who were then physically examined thoroughly were found to have serious and current physical illness.

Speed and accuracy then is the stress of all training and the lack of it is the source of all auditing failures on pcs who are not severely ill.

Even the latter respond once their purely physical illness is properly handled.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:cs.ei.aap.nc-
Copyright © 1969, 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 24 JULY 1969R
REVISED 24 JULY 1978
Remimeo
All Auditors
Case Supervisors
(Revisions in this type style)
(Ellipses indicate deletions)


SERIOUSLY ILL PCS



In Green Form No. 40 there is an item:

“Seriously Physically Ill.”

This is handled as follows:

1. Medical Examination

2. Medical Care

3. Auditing composed of the following:

Touch Assists, a Contact Assist, two-way comm, ruds on the incident, ruds before the incident, Dianetic Assist, life ruds, two-way comm on suppression, 3 S&Ds, assessment for area of illness, Prepcheck on area, ruds on area, hello and OK with the affected area, reach and withdraw from area, two-way comm, recall on persons similarly ill, location of the postulate that caused it with itsa earlier itsa, Prepcheck on the body or its part, more ruds, assessment of failed purposes, two-way comm on the sickness.

That’s not a program. It’s just a list of a LOT of things to do. It would not greatly matter what order they were done in but lighter actions should be the earlier.

As a pc who is ill is easily made an effect, the auditing sessions should be smoothly done and each session relatively short....

The remaining items on the GF 40 are then handled.

If “Seriously Physically Ill” is not THE GF 40 item, it is still handled but in its turn doing the above... actions.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:ldv
Copyright © 1969, 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 2 AUGUST 1969R
REVISED 4 SEPTEMBER 1978
Cl IV Grad
Checksheets
Snr Cl VI (Revisions in this type style)
Checksheets (Ellipses indicate deletions)
C/Ses

(Class VIII tapes contain much data on Out of Valence
handling. This Bulletin, formerly Class VIII distribution,
has been revised to present a procedure whereby Snr
Class IV and VI auditors can do LX Lists and Out of
Valence handling on their pus. This revision in no way
revises Class VIII data.)


“LX” LISTS


There are now three “LX” Lists:

LX3—Attitudes

LX2—Emotions

LX1—Conditions.

Originally they were called “X” because they were experimental.

They still are to some extent so the X is retained.

These serve to isolate REASONS A BEING IS CHARGED UP TO SUCH an extent that he is OUT OF VALENCE.

When a person is out of valence he does not easily as-is his bank.

These lists are assessed Method 5.

The best reading item (and then subsequently reading items) are taken up and run by:
3-Way or Quad Recalls

3 Way or Quad Engrams R3RA...


END PHENOMENA

We now have a new discovery. I have found that a person who is out of valence experiences, when run on LX1 lists (and now the others above, LX2 and LX3) and 220H, a remarkable valence shift if he is run on enough items.

In one fashion or another he comments on this in session.

This is the end phenomena of Out of Valence processes (the LX items and 220H).

It is always attained if enough items are run.

Quite ordinary cases are out of valence. If their folder gets too fat you can assume they are out of valence.

Perverts, suppressives and critical, snide, ruthless, arrogant or contemptuous personalities are always out of valence.

A person who is in treason on the 1st dynamic is always out of valence.

So whether GF No. 40 (h) OUT OF VALENCE reads or not, if the folder is fat, you play safe and assess and run LX items until the person has the Valence cognition.

Without being coached, a person who is out of valence always has the cognition if he is run on enough items and 220H.


USE OF LISTS

One begins with LX3. He assesses it Method 5 and takes the item that read best, handles it, then the item that read next best, and so on down the list.

If no EP, LX2 is taken up and handled in the same manner, then LX1. 220H is the last step of Out of Valence handling if the EP has not yet been reached.

Today you can assume safely that anyone out of valence can be put in valence quietly and efficiently with LX items and 220H if he is audited and if the auditing is standard.

This is quite a worthwhile development as it resolves the heavily overcharged case.

A symptom of a heavily charged case is F/Ning too quickly to be processed well.

Using these lists on a pc is not a critical action. Even (and especially) children are too overcharged to be easily audited.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:ldm.rd.dr
Copyright © 1969, 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 3 AUGUST 1969R
REVISED 22 AUGUST 1978
Cl IV Grad
Checksheets (Revisions in this type style)
Snr Cl VI (Ellipses indicate deletions)
Checksheets
C/Ses
LX2
EMOTIONAL ASSESSMENT LIST
(To be done before LX1)


3 Way or Quad Recall
3 Way or Quad Engrams R3RA

Reference: HCOB 2 Aug 69R “LX” LISTS
HCOB 26 Jun 78RA New Era Dianetics Series 6RA
URGENT IMPORTANT
ROUTINE 3RA ENGRAM
RUNNING BY CHAINS
HCOB 20 Sep 78II LX LIST HANDLING

Date: _____________________________________

Pc Name:__________________________________

Apprehension ____________
Fear ____________
Hate ____________
Agitation ____________
Shame ____________
Blame ____________
Regret ____________
Grief ____________
Remorse ____________
Sorrow ____________
Sadness ____________
Despondency ____________
Depressed ____________
Despair ____________
Anger ____________
Rage ____________
Greed ____________
Haughty ____________
Arrogant ____________
Cold ____________
Contemptuous ____________
Hostility ____________
Resentment ____________
Antagonism ____________
Boredom ____________
Conservatism ____________
Enthusiasm ____________
Proud ____________
Elation ____________
Serenity ____________
Unemotional ____________


LRH:rs.rd.jk L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1969, 1978 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 9 AUGUST 1969R
REVISED 21 AUGUST 1978
REISSUED 4 NOVEMBER 1978
Class IV Grad
Checksheet
Snr Class VI (Revisions in this type style)
Checksheet (Ellipsis indicates deletion)
C/Ses
(Reissued 4 Nov 78 to correct typo—
correction in italics.)
LX1 (CONDITIONS)
(Formerly issued to Class VIII auditors
as a research list on 5 October 1968)

Used after LX3 and LX2.
3 Way or Quad Recall
3 Way or Quad Engrams R3RA

Reference: HCOB 2 Aug 69R “LX” LISTS
HCOB 26 Jun 78RA New Era Dianetics Series 6RA
URGENT IMPORTANT
ROUTINE 3RA ENGRAM
RUNNING BY CHAINS
HCOB 20 Sep 78II LX LIST HANDLING

Date: _____________________________________

Pc Name:__________________________________

Assessment for largest read.
Overwhelmed ____________
Made Wrong ____________
Forced ____________
Frightened ____________
Suppressed ____________
Crushed ____________
Oppressed ____________
Denied ____________
Overpowered ____________
Overthrown ____________
Defeated ____________
Destroyed ____________
Vanquished ____________
Wiped Out ____________
Annihilated ____________
Changed ____________
Identified ____________
Recognized ____________
Driven Out ____________
Driven Away ____________
Grief ____________
Loss ____________


LRH:rs.rd.kjm L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1969, 1978 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 9 AUGUST 1969RA
Remimeo REVISED 25 JULY 1978
Class VIII RE-REVISED 21 SEPTEMBER 1978
Class VIII Checksheet
Case Supervisors (Revisions in this type style)
(Ellipses indicate deletions)

CASE FOLDER ANALYSIS,
NEW ERA DIANETICS

There are only nine things that can go wrong in a New Era Dianetics session.

These are the only reasons chains do not erase and the session does not complete with very good indicators.

The first eight come under the head of auditing skill or knowledge.

They are listed in order of frequency:

1. Auditor comm lag (lack of speed in giving commands).

2. Flubbed commands in which the commands are used incorrectly.

3. TRs out, either being inaudible or overwhelming or TR 4 not handled.

4. Auditor additives.

5. Failure to call for an earlier beginning of the incident when the pa can find no earlier incident—results in grinding and high TA.

6. Failure to call for an earlier incident when there is one.

7. Demanding pc goes earlier when the last incident was basic, making pc jump into another chain.

8. Misassessment. (Selecting a narrative item and running it by regular R3RA instead of by Narrative R3RA. Or choosing a multiple item or an after the fact item to run. Or taking an item that doesn’t read or in which the pc has no interest.)

9. Pc has out rudiments.

Note that the first four are BEYOND THE VIEW OF THE CASE SUPERVISOR.

The largest number of session failures come under these first four. Therefore it is routine for the Case Supervisor to have the pc asked what the auditor did. It is usually surprising. It will be one of the first four listed above. It requires a retrain.

The next four are also auditor flubs but are detectable if the Case Supervisor reads the worksheets of the session.

Therefore the Case Supervisor must know 5, 6, 7 and 8 above very well indeed and be able to look for them. In all of these the TA goes high or very low and the session ends up as a bust.

You can easily see 5. The pc is still on the same chain but begins to grind DEF DEF DEF DEF DEF, the TA goes way up or down below 2 and the auditor command

“H.” “Is there an earlier beginning to this incident?” is spectacularly absent. So the C/S tells the next auditor to get the earlier beginning of the same incident and run the incident from its earlier beginning, then go earlier as necessary to complete the chain. It will eventually go to EP with an F/N and the postulate coming off and VGIs obtained.

6 is very easy for the C/S to spot. The pc has been given DEF DEF DEF DEF DEF, etc. and has been asked for an earlier beginning to the same incident but hasn’t been asked for an earlier incident. So the C/S tells the next auditor to get an earlier incident.

7 is also easy for a C/S to detect from the worksheet of that session. Before the pc jumped to another chain by being forced to go earlier below basic, the TA was dropping and the incident was erasing, but the auditor failed to ask, after each run through the incident, “Has it erased?” The pc may have even given up a postulate, but the auditor missed the EP and pushed the pc earlier. Also the pc protested or had trouble when the auditor tried to go “earlier than basic” and also may mention another somatic.

In 8, misassessment, you can tell just by looking at the item that it is multiple such as “A burning pain in my hair and a feeling of tension on my hand”; that it is narrative “getting my feet wet” (where’s the feeling in that???); or after the fact of the engram “dizziness after a car wreck.” A real classic would be “A stomach ache when I was thrown from a horse.” The C/S hardly has to look at the end of the session to know it will be no erasure, high or low TA and bad indicators at the Examiner.

As auditors who do these last four things have their metering or basic definitions madly out (such as “I never did understand what a somatic was”) and as in the first four the approach to the pc, TRs and additives need ironing out, the C/S sends the auditor for retrain.

From the C/S point of view (and fact) the technology applied gets uniform good results. Thus the C/S never gets reasonable.

The auditor will on retrain settle down. 100% sessions will occur regularly when he really can audit.

PC REPAIR

The commonest C/S for a pc after a Dianetic session that ends with a high TA or below 2 TA and/or bad indicators at Examiner is “L3RF Method 5 and Handle.” If the L3RF, properly assessed and handled doesn’t resolve it, “To a Scientology auditor for a GF to F/N. Assess auditors, auditing, Dianetics, Scientology, sessions, reviews, gains (or whatever you care to add), Prepcheck.”


OUT RUDS

In number 9, we get several manifestations. The pc has a good looking session yet complains to the Examiner. That is to say VGIs F/N cog at session end, but sour grapes ten minutes later at the Examiner’s.

A pc who gets sad at session end and is or has been sad a long time and is sad and moping or despondent is, of course, suffering from an ARC Brk and is being audited over one and probably has had it for long duration. The proper C/S action is “To a Scientology auditor for a GF to F/N. Check ARC Brk Long Duration (LD).” This last is done with itsa earlier itsa and ARCU CDEINR by the auditor.

The pc who is being audited over a PTP won’t be making any gains. They quickly evaporate. The C/S orders “To a Scientology auditor for a GF to F/N. Check problems and being audited over problems.”

When a pc is a bit nasty to the auditor or Examiner, he is of course being audited over withholds. The C/S is “To a Scientology auditor for a GF to F/N. Then check and pull all withholds and check if the pc has been audited over withholds.”


PHYSICALLY ILL PCs

When a pc is ill or has a history of illness you get him/her medical attention and apply HCOB 24 July 69R, SERIOUSLY ILL PCs.

When a pc gets ill after auditing but the sessions look alright, you can be pretty sure that the pc is being audited over out ruds so a C/S orders “To a Scientology auditor for a GF to F/N. Assess GF 40 and handle any out ruds found in that assessment first.”

SPECIAL CASES

There may be some special versions of out ruds but they are all one variety or another of out rud.

The pc himself can generate out ruds by lying to his New Era Dianetics auditor. It still shows up as out ruds, withholds.

One pc (out of a hundred) said uniformly that “it was getting more solid” to escape each incident, got himself into a jump chain situation continually and became very ill indeed. This also operated as a withhold in session. It was not detectable in the worksheets except that the pc became ill. It came out while flying ruds in a review session.

But generally pcs don’t act up in sessions if the auditing is straightforward and many get better even when audited over all kinds of out ruds.

When a C/S begins to be mystified concerning some pc, why betterment isn’t occurring—why the pc’s manifestations and remarks never change—or the pc becomes ill, then only three things need to be done. And all three should be ordered by the C/S.

1. Medical exam and any treatment.

2. Review to straighten up all out ruds.

3. New Era Dianetics auditing, using both Narrative R3RA Quad and full Preassessment procedure on troubled areas.


ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT FORM

There is one other flub a bit maddening to a C/S.

When the C/S says “Assess existing lists or add” and the auditor says no items, it is quite often an auditor flub, a special kind of 8 above—misassessment.

One green auditor took 3 pcs in a row and could find no item, concluding that each of the 3 pcs were done with Dianetics! It turned out that the auditor’s TR I was so bad the pcs couldn’t hear her!

Another auditor didn’t have his meter plugged in and another one was found never to have done any meter drills.

Aside from getting the pc asked what the auditor did, which also should be done when it’s obvious there should have been an item and wasn’t, the C/S should order “Do a new Original Assessment Form” when the old list F/Ns or draws a blank even when properly assessed.

The pc can also be sent to the Examiner to be asked if there is anything not handled. The pc may give an area of interest. If there is one, but it hasn’t read, the C/S should send the pc to a Scientology auditor for GF to F/N and probably a GF 40RD Expanded and handle. Then one can get the area asked about in Review and Suppress and Protest put in on it and back to Dianetics.


EXTERIOR

Some pcs go exterior and the auditor may have missed it and continued auditing over it. Auditing past exterior can drive the TA high (or low) and the pc may become very upset and/or ill.

C/S for an L3RF to be done to determine if the pc has gone exterior. If so . . . and the pc has never had an Int RD the C/S would order an Interiorization Rundown. The Int Rundown stabilizes the exteriorization and makes it possible to audit the pc further.

Additionally, the pc could have had an Int RD that was messed up. This would . . . be determined by an L3RF and if found the C/S would be for an Int RD Correction List.... (If Int had been done and previously corrected, the C/S would order an End of Endless Int Repair RD (HCOB 24 Sep 78) after first having the pays folders FESed to ensure there were no unhandled Int errors present.) The Int RD and its correction must be turned over to a trained Scientology auditor.

When any Int actions, the Int RD, Int RD Correction or the End of Endless Int Repair RD, as needed, has been successfully completed, put the pc back on Dianetics.

I have personally C/Sed a vast number of Dianetic sessions and the above is all I had to do or know to keep them all going well.

If you look for tricky processes in Dianetics to “solve” some case, you will make a bad error as a C/S. They all come under the above data.

Good luck.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:rs.ldm.ei.rd.lfg.dr
Copyright © 1969, 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 17 OCTOBER 1969RA
REVISED 19 JULY 1978
RE-REVISED 20 SEPTEMBER 1978
(Revisions in this type style)
Remimeo
Dn Checksheet
Class VIII
Checksheet
DRUGS,
ASPIRIN AND TRANQUILIZERS

(Note: This Bulletin has been revised to align with New Era Dianetics Series Bulletins, in particular HCOB 15 July 71RA 111, Rev. 27 June 78 Re-rev. 19 Sept 78, C/S Series 48RA, New Era Dianetics Series 9R, DRUG HANDLING.)


I have just made a real breakthrough on the action of pain-killers (known as aspirin, tranquilizers, hypnotics, soporifics).

It has never been known in chemistry or medicine exactly how or why these things worked. Such compositions are derived by accidental discoveries that “such and so depresses pain.”

The effects of existing compounds are not uniform in result and often have very bad side effects.

As the reason they worked was unknown very little advance has been made in biochemistry. If the reason they worked were known and accepted possibly chemists could develop some actual ones which had minimal side effects.

We will leave the fact that this could be the medical biochemical discovery of the century and let the Nobel Prizes continue to go to the inventors of nose drops and new ways to kill and simply ourselves use it. Biochemical tech is not up to the point at this time that it can utilize it.

Pain or discomfort of a psychosomatic nature comes from mental image pictures. These are created by the thetan or living beings and impinge or press against the body.

By actual clinical test, the actions of aspirin and other pain depressants are to:

A. INHIBIT THE ABILITY OF THE THETAN TO CREATE MENTAL IMAGE PICTURES and also

B. TO IMPEDE THE ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY OF NERVE CHANNELS.

Both of these facts have a vital effect on processing.

If you process someone who has lately been on drugs, including aspirin, you will not be able to run out the Dianetic engram chains properly because they are not being fully created.

If you process someone immediately after taking aspirin for instance, you probably will not be able to find or assess the somatics that need to be run out to handle the condition. For the next day after taking the aspirin or drug the mental image pictures may not be fully available.

In the case of chronic drug taking, the drugs must be wholly worn off and out of the system and the engrams of drug taking must be run out in their entirety, triple or quad flow. If this is not done, auditing will be trying to handle chains that aren’t being fully created by the thetan.

In the case of auditing someone who has taken drugs—aspirin, etc.—within the last few hours or two or three days, the chains of engrams definitely will be found not fully created and therefore not available.

This would all be fine except for three things:

1. Auditing under these conditions is very difficult. The TA may be high and will not come down. One gets “erasures” at TA 4.0 with an “F/N.” Auditing errors become easy to make. The bank (chains) is jammed.

2. The thetan is rendered STUPID, blank, forgetful, delusive, irresponsible. A thetan gets into a “wooden” sort of state, unfeeling, insensitive, unable and definitely not trustworthy, a menace to his fellows actually.

3. When the drugs wear off or start to wear off the ability to create starts to return and TURNS ON SOMATICS MUCH HARDER. One of the answers a person has for this is MORE drugs. To say nothing of heroin, there are, you know, aspirin addicts. The compulsion stems from a desire to get rid of the somatics and unwanted sensations again. There is also something of dramatization of the engrams already gotten from earlier drug taking. The being gets more and more wooden, requiring more and more quantity and more frequent use.

Sexually it is common for someone on drugs to be very stimulated at first. This is the “procreate before death” impulse as drugs are a poison. But after the original sexual “kicks” the stimulation of sexual sensation becomes harder and harder to achieve. The effort to achieve it becomes obsessive while it itself is less and less satisfying.

The cycle of drug restimulation of pictures (or creation in general) can be at first to increase creation and then eventually to inhibit it totally.

If one were working on this biochemically the least harmful pain depressant would be one that inhibited the creation of mental image pictures with minimal resulting “woodenness” or stupidity and which was body soluble so that it passed rapidly out of the nerves and system. There are no such biochemical preparations at this time.

These tests and experiments tend to prove that the majority of pain and discomfort does come from mental image pictures and that these are immediately created.

Erasure of a mental image picture by standard Dianetic processing removes the compulsion to create it.

Drugs chemically inhibit the creation but inhibit as well the erasure. When the drug has worn off the picture audited while it was in force can return.

The E-Meter tone arm under drugs or on a drug case can go very high—TA 4.0 TA 5.0. It can also be dropped to “dead thetan” (a false Clear read).

Auditing a person on drugs can obtain an “erasure” and “F/N” at TA 4.0. But the erasure is only apparent and must be “rehabbed” (verified or redone) when the person is off drugs.

Any habitual drug taker, applying for auditing while still on drugs is handled per New Era Dianetics Series 2R NEW ERA DIANETICS FULL PC PROGRAM OUTLINE and New Era Dianetics Series 9R DRUG HANDLING.

A full drug handling program as the very first action would be done on the case. (This includes Objective Processes, Sweat Out Program if LSD or Angel Dust have been taken, Hard TRs Course, Narrative R3RA running of each reading drug, medicine or alcohol, the preassessment of each reading drug, medicine or alcohol, and the prior assessment, followed by additional Objective Processes.)

TRs and Objective processing will ease the withdrawal symptoms of the habitual drug user. (This includes alcohol.) Even though drug handling steps are in progress, do not consider the drug has worn off until 6 weeks have passed.

A person who has taken aspirin or other drugs within the past 24 hours or the past week should be given a week to “dry out” before more auditing is given.

Auditing assists can and should be given whenever needed despite the pcs having taken drugs. The erasure of any engram chains run would then be verified after the drug has worn off. (This can be up to 6 weeks for certain drugs and medications such as anesthetics.)

No alcohol may be consumed within 24 hours before an auditing session and where alcohol consumption has been excessive, the drying out period would be extended to several days or a week.

It is not fatal to audit over drugs. It is just difficult, the results may not be lasting and need to be verified afterwards.

Chronic drug takers who have not had drugs specifically handled may go back to drugs after auditing as they were too drugged during auditing to get rid of what was bothering them and which drove them to drugs.

With the enemies of various countries using widespread drug addiction as a defeatist mechanism, with pain-killers so easily available and so ineffective, drugs is a serious auditing problem.

It can be handled. But when aspirin, that innocent seeming pain-killer, can produce havoc in auditing if not detected, the subject needs care and knowledge.

The above data will keep the auditor clear of the pitfalls of this hazard.

To paraphrase an old quote, we used to have iron men and wooden ships. We now have a drug society and wooden citizens.

I’ve been studying this for over a year and a half and have made the breakthrough.

Drug companies would be advised to do better research.

And auditors are advised to ask any pc, “Have you been taking any drugs or aspirin ?”

The medical aspect is an understandable wish to handle pain. Doctors should press for better drugs to do this that do not have such lamentable side effects. The formula of least harmfulness is above.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:ldm.ei.rd.dr.nc
Copyright © 1969, 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 5 NOVEMBER 1969R
Class IV Grad Issue V
Checksheets (HCOB 4 Aug 69 Amended and Revised)
Snr C/ass VI REVISED 4 SEPTEMBER 1978
Checksheets
C/Ses (Revisions in this type style)

LX3 (ATTITUDES)
(Used before LX2)

Reference: HCOB 2 Aug 69R ”LX” LISTS
HCOB 26 Jun 78RA New Era Dianetics Series 6RA
Issue II URGENT IMPORTANT
ROUTINE 3RA ENGRAM
RUNNING BY CHAINS
HCOB 20 Sep 78 LX LIST HANDLING
Issue II

3 Way or Quad Recall
3 Way or Quad Engrams R3RA

Date: __________________________________

Pc Name:_______________________________

Treachery ___________
Disloyalty ___________
Helplessness ___________
Hostility ___________
Rudeness ___________
Cruelty ___________
Disobedience ___________
Rebelliousness ___________
Wastefulness ___________
Stinginess ___________
Cowardliness ___________
Dirtiness ___________
Ungodliness ___________
Wickedness ___________
Cunning ___________
Criticism ___________
Falsity ___________
Pretense ___________
Glee ___________
Laughter ___________
Mockery ___________
Embarrassment ___________
Feeling Hurt ___________
Oppressive ___________
Ridicule ___________
Good ___________
Persecution ___________
Betrayal ___________
Guilt ___________


LRH:ldm.rs.rd.kjm L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1969, 1978 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 15 NOVEMBER 1969R
Issue I
REVISED 27 JULY 1978
Remimeo (Revisions in this type style)
Class VIIIs (Ellipses indicate deletions)
Dn Auditors
Dn Checksheet
Checksheet IMPORTANT AND URGENT
Interne
Checksheets
All Classes
CASE SUPERVISION
AUDITING AND RESULTS


The whole “secret” of producing high case gain and total results with New Era Dianetics and Scientology auditing lies in the following:


NEW ERA DIANETICS RESULTS

When an auditor can produce exact auditing on New Era Dianetics you know he can audit.

New Era Dianetics is a very simple, precise procedure. The major errors are:

(a) misassessment (inability to use a meter usually but out TRs can do it)

(b) taking narrative items and running them as somatic chains

(c) forcing a pc toward “earlier incident” when it required “earlier beginning” making the pc jump chains

(d) fumbling commands

(e) out TRs.

An auditor’s poor TRs and corny errors such as above will prevent New Era Dianetics results.

But the New Era Dianetics auditing is so simple THAT IT DEMONSTRATES CLEANLY WHETHER THE PERSON CAN AUDIT OR NOT.

This is not true of Scientology auditing particularly VI, VII and VIII. Here the procedure is more complex. The errors of the auditor are obscured in the possibility of a wrong C/S or a complex pc. Thus whether the auditor can audit or not, just as an auditor, is obscured.

Thus, with the auditor as a variable factor, the tech can look variable.

Therefore you can lay down this rule as truth and it will be truth until the end of time:

If a IV, V, VI, VII or VIII cannot produce invariably excellent results his basic auditing is deficient but obscured by the complexity of material.

Therefore it is vital that an auditor be a proven result-getting New Era Dianetics auditor before any result can be expected of him in his/her Scientology auditing.

We have now had several dark mysteries cleared up on this subject with many examples. For instance in 1969 when Standard Dianetics was introduced one auditor who had been thought a competent VI and had been “auditing” for years was found to be getting too many failed pcs; he was trained up as a Standard Dianetic auditor and on his first sessions it was found that he could not produce Standard Dianetic results; he was vigorously groomed on his TRs which were wildly out and always had been and made to do the very exact businesslike procedure of Standard Dianetics. He then got excellent Standard Dianetic results session after session on his pc and could be designated as a very good Dianetic auditor. He was briefly retreaded on his Scientology materials and at once could get terrific results with upper level Scientology.

From this we can state without any fear of contradiction by your future experience that:

An VIII who is not a proven . . . Dianetic auditor as well is not dependable as an auditor no matter who trained him.

The practice of loosely certifying HNEDAs without total proof that they get excellent uniform session results on Dianetic pcs can foul up the whole field and jeopardize the entire auditing future of the student. To certify a New Era Dianetics auditor who doesn’t get provenly excellent . . . Dianetic results is an act of treason against all that person’s future pcs and all the rest of us.

If tech is “out” in an area it will be because some of the auditors, whatever their class, are not capable of delivering simple Dianetic sessions, regardless of the level at which they are auditing. And out tech will be compounded if the Case Supervisor is not also an excellent New Era Dianetics auditor for he won’t know the errors for which to look.

When you can really dig this and know it and get it in practice the bulk of out tech and “failed pcs” in an area will vanish.

I know it is sometimes hard to achieve a simplicity as simple as New Era Dianetics but when it is done, tech worries from there on up are over.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:rs.ei.rd.lfg
Copyright © 1969, 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 23 NOVEMBER 1969RB
Issue III
Remimeo
Class VIII REVISED 3 AUGUST 1978
Class VIII RE-REVISED 4 SEPTEMBER 1978
Checksheet
Course Supervisors (Revisions in this type style)
Registrars
Dianetic Checksheet
Dianetic Auditors

(This Bulletin has been revised to align with New Era Dianetics tech. The Dianetic Student Rescue Intensive is given in HCOB 2 July 1978 New Era Dianetics Series 11, DIANETIC STUDENT RESCUE INTENSIVE.

There are, additionally, Scientology steps to the Student Rescue Intensive, which can be done by a trained Scientology auditor. These steps are contained herein, to give you additional Student Rescue Intensive steps you can do on your pc if you are a Class III or above Scientology auditor AND a New Era Dianetics auditor.)



STUDENT RESCUE INTENSIVE


In working with a student, a supervisor found that engrams and secondaries gather around the subject of study and developed some material on it which I tested and redeveloped.

He said:

“The subject of study has been abound with ‘authorities’ and boobytraps forever and a day, but until Ron researched this field of human endeavour and published his findings on tapes, HCOBs and Policy Letters, nobody has EVER made any progress toward the resolution of study itself as a problem.

“In this very day and age we find physical punishments of students the rule rather than the exception, and even the use of instruments like canes, sticks, shoes and such like articles in order to ‘teach’ a student (create ‘ARC’) is accepted as normal practice.

“The phenomena of secondaries and engrams resulting thereof, which inhibit study are not known about or completely ignored, and often handled by a further duress.

“And many a once bright keen young student throws in his study in despair and goes to the nearest oculist for even stronger lenses in his glasses to help his ruined eyesight.

“THE SUBJECT, THE VERY IDEA OF STUDY ITSELF HAS BECOME TRAUMATIC, IT IS AN AREA OF LOSSES AND PHYSICAL PAINS.”

The Class VIII C/S can be audited by a Class III who is also a New Era Dianetics auditor.

1. Fly a rud to F/N.

2. Do Remedy A on Dianetics or Scientology. (Omit if student has had one.)

3. Do Remedy B. (Omit if student has had one.)

(Ref: Book of Case Remedies
HCOB 9 Nov 67 Review Auditor’s Book of Case Remedies
Revision of Remedy A, Remedy B and S and Ds)

4. Assess:

Being Trained Education
Being Educated Schools
Study Teachers
Learning Enforcement
Stress Misunderstoods

5. Prepcheck best reading item.

This completes the Scientology steps of the Student Rescue Intensive.


DIANETIC STUDENT RESCUE INTENSIVE

6. Take the item found in 4 above and do a preassessment on it.

7. Find the running item, using standard preassessment procedure. (Ref: HCOB 18 Jun 78 New Era Dianetics Series 4 ASSESSMENT AND HOW TO GET THE ITEM.)

8. Run out the item you have found in Step 7, R3RA Quad (or Triple if pc is not yet Quaded).

9. Repeat the preassessment on the original item found in Step 4 and repeat Steps 7 and 8 on that item.

10. Continue reassessing the Preassessment List on the original item and running out R3RA Quad the best reading running item until there are no further reads on the preassessment of that original item.

The intensive should be concluded when the pc is now happy about study.


PROMOTING STUDENT RESCUE INTENSIVES

Any org or course has on it some slow students or students who easily dope off while attempting to study, or students who become upset by study or try to blow.

A registrar should periodically obtain a list of these and see that they are sold a Student Rescue Intensive.

A Student Rescue Intensive is not run until the pc has been completed up to Action Eleven of the New Era Dianetics Full Pc Program Outline (HCOB 22 Jun 78 New Era Dianetics Series 2) as it would interrupt his program because drugs, if he has taken any, are a probable contributory cause to being unable to study. Also the Student Rescue Intensive is not a substitute for proper Word Clearing of Dianetic, Scientology and earlier courses and training. It does, however, make the latter much more effective.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:dr
Copyright © 1969, 1973, 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 21 DECEMBER 1969
OTL DK to issue
to all SHs
and AOs
Ltr Reg’s Hats
Reg’s Hats
Tech Sec
OES
To Master Files WW

SOLO AUDITING AND R6EW

(Cancels Base Order No. 9 which removed HDC as a prerequisite of R6EW Solo)


The problems of a person on Solo not knowing how to audit gives us a great deal of trouble in AOs as well as SHs.

The R6EW checksheet has been several times revised and at one time incorrectly has included all kinds of implants to study. Also, the materials to be audited have in the past erroneously been issued as part of the R6EW study pack.

In all such Solo courses the person is not issued what he will eventually audit on until he has completed the study pack. He then attests or is examined and having passed, he is given a review session to, mainly, fly his ruds. He is then issued the auditing materials and gets on with his Solo. Where this sequence is violated trouble occurs.

We have also had people glance at the materials to be audited, pick out something that strikes their interest and then go and attest leaving an out grade.

The troubles on Solo courses are

1. Has no real training as an auditor.

2. Is given unnecessary or unhelpful materials to study.

3. Is issued the auditing materials he will Solo audit before he attests to the study materials.

4. Wasn’t ready for the grade and will use it to cure an ARC break or ingrown eyelids, these not having been handled in earlier auditing.

5. Doesn’t actually audit the Solo materials but attests leaving an out grade.

The above are, by experience, a general rundown of the problems having to do with all Solo grades.

They begin with R6EW. When this is out they have trouble from there on.

The essence of this course is that one is trying to make a SOLO auditor, not a person who can audit others.

In 1969 I ordered the HDC materials to go on the R6EW checksheet. Someone re-interpreted this as “The Dianetics Course is a requisite for R6EW Solo” which is wild.

People enrolling on this course are going the SOLO route. There are 2 routes, called the SOLO and the PROFESSIONAL.

Solo auditors must have meter lessons and other theory so they know about mental image pictures. They must also do actual Solo sessions well BEFORE GOING NEAR THE MATERIALS OF THE GRADE.

Thus the Solo Course R6EW breaks down into these requisites:

1. The person as a case to have had all grades up to the level including Dianetics Triples, any other Scn auditing like Class VI auditors use, Scientology Triples, Acceleration and POWER. If the student hasn’t got all these he’ll never make it as a CASE on Solo. Thus (1) is GET GRADES DONE BELOW R6EW.

2. The Solo student must be trained on the meter, about the time track, mental image pictures and any other theory needful without

(a) trying to teach him a full Academy Course or

(b) denying him vital data needed in Solo.

He must for instance be able to fly his ruds. So (2) is GET THEORY IN AND ADEQUATELY LEARNED.

3. The student must be able to do Solo auditing drills which would begin with drills such as the E-Meter book drills done Solo. These include keeping the admin properly. So (3) is PRACTICAL SOLO DRILLS.

4. The student needs to do actual auditing Solo which help him and his case. These would include running a light lock, cleaning up an ARC break, handling a PTP, doing a clean up on overts (rather than W/Hs). Such sessions would have to go to a Supervisor, each one, for C/Sing. When he can actually handle himself Solo, he is then and only then finished with his training. IF HE STILL CAN’T SOLO AUDIT, REQUIRE A FULL HDC COURSE BE TAKEN. So (4) is PROVE HE CAN SOLO AUDIT.

5. The student is now issued his auditing materials for the grade. These MUST NOT BE INCLUDED IN THE STUDY PACK AS HE WILL SELF-AUDIT ON THEM AND NOT GET TRAINED. So (5) is ONLY ISSUE THE GRADE MATERIAL WHEN ALL STUDY IS COMPLETE.

6. When the auditing is done, or session by session as C/S is available, and the student is seen to have actually done it by folder he is permitted to attest. So (6) is DON’T PERMIT ATTESTATION WITHOUT CONFIRMATION OF ACTUAL AUDITING.

The checksheets and actions of R6EW (and any other Solo course or grade) must be in keeping with these stipulations or there will be no adequate result from Solo grades.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:rs
Copyright © 1969
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 27 FEBRUARY 1970
UK Stn Ship
Only
GROUP ENGRAM PROCESS


A group is composed of individuals. If they have a group engram it only has force because of basics on that subject in their banks. Thus, if they are cleaned up on the general subject, the general group engram should blow off and disappear.

This, therefore, is done on every member of the group.

LISTING, NULLING and TRS MUST BE FLAWLESS.

(1) Do the Info Sheet provided below.

(2) Fly a rud to F/N. If TA high get it down by listing “What has been overrun?” to a BD item and rehab it to F/N.

(3) List by laws of listing and nulling but be sure to get a BD item, which F/Ns, the question “What is the greatest overt you have ever committed on the whole track?” The list may be rather long.

(4) Now run (despite F/N) “What ARC break occurred just before that?” Use ARCU and CDEI. Desist on this step at the first F/N cog VGIs.

(5) Now list, “What is the most unwanted change experienced by this or another org?” By L & N to a BD item and F/N.

(6) “What ARC break was connected with that?”

(7) Now list the question by L & N “What purpose has failed?” This should be to a BD item. It will F/N and the pc cognite and GIs.

(8) “What ARC break was connected with that?” ARCU CDEI to F/N VGIs.

Note to auditor—if you can’t get it to F/N prepcheck it but if correct items all above lists really should F/N.

Info Sheet
Org Name _________________________________________________________________________
Name of Member (Print)_______________________________________________________________
Level or Grade of case_________________________________________________________________
TA at Start____________________________Needle behavior_________________________________
General attitude to auditor______________________________________________________________

The session should be rapid and deft. Do not however overwhelm by chopping comm. Follow “End Phenomena and F/N” data as per recent HCOB 20 February 70. This is particularly important in the “Greatest Overt” process as pc gets introverted in listing.

In doing this on group members who are being called in, it is important to inform them “This is not a Sec Check. It is a new process being run to help the org.” This can be posted on the board. Do NOT tell them you are running a group engram as they will become enturbulated, self-list, etc.

Any pc who is sick a day or two afterward has had a wrong item given him or her.

On members of the group not previously audited by anyone, Tech Services for the operation should do the Info Sheet using a meter for TA and needle state and not put the person through to actual session but info the D of T to get the person audited on Dianetics.


LRH:jz L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1970 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 11 MARCH 1970
UK Stn Ship
Only
IMPORTANT NOTE ON GROUP
ENGRAM INTENSIVE

A pc who is on a specific cycle of auditing should never have it interrupted to do another cycle. This is an invariable rule. Complete an auditing cycle once begun.

Example: Pc in the middle of having flows 2 and 3 run on Dianetics, given a Group Engram Intensive before Dn Triples completed. The Group Engram Intensive tends to collide with the cycle already in progress and the TA goes high at Examiner.

There are certain basic rules that make standard tech, standard tech. One of them is complete an auditing cycle before beginning another.

Doing “whole org” auditing actions can collide with this unless it is watched.


LRH:nt L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1970 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED





HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 15 MARCH 1970
Class VIII
Checksheet
Class VIII C/S DOUBLE FOLDER DANGER
Checksheet


When a pre-OT has a Solo and an auditing folder, both, there is a great danger if the Case Supervisor does not look at BOTH before C/Sing.

There has been an instance of a pre-OT running strange C/Ses on himself. Another ran C/Ses out of other folders on himself. In both cases the consequences were hard to repair when finally found.

In another case in the Solo folder the pre-OT had gone exterior with full perception. But the non-Solo auditing folder was being C/Sed. The TA shot up for 2 months without any C/S except myself calling for all folders.

Pre-OTs unfortunately run on a Solo folder and an audited folder. Unless both are to hand when C/Sing wild errors can be made by the C/S.

There is also the case of a person having two audited folders, being C/Sed at the same time. This is an admin error.

The firm rule is C/S ONLY WITH ALL FOLDERS TO HAND.

The embarrassing situation where one can’t get a folder from another org or field auditor or where the old folder is lost has to be made up for somehow. It mustn’t halt auditing totally.


LRH:dr.wa L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1970 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 25 JUNE 1970RA
Issue II
REVISED 6 OCTOBER 1978
Remimeo
(Revisions in this type style)
C/S Series 12RA

GLOSSARY OF C/S TERMS

Ref: HCOB 5 Apr 77 Expanded Grades
HCOB 24 Sept 78 Dianetic C/ear
Issue III
HCOB 22 June 78R NED Series 2R
New Era Dianetics Full
Pc Program Outline
RECOVERY PROGRAM: The pack of

LRH EDs 100 Int 10 May 70 Lower Grades Upgraded
102 Int 20 May 70 The Ideal Org
103 Int 21 May 70 Fast Flow Grades Cancelled
104 Int 2 Jun 70 Auditing Sales and Delivery
Pgm No. 1
106 Int 3 Jun 70 What Was Wrong
107 Int 3 Jun 70 Orders to Divisions for
Immediate Compliance
10 SH 6 Jun 70 SH Pcs
108 Int 11 Jun 70 Auditing Mystery Solved
101 Int 21 Jun 70 Popular Names of
Developments

comprising the program to recover full use and results of EXPANDED LOWER GRADES.

PROGRESS PROGRAM:

What is called a “Repair Program” on the first issue of the C/S Series HCOB just being issued is renamed a PROGRESS PROGRAM. It has been found that case gain which has not been earlier achieved can be consolidated by a PROGRESS PROGRAM. It takes 25 hours, can be done by a Class I or above as long as it is C/Sed by an VIII who has Narrated on the new C/S Series. This is quite a technical development in itself. It is the answer to a pc who had “Quickie Grades” and didn’t actually reach full abilities in earlier Scientology auditing. It is followed by an Advance Program which follows below.

ADVANCE PROGRAM:

This is what was called a “Return Program” in the C/S Series. The name is being changed from “Return” to “Advance” as more appropriate. It gets the pc really up to where he should be. It may take 50 hours or more.

EXPANDED LOWER GRADES:

Pcs won’t like being told they “have to have their lower grades rerun.” Actually that’s not a factual statement anyway. The lower grades harmonic into the OT Levels.
They can be run again with full 1950-1960 to 1970 processes as given on the SH courses all through the 1960s. These are now regrouped and sorted out and are called EXPANDED LOWER GRADES. See also HCOB 5 April 77, Expanded Grades and
HCOB 22 June 78R, New Era Dianetics Series 2R, NED Full Pc Program Outline. There are no Dianetic or Scientology single or “Quickie” lower grades anymore.

DIANETIC CLEAR:

The state of C/ear can be achieved on Dianetics.

It is not however attained by feeding people cognitions; Clears are made through auditing.

The state of Dianetic C/ear means the pa has erased his Dianetic case or mental image pictures.

The discovery that a Dianetic C/ear must not be run on engrams, R3RA or any version of R3R, results in an expansion of the Non-lnterference Zone.

After Dianetic C/ear, you can run Grades O-IV. You do not run the pc on the R3RA section of the new Service Fac handling, however. He can be given Touch or Contact Assists (as can Clears and OTs), but not a Dianetic Auditing Assist nor any Dianetic auditing.

A Dianetic C/ear is not run on Power, R6EW or the Clearing Course, but goes directly onto OT I (after doing the Solo Auditor Course).

CLASSIFICATION CHART:

This chart “Classification and Gradation Chart” has been reissued many times. All issues are more or less valid. To save print, the process run column appears in “Processes Taught” on the auditor side of the chart. All these processes and more are used in Expanded Lower Grades. The chart is valid.

QUICKIE GRADES:

Persons were too demanding to be done quickly. On many cases these grades as given were valid but a large number of cases needed Expanded Lower Grades. 20 minutes from Grade 0 to IV and 5 minutes Power was far more than many could stand up to. These need a PROGRESS PGM and an ADVANCE PGM. This is true of persons at VA or R6EW or on CC or OT Levels. All these who haven’t fully made it need a PROGRESS PGM and an ADVANCE PGM “to pick up all the latent gain they missed.”

DIANETIC PCS:

Dianetic pcs should be audited on New Era Dianetics until no somatics, then go up through Quad or Expanded Lower Grades to Power, R6EW, Clearing Course and OT Levels.

TRAINING:

Any pc who has trouble needs training and the amount of time required in Expanded Lower Grades and so on makes it cheaper to be trained.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:sb.rd.nc
Copyright © 1970. 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 30 JUNE 1970RA
RE-REVISED 9 APRIL 1977
Remimeo
C/S Series 13RA

VIII ACTIONS

(GF 40, IV Rundown, VIII Case Supervision.)


Inevitably, when any new approach or process is released, some will instantly assume that all “older” (actually more basic) data has been cancelled. There is no statement to that effect. It is not guessed that this will be assumed and so we could lose an entire subject.

We did in fact lose Dianetics for a decade and all but lost Scientology in the following ten years.

A subject can be reorganized and made more workable. That was done in 1969 for Dianetics. BUT IT HAD NEVER BEEN UNWORKABLE!

The 1969 Dianetics reorganization refined the 1962-63 discoveries of R-3-R. A better communication was made to the user and the preclear.

Amazingly, the reissue of Dianetics as Standard Dianetics caused about a dozen people (even in high places unfortunately) to at once assume that Dianetics wiped out any need for Power, Scientology clearing or anything else! Even an unauthorized Policy Letter, (not signed by me) and an HCOB (also not signed by me) gave this impression. They were of course cancelled the instant they were discovered to have been sent out.

This idea that the “old” is always cancelled by anything “new” has its root in the idea that a later order cancels earlier orders, which is true. But orders are one thing and tech basics another.

What if, in the science of physics, a book by Professor Glumph came out, omitting the three laws of motion and gravity. It is assumed then that Newton’s laws are no longer valid. Because they are old. (Newton lived between 1642 and 1727.) So some young student engineer is baffled because bridges have weight and can’t work out gravity or motion! And he and his fellows begin to build without knowing these laws and there goes the whole of engineering and the culture itself!

This is no fantasy. As a college student in upper math I was utterly baffled by “calculus.” I couldn’t find out what it was for. Then I discovered it had been developed by Sir Isaac Newton, examined the basics and got the idea. My college text omitted all the basic explanations and even the authorship of the subject! Calculus today is really not enough used because it isn’t understood.

Anyway, here’s the main surprise: Until 1970 the whole of Scientology was never in use in processing! Students had ridden along with the research line up into the OT sections, discarding the ladder behind them. For nearly 3 years an increasing proportion of preclears were not actually making it. The gradient to get them onto the Bridge had been neglected as “old” when in fact they were not “old” but BASIC.

The amazement of auditors (and their delight) when the HCOB on Auditors Rights (C/S Series No. 1) was released indicated that they had become “process oriented” with all the WHY gone.

VIII AUDITING

The 1968 VIII standardization aimed actually at good TRs, auditing presence, and basics in auditor performance. VIII auditing was developed to handle the Or band.

It is entirely valid. Its only omission was detailed actions now developed as to how to handle a pc or pre-OT who had been pulled up the line and had fallen on his head.

Out grades was spotted and discussed in detail in VIII auditing.

Giving lower grades fast was the only error. It was not realized in 1968 that end phenomena of lower grades was not being required.

The re-release of the entire band of Academy and Saint Hill materials in 1970 is a re-emphasis on the validity and necessity of using it ALL on pcs! And in understanding the mind and life! And all this is quite welcome and very successful. Not noticed is that this whole band was never before presented for full use on all pcs. As I say 19501969 auditors had been riding with the “newest and latest” because it was “popular.” Only a few wise old-timers continued to use the most basic actions.

But just as VIII auditing was an unauthorized signal to suppress all that had been known before, so now, with the full release for use of Expanded Lower Grades, a few began to say that VIII auditing was now “old”!

One assumes then that some like to be able to say that something is now “old.” Has a superior sort of ring to it, I guess. Anyway we’d better disregard this tendency to retire basics. It is more amusing than otherwise. So let’s get on with the job.


RESISTIVE CASES

The RESISTIVE CASE Rundown is an VIII development TO HANDLE THOSE WHO CANNOT MAKE THE GRADES.

It was put into the Green Form as GF 40 so as to preserve it.

To it could now be added “Overwhelmed.” This would indicate need of Repair (Progress) and Return (Advance) Programs. But many other indicators exist already.

So when do you use a GF 40?

Let us say the pc has been run on Grade Zero. And at the Examiner cannot or does not attest.

One would first look for simple auditing errors in recent sessions. These would get reviewed and corrected.

One would then look for lower actions than Grade Zero that had been missed.

If it still seemed hard to figure out, one would use a GF 40, Resistive Cases.

In essence, if one adds “Overwhelm” to the GF 40 list you have on it all the reasons a pc won’t advance IF he has been run on all processes up to that point.

Overwhelm would indicate need of a Repair and Return.

Grade I, Problems, is the usual ordinary reason for no case advance.

Problems shows up as an out rud in GF 40 and is simply put in as a rud not as a grade.

But if a Grade II or above has a problem??? That means Grade I is out.

GF 40 remains even more plainly as a “When all else fails.”

It is used that way.

When a pc doesn’t attest, and all has been done for him otherwise, you use a GF 40.

This was its proper use in the first place.

All such materials except rapid or Quickie Grades are valid.

And (joke) these remarks on GF 40 Resistive Cases does not wipe out “Repair and Return Programs.”

IV RUNDOWN

The so-called IV Rundown as taught on the VIII Course is of course quite valid.

Originally developed to catch cases that had somehow gotten up to OT III and were falling on their heads, it is a collection of actions. It salvaged many cases.

The missing datum was that in recent times these cases were falsely reported to have had their lower grades. THEY, the cases themselves, said they had “had lower grades.” This made a mystery. The fact is, with multiple declare (declaring 0 to IV to the Examiner all at one time mostly without any mention of end phenomena of the grade) these cases were OUT GRADE in the extreme.

The IV Rundown was an effort to catch it all up to make a real OT.

“Out Grades” didn’t read as it didn’t mean anything to the pc and besides “they’d all been rehabbed a dozen times anyway.” But nobody mentioned never having attained any end phenomena and the Class Chart was never really gotten IN IN IN in the first place.

You will find many pcs have had various parts of the “IV Rundown” run earlier.

For awhile it was the fashion to use the IV Rundown or a part of it on any balky case at any level.

At OT IV (which was an audited step and none of it really confidential) the C/S simply ordered run whatever was left of it not already run.

Somewhere on the case all of the IV Rundown still should be run. But of course that would now be on a Return (Advance) Program and well up the line.

If Repair-Return doesn’t get a grade made this is the time to do a IV Rundown. On (3) Valence Shifter - LX1, LX2, LX3 lists can be done in triple, recall, secondary, engram.

Earlier Practices, Former Therapy can also be triple, recall, secondary, engram.

This is on Page 28 (not 23) of the original VIII Case Supervisor Manual and part of it is also now GF 40.

If a case really needs this he won’t be making a lower grade really so the GF 40 or its slightly wider OT IV Rundown can be used.

To both, “Overwhelmed by auditing” should be added in any future issue to indicate a needed repair action.

CASE SUPERVISOR ACTIONS

HCOB 10 Dec 1968 “Case Supervisor Actions” Confidential, VIIIs only, is still valid. It remains confidential as it mentions some OT phenomena that would spin a Grade VA. However, some VIII C/S is going to be told that “Expanded Lower Grades changes all that.” It doesn’t.

Listen: In the next to last paragraph of the cover page of this manual (HCOB 10 Dec 68) it says:

“Standard grades are not part of this set-up AS IT IS UNDERSTOOD THAT THE AUDITOR KNOWS THESE. Directions to do standard grades are written on a blank sheet.” (I have added the block letters for emphasis here.)

At the time this was written I had not discovered that lower grades were gone out of use and I let be published Triple Grades which seemed to condense all lower grades. The major process or major grade process may not be enough to make a pc make a lower grade. I am sorry I gave any support at all to such an idea by not examining the whole scene when it began to show up. I did find it and did correct it however when auditing statistics over the world showed the fault. (28 hours was the total weekly delivery of orgs!!)

If you add the dozens and dozens of lower grade processes as given in Expanded Lower Grades to the VIII C/S HCOB of 10 Dec 68 and included this C/S Series and its new development of Repair (Progress) and Return (Advance) Programs you would have the whole package of C/Sing.

So the VIII actions are all valid.

Auditor classes below VIII have this C/S Series. The AO C/S Course adds in the VIII actions as well.

Any C/S who does not know well The Original Thesis, Dianetics: The Evolution of a Science, Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health. Scientology 8-80 and Scientology 8-8008 will go badly astray. It is vital to know these books and others in this area, to know what one is trying to handle.

Class VI (SHSBC) tapes and bulletins are all valid and vital to lower grade auditing and C/Sing.

I trust this gives the C/S some idea of what is still “in.”

It all is.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Revised by CS-4/5
Approved by

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:JE:dz.nt.dr
Copyright © 1970, 1973, 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 15 JULY 1970R
(Corrected and Reissued 25 Nov 1970)
Remimeo
Dianetic REVISED 17 JULY 1978
Auditor
Dianetic (Revisions in this type style)
Checksheets (Ellipsis indicates deletion)

UNRESOLVED PAINS

It occasionally happens that a pc’s certain pain does not resolve on Dianetics.

There are two reasons for this:

1. NOT ENOUGH AUDITING ON ENOUGH CHAINS.

Sooner or later the exact small piece of an engram “already run” shows up on another chain later.

Example: Pain in an area of an operation occurs now and then again weeks, months or years after the operation has been run out as an engram. Sooner or later just on general auditing the missing bit of the operation shows up, blows. Voila! Pain gone forever.

This is peculiar especially to abdominal operations like an appendectomy. The operation was run out. The scar stays puffy. The pc is occasionally ill from it. Pc’s conclusion is that Dianetics hasn’t worked on it. More auditing on other somatics (just general Dianetics) is given. One day the remaining bit of the operation, hidden from view, apparently erased, shows up, blows. Pc now fine.

A reason for this is “overburden” in that the incident was too charged in one place to be confronted. As the whole case is unburdened, confront comes up. The piece that was missing (and giving the pain) blows.

There is no way of forcing it. In fact it would be fatal to try.

The other reason for it is that the missing bit causing the pain is a different somatic like “a chest compression.” This bit of the operation had another basic than the one run.

The answer to a persistent or recurring somatic in an injured area is always more Dianetic auditing.... Persistent, chronic and recurring somatics are handled fully with New Era Dianetics Series tech.

Reference: HCOB 28 July 71 R New Era Dianetics Series 8
Rev. 25.6.78 DIANETICS, BEGINNING A PC ON
HCOB 18 June 78 New Era Dianetics Series 4
ASSESSMENT AND HOW TO GET THE ITEM
HCOB 26 June 78 New Era Dianetics Series 6
Issue II ROUTINE 3RA, ENGRAM RUNNING BY CHAINS
HCOB to Sept 70R CHRONIC SOMATIC, DIANETIC HANDLING OF
C/S Series 18R
HCOB 16 Aug 70R GETTING THE F/N TO EXAMINER
C/S Series 15R

2. SYMPATHETIC NERVOUS SYSTEM PAINS.

There are two sides to the body. As you learn in Touch Assists, if the right hand is injured you include also the left hand.

Body nerves conduct pain. The two sides of the body interlock. Pain gets stopped in the nerves.

If the right elbow is hurt the LEFT elbow will have echoed the pain.

Example, you find a pc with a pain in the left elbow. You try to audit a left elbow chain. It doesn’t fully resolve.

If you ran injuries to the RIGHT elbow, suddenly there’s a somatic going through the left elbow! It gets well.

This is the sympathetic nervous system. The right ear, injured, also gets echoes with a somatic in the left ear. You audit the right ear only. Pc comes up with a sore left ear!

You can actually direct a pc’s attention to it (non-standard but a research technique) and he can find where the uninjured ear echoed the injured ear.

Where you can’t fully repair a crippled left leg, don’t be surprised to find it was the right leg that was hurt.

You audit the left leg somatic in vain. If you do, start auditing somatics in the OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE BODY.

TOOTHACHE

The mystery of toothache is resolved in both 1 and 2 above, especially 2.

The pain is concentrated on the left upper molar. You audit it in vain. Toothache persists.

Look at the pc’s mouth. Has the RIGHT upper molar ever been pulled or injured? Yes. That’s how the left molar began to decay. The right upper molar was pulled. The pain (especially under the pain-killer on the right side only) backed up and stopped on the opposite side. Eventually the left upper molar, under that stress, a year or ten later, caves in and aches.

Mysterious as it wasn’t injured. Mysterious as the opposite molar is long gone, doesn’t hurt anymore.

When a toothache does not resolve in auditing, audit the opposite tooth on the other side. You can actually do it by count of teeth.

It’s sort of auditing a no somatic.

Pc in misery with right upper molar. No pain on left side. Audit an injury he had on the left side (it will read on the meter also). Voila! The toothache that wouldn’t go away eases up!

The fellow who has the exact opposite teeth pulled (upper right wisdom, upper left wisdom) is in for it as there is a constant cross-play. Makes the mouth odd and pressury. Both sides are reacting to the other side!

Dentists often note the strange pressure, “bursting feelings,” a patient has when a tooth “needs pulling.” This is the stress in the nerves from an injury which occurred on the opposite side!

An auditor can audit a right side tooth in vain unless he knows enough to audit THE OTHER SIDE.

For a pc with a toothache, on the right side, you can list for feelings on the left side of the mouth and get “numbness,” “no feeling,” etc. Audit that list and suddenly magically the toothache on the opposite side not being audited eases up.

Full preassessment of the troubled area and R3RA Quad is used when the tooth trouble persists.

As toothaches sometimes give a Dianetic auditor a failure, he should know about the sympathetic factor as above. The failure becomes a success.

LRH:sb.kjm.rd.lfg L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1970, 1978 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 16 AUGUST 1970R
REVISED 7 JULY 1978
Remimeo
Dn Checksheet
Class VI (Revisions in this type style)
Class VIII (Ellipses indicate deletions)
C/S Checksheet

C/S Series 15R

GETTING THE F/N TO EXAMINER

(High, Low TAs and Chronic Somatics)

(Note: This Bulletin has been revised to include
references to the New Era Dianetics Series tech.)


If after an F/N session end the pc’s TA goes up, as at the Examiner’s in an org. the pc is afflicted with unflat engram chains.

All high TAs depend on unflat or restimulated engram chains.

TAs go high on overrun because the overrun restimulates engram chains not yet run.

Engram (or secondary or lock) chains can be keyed-out. This does not mean they stay out. In a few minutes or hours or days or years they can key back in.

A pc will also de-stimulate in from 3 to 10 days usually. This means he “settles out.” Thus a pc can be overrun into new engram chains (by life or an auditor), TA goes up, 3 to 10 days later the TA comes down.

When a pc is audited to F/N VGIs and then a few minutes later has a high TA the usual reasons are:

1. Has had his comm chopped or full Dianetic or Scientology end phenomena not reached or

2. Has been run on an unreading item or subject or

3. Is overwhelmed or

4. Has a lot of engrams keying in or

5. Has been run in the past without full erasure of engrams or attaining end phenomena.

6. Lists badly done or other misauditing cause a pc to feel bad and key-in chains also.

7. A pc can be audited when too tired or too late at night.

The solution to any of these is easy—on (1) always see that the pc attains full EP, particularly on engram chains. On (2) make auditors check for read even in two-way comm subjects, list questions or Dianetic items before running them. On (3) see also (2) and get the pc a proper Progress (Repair) Program. On (4) repair or isolate pc so his PT isn’t so ferocious looking (meaning Repair (Progress) Pgm him well or let him change his environment and then audit him) or (5) look into his folder to see who
audited him on so many chains when, with no real erasure or EP. (6) You use repair lists (like L4BRA, L1C, etc.) and other usual action. On (7) you make the pc get some rest and if he can’t, make him go for a walk away until he is tired and then walk back and get some sleep.

All these really add up to keyed-in or unflat engram chains. Whether the pc can handle them depends on repair and the usual.

Of all these the past auditing without attaining EP on engram chains (whether done in Dianetics or Scientology) is a usual reason for a much audited pc to have a high TA.

The answers to any high TA that won’t come down and to any pc who continually arrives at Examiner after an F/N VGI session end with his TA UP are:

A. Faulty auditing not letting pc go to full Dn EP when running engrams.

B. A false Auditing Report (PR type report meaning promoting instead of auditing).

C. Too many engram chains in past restim by life or auditing.

D. False TA or inoperable meter.

It is usual to do a PICTURE AND MASSES REMEDY to find and handle restimulated engram chains which are causing the TA to be high. This is done after the pc has had a Drug Rundown as unhandled drugs can also cause a TA to be high (see HCOB 24 July 78 DIANETIC REMEDIES).


CHRONIC SOMATIC

A pc who has a chronic somatic would get programmed like this:

1. Repair (Progress) Pgm as necessary until pc feeling better.

2. Original Assessment Sheet, with its full handling per New Era Dianetics Series 2, FULL PC PROGRAM OUTLINE and New Era Dianetics Series 8, DIANETICS, BEGINNING A PC ON.

3. Continue with the New Era Dianetics Full Pc Program, taking each step to full completion.

IF the Dianetic auditing is standard and to Dianetic EP (erasure, F/N, cognition, postulate if not included in the cognition, VGIs) you will see this pattern at the Examiner . . .

First few sessions
TA 4.0 or more at Exam. Doubtful GIs.

Next few
TA 3.75 and blowing down to 3.25 at Exam. GIs.

Next few
TA 3.75 BD to F/N at Exam. GIs to VGIs.

Next two or three
TA 3.5 BD to F/N at Exams. VGIs.

Finally
TA 2.5 F/N VGIs at the Examiner.


That’s what you would expect to see if the auditing was standard, if the case was straightened out of past flubs in the repair step. Errors such as running unreading items or firefights caused by out TRs or false auditing reports or Dn EP not reached at session end or pc needing ruds put in at session starts would prevent this pattern from happening at the Examiner’s. So if the pattern doesn’t happen you know the auditing is goofy or something is out which had better be found. One pc for instance had a huge W/H of having a disease and was audited over it for 2 years = auditing over a W/H and PTP = no case gain. Silly pc. But also a very dull C/S not to alert to some outness there and find it. Another pc had a high TA and the fault was just that she never got any auditing at all! So they kept operating on her! Somebody didn’t know Dianetics and auditing was for USE.

HIGH TA AND ILLNESS

Pcs with high TAs feel ill and get ill.

No use to elaborate on that. It’s just a fact and is THE fact about pcs who get ill. So maybe you see why this HCOB is important!


LOW TA AT EXAM

Pcs with low TAs are more or less in apathy.

If it F/N VGIs at session end and is low at Exam (like 1.9) (OR if it went low in session and didn’t F/N), then the pc is:

(a) overwhelmed and needs auditing and Life Repair

(b) can have been run on a flat or unreading item that invalidated his former win.

Example: Pc listed on an unreading list few sessions later worrying about it and coming to Exam with low TA. Repair is the answer. Low TA pcs need a Life Repair also.

The NEW ERA DIANETICS SERIES tech, fully and correctly applied, will handle all aspects of the chronic somatic. See HCOB 22 June 78, New Era Dianetics Series 2, FULL PC PROGRAM OUTLINE.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:sb.rd.lfg
Copyright © 1970, 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 11 SEPTEMBER 1970
SH’s
AOs Only
Solo C/S Hat SOLO ASSISTS
Adv Cses Super

It is absolutely forbidden to assign 2-way comm actions as “Solo.”

Example: An out-point list, an assessment list, listing for items, 2WC on case etc.

PROGRESS AND ADVANCE ACTIONS may not be assigned by a Solo C/S to be done Solo.

A Solo auditor may not do these actions.

Dianetics R3R may not be attempted in Solo auditing.

The reasons for this are too obvious to be given stress.

I have never seen a Solo auditor do anything but louse himself up on these actions. Here and there somebody might have gotten away with it. But I have seen too many cases loused up this way to condone it as anything but squirrel Solo.

A Solo auditor can fly ruds and engage in a BPC L1 or L7 WHILE AUDITING PROPER SOLO ACTIONS, and he can of course do the standard Solo actions for the grade.

But doing L7, L1B etc. as general REPAIR actions is for the dickey birds.

There ARE NO SOLO REPAIR OR PROGRESS OR RETURN OR ADVANCE PROGRAMS .


LRH:rr L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1970 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED



HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 11 SEPTEMBER 1970R
REVISED 7 JULY 1978
Remimeo (Revisions in this type style)
Dn Checksheet
Class III
Class VIII C/S Series 18R
C/S Checksheet
CHRONIC SOMATIC,
DIANETIC HANDLING OF


The full Dianetic handling of the pc who has a chronic somatic is given in the HCOB C/S Series 15 of 16 August 1970R, “Getting the F/N to Examiner.”

This HCOB calls the fact to attention. It could get overlooked or be hard to find again as the title of HCOB 16 August does not indicate it directly.

Also see New Era Dianetics Series 1-18.


LRH:sb.rd.lfg L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1970,1978 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 8 MARCH 1971R
REVISED 25 JULY 1978
Remimeo
(Revised to align with New Era Dianetics tech)
(Revisions in this type style)

C/S Series 29R

CASE ACTIONS, OFF LINE


A C/S can be plagued by off-line case actions of which he is not informed.

The existence of these can wreck his carefully laid out programs and make a case appear incomprehensible.

Thus it is up to a C/S to suspect and find these where a case isn’t responding normally in auditing.

1. LIFE KNOCKING RUDS OUT FASTER THAN THEY CAN BE AUDITED IN.

Schedule sessions closer together and give very long sessions so life hasn’t a chance to interfere. Can go as far as requiring person via the D of P to stay in a hotel away from the area of enturbulation or not associate until case is audited up high enough.

Shows up most drastically in Interiorization intensives where no ruds can be run unless the RD is complete. Thus Int has to be done in one session, with the 2WC IntExt the next day.

2. PC PHYSICALLY ILL BEFORE NEXT SESSION AND AUDITING OF A MAJOR ACTION BEING DONE ON A SICK PC WHO SHOULD HAVE ANOTHER C/S ENTIRELY.

Happens when delayed or late new Exam Reports don’t get into folder before C/Sing it. Ginger up exam routing.

Happens when auditors are not alert to the pc’s illness and audit anyway. Make auditors not audit and report at once sick pcs.

Pcs hiding general illness may show up as no case gain. Answer is to get a full medical exam.

3. SELF-AUDITING.

Detected by no lasting gain. Hi-Lo TA Assessment will show it up.

Two-way comm on when they began to self-audit (usually auditor scarcity or some introverting shock).

4. COFFEE SHOP AUDITING.

Meterless fool around, often by students, stirring up cases.

Forbid it in an area.

5. TOUCH AND CONTACT ASSISTS INTERRUPTING A GENERAL COURSE OF AUDITING, OFTEN TO NO F/N.

Make all such assists be done on a worksheet and make it mandatory to take the pc to an Examiner afterwards.

W/S and Exam Rpt then appear in folder.

The C/S can then get in the other actions (ruds, S & D, HCOB 24 July 69R) on the injured pc.

6. STUDY RUNDOWNS.

An illegal and offbeat line can occur when auditing out misunderstoods in study or “Management Word Rundown” or such occurs in the middle of a general auditing program.

Require that C/S okay is required.

Get such done at the START of courses and BEFORE a major auditing cycle is begun. Enforce this hard as the other answer that will be taken will be to do it at the end of the cycle and wreck major auditing program results.

7. ILLEGAL PATCH-UPS.

Sometimes all through an intensive there is another auditor unknown to the C/S who 2WCs the pc or audits the pc who is complaining to him or her.

Shows up in the Hi-Lo TA Assessment.

Forbid it.

8. PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT THEIR CASES.

Past life reality is often badly hurt by people who talk about being Napoleon, Caesar and God. This makes “past lives” an unreal subject by bad comparison.

Restimulative material is sometimes used to “push someone’s buttons.”

Bullbait that uses actual processes or implants should be stamped out hard.

9. ADVANCED COURSE MATERIAL INSECURITY.

I have seen several cases wrecked by careless storage of Ad Course materials where lower levels could get at them.

One notable case was a suppressive who got hold of Ad Course materials and chanted them at his wife to drive her insane. She recovered eventually. He didn’t.

When a C/S gets a whiff of upper level materials on a lower level pc worksheet he should make an ethics matter of it and get it traced.

10. ILLEGAL DRUG USE.

A pc who suddenly relapses onto drugs or who has a long drug history can cause a case to look very very odd. The TA flies up. The case, running okay, suddenly ceases to run.

Addicts can come off it if given full drug handling per New Era Dianetics Series 9 DRUG HANDLING.

LRH:mes.rd.ldv L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1971, 1978 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 27 MARCH 1971RA
Remimeo
REVISED 25 JULY 1978
RE-REVISED 21 SEPTEMBER 1978

(Revisions in this type style)
(Ellipses indicate deletions)


DIANETIC ERASURE


There are several corny stunts that can occur in Dianetics, any of which will add up to no erasure.

1. Trying to run an item that didn’t read on being given or when being called. As the chain is not charged it will be hard if not impossible to run. Instant F/N and BD items are of course the very best and almost always erase very easily.

2. Starting a new session with a new item with the TA way way up. To play it safe in Dianetic auditing (it can be handled in Scientology) the Dianetic auditor who starts a session and a new action at the same time with the TA high is very foolish. It may not be high on what the auditor is now newly trying to run. The correct action is not to start the session. Just end off with no auditing done.

The pc is ill or is having trouble in life. If you were running a chain in the last session and continue it in the next, disregard the high TA. A way to get around this is get some new items from the high TA pc and take one that blows down well and you can probably bring it off. Safest is don’t audit a high TA pc unless to repair an unflat chain (or to run Interiorization RD). This rule is variable. But you should know it is risky to audit a new item taken from an earlier list when the pc comes into session with a high TA as it may not be high on what you are about to run and so you may get no F/N and erasure. The only remedy is to get new items and choose a BD one (or to turn the pc over to a Scientology auditor to assess a Hi-Lo TA list and handle).

3. Narratives are too often just run through once or twice and abandoned. This leaves the incident still charged and affecting the pc. (A narrative item describes only one possible incident, i.e. “dropping an ironing board on my foot” = no chain.) A narrative needs to be run and run and run on that one incident. You run the incident narrative to erasure and only go earlier similar if it starts to grind very badly. You run the incident to EP.

4. Running a pc who has exteriorized in auditing on something other than an Interiorization RD will produce a high TA and no F/N and erasure in the session. After Int RD has been run anything can be run.

5. Probably the WORST blunder is failing to ask for DEF again when the pc says, “It’s erased” but the TA is still high. This is really a corny error. TA 4.9.

Pc says, “It’s erased! All blank now,” and the auditor fails to ask DEF once more. There is a moment when the pc’s NOT-IS of the picture squeezes it into invisibility. The mass of it is still there. It takes just one or two more passes through to get the BD, F/N, postulate and VGIs (which is the erasure). It’s up to the auditor not to let the pc go without that additional DEF, which will then bring the BD, F/N, postulate off and VGIs.

This error is more common than one would think.

6. Of course, not asking for an earlier incident mentioning the same item will also cause a grind and no erasure. When the item isn’t also mentioned in the command the pc can jump chains. And if the earlier beginning is not asked for at all on basic, when there is one, or on narratives, of course there will be no erasure.

7. Auditing a pc under protest will cause the TA to stay up and no F/N and erasure.

8. Ending off a chain or engram at the first sight of an F/N and then wondering why . . . no postulate came off.

The skilled Dianetic auditor knows these things cold and does not make these errors. Thus he gets his end of session erasure and F/N regularly and gets F/N at the Examiner as well when the case has had a few sessions.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH: mes.rd.rb .kjm
Copyright © 1971, 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 5 APRIL 1971
Remimeo REISSUED 13 JANUARY 1975
All Auditors REISSUED 6 NOVEMBER 1976
C/Ses
C/S Series 33RA-1

TRIPLE AND QUAD RERUNS

LAW: WHEN ONE OR MORE OF THE FOUR FLOWS OF AN ITEM OR GRADE ARE LEFT UNRUN, WHEN USED IN LATER PROCESSES THE EARLIER UNRUN ONES RESTIMULATE AND MAKE MASS.

This tells you that high TAs, heavy pressures and even illness can come from bypassed flows.


BYPASSED FLOWS

Example: Dianetic Singles have been run on 7 items. Now the auditor begins to run new items Triple without running Triple on the already run items. The result will be 7 unrun Flow 2s and 7 unrun Flow 3s. These will restimulate and form mass and bypassed charge.

Example: Now let us say all 7 previous items have been run Triple. And the auditor now runs a new item Quadruple. This leaves 7 unrun Zero chains. These can restimulate and form mass and bypassed charge.

Example: Now let us say that Dianetics was all run Single and grades were run Triple. This will restimulate the Dn chains F2 and F3.

Example: Let us say that Dianetics and Scientology grades were all run Triple. An Interiorization Rundown is now run Quad. This will throw all Dianetic and Scientology unrun Flow Zeros into restimulation and give bypassed charge.

ANY LATER GRADE RUN WITH MORE FLOWS THAN USED IN EARLIER ACTIONS CAN THROW THE EARLIER UNFLAT FLOWS INTO RESTIM, PILE UP MASS GIVING HIGH TA AND BPC GIVING ARC BREAKS.

REPAIR

The more the condition is repaired by L1C, L4BR etc. etc., the worse the mass gets.


SOURCE OF HIGH TA

Thus high TAs have three principal sources:

(1) Overruns
(2) Auditing past exterior
(3) Earlier unrun flows restimulated by those flows used in later actions.

There are other minor ones such as drug background, illness etc. as per Hi-Lo TA Assessment.


REHABS

One must NOT recklessly or continuously rehab a past major action. This causes overrun. The thetan is placed at the end of the incidents not yet in restimulation or run and the bank gets more solid.


MASSY THETANS

The whole trick of this universe is contained in thetans copying or picturing incidents and then getting stuck in the later portion of them.

“Incidents” is the keynote. A thetan is incident hungry.

This is what traps him.

For some reason he has to be at the earliest end of incidents to erase them. The later he is in incidents and the later he is on the track the more solid he is.

This also applies to the “auditing time track.”

By omitting things like flows on the auditing time track, the thetan thus becomes massy.
The whole theory of the Interiorization Remedy is based on having gone out (later) after he went in (earlier). So exteriorizing can stick him. (People buy the Int RD to exteriorize but the remedy is only done to permit further auditing. They Ext of course when the bank is handled.)

When flows of items are bypassed and then later restimulated by auditing them, mass occurs.


GETTING IN ALL FLOWS

When doing additional flows on earlier items or processes one must also check or rehab those flows marked as run to F/N in worksheets.

This again will leave unflat flows and BPC unless it is (lone.

And if it is overdone it will raise the TA by overrun.

So if one had a case that had Single Dianetics and was later run on Triple for new items (but the Singles not done into Triple) one would have to RUN FIRST the missing unrun flow or flows if they read and then check the first Single F1 for flatness, then check other previously run flows.

The rule is run the previously unrun one or ones first if they read to get charge off, then verify or run the ones listed as run already.

Then one would do the same for the next item. Run the previously unrun flow or flows if they read and then verify or run those listed as already run to be sure they F/N.

All items, in chronological sequence, and all processes, would have to be run Quad.

IT WOULD BE A WASTE OF TIME NOW TO RUN IN ONLY TRIPLES.

Whether you have the Quad commands or not they are easy to figure out as you are only missing the Zero flow, self to self.

So all C/Ses and auditing actions are “Rehab or Run F1, F2, F3, F0 if they read” when getting in all flows on things run to date.

HIGH TA

When you are sure an Int RD has been done correctly and its 2WC went F/N and the TA later goes high, you check the Int RD. That is the most usual reason. This simple action is amazingly subject to flubs.

If the TA goes high later you can do a C/S Series 53 or a Hi-Lo TA Assessment and handle.

If the TA is still high or low, you had better check the state of flows. Were more flows run on later actions than were run on earlier actions?

If so, your pc has felt massy, sometimes even ill.

The right action is to get in all flows from the beginning. And do it Quad. Bring all his auditing up to Quad.

(If his folder is not available, he has kind of had it. I know of no way, at this writing, to recover lost Dn items but will have to work something out.)


NOT IN TROUBLE

If the pc is not in trouble, his best bet is to get on up the grades to Expanded OT III.

IN TROUBLE

If he is massy and is having trouble the best bet is to:

(1) Be totally sure of his Int RD.

(2) Check O/Rs particularly of a major grade twice or bypassed F/Ns, locate and indicate them.

(3) FES, list the items and grades and do a Full Flow action from the beginning of his auditing, raising them all to Quadruple.


RUNNING ZERO FLOWS

The Zero flow in Dianetics is a bit strange. It can be done by full R3R BUT it often depends on the decision the pc made and may F/N very suddenly. It is easily overrun and can be very fast.

A pc can be gotten into trouble on Zero flows if the auditor is slow and is not alert to his meter and misses the F/N and gives R3R commands after the flow has blown .
REHAB OR RUN

The auditor getting in Zero flows can also ARC Brk the pc by failing to verify if the previously run flows are flat. All the auditor wants is to see them F/N on the command. If they don’t he runs them.

Sometimes when he has “run them” again he finds they are being overrun or run twice and has to rehab them by finding this out. The pc sometimes doesn’t know until he actually starts to run them. Then he finds they are already run. The clue to this is a climbing TA. If the TA goes up, get off that flow and rehab it.

Example: Pc at first thinks “Pain in shoulder” F2 was never run. Starts to run it. TA goes up. Auditor must pull him off of it by finding out if it is being run twice and rehab it to F/N.

The moral in all these reruns is don’t firefight, keep an L1C List and an L3RD List handy and use them.

RESULTS

The results of straightening up the Int-Ext RD, rehabbing O/Rs and putting in ALL FLOWS on a pc are fantastic.

Getting an All Flows Rundown done correctly gives one all the latent gain the pc
has been begging for.

So send to Cramming all C/Ses and auditors who flub.

Program it right.

C/S it right.

Audit it right.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revised by
W/O Ron Shafran
CS-4
Approved by
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:nt
Copyright © 1971, 1975, 1976
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

[This HCOB was reissued to correct the signature which is the only change.]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 11 APRIL 1971RC
Remimeo
REVISED 14 JULY 1978
RE-REVISED 21 SEPTEMBER 1978
(Revisions in this type style)
(Ellipses indicate deletions)
IMPORTANT
L3RF
DIANETICS AND INT RD REPAIR LIST

This list includes the most frequent Dianetic 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 DIANETICS WITHOUT A FULL AND COMPLETE DN CS-1 INDOCTRINATION IS A FOOLISH ACTION.

TAKE ANY READ FOUND TO F/N BY FULL REPAIR OF IT PER THE INSTRUCTIONS .

1. WAS THERE AN EARLIER SIMILAR INCIDENT? _________
Indicate it. Run the chain to full EP.

2. WAS THERE NO EARLIER SIMILAR INCIDENT? _________
Indicate it. Determine if the chain erased or if the last incident needs to be run through again. Complete the chain to full EP by indication or by running it to full EP. Scn handling would include Date/Locate if needed.

3. WAS THERE AN EARLIER BEGINNING? _________
Indicate it. Handle with R3RA and complete the chain to full EP.

4. WAS THERE NO EARLIER BEGINNING? _________
Indicate it. Complete the chain to full EP R3RA DEF on last incident if unflat.

5. WAS AN F/N INDICATED TOO SOON? _________
Indicate it. Run the last incident (or chain) to full EP.

6. DID THE AUDITOR STOP JUST BECAUSE THERE WAS AN F/N? _________
Indicate it. Complete the chain to full EP using commands DEF on the last incident run.

7. WAS AN F/N INDICATED TOO LATE? _________
Indicate it. Get off the postulate made at the time of the incident. Indicate the overrun.(Scn handling would include D/L if needed.) . . . Then, if the pc jumped to another chain, get last incident pc ran on the jumped-to chain and do an L3RF on it.

8. WAS THE POSTULATE BYPASSED? _________
Indicate. Get the postulate. Indicate that the chain was overrun. (Scn handling would include a D/L if necessary.) If pc jumped chains, handle as above.

9. HAS THE INCIDENT ERASED? _________
Indicate. Get the postulate made at the time of the incident. Indicate the overrun. (If any difficulty, Scn handling would include a D/L.)

10. WAS AN F/N NOT INDICATED AT ALL? _________
Indicate. Get off the postulate if not already given. Indicate the overrun. (D/L by Scn auditor if necessary.) If jumped chains, handle as in 7.

11. WAS THERE NO CHARGE ON THE ITEM IN THE FIRST PLACE? _________
Indicate it, and that it shouldn’t have been run. Scn handling would include D/L if necessary.

12. DID YOU JUMP CHAINS? _________
Indicate it. Reorient to the original chain. Find out if it erased and get the postulate if not previously given. Indicate the overrun, or run the chain to full EP. Then locate last incident pc ran on the chain he jumped to. As this has now been restimulated but not run, do an L3RF on it. Scn handling would include D/L if necessary.

13. DID YOU JUMP FLOWS? _________
Indicate it. Reorient to the original chain and take it to full EP using commands DEF. If necessary and the pc is still upset about the other flow, do an L3RF on it.

14. WERE THERE FLUBBED COMMANDS? _________
Indicate it, E/S to F/N.

15. DID THE AUDITOR GOOF ON A SEQUENCE OF COMMANDS? _________
Indicate it, E/S to F/N.

16. DID YOU NOT HAVE A COMMAND? _________
Indicate it, E/S to F/N.

17. DID YOU HAVE A MISUNDERSTOOD ON THE COMMAND? _________
Find it and clear it.

18. SHOULD THE INCIDENT BE RUN THROUGH ONE MORE TIME? _________
Indicate it. R3RA DEF on the incident, run chain to full EP.

19. TOO LATE ON THE CHAIN? _________
Indicate it. Get the earlier similar incident and complete the chain with R3RA to full EP.

20. WAS A CHAIN NOT COMPLETED? _________
Indicate it. DEF on the incident, run chain to full EP.

21. INCIDENT GONE MORE SOLID? _________
Indicate it. Check for earlier incident or earlier beginning and complete the chain to full EP.

22. WAS AN INCIDENT SKIPPED? _________
Indicate it. Find out what it was, run it and complete the chain to full EP.

23. WAS AN INCIDENT LEFT TOO HEAVILY CHARGED? _________
Indicate it. Find out what it was, run it through again. Complete the chain to full EP.

24. DID YOU SAY SOMETHING WAS ERASED JUST BECAUSE
YOU WERE TIRED OF RUNNING IT? _________
Indicate it. Complete the chain to full EP with R3RA DEF on the last incident run.

25. STOPPED RUNNING AN INCIDENT THAT WAS ERASING? _________
Indicate it. DEF on the incident and erase it. Get full EP.

26. WENT PAST BASIC ON A CHAIN? _________
Indicate it. Get full EP. Then, if pc jumped to another chain, get last incident pc ran on the jumped-to chain and do an L3RF on it. Scn handling would include D/L if necessary.

27. WAS AN EARLIER MISRUN INCIDENT RESTIMULATED? _________
Indicate it. Find out what it was and do an L3RF on it.

28. DID TWO OR MORE INCIDENTS GET CONFUSED? _________
Indicate it, sort it out with an L3RF on it.

29. WAS AN IMPLANT RESTIMULATED? _________
Indicate it. If no joy do an L3RF on the time of the restimulation.

30. WAS THE INCIDENT REALLY AN IMPLANT? _________
Indicate it. If necessary do an L3RF on it. Scn handling would include D/L if needed.

31. 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, turn the pc over to a Scientology auditor who is classed to do an L4BRA.

32. NOT YOUR ITEM? _________
Indicate it, E/S to F/N.

33. NOT YOUR INCIDENT? _________
Indicate it, E/S to F/N. L3RF if any trouble.

34. DID THE PREASSESSMENT ITEM GOTTEN HAVE NO CHARGE ON IT? _________
Indicate the item was uncharged and should not have been taken up and all items connected with it should not have been run. (Scn handling would include D/L if necessary.)

35. WAS THERE ANOTHER PREASSESSMENT ITEM THAT SHOULD HAVE READ? _________
Get what it was and note its read as the pc gives it. Find out if the preassessment item taken up is uncharged. If so handle as above. If not, continue with the action you are on to EP and handle the new item given in its order.

36. WAS THE ORIGINAL ITEM ALREADY HANDLED? _________
Indicate that the original item was already handled and that items connected with it should not have been run. (Son handling would include a D/L if necessary.)

37. (OMIT WHEN RUNNING DRUGS)
WAS THERE NO INTEREST IN RUNNING AN ITEM? _________
Indicate it, and that it shouldn’t have been run. Scn handling would include D/L if needed.

38. WAS THE SAME THING RUN TWICE? _________
Indicate it. Spot the first erasure, indicate the overrun. Scn handling would include D/L if needed.

39. WAS THERE A WRONG DATE? _________
Indicate it. Get the correct date and run the incident (if unflat) and chain to full EP.

40. WAS THERE NO DATE FOR THE INCIDENT? _________

Indicate it. Get the date and run the incident (if unflat) and chain to full EP.

41. WAS IT A FALSE DATE? _________
Indicate it. Get the correct date and run the incident (if unflat) and any chain to full EP.

42. WAS THERE AN INCORRECT DURATION? _________
Indicate it. Get the correct duration and run the incident (if unflat) and any chain to full EP.

43. WAS NO DURATION FOUND FOR THE INCIDENT? _________
Indicate it. Get the duration and run the incident (if unflat) and any chain to full EP.

44. WAS THERE A FALSE DURATION? _________
Indicate it. Get the correct duration and run the incident (if unflat) and any chain to full EP.

45. DID YOU RESENT DURATIONS? _________
Indicate it. E/S to F/N. Run the incident (if unflat) and any chain to full EP.

46. WAS AN EARLIER DIANETIC UPSET RESTIMULATED? _________
Locate what it was, indicate it. Sort out with an L3RF if necessary.

47. WAS AN EARLIER ARC BREAK ON ENGRAMS RESTIMULATED ? _________
Indicate it. Sort it out with an L3RF.

48. WAS THERE AN ARC BREAK IN THE INCIDENT? _________
Indicate it. Run the incident, if unflat, to full EP.

49. WERE YOU PROTESTING? _________
Indicate it, clean it up E/S to F/N.

50. DID THE AUDITOR DEMAND MORE THAN YOU COULD SEE? _________
Indicate it, E/S to F/N. If any difficulty, turn the pc over to a Scientology auditor classed to do an L1C if necessary.

51. DID THE AUDITOR REFUSE TO ACCEPT WHAT YOU WERE SAYING? _________
Indicate it, E/S to F/N. If any difficulty, turn the pc over to a Scientology auditor classed to do an L1C as necessary.

52. WERE YOU PREVENTED FROM RUNNING AN INCIDENT? _________
Indicate it, E/S to F/N. Run the incident (if unflat) to full EP. If any difficulty turn the pc over to a Scientology auditor classed to do an L1C on it.

53. DID THE AUDITOR SIMPLY STOP GIVING COMMANDS? _________
Indicate it. Complete the chain by running the last incident found DEF to full EP.

54. WAS A COGNITION INTERRUPTED? _________
Indicate it.... Get the cognition and any postulate connected with it. (if any difficulty at this point turn pc over to a Scientology auditor for an L1C.) Continue chain if unflat, or indicate the overrun.

55. WAS THERE A POSTULATE THAT WAS NOT EXPRESSED? _________
Indicate it.... Get the postulate and indicate the overrun. (Scn handling would include L1C or D/L if needed.)

56. WERE YOU DISTRACTED WHILE RUNNING AN INCIDENT? _________
Indicate it, E/S to F/N. Run the incident (if unflat) and any chain to full EP. If any difficulty, turn pc over to a classed Scientology auditor for L1C.

57. WERE YOU AUDITED OVER AN ARC BREAK? _________
PROBLEM? _________
WITHHOLD? _________
Indicate it. If you are trained to do so, handle the out rud. If not, turn the pc over to a Scientology auditor classed to handle out ruds. Do not pull W/Hs before the engram or chain is repaired or it will mush engrams.

58. WERE YOU HELD UP BY THE AUDITOR? _________
Indicate it, E/S to F/N.

59. WAS AN ITEM SUPPRESSED? _________
Indicate it. Get the Suppress off E/S to F/N, then run the item and any chain to full EP.

60. WAS AN ITEM INVALIDATED? _________
Indicate it. Get the Inval off E/S to F/N, then run the item and any chain to full EP.

61. WAS AN ITEM ABANDONED? _________
Indicate it, get the item back and run the item and any chain to full EP.

62. WAS A CHAIN ABANDONED? _________
Indicate it, get the chain back and run to full EP.

63. WAS THE ITEM ORIGINALLY MISWORDED? _________
Indicate it. Get the correct wording and give it to him. Handle to full EP if unflat.

64. WAS THE WORDING OF THE ITEM CHANGED? _________
Indicate it. Get the correct wording and give it to him. Run it (if unflat) to full EP.

65. WERE YOU RUNNING AN ITEM THAT WAS DIFFERENT THAN THE ONE ASSESSED? _________
Indicate it. Get the item the pc was actually running, handle to full EP. Then L3RF on the item actually assessed.

66. STUCK PICTURE? _________
Indicate it. Do an L3RF on it. You can also unstick it by having him recall a time before it and a time after it.

67. ALL BLACK? _________
Spot the black field or picture. Get the correct duration. If no go, L3RF on it.

68. INVISIBLE? _________
Spot the invisible field or picture. L3RF on it.

69. 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 L3RF on that session.

70. WHEN YOU SAID IT WAS ERASED DID IT STILL HAVE A MASS? _________
Indicate it. DEF, checking for earlier beginning, run to erasure and full EP. If necessary do an L3RF on it.

71. WAS THERE A PERSISTENT MASS? _________
L3RF on it.

72. WAS THERE TROUBLE WITH A PRESSURE ITEM OR PRESSURE ON AN ITEM? _________
L3RF on it.

73. DID YOU GO EXTERIOR? _________
Indicate it. Handle if you are a Scientology auditor. Turn the pc over to a Scientology auditor for a full Int RD or become a classed Scientology auditor and handle.

74. WAS YOUR INT RD MESSED UP? _________
Indicate it. Handle if you are a Scientology auditor. If not, turn the pc over to a Scientology auditor to get his Int RD straightened out, or get trained as a classed Scientology auditor and handle.

75. WERE YOU AUDITED OVER DRUGS, MEDICINE OR ALCOHOL? _________
Indicate it. L3RF on that time, then verify all chains to ensure they erased. Note for C/S attention to verify if Objectives and all other points of full drug handling have been done.

76. WAS A PAST DEATH RESTIMULATED? _________
Indicate it. If it doesn’t blow run it out Narrative Secondary R3RA.

77. DID YOU ATTAIN SOME STATE AND IT WAS INVALIDATED? _________
Indicate it. Return folder to C/S for handling.

78. DID YOU GO CLEAR AND NOBODY WOULD LET YOU DECLARE? _________
Indicate it. Return folder to C/S for handling.

79. WAS THERE NOTHING WRONG IN THE FIRST PLACE? _________
Indicate it. Continue the action you were on.

80. WAS THIS LIST UNNECESSARY? _________
Indicate it. If it doesn’t F/N turn the pc over to a Scientology auditor for a rehab or become a Scientology auditor to handle.

81. HAS THE REAL REASON BEEN MISSED? _________
Indicate it. Locate the real reason and handle.

82. WAS SOMETHING ELSE WRONG? _________
Locate what it is and sort it out.


LRH:ldv.dr L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1971, 1978 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 21 APRIL 1971RC
REVISED 25 JULY 1978
Remimeo
All Auditors
Class VIII (Revisions in this type style)
Dn Checksheet (Ellipsis indicates deletion)
Int-Ext Checksheet

C/S Series 36RC

DIANETICS
(Applies also to Int-Ext Rundown)
(Ref HCOB 4 Apr 71RA, C/S Series 32RA,
and HCOB 5 Apr 71RA, C/S Series 33RA)


TRs

TR Zero exists so an auditor is not ducking the session but can sit there relaxed, doing his job.

TR One must be done so the pc can hear and understand the auditor (without blowing the pc’s head off either).

TR Two must be done so that the pc gets acknowledged. This can be so corrupted that the auditor doesn’t ack at all but gives the pc meter reads! Instead of acks! Or keeps saying, “I didn’t understand you,” etc.

TR Three basically existed so that the auditor would continue to give the pc commands and not squirrel off or pack up with total silence.

TR Four exists so that the pc’s origins are accepted and not Qed and Aed with or invalidated.

And, surprise, surprise, TRs are for use in the session itself, not just a drill. They are how one runs a session.

An auditor can miss by calling “F/Ns” with high or low TA. And one never feeds meter data to the pc: “That read,” “That didn’t read,” “That blew down,” just must not exist in session patter. “Thank you. That F/Ned,” is as far as an auditor goes. And that’s the end of the cycle and says so.

Erasure can be overlooked by an auditor. In Dianetics this fault is fatal.

Auditor’s Code must be in on all points and particularly invalidation. Pc says, “That’s so and so.” An auditor who says, “I’m sorry. You are wrong,” or any other invalidation is going to wreck a pc’s case. A full knowledge of the Auditor’s Code and actually applying it saves endless troubles. It is an auditing TOOL, not just a nice idea.


REHABBING CHAINS

One rehabs a Dianetic chain that, according to a previous worksheet, erased by saying, “According to session records (flow direction) (item) erased.” That’s all. One does not say, “Did the chain giving others a headache erase?” One does not run it again to find out. One does not run a single command “to see if it F/Ns again.” One can say, “Do you agree that the chain giving another a headache erased?” But the more you ask the pc to look for an erased chain the more messed up things will get. It isn’t there. But the auditor by his action can imply it should be there or might be there. A totally wrong
approach would be “Look around your bank and see if what isn’t there any more isn’t there.”

Dianetics is NOT Scientology. A Dianetic chain is not a release. If you try to use Scientology rehab tech on a Dianetic chain, you have had it. It isn’t a “release” (which is a key-out). A Dianetic chain is an erasure. You can’t rehab erasures with “How many times?”, etc.

The test of this is the doing. If you try to use Scn rehab on Dianetic chains, the PC MIGHT TRY TO FIND SOMETHING. This causes him to key-in other unrun or similar items.

It is a dangerous action at best to try to handle old erased chains. The best you can do is to tell the pc what the old W/S said. If no W/S exists leave the already erased flows alone!

FLUBBED CHAINS

Many times, a Folder Error Summary will give a flubbed chain and then fail to note it was repaired in the next session!

A C/S and auditor would have been pretty irresponsible to just go on auditing past flubbed chains.

The only safe way to handle some previous flubbed chain is to:

(a) Verify in the folder if it was repaired.

(b) If still unrepaired assess the L3RE on it and handle according to the L3RE.


L3RE

Using the new L3RE (HCOB 11 Apr 71 RB) is a Dianetic action.

A Scientology auditor erroneously can try to use it as a two-way comm type of list. If a chain needed one more DEF, then two-way comm on it with no DEF is not going to complete it.

L3RE has its own directions. Questions not marked with directions are used to indicate the fact. This can amount to two-way comm as the pc chews it over. But L3RE where marked is handled by Dianetics actions. Look over the list and its directions for each question and you will see that some are given directions that are NOT 2WC.

Example: “Earlier beginning” reads. You can’t just say, “The incident had an earlier beginning,” and you can’t say, “Tell me about the earlier beginning.” The pc will go up the wall. There’ll be no erasure. You have to use R3M and get him to the earlier beginning and then run it and if it still doesn’t erase, get him to an earlier similar and erase that.

L3RE is a Dianetics list. It is not a Scientology list that is cleared each question to F/N by 2-way comm.

OVERRUN

Overruns are demonstrated by a rising TA.

If as you seek to get in Full Flow Dianetics (Ref: HCOB 7 Mar 71R Rev 25 July 78 C/S Series 28RA-1R USE OF QUADRUPLE DIANETICS. HCOB 4 Apr 71-1RA Rev 25 July 78 C/S Series 32RA-1RA USE OF QUAD DIANETICS. HCOB 5 Apr 71 Reissued 13 Jan 75 C/S Series 33R-1 TRIPLE AND QUAD RERUNS (page 380 Tech Vol VIII) ) the pc’s TA begins to average higher, overrun is occurring.

Example: While doing FFD pc’s TA has been riding at 2.2 and F/Ns. After a new FFD action it begins to ride at 2.5 and F/Ns. Something is being overrun. Find it and indicate it. And cease to stir the bank up so much! The fault is going over items already run.

In doing a Full Flow Table you often find that the same or similar have been run in the past.

Sometimes you find that a previous attempt to run the item a second or third time has resulted in an ARC break, the reason for which was never detected.

The right action is to note the session date it was first run and just tell the pc, “Feeling surprised was run three times. On (first date it was erased) it was erased. When later run it was an overrun.” This tends to blow the later charge laid in by trying to run the same item again.

It sounds so strange that erased chains can be overrun. But it is true. What happens is that pcs try to cooperate and put something there.


FIREFIGHTS

The action of a quarrel between an auditor and a pc is called a firefight.

Restimulating earlier unrun engrams or overrunning chains upsets a pc. The best action, as soon as a pc is disturbed, is to do an L3RE fast and handle what reads the way it should be handled according to the L3RE.

The wrong way is to argue or try to go on.

The pc does NOT know what it is. He just feels awful. He tries to guess. He will ARC Brk or get sad if the auditor continues.

The correct action is an L3RE.

L1C is not of great use in a Dianetic ARC Brk. L3RE is.

If the pc remains ARC broken, try L3RE again, particularly the whole L3RE.

A Scientology session would be handled with some other list (L1C, L4BRA, etc.). A Dianetic session, including and especially FFD, is handled with L3RE.

You NEVER prepcheck while doing Dianetics. This mushes up the engrams.


INTERIORIZATION

ALL these cautions apply as well to an Interiorization-Exteriorization Rundown, when restim occurs one uses an L3RE quickly.

Int-Ext RD is essentially a Dianetic, not a Scientology, action.


SAFE ACTIONS

A fully genned-in auditor, well crammed, well drilled, well skilled, can be trusted with Dianetics, Dianetic Quads and an Int-Ext RD. Auditors not so handled can get pcs into serious trouble with these things.

A safe course is to use Quads on new, never audited before pcs.

Those begun on Quads use then only Quad flows.
C/S RESPONSIBILITY

Any trouble a C/S is running into comes from the factors of TRs, metering, Code and incomplete or false auditors’ reports.

If when I am C/Sing I ever find an auditor has omitted key session actions or has falsified a report, I order that auditor not to Cramming but a full retrain of the Hubbard New Era Dianetics Course right on up.

A C/S does not see these points. He can get the pc asked what the auditor is doing or did. He can get sessions monitored. This helps him fill this gap in his data.

It’s what isn’t in the auditor’s report that is often the trouble. Auditors omit what they said, omit the firefight, omit session alter-is in their worksheets.

All this sticks the C/S’s neck out for the axe of failure.

So particularly in FFD, Int-Ext and other such actions, a C/S has to act to obtain confidence in the auditor’s TRs, metering, Code use and accurate worksheets.


RISK

In FFD, Int-Ext RD and Power, experience has proven that if the auditor is not top grade, if the C/S is not alert, we put a pc at risk.

The USUAL is what keeps the pc safe.

A thorough study of his case, looking for obvious bugs (such as Int-Ext RD done twice, the case a druggie but drug engrams never run, Int done but its 2WC flubbed, to name a few serious ones), sending auditors to Cramming for the slightest flub, insisting on standard TRs USED IN SESSION, good metering, use of the Code, accurate and complete worksheets, use of standard tech, all guarantee the safety and progress of the pc.

INTRODUCING FFD

FFD (like the Int-Ext RD) requires flawless C/Sing and auditing or the case goes wrong.

When these actions were introduced they showed up any flaws in case studying, TRs, metering, Code and worksheets.

There are two ways to handle. (a) Cancel FFD and Int-Ext as actions. Obviously that is going backwards and is impossible. (b) Begin and continue a serious, effective campaign in the org to (1) Train auditors better, (2) Cram expertly on every flub, (3) Raise quality of TRs and metering.

As you can see, my approach is to improve quality of training, cramming and delivery.

Please help me out in getting this in.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:nt.ts.rd.rb
Copyright © 1971, 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 26 APRIL 1971
Issue II
ALL AD COURSES
Include this and HCOB
26 Apr 71 Issue I in
Solo Course Packs and
on Checksheets.

SOLO COGNITIONS


In HCOB 26 April 1971 Issue I, the definitions and conditions in an audited session are described.

The definition of in session also applies to Solo auditing.

If the Solo auditor is so all-thumbs with his papers, meters, platens that they distract him from his own bank he is not likely to as-is or cognite.

Recently, on Flag, we have taken failed OT IIIs and put them back through a full heavy retrain on R6EW and then pushed them back up the line with good success.

When a Solo auditor is also a rabbit (runs from everything including his bank) he has no chance to overcome it if he is all thumbs with his tools.

Requiring arduous, perfect drills on Solo metering and auditing actions at R6EW level should occur before the pc sees any materials. He must first and foremost be a Solo auditor, familiar with his meters and papers to such a degree that they do not in any way distract him.

Only then can you add a bank to the scene.

A poor Solo auditor does not cognite as his attention is on the tools not his bank.

Where the Solo auditor fails, he has not learned his tools. The remedy is to make him learn them.

The bridge between OT II and III is sometimes a hard one. It may be that an HDC Course is vital before the pre-OT can make this bridge.

The Solo auditor who “attests” rather than confront his bank probably never learned to use his auditing tools in the first place. Then, adding the bank as something to confront results in confusion.

Cognitions in Solo auditing depend upon the ability to use the tools of auditing so well, they serve no distraction in Solo session.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH: mes
Copyright © 1971
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 9 JUNE 1971 RA
Issue I
Remimeo
REVISED 25 NOVEMBER 1976
RE-REVISED 28 MARCH 1977
(Re-Revised to correct typographical error on p. 147 in
“High TA & ARC Brks” section. No other changes.)
(Revision in this type style)

C/S Series 41RA

C/S TIPS


LISTS

Always C/S to correct lists first when lists are out or suspected to be out.

Don’t do ARC Brks first in a case of out lists as an out list can make an ARC break that can’t be handled by ARC Brk but only an L4BR.

On a GF when lists show up or overlists you should handle that (first action in handling the GF) but also you must order an “L4BR Method 5 and handle.” Method 5 is the once through for assessment.


NO READ AUDITORS

When auditors can get no reads on things you get their:

(a) TRs checked to see if they can even be heard.

(b) Their metering checked for meter position on auditing table, can they see meter, pc and write without shifting eyes?

And can they see pc’s hands on the cans?

And was the meter turned on and charged and can an auditor work the tone arm smoothly with his thumb?

(c) Does the auditor discount reads gotten on clearing commands? (They are the reads.)

(d) Can the auditor read out a list and see the meter reads as a coordinated action?

CRAMMING

Send auditors to Cramming on all flubs, insist they GO to Cramming, insist Cramming calls them in and crams them and insist on a carbon copy of the fact that cramming has been done.

All the hard work of C/Sing comes in when auditors are flubby.

It takes weeks to make an auditor after he has had a course and it’s only done by cram—cram—cram.

R-FACTORS

Never order an R-Factor that takes pc into future or past as he then won’t be in session. Example: C/Ses “R-Factor we are setting you up for Dianetics.” Promptly the pc is up ahead not in this session.


MIXING STARTS

There are many ways to start a session. Don’t mix them.

It’s “2WC what do you have your attention on?”

“Fly a rud if no F/N.”

“Fly all ruds.”

“2WC the TA down.”

“Fly a rud or GF + 40 Method 5 and handle.”

It’s not a mixture of frantic efforts to get a TA down.

If the auditor can’t on what the C/S says THE AUDITOR ENDS OFF.

Interiorization is undone or out, there may be list errors, there may be overruns, but for sure it’s a case for FOLDER STUDY, not for an auditor C/Sing in the chair.


HIGH TA & ARC BRKS

Train your auditors NEVER TRY TO GET A TA DOWN FROM ABOVE 3.0 ON ARC BREAKS.

LOW TA QUITS

Some auditors see a TA sink below 2.0 and then won’t continue the 2WC or process to get the TA back up.

“The TA sank so I quit” is a common auditor note.

Compare this: “The TA rose above 3.0 so I quit.”

See? Doesn’t make sense.

If a TA sinks below 2.0—and the auditor’s TRs are good—the same action will usually bring it up to 2.0 and F/N.

Come down hard on auditors who do this.

Get their TRs checked, make them continue.


EXAM F/Ns AFTER FLUBS

Pcs whose TAs are high in session or low in session get F/N at the exams put the finger on the auditor. They are protesting or being overwhelmed.

Always C/S “Examiner! Ask pc what auditor did in session.”

Then you know it’s the auditor or the case. The pc will say the auditor was okay. So it’s case. But usually when cases are puzzles there’s weird things going on with TRs.

Also the auditor may be noisy or laugh hard or is boisterous and being “interesting.”

C/S VIA

The C/S is handling cases on the via of an auditor.

If the auditor is perfect the C/S can handle the work out of the case. If the auditor is not perfect in TRs, metering, Code, reports and doing the C/S then the C/S is solving a factor unknown to him, not the pc’s case.

So, be a perfect C/S. Demand perfect auditing. Cases fly.


HIGHER LEVELS

A C/S who assesses a pc to higher levels to solve lower ones is really asking for a wreck.

It’s always the earlier actions that are out.

Trying to cheat a case up to Grade II when he won’t run on Grade I is like trying to run the whole Grade Chart to cure a cold.

A pc can always be solved in or below where he is.

“Oh, we’ll put him up a grade and cure his high TA” is like “He can’t pass kindergarten so we’ll enroll him in college.”


C/S EXPERTISE

A C/S has to know his auditing materials, HCOBs and texts MUCH better than an auditor.

If a C/S is not being successful, get a retread on VI and VIII materials.

A C/S also must be confident HE could crack the case as an auditor.

When a C/S is shaky on his materials then the world of auditing looks very unstable.

The tech is very exact, very effective. If any errors existed in it they’ve been corrected.

So the variables are the knowledge of the C/S, his discipline and demands of auditors and the actions of the auditor.

If THESE are stable then the cases that come along are easy as can be.

The successful C/S knows his materials. If he wants to be even more successful he keeps his study up.

Then he is steady and calm for he is totally certain.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:sb.nt
Copyright © 1971, 1976, 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 29 JUNE 1971RA
Remimeo REVISED 14 JULY 1977
Tech & Qual (Reissued 27 September 1977
Supervisors to include revision date.)
Supervisor Courses CANCELS
Cramming Offs BTB 29 JUNE 1971 R
Word Clearers SAME TITLE

Word Clearing Series 7RA
IMPORTANT
STEPS TO SPEED
STUDENT PRODUCT FLOW
(For Supervisors and Tech Product Officers—
an LRH Despatch to Flag D of T)

If you consider each student who is tearing along successfully as an F/Ning student, you would check anything that slowed the F/N.

Using dope-off as the detection of misunderstoods is running at a below F/N level.

So if you consider that each student who is not 5.0 during study has a misunderstood WORD (not phrase or idea or concept) you could drive up velocity. Like auditing by slowed F/N instead of TA rise.

An estimation of tone level of the current students shows them at about + or 2.5. A very tight meter.

This could be remedied.

If I had this problem and a group of students at 2.5 I might approach it this way:

Put a meter on the desk. Use “I am not auditing you” so not to in-session them and start with the faster students. I would check “In your study have you encountered any word you did not fully understand?” If I got a read I’d send them to make up a list from the first P/L or tape and LOOK THEM UP and USE THEM IN SENTENCES and take the next one. Any real BIs, I’d send directly to a Word Clearing session.

I’d work on them until all their language was ironed out. Then I’d push this back to a first few days action on the new ones—when I had the old ones handled.

Now possibly this is in to some degree.

5,235 (points per week) is of course high. There are however lows that take it down. By eliminating these as slows, this average would rise.

These are not orders. They are organization steps to speed product flow—which can be done without shattering stops such as “all students to TRs.”

Quality would rise as well as speed.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Assisted by
LRH:AH:lf.pat AVU I/A
Copyright © 1971, 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 5 JULY 1971RB
Remimeo
REVISED 19 JULY 1978
RE-REVISED 20 SEPTEMBER 1978
(Revisions in this type style)

C/S Series 49RB

ASSISTS


There are three types of assists.

They are:

1. Contact Assist
2. Touch Assist
3. Dianetic Assist

They are quite different from each other.

They are VERY effective when properly done.

Clears, OTs and Dianetic Clears may be run on NED for OTs, Contact Assists and Touch Assists. It is forbidden, however, to run Dianetics on anyone who is Clear or above. (Ref: HCOB 12 Sept 78 DIANETICS FORBIDDEN ON CLEARS AND OTs.)

A preclear with a severe injury or illness can be run on all three and SHOULD BE.

If the handling is very soon after injury, burns do not blister, breaks heal in days, bruises vanish.

But to obtain such results it is necessary that the C/S and auditor or auditor alone know and RESPECT the assist tech. It is too often a toss-off, only one kind being done and then not to EP.

Every assist must end with an F/N (at Examiner or checked on a meter).


CONTACT ASSIST

Done off meter at the physical mest universe location of the injury. EP—pain gone. Cog. F/N.

See BTB 9 Oct 67R, ASSISTS FOR INJURIES.


DIANETIC ASSIST

Done in session on the meter. EP pain gone. Cog. F/N.

See HCOBs

12 Mar 69 II PHYSICALLY ILL PCs AND PRE-OTs
24 Apr 69 RADIANETIC USE
14 May 69 SICKNESS
23 May 69R AUDITING OUT SESSIONS, NARRATIVE VERSUS
SOMATIC CHAINS
24 Jul 69R SERIOUSLY ILL PCs
27 Jul 69 ANTIBIOTICS
15 Jan 70 THE USES OF AUDITING
21 Jun 70 C/S Series 9, SUPERFICIAL ACTIONS (SICK PCs)

8 Mar 71R C/S Series 29R, CASE ACTIONS, OFF LINE
23 Jul 73RA ASSISTS
2 Apr 69RA DIANETIC ASSISTS
11 Jul 73RB ASSIST SUMMARY
4 Apr 71-1RB USE OF QUAD DIANETICS
New Era Dianetics Series Bulletins.


TOUCH ASSIST

Done off the meter by an auditor on the pc’s body. EP pain gone. Cog. F/N.

See HCOBs:

2 Apr 69 RADIANETIC ASSISTS
23 Jul 73RA ASSISTS
and:
BTB 7 Apr 72R TOUCH ASSISTS, CORRECT ONES
BTB 9 Oct 67R ASSISTS FOR INJURIES


UNCONSCIOUS PC

An unconscious pc can be audited off a meter by taking his hand and having him touch nearby things like pillow, floor, etc. or body without hurting an injured part.

A person in a coma for months can be brought around by doing this daily.

One tells them a hand signal like, “Press my hand twice for ‘Yes,’ once for ‘No,’” and can get through to them, asking questions and getting “Yes” and “No” hand responses. They usually respond with this, if faintly, even while unconscious.

When one has the person conscious again one can do the assists.

FIRST AID RULES APPLY TO INJURED PERSONS.

IN MAKING THEM TOUCH SOMETHING THAT WAS MOVING, STOP IT FIRST.

IN MAKING THEM TOUCH THINGS THAT WERE HOT, COOL THEM FIRST.

WHEN POSSIBLE MAKE THEM HOLD THE THINGS THEY WERE HOLDING, IF ANY, WHILE DOING A CONTACT ASSIST.

IF AFTER A TOUCH OR CONTACT ASSIST THEY DON’T F/N WHEN TAKEN TO OR GIVEN AN EXAM, CHECK FOR O/R AND IF NO F/N TAKE THEM AWAY AND COMPLETE THE ASSIST.

DIANETIC ASSISTS CAN BE RUN QUAD.

This is important tech. It saves pain and lives. Know it and use it.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:nt.rd.lfg.kjm
Copyright © 1971, 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 17 JULY 1971R
Remimeo REVISED 6 JULY 1978
C/Ses
Testing (Revisions in this type style)
Personnel (Ellipsis indicates deletion)
Class IX
C/S Series 51R

OUT OF VALENCE
(OCA Graph)

Note: This Bulletin has been revised to include the reference on
NEW ERA DIANETICS SERIES tech regarding valence handling.


On OCA graphs (the plotted test score of a pc) you find sometimes a case that read high on the graph will drop and read lower after auditing.

This is caused by the fact that the person was OUT OF VALENCE in the first place. Social machinery was what the first registered. Now after auditing the graph expresses something closer to the actual being even though it dropped.

We have known about this since ‘57 or ‘58 but I do not think it was fully written up. Further, we now know MORE about it.

If you look into suppressive person tech you will find an SP has to be out of valence to be SP. He does not know that he is because he is himself in a non-self valence. He is “somebody else” and is denying that he himself exists, which is to say denying himself as a self.

Now this doesn’t mean all persons whose graphs dropped were active SPs. But it does mean they weren’t being themselves.

After some auditing they became themselves somewhat and this self isn’t the social cheery self the first graph said.

But the dropped graph is nearer truth.

Now, how to get the graph UP again?

The person with the dropped graph is closer to being himself but is not yet fully restored, not yet fully into his “own valence.”

While Class XI would handle this a bit differently, Class VIII Rundown already has an answer. The Class VIII out of valence lists LX1, LX2 and LX3 and the recall, secondary and engram Quad for each assessed item from these lists is a way to handle.

Additionally we now have a NEW ERA DIANETICS process specifically designed to getting a pc into valence. Ref: HCOB 20 June 1978, New Era Dianetics Series 15, IDENTITY RUNDOWN. It is not done out of sequence in the Dianetic Rundown as a hit and miss patch-up.

Completing any cycle the pc is on is of course fundamental....

The fact is that the pc is emerging more and more and becoming himself and then he himself begins to gain.

The graph that dives will come back up if general processing is done.

The pc will keep saying he is “more there.” And it is true.


LRH:nt.rd.lfg L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1971,1978 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 23 JULY 1971R
REVISED 16 JULY 1978
Remimeo
(Revises and replaces HCOB
15 Mar 71 of same title.)
(Revisions in this type style)
(Ellipsis indicates deletion)

ASSISTS

For a pc being run on a Touch Assist for handling something around the head (for example: teeth), go further even to the toes as the area extends through the nerve channel to the whole body. Right—left and also whole body. A head somatic also sticks in the spine.

ASSIST EP

All assists are run to cognition and should F/N VGI at the Examiner.


INJURY RUNDOWN

On an injury, after the Contact Assist, a Touch Assist and then an L1C on the injured member could be done.... Dianetic actions would follow as necessary. This would include handling the injury fully as a narrative item and then fully handling all somatics connected with it, per New Era Dianetics Series tech. (Ref: HCOB 28 July 71R Revised 25 June 78 New Era Dianetics Series 8, DIANETICS, BEGINNING A PC ON, HCOB 18 June 78 New Era Dianetics Series 4, ASSESSMENT AND HOW TO GET THE ITEM and HCOB 11 July 73RA Revised 15 July 78, ASSIST SUMMARY.)

PC RUNNING A TEMPERATURE
COMMANDS CORRECTED FROM EARLIER ISSUE

A persistent temperature can be brought down by running the pc on Objective “Hold it still.”

This can be run on a two command basis.

VERSION A

For a pc running a temperature too ill for regular auditing, he should be given antibiotics and an assist type boost, not a major action like Dianetics.

This version would be run if the pc is far too ill to get up. The pc is run on a meter to cog F/N VGIs.

1. 2 command Repetitive Process alternate commands:

a. Look around here and find something.

b. Hold it still (until pc can or feels he can).

Then (a) again.

Then (b) again, etc.

This will drop a fever.

2. 2WC How do you feel? Have you felt like this before? Earlier similar to F/N VGIs.

VERSION A is NOT very lasting. It is for very ill pcs and very high temperatures.

VERSION B

This is true Objective “Hold it still” and is very lasting.

It is done on a pc who can, even with effort, walk around a room.

It is done OFF the meter to cog, GIs. The pc then should at once be put on the meter and will be found to have an F/N. If no F/N on the meter the process is either (a) unflat or (b) overrun. If unflat it is continued, flattened off the meter and the same meter test follows. If overrun the release point is rehabbed.

VERSION B commands are:

(a) Look around here and find something.

(b) Walk over to it.

(c) With your hands, hold it still.

The three commands are given in (a) (b) (c) sequence one after the other, the pc executing each command and being acknowledged until the pc has a cognition and GIs. He is then checked on the meter.

A thermometer can be used to check temperature after the meter check for F/N. The temperature will be found to have subsided.

Both A and B versions can be used on the same pc.

Let us say on Monday, A Version is used. Then on Tuesday if temperature has gone back up but pc is better B Version is then used.

The temperature process is most effective on a low order persistent fever that goes on and on for days and even weeks. In such cases Version B would be used and the temperature would come down and stay down very nicely.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:sb.nt.rd.lfg
Copyright © 1971, 1978
by L Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 28 JULY 1971RA
REVISED 25 JUNE 1978
RE-REVISED 22 SEPTEMBER 1978
Remimeo (Revisions in this type style)

C/S Series 54RA
New Era Dianetics Series 8R
DIANETICS, BEGINNING A PC ON


Make Dianetics work fully in our modern culture.

DO NOT BEGIN DIANETICS WITH A HEALTH FORM ANY LONGER.

BEGIN DIANETICS WITH THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT SHEET HCOB 24 JUNE 1978R. THIS IS VITAL.

DRUGS OR ALCOHOL

IF YOU GET ANY TA ACTION OR READS ON DRUGS OR ALCOHOL EVEN IF THE PC SAYS “NO” IT IS THE FIRST DIANETIC ACTION TO HANDLE THESE AS COVERED ON HCOB 15 JULY BRA, III, NEW ERA DIANETICS SERIES 9R, DRUG HANDLING.

If the pc is currently on drugs, it may be necessary to put him through Objective Processes and a Hard TRs Course to get him off drugs. Doing this will avoid the painful withdrawal symptoms particularly present in coming off heroin or psychiatric drugs. The usual sequence of Drug Rundown steps is given in HCOB 22 Jun 78R New Era Dianetics Series 2R Full Pa Program Outline and HCOB 15 Jul BRA, Issue III, New Era Dianetics Series 9R Drug Handling.

The pc in many cases won’t be able to run any engrams at all unless you run out drugs, alcohol or medicines first. They will run these and these alone until the engrams are gone.

People who “can’t run engrams” are usually drug cases.

MEDICINE

If Medicine Part E of the Original Assessment Sheet reads then handle it per C/S Series 48RB, as it reacts like any other drug, but pcs sometimes don’t think of medicine as drugs. They are.
LOSSES AND DEATHS

If Losses (of position, possessions, pets, etc.) reads or if Deaths of relatives, etc. read on Parts F and G check for interest and run them out Narrative Secondaries R3RA Quad.

UPSETS

If Upsets read and the pc is interested in running it out, handle it with R3RA Narrative Quad. They can also be handled with regular preassessment, etc., as in New Era Dianetics Series 4R.
DANGERS

If Part I reads and the pc is interested run the Danger out R3RA Narrative Quad. They can also be handled with regular preassessment, etc., as in New Era Dianetics Series 4R.
ILLNESSES, ACCIDENTS, OPERATIONS

Parts J. K, L, M, N are handled if reading by checking interest with the pc and running out the illness, operation, accident or undesired physical condition R3RA Quad Narrative.

Preassess these items if needed to take to a full and complete handling with R3RA Quad.
FAMILY INSANITY

If Section P reads, run the loss out R3RA Secondaries Quad. This can be preassessed if needed.
PERCEPTION DIFFICULTIES

Lack of perception (sight, hearing, etc.) comes from overts and improves when Flow 2 is done on any R3RA chain.

Having found the complaint regarding perception (which can include lack of feeling, lack of emotion) you would treat it as an original item and would preassess the condition and then handle it with R3RA Quad, like any other original item. See New Era Dianetics Series 4R on handling original items.

COMPULSIONS, REPRESSIONS, FEARS

If any compulsions, repressions or fears read in Part AA treat them as original items just as given in New Era Dianetics Series 4R.

PREVIOUS DIANETIC OR SCIENTOLOGY PROCESSING

If the pc has charge on his previous processing, the auditing can be run out R3RA Narrative Quad, first checking interest with the pc. Earlier beginning and earlier similar are used.
LOOK ON YOURSELF AS SOMEONE ELSE

If Section FF reads, the pc should be given the Identity Rundown when he reaches the correct step on his New Era Dianetics program.

FORMER PRACTICE

If Section GG reads, Former Practices, treat any former practice as an original item and handle per New Era Dianetics Series 4R.

PROBLEMS YOU’RE TRYING TO SOLVE WITH PROCESSING

If this section reads and the pc is interested, treat the problem as an original item per New Era Dianetics Series 4R.

DONE SOMETHING HARMFUL TO DIANETICS, DIANETICISTS,
SCIENTOLOGY, SCIENTOLOGISTS, ORGANIZATIONS

If this reads, check interest and treat it as an original item per New Era Dianetics Series 4R.
REPAIR

REPAIR BY L3RF ANY FLUBBED DIANETIC SESSION OR CHAIN WITHIN 24 HOURS. Do not let it go unrepaired.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH Ifg.kjm
Copyright © 1971,1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 16 AUGUST 1971R
Remimeo Issue II
Courses REVISED 5 JULY 1978
Checksheets
(Revisions in this type style)


TRAINING DRILLS REMODERNIZED

(Revises 17 APRIL 1961.
This HCOB cancels the following:

Original HCOB 17 April 1961 TRAINING DRILLS MODERNIZED
Revised HCOB 5 Jan 71 TRAINING DRILLS MODERNIZED
Revised HCOB 21 June 71 TRAINING DRILLS MODERNIZED Issue III
HCOB 25 May 71 THE TR COURSE

This HCOB is to replace all other issues
of TRs 0-4 in all packs and checksheets.)

Due to the following factors, I have modernized TRs 0 to 4.

1. The auditing skill of any student remains only as good as he can do his TRs.

2. Flubs in TRs are the basis of all confusion in subsequent efforts to audit.

3. If the TRs are not well learned early in Scientology training courses, THE BALANCE OF THE COURSE WILL FAIL AND SUPERVISORS AT UPPER LEVELS WILL BE TEACHING NOT THEIR SUBJECTS BUT TRs.

4. Almost all confusions on meter, Model Sessions and Scientology or Dianetic processes stem directly from inability to do the TRs.

5. A student who has not mastered his TRs will not master anything further.

6. Scientology or Dianetic processes will not function in the presence of bad TRs. The preclear is already being overwhelmed by process velocity and cannot bear up to TR flubs without ARC breaks.

Academies were tough on TRs up to 1958 and have since tended to soften. Comm Courses are not a tea party.

These TRs given here should be put in use at once in all auditor training, in Academy and HGC and in the future should never be relaxed.

Public courses on TRs are NOT “softened” because they are for the public. Absolutely no standards are lowered. THE PUBLIC ARE GIVEN REAL TRs— ROUGH, TOUGH AND HARD. To do otherwise is to lose 90% of the results. There is nothing pale and patty-cake about TRs.

THIS HCOB MEANS WHAT IT SAYS. IT DOES NOT MEAN SOMETHING ELSE. IT DOES NOT IMPLY ANOTHER MEANING. IT IS NOT OPEN TO INTERPRETATION FROM ANOTHER SOURCE.

THESE TRs ARE DONE EXACTLY PER THIS HCOB WITHOUT ADDED ACTIONS OR CHANGE.


NUMBER: OT TR 0 1971

NAME: Operating Thetan Confronting.

COMMANDS: None.

POSITION: Student and coach sit facing each other with eyes closed, a comfortable distance apart—about three feet.

PURPOSE: To train student to be there comfortably and confront another person. The idea is to get the student able to BE there comfortably in a position three feet in front of another person, to BE there and not do anything else but BE there.

TRAINING STRESS: Student and coach sit facing each other with eyes closed. There is no conversation. This is a silent drill. There is NO twitching, moving, confronting with a body part, “system” or vias used to confront or anything else added to BE there. One will usually see blackness or an area of the room when one’s eyes are closed. BE THERE, COMFORTABLY AND CONFRONT.

When a student can BE there comfortably and confront and has reached a major stable win. the drill is passed.

HISTORY: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard in June 71 to give an additional gradient to confronting and eliminate students confronting with their eyes, blinking, etc. Revised by L. Ron Hubbard in August 1971 after research discoveries on TRs.


NUMBER: TR 0 CONFRONTING REVISED 1961

NAME: Confronting Preclear.

COMMANDS: None.

POSITION: Student and coach sit facing each other a comfortable distance apart— about three feet.

PURPOSE: To train student to confront a preclear with auditing only or with nothing. The whole idea is to get the student able to be there comfortably in a position three feet in front of a preclear. to BE there and not do anything else but BE there.

TRAINING STRESS: Have student and coach sit facing each other, neither making any conversation or effort to be interesting. Have them sit and look at each other and say and do nothing for some hours. Student must not speak, blink, fidget, giggle or be embarrassed or anaten. It will be found the student tends to confront WITH a body part, rather than just confront, or to use a system of confronting rather than just BE there. The drill is misnamed if confronting means to DO something to the pc. The whole action is to accustom an auditor to BEING THERE three feet in front of a preclear without apologizing or moving or being startled or embarrassed or defending self. Confronting with a body part can cause somatics in that body part being used to confront. The solution is just to confront and BE there. Student passes when he can just BE there and confront and he has reached a major stable win.

HISTORY: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard in Washington in March 1957 to train students to confront preclears in the absence of social tricks or conversation and to overcome obsessive compulsions to be “interesting.” Revised by L. Ron Hubbard April 1961 on finding that SOP Goals required for its success a much higher level of technical skill than earlier processes. Revised by L. Ron Hubbard in August 1971 after research discoveries on TRs.


NUMBER: TR 0 BULLBAIT REVISED 1961

NAME: Confronting Bullbaited.

COMMANDS: Coach: “Start” “That’s it” “Flunk . “

POSITION: Student and coach sit facing each other a comfortable distance apart— about three feet.

PURPOSE: To train student to confront a preclear with auditing or with nothing. The whole idea is to get the student able to BE there comfortably in a position three feet in front of the preclear without being thrown off, distracted or reacting in any way to what the preclear says or does.

TRAINING STRESS: After the student has passed TR 0 and he can just BE there comfortably, “Bullbaiting” can begin. Anything added to BEING THERE is sharply flunked by the coach. Twitches, blinks, sighs, fidgets, anything except just being there is promptly flunked, with the reason why.

PATTER: Student coughs. Coach: “Flunk! You coughed. Start.” This is the whole of the coach’s patter as a coach.

PATTER AS A CONFRONTED SUBJECT: The coach may say anything or do anything except leave the chair. The student’s “buttons” can be found and tromped on hard. Any words not coaching words may receive no response from the student. If the student responds, the coach is instantly a coach (see patter above). Student passes when he can BE there comfortably without being thrown off or distracted or react in any way to anything the coach says or does and has reached a major stable win.

HISTORY: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard in Washington in March 1957 to train students to confront preclears in the absence of social tricks or conversation and to overcome obsessive compulsions to be “interesting.” Revised by L. Ron Hubbard April 1961 on finding that SOP Goals required for its success a much higher level of technical skill than earlier processes. Revised by L. Ron Hubbard in August 1971 after research discoveries on TRs.

NUMBER: TR 1 REVISED 1961

NAME: Dear Alice.

PURPOSE: To train the student to deliver a command newly and in a new unit of time to a preclear without flinching or trying to overwhelm or using a via.

COMMANDS: A phrase (with the “he saids” omitted) is picked out of the book Alice in Wonderland and read to the coach. It is repeated until the coach is satisfied it arrived where he is.

POSITION: Student and coach are seated facing each other a comfortable distance apart.

TRAINING STRESS: The command goes from the book to the student and, as his own, to the coach. It must not go from book to coach. It must sound natural not artificial. Diction and elocution have no part in it. Loudness may have.

The coach must have received the command (or question) clearly and have understood it before he says “Good.”

PATTER: The coach says “Start,” says “Good” without a new start if the command is received or says “Flunk” if the command is not received. “Start” is not used again. “That’s it” is used to terminate for a discussion or to end the activity. If session is terminated for a discussion, coach must say “Start” again before it resumes.

This drill is passed only when the student can put across a command naturally, without strain or artificiality or elocutionary bobs and gestures, and when the student can do it easily and relaxedly.

HISTORY: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard in London, April 1956, to teach the communication formula to new students. Revised by L. Ron Hubbard 1961 to increase auditing ability.


NUMBER: TR 2 REVISED 1978

NAME: Acknowledgements.

PURPOSE: To teach the student that an acknowledgement is a method of controlling preclear communication and that an acknowledgement is a full stop. The student must UNDERSTAND and APPROPRIATELY acknowledge the comm and in such a way that it does not continue the comm.

COMMANDS: The coach reads lines from Alice in Wonderland omitting the “he saids” and the student thoroughly acknowledges them. The student says “Good,” “Fine,” “Okay,” “I heard that,” ANYTHING only so long as it is appropriate to the pc’s comm—
in such a way as actually to convince the person who is sitting there as the preclear that he has heard it. The coach repeats any line he feels was not truly acknowledged.

POSITION: Student and coach are seated facing each other at a comfortable distance apart.

TRAINING STRESS: Teach student to acknowledge exactly what was said so preclear knows it was heard. Ask student from time to time what was said. Curb over and under acknowledgement. Let student do anything at first to get acknowledgement across, then even him out. Teach him that an acknowledgement is a stop, not beginning of a new cycle of communication or an encouragement to the preclear to go on and that an acknowledgement must be appropriate for the pays comm. The student must be broken of the habit of robotically using “Good,” “Thank you” as the only acks.

To teach further that one can fail to get an acknowledgement across or can fail to stop a pc with an acknowledgement or can take a pc’s head off with an acknowledgement.

PATTER: The coach says “Start,” reads a line and says “Flunk” every time the coach feels there has been an improper acknowledgement. The coach repeats the same line each time the coach says “Flunk.” “That’s it” may be used to terminate for discussion or terminate the session. “Start” must be used to begin a new coaching after a “That’s it.”

HISTORY: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard in London in April 1956 to teach new students that an acknowledgement ends a communication cycle and a period of time, that a new command begins a new period of time. Revised 1961 and again in 1978 by L. Ron Hubbard.


NUMBER: TR2 1/2 1978

NAME: Half Acks.

PURPOSE: To teach the student that a half acknowledgement is a method of encouraging a pc to communicate.

COMMANDS: The coach reads lines from “Alice in Wonderland” omitting “he saids” and the student half asks the coach. The coach repeats any line he feels was not half asked.

POSITION: The student and coach are seated facing each other at a comfortable distance apart.

TRAINING STRESS: Teach student that a half acknowledgement is an encouragement to the pa to CONTINUE talking. Curb over-acknowledgement that stops a pc from talking. Teach him further that a half ask is a way of keeping a pc talking by giving the pc the feeling that he is being heard.

PATTER: The coach says “Start,” reads a line and says “Flunk” every time the coach feels there has been an improper half ask. The coach repeats the same line each time the coach says “Flunk.” “That’s it” may be used to terminate for discussion or terminate the session. If the session is terminated for discussion, the coach must say “Start” again before it resumes.

HISTORY: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard in July 1978 to train auditors in how to get a pa to continue talking as in R3RA.


NUMBER: TR 3 REVISED 1961

NAME: Duplicative Question.

PURPOSE: To teach a student to duplicate without variation an auditing question, each time newly, in its own unit of time, not as a blur with other questions, and to acknowledge it. To teach that one never asks a second question until he has received an answer to the one asked.

COMMANDS: “Do fish swim?” or “Do birds fly?”

POSITION: Student and coach seated a comfortable distance apart.

TRAINING STRESS: One question and student acknowledgement of its answer in one unit of time which is then finished. To keep student from straying into variations of command. Even though the same question is asked, it is asked as though it had never occurred to anyone before.

The student must learn to give a command and receive an answer and to acknowledge it in one unit of time.

The student is flunked if he or she fails to get an answer to the question asked, if he or she fails to repeat the exact questions, if he or she Q and As with excursions taken by the coach.

PATTER: The coach uses “Start” and “That’s it,” as in earlier TRs. The coach is not bound after starting to answer the student’s question but may comm lag or give a commenting type answer to throw the student off. Often the coach should answer. Somewhat less often the coach attempts to pull the student into a Q and A or upset the student. Example:

Student: “Do fish swim?”
Coach: “Yes”
Student: “Good”
Student: “Do fish swim?”
Coach: “Aren’t you hungry?”
Student: “Yes”
Coach: “Flunk.”

When the question is not answered, the student must say, gently, “I’ll repeat the auditing question,” and do so until he gets an answer. Anything except commands, acknowledgement and as needed, the repeat statement is flunked. Unnecessary use of the repeat statement is flunked. A poor command is flunked. A poor acknowledgement is flunked. A Q and A is flunked (as in example). Student misemotion or confusion is flunked. Student failure to utter the next command without a long comm lag is flunked. A choppy or premature acknowledgement is flunked. Lack of an acknowledgement (or with a distinct comm lag) is flunked. Any words from the coach except an answer to the question, “Start,” “Flunk,” “Good” or “That’s it” should have no influence on the student except to get him to give a repeat statement and the command again. By repeat statement is meant, “I’ll repeat the auditing command.”

“Start,” “Flunk,” “Good” and “That’s it” may not be used to fluster or trap the student. Any other statement under the sun may be. The coach may try to leave his chair in this TR. If he succeeds it is a flunk. The coach should not use introverted statements such as “I just had a cognition.” ‘Coach divertive’ statements should all concern the student, and should be designed to throw the student off and cause the student to lose session control or track of what the student is doing. The student’s job is to keep a session going in spite of anything, using only command, the repeat statement or the acknowledgement. The student may use his or her hands to prevent a ‘blow’ (leaving) of the coach. If the student does anything else than the above, it is a flunk and the coach must say so.

HISTORY: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard in London in April 1956, to overcome variations and sudden changes in sessions. Revised 1961 by L. Ron Hubbard. The old TR has a comm bridge as part of its training but this is now part of and is taught in Model Session and is no longer needed at this level. Auditors have been frail in getting their questions answered. This TR was redesigned to improve that frailty.


NUMBER: TR 4 REVISED 1961

NAME: Preclear Originations.

PURPOSE: To teach the student not to be tongue-tied or startled or thrown off session by originations of preclear and to maintain ARC with preclear throughout an origination.

COMMANDS: The student runs “Do fish swim?” or “Do birds fly?” on coach. Coach answers but now and then makes startling comments from a prepared list given by supervisor. Student must handle originations to satisfaction of coach.

POSITION: Student and coach sit facing each other at a comfortable distance apart.

TRAINING STRESS: The student is taught to hear origination and do three things. 1. Understand it; 2. Acknowledge it; and 3. Return preclear to session. If the coach feels abruptness or too much time consumed or lack of comprehension, he corrects the student into better handling.

PATTER: All originations concern the coach, his ideas, reactions or difficulties, none concern the auditor. Otherwise the patter is the same as in earlier TRs. The student’s patter is governed by: 1. Clarifying and understanding the origin. 2. Acknowledging the origin. 3. Giving the repeat statement “I’ll repeat the auditing command,” and then giving it. Anything else is a flunk.

The auditor must be taught to prevent ARC breaks and differentiate between a vital problem that concerns the pc and a mere effort to blow session. (TR 3 Revised.) Flunks are given if the student does more than 1. Understand; 2. Acknowledge; 3. Return pc to session.

Coach may throw in remarks personal to student as on TR 3. Student’s failure to differentiate between these (by trying to handle them) and coach’s remarks about self as “pc” is a flunk.

Student’s failure to persist is always a flunk in any TR but here more so. Coach should not always read from list to originate, and not always look at student when about to comment. By originate is meant a statement or remark referring to the state of the coach or fancied case. By comment is meant a statement or remark aimed only at student or room. Originations are handled, comments are disregarded by the student.

HISTORY: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard in London in April 1956, to teach auditors to stay in session when preclear dives out. Revised by L. Ron Hubbard in 1961 to teach an auditor more about handling origins and preventing ARC breaks.

As TR 5 is also part of the CCHs it can be disregarded in the Comm Course TRs despite its appearance on earlier lists for students and staff auditors.


TRAINING NOTE

It is better to go through these TRs several times getting tougher each time than to hang on one TR forever or to be so tough at start student goes into a decline.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:jw:JR:JS:nt.pe.rd.lfg
Copyright © 196t, 1971, 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 8 SEPTEMBER 1971R
REVISED 20 MAY 1975
(Note: This is a revised issue for Class VIII
Class VIII Only & HSST Courses. The Power and Upper Level
Class VIII C/Ses C/Ses will be issued as additions for Class
Class VIII Auditors VII & Solo C/S Courses.)
Class VIII Checksheets
HSST Course
CASE SUPERVISOR ACTIONS

This is the revised issue of the Class VIII HCOB Case Supervisor Actions. Several C/Ses have been brought up to date from the original C/S Booklet of 10 Dec 68.

The following are basic Case Supervisor actions.

It is to be noted Symptoms are double lettered (AA, BB) and the Directions to Auditors are numbered (1, 2, 3). When more than one Direction applies to a Symptom, a letter is added (1A, 1B).

In the future if a related Symptom is added, it will go to a triple letter for the same Class (BBB, JJJ).

In the future, for a triple letter, a Direction will be numbered as hundreds, (BBB 200, BBB 200 A).

Thus we have a system which can expand and be refined which can be charted and boxed.

A chart can be drawn up of Symptoms. This chart gives the numbers for Directions. To save himself from writing, the Case Supervisor can get the slips run off separately in quantity.

These slips can be packaged in envelopes. Or go into a covered wooden box with 80/100 pigeon holes. The door closes over the holes, the chart is on the inside of the door, the whole thing can be padlocked. The pattern is that of a flag locker in which signal flags are kept. Each pigeon hole is numbered.

The C/S then simply looks on his chart, deals out of the C/S locker a number of slips, staples them, puts on auditor and pc, uses a time/date stamp and he is very much in business.

The C/S does not issue the Symptoms in folders. Only the directions.

His comments to the auditor can be made on a blank sheet stapled in front of the separate slips.

He then has his locker, he has his independent copy of this HCOB for separate reference. He will have his chart.

His only real problem is how to keep himself supplied with slips of Directions. It is probably best to cut these all of a piece on mimeo stencils and get them run off in batches.

Standard grades are not part of this set-up as it is understood that the auditor knows these. Directions to do standard grades are written on the blank sheet.

Good Luck.

INDEX
CLASS VIII

SYMPTOM DIRECTION PIGEON
NAME NO. NO. HOLE
Rudiments, Light use AA 1 1
Rudiments, Fly all BB 2 2
Ruds, or GF CC 3 3
Green Form CCC 300 4
GF all Black CCC 300A 5
GF, Misunderstood Case CCC 300B 6
Ruds, High TA on DD 4 7
High TA Chronic DDD 400 8
Out Rudiments DDD 400A 9
Complaints About F/Ns EE 5 10
Previous Bad Auditing FF 6 11
Nattery or Critical Pc GG 7 12
Crossed Rudiments HH 8 13
Rudiments, Protesting HHH 800 14
Out Rudiments HHH 800A 15
Repeating PTP HHH 800B 16
Bad Session last time II 9 17
Incomplete Actions III 900 18
Rock Slam III 900A 19
Rock Slam at Examiner III 900B 20
Assist III 900C 21

Lists Errors In:

Recent Possible Incorrect List JJ 10A 22
Lots of Earlier List Available JJ 10B 23
Old Earlier List Not Available JJ 10C 24
List (Recent) Not Available JJ 10D 25
List Item Didn’t F/N JJJ 100E 26
List Error 3 SPs JJJ 100H 27
Persisting Item JJJ 100J 28
Alcohol KK 11 29
Drugs LL 12 30
Tiredness MM 13 31
Exteriorization, Bypassed NN 14 32
F/Ns Bypassed in Session OO 15 33
F/N Packed up PP 16 34
Exteriorization, Case Cannot QQ 17 35
Exteriorization QQQ 170 36
Money, Has Trouble With RR 18 37
Solid, Bank Gone Solid SS 19 38
Process Split by Break TT 20 39
Gains Invalidated UU 21 40
Resistive Case, Assess 7 Cases VV 22 41
Resistive Case, Doesn’t Want Auditing VV 22A 42
SYMPTOM DIRECTION PIGEON
NAME NO. NO. HOLE
Resistive Cases, Recall Pretending VV 22B 43
Resistive Cases, Prevent Auditing VV 22C 44
Resistive Cases, Drugs VVV 220D+E 45
Resistive Cases, Drugs, Poor Ethics VVV 220D+E 46
Resistive Cases, Drugs, Overts VVV 220E(1) 47
Resistive Cases, Former Therapy VVV 220F 48
Resistive Cases, Earlier Practice VVV 220G 49
Resistive Cases, Out of Valence VVV 220H 50
LX3 VVV 220H(1) 51
LX2 VVV 220H(2) 52
LX1 VVV 220H(3) 53
LX1 Assessed to Grief or Loss VVV 220H(4) 54
Resistive Cases, Overts VV 22I 55
Resistive Cases, Grades VV 22J 56
Resistive Cases, Rudiments VV 22K 57
Resistive Cases, Rudiments VVV 220K(1) 58
Resistive Cases, Engram Matching
PT Dangers VVV 22L 59
Resistive Cases, Physically Ill VV 22M 60
Had Been Physically Ill VVV 220M(1) 61
Resistive Cases, ARC Breaks VVV 220K(2) 62
S&D, Singular Item YYY 250A 63
Physically Ill YYY 250B 64
PTS, Environmental Menace YYY 250C 65
Assists ZZZ 260 66
Unwarranted Sec Checks ZZZ 260D 67

__________


CASE SUPERVISOR AA
CLASS VIII

Rudiments, light use of

Symptoms
Pc in session easily.
Gets case gains.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 1
CLASS VIII

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

1. Fly the ruds to F/N.

Run the rudiments, ARC break, PTP and/or M/W/H to the first F/N. Use Suppress and False if pc edgy about ruds. Do not fly any ruds if pc has F/N at sess start.
____________________________________________________________________


CASE SUPERVISOR BB
CLASS VIII
Rudiments, fly all

Symptoms
Pc or pre-OT not in session.
Tends to take over session.
Hard to handle in session.
Ends sessions with bad indicators.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 2
CLASS VIII
To the Auditor

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

1. Fly each rudiment to floating needle.

ARC Brk
Present time problem
Missed withholds.

Use Suppress on a “clean” read.

Use False read (Has anyone said you had a_______when you didn’t.)
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR CC
CLASS VIII
Rudiments or Green Form

Symptom
Case not audited for some time.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 3
CLASS VIII

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

1. Fly a rud or do GF, Method No. 3.

(If there is no F/N on rudiments, then do a Green Form omitting the standard ARC Brk, PTP and M/W/H which have just been done anyway.)

Use itsa earlier itsa. No lists.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR CCC
CLASS VIII
Green Form

Symptom
Pc requesting review.
Pc has not been audited for some time.
____________________________________________________________________


CASE SUPERVISOR 300
CLASS VIII

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

1. Assess GF+40 once through, marking lengths of reads.
2. Return folder to C/S (who should also have the FES info on the case available to do a proper C/S.)
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR CCC
CLASS VIII
Green Form

Symptom
All Black reads.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 300A
CLASS VIII

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

1. List what it was to an item or date it.
Running it is too heavy a Green Form action.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR CCC
CLASS VIII
Green Form

Symptom
Misunderstood Case Condition reads.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 300B
CLASS VIII

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

1. Handle Misunderstood Case Condition if it reads.
Get in Suppress and Invalidated.
Do a Remedy B on “Who or what haven’t you understood about (your case),” test if it’s “Case or Cases,” do a Remedy B on the question that reads.
2. Verify and rehab all grades and sections (if Clear omit Power).
3. Return folder to C/S for further action if (2) hangs up and doesn’t go.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR DD
CLASS VIII
Rudiments, high TA on

Symptom
TA goes up high when rudiments used.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 4
CLASS VIII

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

1. Per C/S Series 1, Auditors Rights, check Protest or Overrun. If TA remains high, the trained auditor is to do a C/S 53 and handle.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR DDD
CLASS VIII
High TA, chronic

Symptom
TA is at 3.5 or above.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 400
CLASS VIII

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

1. Assess Short Hi-Lo TA List (C/S Ser 53) and handle to F/Ning list.

(NOTE: Also handle any errors found in FES which the pc may not be aware of, like processes run twice etc.)
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR DDD
CLASS VIII
Out rudiments

Symptoms
Audited over ARC breaks of long duration and M/W/H.
Too many GF, Remedy Bs and S&Ds.
Pc was OK now reported in grief after too much over-correction and errors.
He’s had too many repairs that were badly done.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 400A
CLASS VIII

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

1. Fly each rud to F/N. Be alert for ARC breaks of long duration. Chase back to basic.
2. Assess: Auditing
Treatment
Healing
Scientology
Sessions
Auditors
Reviews
Correction
3. Prepcheck each item that reads, in order of size of read.
4. Back to C/S (for a C/S based on what was found in FES.)

CASE SUPERVISOR EE
CLASS VIII
Complaints about F/Ns

Symptom
Pc or pre-OT claims he F/Ns too easily or too quickly when he has not had any gains.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 5
CLASS VIII

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

1. Check for cut communications (itsa E/S itsa to F/N).
2. Prepcheck floating needles “On floating needles_______” to F/N.
Be sure to clear the command well with a green pc.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR FF
CLASS VIII
Previous bad auditing

Symptoms
Pc reluctant, has aches or pains.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 6
CLASS VIII

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

1. Assess: Auditors
Auditing
Scientology
Dianetics
Engrams
Secondaries
Locks
Reviews
Sessions
Cases
Case gain
Results
2. Prepcheck result.
Beware on the assessment pc doesn’t “get an item” just because he doesn’t understand it. If so, clear item and reassess.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR GG
CLASS VIII

Nattery or critical pc

Symptoms
Pc is highly critical.
Natters.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 7
CLASS VIII

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

1. Prepcheck “Withholds?” “On withholds has_____.”
Clear command well.
2. Pull withholds, E/S.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR HH
CLASS VIII
Crossed rudiments

Symptoms
Pc or pre-OT answers PTPs with ARC breaks, ARC breaks with PTPs, missed W/Hs with PTPs, etc.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 8
CLASS VIII

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

1. Clear each rudiment thoroughly with preclear before running it and fly each rud to F/N.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR HHH
CLASS VIII
Rudiments

Symptoms
Pc or pre-OT shows signs of protesting in session. Lots of False assertions by auditors.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 800
CLASS VIII

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

1. Get in ruds with Suppress and False with prefix “In auditing has there been an/a _____ “ ARC break, problem, withhold (not missed W/H). If the pc or pre-OT can’t think of it, after he looks for it, you test False read with various questions. “Who said you had an/a _____reading when you didn’t have one.” or “Has anyone asked for answers you didn’t have.” or “Has somebody pulled_____ that had been pulled before.” etc.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR HHH
CLASS VIII
PTP

Symptom
Preclear has repeating PTP.

CASE SUPERVISOR 800B
CLASS VIII

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

1. Pick up ARC breaks. ARCU CDEINR, itsa earlier similar itsa to F/N.
2. Handle PTPs. If it reads well, itsa earlier similar itsa to F/N. Make a Remedy B out of the PTP if it requires handling in any way but mild itsa. Use the PTP
she says it is in the question. “In your past who or what was similar to_____.”
Make it make sense. Handle per the laws of L&N.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR II
CLASS VIII
Bad session last time

Symptoms
From folder pc was mishandled.
Wound up at the Examiner caved in.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 9
CLASS VIII

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

NOTE: Study the folder to find and correct the error.

If out ruds:

1. Run ruds with the questions:

In your last session did you have an ARC break?
In your last session did you have a problem?
In your last session did you have a withhold?

2. If no F/N yet, do L1C “In your last session_____.”
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR III
CLASS VIII

Incomplete actions

Symptoms
Pc either overrun or underrun as session did not end on F/N.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 900
CLASS VIII

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

1. C/S is to handle as per C/S Ser 34 “Non-F/N Cases.”
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR III
CLASS VIII
Rock slam

Symptoms
R/S on M/W/H. Hard to clean.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 900A
CLASS VIII

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

1. Prepcheck missed withholds.
“On missed withholds has anything been_____.”
2. Pull overts. (Be sure to get the crime back of the R/S. Use method of magnifying or exaggerating the overts if needed. )
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR III
CLASS VIII

Rock slam

Symptoms
Pc or pre-OT, R/S at Examiner.
A R/S, the pc came out of session which means the F/N was an ARC break needle or false report. A rock slam can be caused by either a crime or an invalidation. It can cool on invalidation but would come back as a crime.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 900B
CLASS VIII

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

1. Clean up invalidation of last session.
2. Handle any continuous PT overts on Scientology and see if it continues to read as invalidation or as a real read. If it is even vaguely hard to clean, the correct action is to list.
3. “What are you trying to prevent.” List & null to one reading item.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR III
CLASS VIII
Assist

Symptoms
Ruds overrun.
By Examiner statement still had a PTP after the last session.
Delicate pc.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 900C
CLASS VIII

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

1. Indicate to the pc overrun and bypassed F/Ns.
2. Assesses GF Method 5.
3. Return folder back to C/S.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR JJ
CLASS VIII
Lists, errors in

Symptoms
Listing trouble.
Pc nattery.
Ethics trouble after being listed on an S&D.
Rem B or Prevent. Ill after being listed on something.
Heavy session ARC breaks without explanation.

Actions
(1) Recent list.
(2) Old lists.
(3) The earlier list (recent) not available.
(4) Old earlier lists not available.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 10A
INSTRUCTION TO THE AUDITOR

Lists
(1)

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

Recent possible incorrect list.

(1) Find the list, do L4B, Method 5, on it.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 10B
CLASS VIII
Lists
(2)

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

Lots of earlier lists available.

1. Find the earliest S&D. Do L4B to correct item by the Laws of Listing and Nulling HCOB 1 August 68. Give it to the pc as his first S&D item. Correct no further.
2. Find the earliest Remedy B. Do L4B to correct item as in (1).
3. Find the earliest list ever done on the case, do L4B as in (1).
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 10C
CLASS VIII

Lists
(3)

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

Old earlier lists not available.

1. Assess review, auditors, auditing, lists, old lists, list items.
2. Do L4B with “On (item found in (1) “ Method 5). Handle each item as it reads with itsa and indicate the BPC.

Or as an alternate C/S do the following:

1. L4B on every list pc can recall (Method 5).
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 10D
INSTRUCTIONS TO THE AUDITOR

Lists
(4)

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

The earlier list (recent) not available.

1. Do L4B “On that list (specify)_____” (Method 5).
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 100E
CLASS VIII
Lists
(5)

List item didn’t F/N in the matter of listing and nulling.

1. Do L4B on that list (specify), Method 5.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 100H
INSTRUCTIONS TO THE AUDITOR

Lists
(6)

List error, 3 SPs found on one list.
Difficulty on the job.

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

1. Find and correct this incomplete list. Renull to one reading item.
2. Do L4B, Method 5.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 100J
INSTRUCTIONS TO THE AUDITOR
Lists
(7)

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

A persistent item that doesn’t blow. Wrong item.

1. Find which list it came from.
2. Correct the list by L4B, Method 5.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR KK
Alcohol

Symptoms
Delusions.
Can’t leave alcohol alone.
Dishonesty.
Physical deterioration.
Deception.
Religious fixations.
Sexual perversions or promiscuity.

Alcohol produces its effect by rapidly burning up the B1 vitamin and foods in the body. This pulls a thetan in to the resulting low area.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 11
INSTRUCTIONS TO THE AUDITOR

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

Give pc B1 before session.
1. Fly ruds or GF to F/N.
2. Rehab any and all releases through drinking. Get number of times by counting.
3. 3 Way or Quad Recall:
F1. Recall another giving you alcohol.
F2. Recall giving alcohol to another.
F3. Recall another giving alcohol to another or others.
F0. Recall giving yourself alcohol.
4. 3 Way or Quad Engrams:
F1. Locate an incident containing pain and unconsciousness of another giving you alcohol.
F2. Locate an incident containing pain and unconsciousness of you giving alcohol to another or others.
F3. Locate an incident containing pain and unconsciousness of another giving alcohol to another or others.
F0. Locate an incident containing pain and unconsciousness of giving yourself alcohol.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR LL
Drugs

Symptoms
Registers on the meter as having taken drugs.

High TA.
Seems unauditable on ARC Straightwire or above or hangs up in doing grades.
Talks randomly.
Compares Scientology sessions to former drug trips.
Looking for the same euphoria from a Scn session as received during drug trips.
Dub-in engram.

Drugs, and also bio-chemical substances used in “treatment” or in tranquilizing the person produce delusion. This is done by making a reduced creation in the body so that the thetan is dragged into heavily creating. Makes a + and -.

If a person is heavily the effect of something, then he has done it as an overt.

A preclear who has recently been on drugs should not be audited until off them for 6 weeks.

B1 vitamin in heavy dosage has been known to alleviate the no-create body drag and so stop the obsessive create thetan drag.

Auditing someone during a drug delusion state heavily hangs up a case and must not be done. Vitamins are not drugs.

Drugs include a long category of substances and even some poisons.

Anything that produced a release of a thetan from the body can be rehabbed.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 12
INSTRUCTIONS TO THE AUDITOR

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

The Class VIII Drug Rundown:

1. Fly rud or GF to F/N by itsa earlier itsa, no lists.
2. Rehab former releases for each type of drug taken, get number of times released on each. (Each should F/N.)
3. 3 Way or Quad Recall:
F1. Recall another giving you drugs.
F2. Recall giving drugs to another.
F3. Recall another giving drugs to another or others.
F0. Recall giving yourself drugs. 4. 3 Way or Quad Secondaries:
F1. Locate an incident containing loss or emotion of another giving you drugs.
F2. Locate an incident containing loss or emotion of you giving drugs to another or others.
F3. Locate an incident containing loss or emotion of another giving drugs to another or others.
F0. Locate an incident containing loss or emotion of giving yourself drugs. 5. 3 Way or Quad Engrams:
F1. Locate an incident containing pain and unconsciousness of another giving you drugs.
F2. Locate an incident containing pain and unconsciousness of you giving drugs to another or others.
F3. Locate an incident containing pain and unconsciousness of another giving drugs to another or others.
F0. Locate an incident containing pain and unconsciousness of giving yourself drugs.

RUN THE ENGRAMS PRECISELY BY THE BOOK.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR MM
CLASS VIII
Tiredness

Symptoms
Tired continually.
Sleeps too much.

Tiredness is technically BLUNTED PURPOSE.

The most effective way to handle this is by the overt-motivator engram.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 13
CLASS VIII

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

Tiredness:

F1. Find and run an engram or chain of the pc’s purpose being blunted to F/N.
F2. Find and run an engram or chain of blunting the purpose of another or others to F/N.
F3. Find and run an engram or chain of another blunting the purpose of another or others.
F0. Find and run an engram of the pc blunting his own purpose. (If a Quad pc.)
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR NN
CLASS VIII
Exteriorization, bypassed

Symptoms
Pc or pre-OT went exterior and the auditor kept on auditing when he should have stopped right there, pc went back in or got upset about it.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 14
CLASS VIII

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

Int RD if the pc hasn’t had any yet. If he has, then:

1. Date/Locate the point of exteriorization.
2. Acknowledge pc’s release in last session. NOTE: If pc is still upset, the Int RD needs to be repaired.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR OO
CLASS VIII
F/Ns bypassed in session

Symptoms
Auditor went by F/Ns on the same subject. TA was low, pc cognited. TA then went up on same subject.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 15
CLASS VIII

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

1. Rehab the F/N by asking “On the process (described) how many times were you released? “
2. Indicate the overrun.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR PP
CLASS VIII

F/N packed up

Symptoms
Case has ceased to F/N.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 16
CLASS VIII

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

1. Handle as per C/S Ser 34 “NON F/N CASES.”
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR QQ
CLASS VIII

Exteriorization, case cannot

Symptoms
Case doesn’t exteriorize at a level it should.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 17
CLASS VIII

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

1. Assess: Exteriorization
Death
Release
Fear
Havingness
Nothing
Going off
Responsibility
Dizziness.

2. Prepcheck what assessed out.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR QQQ
CLASS VIII
Exteriorization

Symptoms
Bypassed in this or former session.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 170
CLASS VIII

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

1. C/S inspects the folder and orders an Interiorization Rundown.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR RR
CLASS VIII
Money, has troubles with

Symptoms
Cannot buy training or processing.
Has money troubles.
Wastes money.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 18
CLASS VIII

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

LM 1

1. Assess: Beggarized
Pauperized
Poor
Rich
Broke
Money
Power
Buying
Poverty
Capital
Accounts
Embezzlement
Waste

2. Prepcheck the items that read in order of size of read.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR SS
CLASS VIII
Solid, bank gone solid

Symptoms
Engrams, masses feel too solid to pc.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 19
CLASS VIII

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

1. L3B, Method 3, and handle. (Also can be done by Dn auditor.)
2. Then on to Dianetic C/S to handle any pictures and masses.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR TT
CLASS VIII
Process split by a break

Symptoms
A break was taken or a session ended without a major action completed. OR TA went up the moment the session was resumed or the process in next session was started again.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 20
CLASS VIII

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

1. Check to see if the process went release out of session.
If so, rehab the F/N.
If no F/N to be had then run ruds “Between sessions_____.” to F/N and
finish the process.
If TA high, do not do rods. Instead assess Short Hi-Lo TA List (C/S Ser 53) and
handle.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR UU
CLASS VIII
Gains invalidated

Symptoms
Pc roller-coasters after an apparently good session.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 21
CLASS VIII

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

1. Check for invalidation “Since last session has anything been invalidated.”
If no F/N run “Since last session has anything been suppressed.”
If no F/N do Green Form. No lists. Itsa earlier itsa only.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR VV
CLASS VIII

Resistive case
(Can be used more than once so long as same item does not get used again after being handled.)

Symptoms
Thick review folder
Roller-coasters
Complains
Blows courses or orgs
Long sessions
Hard to get F/Ns
Doesn’t want auditing
Makes trouble for auditors
Does not respond to auditing.
_____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 22
CLASS VIII
Pc or pre-OT: Date:_________________
Auditor: Time: ________________

Assess 7 cases
Separate RUDS & GRADES
Do not state “Resistive Cases” but “Special Cases,” HCOB 23/9/68 Issue II.

(a) Does not want auditing
(b) Pretending training or grades not attained
(c) Has not had auditing
(d) Seeking the same thrill attained from drugs
(e) Has taken drugs
(f) Former therapy before Scientology
(g) Has been part of earlier practices
(h) Out of valence
(i) Continuously committing overts in Scientology
(j) Audited with prior grades out
(k) Audited with rudiments out
ARC Brk_____ PTPs_____ Withholds_____ Ovt_____
(l) Has an engram exactly matching PT dangers
(m) Seriously physically ill

OR assess list of HCOB 30 June 71R “Expanded GF 40RB” Method 5 and fully handle per the list instructions.

The following C/Ses are included here to be referred to in using HCOB 30 June 71R “Expanded GF 40RB.”
_____________________________________________________________________

RESISTIVE CASES 22A

(a) Discuss, in session start why he or she doesn’t want auditing and identify the cause, as it arises, ARC Brk, PTP or missed W/H and handle.

Don’t fail to pull the M/W/H if pc natters. Don’t call it an ARC break.
_____________________________________________________________________

RESISTIVE CASES 22B

(b) 3 Way or Quad Recall
F1. Recall another pretending to you.
F2. Recall you pretending to another.
F3. Recall another pretending to another or others.
F0. Recall pretending to yourself.
F1. Locate an incident containing pain and unconsciousness of another pretending to you.
F2. Locate an incident containing pain and unconsciousness of you pretending to another.
F3. Locate an incident containing pain and unconsciousness of another pretending to another or others.
F0. Locate an incident containing pain and unconsciousness of you pretending to yourself.

RESISTIVE CASE 22C

(c) List and null who or what would prevent auditing? To one item.
____________________________________________________________________

RESISTIVE CASE 220D OR E

(d) or (e)

1. Rehab drugs. Get how many times released for each type of drug to F/N.

2. 3 Way or Quad Recall
F1. Recall another giving you drugs.
F2. Recall giving drugs to another.
F3. Recall another giving drugs to another or others.
F0. Recall giving yourself drugs.
3. 3 Way or Quad Secondaries per C/S 12 Commands.
4. 3 Way or Quad Engrams, R3R
F1. Locate an incident containing pain and unconsciousness of another giving you drugs.
F2. Locate an incident containing pain and unconsciousness of you giving drugs to another.
F3. Locate an incident containing pain and unconsciousness of another giving drugs to another or others.
F0. Locate an incident containing pain and unconsciousness of giving yourself drugs.

Run engrams by the book. Then to Dn auditor for Dn Drug Rundown.
____________________________________________________________________

RESISTIVE CASES 220E (1)
Drugs

Symptoms
Registers on the meter as having taken drugs.
No F/N on having taken drugs.
Has overts on drugs if won’t rehab.

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

1. Get in ruds with attention to missed withholds and overts. Look for R/S, clean to basic.
2. Rehab any and all drugs.
____________________________________________________________________

RESISTIVE CASES 220F

(f) 3 Way or Quad Recall
F1. Recall another giving a former therapy to you.
F2. Recall giving a former therapy to another.
F3. Recall another giving a former therapy to another or others.
F0. Recall giving a former therapy to yourself.
3 Way or Quad Engrams, R3R, by the book.
F1. Locate an incident containing pain and unconsciousness of another giving a former therapy to you.
F2. Locate an incident containing pain and unconsciousness of you giving therapy to another.
F3. Locate an incident containing pain and unconsciousness of another giving therapy to another or others.

F0. Locate an incident containing pain and unconsciousness of you giving a former therapy to yourself.
_____________________________________________________________________

RESISTIVE CASES 220G

(g) 3 Way or Quad Recall
F1. Recall another forcing an earlier practice on you.
F2. Recall you forcing an earlier practice on another.
F3. Recall another forcing an earlier practice on another or others.
F0. Recall forcing an earlier practice on yourself.

3 Way Engrams, R3R, by the book.
F1. Locate an incident containing pain and unconsciousness of another forcing an earlier practice on you.
F2. Locate an incident containing pain and unconsciousness of you forcing an earlier practice on another.
F3. Locate an incident containing pain and unconsciousness of another forcing an earlier practice on another or others.
F0. Locate an incident containing pain and unconsciousness of you forcing an earlier practice on yourself.
_____________________________________________________________________

RESISTIVE CASE 220H

OUT OF VALENCE (For Section K of Expanded GF 40RB.)

1. Assess LX3.

2. Handle all significantly reading items in order of read by 3 Way or Quad Recall, 3 Way or Quad Engrams on each item.

3. Continue as above with LX2 then LX1. End off when pc has a marked change in valence.

If no valence change on LX lists then continue with 3 Way or Quad Recall, 3 Way or Quad Engrams on being someone else per 4 and 5 below.

4. 3 Way or Quad Recall each leg to F/N.
F1. Recall another causing you to be someone else.
F2. Recall you causing another to be someone else.
F3. Recall another causing another or others to be someone else.
F0. Recall causing yourself to be someone e/se.

5. 3 Way or Quad Engrams
F1. Locate an incident containing pain and unconsciousness of another causing you to be someone e/se. R3R to erasure and F/N.
F2. Locate an incident containing pain and unconsciousness of you causing another to be someone else. R3R to erasure and F/N.
F3. Locate an incident containing pain and unconsciousness of another causing another or others to be someone else. R3R to erasure and F/N.
F0. Locate an incident containing pain and unconsciousness of you causing yourself to be someone else.
_____________________________________________________________________

C/S 220H (1)

3 Way or Quad Recall
F1 . “Recall another causing you to take the attitude of (LX3 item).”
F2. “Recall you causing another to take the attitude of (LX3 item).”
F3. “Recall another causing another or others to take the attitude of (LX3 item).”
F0. “Recall causing yourself to take the attitude of (LX3 item).”

3 Way or Quad Engrams (Standard R3R)
F1. “Locate an incident of another causing you to take the attitude of (LX3 item).”

F2. “Locate an incident of your causing another to take the attitude of (LX3 item).”
F3. “Locate an incident of another causing another or others to take the attitude of (LX3 item).”
F0. “Locate an incident of you causing yourself to take the attitude of (LX3 item).”
_____________________________________________________________________

C/S 220H (2)
CLASS VIII

Pc or pre-OT: Date:_________________
Auditor: Time: ________________

1. Fly a rudiment to F/N.

2. Assess LX2 (or use existing list if previously assessed. Handle in order of read. )

3 Way or Quad Recall
F1. “Recall another causing you to feel (LX2 item).”
F2. “Recall you causing another (to feel) (LX2 item).”
F3. “Recall another causing another or others (to feel) (LX2 item).”
F0. “Recall causing yourself to feel (LX2 item).”

3 Way or Quad Secondaries
F1. “Locate an incident of another causing you to feel (LX2 item).”
F2. “Locate an incident of you causing another (to feel) (LX2 item).”
F3. “Locate an incident of another causing another or others (to feel) (LX2 item).”
F0. “Locate an incident of you causing yourself to feel (LX2 item). “
_____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 220H (3)
CLASS VIII

Pc or pre-OT: Date:_________________
Auditor: Time: ________________

1. Fly rudiments to F/N.
2. Assess LX1 (omit any item handled earlier)—run 3 Way or Quad Recall and Engrams.
F1. Run “Recall another causing you to be (LX1 item).”
F2. Run “Recall you causing another to be (LX1 item).”
F3. Run “Recall another causing another to be (LX1 item).”
F0. “Recall causing yourself to be (LX1 item).”

F1. Find and run an engram of “ another causing you to be (LX1 item).”
F2. Find and run an engram of “you (LX1 item)ing somebody or something.”
F3. Find and run an engram of “another (LX1 item)ing another.”
F0. Find and run an engram of “you causing yourself (LX1 item).”
_____________________________________________________________________

RESISTIVE CASES 220H (4)

LX1 assessed to grief or loss.

Pc or pre-OT: Date:_________________
Auditor: Time: ________________

1. Fly ruds to F/N, check for any protest.
2. Run “Recall grief” to F/N.
3. Find and run a secondary or chain of grief and loss to pc or pre-OT.
4. Find and run overt secondary or chain of causing grief and loss.

5. Find and run a secondary or chain of another causing grief and loss to another.
6. Find and run a secondary or chain of you causing yourself grief and loss.
_____________________________________________________________________

RESISTIVE CASES 22I

CONTINUOUS OVERTS.

List and null “What are you trying to prevent” by the laws of listing and nulling to one item.
If 2 or more read on 1st nulling, extend the list until only 1 reads when all are called.
_____________________________________________________________________

RESISTIVE CASES 22J

AUDITED WITH PRIOR GRADES OUT.

Check sub-zeros, grades up to IV and run those not previously run.
_____________________________________________________________________

RESISTIVE CASES 22K

AUDITED WITH RUDIMENTS OUT.

Run each to F/N: In auditing have you had an ARC break.
(Itsa, earlier itsa, ARCU CDEI.)

In auditing have you had a problem?
(Itsa earlier itsa.)

In auditing have you had a withhold?
(Itsa earlier itsa and WHO nearly found out?)
_____________________________________________________________________

RESISTIVE CASES 220K (1)

AUDITED WITH RUDIMENTS OUT.

Run each to F/N:
1. In auditing have you been audited with an/a _____ARC Brk, PTP, withhold.
On ARC Brk use ARCU CDEINR itsa earlier similar itsa to F/N.
On PTP handle with itsa earlier similar itsa to F/N.
On withholds, who nearly found out, itsa earlier similar itsa to F/N.
2. Then “Have you audited someone over an “ ARC Brk, PTP, withhold, each to F/N.
_____________________________________________________________________

RESISTIVE CASES 220K (2)

AUDITED WITH RUDIMENTS OUT.

Assessed to ARC breaks
1. Prepcheck ARC breaks.
2. If no good indicators at end trace back breaks by ARCU CDEINR.
Itsa earlier similar itsa.
_____________________________________________________________________

RESISTIVE CASES 22L

Engram matching PT dangers
(Please use LRH C/S YYY, C/S 250C, “Environmental Menace”)

RESISTIVE CASES 22M

SERIOUSLY PHYSICALLY ILL.

Get a competent medical analysis. When well or if no improvement, find and audit any engrams or chain to F/N, R3R Triple or Quad.
(Ruds do not have to be flown.) (Be careful in auditing a person running a fever, audit lightly. Do not force them into anything.)
_____________________________________________________________________

RESISTIVE CASES 220M (1)
Had been physically ill.
Protesting the item.

Pc or pre-OT: Date:_________________
Auditor: Time: ________________

1. Fly ruds to F/N, check protest on illness item. If so, handle protest fully, (itsa earlier similar itsa). If item still reads, find and run an illness engram chain to F/N.

You can’t run a recall process on illness or engrams. It is too much. If it doesn’t read on illness reassess and send back to C/S.
_____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR YYY
CLASS VIII
S & D WSU

Symptoms
Reads on Green Form as PTS.
Been ill.
_____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 250
INSTRUCTIONS TO THE AUDITOR

Pc or pre-OT: Date:_________________
Auditor: Time: ________________

1. PTS interview per C/S Series 79 or HCOB 10 Aug 73.
2. 3 S & Ds, if necessary.
_____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR YYY
CLASS VIII
Flubbed S & D.

Symptoms
Singular item has been represented.
_____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 250A
CLASS VIII

Pc or pre-OT: Date:_________________
Auditor: Time: ________________

1. Renull the list, not the represent list. Indicate the item to the pc. Indicate error of represent. Handle any PTPs and missed withholds.

2. Then get on with the grade or section.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR YYY
CLASS VIII

Illness

Symptoms
Pc PTS.
Unskilled L&N auditor.
Pc has had S & D.
WSU in the past which were correct. (S & Ds being a limited process.)
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 250B
CLASS VIII

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

1. Fly a rud.
2. Assess: Difficulties
Being suppressed
Attacks
Enemies
Suppressing
Incomplete cycles
Unmocking
Defense
Protest
Make nothing of
Withdrawing from
3. Prepcheck each reading item in order of size of read to F/N. Being careful to handle any ARC breaks.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR YYY
CLASS VIII
Environmental menace

Symptoms
Pc or pre-OT PTS
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 250C
CLASS VIII

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

1. Fly each rud to F/N.
2. Find the environmental menace to the pc just by discussion. It’s the obvious one. It is a situation that is wanted, not an item.
3. Find an engram containing a situation that exactly matches the PT situation found in 2.
4. Run subject of engram three ways or quad.
F1. “Locate an engram that matches PT dangers.”
(Use as command 1, then 2, 3, 4, etc.) R3R.
F2. “A time when you gave another such an engram.” R3R.
F3. “A time when another gave another or others such an engram.” R3R.
F0. A time when you gave yourself such an engram.” R3R.

CASE SUPERVISOR ZZZ
CLASS VIII
Assists

Symptoms
Had a severe injury.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 260
CLASS VIII

Handle as per HCOB 23 July 71—”Assists,” Section “Injury Rundown.”

1. Touch Assist.
2. Contact Assist.
3. L1C on the injured member.
4. Then R3R on the injury incident.

Usual Dianetic actions would follow as necessary.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR ZZZ
CLASS VIII
Unwarranted Sec Checks

Symptoms
No Green Form done to indicate pc should have a Joburg.
Run past many free needles.
____________________________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR 260D
CLASS VIII

Pc or pre-OT: Date:________________
Auditor: Time: _______________

1. Do a Prepcheck on Joburg or Sec Checks, whichever reads.

2. Clean up this evaluation and needless action and indicate to the pc or pre-OT it was needless.

3. L1R.

4. Pc or pre-OT to next grade or action.
____________________________________________________________________



CLASS VIII
CASE SUPERVISOR CHART

SYMPTOM DIRECTION PIGEON
SYMPTOM NO. NO. HOLE
Alcohol KK 11 29
All Black CCC 300A 5
ARC Break, Resistive Case VVV 220K(2) 62
Assist III 900C 21
Assist, Has a Severe Injury ZZZ 260 66
Bad Session II 9 17
Bad Indicators BB 2 2

SYMPTOM DIRECTION PIGEON
SYMPTOM NO. NO. HOLE
Bad Auditing, Previous FF 6 11
Blows, Course or Org VV 22 41
Breaks in Session TT 20 39
Critical Pc GG 7 12
Crossed Rudiments HH 8 13
Drugs LL 12 30
Drugs, Poor Ethics History VVV 220E(1) 47
Drugs, No F/N on Rehabs VVV 220E(1) 47
Engram LX1 VVV 220H(3) 53
Engram Matching PT Dangers VVV 22L 59
Ethics, Poor History VVV 220E(1) 47
Exteriorization, Case Cannot QQ 17 35
Exteriorization Bypassed NN 14 32
Exteriorization, Overrun QQQ 170 36
F/N, Bypassed in Session OO 15 33
F/N, Complaints About EE 5 10
F/N, Packed Up PP 16 34
Gains Invalidated UU 21 40
Green Form CCC 300 4
Green Form or Ruds CC 3 3
High TA, Chronic DDD 400 8
High TA, Ruds DD 4 7
Ill, Physically Ill YYY 250B 64
Incomplete Actions III 900 18
Invalidation of Gains UU 21 40

List Errors
List Errors in
1. Lists Recent JJ 10A 22
2. Earlier List Available JJ 10B 23
3. Old Earlier List Not Available JJ 10C 24
4. Recent Lists Not Available JJ 10D 25
5. Item but no F/N JJJ 100E 26
6. S&D, List Error JJJ 100H 27
7. Persistent Item JJJ 100J 28

LX3, Assessment Engram VVV 200H(1) 51
LX2, Assessment Secondary VVV 220H(2) 52
LX1, Assessment Engram VVV 220H(3) 53
Long Session VV 22 41

SYMPTOM DIRECTION PIGEON
SYMPTOM NO. NO. HOLE
Money, Has Problem With RR 18 37

Out Ruds DDD 400A 9
Out Ruds, ARC Break Needle HHH 800B 16

Process Split by a Break TT 20 39
PTP, Repeating HHH 800B 16
PTS, Environmental Menace YYY 250C 65

Resistive Cases
Assessment 7 Cases VV 22 41
Doesn’t Want Auditing VV 22A 42
Recall Pretending to F/N VV 22B 43
Prevent Auditing Auditing VV 22C 44
Drugs VVV 220D + E 45
Drugs Poor Ethics VVV 220E(1) 46
Drugs Overts VVV 220E(1) 47
Former Therapy VVV 220F 48
Earlier Practices VVV 220G 49
Out Valence VVV 220H 50
LX1 List VVV 220H(3) 53
LX1, Assessment to Grief or Loss VVV 220H(4) 54
Overts VV 22I 55
Grades VV 22J 56
Rudiments VV 22K 57
Rudiments VVV 220K(1) 58
Physically Ill VV 22M 60
Had been Physically Ill VVV 220M(1) 61
ARC Breaks VVV 220K(2) 62
Rock slam, Hard to Clean III 900A 19
Rock slam, At the Examiner III 900B 20
Roller-Coaster VV 22 41
Rudiments, Resistive Case VV 22I 55
To F/N AA 1 1
OR Green Form CC 3 3
Fly All BB 2 2
Protesting in Session HHH 800 14

S&D
List Errors JJJ 100H 27
WSU YYY 250 61
Flubbed YYY 250A 61
Unskilled Auditor YYY 250B 62
Sec Checks ZZZ 260D 65
Secondary LX1, Grief and Loss VVV 220H(4) 54

SYMPTOM DIRECTION PIGEON
SYMPTOM NO. NO. HOLE
Solid, Bank gone Solid SS 19 38

Thick Folder, Resistive Case VV 22 41
Tiredness MM 13 31

Unwarranted Sec Checks ZZZ 260D 65

Valence Recall another Person,
Engram or Chain VVV 220H 50


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:nt
Copyright © 1971, 1975
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 14 SEPTEMBER 1971R
REVISED 19 JULY 1978
Remimeo
Also Dn Text
(Revisions in this type style)

C/S Series 59R

DIANETIC LIST ERRORS


It can happen that a Dianetic list of somatics, pains, emotions and attitudes can act as a list under the meaning of the Laws of Listing and Nulling as per HCOB I August 68.

The most violent session ARC Brks occur because of list errors under the meaning of listing and nulling. Other session ARC Brks even under withholds are not as violent as those occurring because of listing errors.

Therefore when a violent or even a “total-apathy-won’t-answer” session upset has occurred in Dianetics, one must suspect that the preclear is reacting under the laws of listing and nulling and that he conceives such an error to have been made.

The repair action is to assess the prepared list which corrects listing errors. This is L4BRA—HCOB 15 Dec 68 amended to 18 March 71.

It is used “On Dianetics lists” as the start of each of its questions when employed for this purpose.

When a pc has not done well on Dianetics and when no other reason can be found the C/S should suspect some listing error and order an L4BRA to be done “On Dianetic lists “ at the start of each question.

Each read obtained on the list is carried earlier similar to F/N as per HCOB 14 Mar 71 “F/N Everything” or, preferably the list is found in the folder and properly handled in accordance with what read on L4BRA.

Dianetic lists can be carried to an item that blows down and F/Ns.

This does not mean the item found is now wholly clean. Even though it F/Ned it will in most cases need to be run on secondaries and/or engrams (R3RA Quad) to erasure and full Dianetic end phenomena. (Ref: New Era Dianetics Series 1 through 18.)

A C/S must be alert to the fact that:

(a) Extreme upsets and deep apathies are almost always list errors.

(b) That a Dianetic list can be conceived to be a formal list and can behave that way.

(c) L4BRA is the correction list used in such cases.

(d) Laws of Listing and Nulling HCOB 1 August 1968 can sometimes apply to Dianetic lists.

Very few Dianetic lists behave this way but when they do they must be handled as above.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:nt.rd.lfg
Copyright © 1971, 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

Remimeo REVISED 1 APRIL 1978
PR Hats (Revision in this type style)
Auditors
TONE SCALE IN FULL

TONE SCALE EXPANDED KNOW TO MYSTERY SCALE
SERENITY OF BEINGNESS 40.0 KNOW
POSTULATES 30.0 NOT KNOW
GAMES 22.0 KNOW ABOUT
ACTION 20.0 LOOK
EXHILARATION 8.0 PLUS EMOTION
AESTHETIC 6.0
ENTHUSIASM 4.0
CHEERFULNESS 3.5
STRONG INTEREST 3.3
CONSERVATISM 3.0
MILD INTEREST 2.9
CONTENTED 2.8
DISINTERESTED 2.6
BOREDOM 2.5
MONOTONY 2.4
ANTAGONISM 2.0 MINUS EMOTION
HOSTILITY 1.9
PAIN 1.8
ANGER 1.5
HATE 1.4
RESENTMENT 1.3
NO SYMPATHY 1.2
UNEXPRESSED RESENTMENT 1.15
COVERT HOSTILITY 1.1
ANXIETY 1.02
FEAR 1.0
DESPAIR .98
TERROR .96
NUMB .94
SYMPATHY .9
PROPITIATION—(Higher Toned—Selectively Gives) .8
GRIEF .5
MAKING AMENDS—(Propitiation—Can’t W/H Anything) .375
UNDESERVING .3
SELF-ABASEMENT .2
VICTIM .1
HOPELESS .07
APATHY .05
USELESS .03
DYING .01
BODY DEATH 0.0
FAILURE -0.01
PITY -0.1
SHAME—(BEING OTHER BODIES) -0.2
ACCOUNTABLE -0.7
BLAME—(PUNISHING OTHER BODIES) -1.0
REGRET—(RESPONSIBILITY AS BLAME) -1.3
CONTROLLING BODIES - 1.5 EFFORT
PROTECTING BODIES -2.2
OWNING BODIES -3.0 THINK
APPROVAL FROM BODIES -3.5
NEEDING BODIES -4.0 SYMBOLS
WORSHIPPING BODIES -5.0 EAT
SACRIFICE -6.0 SEX
HIDING -8.0 MYSTERY
BEING OBJECTS - 10.0 WAIT
BEING NOTHING -20.0 UNCONSCIOUS
CAN’T HIDE -30.0
TOTAL FAILURE -40.0 UNKNOWABLE


LRH:ams.dr L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1971,1978 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 24 OCTOBER 1971R
REVISED 26 JANUARY 1977
Remimeo
Add to
E-Meter Books (Revisions in this type style)
Chkshts (References to footplates have been deleted.)


FALSE TA


Some pcs have a very difficult time in auditing due solely to can (electrode) outnesses.

Some auditors have heavy losses because they do not realize the troubles that can come from electrodes and thus remedy them.

TA USE

The TA must be between 2 and 3 for a correct F/N.

When the TA is reading falsely a pc can be butchered.

Example: Auditor talking the TA down. It gets to “3.1” by his meter. So he gets the pc to talk a bit more to get the TA between 2 and 3 and F/N. The TA suddenly rises to 3.8.

Pc and auditor go desperate. What has happened is that the TA was a false read. It was really reading 2.9 and F/Ning but for reasons given below it read “3.1.” Thus the auditor overran the F/N and by keeping on invalidated the release, pulled the pc’s attention out of session and demanded more than the pc had to give.

Example: Auditor two-way communicating with pc to get the TA up from “1.8.” The TA suddenly sinks to 1.6, pc goes into apathy.

What happened was a missed F/N. For reasons covered below the TA at 1.8 was false and was really at 2.1 and F/Ning.

Example: Pc being asked for an earlier similar incident because TA is at “4.0.” Pc can’t get one, gets desperate, TA goes to 5.0.

For reasons given below the TA was at 3.0 but was reading falsely at “4.0.”

Some cases get upset at the very idea of F/N when these mistakes are made.

More than one case has missed all his wins for a year because of a false TA.

So it is very important to know how a false TA comes about and how to avoid it.

A properly set up meter with cans (electrodes) fitted to a pc who is holding them properly IS AL WA YS CORRECT.

However, totally false tone arm readings can exist and an auditor must know how these come about.

TRIM

A meter can be improperly trimmed (not set at 2.0 with the trim knob) and can give a false TA position.

Further, when a meter is not left on a minute or two before trimming, it can drift in the session and give a slightly false TA.

The trim can be quietly checked in mid-session by snapping out the jack where the cord goes into the box and putting the TA on 2, seeing if the needle is now on SET. If
not, the trim knob can be moved to adjust it. The jack is quietly slipped back in. All without distracting the pc.

DISCHARGED

A cadmium cell meter discharges very suddenly when it does go flat.

In mid-session the meter can run out of battery. The TA will cease to act well and may go very false.

The remedy is to keep a meter charged at least one hour for every 10 of auditing for 240 AC volt charging current, or 2 hours for every 10 of auditing on a 110 AC volt charging current.

A meter lasts much longer than this in practice but the above is very safe.

Before each session snap the knob over to TEST. The needle should hit hard on the right side of the face. It can even bounce. This guarantees lots of charge in the battery and no chance of a meter going flat in session.

If the needle doesn’t snap to the right hard or if it doesn’t quite get there on TEST, then that meter will go flat in mid-session and give false TA and no reads or TA on hot subjects.

ONE-HAND ELECTRODE

A single hand electrode with two terminals separated by a rubber works. BUT it always gives a falsely high TA.

A Solo auditor who does not know this can get a release point and go half mad wondering why he is F/Ning at 4.0!

The answer is to make a “single hand” electrode out of two small cans (about 3 3/4 inches by 2 1/8 inches or 9 1/2 cm by 5 1/2 cm) (or even smaller for a very small handed pc). Glue a thin circle of foam rubber solidly to the bottom of one can so it reaches out slightly around the bottom. (Don’t glue it up the sides.)

Put the alligator jaw clips one to each can. Now put the can bottoms together and hold them in one hand. Mark the TA (1)—meaning one hand (such as 3.75 (1) ). Now take the cans one in each hand and mark the TA (2)—meaning two hands (such as 3.0 (2) ).

Audit with them in one hand. Keep your worksheets with (1) marks (such as 3.5 (1) ). Check at start and middle and end by taking a can in each hand and putting down the 2 can read (such as 2.5 (2) ).

It is too much trouble to totally change cans and the distraction can change the TA read.

This two small can arrangement is not quite accurate. It gives a lower TA than big cans. But the difference is slight. It can scare you with a 1.9 when trim is 2.0 and real TA is 2.0. If this happens check with big cans.

(As an added tip a Solo auditor usually keeps the back of his hand on his leg while Solo auditing. The small 7 1/2 volt current gives a tingle to the leg that is distracting when one’s hand is moist. Put a piece of foam rubber in a plastic sack. Lay the sack on the leg, put your hand on this pad. It insulates the area and is very comfortable. )

MOIST HANDS

When a pc’s hands sweat a lot you will get a low TA.

Contrary to 19th century superstition the meter does not work on sweat. Very sweaty hands as found on nervous persons gives a false TA. It goes low.

Many “low TA cases” are just sweaty hand cases.

Paper handkerchiefs (Kleenex) are a standard item for an auditing room—for grief charges and burning eyes, etc. These should be available.

If the TA is low, check if the pc’s hands are wet. If so have him wipe them and get a new read. It is usually found that the 1.6 was really 2.0. Or the 1.6 was really 1.8 and the trim was 1.8 = 2.0.

Have the pc wipe hands, check and correct trim before you bypass all a “low TAs” F/Ns!

TAs can go low. Invalidation of the pc, lousy TRs can drive one low. If so the TA comes back up on repair.

But don’t brand a case a low TA case until you make sure his hands are dried and the meter trimmed.

Also, very small cans or cans too small for the pc can give a slightly low reading.

DRY HANDS

Some pcs have extremely dry hands, usually from industrial chemicals such as chlorine in dishwater or skin scale.

This can give a wildly high TA.

The pc can be worried to death with high TA repairs when in fact he just doesn’t have contact with the electrode.

A quick test is have the pc put the cans under his armpits and you’ll see if it’s his calloused or chemically dried out hands.

ARTHRITIC HANDS

A rare pc is so crippled with arthritis that he doesn’t make contact fully with the cans.

This gives a high TA.

Use wide wrist straps and you’ll get a right read.

SLACK GRIP

Sometimes a rare pc lets his hands go slack on the cans, particularly if they are the wrong size cans, too big.

This gives a mysterious “high TA.” It is false. The TA will come down only to 3.2 and F/N and of course an overrun then really gives a high TA. And the pc goes a bit frantic and begins to believe things don’t erase or release.

Keep the pc’s hands in sight. Check the pc’s grip. Get smaller cans.

CAN SIZE

The most common fault is wrong can size.

For a normal or large handed pc the can size is about 4 7/8ths inches by 2 5/8ths inches or 12 1/2 cm by 7 cm. This can be altered as big as 4 1/2 inches by 3 inches diameter or 11 cm by 8 cm. This is standard.

This can is too large for people with small hands. These should use a can 3 3/4 inches by 2 1/8th inches or 9 cm by 5 cm diameter or thereabouts.

A small child would be lost even with that can. So a small 35 mm film can could be used. This is 2 inches long by 1 3/16ths diameter or 5 cm by 3 cm. This works but watch it as these cans are aluminum. They do work but test for true read with a slightly larger can and then trim to adjust for the aluminum if any different.

Cans of course should be STEEL with a thin tin plating. Regular soup cans.

Can size to match the pc avoids slack can grip or tiring the hands into going slack, giving the auditor 3.2 F/Ns and trouble.

COLD PC

A pc who is too cold sometimes has a falsely high TA.

Wrap him in a blanket or get a warmer auditing room.

The auditing environment is the responsibility of the auditor.

LATE AT NIGHT

Between 2 and 3 AM or late at night a pc’s TA may be very high. The time depends on when he sleeps usually.

This TA will be found normal in regular hours.

RINGS

Rings on the pc’s hands must always be removed. They don’t influence TA but they give a false rock slam.

FLOATING TA

Many an auditor before now has gone a bit mad trying to handle a floating TA. They are not very common and are startling.

What happens is the pc is so released the needle can’t be gotten onto the dial. The needle is swinging wider than the meter dial both ways from center and appears to lay first on one side then the other. The TA can’t be moved fast enough to keep the extreme floating needle on the dial.

This gives a false TA of sorts as it can’t be read.

Some auditors seeing it for the first time have even sent the pc out of the room so they could “adjust” the meter or get another one!

Thus the very highest state of release can be invalidated as where is the TA?

RUSTY CORRODED CANS

You’d think soup was very expensive the way some auditors hold onto old cans.

Corroded cans can falsify TA. Get new ones now and then.

TIGHT SHOES

And then there was the vain lady who wore shoes too small for her feet.

She removed them every session. The session went well each time.

Then she put on her agonizing shoes and went to the Examiner and the C/Ses and auditors all went mad trying to find out why every exam had a high TA.

Tight shoes.

The E-Meter is accurate. It is a lovely instrument.

You have to fit the pc to it.

Good luck.


LRH:PA:nt.lf L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1971, 1977 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Revised by Paulette Ausley

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 12 NOVEMBER 1971RA
Remimeo REVISED 26 JANUARY 1977
E-Meter Books (Revisions in this type style)
Studies
Checksheets FALSE TA ADDITION

(Refers and adds to HCOB 24 Oct 1971R
“False TA.”)

COLD CANS

Regardless of can size, cold E-Meter electrodes tend to give a much higher tone arm reading particularly on some pcs.

Until the cans warm up, the reading is generally false and is false in the direction of high.

A chilled pc almost always has a high TA until he or she gets warm. Just throwing a coat over the pc’s shoulders can bring down a TA in a cool room. But some pcs are “cool blooded” and the shock of ice cold cans can drive the TA up and it takes a while to drift down.

This has a great effect on examinations where the cans are used very briefly.

A practice which gets around this is for the auditor or Examiner to hold the cans briefly until they are warm and then give them to the pc. A variation is for the auditor or Examiner to put the cans under his armpits while setting up. This warms them.

There are probably many other ways to warm up cans to body temperature.

FOOTPLATES

Tests show that footplates do not read on the meter. The use of footplates is thereby cancelled.

PCs WHO FALSIFY

Some pcs (rare) take mistaken pride in being able to push the TA up by straining or tensing.

By just moving into the body the TA can be sent up by an otherwise exterior pc.

Some pcs also take a road out by “getting an F/N at will.” They have various tricks that do this, the main one being to “think of something else” and get an F/N.

Any of these (rare) pcs are manifesting out-of-sessionness. They aren’t in session.

The definition of in session is “interested in own case and willing to talk to the auditor.” Remedy that and they cease such tricks.

Usually they aren’t being run on what they are interested in or have comm blocks or withholds or no confidence. They are easy to detect and easy to handle.


LRH:PA:nt L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright (g) 1971, 1973, 1977 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard Revised by
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Paulette Ausley

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 15 FEBRUARY 1972R
REVISED 26 JANUARY 1977
Remimeo
All Tech/Qual
Terminals (Revisions in this type style)

FALSE TA ADDITION 2

Ref: HCOB 24 Oct 71R FALSE TA
HCOB 12 Nov 71RA FALSE TA
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 HCOB 24 Oct 71R and Addition 12 Nov 71RA and this HCOB “False TA,” C/S Series 53 and the Hi-Lo TA Assessment.

The commonest sources of high TA are PROTEST, OVERTS and out INTERIORIZATION RD and too big or too small cans.

The commonest sources of low TA are overwhelming auditor TRs or wet sweaty hands.

The 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.nt
Copyright © 1972, 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 18 FEBRUARY 1972R
Issue I
REVISED 26 JANUARY 1977
Remimeo
(Revisions in this type style)
(References for footplates have been deleted.)

FALSE TA ADDITION 3

(There are now four False TA HCOBs including this one.
These were issued as more data was uncovered:

HCOB 24 Oct 71R FALSE TA
HCOB 12 Nov 71RA FALSE TA ADDITION
HCOB15 Feb 72R FALSE TA ADDITION 2
and this one
HCOB18 Feb 72R 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.

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.

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

Revised by
Paulette Ausley
LRH:PA:nt
Copyright © 1972, 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 19 MARCH 1972
Remimeo
Ethics
C/SING OR AUDITING WITHOUT
FOLDER STUDY

A two weeks loss of pay and a suspension of certs is a penalty for any C/S or auditor who acts on a case

(1) Without an up-to-date FS

(2) Without an FES done on auditing, and:

(3) Without a preliminary study of the folder before C/Sing or auditing
(4) Who C/Ses for or delivers Quickie auditing of any level for “completion”

(5) Who does not work for the product of a fully and utterly completed pc on that grade

(6) Who falsifies a statistic or a worksheet.

FES Units must exist to FES folders for C/Ses.

WE MUST END ALL QUICKIE TENDENCIES IN C/Ses AND AUDITORS.

Failure to complete the pc totally and utterly on any level can cost us our friends.

Bonuses may only be paid to C/Ses and auditors on 25 CHAIR HOURS OR MORE A WEEK PLUS A LESSER BONUS FOR ADMIN TIME, NOT VALID WITHOUT THE CHAIR HOURS.

NO bonuses of any kind may be paid henceforth to C/Ses or auditors for “completions” as these lead to Quickie actions which then reduce the power inherent in auditing.

Auditing can perform miracles. But only in HONEST HANDS.

A Comm Ev may be requested and must be given in the event of false accusation.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:mes
Copyright © 1972
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 4 APRIL 1972R
Issue III
Remimeo REVISED 21 JUNE 1975
Student Hat
Staff Hats (Revision in this type style)

IMPORTANT

ETHICS AND STUDY TECH
(Cancels the issue revised 7 April 72.)

The basic WHY of the majority of cases of post nonperformance of a staff member and OUT TECH in an org stems from misunderstood words.

The primary point that has to be gotten in is study tech.

This is also our bridge to society.

Yet study tech is the tech that includes misunderstood word tech.

Thus if study tech is not in, people on staffs see nothing wrong with hearing or reading orders containing words they do not understand and have no urge to look them up. Further they often feel they do know words that they in fact do not know.

When this situation exists it is next to impossible to get study tech and Word Clearing tech in. For, the orders seeking to get in study tech may contain words the person does not understand. Thus he doesn’t really comply with the orders and study tech does not get in. Thus the ability to hear or read and understand continues to be missing.

Therefore these ethics actions become part of standard ethics.

1. A PERSON MAY BE SUMMONED TO A COURT OF ETHICS OR EXECUTIVE COURT OF ETHICS IF IT BE FOUND THAT HE HAS GONE PAST A WORD HE DOES NOT UNDERSTAND WHEN RECEIVING, HEARING OR READING AN ORDER, HCOB, POLICY LETTER OR TAPE, ANY AND ALL LRH WRITTEN OR PRINTED MATERIALS INCLUDING BOOKS, PABS, DESPATCHES, TELEXES AND MIMEO ISSUES WHICH RESULTED IN A FAILURE TO DO DUTIES OF HIS POST WITHOUT HIS AT ONCE MAKING AN EFFECTIVE EFFORT TO CLEAR THE WORDS ON HIMSELF, WHETHER HE KNEW HE WAS MISSING THEM OR NOT AS THE SOURCE OF HIS INACTION OR DAMAGING ACTIONS.

The charge is NEGLECTING TO CLARIFY WORDS NOT UNDERSTOOD.

2. A STAFF MEMBER WHO DOES NOT USE STUDY TECH OR GET IT KNOWN WHILE STUDYING OR INSTRUCTING MAY BE SUMMONED TO A COURT OF ETHICS OR AN EXECUTIVE COURT OF ETHICS.

The charge is FAILURE TO EMPLOY STUDY TECH.

3. A STUDENT ALTER-ISING OR MISADVISING OTHERS ON THE USE OF STUDY TECH MAY BE SUMMONED BEFORE A COURT OF ETHICS.

The charge is ADVOCATING A MISUSE OR NEGLECT OF PROPER STUDY TECH.

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.

5. ANY PUBLIC DIVISION PERSON, STAFF MEMBER OR SCIENTOLOGIST FOUND USING TERMS, CIRCUMSTANCES OR DATA ON RAW PUBLIC IN PUBLIC LECTURES OR PROMOTION OR IN PR BEYOND THE PUBLIC ABILITY TO GRASP WITHOUT STRESSING STUDY TECH OR AT ONCE TAKING EFFECTIVE MEASURES TO CLARIFY OR RELEASING MATERIALS BROADLY TO A WRONG PUBLIC MAY BE SUMMONED TO A COURT OF ETHICS IF ANY FLAP OR UPSET RESULTS.

The charge is FAILURE TO APPLY STUDY TECH IN DISSEMINATION.


SUPPRESSIVE

Furthermore, as study tech is our primary bridge to society and the basic prevention of out tech and out admin, if any offense as above found guilty in a Court of Ethics is REPEATED and the person has had two such Courts on this offense the person may be summoned before a Committee of Evidence on a charge of COMMITTING AN ACT OR OMISSION UNDERTAKEN TO KNOWINGLY SUPPRESS, REDUCE OR IMPEDE SCIENTOLOGY OR SCIENTOLOGISTS and if found guilty beyond reasonable doubt may be declared a SUPPRESSIVE PERSON and expelled with full penalties.

AXIOM 28

Failures to teach, or use study tech or alterations of study tech are actually offenses against AXIOM 28 as it is applied internally in an org on admin and tech and from the org to society.

Study tech including its technology of Word Clearing is in fact the technology of Axiom 28.

The Axiom (amended) follows:

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.

LRH:ldv L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1972. 1975 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

L. Ron Hubbard

EXECUTIVE DIRECTIVE


LRH ED 176 INT 24 April 1972
Reissued
To: C/O, ED 11 April 1977
Tech Sec Cancels all other
versions of LRH ED 176

Subject: AUDITOR RECOVERY
(Reissued as statistically by far the most
successful version of LRH ED 176 ever issued.
This is the original LRH version of the ED.)

Reference: LRH ED 174 INT STUDY AND TECH BREAKTHROUGH
HCO PL 9 April 72 CORRECT DANGER CONDITION
HCOB 30 Mar 72 PRIMARY CORRECTION RUNDOWN
HCOB 20 Apr 72 C/S Series 78 PRODUCT PURPOSE AND
WHY AND WC ERROR CORRECTION

SITUATION: It quite often happens that an org has an auditor that stops producing or doesn’t produce or blows or ceases to audit.

Investigation has revealed that the auditor situation is similar to that of students who blow for lack of study tech.

Each auditor who lets down has a WHY and has misunderstood words or has not really checked out on his current tech. Thus they foul up, let down or blow.

As orgs sometimes find it hard to get auditors, the situation can be very hard on the C/O or ED and Tech Sec unless it is handled.

STATS: Well Done Auditing Hour stats very low in some orgs and backlogs in many.

WHY: Auditors can ease off or cease auditing for individual WHYs for each auditor.

IDEAL SCENE: All auditors auditing more than their minimum and happily on post.

HANDLING:

1. Compile three lists of auditors (a) who have left but are still in area or (b) who want to leave the org or (c) who are not getting out their hours.

HAS. _________

2. M4 and study the Data Series so as to know what a WHY is, and the above references. Dir of Pers Enhancement (or Qual Sec or as designated or done by the C/O or ED). _________

3. Call in auditors on lists (b) and (c) whether on tech posts or admin. Assess both Trouble Area Lists in the P/L 9 April 72 Issue III. Fly each read with 2-way comm and earlier similar and keep a worksheet of the auditor’s answers. Find the WHY of the letdown in auditing. If not directly apparent from answers given, and is not obvious (such as PTS or missed words or no study tech or has not read materials or other very apparent reasons) then you can list to a BD F/N item the question “What reason do you have for not auditing?” The BD F/N item will be their Why. Write it below the Trouble Area Assessment in the space provided.

DIR OF PERS E OR
THE C/O OR ED
DESIGNATED PERSON. _________

4. See that action is done to remedy the WHY, whatever it was. It will be the 1st Dynamic Danger Formula of that P/L completed.

HAS. _________

5. Do the same with list (a) in 1 above.

SAME PERSON WHO
DID 3 ABOVE. _________

6. See that they apply 1st Dynamic formula.

HAS. _________

7. Try to get some of list (a) to join the org staff.

HAS. _________

8. Get all org auditors and supervisors through the Primary Correction Rundown HCOB 30 Mar 72, allowing for those steps already done previously on LRH ED 174 INT or lists (b) and (c).

QUAL SEC. _________

9. Correct any wrong Whys found using C/S Series 78 HCOB 20 April 72 by correct C/Sing and handling.

ORG C/S. _________

Completely aside from remedying any out tech you may have, and the personal benefit the auditors will receive, this should solve any auditor scarcity problem.

It is a very effective program.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Reissue proposed by
CS-4/5

Approved by
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:JE:mes.lf

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 3 MAY 1972R
REVISED 18 December 1977
Remimeo
Executive Hats
(Revision in this type style)
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.

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 outethics 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.


EXEC OR OFFICERS 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, downstate 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 BYPASS 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.”

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 roller-coaster 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 BPL 31 May 1971RF Issue IV PTS AND SP DETECTION, ROUTING AND HANDLING CHECKSHEET, 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 HCOB 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 first dynamic to

1st 1. Bypass 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.

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 Sep 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

Revision assisted by
Pat Brice LRH Comps
Unit I/C

LRH:PB.dr
Copyright © 1972, 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 16 JUNE 1972RA
Remimeo REVISED 27 FEBRUARY 1975
RE-REVISED 7 DECEMBER 1976
(Revision in this type sty/e)

C/S Series 81RA

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 staledate 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 “AUDITOR’S 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 HCOB 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.

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 auditors may only be HOURS AUDITED with FES and admin hours separately noted.

The D of P has a dual stat. The stats are: (a) Pcs Completed or out of hours routed to Dept. 6. Penalty: If one pa not routed to the Reg. the D of P loses stats for the day. If found that D of P is encouraging small or inadequate Tech Estimates so that the pc frequently runs out of hours, the D of P forfeits his stats for the day. (b) WDAHs is the second D of P stat.

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 the stat of Completed Intensives and Completed Courses. Definition: The Completed Intensives stat is a 12 1/2 hour intensive completed within a period of one week. If an Ex Dn, Introspection RD, L-Rundown, Power (or any other processing which is delivered at other than regular rate) is fully completed and attested in the middle of a 12 1/2 hour intensive, that last intensive may be counted as one on the stat for that week.

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

Revised by
W/O Ron Shafran
in 1975
Revised by
Julie Gillespie
Training & Services Aide in 1976

Approved by

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:JG:RS:nt
Copyright © 1972,1975,1976
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 11 JULY 1973RB
Remimeo RE-REVISED 21 SEPTEMBER 1978
(Revisions in this type style)
(Ellipsis indicates deletion)

ASSIST SUMMARY

(Note: This Bulletin has been revised to incorporate
HCO Bulletin of 6 Jan 1974, ASSIST SUMMARY ADDITION
and to align with vital data on the New Era Dianetics Series.)

Reference:
HCOB 5 Jul 71RB C/S Series 49RB
ASSISTS
HCOB 23 Jul 71R ASSISTS
HCOB 12 Mar 69 1I PHYSICALLY ILL PCs AND PRE-OTs
HCOB 24 Apr 69RA DIANETIC USE
HCOB 14 May 69 SICKNESS
HCOB 23 May 69R AUDITING OUT SESSIONS, NAR
RATIVE VERSUS SOMATIC CHAINS
HCOB 24 Jul 69R SERIOUSLY ILL PCs
HCOB 27 Jul 69 ANTIBIOTICS
HCOB 15 Jan 70 THE USES OF AUDITING
BTB 9 Oct 67R ASSISTS FOR INJURIES
HCOB 2 Jan 71 ILLEGAL AUDITING
HCOB 15 Jul 70R UNRESOLVED PAINS
Reiss. 25 Nov 70,
Rev. 17 Jul 78
BTB 7 Apr 72R TOUCH ASSISTS, CORRECT ONES
HCOB 2 Apr 69R DIANETIC ASSISTS
HCOB 19 Jul 69RA DIANETICS AND ILLNESS
BTB 28 May 74RA FULL ASSIST CHECKLIST FOR
INJURIES AND ILLNESSES
HCOB 24 Apr 69R DIANETIC RESULTS
Any tape or materials on “Prior Confusion”
Any tape or materials on “Postulates and Injuries”
(1952 Autumn, London Lectures, etc.)
HCOBs on mistakes being made in presence of suppression, 1968.
New Era Dianetics Series 1 through 18, especially:
HCOB 28 Jul 71RB New Era Dianetics Series 8R
Rev. 25 Jun 78, DIANETICS, BEGINNING A PC ON
Re-Rev. 22.9.78
HCOB 26 Jun 78RA II New Era Dianetics Series 6RA
ROUTINE 3RA, ENGRAM RUNNING BY
CHAINS
HCOB 18 Jun 78R New Era Dianetics Series 4R
ASSESSMENT AND HOW TO GET THE
ITEM


Injuries, operations, delivery of babies, severe illnesses and periods of intense emotional shock all deserve to be handled with thorough and complete assists.

C/ears, OTs and Dianetic Clears are no longer run on Dianetic auditing assists, secondaries, engrams or narrative incidents. They may however receive Touch Assists and Contact Assists, etc. If further handling is required a New Era Dianetics Special Rundown for OTs has been developed which is available at AOs and Flag. (Ref: BTB 17 Sep 78 BREAKTHROUGH and HCOB 12 Sep 78 DIANETICS FORBIDDEN ON CLEARS AND OTs.)

New Era Dianetics assists may be done, as usual, whenever needed by preclears.

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.

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.

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 F/N.

A TOUCH ASSIST until the person has reestablished communication with the physical part or parts affected. To F/N.

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 F/N.

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 F/N.

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 F/N.

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.

RUN THE INCIDENT ITSELF Narrative R3RA Quad to erasure and full EP. Interest is checked. It is understood here that Flow 1 was the physical incident itself, not necessarily something done to the person but as something that happened to him or her.

(Ref: HCOB 26 June 78RA, New Era Dianetics Series 6RA, R3RA REVISED ENGRAM RUNNING BY CHAINS; HCOB 28 June 78RA, New Era Dianetics Series 7RA, R3RA COMMANDS; HCOB 25 June 78R, New Era Dianetics Series 8R, DIANETICS, BEGINNING A PC ON.)

HANDLE ANY SECONDARY, which is to say emotional reactions, stresses or shocks before, during or after the situation. Narrative secondaries are run R3RA Narrative Quad. Interest is checked. It is important to get the earliest beginning of the incident and to continue to check for earlier beginning each run through. (Ref: HCOB 26 June 78RA, New Era Dianetics Series 6RA, R3RA REVISED ENGRAM RUNNING BY CHAINS; HCOB 28 June 78RA, New Era Dianetics Series 7RA, R3RA COMMANDS; HCOB 25 June 78R, New Era Dianetics Series 8R, DIANETICS, BEGINNING A PC ON.)

PREASSESS THE INCIDENT and take to full Dianetic EP all somatics connected with the incident in which the pc is interested. The full preassessment procedure is given in HCOB 18 June 78R, New Era Dianetics Series 4R, ASSESSMENT AND HOW TO GET THE ITEM and the above issues.

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 already discovered that he had decisions connected to the incident. It is carried to F/N. 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.

(Ref: HCOB 27 June 78RA, New Era Dianetics Series 9R, DRUG HANDLING and HCOB 19 May 69RA, DRUG AND ALCOHOL CASES, PRIOR ASSESSING.)

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 ease 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.

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 present time.

HIGH OR LO TA: A C/S 53 RL 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.

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 can 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 HCOB, HCOB 23 Jut 71R, ASSISTS, 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.

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.

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.lfg.dr
Copyright © 1973, 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 16 NOVEMBER 1973
Remimeo

STUDY TECH & POST

(References: HCO PL 4 April 72 Revised
7 Apr 72 ETHICS AND STUDY TECH and HCO PL
4 April Issue III Revised 7 Apr 72 Addition.)

It has just been found that certain staff could not perform their duties because they knowingly went by misunderstood words in despatches and telexes.

By this willful failure they had dumped their hats on seniors for two years.

They were wiped out on post, could not evaluate or find out what was going on. And spent a bulk of their time sleeping.

THEREFORE:

5. Any person who goes by misunderstood words or abbreviations in telexes or despatches or materials he handles on post without clarifying them SHALL BE SUMMONSED TO A COURT OF ETHICS.

The charge is NEGLECT OF DUTY and the minimum sentence is TREASON.

6. Any auditor failing to write clearly on worksheets or put down enough text to make the worksheet understandable shall be summonsed to a Court of Ethics.

The charge is NO REPORT.

7. Any Case Supervisor who permits an auditor to write incomprehensibly or omit data shall be summonsed to a Court of Ethics.

The charge is CONDONING NEGLECT OF DUTY.


ADDITIONAL PENALTY

Whenever this policy letter or its references are found to be out in an area and not enforced there can be no plea of ignorance and the seniors of the area are themselves liable to Comm Ev.

Violations of study tech and failures to use this technology are responsible for great losses and out tech, out admin and overwork of seniors.

The matter has been regarded too lightly and has caused great losses, blows and has impeded progress on this planet.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:nt
Copyright © 1973
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 23 NOVEMBER 1973RA
Remimeo REVISED 23 APRIL 1975
Tech & Qual REVISED 26 JANUARY 1977
All Levels
All Auditors (Revisions in this type style)
All Tech
Checksheets (References to footplates have been deleted.)

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 pcs’ 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 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.

Vanishing creams don’t work as they are found to actually dry out the skin after repeated application and so produce a falsely high 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 hand cream such as Vaseline Intensive Care Lotion (obtainable from any cosmetics store) not a greasy hand cream or vanishing

A good hand cream rubs all the way into the skin and leaves no excess grease. This restores normal electrical contact.

Such a hand cream would only have to be applied once per session—at session start—as it lasts for a long while. Hand cream is never applied during session.


If a cream leaves smears on a can, it is too heavily applied or too little absorbed.

Hand cream is usually smeared on, rubbed in and can then be thoroughly wiped off. The hands 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.

If the TA then goes too high, use hand 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 HCOB should correct it and in future sessions you should continue the remedy on that pc.

NOTHING in this HCOB excuses the misreading or falsifying of a TA. Get the TA in normal range with this HCOB before you start calling processes ended.

CS-53RJ and the False TA Checklist HCOB 21 Jan 1977 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 hi 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 HCOB 21 Jan 1977 FALSE TA CHECKLIST as references) AND REMEDY THE FALSE TA SITUATION AND THEN RESUME NORMAL AUDITING. He must not go on calling hi or low TA F/Ns just by assuming the TA is false.

Given a contact the meter always tells the truth.


LRH:PA:nt L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1973, 1975. 1977 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Revised by Paulette Ausley

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 28 MARCH 1974R
REVISED 27 OCTOBER 1976
Remimeo CANCELLED 9 MAY 1977
Ex Dn C/Ses CORRECTED 11 MAY 1977
Ex Dn Auditors

Expanded Dianetics Series 21R

EXPANDED DIANETICS DEVELOPMENTS
SINCE THE ORIGINAL LECTURES
CANCELLATION

This issue is cancelled as it was originally written by former CS-4 and some of the data contained in it is incorrect.

All applicable data is now included in BTB 9 May 1977 Issue I, Expanded Dianetics Series 21RA, EXPANDED DIANETICS ACTIONS.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Assisted by
FMO 1709 I/C


LRH:RS:lf
Copyright © 1974, 1976. 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 23 APRIL 1974RA
REVISED 1 OCTOBER 1976
Remimeo
Ex Dn C/Ses (Revisions in this type style)

Expanded Dianetics Series 22RA

EXPANDED DIANETICS
REQUISITES

The recent review of Expanded Dianetics has shown that Ex Dn can be made to fail if the pc is improperly set up for it.

The following checklist is for use by C/Ses to ensure full set-ups for Ex Dn have been done.

Attach to the inside left cover of the folder.

1. Pc has done a full set of TRs 0-4 and 6-9. ________

2. Pc has had a full battery of Objective Processes run to full EP. ________

3. Pc has been given a thorough CS-1 and is grooved in. ________

4. Pc has completed (very) Drug RD which is FLAT. No no-interest but reading items remain unrun. No medicine, drug or stimulant left unrun. ________

5. Pc successful at Dianetic engram running. Can run Dn easily. ________

6. Pc has had Word Clearing Method 1 run very flat to F/N list. ________

7. Pc has been Word Cleared Method 5 on the L-3ExDRB and R3R words. ________

8. Pc has had any high or low TA handled with a C/S 53RJ. ________

9. Pc is not in the Non-Interference area. ________

10. Pc has had any messed up L & N and Why lists corrected. ________

11. Pc has not been left in the middle of a major action or RD to start Ex Dn. ________

12. Pc is getting Ex Dn after Dn (like Drug RDs, etc) but before grades, after grades but before Power, after Power but before Solo and after OT III or after any single grade above OT III. These are the only points Ex Dn is run on a case. ________

Only if you make sure each of these points is fully in will the pc fly on Ex Dn.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
As assisted by CS-5
BDCS:LRH JE nt for the
Copyright © 1974,1976 BOARDS OF DIRECTORS
by L. Ron Hubbard of the
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED CHURCHES OF SCIENTOLOGY

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 31 AUGUST 1974RA
RE-REVISED 9 APRIL 1977
Remimeo
Tech Secs (Revisions in this type style)
Auditors
Registrars CANCELS
HCOB 30 OCT 71
TRIPLE GRADES VS EXPANDED

URGENT

C/S Series 93RA

NEW GRADE CHART


The “NEW” thing to do is the Grade Chart. Everything you are doing should contribute to getting the pc up the Bridge. THIS is the Bridge.

There is a new Grade Chart being prepared which has some changes in it, based on recent discoveries. It is urgent that you know of these in advance.

DRUG RUNDOWN

The effects of an omitted or incomplete Drug RD are severe enough to deny a person any lasting case gain.

This is covered in HCOB 31 May 74 “Unhandled Drugs and Ethics.” Some orgs have taken this HCOB so literally however, that they have taken pcs off Adv Cses Grades, refused to do assists on ill pcs and some showed pcs the HCOB and invaled their gains.

This was not the intention of the HCOB. The C/S Series remain valid.

The Drug RD belongs on the Grade Chart after Life Repair. A Drug RD cannot be done over out ruds and a Life Repair may be necessary to get in a pc’s ruds.

Life Repair is not a prerequisite for the Drug RD, however, and if done is not to be dragged out intensive after intensive. In some cases a pc could not complete Life Repair without a Drug RD.

Following the Drug RD is ARC S/W, then the rest of Dianetics to completion.

QUAD VS EXPANDED GRADES

Expanded Grades are NOT a prerequisite for Power. They may come anywhere on a pc’s program as given in HCOB 5 April 77 “Expanded Grades” including after OT III. Quad Grades are a prerequisite for Power.

EXPANDED DIANETICS

Ex Dn by the way belongs ideally after Grade IV Expanded, but can be done after Dn, after Power but before Solo, and after OT III or any single OT Level above OT III.

Some pcs R/S and have evil purposes to do others in. But no Grade 0 or Grade I or Grade II. What others? Martians?

“Got to secretly do everybody in” probably applies to Apeville some long date ago and he’s never come up to PT.

The best answer is to bring the pc up the Grade Chart to Grade IV then do his Ex Dn unless the pc would need XDN to make it at all. (See HCOB 15 Apr 72 “Expanded Dianetics Series 1R” and HCOB 29 Nov 70 “C/S Series 22.”)

The prerequisites for Ex Dn are covered on HCOB 23 April 74R “Ex Dn Series 22R, Expanded Dianetics Requisites.”

GRADE II

Some orgs specialize in Grade II, especially on org staff. The pc is always getting Confessionals or his O/Ws pulled on so and so.

If you look on the Grade Chart you will find withholds and overts are Grade TWO.

Below Grade Two lies Grade I (Problems) and Grade Zero (Communications). And below that is Dianetics and at the bottom end of Dianetics is the drug handling.

Now how do you expect a fellow who has unhandled drugs (or omitted drug items because of “no interest”) to even know (no Grade 0) that other people are around or that (Grade I) he is caved in with problems he’s never cognited on?

And he’s supposed to have enough responsibility to answer up on Grade II? With real overts and withholds?

This does not mean you must never Sec Check. It does mean that Sec Checks are no substitute for auditing or guarantee of innocence.

Grades are grades and the Grade Chart sequence is correct.

SOLO SET-UPS

Set-ups for Solo are fully covered on HCOB 8 Jan 72RC, Solo C/S Series 11RC.

This will be included as part of Solo on the Grade Chart as it is a vital step.

Pcs won’t make it on Solo if they aren’t set up.

FULL LIST

Here’s the full list of grades showing where the various RDs now offered fit.

GROUP PROCESSING—not mandatory or a prerequisite.

LIFE REPAIR—as needed but not prerequisite for Drug RD. To get ruds in on life.

DRUG RD, means:
TRs 0-4, 6-9—mandatory for a druggie currently on drugs, FLAT.
Full C/S-1—where not done. To fully educate pc.
Objectives—Full battery to full EPs per basic books and early HCOBs on them.
Class VIII Drug Handling—list and rehab all drugs, 3 way recalls, secondaries and engrams of taking and giving drugs.
AESPs on each reading drug—listed separately and handled with R3R, each drug to full F/N assessment of drug list.

“No Interest” drug items—all reading ones run where they exist.

Prior Assessment—AESPs listed separately and run R3R, prior to first drug or alcohol taken.

ARC S/W QUAD.

DIANETICS, means:
C/S 54—complete handling of Pc Assessment Form begun with Drug RD.
Health Form—fully handled to full F/N assessment.

QUAD GRADE 0—as issued.
QUAD GRADE I—as issued.
QUAD GRADE II—as issued.
QUAD GRADE III—as issued.
QUAD GRADE IV—as issued.

EX DN—not mandatory except where pc is a low OCA, an R/Ser (2%), chronically ill or psycho. Means:
Set-ups—per HCOB 23 April 74R, “Ex Dn Series 22R.”
OCA Left Side Handling—as issued.
OCA Right Side Handling—as issued.
All Ev Purps and R/Ses FULLY handled with no shortcuts.

EXPANDED GRADES—Ideally can go after Ex Dn and before Power, but is not a prerequisite for Power (Quad Grades are a prerequisite). Can come after Drug RD, Full Dn RD, Quad Grades, Ex Dn, Power (but before Solo), after OT III or any single OT level on up.

POWER PROCESSING—Grade IV Quad and Drug RD required and as per the Power Checklist.

SOLO GRADE VI, means:
Solo Set-ups—done at SH or AO per Solo C/S Series 11RC.
Solo Auditor’s Course.
Solo Audit Grade VI materials.

CLEARING COURSE
OT I
OT II
OT III
OT VII PROCESSES
OT III EXPANDED
OT IV
OT V
OT VI
FULL OT VII VERIFICATION
OT VIII—when issued.
OT IX on up.

PROGRAMMING

The C/S Series, especially the early HCOBs, numbers 1-13RA, fully cover the use of the Grade Chart in programming.

THE GRADE CHART IS THE BASIC PROGRAMME OF A PC.

This datum has been neglected in some orgs, who have specialized in the new RDs developed since ‘71.

With refinement of repair and corrective actions and the release of new RDs, some may have forgotten that repair is only done to get off the overwhelm so that you can put the pc back on the Grade Chart.

SUMMARY

I thought I’d better fill you in on these changes and how the new Grade Chart lines up. Make full use of this Chart with C/S Series programming tech in and your pcs will fly. Here’s to lots of case gain and rave success stories.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
As assisted by
CS-5
BDCS:LRH:JE:nt.lf for the
Copyright @ 1974, 1976, 1977 BOARDS OF DIRECTORS
by L. Ron Hubbard of the
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED CHURCHES OF SCIENTOLOGY

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 1 NOVEMBER 1974RA
REVISED 5 SEPTEMBER 1978
Remimeo
XDn Spclsts (Revised to correct the definition of a rock slam.
Cl IVs & Above Revisions in this type style.
C/Ss Ellipsis indicates deletion.)
HCO Dept 3 Hats
PTS/SP Detection Crs

ROCK SLAMS AND ROCK SLAMMERS

Reference: HCOB 3 September 1978
DEFINITION OF A ROCK SLAM

A lot of controversy has shown up this year on the subject of R/Ses and R/Sers. Therefore, the following bulletin was compiled from my materials to clarify the matter. My research on this was actually done years ago and remains very valid indeed.

R/Ses

An R/S or rock slam is defined as the crazy, irregular left-right slashing motion of the needle on the E-Meter dial. R/Ses repeat left and right slashes unevenly and savagely, faster than the eye easily follows. The needle is frantic. The width of an R/S depends largely on sensitivity setting. It goes from one-fourth inch to whole dial. But it slams back and forth. It is actually quite startling to see one. IT IS VERY DIFFERENT FROM OTHER METER PHENOMENA.

Recently auditors arriving on Flag were found not to know what an R/S was but were calling dirty needles, dirty reads, rocket reads, body motion and even ticks as R/Ses. That comes from never having been trained on what an R/S is and never having seen one. R/SES ARE UNIQUE IN APPEARANCE. On the other hand, far more serious is the fact that auditors have many times seen R/Ses, didn’t mark them down and didn’t report them! This is a High Crime as it injures society, the org and the person himself (see HCOB 10 Aug 76R “R/Ses, What They Mean”).

Actually this is quite a serious matter because pcs get labelled as R/Sers and get run on evil purposes connected with this “R/S” that isn’t one. You can really foul up a pc that way.

A meter also sometimes “goes crazy” on an R/Ser. You see it work, then it doesn’t read, etc. While this is rare it does happen. Auditors have changed their meters just to find the new one was also crazy. But the R/S will show up through all this. An inoperational meter does not mean you have an R/Ser—you might have just forgotten to charge it or have faulty leads.

ROCK SLAMMERS

In a normal group of 400, the actual percentage of R/Sers is low. It’s about 8 in 400, or 2 - 2 1/2%. Those figures should seem familiar. They are the same percentage for SPs. And that gives you a clue to the identification of an R/Ser.

Where requirements for Scn or SO orgs have been established for R/Ses they apply to the 2 - 2 1/2% of real R/Sers as these are high risks for staff purposes.

These people can of course be salvaged as pcs using Expanded Dianetics. Letting them on staff could be disastrous, however.

A handled R/Ser can be expected to eventually wind up in the same category as a cleared cannibal. His experiential track is too educated in evil and too uneducated in anything else. So even when cleaned up will need a lot of living.

R/Sers are also very expensive people to keep around. They waste the available resources and produce overt products. They cost a fortune in waste, repairs, lost business. They also cost a heartbreaking number of damaged people.


CHECKLIST

To assist you in the identification of R/Sers a checklist of characteristics and their reference has been done.

This checklist is to be used whenever a C/S is called upon to inspect a folder to determine whether a person is an R/Ser. That he R/Ses is the main thing. The other points simply help investigate whether he R/Ses. He doesn’t have to have all these characteristics to be an R/Ser.

1. The R/Ses reported are actual R/Ses and not some other read or broken meter leads, a dusty or worn TA or trim “pot,” or cans in contact with metal such as rings, bracelets, etc. ________

Ref: E-Meter Essentials; Book of E-Meter Drills; The Book Introducing the E-Meter; HCOB 8 Nov 62 “Somatics, How to Tell Terminals and Opposition Terminals” pg 2 and 4; HCOB 6 Dec 62 “R2-10, R2-12, 3GAXX”; BTB 14 Jan 63 “Rings Causing Rock Slams”; HCOB “False TA Series” 24 Oct 71R, 12 Nov 71RA, 15 Feb 72R, 18 Feb 72R, 21 Jan 77R, 23 Nov 73RA .

2. R/Ses have to do with evil thoughts, overts or intentions. ________

3. Pc is slow or no case gain. ________

3A. Pc is in a chronically nattery or critical state. ________

Ref: HCOB 23 Nov 62 “Routine Two-Twelve”; . . . HCOB 6 Dec 62 “R2-10, R2-12, 3GAXX”; HCOB 28 Nov 70 C/S Series 22 “Psychosis”; BPL 31 May 71RG “PTS/SP Detection, Routing 8. Handling Checksheet” and materials. ________

4. Pc chronically ill or who acts most “PTS.” This can be suppressed and hidden from view, however. ________

Ref: HCO PL 15 Nov 70R “HCO and Confessionals”; HCOB 28 Nov 70 C/S Series 22 “Psychosis”; PTS/SP Pack.

4A. He covers up his crimes with lots of PR. ________

5. Pc’s product is consistently an overt act and his activities destructive to others whether they have spotted this or not. ________

Ref: HCO PL 14 Nov 70 Org Series 14 “The Product as an Overt Act”; PTS/SP Pack; HCO Manual of Justice.

6. Pc’s behavior or condition or OCA classifies as psychotic. ________

Ref: HCOB Ex Dn Series and tapes; HCOB 28 Nov 70.

7. The people near him get in trouble. ________

Where some of the answers to this checklist are yes you can be certain an R/S will be found in auditing. HCO handles and Qual programs them for rehabilitation.

LIST ONE R/Ser

There are, for our purposes, two kinds of R/Sers. (a) Those who R/S on subjects not connected with Scn and (b) Those who R/S on subjects connected to Scientology. The latter is a “List One R/Ser” and it is of great importance to us that they be located and moved off lines when they are part of staffs as their intent is solely to destroy us whatever else they say: their long run actions will prove it.

The definition of a List One R/Ser is anyone who has R/Sed on List One. If that is confirmed fully, that’s it. Not all points on the checklist have to be present. The full list of Scientology List One items can be found in HCOB 24 Nov AD 12 “Routine 2-12 List One - Issue One, the Scientology List.”

Where there is any doubt as to the validity of a List One R/S, a verification should be done. The procedure is to vigorously Sec Check the pc on the subject of the reported List One R/S. This Sec Check must be done by an auditor who knows R/Ses and can make lists read and pull W/Hs connected with R/S.


PCs WHO R/S

Pcs who R/S are given Ex Dn. This does not change even though the pc is not an R/Ser. See HCOB C/S Series 93 and HCOB 10 Aug 76R “R/Ses, What They Mean.”

Where a pc R/Ses he will have evil purposes and be on a succumb as a result. R/Ses indicate an area of psychosis which will ruin the pc’s life if allowed to go unhandled.

SUMMARY

This HCOB in no way changes Ex Dn as a requirement for R/Ses or makes it OK not to handle them.

Staff concerned must be able to identify an R/Ser which is different from someone with an R/S.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Assisted by CS-4/5

Revision by

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:dr
Copyright © 1974, 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 16 JANUARY 1975R
REVISED 6 JULY 1978
Remimeo
C/Ses (Revisions in this type style)
IV and VI (Ellipsis indicates deletion)
C/Ses
Class VIII
C/S PAST LIFE REMEDIES
Dn C/S Course
(Note: This Bulletin has been revised to align with the
New Era Dianetics Series Bulletins Series 1-18.)

There are many remedies and considerable tech developed over the years on the subject of pcs unable to go earlier than this life. There was no full coverage bulletin which gave the full story on this.

The earliest was getting the pc to locate and run imaginary incidents. This is fully covered in Science of Survival, especially Book Two, Chapter Nine, “Imaginary Incidents.” The auditor clears the idea of imaginary incidents and running them, then persuades the pc to run them without forcing him.

Delusion tends to run off but the real incidents move into view as well. These imaginary incidents can be run R3RA Narrative Quad.... Full preassessment procedure (per New Era Dianetics Series tech) of the somatics, emotions, etc., of the imaginary incident, can be incorporated in the Past Life Remedy as part of the action of grooving in the pc. (See: HCOB 18 June 78, New Era Dianetics Series 4, ASSESSMENT AND HOW TO GET THE ITEM, and HCOB 28 June 78, New Era Dianetics Series 7, R3RA COMMANDS, for Narrative and R3RA Quad commands.)

Another Past Life Remedy would be for the auditor to assess the following list on the pc:

earlier existences abandoned pictures
previous existences past life experiences
past lives memory
earlier lives amnesia
unreal pictures forgetting
other times leaving bodies
past deaths past bodies
going backtrack new bodies
imaginary incidents lost possessions
invalidated pictures forgotten pictures
other identities death
imaginary beingnesses losing a body
pretended injuries forgotten memories
pretended illnesses invalidated memories
disgusting pictures painful pictures
painful memories ignored pictures
enforced pictures fading pictures
fearful incidents fearful pictures
sad pictures forgotten times
invalidated track pretended incidents
only one lifetime unbelievable pictures
unknown incidents forgotten families
lost friends between body experiences
degraded experiences unreal experiences
deja vu forgotten beingness
forgotten lives abandoned deaths
not-ised existence not-ised existences
invalidated pictures invalidated memories

invalidated imagination not-ised imagination
invalidated perception abandoned perceptions
things you don’t want to find out about

Any item can be added to the above by the pc.

You then take the largest reading item found in the above and ask the pc to describe it briefly. Ask him “In your own words briefly describe (item that read).”

Use the exact wording the pa gave you. Treat that wording as an original item exactly as though it had been obtained on the Original Assessment List, New Era Dianetics Series 5.

Handle the items the pa gives you exactly as you would handle any original item or items in New Era Dianetics Series 4 (preassessment, etc.)

Exhaust all reading items in the above prepared list.

Reassess the prepared list and do each of the above steps.

When the pa is able to go earlier than this life with good reality then the remedy is complete.

Often the pc won’t go backtrack because he’s a druggie.

What has happened here is that he restimulated past lives with drugs, got into frightening pictures that he didn’t understand and now backs off from ANY bank content except drugs. That is handled with a full Drug RD, including a full battery of Objectives and all reading items run including “no interest” items. The standard approach on any pc is to get full drug handling done first. See: HCOB 27 June 78, New Era Dianetics Series 9, DRUG HANDLING.

Another reason could be the pc is in recent shock of having died. Such a case is overburdened and is destimulated with general auditing and then gets a Past Life Remedy if he hasn’t gone backtrack. You could even do a Prior Assessment to this life.

The subject of invalidation of past lives and people talking about them out of session or claiming to be famous people invalidates past lives for a pc and is actually related to suppression and PTS phenomena. If you suspect this you could ask “Has anyone been talking to you about past lives or famous people?” From this question possible suppression in the environment can be located and used in a PTS RD, HCOB 9 Dec 71R, Revised 21 Oct 74.

CHILDREN

Children are usually very burdened cases and can be hard to C/S on Dianetics if it hits this life only which will leave the pc wide open to key-in and at the age of 20 be found all keyed-in “with all grades run.”

I find they are jammed into fiction stories, education, books and movies and run these like engrams. These children speak of “remembering” all the time. They say they can’t go backtrack “because they don’t remember.” They don’t seem to take it from pictures. Contrary to psychology theories and popular belief I find children in very rough case shape, nervous, frightened, griefy, etc. They get stuck in the books and movies they see.

I have handled this in various ways. The easiest way to unburden cases is by Objectives (contact processes) and Recall (ARC S/W, Self Analysis). That is the general approach. You can list for mental image pictures pc has seen in life, in movies or books, take the best reading one and do full preassessment procedure on it, handling the running item obtained with R3RA Quad. Then repeat the preassessment steps until you get no reads on the Preassessment List you have assessed for that original item.
Return to the mental image pictures list, take the next largest reading item and do full preassessment, etc. Follow HCOB 18 June 1978, ASSESSMENT AND HOW TO GET THE ITEM (New Era Dianetics Series 4) exact/y.

Preassessment can also be done on unwanted attitudes, emotions, pains, etc. (the Preassessment List) one had as a child. These would then be fully handled as above to unburden the case.

A direct approach is to ask “What book or movie were you particularly interested in?” You’ll usually find that the person had a stuck picture on it. Then ask “Did you ever have anything to do with that sort of thing?” Then they go into it because you’re asking for an E/S. You could then run out the earlier incident Narrative R3RA Quad and you’d be away.

Where the pc is stuck in upsetting incidents from movies or books you can list for “Bad incidents you’ve seen or read about,” take the best reading one with pc interest and run it out R3RA Narrative Quad. Then handle with preassessment procedure, per above. Be sure to accept stories, TV, movies or books as these are fully valid to run.


REVIEW

A Scientology review action that can be done is to assess auditors, auditing, past lives, Dianetics, Scientology, time, preclears and erasure. Then prepcheck in order of reads, reassess and prepcheck. This is a valuable action to do before ARC S/W Triple and often by itself will handle those unable to go past track.

A further Scientology approach would be to assess the past, memory pictures, past lives and prepcheck in order of reads. Then L&N “Who or what would have no future?” then L&N “Who or what would it have been awful to have been?” These items can be checked and used in a PTS RD or can have their intentions listed and run as part of Ex Dn handling.

SUMMARY

The technology on past lives is important for a C/S to know, especially the Dianetics C/S.

The subject usually resolves with a Drug RD and general auditing but when it doesn’t you have these remedies to use.

Use them well.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:rs.rd.lfg
Copyright © 1975, 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 23 APRIL 1975R
REVISED 26 JANUARY 1977
(Revisions in this type style)
Remimeo
Tech & Qual
All Levels
All Auditors
All Tech
Checksheets
VANISHING CREAM AND FALSE TA

Ref: HCOB 24 Oct 71R FALSE TA
HCOB 12 Nov 71RA FALSE TA ADDITION
HCOB 15 Feb 72R FALSE TA ADDITION 2
HCOB 18 Feb 72R FALSE TA ADDITION 3
HCOB 21 Jan 77 FALSE TA CHECKLIST
HCOB 23 Nov 73RA DRY AND WET HANDS
MAKE FALSE TA


After further and more extensive tests vanishing creams have proven unsuitable as a solution to dry hands.

In some cases vanishing creams have actually dried out pcs’ hands and caused a false high TA.

Vaseline Intensive Care Lotion has proven very workable when applied to a pc’s hands, rubbed in and any excess wiped off.

Another cream called Locorten was also found workable but it contains cortisone which burns the eyes if you rub them with your hands. Further tests are underway on Locorten without cortisone but these are not yet complete.

Another hand cream formula was found 90% effective upon test and is somewhat similar to the Locorten formula without cortisone. Its formula is:

75 grams Emulsified Cetomacrofolis Wax
(80% cetostearyl alcohol and 20% cetomacrofol 1000)
100 grams Cetyl Alcohol
20 grams Sorbitol Solution - 70%
1 gram Sorbic Acid
up to
500 grams water.

You could have this cream made up by any pharmacist.


A NOTE ON FOOTPLATES

Footplates obscure F/Ns and reads.

Their use is hereby cancelled.


FALSE TA HANDLING

It has never been OK to call a pc’s attention to his hands or TA or meter during a session. Therefore when handling a false TA get the TA in range with hand cream or can size or grip before session.

Don’t check for hand cream or can grip or change cans during the session except as directed on correction lists such as a C/S Series 53RJ under false TA.

Otherwise it throws the pc out of session and puts his attention on his TA.

Use the session for auditing.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Revised by
Paulette Ausley

LRH:PA:nt
Copyright © 1975, 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED














SPECIAL RUNDOWN LECTURES
Daytona, Florida
29 October—8 December 1975


L. Ron Hubbard personally briefed and trained a specially picked team of auditors on a new Flag rundown. Following is a list of the tapes that were made of those briefings. This new rundown later became known as “The New Vitality Rundown.”

**7510C29SO First Lecture - Special Rundown
**7510C30SO Second Lecture—Special Rundown Pilot
**7510C31 SO Third Lecture—Special Rundown Pilot
**7511C01 SO Fourth Lecture—Special Rundown Pilot
**7511C02SO Fifth Lecture—Special Rundown Pilot
**7511C03SO Sixth Lecture—Special Rundown Pilot
**7511C04SO Seventh Lecture—Special Rundown Pilot
**7511C05SO Eighth Lecture—Special Rundown Pilot
**7511C06SO Ninth Lecture—Special Rundown Pilot
**7511C07SO Tenth Lecture—Special Rundown Pilot
**7511C08SO Eleventh Lecture—Special Rundown Pilot
**7511C10SO Twelfth Lecture—Special Rundown Pilot
**7511C11SO Thirteenth Lecture—Special Rundown Pilot
**7511C12SO Fourteenth Lecture—Special Rundown Pilot
**7511C13SO Fifteenth Lecture—Special Rundown Pilot
**7511C14SO Sixteenth Lecture—Special Rundown Pilot
**7511C17SO Seventeenth Lecture—Special Rundown Pilot
**7511C18SO Eighteenth Lecture—Special Rundown Pilot
**7511C19SO Nineteenth Lecture—Special Rundown Pilot
**7511C20SO Twentieth Lecture—Special Rundown Pilot
**7511C21 SO Twenty-first Lecture—Special Rundown Pilot
**7511C24SO Twenty-second Lecture—Special Rundown Pilot
**7512C08SO Ron’s Talk

THE TECHNICAL BULLETINS OF DIANETICS

AND SCIENTOLOGY

by L. Ron Hubbard

Published August 1976


The Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology represent the complete reference work of Dianetics and Scientology technical bulletins.

The first eight volumes of this big ten volume set contain all of Ron’s technical bulletins from 1950 to 1976. This is the complete time track of Ron’s written technical materials.

The ninth volume contains all of the technical series issues, such as the Basic Auditing Series, Expanded Dianetics Series, Cramming Series, and many more.

The tenth volume contains the famous C/S Series plus a 250-page master subject index. You can find all of the references for any subject listed in this index. Over 20,000 entries!

Four-way indexing makes any technical reference easy to find. Each volume has the bulletins listed by date, by date with a summary of contents, alphabetically by title, and a subject index in each volume.

Ten hardbound volumes, all the size of the Organization Executive Course Volumes (7 3/4” by 12”), 5,600 pages total, each volume over 500 pages thick and individually indexed plus a cumulative index for the set. Available from your nearest Scientology Organization or Mission, or direct from the publishers: Church of Scientology Publications Organization U.S., 4833 Fountain Ave., East Annex, Los Angeles, California 90029, U.S.A.; or Scientology Publications Organization, Jernbanegade 6, 1608 Copenhagen V, Denmark.

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 10 AUGUST 1976R
REVISED 5 SEPTEMBER 1978
(Only revision is the correction of the definition of a
rock slam. Revisions in this type style.)
Remimeo
All Sec
Checkers
All HCO Ref: HCOB 3 Sep 78,
All Meter DEFINITION OF A ROCK SLAM
Operators

R/Ses, WHAT THEY MEAN

(HANDLING OF CONFESSIONALS CHECKSHEETS)
(PTS PROCESSING CHECKSHEETS)
(EXPANDED DIANETICS CHECKSHEETS)
(METER OPERATION CHECKSHEETS)
(VARIOUS RUNDOWN CHECKSHEETS)


The crazy, irregular, left-right slashing motion of the needle in the E-Meter dial is called “A rock slam” or “R/S.” It repeats left and right slashes unevenly and savagely, faster than the eye easily follows. The needle is frantic. The width of an R/S depends largely on sensitivity setting. It goes from one-fourth inch to whole dial. But it slams back and forth.

The term was taken from a process in the 50s which sought to locate “A rock” on the pc’s early time track; the “slam” is a description of the needle violence, meaning it “slams” back and forth. For a time all left-right motions of the needle were considered and called “rock slams” until it was found that a smooth left-right flow was a symptom of release or key-out and this became the “floating needle.” There is yet another left-right motion of the needle called the “theta bop.” This occurs when the person has or is trying to exteriorize. “Theta” is the symbol for the person as a spirit or goodness; “bop” is an electronic term for a slight hitch in the sweep of a needle. A “theta bop” hitches evenly at each end of the sweep left and right and is very even in the middle of the sweep.

Neither the “floating needle” nor the “theta bop” can be confused with a “rock slam.” The difference of the rock slam is uneven, frantic slashing left and right; even the distances traveled left and right are likely to be different in each swing from the last.

A “rock slam” can be caused sometimes by leaving rings on the pc’s fingers or by a short circuit in the meter or by the cans (electrodes) touching something like a dress. These are the mechanical considerations and must be ruled out before the pc can be considered to have “rock slammed.” If the pc is not wearing rings and if the meter needle is calm with the lead unplugged, if the lead is okay, and if the pc is not jiggling the ends of the cans against his clothes, then the pc’s rock slam is caused by the pc’s bank .

One has to be very careful about the correctness of the pc actually having rock slammed while on the meter, that it was actually observed, that it was not mechanically caused as above. One puts the R/S down on the worksheet and also gives exactly what was asked. And also that the mechanical points were checked without distracting the pc.

ONE MUST ALWAYS REPORT A ROCK SLAM IN THE AUDITING REPORT, NOTE IT WITH SESSION DATE AND PAGE INSIDE THE LEFT COVER OF THE PC’S FOLDER AND REPORT IT TO ETHICS INCLUDING THE QUESTION OR SUBJECT WHICH ROCK SLAMMED, PHRASED EXACTLY.

Why? Because the rock slam is the most important needle manifestation! It gives the clue to the pc’s case.

In 1970 I began a full-scale research project into the subject of insanity and its relationship to cases and case gains and suppression. It was only then that the full significance of the rock slam was unearthed. This research developed into what is now called EXPANDED DIANETICS, a series of special processes and actions with their drills and training which permits the auditor to handle a specific case type. This was, by the way, Man’s first system of positive detection and handling of psychosis and the first full understanding of what psychosis is.

While this bulletin is not in any way a two-minute course in or a substitute for full training in Expanded Dianetics, any auditor who audits, Sec Checks, or handles people on a meter has to know what a rock slam is and how it behaves and what he should do about it.

The first thing is to be able to recognize one and to quickly with the scan of the eye and unplug of the meter cord (without any distraction of or notice by the pc) make the checks for a mechanical rock slam as given above.

You can make a meter “rock slam” with no pc or cord connected to it by (a) turning it on; (b) put the sensitivity at perhaps 2; © put the needle at “set”; (d) rapidly, very rapidly, move the TA back and forth maybe a quarter of an inch and do it unevenly. That, if you did it very fast and unevenly, would be something that resembled a rock slam. But no matter how fast you made your fingers move, a real R/S is a trifle faster. If you do that you will see what an R/S looks like. The needle in this experiment is not made to hit the sides of the meter.

Now if you take the same set-up and smoothly slowly move the tone arm back and forth about 2 times a second without any roughness and the same distance right and left, you will have a floating needle. Note it very well as this comes at a time of release and is the thing a good auditor hopes to see and gives him the end-off signal for a process. It has to be well known as you NEVER bypass one in a session and to do so makes an uncomfortable pc. (The pc will often cognite—get a realization about himself or life at this point and one does not stop him from doing this.) This is the thing you indicate to the pc. You don’t ever indicate rock slams or theta bops. When you see it, and without stopping or interrupting the pc’s cognition, you always say, “Your needle is floating.”

Now the theta bop can also be shown to yourself by you. Set up the meter as above. Only this time, you smoothly swing it to the right and give it a tiny twitch in the same direction. Then you smoothly, at once, swing it to the left and give it a tiny twitch in the same direction. Then do it to the right. And so on. This is a theta bop. It is different than a floating needle only in that it hitches at each end of the swing. So learn to recognize it.

There is a vicious smooth right direction slash that occurs when a pc hits a certain area of the bank that is called a “rocket read” and there is of course the small fall, long fall (which both go to the right and indicate a charged question or reaction) and there is the gradual rise to the left. But these do not repeat back and forth which is the characteristic of the rock slam, floating needle and theta bop.

All right, so we know exactly what it looks like when we talk about a ROCK SLAM as a read of the meter. We know how it can be mechanically caused. And we know what we have to record and report when it is seen.

But exactly what does a rock slam mean with regards to the pc?

If you don’t know this you can miss on the pc, on the case, on the org and humanity.

A ROCK SLAM MEANS A HIDDEN EVIL INTENTION ON THE SUBJECT OR QUESTION UNDER DISCUSSION OR AUDITING.

Two things underlie insanity, or to be more specific, there are two causes and conditions both of which have been lumped together by man and called insanity. He could not of course define it as he didn’t know what caused it.

The first of these two things does not concern us overly much here and is the subject of a separate checksheet and training and is called PTS or Potential Trouble Source handling. A “PTS” is a person who has been or is connected with somebody who has evil intentions. A PTS can feel uncomfortable in life or be neurotic or go insane because of the actions upon him of a person with evil intentions. Most of the people in institutions are probable PTSes.

The second of these two things is insanity caused to the individual himself (let alone others) by hidden evil intentions.

The extent of these intentions and what the person will do (and hide) in order to carry them out is quite shocking. These people are covert or overt criminals and many of them are insane—meaning beyond all rationality in their acts. Because their evil intentions are hidden and because they are often very plausible such individuals are what make “behavior so mysterious” and “Man look so evil when you see what Mankind does” and all sorts of fallacies.

It is this last type, the chronic, heavy rock slammer, which Expanded Dianetics handles.

One rock slam doesn’t make a psychotic. Or a total menace to everyone. But it does mean there could be more and it might in rare cases mean you have, seeing enough of these R/Ses, a very dangerous person on your hands and in your vicinity. And that person must be handled by Expanded Dianetics.

You won’t see a great many rock slams in auditing people so you could be totally thrown off by surprise when you see one. And mess it all up because you are surprised. So know what it is and don’t get all quivery and make mistakes and blow your confront. Just carry on.

If you don’t note the EXACT question that was asked and the EXACTLY worded statement the pc made when the R/S was seen, you can muck it up for the Expanded Dianetics guys. They won’t be able to get it turned back on again easily and will lose a lot of time. So you have to be sure your auditing report is accurate, that the R/S is written BIG on the column and circled and, no matter what else you do in the session, you have to get it recorded in the left front cover of the folder giving the date and page of the session and you have to report it to Ethics. And also you don’t third party the pc and give him a bad time in the session because of it.

Now R/Ses most easily turn on during Sec Checks or Integrity Processing or when pulling withholds or trying to investigate something. So the people who see these most often are those engaged in that activity and not routine auditing (when they can also but more rarely turn on). Further the most likely person to collide with “needing to be Sec Checked” is an R/Ser, which again increases the numbers of R/Ses seen in these activities compared to routine auditing. But a very heavy R/Ser will also turn them on in routine auditing.

It is the exact point of the R/S in the session, the exact question that was asked and the exact subject or phrase where the R/S turned on that are important. And these are very important as then the person can be fully handled with a full Expanded Dianetics Rundown by a qualified Expanded Dianetics Specialist. When, of course, the person gets to that point on his Grade Chart. The Grade Chart points are after Dianetics (like Drug RDs, etc.) but before grades, after grades but before Power, after Power but before Solo, and after OT III or after any single grade above OT III. These are the only
points where Expanded Dianetics can be delivered and the R/S fully and completely handled.

Now here is how you can turn off an R/S and mistakenly think it is handled:

1. The overt-motivator sequence has two sides. One is what the person has done (overt) and what is done to the person (motivator). You can ask, when the person R/Ses on something, if anyone has ever INVALIDATED him on that subject or action. He will find some and the R/S will turn off AND WON’T EVEN BE FAINTLY HANDLED BUT ONLY SUBMERGED. One can believe he has “handled” the R/S. Not true. He has just turned it off and maybe made it harder to find next time. One can ask what the person has done TO the subject mentioned and while this may unburden the case and make the person a bit better, the R/S is NOT handled, only turned off or submerged. It’s almost as if there are so many overts and motivators on this subject or in this area that the push-pull of it makes the needle go wild (R/S). And indeed, this may be the energy cause, in the bank, of the needle reaction. But neither overt nor motivator handles an R/S finally because the CAUSE of the R/S is an INTENTION to harm and it isn’t all that likely the basic intention will be reached.

2. Another apparent way the R/S can get “handled” and isn’t is to take the R/Ser earlier similar on the subject of the R/S. The R/S will probably cease, go “clean.” But in actual fact it is still there, hidden.

3. The third way an R/S can be falsely “handled” is to direct the person’s attention to something else. If, when this is done, the exact subject of the R/S is not noted by the auditor, it will be difficult to find it again when the person goes into Expanded Dianetic auditing.

4. Yet another, and probably the last way to falsely “handle” an R/S is to abuse the person about his conduct or behavior or the R/S, or to “educate” him to do better, or to “modify” his behavior with shocks or surgery or other tortures like the psychiatrists do. In other words one can seek to suppress the R/S in numerous ways. Maybe the R/S won’t occur (being too overburdened now) but it is still there, buried very deep and possibly beyond reach now.

So if you understand the above four points you will see that although you can ease off the R/S, you have not handled it. It has merely gone out of sight.

All right, what then DOES HANDLE an R/S?

I warned you that this isn’t a two-minute course on Expanded Dianetics and it isn’t. An R/S is HANDLED by a fully qualified Expanded Dianetics auditor delivering full Expanded Dianetics to the person at that point on the Grade Chart where Expanded Dianetics is supposed to be delivered. If anyone thinks it can be done effectively any other way or if he C/Ses it to be done and the auditor is stupid enough to try to do that C/S, then it’s Committees of Evidence and suspended certificates all around.

With that warning, and only with that warning, I can briefly state what has to be done with the case. This is not what YOU do if you are not delivering full Expanded Dianetics at the right point on the Grade Chart. It is a brief statement so that you can understand what lies under that R/S.

The pc with an R/S on any given subject and who R/Ses while discussing that or related subjects HAS AN EVIL INTENTION TOWARD THE SUBJECT DISCUSSED OR SOME CLOSELY RELATED SUBJECT. The pc intends that subject or area of life nothing but calculating, covert, underhanded HARM which will be at all times carefully hidden from that subject.

Thus, the Expanded Dianetics Specialist, in handling that case (at the proper point on the Grade Chart) has to be able to locate each and every subject and question and R/S in that person’s folder as noted by Sec Checkers and previous auditors or
Cramming Officers or Why Finders. He has to have the complete list of R/S subjects. If they are noted as to session date and page and if all Sec Checking papers and cramming papers are in that person’s folder, then the Expanded Dianetics Specialist can do a full and complete job. Otherwise he has to do a lot of other time wasting actions to get the R/Ses found and turned on again.

What the Expanded Dianetics Specialist actually does is locate EXACTLY the actual evil intention for every R/S on the case and handle each one to total conclusion. When he is finished, if he has done his job well, the person’s behavior will be magically improved and as to his social presence, menace and conduct, well that will be toward survival.

When you see an R/S, if you are not an Expanded Dianetic Specialist doing Expanded Dianetics at the correct point on the Grade Chart, you don’t say “Hey, you’ve got an evil intention!” and you don’t ask “Say, what’s that evil intention?” or do corny things like that because you’ll get the pc self-listing, you may get a wrong item, you won’t know what to do with it and you’re just likely to get the auditing room wrapped around your neck right there.

No, you quietly note it, make sure it isn’t a mechanical fault, write it big on the worksheet, write down everything the pc is saying swiftly, note what question you were asking and let the pc talk and ack him and go on with what you are doing with the pc at the time. And after session you note it in the left-hand cover of the folder and send a report to Ethics.

And some day, when he’s done his Drug Rundown or gotten to one of the points on the Grade Chart where a full XDn can be done, why then it will be handled. And a good C/S will program or tip the case for that to be done.

So that’s the know-how you have to know about R/Ses to really help the guy and the society and your group.

We’re not in the business of curing psychos. The governments at this writing pay the psychiatrists billions a year to torture and kill because of R/Ses they don’t know anything about. The crime in the society out there is caused by people who R/S. Stalin, Hitler, Napoleon and Caesar were probably the most loaded R/Sers of all time unless it was Jack the Ripper or your local friendly psychiatrist.

So know what you are seeing when you see it and know what to do about it. And don’t kid yourself. Or vilify or mow down people who R/S; we’re not in that business.

And the Expanded Dianetic Specialist and the pc someday will love you dearly for knowing your job and doing it right.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:nt.dr
Copyright © 1976, 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

THE VOLUNTEER
MINISTER’S HANDBOOK

by

L. Ron Hubbard

Published October 1976


In The Volunteer Minister’s Handbook, L. Ron Hubbard has made available many of his discoveries in the fields of communication and social interaction, which can be used by anyone to help themselves and others.

How do you deal with an emotional upset? How do you salvage a broken marriage? What can you do when there is an emergency or a sudden accident? How do you handle a drug problem or alcoholism? What could you do to help a runaway teenager? A failing businessman? What is the right way—the effective way—to handle these situations and thousands of situations like them?

As a Volunteer Minister, you’ll know the answers.

Simply being critical of people or situations accomplishes nothing. When a person finds fault with something, it implies that he wants to do something about it, and would if he could.

By studying this book, you can gain the knowledge you need to really help others lead happier lives. And you’ll be helping yourself too.

676 pages, 66 brilliant full-color photographs mostly taken by L. Ron Hubbard, index, glossary, hard cover with dust jacket. Available from your nearest Scientology Organization or Mission, or direct from the publishers: Church of Scientology Publications Organization U.S., 4833 Fountain Ave., East Annex, Los Angeles, California 90029, U.S.A.; or Scientology Publications Organization, Jernbanegade 6, 1608 Copenhagen V, Denmark.

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 20 OCTOBER 1976
(Also issued as HCO PL 20.10.76 same title.)
Remimeo
DPE
Ethics Officers
PTS/SP Checksheet
PTS DATA


Based on a recent pilot it has become quite obvious that a full and complete PTS handling would consist of:

A. PTSness handled terminatedly by interview or auditing by a person trained on BPL 31 May 71RC.

B. Complete study and pass on the PTS/SP Checksheet, BPL 3l May 71RC Revised 12 August 1976.

The correctly located suppressive, who is then handled based on a thorough understanding of the mechanics of PTS/SP phenomena form the simplicity that is PTS tech. The tech of locating the suppressive source is also fully covered. in the PTS/SP Checksheet and is a vital prerequisite for PTS handlers.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

As assisted by CS-5
LRH:JE:nt
Copyright © 1976
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 20 OCTOBER 1976R
REVISED 29 JUNE 1977
Remimeo
SSO
DPE (Revisions in this type style)
Ethics Officers
PTS/SP Checksheet
PTS DATA


Based on a recent pilot it has become quite obvious that a full and complete PTS handling would consist of:

A. PTSness handled terminatedly by interview or auditing by a person trained on BPL 31 May 71RF.

B. Complete study and pass on the PTS/SP Checksheet, BPL 31 May 71RF Re-Revised 4 Mar 77.

The correctly located suppressive, who is then handled based on a thorough understanding of the mechanics of PTS/SP phenomena form the simplicity that is PTS tech. The tech of locating the suppressive source is also fully covered in the PTS/SP Checksheet and is a vital prerequisite for PTS handlers.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

As assisted by CS-5

Revision assisted by
Anna Nordlof
Int Cross Check Br Dir
Int HQ

LRH:IE:AN:nt.lf
Copyright © 1976, 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 20 OCTOBER 1976
Remimeo
DPE
Ethics Officer Issue II
PTS/SP Checksheet
PTS HANDLING


Once in a while I hear of PTS handlings that “didn’t work” or “still PTS” or some such. Or I’ll come across such extremes as a PTS is virtually an incurable leper to be shunned and kept isolated or almost everyone is PTS to some degree so what can you really do about it. The basic thing to realize is that PTSness, like any other case condition afflicting Man, responds to plain old standard tech. But one has to have studied and understood that tech to apply it, naturally.

I recall years ago in handling PTSes, that none of them at first knew what PTS really meant or what it was all about even when they used the term freely! So I recently called for a pilot to see what would be the effect of a study method of curing PTSes.

FIRST PILOT

Before the final pilot was done, an earlier pilot was attempted by an Aide which was not conducted as laid down. CS-5 reviewed the failed pilot to find why so many failed on it. 4 out of 6 were never completed and the 2 that did failed.

CS-5 reported “What I found on these was that they uniformly were not PTS in the first place or were PTS but that was not the major trouble with the person. Three of the cases (2 on auditing and I on study) were out-ethics, R/Sing, Exp Dn cases who were trying to use PTS as the reason for their behavior. Thus handling their PTSness would not resolve anything. The most interesting case here was the study one who realized that he was not PTS and that that had been a wrong indication and that what was really wrong with him was that he had bad intentions and was committing overts. One of the audited cases had a similar realization but has not done as well on post and did get very sick 2 months or so later. Of the other 3 pilot cases in this first batch one could only come up with in-the-org terminals so is another Exp Dn case and the other 2 assigned to study were severely bugged students so never got off the ground (one has now finished the course 4 months later). So that’s what happened to the original pilot.”

The second pilot was then ordered to determine the original possibility, that people could study their way out of being PTS.

SECOND PILOT

Three were put onto the PTS/SP Checksheet to study and three were handled by internes who had done the PTS/SP Checksheet themselves. The cases handled by auditing/interview steps completed their handlings within 10 hours. The study cases averaged 4-6 weeks of part-time study. Two studiers from the original pilot also completed the course. All were then watched for bad originations to the Examiner, medical reports, ethics trouble or trouble on post. In all cases, including those not yet complete on study, none of these indicators showed up. One case originated case troubles but this turned out to be one of the “Exp Dn” cases not PTSness.

On the study pilot the daily reports and success stories on completion uniformly mention more certainty, more stability and being more at cause with the data. Of particular interest is that three of the participants “cogged” they were not actually PTS (yet evidence of real PTS sits had gotten them on the project) but while they were studying they would align past PTS handlings they didn’t fully understand at the time, spot why past PTS terminals were correct or incorrect, spot terminals who gave them a hard time in the past and see why certain people behaved the way they did. In short it
appears the studiers were blowing charge on their past PTS handlings and on terminals in their life almost like an auditing session and while they were saying not PTS, no longer PTS (now that they had the data) is probably closer to the truth. All are reported to be doing well on post with no illness, roller-coaster or ethics trouble.

The PTS handlers (who had done the PTS/SP pack) were of particular use where the person had a study bug that needed handling before study could be done and assisting in working out the handlings for PTS sits that were uncovered. Also S&Ds and 10 Aug HCOB handlings and PTS interviews are not Solo actions. And it takes hours, not intensives to handle.

FALSE PTS

As noted from the first pilot false PTSness must be watched for as unhattedness, ignorance of Scientology basics for handling life, past bad auditing uncorrected as well as unhandled bad intentions and personal out-ethics can be mistaken for PTSness and won’t resolve as PTSness. This should be suspected when your “PTSes” start going above 20% of staff and public.

SUMMARY

We have had the tech of PTSness for years, but it wasn’t being fully used and then got mixed in with Exp Dn. PTSness can be handled routinely when the tech is fully known and applied. A PTS person can be brought to cause over his situation through study of the PTS tech. This is vitally important for staff. We can handle and the person himself can handle.

There is no substitute for understanding.


LRH:JE:nt L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1976 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED As assisted by CS-5


HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 23 OCTOBER 1976
Remimeo
All Orgs
All HGCs INTERNESHIP AND HGC
Effective 1 December 1976

No new auditor may audit for the HGC, from the Tech Training Corps or field or wherever, who has not done the interneships for his Class.

Any auditor now C/Sing or auditing may continue to do so until I Feb 77 providing he does his full interneship part-time and off production hours. The completion of such interneship must occur before I Feb 1977.

Interne supervisors or Qual Secs may not hold back internes in completion by extended and unreasonable auditing requirements.

Until 1 Feb 1977, auditors auditing in the HGC or C/Ses C/Sing for it may count their HGC successes and hours as interneship auditing.

LRH:nt L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1976 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 24 OCTOBER 1976R
REVISED 10 FEBRUARY 1977
Remimeo
(LRH ED 257 INT of 1 December 1974
revised and reissued as an HCOB)
(Revisions in this type style)

C/S Series 96R
DELIVERY REPAIR LISTS

THERE’S NOTHING WRONG WITH YOUR CF, YOUR PC, YOUR STUDENT, STAFF MEMBER OR YOUR OWN DELIVERY THAT A PREPARED LIST WON’T HANDLE.

“ARC broken CFs,” blown students, demanded refunds, low success stories, withdrawn auditors, ineffective staffs are pretty silly problems to have these days.

Many years ago I developed a system called “Prepared Lists.”

These isolated the trouble the pc was having in auditing without taxing anyone’s imagination and sending the auditor into a figure-figure on the pc.

These prepared lists were assessed on an E-Meter. One took up the biggest read first and then cleaned up all other reads.

Time has gone on. The system of prepared lists has been expanded to include not only pcs but students and staff.

It may have gone overlooked that such lists now include anything that could happen to a pc or student. In other words, prepared lists have become very thorough.


WHO CAN USE

The only reason ever found for prepared lists not working was an auditor’s weak TR 1 and inability to read a meter.

Even this difficulty has been handled by “Qual Okay to Audit” checksheets.

Before an auditor should be let near a prepared list he should be put through at least six “Okay to Audit” short checksheets in Qual.

Qual is not fast flow. Things done in Qual are Method 4 Word Cleared and starrated, with all demos and drills. Only if this is done can you have some certainty that a prepared list will read on the pc and that the pc or student will get handled.

These Qual “Okay to Audit” checksheets are done AFTER a student has been trained and classed as an auditor. The “Okay to Audit” is for auditing in an org whether staff or interne.

The checksheets are:

(1) Board Policy Letter 14 Nov 74RA Issue I
QUAL OKAY TO OPERATE AN E-METER

(2) Board Policy Letter 14 Nov 74R Issue II
QUAL OK NO. 2R, QUAL OK TO ASSESS PREPARED LISTS

(3) Board Policy Letter 14 Nov 74 Issue III
QUAL OK NO. 3, QUAL OK TO AUDIT LISTING AND NULLING
(4) Board Policy Letter 14 Nov 74 Issue IV
QUAL OK NO. 4, QUAL OK TO CORRECT LISTING AND NULLING
(5) Board Policy Letter 8 Nov 71RC
QUAL OK NO. 5RA, INTERNESHIPS ELECTRONIC ATTESTATION
FORM
(6) Board Policy Letter 20 July 70R Issue III Revised 25 Nov 74
TWO-WAY COMM CHECKSHEET

Only when these have been thoroughly and honestly studied, drilled and done should an auditor be permitted to assess prepared lists on pcs and students.

It takes standard auditor training to handle the points found reading on a list.
CASE SUPERVISING

A C/S who is trained as a C/S must know what lists to use. And he must see to it that his auditors are trained via the above checklists. Otherwise the lists just won’t read and the C/S, the pc and the org are left up the creek!

LOTS of “lists that didn’t read” are found in folders. I used to make a practice of just having them nulled again by an auditor whose metering and TRs were good and THEY READ AND THE CASE RESOLVED.


PC LISTS

1. HCO BULLETIN 24 NOVEMBER 1973RD, C/S SERIES 53RK, “SHORT HI-LO TA ASSESSMENT C/S.” This is a famous list. It solved the long long problem of high and low TAs and really solved it. Unfortunately it has a name of being done for high and low TAs. In truth it practically handles the whole repair of any difficult case today! One assesses it Method 5. One handles the reads from the top down. It can also be reassessed several times until it F/Ns on a whole M5 assessment. It is quite remarkable what it will do for a case that has been running badly or is bogged, quite in addition to handling high and low TAs!

2. HCO BULLETIN 1 JANUARY 1972RB, “LIX HI-LO TA REVISED.” This is the same list as C/S 53RK above. It has been brought up-to-date. It gives the whole question for each subject as in C/S 53RK and the same handling. It is easier to use on a pc whose attention wanders or who is not very familiar with terms.

3. HCO BULLETIN 29 OCTOBER 1971R, “INT RUNDOWN CORRECTION LIST REVISED.” As Interiorization-Exteriorization problems (when they exist) have to be handled before any other thing is handled, an auditor sometimes assesses another list and then finds himself doing this list. “Int” appears on many other lists and when it reads one does this list. One has to go back and complete the original list of course. “Int” problems cause high TA, headaches and general upset. I’ve begun to think after seeing a lot of headache cases that maybe only Int-Ext problems cause headaches! Instead of repairing Int, sometimes auditors will run it again and again. Also Int can go flat to cog VVGIs on an early flow, even a recall flow. Then if one insists on finishing the Int RD, one has trouble and I mean trouble. So this is a valuable list.

4. HCO BULLETIN 15 DECEMBER 1968R, “L4BR” “FOR ASSESSMENT OF ALL LISTING ERRORS.” An out list (meaning one done by listing and nulling, not a prepared list) can raise more concentrated hell with a pc than any other single auditing error. The amount of misemotion or illness which a wrong list generates has to be seen to be believed. When a pc is ill after a session or up to 3 days after, always suspect that a listing action done on the pc had an error in it. It MUST be corrected. This prepared list L4BR corrects lists of the listing and nulling variety. It can be run on old lists,
current lists, general listing. There has been no reason to revise this since 2 June 1972. It really works!

5. HCO BULLETIN 19 MARCH 1971, “LIST 1-C.” This is the updated version of the earliest list ever compiled. It is used during sessions at the auditor’s discretion and in other ways. It also prevents some pc from insisting “It’s an ARC Brk” (which never clears) when it’s really a withhold, a common error. It can also be addressed to life. Usually when a session blows up, an L1C is used fast rather than just sit and ack!

6. HCO BULLETIN 11 APRIL 1971 RA, L3RD “DIANETICS AND INT RD REPAIR LIST.” This is the key list of Dianetic auditing and is the Dianetic standby in case of trouble. As the Int RD is also Dianetics, while doing it, one uses L3RD for trouble.

7. HCO BULLETIN 2 APRIL 1972RB ISSUE II, EXPANDED DIANETICS SERIES 3RB, “L3 EXD RB.” This is the prepared list for Expanded Dianetics.

8. HCO BULLETIN 21 JANUARY 1977, “FALSE TA CHECKLIST.” This was a very important discovery about TAs. One uses this when another list indicates a false TA or one is suspected. Auditors have been known to get so desperate about a pc’s TA that they falsified worksheets. This (and C/S 53RK) make that totally needless. I’ve seen this change a case from despair to VVVVGIs!

9. HCO BULLETIN 16 APRIL 1972, “PTS RD CORRECTION LIST.” It also gives the expected actions of a PTS Rundown. Doing PTS Rundowns without this prepared list handy can be risky.

10. HCO POLICY LETTER 7 APRIL 1970RA, “GREEN FORM.” This was the earliest Qual Saint Hill weapon (26 June 65) for case cracking. It is modernized up to 29 Sept 74 in the above issue. Used for general case clean-up particularly on an out rud type pc or when ruds won’t fly. It is not used to handle high or low TA.

11. HCO BULLETIN 30 JUNE 1971R, “EXPANDED GF 40RB.” Called “GF 40X.” This is the “7 resistive type cases” at the end of the Green Form expanded out. This is how you get those “earlier practices” and other case stoppers. This done well gives a lot of extensive work in Dianetics. It’s lengthy but really pays off.

If you were to do a C/S 53RK Method 5, all handled, and to an F/Ning list and then do a GF 40XRB, all handled, reassessed to an F/Ning list you would “crack” most cases to a point where they ran well.

12. BOARD TECHNICAL BULLETIN 28 MAY 1974R, “FULL ASSIST CHECKLIST FOR INJURY AND ILLNESS.” While you don’t put the pc on the cans for this one, you mark it as to the state the pc is in and it says what you do for illness and injury. This one, done correctly, is how the minister runs the medico out of business.


STUDENT LISTS

13. HCO BULLETIN 15 NOVEMBER 1973R, “FEAR OF PEOPLE LIST-R.” This is for the handling of timid tech staff who back off from handling rough pcs.

14. HCO BULLETIN 15 NOVEMBER 1974, “STUDENT REHABILITATION LIST.” This is the one that gets a bogged student sailing, gets a blown student back, gets an auditor back auditing. It even cures the revolutionary student! This is the master list for students—even students in grammar schools and colleges! A real winner.

15. BOARD TECHNICAL BULLETIN 27 MARCH 1972R ISSUE I, “STUDENT CORRECTION LIST, STUDY CORR LIST-1.” A list for correcting students on course.

STAFF LISTS

16. HCO BULLETIN 27 MARCH 1972R ISSUE II, “COURSE SUPERVISOR CORRECTION LIST, STUDY CORR LIST 2R.” This is to get the Course Supervisor going well.

17. HCO BULLETIN 27 MARCH 1972RA ISSUE III, “AUDITOR CORRECTION LIST, STUDY CORR LIST 3.” This one corrects auditors who are having a rough time.

18. BOARD TECHNICAL BULLETIN 27 MARCH 1972RA ISSUE IV, “CASE SUPERVISOR CORRECTION LIST, STUDY CORR LIST 4.” This one corrects Case Supervisors, gets them back on the rails.

19. BOARD TECHNICAL BULLETIN 27 MARCH 1972RC ISSUE V, “EXECUTIVE CORRECTION LIST, STUDY CORR LIST 5.” This prepared list locates an executive’s troubles and indicates handling.

20. BOARD TECHNICAL BULLETIN 4 FEBRUARY 1972RD, “STUDY SERIES 7.” A real long workout for a person who won’t study or who is having real trouble on a course. Goes after it in depth. Can be used as a second list to Student Rehab List above or by itself.

21. HCO BULLETIN 21 JULY 1971RD, WORD CLEARING SERIES 35RD, “WORD CLEARING CORRECTION LIST REVISED.” Usually written “WCCL.” This is the famous list that goes with Method 1 Word Clearing or with any Word Clearing bog. Also corrects high and low TA WHEN it occurs in a Word Clearing session. This is the Word Clearer’s friendly friend.

22. HCO POLICY LETTER 9 APRIL 1972, “ETHICS, CORRECT DANGER CONDITION HANDLING.” Locates the trouble area that got him into a Danger condition. Goes with the famous “3 May P/L” HCO PL 3 May 1972.

23. HCO POLICY LETTER 13 MARCH 1972, “ESTABLISHMENT OFFICER SERIES NO. 5.” An invaluable text and list for PRODUCT CLEARING. It’s a list of what you do to clear products. From it a prepared list can be made.

24. HCO POLICY LETTER 23 MARCH 1972, ESTABLISHMENT OFFICER SERIES 11, “FULL PRODUCT CLEARING LONG FORM.”

25. HCO POLICY LETTER 12 JUNE 1972, DATA SERIES 26, ESTO SERIES 18. A list you assess to locate trouble an evaluator might be having. Also for slow evaluators or slow students on a Data Series Course.

26. HCO BULLETIN 28 AUGUST 1970RA, “HC OUT-POINT—PLUS-POINT LISTS RA.” This is a prepared list that locates the out-points in a person’s own thinking. When people can’t seem to evaluate (or think brightly) this list will do wonders. Some Data Series Course students make no progress at all until they are assessed on this list and handled.

27. HCO BULLETIN 2 DECEMBER 1974, “DYNAMIC SORT OUT ASSESSMENT.” (Revised from BTB 4 Dec 71 Issue II, replacing HCOB 4 Dec 71 Issue II R- I C Assessment by Dynamics. ) This gets those dynamics that are charged and handles them. Increases social personality and even can shift valences.


CONFIDENTIAL AND AO LISTS

28. HCO BULLETIN 21 SEPTEMBER 1970, “LP1.” This is a Power Process correction list for Power Processes. It is not used for Power Plus.

29. HCO BULLETIN 13 MAY 1965, “LIST 6 EW.” This list is used in locating bypassed charge when auditing R6EW.

30. HCO BULLETIN 2 AUGUST 1966, “LIST 7 CORRECTED.” This list is used for students Solo auditing on Grade VII.

31. HCO BULLETIN 12 OCTOBER 1969RA, “LDN OT III RA.” This is the list used to handle bypassed charge on OT III.

32. HCO POLICY LETTER 14 JANUARY 1972, “THE GREEN GREEN FORM REVISED.” This form is called a “Green Green Form” because it can be done over and over. It is an auditing form used on OT III.


REPAIR LIST FOR PREPARED LISTS

HCO BULLETIN OF 21 DECEMBER 1975R, “REPAIR LIST FOR PREPARED LISTS” is a basic prepared list which when used will clean up bypassed charge on improperly done past prepared lists and handle a pc who begins by protesting a repair list being done.

This list is only done if the pc sees a list and goes Bls or protests a “C/S 53” being done. The auditor must have very good obnosis and be well trained to do this switch of actions smoothly.

The Repair List for Prepared Lists should be reassessed and all reads handled until it F/Ns on assessment or pa feeling happy about receiving prepared lists and shows no further protest on the subject.


WORD LISTS FOR PREPARED LISTS

Nearly every prepared list has all its words on a separate sheet, ready for Word Clearing on the pc. All the words on a list are cleared on a pc without repeating the same word or asking the list question. Such lists are issued for auditor convenience.

A list of these word lists is being issued as HCOB I Dec 74 so that you can match them to the prepared lists in this bulletin.


OTHER LISTS

From time to time when a need for prepared list is found new ones will be issued on different subjects.

One can REPAIR a pc or student or staff member. One can also FORWARD a case into new areas with other prepared lists.


MIMEO

Some orgs backlog their mimeos.

The AVAILABILITY of lists to auditors is something which should NOT be neglected. It is highly uneconomical as one loses re-signs and students and staff when prepared lists are in non-existence in an org or even short supply.

Tech is the atomic fuel an org runs on.

KEEP PREPARED LISTS IN SUPPLY FOR USE.

TRANSLATED ISSUES

In non-English speaking orgs lists must be very carefully translated and mimeoed for use. In such orgs, more than any others, great care must be taken to have and use lists as they keep tech straight where it tends to go hearsay and verbal.

So, that’s quite an array of prepared lists, isn’t it?

If they are not in full use in your org don’t wonder about your Delivery Stats Why. Or your org and CF problems. It’s a lack of full use of this tech.

Hidden in these prepared lists is a wealth of tech that explodes into wins for your org. your CF, your pcs and students.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Assisted by
Materials Chief FB
Revised by
Paulette Ausley
Approved by
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:RS:PA:nt.lf.nt
Copyright © 1976, 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 26 OCTOBER 1976
Issue I
Remimeo
All HCOs (Also issued as HCO PL 26 Oct 76
All Tech Divs Issue I, same title.)
All Qual Divs
All Courses C/S Series 97

AUDITING REPORTS, FALSIFYING OF

Probably the most covert and vicious crime in auditing is falsifying an auditing report.

At first glance, to someone who is trying to PR himself as an auditor or to escape consequences of session goofs, this might not seem to be the huge crime that it is.

When an auditing report is falsified, means of repairing the pc are denied, out tech and a need for restudy or redrilling of materials is covered up, out tech is spread about and the repute of the org and Scientology are at risk.

There are many ways of falsifying an auditing report. Chief amongst them is omission of vital data in the report. Another is faking the things run or the pc’s actions or reactions.

To the person doing this it may seem that he has covered up his incompetence but in actual fact it is eventually detected.

A twice declared person recently messed up the cases of several VIPs by simply omitting some of their disagreements with what was being done.

Three SPs, now declared, some years ago had a mutual understanding that they would not put down each other’s withholds. These three also falsified auditing reports to the effect that they had run certain things on pcs “and there was nothing on them,” when in fact they either had not run them or there was reaction which they did not put into the report. They messed up about a dozen people before they were caught and it took many, many hours of careful C/Sing and auditing to salvage those cases (and it also took about two years). They made several hundred serious enemies for themselves and today I doubt any Scientologist would even speak to them and their names are remembered with scathing contempt.

It is not only easy to detect a falsified auditing report, it is also inevitable that it will be detected.

The person whose auditing reports have been falsified is easy to spot in folders and records. The auditor marks “VGIs, F/N” and the Examiner notes bypassed charge and bad indicators. An auditor seeking to prevent this being detected has been known to take the Examiner Report from the folder but that there is no Examiner Report would be the first thing a C/S would notice. Examiner Reports have been forged and exchanged with the actual one but this too is very visible.

Lack of a proper success story points directly to out tech and if it is not visible in the folder then that folder contains falsified auditing reports.

The pc in the midst of his auditing, refuses to re-sign for more. An inspection of folder either finds the out tech in the auditing reports or it doesn’t. If the Folder Error Summary finds no out tech, the next thing that is looked for is falsified auditing reports and this is extended to looking at the other cases this auditor has handled to see if there is any similarity of reaction.

A D of P interview with the pc will reveal falsified auditing reports. It will contain data that does not appear in the auditing reports. The first thing suspect is the auditing reports.

Basically, correct tech applied by a competent auditor who has been trained and interned, works and works every time. When it “doesn’t work,” a C/S begins to look for the real scene. There are many ways he can ascertain the actual scene. Amongst these are outside-the-door session taping, monitors, interviews, lack of success stories, failures to declare, failures to re-sign, Examiner Reports at variances with the session reports, personal check-up into the case and many others.

The only thing which temporarily misleads a C/S is a falsified auditing report. But in all our experience with these, the detection of such reports is inevitable even if it occurs a long time afterwards.

The person who would falsify an auditing report is usually found to be a suppressive with abundant R/Ses and evil intentions who never should have been trained in the first place.

Therefore, the penalty for knowingly falsifying an auditing report in order to make oneself seem more competent than one is or to hide departures from the C/S or to omit vital data necessary to C/Sing, resulting in upsets to a case and time spent in investigation by seniors, is actionable by a Committee of Evidence and if the matter is proven beyond reasonable doubt, a cancellation of all certificates and awards, a declare and an expulsion order are mandatory.

Should the person perpetrating the falsification of auditing reports run away (blow) before action can be taken, the result is the same and is enforceable even if the person is not present.

A green auditor may look upon the offense as slight. If he is too untrained to realize that proper application of tech works every time and that improper application is a gross overt act, he may not realize the seriousness of his action. This however cannot be pleaded as a defense. It is not a light thing to end the hopes and close the door on a pc just because one is trying to cover up his blunders. The blundering auditor can be repaired by cramming and retraining. But only if it is known how he has blundered. That in itself is nowhere near as serious as hiding the fact.

Honesty is the road to truth.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:lf
Copyright © 1976
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 28 OCTOBER 1976
Remimeo
All HCOs (Also issued as HCO PL 28 Oct 76, same title.)
All Tech Divs
All Qual Divs
All Courses
C/S Series 98

AUDITING FOLDERS,
OMISSIONS IN COMPLETENESS
(Ref: HCO PL 26 OCT 76 Issue I
HCO B 26 OCT 76)


Omissions from folders and complete loss of folders is a very serious matter.

A Case Supervisor, as well as a Folder Error Summary auditor and the auditor himself can be impeded greatly by folder omissions. Loss of folders entirely is a much greater catastrophe.

While cases and even folders can be reconstructed and eventually handled (at enormous trouble and time to the pc and technical people) this does not minimize the offense.

Usually-Folder Pages are regarded too lightly as a post and are subject to much transfer even when posted. The Director of Tech Services is often far too lax in posting a Folder Archives I/C even as a double hat. Space restrictions often impede the careful preservation of folders in orgs. But all these posts and spaces are vital to a smooth delivery of auditing and should not be lightly looked upon.

The commonest (and most senseless) omissions from folders are:

1. WORD CLEARING WORKSHEETS. These are done in Academies or training or interne areas as well as the HGC and it is often an omitted action to forward them to the person’s pc folder. Often the lines to do so are unknown or completely missing. Yet every metered Word Clearing action should not only be the subject of a worksheet but also must be included in the person’s pc folder in date order. Word Clearers can fail to F/N a chain or even fail to clear a word as a chain when it doesn’t F/N. Such goofs can mess up cases and leave a C/S perplexed as to how the pc was running well one day and badly the next—yet there is no Word Clearing worksheet there, so the fact of ANOTHER AUDITOR on the case is hidden.

2. QUAL WHY FINDING ACTIONS. As Why Finding also includes listing, possibly the most vicious omission is the failure to include Why Finding worksheets in the person’s folder or even do a worksheet on it. Yet at least one org has been temporarily wrecked by indiscriminate “Why Finding” in Qual that resulted in wrong items and wrong lists and messed up the cases of whole staffs. This poor Why Finding has led at times to Why Finding becoming a restricted or forbidden practice. Qual worksheets of Why Finding MUST be included in the person’s folder along with any list made which itself must include the question asked.

3. HCO WHY FINDING. These actions must also be the subject of worksheets and must also be included in the person’s folder.

4. ALL SEC CHECKS AND INTEGRITY PROCESS LISTS AND ACTIONS. It doesn’t matter who or what is doing the Sec Check, the resulting action is NOT the property of the department or branch or person doing the Sec Checking. A full worksheet must be made and ALL such actions done MUST be included in the routine pc folder of the person.

As it is very vital that a pc’s folder be COMPLETE as well as exist, hereinafter the loss of a pc’s folders and the failure to make worksheets and include them in the person’s pc folder shall be actionable by a Committee of Evidence, to be convened by the Senior C/S of an org. and applies to any person or auditor whether staff, mission or field.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:nt
Copyright @ 1976
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

**7612C_ _ Ron’s Journal No. 28

MODERN MANAGEMENT
TECHNOLOGY DEFINED

by
L. Ron Hubbard

Published December 1976


Modern Management Technology Defined is the key to understanding all Scientology administrative terms and puts full understanding and application of policy at your fingertips.

This vital companion to the OEC Volumes contains over 8,600 words and 13,200 definitions, including 2,000 non Scientology business terms. Near the back of the book is a large list of Scientology abbreviations and their definitions.

A team of researchers spent over a year combing through Ron’s administrative writings, policies, books and taped lectures extracting the definitions for this dictionary, then many months were spent verifying that the definitions as extracted were complete, clear and in context.

Not only does this dictionary make it easy to use Scientology administrative policy, it is a key to understanding business and corporate management.

This book is a must for anyone wanting a better understanding of organization and administration; for Scientology admin course students; for owners of OEC Volumes; for anyone who runs or works in a business, large corporation or any organization.

690 pages, illustrated, hard cover with dust jacket. Available from your nearest Scientology Organization or Mission, or direct from the publishers: Church of Scientology Publications Organization U.S., 4833 Fountain Ave., East Annex, Los Angeles, California 90029, U.S.A.; or Scientology Publications Organization, Jernbanegade 6, 1608 Copenhagen V, Denmark.

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 6 DECEMBER 1976
Remimeo (Also HCO PL 6 Dec 76)
All Registrars
All Case Supervisors
All Ds of P ILLEGAL PCS, ACCEPTANCE OF
All Auditors
GO HIGH CRIME BULLETIN


It shall be a Committee of Evidence offense for a Case Supervisor or auditor to C/S or accept for processing and process any pc:

1. Who is terminally (fatally) ill, regardless of what the org or registrars may have promised or asserted. Such diseases as advanced cancer are included.

2. Who has an extensive institutional history which includes heavy drugs, shocks of various kinds and/or so-called psychiatric brain operations.

3. Who has been denied processing by the Guardian Office for reason of past history or connections or current state as it may affect the safety and security of the org.

It shall also be a Committee of Evidence offense for any ED/CO, Org Exec Sec. Technical Secretary, Director of Processing or other executive or staff member to bring pressure or persuasion upon any Case Supervisor or auditor to process such persons.

It is not that such cases cannot in many instances be handled. It is that neither Scientology nor the org. but doctors and psychiatrists, have brought about the condition and such conditions are outside the zone of responsibility of the org.

Registering such pcs is already illegal, but where it has occurred intentionally or accidentally, no one has the right to force such persons upon Case Supervisors or auditors for any reason.

Any promise made by an org to such a person or his relatives is not binding upon an organization or its staff and such promises are also a Comm Ev offense.

Special petition may be made by the person concerned to the Guardian Office, the representatives of which may act to correct injustices or erroneous use of this Policy Letter. But the Guardian Office itself does not have the right to persuade or insist that Case Supervisors or auditors accept the person for processing unless it is very clearly demonstrated that the person does not fall under any of the above three categories.

Doctors are too often careless and incompetent, psychiatrists are simply outright murderers. The solution is not to pick up their pieces for them but to demand medical doctors become competent and to abolish psychiatry and psychiatrists as well as psychologists and other infamous Nazi criminal outgrowths. Society and police agencies should deal with such offenses. It is not up to Scientologists to salvage the wreckage created by these professions, but to prevent it from happening in the first place by reforming a degraded society.

Until such time as doctors have become fully competent and psychiatry and psychology have been recognized for what they are and abolished, Case Supervisors and auditors are actionable for surrendering their rights and handling such. It is not that they cannot. They must not.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

for the
BDCS.LRH nt
Copyright © 1976 BOARDS OF DIRECTORS
by L. Ron Hubbard of the
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED CHURCHES OF SCIENTOLOGY

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 10 DECEMBER 1976RA
Remimeo REVISED 7 JULY 1978
All Auditors RE-REVISED 18 SEPTEMBER 1978
All Interne
Supervisors (Revisions in this type style)
All C/Ses
URGENT—IMPORTANT

C/S Series 99RA

SCIENTOLOGY F/N AND TA POSITION

Through verbal tech just located, it has been found that some auditors have been ordered to disregard all F/Ns that were above 3.0 or below 2.0 on the meter.

Auditors have also called F/Ns which were ARC break needles, thus falsely indicating to the pc.

These two actions—disregarding actual F/Ns because the TA was not between 2.0 and 3.0 and calling “F/Ns” that were actually ARC break needles—have upset many preclears.

The outnesses here are: A. not considering pc indicators as senior and B. not noting pc indicators when calling an F/N and C. ignoring and giving junior importance to the technology covered in false TAs. (See list of references at end of this HCOB or the Subject Index of the HCOB Volumes.)

Auditors have even been led to falsify worksheets (giving TA as in range when it actually was not when calling an F/N) because they might “get in trouble” for calling an F/N in the wrong range, such as 1.8 or 3.2.

The CORRECT procedure for out of range F/Ns is:

1. Look at the pc’s indicators.

2. Call the F/N regardless of its range.

3. Mark down the ACTUAL TA position.

4. Handle the false TA at the earliest opportunity when it will not intrude into the current cycle on which the pc is being audited. (You don’t interrupt a Quad R3RA, for instance, to handle false TA; you complete it and then, when directed by the C/S, you handle the false TA.)

5. On any pc you suspect has had his F/Ns disregarded because of false TA, you C/S for and get run a repair and rehab of this error.

E-Meter cans can monitor or change TA position when the palms are too dry or too wet or when the cans are too big or too small or when the wrong hand cream is used. The E-Meter does not read on hand moisture alone as was long believed by people in electronics. But TA depends upon resistance to electrical current in the palms, leads, and meter as well as its main resistance which happens to be mental masses or lack of them.

To simply tell some interne “Always disregard an F/N not in correct range” is to set him up for loses and set the pc up for crashes. The correct information is that an F/N which isn’t in range is accompanied by pc indicators that indicate whether it is an F/N or not. AND indicates you better get the false TA handled fast as soon as it won’t
interrupt the current cycle. AND you always note where it F/Ned so the C/S can C/S for false TA handling.

Where an ARC break needle (which looks like an F/N) is observed, whether it is in range or out of range (2.0 to 3.0 or below 2.0 or above 3.0) you LOOK at the pc and establish the pc’s indicators before falsely calling an F/N. A pc who is about to cry is NOT an F/Ning pc and if you indicate an F/N to that pc you will further the ARC break and suppress the emotional charge that is about to come off.


REPAIR

Where the above matters have not been fully understood and errors have occurred on pcs, it must be assumed that:

1. Auditors have falsified their worksheets as to TA position and thus built up withholds and made themselves blowy.

2. That every pc who has ever had high or low TA trouble has had F/Ns disregarded and ARC break F/Ns falsely indicated.

3. That a briefing and drilling of all internes and auditors must occur on this HCOB.

4. That a brief program of clean-up of disregarded F/Ns and falsely called ARC break F/Ns be done on every pc.

5. That every such pc be considered as having false TA troubles and these must be C/Sed for and corrected.

6. That all auditors and internes be drilled on all HCOBs relating to pc indicators.

SAMPLE CLEAN-UP C/S

Disregard TA position, use only F/Ns and pc indicators in doing this C/S.

1. It has been found that some of your F/Ns (release points) may have been disregarded by past or present auditors.

2. Have you ever felt an F/N (release point or end of an action) had been bypassed on your case? . . .

3. Find and rehab the . . . overrun of the release point to F/N. Check for any other bypassed F/Ns and rehab them.

4. Have you ever felt an F/N should not have been indicated by the auditor when it was? . . .

5. Find the . . . point and get in Suppress on it and complete the action. Check “Are there any other F/Ns which should not have been indicated by the auditor when they were?” and handle as above.

6. Find and run the ARC breaks bypassed, with ARC break handling.

7. Find and handle the false TA in totality.


DIANETIC F/Ns

An F/N seen by the auditor in running R3RA is not called until the full Dianetic
EP is reached.

An auditor running R3RA is NOT looking for F/Ns. He is looking for the postulate which is sitting at the bottom of the chain he is running.

The EP of a Dianetic chain is always always always the postulate coming off.

The postulate is what holds the chain in its place. Release the postulate and the chain blows. That’s it.

The auditor must recognize the postulate when the pc gives it, note the VGIs, call the F/N and end off auditing that chain.

An F/N seen as the incident is erasing is not called.

The pc does not have to state that the incident has erased. Once he has given up the postulate, the erasure has occurred. The auditor will see an F/N and VGIs. NOW the F/N is called. F/Ns are not indicated until the EP of postulate off, F/N and VGIs is reached.

It’s the postulate—not the F/N that we are going for in New Era Dianetics.


POWER F/Ns

F/Ns are disregarded in Power.

Each Power Process has its own end phenomena and is ended only when that is obtained.

REFERENCE HCOBs FOR FALSE TA

1. HCOB 24 Oct 71R FALSE TA
2. HCOB 15 Feb 72R FALSE TA ADDITION 2
3. HCOB 12 Nov 71RA FALSE TA ADDITION
4. HCOB 18 Feb 72R I FALSE TA ADDITION 3
5. HCOB 21 Jan 77RA FALSE TA CHECKLIST
6. HCOB 23 Nov 73RA DRY AND WET HANDS MAKE FALSE TA
7. HCOB 23 Apr 75R VANISHING CREAM AND FALSE TA

PC INDICATORS HCOBs

1. HCOB 29 Jul 64 GOOD INDICATORS AT LOWER LEVELS
2. HCOB 28 Dec 63 INDICATORS PART ONE, GOOD
INDICATORS
3. HCOB 23 May 71R RECOGNITION OF RIGHTNESS OF THE
BEING
Issue VIII Rev. 4.12.74
4. HCOB 22 Sep 71 THE THREE GOLDEN RULES OF THE C/S
HANDLING AUDITORS
5. HCOB 21 Oct 68R FLOATING NEEDLE


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:nt.rb.dr
Copyright © 1976, 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 10 JANUARY 1977
Remimeo
Word Clearing Series 55

HOW TO WIN WITH WORD CLEARING

By actual application of the tech Word Clearers can obtain much higher results and wins. Several recent examples have come up where some top tech and admin personnel were not duplicating issues and instructions yet they had been word cleared on these materials with no MUs found. When word cleared again by someone who really knew his business the MUs came off for hours with a resurgence of activity at the end. In a number of the cases success stories were written about never having found a misunderstood word before! All of the examples cited had the following common denominators:

1. The Word Clearer could really handle a meter and make a question read.

2. The Word Clearers had personal certainty on the workability of Word Clearing and could apply it exactly and find MUs to rave results.

TRs AND METERING

The fact that most Word Clearing starts off with the phrase “I am not auditing you” does not mean that TRs and metering do not apply. Quite the contrary they are vital skills that need to be kept sharp by daily TRs just like any auditor and a weekly or monthly Qual check on TR 1 and the ability to make a question read. The reason is quite simple. A Word Clearer must grasp that all forms of Word Clearing that he can apply, either metered or unmetered, were developed to help the individual find the MUs he was unable to find himself. One must assume that the person has already looked up all the MUs he could find (it is after all an ethics offense to fail to clarify words not understood) and is now putting himself in the hands of the Word Clearer to find any MUs that may be just beyond his awareness. Any lack of impingement on metered Word Clearing or reasonableness about slips and slurs or missed definitions on non-metered Word Clearing will leave a person “knowing” he has no MUs but wondering why he still has difficulty with the subject or post.

It may just be that people who find themselves resistive to Word Clearing have not grasped these points either, and wonder why they need Word Clearing when they don’t “think” they have MUs.

PERSONAL CERTAINTY

Word Clearing works. There is no shortage of people who can attest to that. The only times Word Clearing would seem to fail would be if there were errors such as:

a) No reads or missed reads.

b) Ignored slips and flubs in non-metered Word Clearing.

c) Getting off into considerations or confusions without getting to the MUs that always exist at the bottom and then getting the MUs fully defined.

The remedy is simple. If one has been word cleared on an area without a resolution of the original difficulty then MUs have been missed and one need only report right back to a Word Clearer and say “I want my MUs found!” In some cases a WCCL may be required, but more often than not it’s just find the missed MUs.

For anyone who has not yet experienced what it’s like to find a real MU then just report to a Word Clearer and pick any subject or area of difficulty and start getting the
MUs found until the subject or area now makes sense. Continue this on as many subjects as needed to leave no doubt as to the workability of Word Clearing. (The case gain from a real MU found can sometimes rival the biggest wins in auditing.) Any Word Clearer must have this certainty and pass it on to those he word clears.

The wins and gains are there for the taking. A better functioning org with highly productive staff and public is the reward. You deserve it. Just follow the tech as laid out in the Word Clearing Series and you will have it.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Assisted by CS-4/5
for the
BDCS:LRH:JE:lf
Copyright t 1977 BOARDS OF DIRECTORS
by L. Ron Hubbard of the
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED CHURCHES OF SCIENTOLOGY





HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 10 JANUARY 1977
Remimeo
ETHICS AND WORD CLEARING
(References: HCO PL 4 April 72R
ETHICS AND STUDY TECH and HCO PL
16 November 73 STUDY TECH & POST)

While it has been made a Court of Ethics offense to fail to clarify words not understood no provision has been made for this failure stemming from faulty Word Clearing which does not locate the MUs.

THEREFORE:

8. Any Word Clearer who word cleared materials on which misunderstoods have been found at a later date SHALL BE SUMMONSED TO A COURT OF ETHICS.

The charge is OUT TECH.

The references for this Policy Letter are still very much in force.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Assisted by CS-4/5
for the
BOARDS OF DIRECTORS
of the
CHURCHES OF SCIENTOLOGY BDCS:LRH:JE:lf
Copyright © 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[The two HCO PLs mentioned as references above are included on pages 203 and 221 of this volume.

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 13 JANUARY 1977RA
Remimeo REVISED 13 FEBRUARY 1977
Tech & Qual REVISED 5 MARCH 1977
All Levels
All Tech (Revision in this type style)
Check sheets
HANDLING A FALSE TA

Ref: HCOB 24 Oct 71R False TA
HCOB 12 Nov 71R False TA Addition
HCOB 15 Feb 72R False TA Addition 2
HCOB 18 Feb 72R False TA Addition 3
HCOB 23 Nov 73RA Dry & Wet Hands Make False TA
Book: E-Meter Essentials
Book: Introduction to the E-Meter
HCOB 10 Dec 76 F/N & TA Position
HCOB 21 Jan 77R False TA Checklist

HCOB 13 Jan 77 Handling a False TA is revised to show LRH quotes (which are indicated by quotation marks).

“It has recently been discovered that auditors have been mishandling false TA by assessing with the meter to find what the cause of the false TA is instead of directly checking the pc themselves.

“A recent example of this is the False TA Checklist (HCOB 29 Feb 72RA Revised 23 April 75) was being used by assessment on the meter to try to find the pc’s false TA cause. The false TA was not remedied as the auditor never even felt the pc’s hands! Never even checked the pc’s grip! Never felt what the pc’s hands felt like with cream on them! The auditor just checked the lines on the meter and when a read was obtained the pc was asked and nothing came of it. The false TA, now being unhandled, due to the auditor’s confusion caused the pc to be audited over further false TA and drove the pc into desperation. I had to jump in and handle this one. All I did was check the grip and I found that the can size was way too big and part of the pc’s hand (the palm cup) was not touching the can thus causing the TA to read higher = false TA. The cans had to be reduced to 1 1/4 inch diameter aluminum tubing! This particular pc was also misapplying hand cream. The quantity was incorrect and the way the pc was putting it on was not handling the false TA. This pc needed to put Vaseline Intensive Care on extensively then wipe off the hands with Kleenex and then put a bit more on and rub it all over the hands and ensure that the thumbs were being covered. One more factor that messed up the case was the sensitivity was set too high and consequently F/Ns were missed and the TA shot up.”

Another example of this was we had a pc who constantly had low TA F/Ns. Upon checking his grip we discovered that he held the cans so tight that it caused his hands to sweat and part of the hand was actually off the cans. Adjusting the grip handled the false TA. This pc then started to cognite that he was really a fast pc after all and there was nothing wrong with him.

We had another interesting one. This particular pc crossed her legs and had cans that were too big. By having her uncross her legs and recognizing that the can size was off and needed changing to 1 3/4” diameter aluminum tubing remedied her false TA.

So you have to watch it. Make sure that the sensitivity is set correctly for that pc so you don’t miss the F/Ns.

“NONE OF THIS WAS DONE BY AUDITOR ASSESSING A LIST. IT WAS DONE BY OBSERVING THE PC’S HANDLING OF CANS AND POSITIONS AND SEEING WHAT IT DID TO TA POSITION.

“The main point here was the auditor thought that a false TA was think and would register on the meter. That is as silly as asking the meter if you should buy ice cream today or not. The meter can’t answer when the answer is required of the preclear. How the hell would the meter know if the pc’s hands were dry or cold. The auditor has to feel them, touch them, check for dryness by feeling them. Do they FEEL dry? Do they FEEL cold? Are the pc’s feet so cold that no circulation gets through? Do you know without feeling them? Does the hand cream you are using dry up? How do you know without feeling the pc’s hands? I have known a pc to say no it hasn’t dried up because the pc hated wearing cream and didn’t want to put more on. So feel the hands. Don’t just ask the pc and then assume that that is it. You will mess up cases and won’t handle the false TA.

“False TA is in the physical universe. It is something that really exists. When you start checking for meter reads you are violating this law. It is in the physical universe not the pc’s think or bank. It can badly mess up a case to not find the cause of false TAs and then carry on with auditing.”

Understanding the meter and what the meter reads on and understanding false TA and what causes it are the basics behind finding a false TA and remedying it so that the pc can happily continue on with auditing and advance.

“If you think that you have solved a false TA yet the pc still has high or low TA F/Ns then you haven’t solved it at all and you had better roll up your sleeves and get bright and go in there and find it. And the way you do this is to check the pc. What do the hands feel like? What type of clothing is the pc wearing? Feel for tight clothes. Don’t just take the pc’s word. Maybe they like wearing tight shoes but look at that 4.5 F/N. Let them wear tight shoes out of session but get rid of those tight shoes in session so you can get an accurate reading meter.”

Don’t use this to hassle pcs and interject it into sessions whenever you please. When you see a false TA phenomena note it down and the C/S will include it in the program to be handled. This is covered in HCOB 10 Dec 76 F/N AND TA POSITION.

There is no pc on this planet or any planet that wants to experience over-repair and misery due to false TAs. You will be doing them a great service to handle it for them so they can happily be audited after that. Don’t Q&A with the pc’s considerations just find what ‘in the physical universe’ is causing the false TA and remedy that in the physical universe.

Note: The False TA Checklist has been rewritten and issued as HCOB 21 Jan 77R.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
As assisted by
Paulette Ausley

Revised to show
quotation marks by
Paulette Ausley

2nd Revision assisted
by Paulette Ausley
LRH Tech Expeditor

for the
BCDS:LRH:PA:nf.lf.nt
Copyright t) 1977 BOARDS OF DIRECTORS
by L. Ron Hubbard of the
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED CHURCHES OF SCIENTOLOGY

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 21 JANUARY 1977RA
REVISED AND REISSUED 7 JUNE 1978
Remimeo
All Levels
All Auditors (Revisions in this type style)
All Tech
Checksheets
FALSE TA CHECKLIST

Ref: HCOB 24 Oct 71R FALSE TA
HCOB 12 Nov 71RA FALSE TA ADDITION
HCOB 15 Feb 72R FALSE TA ADDITION 2
HCOB 18 Feb 72R FALSE TA ADDITION 3
BTB 24 Jan 73R 1I EXAMINER & FALSE TA
HCOB 24 Nov 73RC C/S 53RK
HCOB 23 Nov 73RA DRY AND WET HANDS MAKE FALSE TA
HCOB 13 Jan 77RA HANDLING A FALSE TA

“This Bulletin cancels HCOB 29 February 1972RA Revised 23 April 1975 as it is misleading and has caused some auditors to assess the pc on the meter to find the cause of false TA instead of checking directly with the pc.”

This Bulletin reinstates the False TA Checklist with specific handlings that are directly from the issues that I wrote on 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 HCOBs state why.”

The auditor signs and answers the following points on the checklist. The auditor must obtain information by checking the pc’s hands himself or herself to see if the hands are dry or wet. The cause of false TA is in the physical universe and that is where the check is done. It is not done by asking the pc or checking the questions on the pc for meter reads. So the auditor would feel the hands of the pc to establish if they are dry or wet, would feel the pc’s hands with cream on them to see if the cream has dried up, would see if the pc’s hands cup so as to form an area that does not touch the cans and so forth. False TA is not think or mental mass. It is in the physical universe and that is where it has to be handled for it to be remedied. The handling sheet follows the items mentioned below.

“R-Factor to pc: ‘I am going to check the cans, your hands and various other things to adjust everything for best accuracy.”’

(See numbered list at back for handlings. Each number in the checklist is exactly represented in the handling by the same number to make it easy to switch to the handling section when doing this checklist.)

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 hand 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 1/2 inches by 3 inches or 11 cm by 8 cm ________

10. TA position on medium cans? Size approx 4 7/8 inches by 2 5/8 inches or 12 1/2 cm by 7 cm ________

11. TA position on small cans? Size approx 3 3/4 inches by 2 1/8 inches or 9 cm by 5 cm ________

11A. Can size for a child is incorrect? Size can go down to photographic aluminum 35 mm film cans for a child. Size approx 2 inches by 1 3/16 inches or 5 cm by 3 cm Note down TA position. ________

11B. If the above mentioned can sizes aren’t correct for the pc’s hands other sizes can be tried. 1 1/4” tubing 1 3/4” tubing as well as other can size checked to see which fits the pc’s hand. Note down TA position. ________

12. Are the cans too large for the pc? ________

13. Are the cans too small for the 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. Does the pc loosen his grip on the cans? ________

19. Check the pc’s grip, does he hold the cans correctly? (See E-Meter Drill 5.) ________

20. Is the pc hot? ________

21. Has the pc slept well? ________

22. Is the pc cold? ________

23. Is the pc hungry? ________

24. Is it too late at night? ________

25. Is the auditing being done not in the pc’s normal regular awake hours? ________

26. Are there rings on the pc’s hands? (Remove any rings.) ________

27. Is the pc wearing tight shoes? ________

28. Is the pc wearing tight clothes? ________

29. Is the pc using the wrong hand cream? ________

30. Is the application of the hand cream correct and does it cover the entire hand? ________

31. Is the chair the pc is sitting in comfortable? ________

32. Is it actually chronic high or low TA case condition? ________

33. Has the pc gone into despair over his TA? ________

The handling of these points is stated in the reference HCOBs.

The handling of high or low TA after checking these points is by C/S 53RK, Short Hi-Lo TA Assessment C/S.

The way to be sure of a C/S 53RK 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.

FALSE TA CHECKLIST HANDLING SHEET

1. IS THE METER FULLY CHARGED?

Handling: “Keep a meter charged at least one hour for every 10 of auditing for 240 AC volt charging current, or 2 hrs for every 10 of auditing on a 110 AC volt charging current.

“Before each session snap the knob over to TEST. The needle should hit hard on the right side of the face. It can even bounce. If the needle doesn’t snap to the right hard or if it doesn’t quite get there on TEST, then that meter will go flat in mid-session and give false TA and no reads or TA on hot subjects.” LRH (HCOB 24 Oct 1971R False TA.)

2. IS THE METER TRIMMED CORRECTLY?

Handling: “A meter can be improperly trimmed (not set at 2.0 with the trim knob) and can give a false TA position. When a meter is not left on a minute or two before trimming, it can drift in the session and give a slightly false TA.

“The trim can quietly be checked in mid-session by snapping out the jack where the cord goes into the box and putting the TA on 2, seeing if the needle is now on SET. If not, the trim knob can be moved to adjust it. The jack is quietly slipped back in. All without distracting the pc.” LRH (HCOB 24 Oct 1971R False TA.)

3. ARE THE LEADS CONNECTED TO THE METER AND CANS?

Handling: “A properly set up meter with cans (electrodes) fitted to a pc who is holding them properly IS ALWAYS CORRECT.” LRH (HCOB 24 Oct 1971R.) Reference for setting up a meter is covered in E-Meter Drills book EM 4.

4. ARE THE CANS RUSTY?

Handling: “Corroded cans can falsify TA. Get new ones now and then.” LRH (HCOB 24 Oct 71R.)

5. ARE PC’S HANDS EXCESSIVELY DRY REQUIRING HAND CREAM?

Handling: “A quick test is have the pc put the cans under his armpits and you’ll see if it’s his calloused or chemically dried out hands. The excessively dry hand is seen as shiny or polished looking. It feels very dry. The correct treatment is to use a hand cream such as Vaseline Intensive Care Lotion (obtainable from any cosmetics store) not a greasy hand cream or vanishing cream. A good hand cream rubs all the way into the hand and leaves no excess grease. Hand cream is usually smeared on, rubbed in and can then be thoroughly wiped off. The hands will usually produce, then, a normal TA and meter response.” LRH (HCOB 23 Nov 73RA Revised 23 April 75 Revised 26 Jan 77 Dry and Wet Hands Make False TA.)

6. ARE THE PC’S HANDS EXCESSIVELY WET REQUIRING POWDER?

Handling: “If the TA is low, check if the pc’s hands are wet. If so have him wipe them and get a new read. It is usually found that the 1.6 was really 2.0 . . . Have the pc wipe hands. LRH (HCOB 24 Oct 71R.)

“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 & should work for two to three hours.” LRH (HCOB 23 Apr 73RA.)

7. THE PC IS NOT BEING TOLD CONTINUALLY TO WIPE HIS HANDS?

Handling: Above per wet hands.

8. THE PC’S GRIP ON THE CANS IS NOT BEING CONTINUALLY CHECKED BY THE AUDITOR IN A WAY THAT INTERRUPTS THE PC?

Handling: “Keep the pc’s hands in sight. Check the pc’s grip. Get smaller cans.” LRH (HCOB 24 Oct 71R.)

9. TA POSITION FOR LARGE CANS?

Handling: “For a normal or large handed pc the can size is about 4 7/8ths inches by 2 5/8ths inches or 12 1/2 cm by 7 cm. This can be altered as big as 4 1/2 inches by 3 inches diameter or 11 cm by 8 cm. This is standard.” LRH (HCOB 24 Oct 71R.)

10. TA POSITION ON MEDIUM CANS?

Handling: Covered above.

11. TA POSITION ON SMALL CANS?

Handling: “This can should be 3 3/4 inches by 2 1/8th inches or 9 cm by 5 cm diameter or thereabouts. A small child would be lost even with that can. So a small 35 mm film can could be used. This is 2 inches long by 1 3/16ths diameter or 5 cm by 3 cm. This works but watch it as these cans are aluminum. They do work but test for true read with a slightly larger can and then trim to adjust for the aluminum if any different. “Cans of course should be steel with a thin tin plating. Regular soup cans. Can size to match the pc avoids slack can grip or tiring the hands into going slack, giving the auditor 3.2 F/Ns and trouble.” LRH (HCOB 24 Oct 71R.)

11A. CAN SIZE FOR A CHILD IS INCORRECT?

Handling: Size can go down to photographic aluminum 35 mm film cans for a child. Note down TA position.

11B. IF THE ABOVE MENTIONED CAN SIZES AREN’T CORRECT FOR THE PC’S HANDS OTHER SIZES CAN BE TRIED.

Handling: 1 1/4” tubing or 1 3/4” tubing as well as other can size checked to see which fits the pc’s hand. Note TA position.

12. ARE THE CANS TOO LARGE FOR THE PC?

Handling: “Can size to match the pc avoids slack can grip or tiring the hands into going slack.” LRH (HCOB 24 Oct 71R.)

Check the pc’s grip and see if the hand is touching all of the can and if the size is comfortable. (Ref: HCOB 13 Jan 77RA Handling a False TA.)

13. ARE THE CANS TOO SMALL FOR THE PC?

Handling: Per above. Check how the pc is holding the cans and if the entire hand is on the cans and if they are comfortable and adjust accordingly per above.

14. ARE THE CANS JUST RIGHT FOR THE PC?

Handling: Check the grip and see if the can size is correct for the pc. Do the cans comfortably fit the pc’s hands with the hand touching the cans so it gets an accurate reading on the meter? If the can size is correct then you must ensure that the grip is also correct on the cans.

15. ARE THE CANS COLD?

Handling: “Regardless of can size, cold E-Meter electrodes tend to give a much higher tone arm reading particularly on some pcs.

“Until the cans warm up, the reading is generally false and is false in the direction of high. Some pcs are ‘cool blooded’ and the shock of ice cold cans can drive the TA up and it takes awhile to drift down.

“A practice which gets around this is for the auditor or Examiner to hold the cans briefly until they are warm and then give them to the pc. A variation is for the auditor or Examiner to put the cans under his armpits while setting up. This warms them. There are probably many other ways to warm up cans to body temperature.” LRH (HCOB 12 Nov 71RA Revised 26 Jan 77.)

16. ARE THE PC’S HANDS DRY OR CALLOUSED?

Handling: Covered above under pc’s hands excessively dry requiring hand cream.

There are ways to apply the hand cream so that it is correct for that individual pc and does handle the false TA. You can spread it on extensively then wipe it off and then rub a bit more in ensuring the thumbs are included is one way. (Ref: HCOB 13 Jan 77RA.)

The point is to feel the hands with the cream on them to see if it has handled the excessively dry hand that is seen as shiny or polished looking.

And it now should no longer feel dry. (HCOB 23 Nov 73RA Revised 23 Apr 75, Revised 26 Jan 77.) The correct treatment is to use a hand cream such as Vaseline Intensive Care Lotion (obtainable from any cosmetics store) not greasy hand cream or vanishing cream.

A good hand cream rubs all the way into the skin and leaves no excess grease. This restores normal electrical contact. Such a hand cream would only have to be applied once per session—at session start—as it lasts for a long while.

If a cream leaves smears on a can, it is too heavily applied or too little absorbed. (HCOB 23 Apr 75R, Revised 26 Jan 77.)

17. DOES THE PC HAVE ARTHRITIC HANDS?

Handling: “A rare pc is so crippled with arthritis that he doesn’t make contact fully with the cans. This gives high TA. Use wide wrist straps and you’ll get a right read.” LRH (HCOB 24 Oct 71R.)

18. DOES THE PC LOOSEN HIS GRIP ON THE CANS?

Handling: Check the grip. Does the angle of the cans go across the palms of the pc? Is the natural curl of the fingers sufficient to hold the cans in place, and is the placement of the cans at an angle ensuring that the maximum skin area is touching the cans? (Ref: Book of E-Meter Drills. ) See if the palm is touching the can and not elevated off. (Ref: HCOB 13 Jan 77RA.)

19. CHECK THE PC’S GRIP, DOES HE HOLD THE CANS CORRECTLY?

Handling: Covered in above section. Also check to see if the pc is holding the cans so tight that it is causing the hands to sweat and read falsely low. (Ref: HCOB 13 Jan 77RA.)

20. IS THE PC HOT?

Handling: Get a fan in the room or handle the room so that it is cooler and the pc comfortable.

21. HAS THE PC SLEPT WELL?

Handling: Don’t audit a pc who has not had sufficient rest or is physically tired. (Ref: HCO PL 14 Oct 68R The Auditor’s Code.)

22. IS THE PC COLD?

Handling: “A pc who is too cold sometimes has a falsely high TA. Wrap him in a blanket or get a warmer auditing room. The auditing environment is the responsibility of the auditor.” LRH (HCOB 24 Oct 71R.)

23. IS THE PC HUNGRY?

Handling: Get the pc something to eat and don’t audit a pc who has not had enough to eat or is hungry. (Ref: HCO PL 14 Oct 68R The Auditor’s Code.)

24. IS IT TOO LATE AT NIGHT?

Handling: “Between 2 and 3 AM or late at night a pc’s TA may be very high. The time depends on when he sleeps usually. This TA will be found normal in regular hours.” LRH (HCOB 24 Oct 71R.)

25. IS THE AUDITING BEING DONE NOT IN THE PC’S NORMAL REGULAR AWAKE HOURS?

Handling: Covered above.

26. ARE THERE RINGS ON THE PC’S HANDS?

Handling: “Rings on the pc’s hands must always be removed. They don’t influence TA but they give a false rock slam.” LRH (HCOB 24 Oct 71R.)

If the ring can’t come off use a small strip of paper around them to shield the ring touching the can.

27. IS THE PC WEARING TIGHT SHOES?

Handling: Remove them. (Ref: HCOB 24 Oct 71R, HCOB 13 Jan 77RA.)

28. IS THE PC WEARING TIGHT CLOTHES?

Handling: If it turns out that tight clothing is affecting the TA ensure that the pc doesn’t wear tight clothes in future sessions. If possible have the pc remove the tight clothing and see what the effect was that it had on the TA and make sure no more tight clothes are worn in future sessions.

29. IS THE PC USING THE WRONG HAND CREAM?

Handling: Using the reference materials find the right hand cream and test it on the pc. Note TA position.

30. IS THE APPLICATION OF THE HAND CREAM CORRECT AND DOES IT COVER THE ENTIRE HAND?

Handling: Watch how the pc puts on hand cream and see if it covers the entire hand, thumb included. If not then have the pc put on hand cream covering the entire hand and pick up the cans and note TA position. Some pcs may have to put cream on and wipe it off and then re-apply it. (Ref: HCOB 13 Jan 77RA.)

31. IS THE CHAIR THE PC IS SITTING IN COMFORTABLE?

Handling: Get a new chair that is comfortable for the pc.

32. IS IT ACTUALLY A CHRONIC HIGH OR LOW TA CASE CONDITION?

Handling: C/S Series 53RK or Hi-Lo TA Assessment. Done to F/Ning assessment.

33. HAS THE PC GONE INTO DESPAIR OVER HIS TA?

Handling: Handle the false TA with using this list as a guideline so that the cause of false TA is found and fully handled with the pc by the various handlings covered above. When false TA is handled check TA worries, TA hassles and L1C best read.

This handling sheet is used in conjunction with the items that are checked. This gives you the way to handle them.

Refer to reference material in reference section above for further data on handling a false TA.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Assisted by
Paulette Ausley
LRH:PA:RS:dr Revisions assisted by
Copyright © 1977,1978 Paulette Ausley
by L. Ron Hubbard and
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Rick Sheehy














HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 22 JANUARY 1977

Remimeo
All Course
Supervisors IN-TECH, THE ONLY WAY
All D of Ps TO ACHIEVE IT
All C/Ses

The dominating factor of tech being in, is whether the auditor really wants to do a good job and help the pc. It is a matter of professional competence and pride.

If the auditor does not have this there is no amount of rules, reading or supervision that will bring about technical successes.

Fortunately the vast majority of auditors have a high professional conscience and are willing to study, drill and do everything possible to perfect their tech. The Course Supervisor, the D of P. the C/S and Qual Cramming terminals must realize this and must do all possible to fortify it and must abstain from invalidations and accusations and injustices which tend to nullify it.

From this springboard of belief in the auditor and a willingness on the part of those training and handling him, to strengthen the auditor’s determination to be professionally competent, in-tech will only then blossom in an org.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:nt
Copyright © 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 24 JANUARY 1977
Remimeo
All Auditors
All Supervisors
All Interneships
URGENT AND IMPORTANT

TECH CORRECTION ROUND-UP


Auditors and Scientologists for 27 years have tended to be suspicious of HCOBs and Policy Letters not written by myself.

Until a few months ago my opinion was that this, while flattering, was not entirely justified.

However, these last few months have sharply changed my belief into total agreement with all those who have expressed some fear of reinterpretations of bulletins by others.

I have been engaged for some months now in a round-up of out tech issues.

And I have found, I am sorry to say, that mice have been gnawing at the pillars of the Bridge, putting up traffic barriers and false detour signs.

I have been finding serious out tech issues and correcting them.

Whether because of misunderstood words (the commonest cause of out tech alterations) or other reasons, there have been a staggering number of tech sectors that have been corrupted by issues by others that alter-ised.

The corrections I have been doing have been, are being or will be issued shortly. However, not all auditors and Scientologists keep pace with current issues and so I am here giving you a rapid summary of the gross departures from standard tech which have occurred in the past 3 or 4 years and their corrections.

So you were right!

A very few people (3 or 4) have wittingly or unwittingly brought about outnesses which could easily make the difference between successful case handling and failed cases.

Action has been taken to handle them and there are a great many good people at work now in compiling and reissuing the workable tech which I developed in the first place.

It is now forbidden to write an HCOB or an HCO PL and sign my name to it.

If anyone helped compile it or wrote it, my name is followed by “Assisted by_____” the person who helped get it back together at my directions.

Also no Board Technical Bulletin may cancel an HCOB.

So from here on you are relatively safe.

I am always the first to tell you and this is no exception.


TECH CORRECTIONS

There follows here a long list of incorrect procedures or data found to have been issued.

Also a brief rundown of the correct procedure will be found, which is the correct and standard tech.

What makes tech correct? When it doesn’t get results it is incorrect. When it gets the expected result it is correct.

My own writings and researches are based wholly upon things that got and get results.

When another, through misunderstood words or other reasons, “interprets” or changes the original tech, it has been the general experience that results are not obtained.

By studying this list you may very well find some alter-ised points which caused you to have trouble or which caused confusion.

Therefore, the subjects themselves are described in summary form.

Not all issues are out yet which accomplish full correction. Their HCOB numbers therefore cannot be given. Some of the issues are not yet released but will be soon. However, there is no reason to deny you the essence of the material and so I am giving you the full list to date.

I trust this list and HCOB restore some stability.

I hope that any failures you may have had due to alter-ised materials will be spotted by you. And that you will be able to apply some of these right now and get the full materials later.

I like results, you like results. And the following may include some of the reasons you may have had a hard time with some sessions.

I am sorry for that. I have come back on tech lines especially to correct it, and have spent seven months spotting areas where there has been trouble or failures, evaluating them and discovering the alter-is of original materials and issues. In many cases the alter-is sure was hidden. This completes 7 months of search for tech outnesses.

Here is the list.

A: PTS HANDLING

The first shock (which actually began this current search for out tech issues) was the discovery that PTS conditions were going unhandled across the world and had been for some time.

“PTS” means Potential Trouble Source and means the person is affected adversely by a suppressive in his life. A PTS person can be a lot of trouble to himself and to others. The condition is not too difficult to handle and to find that all the tech of handling it was in disuse explained why there had been a lot of trouble and upset on various lines.

After a great deal of search, it was found that PTS handling and another rundown (The Vital Information Rundown) had been restricted only to Expanded Dianetics. Thus one would find on pcs’ programs that they were supposed to go all the way through Dianetics and their grades before their PTS condition was handled. In actual fact a person who is PTS cannot be audited on anything else until the PTSness has been straightened out. This was operating as an effective barrier to cases.

Fortunately, the Technical Bulletin Volumes were not quite off the press and this one was caught with HCOB 27 July 1976 which will be found on page 428 of Volume VIII.

The first thing you do for a pc in any grade or without grades is handle his PTSness.

As long as the subject was hot I decided to look further into it to make sure that the actual tech was still available and to get a pilot done to verify its use in actual practice since few had had any PTS handling for a couple of years.

I initiated a pilot project and it was well executed by CS-5.

The results of this project are found in HCOB 20 Oct 1976.

The outcome of this further research as contained in that HCOB was that the person, for full handling, should be gotten through his PTSness and then should study the complete pack of PTS/SP Checksheet, BPL 31 May 71RC, so that he knows the full mechanics that had been wrecking his life. This is contained in HCO PL of 20 Oct 1976.

While the above named checksheet is quite adequate, a project is now in progress to collect up all original LRH Case Supervisor notes (C/Ses) and handwritten materials on PTSness so that additional issues may be brought out and the checksheet extended. The reason for this is that there is a sector of non-audited handling of PTSness which has never been fully released. This comes under the heading of additional material and the existing PTS material is not only workable but is vital.

So this scene was rounded up and PTSness is again being handled successfully over the world.

As an additional note, a cassette is now being made for general distribution and sale which will soon be released so that PTS people can get one and send it or play it to persons antagonistic to their leading a better life.


B: ORG DELIVERY

No auditing is a technical situation. The ability to procure auditing has a considerable bearing on people’s case progress—naturally.

It was found that some organizations were slow in delivery and were backlogging which tends to create a no auditing situation amongst pcs.

To remedy this backlog, the Technical Secretary of every org was given a new statistic, “VALUE OF SERVICES DELIVERED.” This gives an index of the delivery of the org and brings backlogs into view and will serve as a means of alleviating a no auditing situation in the field where it exists as it calls the fact spectacularly to the attention of all management, local and international. This is HCO PL 12 Nov. 76.

Along with this another situation came to view which again was a matter of other people writing HCOBs.

The Director of Processing had been given in HCOB 16 June 1972R a statistic which encouraged him to simply route pcs out of the org once they had completed a small part of their processing.

Accordingly the statistic of the Director of Processing in an org was revised in HCOB 16 June 1972RA to “the number of pcs routed back into the lines.”

The Director of Tech Services was given a stat of getting actions completed on pcs.

With these two stats operating, one after the other, a no auditing situation in an area is further alleviated.

People do not sufficiently consider no auditing as the most basic failure of cases. It seems so “of course” that it gets entirely overlooked yet it can cause a great deal of trouble.

C: HSDC RE-DO

The first inkling that the Hubbard Standard Dianetics Course curriculum had gone adrift was noticing that two key drills had been omitted and even cancelled by others even though they were vital to an auditor’s skill in handling a Dianetic session.

These drills were Dianetic Training Drills 101, 102, 103 and 104. These have to do with student auditors remembering their commands in session, making him practiced in using commands while handling his meter and admin, training him to use the right command in the right place according to what the pc does and finally training him to use commands and handle the session in spite of any and all distractions or reactions from a pc. Obviously if a Dianetic auditor cannot do these things he cannot run a Dianetic session.

These drills now have been emphatically reinstated in HCOB 19 July 1969R reissued 9 Dec 1976; they are for use in all Dianetic training.

Looking into this further, I found that there was a new unauthorized Dianetics Course which supposedly was based on Dianetics Today being issued which would be a sort of a competitive course to an HSDC. In following this further it was found that even the most fundamental formats of the HSDC which I personally developed and piloted had been grossly alter-ised, that a number of persons had been writing HCOBs on the subject, and that the format had been lost.

The original HSDC is being gathered together at this time with all instructions, C/Ses and drills in the pattern and format which was originally developed and which DID make GREAT auditors. So you can expect a considerable resurgence in the quality of Dianetic auditing some time in the future.

At the same time, a new course, which makes a senior Dianetic auditor, is being put together which is a post-graduate step after a person has become an HSDC. This will take in all the materials found in Dianetics Today and should cover areas of special Dianetic application.

D: ROCK SLAMS

A rock slam (R/S) is defined as “a crazy irregular slashing motion of the needle.”

This particular meter reaction was found to be relatively unknown to auditors on an examination I made of some worksheets. They were calling dirty needles, dirty reads, rocket reads, body motion and even ticks as “R/Ses.” They were also missing real R/Ses.

As the R/S is probably the single most important and dangerous read on the meter, clarifications of this were in order.

Accordingly I wrote HCOB 10 Aug 1976, “R/Ses, WHAT THEY MEAN” and caused to be written from my notes HCOB 1 Nov 1974R, “ROCK SLAMS AND ROCK SLAMMERS.”

For a pc to be branded as an R/Ser is a very serious thing. Also for a real R/Ser to be overlooked by an auditor is a catastrophe both to the pc and to those around that particular person.

Therefore, this is very dangerous ground to have wrong.

These issues will help to clarify that.

At the same time I’m currently at work on a video tape which will be available in Academies some time in the future, which gives all meter reads.

Meanwhile, don’t make any mistakes on R/Ses. Read those bulletins.

Another confusion in this sector was how to define and identify a “List 1 R/Ser.”

All characteristics given in a list issued as HCOB 1 Nov 74 and signed by another with my name were stated to have to be present before a person was a “List 1 R/Ser.” The incorrect HCOB is on page 344 Vol VIII of the HCOB Volumes and will be corrected in later editions.

“List 1” refers to Scientology related terminals as found on page 57 of The Book Of E-Meter Drills.

The additional characteristics on this list only help to look for a List 1 R/S. I issued HCOB 1 Nov 1974R revised 30 Dec 1976 which now corrects this error.

A List 1 R/Ser is simply one who R/Ses on List 1.


E: SEC CHECKING AND INTEGRITY PROCESSING

Following down the trail of auditors missing R/Ses, it was found that Sec Checking had become a nearly lost art.

Sec Checking means, unfortunately, “Security Checking.” That it was so misnamed in its origins obscures the fact that Confessionals have been part and parcel of religion nearly as long as religion has existed.

In actual fact the meter simply gets a pastor or minister over the very dangerous situation of missing a withhold on his parishioner. A person with a missed withhold can become very upset with the person who misses it; the meter, properly operated, makes sure that none are missed.

In an effort to get around what was thought to be a public relations scene, the name “Security Checking” was changed to “Integrity Processing.” This was also a PR error because the actual truth of the matter is it originated as “Confessional” and should have simply been changed back to “handling of confessions.”

This administrative demand of name alteration threw the original issues on “Sec Checking” into disuse.

Additionally “Integrity Processing” did not include all the tech of Sec Checking. And some even thought they were different subjects!

The loss of Sec Checking, more properly called Confessionals, and the failure to use a meter to verify withholds resulted in many student blows (dropouts) and has permitted the continuance of a great deal of natter and upset which are simply the result of missing withholds on people.

When you realize that a lot of the trouble of the Roman Catholic Church probably arose through not having a meter to verify the completeness of Confessionals, you can see what the loss of Sec Checking would do to our own churches and organizations. In other words, we were about to repeat history!

All this original “Sec Checking,” properly Confessional, tech is being rounded up again and will be issued in checksheet form and there will be courses in “The Handling of Confessionals.” But even before you receive these, you should resume the use of
this metered tech as it will save you having people “mad at you” simply because you have missed withholds on them.

It is highly self-protective both from the viewpoint of the auditor and the organization to have the proper metered handling of Confessionals fully in.

BTB 31 Aug 1972RA “HCO CONFESSIONAL PROCEDURE” clarified the matter but this bulletin was on a very limited distribution and is not known. It contains the tech I developed on Sec Checking in the autumn of ‘72.

There should be no further confusion in this matter. “Sec Checking,” “Integrity Processing” and “Confessionals” are all the exact same procedure and any materials on these subjects is interchangeable under these titles.

The materials when all recollected and consolidated and reissued will be under the title of “Confessionals.” But even before that reaches you, you had better determine to become an expert in it, since an auditor’s inability to handle this is a fast route to “how to win enemies and wrongly influence people.”


F: EXPANDED DIANETICS OVERHAUL

Expanded Dianetics began in development in 1970. It is a very fully developed subject. However, for some reason or another, the total materials of Expanded Dianetics were never packaged and exported even when it was reported that they had been. Thus auditors who have been trained as Expanded Dianetics auditors had been denied considerable key materials and have even lost the reason for Expanded Dianetics.

Contributing to this was the removal of “Sec Checking” (Confessionals) materials from the Expanded Dianetics Course to make up the “Integrity Processing Rundown.” Thus the course was stripped even further, for an Expanded Dianetics auditor has to be very expert in the handling of Confessionals.

The actual extent of Expanded Dianetics can be described as follows: “Ex Dn consists of all the work I did on psychos and very difficult cases from 1970 forward, my C/Ses, case histories, any tape lectures or notes, which includes as well all data known to date on Confessionals, and all data on PTSes. The product of the course is an auditor who can handle psychos, R/Sers and any person’s evil intentions as well as any PTSes.”

That would be the full extent and skill of an Expanded Dianetics auditor. There is considerable data connected with the subject and it is the only data, proven, workable data, Man has on the subject of neurosis and psychosis, and is the first breakthrough made in this field as to its actual cause. This also embraces criminality.

While we are very far from being in the business of handling psychos, not all psychos are in institutions or classified as psychos in this society. Furthermore PTS persons become PTS to people who are usually psycho.

Thus this whole scope and breadth of Expanded Dianetics has to be and is being recompiled and issued.

Furthermore the position of Expanded Dianetics on the Grade and Class Chart was muddied up. Actually Expanded Dianetics can be given after a Drug Rundown, after Standard Dianetics, after Scientology grades, after Power, after OT III and at any point upwards after completion of Grade OT III.

A PTS Rundown can be given without regard to whether the person had had Expanded Dianetics or not. A PTS Rundown can be given anywhere and better had be.

An auditor is trained on Expanded Dianetics after he has become an HSDC, a Class IV auditor.

An auditor does not have to be an Expanded Dianetics auditor in order to deliver a PTS Rundown. All he has to do is complete the PTS Checksheet and should be a Class IV in order to audit it. There are even some portions of the PTS Checksheet, particularly as it would be revised, which can be delivered by a person who is not trained as an auditor at all, but this would be non-audited handling which consists mainly of coaching the person as to how to handle his scene.

The complete Expanded Dianetics tech is, as I have said, being recompiled, issued and gotten back in.

G: WORD CLEARING

Having discovered an executive who had “been word cleared” by a “Word Clearer” but who then required more than 4 1/2 hours to clear the first two pages of the same material when handled by a higher classed auditor, I investigated the extent of Word Clearing training and use being out.

A study of the Word Clearing Series was ordered and it was found that there was little concentration on metering and TRs.

These seem to have been slighted because Word Clearing starts with the phrase “I am not auditing you” and this apparently has been taken to mean that one didn’t have to know his meter and TRs in order to word clear. HCOB 10 January 1977, Word Clearing Series 55, “ HOW TO WIN WITH WORD CLEARING” is a result of this investigation and should be given particular importance.

Another factor was spotted and is handled in Board Technical Bulletin 12 January 1977 Revised 16 January 1977, which was issued as a result of my having found that Word Clearers had a wrong stat. The stat of Well Done Auditing Hours would not apply to a Word Clearer. Their stat is now “Number of Misunderstood Words honestly found and fully handled in applicable materials.”

Another action is found in HCO Policy Letter 10 January 1977, “ETHICS AND WORD CLEARING,” wherein “Any Word Clearer who word cleared materials on which misunderstoods have been found at a later date shall be summoned to a Court of Ethics.”

The phrase “I am not auditing you” does not excuse ignorance on the Word Clearer’s part of a meter or a poor command of TRs. Of course this must also include his knowledge of Word Clearing tech. His TRs and metering must be excellent.

The marvelous wins that can be gotten with Word Clearing had been lost and with this should now be recovered.

H: F/N TA POSITION

The subject of missing F/Ns (floating needles) on pcs is very important as a pc who has had an F/N missed becomes overrun and can be very upset and his case can even be stalled.

The first instance I ran into of this (some years ago) had to do with the sensitivity setting on the meter. Most auditors apparently simply would set a sensitivity knob on 5 and leave it there, regardless of how the pc advanced and regardless of who they were auditing. This would give them extremely wide F/Ns which would hit the pin, on one or both sides, and hang up as they were unable to keep the needle on “set.” The correct way to go about this is to always set the sensitivity knob by pc can squeeze. When the pc squeezes the cans, the sensitivity knob should give about a third of a dial drop, no more, no less. Only in that way can you keep a needle on the “set” mark on the dial. Otherwise, F/Ns get missed. Some pcs have to go up to 128 (32) which is a front face meter setting to get such a fall on a can squeeze and I have just noted a pc who had such a wide F/N swing that the sensitivity had to be set at 1 (32), which is about as low as the meter can go without turning off, and even then this pc got a half a dial can squeeze
fall and so had to be watched very carefully so that F/Ns were not missed. I mention this in case it has dropped out again.

The current discovery which just dropped with a clang was that in one interneship, an interne supervisor was using verbal tech which had then spread all over the world to the effect that you MUST NOT call an F/N an F/N unless it were between 2 and 3 on the tone arm dial, and that any F/N type motion which occurred with the TA above 3 or below 2 could not possibly be called an F/N. This was his own craziness and he wished it off with a bunch of verbal tech on an awful lot of auditors and caused an enormous amount of pcs subsequently to be very unhappy.

The result and remedy of this is contained in HCOB 10 December 1976, which is marked Urgent and Important. It is marked that way because apparently there are very few pcs around right now who haven’t had F/Ns missed on them.

This HCOB should be very carefully studied. However, in brief, the correct procedure for out of range (above 3 or below 2) F/Ns is:

1. Look at the pc’s indicators,

2. Call the F/N regardless of its range, if the indicators are alright,

3. Mark down the actual TA position when the F/N is indicated,

4. Handle the false TA at the earliest opportunity when it will not intrude into the current cycle of auditing,

5. On any pc you suspect has had his F/Ns disregarded because of false TA, you C/S for and get run a repair and rehab of points in his auditing when F/Ns were missed on him.

In other words, have your sensitivity correct and when an F/N occurs outside of the range between 2 and 3, know that it is an F/N by the needle motion and by the pc s indicators and call it, indicate it and put it down on the worksheet. Note the actual TA position. Then, before the next session or after you have finished a crucial cycle of auditing on the pc, in the next several sessions, go into the whole subject of his false TA and handle it.

Missing an F/N is very cruel on a pc because it invalidates his having released the charge on the subject on which he is being audited and tends to tell him that he is not better even though he feels better. There is one historic case of an auditor having gotten an F/N in the first ten minutes of auditing and then, because it occurred slightly above 3, auditing the pc for an additional three hours with the TA climbing, the pc unhappy and no results being obtained from the processing. This sort of thing is pretty gruesome.

Verbal tech is no substitute for HCOBs.


I: FALSE TA

Having written the HCOB just above telling auditors that they call the F/N regardless of where it was, providing the pc’s indicators were OK and then handle the TA on the pc, I found that issues on correcting false TA had been messed up.

In both HCOB 29 Feb 1972R Revised 23 Nov 1973 and its successor HCOB 29 Feb 1972RA Revised 23 Apr 1975, careless reading could imply that the False TA Checklist was audited on the pc like any other prepared list. In other words this idiocy set in that the meter reads were going to be used to divine whether or not the meter knew whether or not the pc was responding properly. The list actually, is a list of things the auditor manually, mechanically checks on the pc. He does not consult reads and he does not assess anything on the pc; he simply personally does a checklist and
this was the checklist. It was not assessed to find a reading item. Therefore an auditor trying to correct false TA and get the TA to read between 2 and 3 by using a meter to assess the list would never find out what was going on and would be unable to get the meter into that position.

Accordingly, HCOB 13 Jan 1977 was directed to be written, and the full and entire checklist to be done by the auditor on the pc recompiled and updated. It is being issued as HCOB 21 Jan 1977.

Therefore it will now be very easy for an auditor to correct the false TA on a pc and he will be able to get the meter tone arm properly between 2 and 3.

You know, don’t you, that a TA goes up more than a division when you start using a one-hand electrode? This is not a “false TA” that you can correct. Solo auditors using just one hand have their TAs riding around 3.7 and 4.5 on the tone arm. This is not a case of false TA, it is always checked by using both hands on the cans at the start and end of session. But here again false TA can occur if the hands are too dry or too wet or the can size is wrong.

You shouldn’t have very much trouble with this. Actually it’s a very simple matter, but the outnesses in this sector have caused an awful lot of trouble and I was very happy to be able to find the erroneous issues and get it straight for you.

A video which will eventually become available in Academies will also cover false TA handling.

J: INCOMPLETE AUDITING FOLDERS

For some time Word Clearers, Sec Checkers, Ethics Officers and Cramming Officers have neglected to include their worksheets in the pc’s actual folder.

This causes considerable difficulty for a Case Supervisor since the person may have wrong lists in “Why Finding,” may have R/Sed on a Sec Check, may have had incomplete or incorrect Word Clearing and other tech outnesses in between regular sessions. Where these folder omissions occur an FESer (Folder Error Summary maker) is often prevented from finding where the case went wrong.

Then there is the matter of no folders at all. Somebody has lost them or mislaid them, yet some auditor needs them desperately to find out lists or to actually verify grades attained. The preservation and availability of auditing folders to the next auditor or a Case Supervisor years up the track is of very great importance.

Accordingly HCO PL 28 Oct 1976 and HCOB 28 Oct 1976, C/S Series 98 (which are both the same equal texts) were written by me to remedy these very dangerous tech outnesses.


K: FALSIFYING AUDITOR REPORTS

Along with missing reports it was found that there had been some difficult situations created by the falsification of auditing reports.

From the small matter of saying that the TA was at 3.0 when actually is at 4.5 when the F/N occurred (thus obscuring the fact that false TA had to be handled), up to the very large crime of faking the fact that certain processes had been run when they had not just to get a completion or a bonus and up to falsifying the data or text which the pc gave, this matter of false Auditor Reports can cause enormous amounts of trouble.

The consequences and detection of the falsification of auditing reports is now contained in HCO Policy Letter 26 Oct 1976 Issue 1, the same text issued as HCOB 26 Oct 1976 Issue 1, C/S Series 97. This makes even the minor falsification of an auditing
report a matter of Comm Ev and, if the crime is proven beyond reasonable doubt, there can result a cancellation of all certificates and awards, a declare and an expulsion order.

If you think this is unnecessarily harsh, think of the poor pc.


L: CHECKLIST FOR FESers

It can happen that a pc is taken up into new grades without having completed earlier, more basic grades and without being set up for the later grade. This can result in somebody going through several grades just to cure a mild somatic or a PTP. It can also throw a pc in over his head.

For a long time there have been checklists showing the requirements for most major grades.

A recent instance of a pc going all the way through to OT 111 who had not completed anything caused me to investigate the reasons behind this.

It was discovered that very few Case Supervisors ever check a folder to find out if the pc has actually made the grades lower than the one that he is about to be put on.

A further check showed that few C/Ses ever looked up the earlier history of the case and this resulted in pcs being put up through levels for which they have not been set up and past levels they have not made.

A further investigation showed that these checklists were not in existence for every grade and action.

It became obvious that the people who should be using these checklists would be the Folder Error Summary auditors. These FESers are the only ones who thoroughly go through the folders and Case Supervisors depend on them. Thus if the FESer is not required to verify whether the pc has properly attained the level he is about to go onto and if he has been set up for the level, then nobody is going to check this over and a great many pcs are going to be audited on skipped gradients without set-ups and will get into difficulty.

I have ordered that checklists be made up for FESers to use for each major grade so that they can check off the requisites for each grade and thus handle this out gradient situation. These checklists are being worked on at this time and will be issued in the near future.

In the meantime it is the duty of the FESer to indicate whether or not the pc has actually reached each grade to which he has attested and whether or not he is properly set up for the grade he is about to be embarked upon.


M: AUDITOR RECOVERY

It can happen here and there that an auditor who has been auditing eases off and ceases to audit.

There are various reasons for this. One of the common ones is a skipped gradient in his training. Another one is misunderstood words and the commonest one is overts of omission or commission on the subject of auditing or pcs which have not been handled.

An LRH ED 176RB INT originally issued on 24 April 1972 was unfortunately revised 2 or 3 times by other people and lost its punch.

I reworked this and restored it to its earlier form on 7 Nov 1976 and this is available as LRH ED 176RB INT. The investigation and reissue being assisted by CS-7.

It is available in this form and in the near future will be issued as an HCOB.


N: STUDY TECH

During an investigation of pricing I discovered that “The Student Hat” had disappeared from use and in its place had been put an optional Basic Study Manual. The fact is that the Basic Study Manual has its own uses and is very valuable but it does not begin to replace The Student Hat.

This meant actually that study tech had more or less disappeared in Academies and was not in general use.

The actions taken were to make The Student Hat mandatory on a one-time basis before the next major course a person took and to include it free as a bonus to the person taking that course.

The Student Hat has been restored in totality as a requisite for study tech. This will make study much more positive and much faster.

The Basic Study Manual was put forward sometime ago as a means of getting staffs hatted on their hat materials and as a fast method of getting people reading the materials of their posts. I suppose that is how it drifted over onto major courses, where it has no business.

Thus The Student Hat is back full force and if there are any blown students around you should realize that the reason for their blow is either lack of study tech or undisclosed overts. The thing to do is to get them back and push them through The Student Hat so they can win at their studies and get their overts off so they can look their fellow man in the eye.

There has been another training outness found which I will mention in passing. In some interneships the entire Qual staff of the org has been employed in checking out students. Actually such checkouts are done by the students themselves, on each other where starrates are required in interneships.

It has also been found that twinning on theory occasionally creeps back in. People have not noticed that twinning on theory, meaning two students always study together, went out many years ago and has been cancelled. It makes a noisy classroom and prevents students from getting through their courses rapidly. Twinning on theory sets up too many difficulties such as the loss of one’s twin by reason of graduation or transfer, being sent to Cramming, an odd number of people on the course so that one is without a twin and so on.

Practical is another matter. In practical drilling is done on the twin basis.

The theory and practical are never in the same room; they must be in different rooms. The theory room must be very, very quiet where a student can concentrate and the practical room must be so situated as to allow students to make noise. If any Academy has a noisy theory classroom or if the Academy is difficult to study in, this is probably what is in violation: probably the twinning is going on in theory or the theory rooms are noisy. Only a practical room can be made noisy.

The two issues (putting twinning in on theory) have now been revised and cancelled. They are HCOB 26 Nov 71, Tape Course Series 10, W/Cing Series 26 “HANDLING MISUNDERSTOOD WORDS ON TAPE RECORDED MATERIALS,” which has been revised and cancelled by BTB 26 Nov 71RA (Tape Course Series 8, W/C Series 26RA) of same title (Tech Volume IX, page 440). HCOB 7 Feb 72 Issue 11, W/Cing Series 31, “METHOD 3 WORD CLEARING BY THE STUDENT’S TWIN” has been revised and cancelled by BTB 7 Feb 1972RA Issue II, W/Cing Series 31RA “METHOD 3 WORD CLEARING” (Tech Volume IX, page 448).

The main point is you want a quiet and orderly theory training room and put the noisy demo and practical actions elsewhere. And also don’t hang up people on theory because they lose their twins. Practical twins are highly interchangeable.


O: PROFESSIONAL RATES

It was found in some cases that pcs would enroll on courses and then never take them just so they could have professional rates in their auditing.

This not only denied them the training they paid for but it was also making organizations short of auditors.

Accordingly HCO PL 13 Nov 1976 was issued which clarified “professional rates” which makes it necessary for an auditor to be fully classed in the class of that org from which he is seeking service in order to qualify for a 50% professional discount in auditing. This does not apply to his family.

What’s the matter with becoming an auditor? There are 2 or 3 billion pcs out there and only a few of us auditors. Have a heart and also lend a hand. Furthermore how do you know what good auditing is unless you’re trained?


P: SENIOR CASE SUPERVISOR LINE

It was recently found that the Senior Case Supervisor, in at least one large org. spent most of his time giving advice to executives on personnel case requirements for the crew! This is so far from the duties of a Snr C/S that the HCO PL outlining their duties has been rewritten and has become HCO PL of 26 Sept 1974R, revised and reissued 21 Jan 1977, which tells a Snr C/S in effect to look after the tech quality in his org.

There is another modification on Snr Case Supervisors. Previously it was necessary for someone to go to a distant org and become a Class VIII before he could be qualified as the Snr Case Supervisor of an org. This is no longer necessary. HCO PL 24 Oct 76 Issue III modifies these requirements so that a Snr Case Supervisor can be trained by his local org.

In this same Policy Letter the award of Dean of Technology is outlined. These would be gold certificate Case Supervisors. They are Saint Hill Special Briefing Course Class VIII Course auditors who have attained the case level to the class of his org and has a uniform record of case supervision.

This general overhaul of the Snr Case Supervisor and his lines and duties is in effort to correct out tech and establish excellent tech in any org and its area.


Q: INTERNESHIPS

It was found that very few interneships were now being taught and an investigation undertaken by the Action Aide Flag Bureau at my orders, finally uncovered that interneship checksheets had been added to and added to and stirred about until they had become checksheets within checksheets, thus making interneships interminable.

As a result of this, a special mission was put on the job of reforming interneship checksheets.

These checksheets have now been issued and exist for every level as Board Policy Letters issued from 10 Nov 76 up through BPL 25 Nov 76 Issue 1. They have been greatly simplified and have made interneships into very worthwhile actions.

These new simplified interneship checksheets are in full use at this time.

Along with this interneship program, HCO Policy Letter of 25 Oct 1976 has been issued which requires that all past provisional certificates which have not been validated by an interneship and which are one year or more old from the date of course completion are cancelled. It states such students should be notified and should be enrolled on the interneship for the class. If a properly conducted interneship is satisfactorily completed, their permanent certificate may be reissued.

All of this is in an effort to get auditors straightened out, getting wins and making them really proficient and professional in all areas of the world.


R: ILLEGAL PCs

It has occasionally happened that an auditor has had pushed off on him by persuasion or pressure, cases who should not have been accepted by the org.

HCOB 6 Dec 1976 also HCO PL 6 Dec 76 (identical texts), make this a High Crime.

Certain types of cases may not therefore be forced off on auditors by anyone, and anyone seeking to force such a pc upon an auditor against policy, is actionable by a Committee of Evidence.


S: EXPANDED GRADES BEING REDONE

It has been found that some processes were left out of Expanded Grades 0 to IV and that in some cases these grades had been quickied. Therefore, all Expanded Grades checklists are being reissued and will contain more extensive processes.

Until you have the new Expanded Grades checklists, the ones you are using are still OK.

T: REPAIR LIST REVISED

Through an oversight, an incomplete Board Technical Bulletin 11 Aug 1972RA revised 18 Dec 1974, C/S Series 83RA, was included on page 230 of Volume X of the HCOB Volumes.

A far more extensive write-up, LRH ED 257 INT of 1 Dec 1974, existed which gave much more data and many more prepared lists as repair tools for the auditor.

The LRH ED has now been issued as HCOB of 24 Oct 1976 C/S Series 96 “DELIVERY REPAIR LISTS.”

Although this issue has been updated to some degree, there are still one or two repair lists omitted. Therefore, this is about to be issued again as C/S Series 96R, which will include the additional and valuable lists.


U: ROUTING FORMS AND STAFF STATUSES

It has been found that Staff Status 0, 1 & 11, Sea Org Products 0, 1 & 11 and Org Routing Forms were not in full agreement with one another.

This is taking a lot of straightening out and is very much in need of it, as in one major org it was found to be impossible for a new staff member to route onto post!

This is under full coordination rewrite and will be issued in the near future.


V: STAFF SECTION OFFICER

I have for some time been concerned about the lack of care some orgs had been giving their own staff members.

As a result HCO PL 22 May 1976 was issued which established the post of Staff Section Officer, who was responsible for the training and the processing of staff members.

To further enforce this, the Qual Divisions of orgs were given a new Gross Divisional Statistic in HCO PL of 4 Nov 1976. This gave the dominant Qual Divisional Statistic as “Fully qualified and trained staff members in the org. cumulative.”

Additionally, in HCO PL of 10 Nov 1976 certain staff courses were made mandatory in orgs.

So as not to neglect staff cases, even when auditors were absent, a whole new project has been released concerning “co-audits.”

This is actually a recovery of lost tech. There used to be co-audits, very successful ones, and they had their own special technology.

A tech mission to the UK, reassembled the tech and got staff co-audits going with rave wins.

All of this technology and how it is done, has been issued as Board Technical Bulletins dated around early December 1976 under the title of “Co-audit Series.”

Both the co-audit tech and Group Processing fell under the category of lost tech, but have been restored, polished up and are being issued for full use.


W: UNISSUED RUNDOWNS

It came to my attention in July of ‘76 that about 5 years worth of my developments on Flag had never been fully packaged up or issued for use. The reason for this is, that the Tech Compilations Units which had previously worked on this were disbanded in 1972 by the then CS-4 and was not reestablished.

Several years worth of intensive research and development are therefore backlogged in being issued.

Only one of these areas of development is restricted to Flag, as it is the famous “L” series of rundowns which require such technical accuracy that they can only be audited by a Class XII.

The rest of the rundowns, however, are fully capable of being fully compiled from the notes, lectures, issues and my case supervision notes and released.

Including the repackaging necessary for the HSDC, Expanded Dianetics and reissue of Expanded Grades, all mentioned above, there were 9 rundowns in all which were never compiled or exported.

For that matter, the much earlier Class Vial Course was added to and varied and it also is being repackaged in its original form and exported and is now being taught again in Advanced Orgs.

The remaining rundowns are being worked on for issue as never having seen the light of day in Class IV, Saint Hill and Advanced Orgs.

All this is now being done. So soon this important new tech will appear and be available in orgs.

X: ADVANCED GRADES

For a number of years people have wondered when OT VIII would be released.

Well, to tell you the honest truth, OT VIII has been in existence all those several years, and to it has been added a very large number of OT grades. None of them have been issued. Notes for all these grades are in existence.

What I have been waiting for is 2 or 3 months of free time to go over these materials and write them up and make them available through Advanced Organizations.

Now I will make a bargain with you. If you get all the tech straightened out and the orgs and flaps and emergencies off my lines and get your training in and your Word Clearing in and everything flying and this civilization even more thoroughly pointed in a civilized direction, you will buy me those 3 months’ worth of time so I will be able to afford the time to write up all these Advanced Levels I have researched. Do your job well and buy me these three months.

Is it a bargain?


LRH:act.lf.nt L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1977 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 26 JANUARY 1977
Corrected & Reissued
Remimeo 20 MARCH 1977
Tech & Qual (Correction in this type style)
All Levels
All Auditors
All Tech Checksheets
FOOTPLATES USE FORBIDDEN

Ref: HCOB 24 Oct 71R FALSE TA
HCOB 12 Nov 71RA FALSE TA ADDITION
HCOB 15 Feb 72R FALSE TA ADDITION 2
HCOB 18 Feb 72R FALSE TA ADDITION 3
HCOB 24 Jan 73 Issue II
HCOB 23 Nov 73RA DRY AND WET HANDS MAKE FALSE TA
HCOB 23 Apr 75R VANISHING CREAM AND FALSE TA
HCOB 13 Jan 77R HANDLING A FALSE TA
HCOB 21 Jan 77R FALSE TA CHECKLIST

The use of footplates is forbidden. A recent dispatch to myself from LRH quotes him, “I tested footplates and they don’t read! Not on the bank.”

The above issues cover how to handle a false TA. Use them to resolve TA problems not footplates.

Paulette Ausley
As ordered by
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
BDCS:
LRH:PA:nt.dr for the
Copyright © 1977 BOARDS OF DIRECTORS
by L. Ron Hubbard of the
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED CHURCHES OF SCIENTOLOGY

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 27 JANUARY 1977

CANCELLED 5 DECEMBER 1977

Gen non-remimeo

AUDITOR RECOVERY


HCO B 27 Jan 77 AUDITOR RECOVERY is CANCELLED.

It was based upon LRH ED 176RB INT AUDITOR RECOVERY which was written by a terminal other than LRH and has since been cancelled, with the original LRH ED 176 INT AUDITOR RECOVERY by Ron restored.

LRH ED 176 INT AUDITOR RECOVERY is the issue to be used in doing an Auditor Recovery Program.

Lt. (jg) S. Hubbard
AVU BPL Appeal Line
Authorized by AVU
Approved by
LRH Pers Comm
for the
BOARDS OF DIRECTORS
of the
CHURCHES OF SCIENTOLOGY

BDCS:KU:AH:SH:kjm
Copyright © 1972, 1975, 1976, 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


[Since HCOB 27 Jan 77, Auditor Recovery is cancelled and was not written by LRH, it does not appear in this volume. See LRH ED 176 INT, Auditor Recovery on page 205 of this volume.]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 30 JANUARY 1977
Remimeo CORRECTED 19 MARCH 1977
(Correction in this type style)

FALSE TA DATA

There have been several recent revisions of False TA issues. This issue will just clearly list out all the issues and their dates so there is an easy reference for data on false TA handling.

HCOB 24 Oct 1971R FALSE TA
HCOB 12 Nov 1971RA FALSE TA ADDITION
HCOB 15 Feb 1972R FALSE TA ADDITION 2
HCOB 18 Feb 1972R FALSE TA ADDITION 3
HCOB 24 Jan 1973 Issue II
HCOB 23 Nov 1973RA DRY AND WET HANDS MAKE A FALSE TA
HCOB 23 Apr 1975R VANISHING CREAM AND FALSE TA
HCOB 10 Dec 1976 F/N AND TA POSITION
HCOB 13 Jan 1977 FALSE TA HANDLING
HCOB 21 Jan 1977 FALSE TA CHECKLIST

The above are the issues that deal with false TA.

Paulette Ausley
By order of
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
for the

BOARDS OF DIRECTORS
of the
CHURCHES OF SCIENTOLOGY
BDCS:LRH:PA:nt
Copyright © 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 5 FEBRUARY 1977
(Also published as HCO PL, same date.)
Remimeo
EDs. COs
HESes. S/Cs
HCOs
HASes
Sec Checkers C/S Series 100
Case Supervisors
Staff Section Officers
JOKERS AND DEGRADERS

It is an old principle that people who do not understand something occasionally make fun of it.

A recent investigation however into the backgrounds and case condition of a small handful of people who were joking about their posts and those around them showed a somewhat more sinister scene.

Each of these persons fell into one or more of the following categories:

1. Were rock slammers. (Some List 1.)

2. Were institutional type cases.

3. Were “NCG” (meaning no case gain) (the only cause of which is continuous present time overts).

4. Were severely PTS (Potential Trouble Source) (connected to rock slammers).

It might be supposed that misunderstood word phenomena could also be part of this. The rebellious student in universities is usually handled by clearing up his misunderstoods or curing his hopelessness for his future. However, the investigation did not find that any of these jokers or degraders were acting that way solely because of misunderstood words, but the possibility cannot be ruled out.

The four categories above were, however, fully verified.

All the persons investigated were found to be the subject of declining statistics, both having them and causing them. Their areas were enturbulated. At least one of the jokers was physically driving basic course students out of an org.

In some cultural areas, wit and humor are looked upon as a healthy release. However, in the case of orgs, this was not found to be the case. Intentional destruction of the org or fellow staff members was the direct purpose.

Therefore all executives, HCO personnel and Case Supervisors as well as Qual personnel and Staff Section Officers have a valuable indicator. Where they have a joker or degrader on their hands they also have one or more of the above four conditions in that person.

This opens the door to handling such people.

Properly assigned and then fully done conditions are the correct ethics handlings.

Correctly done Expanded Dianetics, which includes Confessionals and fully done PTS handlings are the case remedies.

Where ethics tech itself is not known or neglected and where there are no HCOs one can, of course, not expect the matter to be handled. And this would be too bad because the case gain and life improvement available in proper ethics handlings, when fully followed through, can be quite miraculous.

Where rock slammers have been undermining the tech and it is not fully known or used or is altered into unworkability one cannot expect Confessionals to be properly done or Expanded Dianetics to be known and properly applied.

The joker is advertising his symptoms. He is also advertising an area of the org where there is enturbulation and down statistics as well as staff members being victimized.

Therefore this is an administrative and technical indicator which cannot be overlooked and should be followed up.

Spotted, investigated and handled, this can be the beginning of an upward spiral for an organization.

Where someone is driving ethics out, tech is not likely to go in. You have to get in ethics and tech before you can begin to get in admin.

The next time you, as an executive, wonder why you are working so hard, look for the joker in the deck.

Humor is one thing. Destroyed orgs and human beings are quite something else.

It is our business to get the show on the road and get the job done.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH: If
Copyright © 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 17 FEBRUARY 1977R
REVISED 20 FEBRUARY 1977
Remimeo (Revision in this type sty/e)
Tr & Serv Aide
Pubs Orgs IMPORTANT
Course Supervisors
All Students COURSE NECESSITIES

Effective on receipt on all students who have not begun the levels named and on all internes for the relevant class:

1. All materials on Word Clearing are added to Level Zero checksheets.

2. All materials on Confessionals (formerly known also as Sec Checking or Integrity Processing) are added to Grade II.

3. All materials on listing and nulling and all materials on PTS, SP tech are added to Level IV.

4. All materials on co-audits are added to the Senior Class IV checksheets.

Where the student has not earlier covered them or as review all the above materials are added to the Senior Class IV checksheets.

5. All the above materials for a first time or review if earlier covered in lower levels are added to the Saint Hill Special Briefing Course.

It has been found that some Class IV auditors who have gone through these levels do not know these vital technologies.

Those who have done so should take their Senior Class IV in their local org or the SHSBC at their earliest ability to do so. Failure to attain a thorough command of the above mentioned tech as well as the previous materials of the mentioned classes can give them loses on their preclears.

All Course Supervisors are responsible for seeing that these materials and current improved checksheets are available to such students without delay. The improved checksheets of this material exist and the bulk of the materials exists in HCOB Volumes where packs are not at once available.

Nothing in this HCOB states these materials cannot be independently studied by other persons or auditors of other or no c/ass.

This HCOB does not assign these materials to pus only at that level and they can be done at any level at need.

Auditors at or above C/ass IV who do not know these materials and can use them well had better do the relevant packs fast to get their tech up to date.

Keep Scientology Working.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
for the
BOARDS OF DIRECTORS
of the
BDCS:LRH:lf.nt CHURCHES OF SCIENTOLOGY
Copyright © 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 24 FEBRUARY 1977
CORRECTED AND REISSUED 26 FEBRUARY 1977
Remimeo (Corrected to add the word “one” in para 6, line 2.)
Expanded Dn
Checksheet
All Auditors
EXPANDED DIANETICS CASES


Those who “compiled” Expanded Dianetics materials previously chose only the case histories of the early research cases.

These cases were not completed on Expanded Dianetics at that time.

According to the Training and Services Aide, this has given auditors the impression that one does not complete Expanded Dianetics cases.

This conclusion is not correct. One DOES fully and completely complete Expanded Dianetics cases!

Not included in the “Case Histories” released was the later complete Expanded Dianetics auditing most of these cases did receive.

Therefore any impression that one does not complete Expanded Dianetics or that one uses small bits of it mixed up with other rundowns or grades should be amended. One DOES complete any such case.

They are often quite lengthy.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

for the

BOARDS OF DIRECTORS
of the
CHURCHES OF SCIENTOLOGY

BDCS:LRH:lf
Copyright © 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 1 MARCH 1977
Issue I
Remimeo
All Orgs
Confessional CANCELLATION OF
Checksheet INTEGRITY PROCESSING HCOBs
SHSBC

Several HCOBs in the Integrity Processing Series were actually excerpted from earlier LRH HCOBs.

These excerpted versions are cancelled with this issue.

The original LRH HCOBs are listed below along with the Integrity Processing HCOBs which are cancelled with this issue.

The consolidation of Confessional materials can be found in BTB 31 Aug 1972RB CONFESSIONAL PROCEDURE.

1. HCOB 9 Dec 1974 Integrity Processing Series 6RA EFFECTIVENESS OF OVERTS IN PROCESSING is cancelled. The data is covered in HCOB 10 July 1964 OVERTS—ORDER OF EFFECTIVENESS IN PROCESSING.

2. HCOB 13 Dec 1972R Integrity Processing Series 10R INTEGRITY QUESTIONS MUST BE F/Ned is cancelled. The data is covered in HCOB 19 Oct 1961 SECURITY QUESTIONS MUST BE NULLED.

3. HCOB 14 Dec 1972R Integrity Processing Series 11R GENERALITIES WON’T DO is cancelled. The data is covered in HCOB 16 Nov 1961 SEC CHECKING GENERALITIES WON’T DO.

4. HCOB 15 Dec 1972R Integrity Processing Series 12R is cancelled. The data is covered in HCOB 22 Feb 1962 WITHHOLDS, MISSED AND PARTIAL.

5. HCOB 16 Dec 1972 Integrity Processing Series 13 HELP THE PC is cancelled. The material is covered in HCOB 10 May 1962 PREPCHECKING AND SEC CHECKING.

6. HCOB 17 Dec 1972 Integrity Processing Series 14 HAVINGNESS is cancelled. The material is covered in HCOB 11 Jan 1962 SECURITY CHECKING TWENTY-TEN THEORY.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Assisted by
Training & Services Aide

LRH:JG:lf
Copyright © 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 1 MARCH 1977
Issue II
Remimeo
Confessional
Auditors CONFESSIONAL FORMS
SHSBC

Never subtract anything from a Confessional.

The best method is to write out a predetermined series of questions, as an additional thing, which is for that person particularly. You figure out about what their relationship to life has been, and then you write a little special series of questions.

It’s always possible to write up an additional list. Don’t make that the only Confessional form. Give that along with a standard Confessional.

You get the idea of what kind of life your preclear has been leading, what his professional and domestic zones are, and you adapt Confessional questions to that and you add it to standard forms.

Compiled from
LRH Taped Lecture
“Teaching the Field
Sec Checks,” SHSBC
6109C26 SH Spec 58
Approved by
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Assisted by
Training & Services Aide

LRH:JG:lf
Copyright © 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 1 MARCH 1977
Issue III
Remimeo
Confessional
Auditors CANCELS
Snr Cl IV BTB 21 DEC 1972 FORMULATING
SHSBC INTEGRITY PROCESSING QUESTIONS


FORMULATING CONFESSIONAL QUESTIONS
(Compiled from LRH taped lecture “Teaching the
Field Sec Checks,” SHSBC 6109C26 SH Spec 58.)


Withholds don’t add up to withholds. They add up to overts, they add up to secrecies, they add up to individuations, they add up to games conditions, they add up to a lot more things than O/W.

Although we carelessly call them withholds, we’re asking a person to straighten out their interpersonal relationships with another terminal.

Our normal Confessional is addressed to the individual versus the society or his family.

It’s what people would consider reprehensible that makes a withhold.

In a Catholic society, not having kept Mass would be a reprehensible action. In a non-Catholic society, nobody would think twice about it. So, most of our Confessionals are aimed at transgressions against the mores of the group. That is the basic center line of the Confessional.

You can have a special mores between the son and the mother, a special mores between the husband and the wife, just as you have a special mores, of course, between the auditor and the preclear.

It’s a moral code that you are processing in one way or the other.

You are straightening out somebody on a moral code, the “Now I’m supposed to’s.” They’ve transgressed on a series of “Now I’m supposed to’s.” Having so transgressed, they are now individuated. If their individuation is too obsessive, they snap in and become the terminal. All of these cycles exist around the idea of the transgression against the “Now I’m supposed to’s.” That is what a Confessional clears up and that is all it clears up. It’s a great deal more than a withhold.

You would go straight to a person’s handling of masses and changes of space. On lacking a clue in that direction, you would go into his most confused motional areas (not e-motional).

This fellow has been a recluse ever since he was twenty. He has not done anything since he was twenty. He has never been anyplace since he was twenty. His hidden standard is he would “get about more.” Could he find himself getting about more, he would know that Scientology was working. You find what area he was in before he was twenty. Staying in the house is a cure for something. So you put him on an E-Meter. You can’t find areas of moving heavy masses or changes in spaces before he was twenty because he wasn’t working. It probably lies in the zone of, maybe, he was in the service? Maybe he was in a boarding school? So all of a sudden you hit the jackpot and you find an area of considerable activity. You’re looking for the area of considerable activity which lies prior to the difficulty. Then you run a Confessional on that area of activity.

You trace it back to boarding school. There’s one boarding school that he absolutely detests, he suddenly remembers. That’s what you do the Confessional on.

Every question you ask has to do with this boarding school. Just add up the factors. How many things can go on in a boarding school? How many people are present? What is there in a boarding school? There are students, boys, instructors, coaches, headmasters, buildings, athletic equipment, and probably transport from there to home, etc.

Find out all the types of crimes that he might have been able to commit against these items. You can dream up a whole form.

One of the ways of doing it is taking an existing Confessional form and just moving it over to the zone of the school. That is not as satisfactory as just putting down all the things he really did in this school that he is never going to tell anybody.

It inevitably is going to be an area of tight mores. He has cut up against those mores, so has individuated himself against the school, so he cannot as-is any part of the track. He’s trapped in that particular zone and activity.

Any set of cut sensory perception will operate as overt bait. Forget is a version of not know. So that any sensory perceptive cut off is an effort not to know and you have a target.

Take everything that you’ve worked up to right there and now do a Confessional on it. Eventually you’ll get a “What do you know!” He’s too in the thing to see it. You can see it because you’re outside of it.

You write up every noun you could possibly think of on the subject of the zone or dynamic that he is having difficulty with and which he fails to cognite on in any way shape or form. You can immediately assume that if he doesn’t cognite on that zone or area, that he’s really pinned down and that he has withholds from you and from the area on the subject of the area that not even he knows.

A cognition is totally dependent upon the freedom to know. Overts and withholds are dedicated to another thing, these are dedicated to not knowingness. So if the person doesn’t cognite, you can immediately assume that he has a large area of not knowingness on the subject that he doesn’t even suspect. You as an outsider to his case can suspect where this fellow is having trouble. You dream up a Confessional to match it. The formula for making up a Confessional is just make up a list of all the items you can think of which have anything to do with that target.

Let’s say his family; he’s always had family trouble. You can get this from a pc’s PTPs. If you look at the type of PTP that the pc has, you’ll know that it is a present time problem of long duration. If it adds up to three or four times in a row of PTPs with his family, it must be a problem of long duration. The hottest way to get rid of that particular zone is to do a Confessional on it. Again, the way to do a Confessional, is to make a list of all the nouns and all the doingnesses which you can think of and just ask the person if he has overts against any of them; has he done anything to, has he interfered with anything about, e.g. “Have you ever interfered with schooling,” “Have you ever done anything to schooling,” “Have you ever prevented schooling.”

It’s little by little that this cognition will take place. It’s not all going to take place in one bang.

In the long run it will be a bang, but the bang only took place because you took the pebbles off the top. When you’ve finally got the thing uncovered—he can look at it and blow it.

This is the rule: ANY ZONE OR ACTIVITY WITH WHICH A PERSON IS HAVING DIFFICULTY IN LIFE OR HAS HAD DIFFICULTY WITH IN LIFE IS A FRUITFUL AREA FOR A CONFESSIONAL.

You will find out every time, he’s got withholds in that zone or area.

One of the indicators of that is a present time problem. Therefore you know it’s a problem of long duration. Three problems of short duration equals one problem of long duration. It’s a good detector mechanism.

THE RULE IN CONFESSIONALS IS BREAK THE PROBLEM DOWN TO ITS MOST FUNDAMENTAL EXPRESSION.

Then write down those nouns associated with it and those basic doingnesses associated with the fundamental expression and then just phrase your Confessional questions on the basis “Have you ever . . . ?” and any other verb you want to put in. “Have you ever done anything to . . . ?” “Have you ever prevented . . . ?”

You don’t have to be fancy as the needle’s going to fall every time you come close to it.

Any area where a person is having difficulty in, he is stupid in. Stupidity is not knowingness. This is through overts. But the overt has to be hidden, so it must be an overt that is withheld.

So, these withholds then add up to stupidity and he of course, has trouble.

There isn’t anything complicated in it at all.

Compiled from
LRH Taped Lecture
“Teaching the Field
Sec Checks,” SHSBC
6109C26 SH Spec 58
Approved by
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Assisted by
Training & Services Aide

LRH:JG:lf
Copyright © 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

Circa 1965
REISSUED AS
Remimeo HCO BULLETIN OF 1 MARCH 1977
Auditors Issue IV
Academy
Snr Class IV
SHSBC A VALID CONFESSIONAL

The following Confessional is reissued for your use.

1. Do you have anything in your possession that really belongs to us?

2. Do you illegally have any Clearing Course data?

3. Have you passed on any confidential information to anyone?

4. Have you falsely attested to the Ethics Officer?

5. Are you using Scientology unethically for your own personal profit?

6. Have you altered any Scientology data?

7. Have you misused any Scientology processes?

8. Are you in possession of confidential data you shouldn’t have?

9. Are you withholding information?

10. Have you broken the Auditor’s Code?

11. Have you validated a suppressive person?

12. Have you validated a suppressive group?

13. Have you altered standard technology?

14. Do you have any knowledge of an undisclosed crime against Scientology?

15. Have you spread destructive rumours?

16. Have you claimed false qualification?

17. Have you illegally run any version of the Power Processes on anyone?

18. Have you illegally discussed the Power Processes with anyone?

19. Have you altered the Power Processes commands?

20. Have you illegally run the Power Processes on someone?

21. Has anything been missed?

22. Have you told any half-truths?

23. Have you told any untruths?

24. Do you have dishonourable intentions?

25. Do you intend abiding by policy?

26. Do you intend running the Power Processes before you are trained on them?

27. Have you mixed the processes of Scientology with other practices?

28. Have you used Scientology data to restimulate another?

29. Has anyone got keyed-in as a result of your having discussed high level data with them?

30. Have you overwhelmed a preclear?

31. Have you goofed and not patched up a case?

32. Do you agree with standard technology?

33. Do you intend abiding by the rules?

34. Do you intend to give the Clearing Course material to anyone?

35. Do you intend to run the Clearing Course materials on anyone?

36. Have you invalidated clearing?

37. Have you invalidated the state of Clear?

38. Are you here as an agent for someone?

39. Has something been nearly found out?

40. Have you given a false attestation?

41. Has anything been missed?

42. What question on this list wouldn’t you like me to ask you again?

43. Are you connected to a suppressive person?

44. Are you connected to a suppressive group?

45. Have you stolen anything from a Scientology org?

46. Are you out to get even with Scientology?

47. Have you ever broken into a Scientology org?

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Reissue assisted by
Training & Services Aide

LRH:JG:lf
Copyright © 1965, 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 8 MARCH 1977R
REVISED 7 APRIL 1977
(Revisions in this type style)
Remimeo (“LRH in quotes”)
Limited
Distribution
Saint Hills POWER CHECKLIST
AOs for info

Ref: HCOB 8 Jan 72RC Solo C/S Series 11RC
HCOB 21 Sep 70 Set Up for Power
HCOB 21 Sep 70 A Letter to Class VII and Class VIII
Students and Auditors
HCOB 31 Aug 74R C/S Series 93R New Grade Chart
HCOB 1 Nov 74R Rock Slams and Rock Slammers
HCOB 10 Aug 76 R/Ses, What They Mean

WHEN MADE OUT STAPLE TO INSIDE LEFT COVER OF PRECLEAR’S AUDITING FOLDER.

C/S CHECKLIST ON FOLDERS OF PRECLEARS ONTO POWER

1. TA range OK. ________

2. Has been de-PTSed with PTS RD auditing and/or PTS/SP Detection, Routing and Handling Checksheet so that any PTSness is terminatedly handled. ________

3. C/S 53 done. ________

4. Int RD OK or properly corrected. ________

5. Lists OK or verified/corrected. ________

6. C/S Series 78 done if necessary. ________

7. Drug RD fully done: ________

(a) Full battery of Objectives. ________
(b) Disinterest drug items that read all run—none left unrun. ________
(c) All drugs on the list. ________
(d) Class VIII PSEAs and Prior Assessment all fully done. ________
(“class VIII auditor not required.”)

8. GF 40X fully handled including engrams—if resistive or Former Therapy or Earlier Practices. ________

9. Runs well on Dianetics. (Including runs past lives.) ________

10. C/S 54 fully done—all items run R3R. ________

11. All grades run to EP with good Success Stories:
Single ( ) Triple ( ) Quad () ________
(a) ARC S/W ________
(b) Dianetics ________
(c) Gr 0 ________
(d) Gr I ________
(e) Gr II ________
(f ) Gr III ________
(g) Gr IV

12. R/Ses handled with full Expanded Dianetics. ________

13. Low OCA has been handled. (This means FULL Expanded Dianetics.) “Means don’t put a pc on Power who has not had his evil purposes and R/Ses handled.” ________

14. No illness after Grade IV or Expanded Dianetics. ________

15. No ethics trouble after Grade IV or Expanded Dianetics. ________

16. By D of P interview pc is happy with gains and not still wanting something handled. ________

17. GF Method 3. ________

18. In Life ruds. ________

PC is fully set up and OK to go onto Power. ________

PC not OK for Power and needs the following per this checklist: ________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________

EX DN

“The Grade Chart points are after Dianetics (like Drug RDs etc) but before grades, after grades but before Power, after Power but before Solo, and after OT III or after any single grade above OT III. These are the only points where Expanded Dianetics can be delivered and the R/S fully and completely handled.”

If a pc has to have Ex Dn due to being an R/Ser before being allowed onto Power he must be given full Ex Dn and no short cuts.


EXPANDED GRADES

Expanded Grades is not a requisite for Power. Expanded Grades very often comes after OT III. It comes after Power too, but not between Solo, Grade VI and OT III.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Assisted by
LRH Tech Expeditor
and
CS-4/5

LRH:PA:lf.dr
Copyright © 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 16 MARCH 1977

Remimeo
Expanded Dianetics Series 25

THE GAMBLER


An obsessive gambler is a psychotic just like a drug addict or an alcoholic.

They are handled the way you handle any other psychotic. They don’t have to do anything for real in life because it all depends on chance and never on themselves. So you have them on the minus effect scale.

Life isn’t real to a psychotic gambler and therefore they never really buckle down to anything. Consequences are unreal to them and criminal acts are incomprehensible as nothing is real anyway.

Getting off overts is nothing to such people because they are not there and take no responsibility for them. Everything else is responsible—not them. Thus you have to find the trail to the R/Ses on the subject and discharge those.

This aspect of such a case is the emergency number one handling.

It has to be recognized for what it is—PSYCHOSIS.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH: if
Copyright © 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 27 MARCH 1977
(LRH in quotes)

Remimeo
XDn Ckshts
XDn Auditors
XDn Courses

PROGRAMMING OF EXPANDED DIANETICS

Ref: HCOB 19 Jun 70 C/S Q & A
HCOB 26 Aug 70 Incomplete Cases
HCOB 31 Mar 71 Programming and Misprogramming
HCOB 28 Sep 71 Know Before You Go


“Expanded Dianetics audits the pc at cause. PTS handling audits the pc at effect. When you start a case or use a piece of Expanded Dianetics you are auditing the case at cause.

“If you suddenly switch off Expanded Dianetics before it is complete you cease to audit the case at cause and if PTS handling is then done you would switch the case over to effect.

“This would be a valence shift and would worsen the case.

“This is one of the consequences of not handling Expanded Dianetics fully and completely once it has begun.

“Sec Checking also audits the case at cause.

“One might program a case to handle his PTSness then handle by Sec Checking and then finish with Expanded Dianetics and be home perfectly safe.

“If one Sec Checked a case, began Expanded Dianetics, failed to complete it and switched to PTS handling, the case would be audited out of sequence and would flip from being cause to being effect.”

So when a case is programmed for Expanded Dianetics and started on Expanded Dianetics it should be fully and completely handled before any other auditing is interjected. Expanded Dianetics should be a fully completed cycle of action and not bit and piece.

“It is not OK to mix up Expanded Dianetics. It doesn’t go into the middle of PTS handling. Hold the form of grades and processes.

“Don’t start a pc on one thing and switch to another without finishing what you began. For example a case was started on Expanded Dianetics out of the blue, followed by three S & Ds, then a GF of some kind, then a track repair and then the S & Ds were handled. This is very bad programming.

“A case started on Expanded Dianetics must be programmed to complete Expanded Dianetics. This should be programmed according to Expanded Dianetics tech and not just one isolated item that needs handling.

“What is started on a case must be completed.

“A case on Expanded Dianetics, would fall into the other half of the PTS/SP scene. By failing to handle a valence shift could occur the moment that somebody starts
to assume that an Expanded Dianetics pc was the effect (PTS) instead of the cause of the scene (Expanded Dianetics).”


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Assisted by

LRH Tech Expeditor

for the

BOARDS OF DIRECTORS
of the
CHURCHES OF SCIENTOLOGY

BDCS:LRH:PA:lf
Copyright © 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 5 APRIL 1977

Remimeo
EXPANDED GRADES


Expanded Grades can be done:

- After Drug RD
- After Full Dn RD
- After Quad Grades
- After Expanded Dn
- After Power (but before Solo or Clear or OT I to III and not during these)
- After OT III
- After OT IV
- After OT V
- After OT VI
- After OT VII

In other words they can be done after any full completion of any one of the above.

A typical and IDEAL program for a pc would be:

- Sub Grade Handling
- Drug Rundown
- Full Dianetics RD
- Quad Grades
- Expanded Dn
- Expanded Grades
- Power
- R6EW
- Clear
- OT I
- OT II
- OT III
- OT III X
- OT IV
- OT V
- OT VI
- OT VII.

However, due to bit and piece auditing done on some pcs Expanded Grades is sometimes entered at other points.

Quad Grades (or even Single Grades for that matter) never should have been abandoned and are restored.

Expanded Grades is NOT a requisite for Power but Quad Grades are.

Pcs flubbily can be programmed backwards like Expanded Grades, Drug RD, Expanded Dn—etc. etc. But it is far from ideal.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:dg.nt
Copyright © 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 11 APRIL 1977
Remimeo
Level III
Level IV
Snr Class IV LIST ERRORS
Ex Dn CORRECTION OF
All Cl IV Auditors


It has been found that the correction of lists, a very vital piece of tech, has been a source of confusion in the field as it apparently has never been written up in an issue. It really is simple if you know your Laws of L & N.

VERIFYING A LIST

The correct procedure for verifying/correcting past L & Ns is to check the items as to whether or not they are correct. Then do an L4BRA on each list where the item is found to be incorrect. You would have to orient the pc to the listing question and the item. You do not direct the question to see if it read. And don’t just do an L4BRA and then not find the right item for the pc as part of the handling (unless the question proves to be uncharged or some such).

NULLING A LIST

One nulls a list when he doesn’t get a BD F/N item on listing. The Laws of L & N strictly apply. An L4BRA would be used if the action bogs with still no item found. One would also null lists the pc made where no item had been found such as a 2WC which turned into a listing action with the pc giving off items or a list the pc somehow made while not on a meter. In these cases there is no item to verify with the pc as correct. Just cull the items into a list, work out with the pc what the question was if it’s not already noted, and null the list.

RECONSTRUCTING A LIST

Sometimes you just don’t have the list and can’t get it or it’s an old Why Finding or PTS interview for which there are no worksheets. In this case you get from the pc what the question was and then get him to give you the items that were already on the list as the item probably was already on the list and you don’t want the pc to get into newly listing the question in PT and then getting into an overlisting situation. Just get him to give you the items he had already put on the list and more often than not you will get a BD F/N item. If you don’t get the item that way then you can extend the list.

SELF-LISTING

Watch it on these as every random stray thought a person has about “why this or that” does not mean it’s a self-list. But do look for it on a person who is manifesting the horrendous BPC an out list can generate, who is introspected or has been trying to figure out who is doing him in after just having seen the Ethics Officer. Just don’t get into trying to make a list out of some non-standard listing question that won’t give you an item. And actually the usual reason for self-listing is a prior wrong L & N item or an item not found. People will self-list to try to find the right item. So find and correct the earlier out list.

LIST CORRECTION BLOW-UP

When you are going along correcting lists and suddenly you get a big pc blow-up and it is not resolving on the list you are correcting you had better quickly realize that you probably are not correcting the list that is out and you’d better find out which list

it is. There is usually an earlier out list to be found, if the list you are correcting does not resolve the upset.

LISTS NOT READING

When you start getting key lists such as Grades III and IV not reading and no items found it’s time for that auditor to get a thorough overhaul on his metering, eyesight and to get off all his MUs on L & N. You also could be setting the pc up for a self-listing situation as he has been given the listing question but no item has been found. So be very sure the question did not read even with Suppress and Inval and TRs were in before getting off a key L & N process.

USE OF L4BRA

The prepared list L4BRA corrects L & N lists. It can be run on old lists, current lists, general listing. When a pc is ill after a listing and nulling session or up to 3 days after, always suspect that a listing action done on the pc had an error in it and get those lists corrected.

Sometimes it is obvious what the error was per the Laws of Listing and Nulling. For example there could be two reading items left on the list in which case you would know to extend the list as it has been underlisted. If this didn’t go, then an L4BRA would be done on the list.

HANDLING AN L4BRA

You handle reading questions on the L4BRA by the directions under the question that read. You don’t just 2WC these questions. For example say question 4 read on the L4BRA, “Is a list incomplete? SF.” You then ask the pc, “What list is incomplete?” Locate it and get it completed to a BD F/N item. You don’t just 2WC “incomplete lists” to an F/N and leave it at that.

By the way the L4BRA is missing a line which is “Was it the first item on the list?” This is being added as it’s quite common that it is the first item and is most often missed.

DO IT RIGHT

An out list can create more concentrated hell with a pc than any other single auditing error. So it’s imperative that listing errors get properly corrected.

The best thing to do is to have the Laws of Listing and Nulling drilled line by line and down cold and just do it right in the first place. Then you will also see at once where old lists violated these laws and you will not be yourself doing lists that have to be corrected later.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Assisted by
CS-4/5

LRH:JE:dr
Copyright © 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 17 APRIL 1977
Remimeo (LRH is quoted)
Tech Divs
Qual Divs
Auditors
C/Ses
RECURRING WITHHOLDS AND OVERTS

Ref: HCO PL 7 Apr 70RA GREEN FORM
HCO B 15 Aug 69 FLYING RUDS
HCO B 10 Jul 64 OVERTS ORDER OF EFFECTIVENESS
IN PROCESSING
HCO B 6 Sep 68 CHECKING FOR FALSE READS
HCO B 11 Sep 68 FALSE READS


DEFINITION

The definition of recurring withhold or overt is an overt or withhold that keeps coming up, repeats again, or shows up again. Definition is obtained here from the American Heritage Dictionary and “the Scientology Tech Dictionary.” Before a recurring withhold or overt can be handled it must be understood what one is. It is simply a withhold or overt that has already been gotten off and comes up again as an answer to an apparent reading withhold or overt question. The pc may also become exasperated at having to get off an overt or withhold that has already been gotten off. The pc may become upset, seem resigned or even protest a recurring overt or withhold. These are just a couple of the signs of a recurring withhold or overt.

METHODS AND HANDLINGS

1. When a pc gets upset with a withhold being demanded that they already got off and they get into protest then “there is obviously a false read as the pc is getting off overts already gotten off.”

HANDLING: “Check for false reads on overts by asking the pc what overt he or she has gotten off more than once and tracing it back with the pc to what auditor or person said something read when it didn’t. You would clean all these up.” (Reference: HCOB 6 Sept 68 CHECKING FOR FALSE READS.)

2. When number 1 above doesn’t handle the recurring overt or withhold:

HANDLING: “Who said or seemed to infer something read when it didn’t? Then this would be dated to blow and located to blow.” (Reference: HCOB 11 Sept 68 FALSE READS.)

3. When a pc gets upset with getting off withholds or overts or mentions he or she felt his or her overts weren’t accepted.

HANDLING: Ask who wouldn’t accept it E/S. (Reference: HCO PL 7 April 70RA GREEN FORM.)

4. “The pc has been invalidated for getting it off.”

HANDLING: Find out who invalidated the pc for getting off overts or withholds. (Note any terminals for later handling on the PTS RD.)

5. “The pc has been punished for getting it off.”

HANDLING: “Find out who punished the pc for getting off overts and withholds. “

The above methods of handling recurring overts and withholds can be found in the reference materials listed above.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Assisted by
Paulette Ausley
LRH Tech Expeditor

LRH:PA:lf
Copyright © 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED






HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 7 MAY 1977
Remimeo

LONG DURATION SEC CHECKING


It has been found on some cases which did not immediately R/S, even though their crimes and past would seem to indicate they should have R/Ses, that when Sec Checking was carried on for several sessions, one each on several consecutive days, R/Ses then began to show up. In two cases, List One R/Ses showed up on persons who had never been noticed as having R/Ses before.

It can then be concluded that R/Sers do not R/S necessarily on casual brief Sec Checks.

Part of this phenomena is that the person quite commonly gives off very shallow overts of the order of “I stole a pen from HASI” or “I thought your TRs were bad and I didn’t tell you” and other shallow PT answers to searching Sec Check questions.

This is so much the case that whenever I see shallow wishy-washy “averts” coming off a case day after day, I suspect that sooner or later a good auditor will suddenly find real roaring overts and R/Ses sitting there.

The soft-spoken quiet “inoffensive” person is also a candidate for this sort of disclosure.

Particularly notable is the person who “has never done anything wrong in his whole life and has no overts of any kind.”

These are just special cases of the same thing and an auditor should be alert to them.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:cb .dr
Copyright © 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 9 MAY 1977
Remimeo
FOREWORD OF
EXPANDED DIANETICS
COURSE
(Issued on the 27th Anniversary of
Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health)


Expanded Dianetics contains our tech for the handling of the neurotic, psychotic and destructive impulses in Man as well as some people who give themselves trouble or have trouble.

Dianetics as early as 1950 and 1951 had its successes in this field. Twenty years of research and experience isolated in 1970 what psychosis really was.

When Expanded Dianetics was first issued those who compiled the case histories left many of them out and those they included were not shown as completed. This omission gave the impression that one did not finish an Expanded Dianetics case. In the current checksheets this has been repaired.

Upper level auditors, in 1973, were using fragments of Expanded Dianetics along with other processes. This has been smoothed out in the present organization of the materials.

Such cases as those who can only be solved by Expanded Dianetics live difficult lives and are often difficult to manage. Thus the auditor must be very knowledgeable on these materials and very skilled. We can solve such cases. But only where people know their business.

There are far more such cases around than one would suspect.

The destructiveness of Man and his apparent general tendency toward 4th dynamic suicide stems entirely from a few of these types in his midst.

So Expanded Dianetics actually begins taking form with the first words of the first chapter of Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health:

“A science of mind is a goal which has engrossed thousands of generations of Man. Armies, dynasties and whole civilizations have perished for the lack of it. Rome went to dust for the want of it. China swims in blood for the need of it; and down in the arsenal is an atom bomb, its hopeful nose full-armed in ignorance of it.”

The last words of DMSMH were “For God’s sake, get busy and build a better bridge!” Nobody built the better bridge. So I did.

This full issue of materials and subsequent research presents, 27 years later, all the tools we have in the field of handling destructiveness in cases.

Use of these technologies brings us to a potential realization of handling the state Man is in.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:cb.dr
Copyright © 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 9 MAY 1977
Issue II
Remimeo
Ex Dn Course
Ex Dn Auditors
Ex Dn C/Ses
Expanded Dianetics Series 29


PSYCHOSIS, MORE ABOUT
(Excerpted from HCOB 17 June 1971)



All aberration is to a greater or lesser degree nonsurvival.

To be rid of major aberrations is to have a new life.

To understand this one must understand the most severe aberration which is psychosis.

The actual basis of all psychosis is motive. It is NOT competence or incompetence.

Below all psychotic conduct lies an evil purpose.

Because psychiatry and psychology did not have this single technical fact they defined psychosis as “incompetence,” had the wrong target and so could not and never did understand psychosis and were thereby led into atrocities such as shocks and brain surgery and, in the country where these subjects originated (Germany), slaughtered 300,000 insane in gas chambers some time before Hitler came to power.

A true psychotic can be brilliant or stupid, competent or incompetent. It is his general motive or purpose that determines whether or not he is insane or sane.

Famous psychotics like Napoleon, Ivan the Terrible, Stalin and Hitler were all quite brilliant yet wound up destroying everything in sight including their own people.

They had a destructive basic purpose. Every psychotic has one. It is usually covert, hidden, but in full play against his unsuspecting friends.

The sole difference in motive is whether it is destructive or constructive.

Everyone has a basic purpose. The psychotic has a destructive one.

The test of a personality then, is whether the result of a person’s activity is destructive or constructive.

Man is basically good. When he finds he is being too destructive he recognizes he is bad for others and seeks to leave. He will also try to become less powerful, ill or to kill himself.

The progress of psychosis then begins with a belief something is evil. This is followed with an effort to stop it. This stop becomes general. A basic purpose is then formed which contains an evil intent.

The being then goes on from disaster to disaster, seeking overtly or covertly to destroy everything around him.

At a guess about 15% to 25% of living human beings are psychotic and bring covert disaster to those around them and themselves.

The evil purpose is expressed by committing harmful acts and withholding them.

Ordinary overt/withhold processes, as in Grade II Expanded, can handle this condition providing the person can be audited and providing the evil purpose is also brought to view.

About 1/3rd of the psychotics handled in this way recover their sanity fully and lead constructive decent lives. Two-thirds are either so far gone or irresponsible hard to audit that they improve but are of little use.

Those already subjected to the brutalities of psychiatric “treatment” or psychological “counseling” are the most difficult.

Those who have been on drugs, particularly LSD 25 as developed by psychiatry “so their nurses would be able to experience what being insane feels like” around 1950, are very difficult cases.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Excerpted by
FMO 1709 I/C

LRH:RS:lf
Copyright © 1971, 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 31 MAY 1977
Remimeo
LSD

YEARS AFTER THEY HAVE
“COME OFF OF” LSD

Characteristics of persons who have been on it from examination of 2 cases:

1) They are disassociated—meaning they are separate from anything they are doing.

2) Whatever occurs has nothing to do with him.

3) Not responsible for their own action or anything else and it doesn’t occur to them that they ever should be.

4) Their emotions are shut off to a greater or lesser extent.

5) Consequences mean little or nothing to them.

6) They are stupid.

7) Normal actions that another can do easily get mucked up by them.

8) They are unpleasant to associate with.

9) They are de-humanized and can be vicious or irrationally cruel.

Apparently they have become a sort of a vegetable or a zombie to a greater or lesser degree.

The LSD apparently stays in the system and is liable to go into action again giving them unpredictable “trips.” Which could be quite fatal while driving and even walking around.

A Drug Rundown which has to include LSD cannot be considered complete until the person has undergone a long period of sweating and heavy liquids and exercise.

The way LSD got popular was because of Henry Luce, the head of Time Magazine, who publicized it and glorified it from mid-1950 on. He and his wife were under psychiatric care and were on LSD.

Nearly as I can trace it, it was the Nazi intelligence drug developed in Switzerland and was probably intended for use in municipal water systems to paralyze the population just prior to an invasion as the invading enemy would then find them all irrational.

It only takes a millionth of an ounce to produce a “full trip.”

When you are dealing with an LSD case or anyone who has ever taken LSD you cannot and must not consider their Drug Rundown complete until they have been sweated and given liquids and exercised for months as well as heavily audited. They can recover with auditing and this handling, but it won’t be very fast.

L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:lf Founder
Copyright © 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 14 JUNE 1977

Remimeo
(HCOB 30 AUGUST 71RA ISSUES I & 11)
(BTB 30 AUGUST 71 ISSUE I RG)


PAID COMPLETIONS SIMPLIFIED


Board Technical Bulletin 30 August 71 Issue I RF Revised 24 September 76, RF-I, Issue I RF-I, I RF-2 are hereby cancelled. It is not valid anyway, nor any previous BTB on the subject of student, preclear or interneship Paid Completions as they and their series cancel an HCOB. BTBs cannot cancel HCOBs.

HCO Bulletins from 30 August 71 Issue I and Issue II forward dealing with Paid Comps, student and pc points and ending with 30 August 71R Issue I are likewise cancelled.

In their place is the formula given in LRH ED 153RK of 14 June 77.

1. Major Training Service 20 Points

2. Major Processing Service 5 Points

3. Minor Service 2 Points

MAJOR TRAINING SERVICE

This is defined as a certificate level action requiring around a month to complete. Examples are HSDC, Class I, Class II, Class III, Class IV. The Student Hat is included as a major course even if covered in payment by a Class course. The Primary Rundown, OEC, Senior Class IV, Expanded Dianetics, Salesmanship Course, any formal special course, but not Dept 17 courses.

Any interneship for a single class counts equally to a full course and is 20 points.

Saint Hills get 80 points for a completed SHSBC and 80 points for a Senior SHSBC as these are very long courses.

AOs get 20 points for every Advanced Course completed and successfully Solo audited (see auditing points as well for AO Solo).

When scholarships form part of any training fee and when the balance was fully paid and the service successfully completed the full points of the course are credited to Paid Comps.

MAJOR PROCESSING SERVICE

This is simply any 12 1/2 hour intensive completed on any formal HGC processing. It includes any rundown, Word Clearing or auditing action received by the preclear.

Saint Hills are the same but with an additional 5 points of each part of Power completed.

AOs get a credit of 2 points for every 12 1/2 hours Solo audited.

Free auditing or service, student co-audits, staff auditing do not count on this stat.

MINOR (DIVISION 6) SERVICES

These are any and all courses, services, co-audits requiring around I to 2 weeks to deliver.

These include HAS, TRs, HQS, public co-audits, any course or counselling or public paid action offered by Department 17.

These minor services must be paid, attended and completed to count on the stat.

No points at all may be taken for any service the person did not complete to the end.

BONUS POINTS

The three classes of service are interchangeable for the purposes of bonus.

Anyone who, having successfully completed a (1), (2) or (3) service who then resigns up for any other (1), (2) or (3) service is credited with double the amount of the service just completed.

These bonus points are intended to ensure:

A. Quality of service.
B. Re-sign ups.
C. Bettered organization.

Any Reg. Public or Div 2, may sign up or re-sign up for any or all the org’s services.

Bonus points are received for every student or pc sent to an SH or AO, meaning double for the last service taken in the sending org.

PACKAGE SALES

Where packages are sold such as multiple intensives or several courses, Paid Comps are credited on the successful completion of each part of the package—such as each 12 1/2 intensive and the bonus points for the last intensive or course are automatically credited. This awards package sales. They must of course be fully paid to count as Paid Comps or bonuses.

No bonus points at all may be taken unless the person actually signs up for the next or another org service.

PENALTIES

The lack of bonus points on those who blow, request refunds etc. operates as a penalty. Recovery or good handling so as to avert refund, as in ARC break pgms, operates to restore the Paid Comps and, if new service is signed up for, the bonus points that would otherwise have been denied the stat are now restored to it.

F/N VGIs ratio at the Examiner is retained as per the original HCOB 30 August 71. In any given day where the F/N ratio at the Examiner falls below 90%, at the Examiner, there is a penalty of one point subtracted from Paid Comps for each No below 90%. There is one point added to Paid Comps for each % above 90% for any given day where F/N VGIs ratio at the Examiner is above 90%.

If there is an unhandled red tag that is left unhandled for more than 24 hours, ALL HGC (or AO Solo & HGC) Paid Comps are lost for that day and for every successive day that that pc remains red tagged.


For every day there is no HAS, full-time competent Recruiter, a Qual Sec and a Staff Section Officer single-hatted on post in the org by reason of no appointment (not by reason of occasional absence by reason of leave or a day off) the CO or ED loses all his Paid Comps.

VERIFICATION

All Paid Comps and bonus computations must be verified by HCO. This verification consists of examining the actual invoices for the completed service to ensure it is fully paid, examination of C&A records and courses to ensure it was actually completed. For bonuses verification consists of examination of the actual invoices for re-sign up and the past invoices of completion of the last service and other records to ensure the service was fully paid and fully completed.

Of course the easiest way to verify is to have an up-to-date filed into CF with the invoices going into them.

Any query or question concerning this HCOB is to be referred to LRH Comm International via the local and Continental LRH Comm.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

for the

BOARDS OF DIRECTORS
of the
CHURCHES OF SCIENTOLOGY

BDCS:LRH:dm.dr
Copyright © 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 26 SEPTEMBER 1977

Remimeo
ART AND COMMUNICATION

(Art HCOB No. 3)


When a work of painting, music or other form attains two-way communication, it is truly art.

One occasionally hears an artist being criticized on the basis that his work is too “literal” or too “common.” But one has rarely if ever heard any definition of “literal” or “common.” And there are many artists simply hung up on this, protesting it. Also, some avant-garde schools go completely over the cliff in avoiding anything “literal” or “common”—and indeed go completely out of communication!

The return flow from the person viewing a work would be contribution. True art always elicits a contribution from those who view or hear or experience it. By contribution is meant “adding to it.”

An illustration is “literal” in that it tells everything there is to know. Let us say the illustration is a picture of a tiger approaching a chained girl. It does not really matter how well the painting is executed, it remains an illustration and it IS literal. But now let us take a small portion out of the scene and enlarge it. Let us take, say, the head of the tiger with its baleful eye and snarl. Suddenly we no longer have an illustration. It is no longer “literal.” And the reason lies in the fact that the viewer can fit this expression into his own concepts, ideas or experience: he can supply the why of the snarl, he can compare the head to someone he knows. In short he can CONTRIBUTE to the head.

The skill with which the head is executed determines the degree of response.

Because the viewer can contribute to the picture, it is art.

In music, the hearer can contribute his own emotion or motion. And even if the music is only a single drum, if it elicits a contribution of emotion or motion, it is truly art.

That work which delivers everything and gets little or nothing in return is not art. The “common” or overused melody, the expected shape or form gets little or no contribution from the hearer or viewer. That work which is too unclear or too poorly executed may get no contribution.

Incidental to this, one can ask if a photograph can ever be art, a controversy which has been raging for a century or more. One could say that it is only difficult to decide because one has to establish how much the photographer has contributed to the “reality” or “literalness” in front of his camera, how he has interpreted it, but really the point is whether or not that photograph elicits a contribution from its viewer. If it does, it is art.

Innovation plays a large role in all works which may become art. But even this can be overdone. Originality can be overdone to the point where it is no longer within any possible understanding by those viewing or hearing it. One can be so original one goes entirely outside the most distant perimeter of agreement with his viewers or listeners. Sometimes this is done, one suspects, when one has not spent the labor necessary to execute the work. Various excuses are assigned such an action, the most faulty of which is “self-satisfaction” of the artist. While it is quite all right to commune with oneself, one cannot also then claim that it is art if it communicates with no one else and no other’s communication is possible.

The third flow, of people talking to one another about a work can also be considered a communication and where it occurs is a valid contribution as it makes the work known.

Destructive attitudes about a work can be considered as a refusal to contribute. Works that are shocking or bizarre to a point of eliciting protest may bring to themselves notoriety thereby and may shake things up; but when the refusal to contribute is too widespread, such works tend to disqualify as art.

There is also the matter of divided opinion about a work. Some contribute to it, some refuse to contribute to it. In such cases one must examine who is contributing and who is refusing. One can then say that it is a work of art to those who contribute to it and that it is not to those who refuse to contribute to it.

Criticism is some sort of index of degree of contribution. There are, roughly, two types of criticism: one can be called “invalidative criticism,” the other “constructive criticism.”

Invalidative criticism is all too prevalent in the arts for there exist such things as “individual taste,” contemporary standards and, unfortunately, even envy or jealousy. Too often, criticism is simply an individual refusal to contribute. One could also state that “those who destructively criticize can’t do.”

“Constructive criticism” is a term which is often used but seldom defined. But it has use. It could probably be best defined as criticism which “indicates a better way to do,” at least in the opinion of the critic. Those who simply find fault and never suggest a practical means of doing it better rather forfeit their right to criticize.

Art is probably the most uncodified and least organized of all fields. It therefore acquires to itself the most “authorities.” Usually nothing is required of an “authority” except to say what is right, wrong, good, bad, acceptable or unacceptable. Too often the sole qualification of the authority (as in poor teaching of some subjects) is a memorized list of objects and their creators and dates with some hazy idea of what the work was. An “authority” could considerably improve his status by using rather precise definitions of his terms. The modern trend of seeking the significance in what the artist meant is of course not likely to advance the arts very much.

Viewing and experiencing art on the basis of what one is contributing to it and what others contribute to it is a workable approach. And it would result in improved art and improved appreciation.

Such a viewpoint, interestingly, also includes some things into the field of art not previously so viewed.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:pat
Copyright © 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HAVE YOU LIVED

BEFORE THIS LIFE?

by

L. Ron Hubbard

Published October 1977


Have You Lived Before This Life? was first published in March 1960. Growing public demand for knowledge about past lives was the catalyst for expanding and republishing this book in October 1977. One of the new chapters includes Ron’s lecture entitled Death, originally given on 30 July 1957.

Both Dianetics and Scientology were researched by L. Ron Hubbard, American writer and philosopher.

One of the more startling discoveries of Dianetics and Scientology was that if a person’s awareness and memory were adequately improved, past life memories could be contacted. The memories were there, in person after person, case after case.

Incredible? “Past lives are ‘incredible’ only to those who dare not confront them,” says Hubbard, “In others, the fact of former existence can be quickly established subjectively.”

Thousands and thousands of case histories have proven this out in over a quarter of a century of research. Doubters and believers, skeptics and scoffers have all discovered hidden memories they never knew existed.

This discovery has sparked off a tremendous amount of public interest over the last 25 years. Today, more and more people are wondering about past and future lives.

Have You Lived Before This Life? presents the original discoveries that started it all.

If past and future lives are a reality, it calls for a reevaluation of many of our current views, values and lifestyles.

This is a book which vitally affects every man and woman in the world today. It is a look into the possibility of larger vistas to the human drama than have ever been dreamed before—the possibility of a continuing existence, with memory, beyond one lifetime.

An adventure awaits you. The adventure of you. You now stand on the threshold of discovery.

324 pages, hard cover with dust jacket, glossary. Available from your nearest Scientology Organization or Mission, or direct from the publishers: Church of Scientology Publications Organization U.S., 4833 Fountain Ave., East Annex, Los Angeles, California 90029, U.S.A.; or Scientology Publications Organization, Jernbanegade 6, 1608 Copenhagen V, Denmark.

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 4 DECEMBER 1977
Remimeo
All Levels
All Auditors
CHECKLIST FOR SETTING UP
SESSIONS AND AN E-METER


In order to prevent constant interruptions of a session to get dictionaries, prepared lists, etc. etc. and in the vital interest of keeping the pc smoothly in session—interested in own case and willing to talk to the auditor, the following checklist has been made.

An auditor should drill this checklist until he has it down thoroughly, without reference to it.

A. PRE-APPOINTMENT:
1. Paid invoice slip of pc. ________
2. Pc folders; 2A. Current 2B. Old. ________
3. Pc folder study by auditor. ________
4. Folder Error Summary. ________
5. A C/S for the session. ________
6. Any cramming actions on the C/S. ________

B. CALL IN:
7. Enough time to do session. ________
8. APPOINTMENT (made by auditor or Technical Services). ________
9. Scheduling Board (auditor, pc, room, time). ________

C. ROOM READINESS:
10. Clean up room. ________
11. Smells removed. ________
12. Room temperature handled. ________
13. Area and hall silence signs made. ________
14. Silence signs placed. ________
15. Knowing where the w.c. is. ________
16. Right sized table, sturdy, doesn’t squeak. ________
17. Side table.
18. Adequate light if room gets dark. ________
19. Flashlight in case power fails. ________
20. Quiet clock or watch. ________
21. Blanket for pc in case gets cold. ________
22. Fan or A/C in case pc gets too hot. ________

D. AUDITING MATERIEL:
23. Paper for W/Ss and lists. ________
24. Ballpoints or pencils. ________
25. Kleenex. ________
26. Anti-perspirant for sweaty palms. ________
27. Hand cream for dry palms. ________

28. Dictionaries including Tech and Admin Dictionaries and a non-dinky one in language. ________
29. Grammar. ________
30. Auditing materiel, white forms, prepared lists including those that might be called for on other prepared lists. ________
31. E-Meter. ________
32. Spare meter. ________
33. Preliminary meter check for charge and operational condition. ________
34. Meter shield (to obscure meter from pc). ________
25. In Session sign for door. ________
36. Extra meter lead. ________
37. Different sized cans. ________
38. A plastic bag to cover one can for pcs who knock cans together. ________
39. Finalize setting up room for session. ________

E. PC ENTRANCE TO AUDITING ROOM:
40. In Session sign on door. ________
41. Phone shut off. ________
42. Putting pc in chair. ________
43. Comfort of chair check with pc and handle. ________
44. Adjusting pc’s chair. ________
45. Check pc clothes, shoes for tightness and handle. ________
46. Check with pc if room is all right and handle. ________

F. METER SET UP FOR SESSION:
47. Check test (for charge). ________
48. See that needle is not dancing by itself or auditing itself. ________
49. Make sure 2.0 = 2.0 by trim. ________
50. Snap in leads jack. ________
51. Verify trim by calibration resistor onto alligator clips. ________
52. Put needle on set. ________
53. Put pc on. ________
54. Adjust pc sensitivity for 1/3 dial drop by pc can squeeze. ________
55. Go through False TA Correction as needed including change of cans, cream, anti-perspirant as needed. ________
56. Have pc take a deep breath and let it out and see if needle gives a latent fall (which it should). ________
57. Check for adequate sleep. ________
58. Check to be sure pc has eaten and is not hungry. ________
59. Ask for any reason not to begin session. ________

G. START THE SESSION.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:dr
Copyright © 1977
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 6 FEBRUARY 1978R
REVISED 16 MARCH 1978
Remimeo (Revisions in this type style)

LSD AND THE SWEAT PROGRAM

Ref: HCOB 25 Oct 71 DRUG DRYING OUT
HCOB 31 May 77 LSD
HCOB 2 Jun 71 CONFRONTING (for ref on gradients)
HCOB 5 Nov 74 DRUGS, MORE ABOUT

It has come to my attention that clarification is needed on HCOB LSD Years After They Have “Come Off Of” LSD. No outlined program has been issued on handling the LSD case.

For purpose of clarification “AN LSD CASE” is anyone who has ever had LSD and not sweated it out and had a full Drug Rundown including Objectives. “When you are dealing with an LSD case or anyone who has ever taken LSD you cannot and must not consider their Drug Rundown complete until they have been sweated and given liquids and exercised for months as well as heavily audited. They can recover with auditing and this handling, but it won’t be very fast.”

The Sweat Program came about because the “Restim” people who have been on LSD experience appears to act like they had just taken more LSD. When you audit out any other drug that’s the end of it. But this isn’t true of LSD.

As it only takes 1/millionth of an ounce of LSD to produce a drugged condition and because it is basically wheat rust which simply cuts off circulation, my original thinking on this over the years was that LSD sticks around in the body. That basically is the idea that underlies the Sweat Program.

LSD is a “KILLER DRUG” and should be labelled as such. It was recently found that many exec trainees who were off-loaded were LSD cases.

Don’t hold somebody off Objectives and Drug Rundown just because he has not had a Sweat Program. They can have their Objectives and Drug Rundown and then go on the Sweat Program, that was the way it was originally designed.

A “Sweat Program” would be for somebody who couldn’t run Objectives or a Drug Rundown because of LSD or for use after Objectives and a Drug Rundown to get rid of the residual LSD.

It is the residual LSD we’re trying to get rid of—LSD that may still be in the body. It’s no substitute for Objectives and a Drug Rundown. You must not consider their Drug Rundown complete until they have completed the Sweat Program and been heavily audited.

As the Sweat Program can be strenuous anyone not in good physical condition is required to see a medical doctor in liaison with the Medical Liaison Officer and C/S to obtain permission to exercise and do jogging. Where exercise and jogging would be detrimental to the individual’s health this program should not be done and a more basic nutritional, medical and auditing program done.

Doing this gradiently is very important as you are not only working LSD out of the system but other bodily poisons will also be flushed out. If the program is done out gradient the individual can become ill from body changes that he is not able to keep up with.

As sweating depletes the body’s mineral supply, extra salt needs to be taken during this program. Indicators of salt depletion can be clammy skin, tiredness, weakness, headache—perhaps cramps, nausea—dizziness (possible vomiting), or possibly fainting. At the first sign of any one of these, some salt should be taken. You can carry a salt shaker with you while running too.

On this program, a person has to be watched because he will be getting out crystals and could go on a trip—a real LSD trip from the crystals coming out.

It is advised that the running jogging portion of this program be done with another person.

VITAMINS AND MINERALS

The “Drug Bomb” in HCOB 25 October 71 DRUGS DRYING OUT, should be taken three times a day. In addition the “Cal-Mag Formula” in HCOB 5 November 74 DRUGS, MORE ABOUT, should be taken 2 times a day. Plus, a teaspoon of salt should be taken daily.

DIET

Quite reduced food intake is important here to get body fat or just mass of the body decreased so that the residual crystals of LSD that have accumulated can come out. If a person keeps eating a lot the body is going to keep building layers of muscles and be busy with metabolizing new food and chemicals for body energy as opposed to using the fat which has been accumulated. This is especially important with the person who has fat as fat has few blood vessels in it. Circulation in fat is poor so LSD in it will not come out until that actual fat is burnt off the body.

In addition to reduced food intake it is important to increase liquid intake as it actually flushes the wastes out of the body. In this way LSD and other accumulated drugs when released from the cells pass through the body pretty quickly so are not as likely to be re-absorbed. Natural juices, no sugar or chemicals added, preferably freshly made, is the desirable liquid to take and you can take as much as you want. Two quarts of fluid a day is the minimum quantity to take. Fresh fruits can be eaten to get rid of the hunger feelings one may experience but should not be consumed in excess. For example: 4 nectarines, 1/2 lb of grapes, a pear and a banana for the day.

In addition to the fruits satisfying the hunger they also give the body minerals lost through sweating.

Besides fruit and juices some protein should be taken. The best source being predigested liquid protein. These must be gotten from a good health food store as opposed to a department store. For example “Progest” which is made in New York is very good.

EXERCISE

It is very essential to exercise. The major exercise being done is jogging or running. Exercise increases the circulation throughout the whole body thus A) carries out cell waste more rapidly and B) causes the circulation to go deeper into the muscles and tissues so those areas which have been stagnant can now get rid of the “residual crystals” which have accumulated.

In addition to increased circulation, exercise especially running causes the body to sweat which will cause the crystals and toxic products in the body to come out through the body pores.

A rubberized nylon sweat suit is essential in running as it will aid sweating. This should not be started until the second to third week so that the body can gradiently get used to profuse sweating.

THE SWEAT PROGRAM

1. The C/S in liaison with the Medical Liaison Officer starts the person off on this program.

2. As necessary the C/S in liaison with the Medical Liaison Officer orders the person to a medical exam by a medical doctor.

3. The Medical Liaison Officer informs the person of the vitamins he or she is to take daily. This includes the “Drug Bomb” three times a day and “Cal-Mag Formula” two times a day plus at least a teaspoon of salt.

4. The diet is fruit, heavy juices and water and two ounces of liquid protein daily (2 oz of liquid protein daily is the minimum dose).

5. The jogging/running is now started on a gradient. The minimum exercise time should be an hour a day. The more time that is put in, the more sweating will be done and the program completed all the faster.

A person can gradiently build up jogging/walking until he is solidly up to Jogging/running for the entire hour.

It is important to set daily goals and try to make them to establish a game and purpose to the daily exercise.

6. Once the Drug Rundown, which is Objectives plus Dianetics is done, the pc may be audited on other actions while continuing with the Sweat Program.

Lack of a Sweat Program doesn’t stop other auditing actions. It is factual that drug handling cannot be considered complete on a pa who has taken LSD until the Sweat Program is completed.

The Drug Rundown is a specific rundown as given in HCOBs and is finished as an auditing action when the pc has done all its steps.

What is not finished apparently is the possible residual LSD and this is handled by a Sweat Out Program. The LSD and the body are part of the physical universe.

So do not stop a pays auditing after he’s done the HCOB’s steps of a Drug Rundown just because he still has to do a Sweat Out Program. Go on auditing him on other actions but be sure he also completes a Sweat Program.

A Sweat Program can be done BEFORE a DRD or even Objectives but should not hold these up either.

RESULTS

The final result is to get the LSD residual crystals out of the body. The phenomena that can occur are many. On this program one has to be watched, because he will be getting out crystals and could go on a trip.

The reactions that one can undergo on this program can vary from anything like actual tripping, heavy misemotion, somatics turning off and on, etc. As the program progresses, the individual will become more causative in his or her environment.

Confront and responsibility will definitely increase and have lasting effects. The individual will become easier to work with and will like and feel more comfortable with himself.

He will be healthier and more in tune with his body.

At first the individual may feel other-determinism about doing this program but that will gradually change and he or she will want to do it for their own welfare. Their responsibility will come up for themselves and others.

Emotions that have been shut off may start to reappear; they can blow through stupidity and become more aware; they can do actions more easily; consequences start to take on meaning to them; and they are aware of the effects that their own actions have on themselves and others.

The above will vary from individual to individual but in each case there will be great change for the better.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Assisted by
Paulette Cohen
LRH:PC:JD:kjm.dr LRH Tech Expeditor
Copyright © 1978 and
by L. Ron Hubbard Jim Dincalci
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED LRH Medical Researcher


HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 6 FEBRUARY 1978R-1
ADDITION OF 16 MARCH 1978
Remimeo
LSD AND THE SWEAT PROGRAM—ADDITION

Ref: HCOB 31 May 77 LSD
HCOB 6 Feb 78R LSD AND THE SWEAT PROGRAM

Clarification is needed at this time on the matter of the auditing of the pc while on the LSD Sweat Program.

Once the Drug Rundown, which is Objectives plus Dianetics, is done the pc may be audited on other actions while continuing with the Sweat Program.

Lack of a Sweat Program doesn’t stop other auditing actions.

However, it is factual that drug handling cannot be considered complete on a pc who has taken LSD until the Sweat Program is completed.

The Drug Rundown is a specific rundown as given in HCOBs and is finished as an auditing action when the pc has done all its steps.

What is not finished apparently is the possible residual LSD and this is handled by a Sweat Out Program. The LSD and the body are part of the physical universe.

So do not stop a pc’s auditing after he’s done the HCOB’s steps of a DRD just because he still has to do a Sweat Out Program. Go on auditing him on other actions but be sure he also completes a Sweat Program.

The Sweat Program can also be done before a DRD or even Objectives but should not hold up a DRD or Objectives.

L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:PC:dr Founder
Copyright © 1978 Assisted by
by L. Ron Hubbard Paulette Cohen
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED LRH Tech Expeditor

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 26 FEBRUARY 1978

Remimeo
Interneships
Academies

INTERNESHIPS VS COURSES


Courses are those activities done in Div IV, Dept 11 for the purpose of training a student on the theory and materials necessary to perform certain skills. The product of a course is a graduate who has learned his materials and successfully applies what he has learned.

Interneships are those activities done in Div V, Dept 14 for the purpose of perfecting the internees application of the basic skills learned on the Div IV course. The product of the interneship is a flubless professional.

Courses and interneships are two separate and distinct activities. When you confuse the two by failure to fully comprehend their actions and products you end up with overlong courses and overlong interneships.


FAST COURSES

A well-run course is where the student gets the theory. Through Word Clearing, demos, drills and actual practical application of the materials per his checksheet, the student is quickly gotten to a point where he grasps the simplicity of the fundamentals of the level and can apply them. Then from the viewpoint of experience with the basics he then rapidly studies the rest of the techniques that comprise the level. He can produce a competent result. This is a course graduate.


FAST INTERNESHIPS

Interneships are not where you learn theory. That belongs on the course. Interneships are there to add polish to professional level. Internes by definition train “onthe-job” under skilled supervision. They acquire skills by doing, not by reading their theory again. They audit. They C/S. They supervise. They get their errors corrected and they audit, C/S and supervise some more. When they have done this in volume and polished up their rough edges so they can think with their materials without hesitation on what to do, they become professionals. This is an interneship graduate.


EXISTING SCENE

All too often it is being found that interneships are being used to teach the course again. Weeks are being spent restudying the materials for checkouts. High Crime checkouts which have been done before are being done again. High Crime checkouts have become everything on a level rather than the basics which is not a lot of issues for any level. The purposes expressed in the 5 Qual OK to Audit Series plus polishing to professional standards the level just studied is the true purpose of interneships. Any course grad who wore his hat as a student should be able to sit down and check out his materials straight off as it is assumed he got it the first time.

So any attempt to turn an interneship into a redo of the original course must be a solution to quickied or badly supervised courses. The right handling would be to reform your courses and get them straight and require retreads on that course for any who show they missed the materials when on the course.

THE REMEDY

The interneships will be streamlined on theory. Following HCOB 28 April 71 “OKAYS TO AUDIT IN HGCs,” will make good auditors. To prevent the interneships from becoming a long haul on theory it will now be required that the student pass an exam on the course materials before routing on to the interneship. Passing grade will be 85%. Missed questions are handled in Cramming. Any who do not get a passing grade must retread the course before being allowed on the interneship.

Should there be too many flunks then a Comm Ev must be requested by the org KOT or LRH Comm on the org’s executives for neglect and failure to handle the courses.

SUMMARY

The theory and routine practical belong on the course. If an interneship gets heavily into theory then there must be poor courses and they had better be corrected and fast. This should settle any questions on the matter.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

As assisted by
CS-5

for the

BOARDS OF DIRECTORS
of the
CHURCHES OF SCIENTOLOGY

BDCS:LRH:JE:dr
Copyright © 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 10 MARCH 1978
Remimeo
Div 2 CANCELS HCO PL OF 4 FEB 1970R
Div 4 AND HCO PL OF 4 FEB 1970
Registrar SAME TITLE
C/S
Tech Estimator
All Orgs
All SHs PILOT

HGC PC APPLICATION FORM


ORG:___________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________
PRECLEAR NAME: DATE:
__________________________________________________________________________________
CURRENT ADDRESS
_____________________________________________________________________
CITY PHONE

I (name) hereby apply for auditing:
Life Repair, any org
Drug Rundown, any org
Dianetic Case Completion, any org
Quad or Expanded Grades, any org
Expanded Dianetics, Continental Orgs, St. Hills, orgs where authorized
Power, in a St. Hill Org
Solo Levels (R6EW, Clear, and OT) in an Advanced Org
Any special type of rundowns (Ls, Int RD, PTS RD, etc.). Specify what
rundowns:__________________________________________________

I realize it may be necessary to prepare my case for a major action, such as above or to handle medical actions or to get auditing for chronic somatics or particular difficulties.
_________________________________________________________
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT

REGISTRAR: DATE: _______________
1. Originates this Routing Form.
2. Tentatively signs up the applicant and receives payment.
3. Issues temporary invoice for payment received.
4. Logs name of applicant to follow up if not returned on this form.
5. Routes applicant and this form to Testing.
6. Alerts Tech Services to applicant arrival on lines and to get applicant’s PT folder to Tech Estimator for study as applicant will be there shortly.

TESTING: DATE: _______________
LOCATION: __________________________________________________________
1. Immediately administers OCA/APA, Aptitude and IQ tests.
2. Has applicant wait while tests are immediately graded.
3. If necessary gets help from Tech Services so applicant is not kept
waiting.
4. Attaches test results to this form.
5. Routes applicant to Tech Estimator.

TECH ESTIMATOR: DATE:______________
LOCATION: _________________________________________________________
1. Quickly reviews pc’s PT folder (if available). Does not keep pc waiting.
2. Interviews the applicant, following the HGC PC TECH ESTIMATION FORM.
3. Reviews the tests and Estimation Form with regard to case gain, what the applicant is trying to handle, time spent on earlier actions.
4. Writes in his estimate on the last page of Estimation Form in duplicate with any additional comments for the Registrar and signs the form.
5. Pc is/is not (circle one) accepted on lines. Number of intensives required:
______________________________________________________
TECH ESTIMATOR

6. Informs the applicant of the estimate. Handles any purely technical questions but not finance or sales matters.
7. Routes the applicant and this form to the Reg with a duplicate copy of last page of Tech Estimation Form.
8. Routes the Tech Estimation Form to pc’s folder.

MAA: DATE:_______________
LOCATION: __________________________________________________________
(AOs AND SHs ONLY)
1. Gives ethics clearance to receive Advanced Levels (Power and up).

REGISTRAR: DATE: _______________
LOCATION: __________________________________________________________
1. If an illegal pc, returns any money temporarily invoiced and routes to Ethics for R-Factor.
2. Signs the applicant up for the full estimate.
3. Receives payment for rest of the estimate or arranges payment for the rest as applicable. Fully invoices all money received including any on temporary invoice.
4. Completes full sign-up forms, waivers, etc. for full tech estimate.
5. Signifies applicant fully accepted by his agreement to full estimate.
6. Signifies applicant not accepted by his refusal to accept estimate and/or work out necessary financial arrangements. Routes to Ethics for R-Factor.
7. If first sign-up, Reg makes a record for his own files for future follow -up .
8. Prospects at the close for others in need of tech estimates.
9. Routes applicant and this form to Tech Services.

TECH SERVICES: DATE:_______________
LOCATION: __________________________________________________________
1. Finds out where the pc’s folders are and arranges to get them immediately.
2. Schedules the pc for auditing.
3. Routes this form to CF.

- END OF ROUTING FORM -

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

As assisted by
CS-5 & CS-3
LRH:JE:FF:dr
Copyright © 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 18 MARCH 1978

Remimeo
HSDC
All Dianetic Auditors

POSTULATES AND ENGRAMS

Ref: Dianetic Auditor’s Bulletin Jan 52
(Tech Vol 1, page 196)
HCOB 20 Aug 63, R3R-R3N THE PRECLEAR’S POSTULATES
HCOB 16 Jun 70, C/S Series 6, WHAT THE C/S IS DOING
ADVANCED PROCEDURES AND AXIOMS
DMSMH


A full Dianetic EP consists of F/N, erasure, cognition and VGIs. This has been well covered in Dianetic HCOBs and is expected of all Dianetic auditors. The Dianetic auditor is running out the forces and charge contained in the pc’s engrams and in doing so the pc’s thoughts and postulates which were buried in the charge will come off in the form of cognitions. When the charge is removed the pc is then able to evaluate and discard these postulates in PT as he sees fit. It is also an indicator of a full EP as a pc who has not gotten the force off an incident is very unlikely to recover the thoughts in the form of cognitions.

Where a pc reaches the basic on a chain and apparently flattens this but without all parts of a full Dianetic EP in evidence the auditor can ask the pc if he postulated anything in the basic incident. This should complete the full Dianetic EP. If not, the incident hasn’t had all the force taken off and should be run through again and continued per standard Dianetic tech to full EP. In the case of an assist one can ask for the postulate made just prior to the illness or injury. Where you have a full Dianetic EP of F/N, erasure, cog and VGIs there is no need to ask for anything further.

One does not list for anything. One doesn’t use “what.” No repeater technique. Just ask the question and get your full EP or flatten the incident.

What the pc postulated just before or while under the stress and pain of his engram could be any manner of significance to the pc, but it is of no significance to the Dianetic auditor other than as a means of ensuring he has gotten the full Dianetic EP and has removed all the charge and force in the pc’s engram. Then you will see a very happy preclear.

AN ENGRAM CHAIN IS NOT COMPLETE UNLESS IT ENDS WITH F/N, ERASURE, COGNITION AND VGIs.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

As assisted by
CS-5
LRH:JE:nc
Copyright © 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 19 MARCH 1978
Remimeo
Snr HSDC
QUICKIE OBJECTIVES

Ref: HCOB 12 Apr 62, CCHs PURPOSE
HCOB 11 Jun 57, TRAINING & CCH PROCESSES
HCOB 3 Feb 59, FLATTENING A PROCESS
CREATION OF HUMAN ABILITY
CONTROL AND THE MECHANICS OF SCS
HCOB 14 Aug 63, LECTURE GRAPHS (No. 5 on
pg 342 of Tech Vol V)


Recent investigations into the effectiveness of Drug RDs including their rate of repair and re-repair revealed a marked tendency to quickie Objectives.

Failure to run Objectives fully and completely, especially on a case with an extensive drug history can set up the pc for less than optimum gain on Dianetics. A Drug RD without full and complete Objectives is not a Drug RD.

TWO-WAY COMM

The easiest and very out tech way to quickie Objectives is to run some commands and then put the pc on the meter and 2WC to F/N or do some fast “rehab.” But did the Objective process ever get run? What actually F/Ned, the Objective or the 2WC? Any Objectives run this way are invalid.

The tech of Objectives is extensive and still very much in force. They have their own EPs and with these they are fully run to actual change for the pc. Only this is valid handling of Objectives.

CURE

The way to handle auditors who quickie Objectives is a full W/Cing of the subject and a big clay demo of the purpose of Objectives and a big clay demo of what effect Objectives have on running a Drug RD and R3R. Then get the auditor’s own Objectives flattened.

Any Drug RD that needs to be repaired or redone must include a careful study of the Objectives to see if they were honestly run and if the valid Objective EPs on the processes themselves were obtained. Where the Objective was obviously quickied just R-Factor the pc you are going to flatten it and do so. If the EP of an Objective was questionable you can ask the pc what happened and if he F/Ns on a real Objective EP fine, otherwise flatten the process.

A fully completed Drug RD with Objectives sets the stage for the pc to fly up the Grade Chart so do it right the first time.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

As assisted by CS-5

LRH:JE:nc
Copyright © 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 23 MARCH 1978R
REVISED 12 NOVEMBER 1978
Remimeo
(Revisions in this type style)

(Cancels BTB 16 Dec 73 Word Clearing
Series 51 WORD CLEARING ERRORS.)
Word Clearing Series 59R

WORD CLEARING DEFINITIONS
Ref: Word Clearing Series 54


The question has recently come up of whether you clear each and every definition of a word for that word to be word cleared. Some words have definitions that lead into technical definitions, specialized definitions or obsolete definitions. So what do you clear when clearing a definition of a word?

There is no reason under the sun to look up every definition or to even read specialized definitions for a word.

The rule actually is to know the definition of the word as given for the context for which it is being used. and that’s it.

You have to look over a full definition to find out which definition applies to the text you have been reading.

There are some words that have 30 or 40 definitions—most of them highly specialized and of no real use in a vocabulary.

So you don’t need to look up definitions of a word that don’t apply. YOU WANT THE DEFINITION WHICH APPLIES TO THE TEXT YOU HAVE BEEN READING. Of course, if you are clearing a word with Word Clearing Method 1 or Method 8 or when the context of the word is not given you would clear each definition excepting technical and specialized definitions which do not apply.

Then you use it in sentences until you have it as a concept.

A cleared word has been defined as follows:

A WORD WHICH HAS BEEN CLEARED TO THE
POINT OF FULL CONCEPTUAL UNDERSTANDING.

Also you don’t look up every word in that definition either. You look up words in a definition only if you find in the definition another word you don’t understand.

Hope this helps to make your Word Clearing a more simple and pleasant task.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:kjm
Copyright © 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 27 MARCH 1978

Remimeo
Word Clearing Series 58

ETHICS PENALTY FOR WORD CLEARERS

(Ref: HCOB 13 Sep 71, Para No. 3)


It has been found that the reason Word Clearers cease to be Word Clearers and blow Word Clearing and the reason Word Clearing drops out in orgs lies in the failure of the Word Clearer to clear the words on himself at the same time he was clearing them on the preclear. This is done without losing one’s presence as an auditor or Word Clearer and without winding up with the student word clearing the Word Clearer.

Hereafter when it is found that a Word Clearer has been accumulating misunderstood words by failure to clear them on himself he will be subject to a Court of Ethics with minimum penalty the loss of a week’s pay or allowance and if the offence is repeated he will be subject to a Comm Ev.

The offences on this are frequent and are a basic Why on Word Clearing dropping out in orgs.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

for the

BOARDS OF DIRECTORS
of the
CHURCHES OF SCIENTOLOGY

BDCS:LRH:jg.dr
Copyright © 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 3 APRIL 1978
Remimeo
Course Supers
Cramming Off
TR DEBUG ASSESSMENT

Reference: HCOB 16 Aug 1971 TRAINING DRILLS MODERNIZED
HCOB 7 Apr 1973R GRADIENTS IN TRs
BTB 15 Aug 1971R TR COURSE BUGS HANDLING
BTB 16 Aug 1971R BREAKTHROUGH—TR COURSE
HCOB 8 Dec 1974 TR 0—NOTES ON BLINKING
BTB 18 Aug 1971R TR COURSE—HOW TO RUN
BTB 5 Nov 1971RA TR COURSE DEBUG DRILL


The purpose of this list is to give a TR Supervisor a standard list to find the cause of a student’s bog on doing TRs, after standard Word Clearing actions have been done but have not resolved the situation.

The supervisor must have an OK to operate an E-Meter and must have been passed on Assessment TRs in Qual to assess the list.

The student is put on the meter, checked for sleep and enough to eat. He is then given an R-Factor that you are going to do a short assessment to find out what the real trouble is on doing TRs.

Then the list is assessed.

Clear the words of each line from the last word to the first before calling the line.

1. Have you been doing TRs over a misunderstood word? ________
(Clear the misunderstood word or words. Each to F/N.)

2. Have you gone exterior while doing a TR? ________
(Indicate. If no F/N on indication route the student to Qual for handling.)

3. Have you been overrun on a TR? ________
(Indicate, rehab if no F/N.)

4. Were you put on the TR Course in the middle of another auditing action? ________
(2WC the action he was incomplete on to F/N. Send data to C/S for OK or not OK on continuing TRs.)

5. While on the TR Course did you already have an upset in life? ________
(Handle the ARC Brk or send to C/S.)

6. While on the TR Course did you already have a heavy problem? ________
(Handle the problem or send to C/S.)

7. While on the TR Course did you already have an unwillingness to let something be known? ________
(Pull the W/H or send to C/S.)

8. On the TR Course have you been falsely passed? ________

9. Have you falsely passed someone? ________

10. Did you fake passing so you could get out of doing more? ________

11. Is there some other reason? ________
(Send to HGC for handling.)

12. Was this list unnecessary? ________
(Indicate it and return student to course.)


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Assisted by
Rick Sheehy
CS-4 I/T

and

Paulette Cohen
LRH Tech Expeditor

LRH:PC:RS:dr
Copyright © 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 8 APRIL 1978

Remimeo

AN F/N IS A READ

Ref: HCOB 2 Nov 1968R CASE SUPERVISOR CLASS VIII
THE BASIC PROCESSES
HCOB 20 Feb 1970 FLOATING NEEDLES AND END PHENOMENA
HCOB I Aug 1970RA F/N AND ERASURE


I recently took over the C/Sing of a case on a Dianetic Assist and found that F/Ns were being neglected as reads.

This pc had a Dianetic list listed out that gave an F/Ning item. All the other reading items were handled with the exception of this F/Ning item.

An F/Ning item is a reading item. An F/N is only a read when an item F/Ns at the end of you calling it. The F/N would occur instantly upon calling the item.

So what does this mean that an F/N is a read? A read means there’s charge there to handle. It means there is force connected with that significance that is available to the pc to view and run. An F/Ning item means there’s charge there as the F/N means something just keyed-out so there must be charge there for there to be a key-out. After all what is keying out?

You can get four F/Ns off the same item. The first one is in finding the item, the second one in running recalls, the third one is in running secondaries and the fourth one is in running the engrams.

The basic mechanics of key-out, key-in and erasure have to be understood before you can understand why an F/N is a read and when it would be a read.

An F/N also means stop that is it end of process, end of rud or end of action being handled. To confuse this with an F/N being a read could be fatal for a pc.

There is no substitute to understanding basics when it comes to understanding what an F/N is; when it means go and when it means stop for that process or action.

An F/Ning assessment does not mean that the assessment is now all reading. This means that the actions have been done and the charge is off that area at least temporarily.

An instant F/N on an item means this item is keying out some charge that can be keyed-in again and run which is really what any other read is saying; there’s charge there to handle.

This piece of tech can make the difference in a case being totally handled and just doing better. Understand it and use it and you will see the difference in the results.


L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:PC:dr
Copyright © 1978 Assisted by
by L. Ron Hubbard Paulette Cohen
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED LRH Tech Expeditor

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 30 APRIL 1978

Remimeo

THE SWEAT PROGRAM FURTHER DATA


Ref: HCOB 6 Feb 78R LSD AND THE SWEAT PROGRAM
HCOB 31 May 77 LSD
HCOB 3 Aug 73 PEP
HCOB 5 Nov 74 DRUGS, MORE ABOUT


The Sweat Program HCOB of 6 February 1978R describes how the original Sweat Program was run. This is a very effective program.

Recent research has given us more data for the program which you should know about.

OVERWEIGHT PEOPLE

It is important that fat on the body be removed as this is one of the main places that LSD can lodge. Compared to the rest of the body, fat tissue has little circulation in it. LSD lodged in fat can stay there for a long time.


UNDERWEIGHT PEOPLE

Underweight people on a strict diet and running can lose more weight than they can afford to lose. This could be detrimental to their health.

On the LSD Sweat Program, a regular balanced diet is okay for the thin person. The weight should be maintained. However, refined sugar or flour and their products should not be taken. See HCOB 3 August 73, PEP.

In this program, the increased circulation and exercise is as important as the sweating.

NORMAL WEIGHT PEOPLE

Those who start at a normal weight and continue to lose weight to the point that their health can be affected should go back to eating well-balanced meals (omitting refined sugar and flour products). This should stop the continued weight loss.


TRIPS

If a person is having trips during the program, he should take a lot of extra Vitamin B Complex and Vitamin C as these aid the body, especially the liver in getting rid of the LSD which is in the system. Normally the vitamins in the program are sufficient for the body to handle the LSD which comes out.


VITAMINS

Pure natural plain yoghurt taken with the vitamins will help prevent stomach upsets from taking too many vitamins at once. Please ensure that your vitamins are not taken on an empty stomach for they can cause stomach burn. Enteric vitamins are not essential as long as the “bomb” is taken with food.

SHOES

The best type of shoes to use for jogging are the ones which are well cushioned in the heel and toe. These are quite popular right now for jogging. They are available in all different colors and stripes.

They should be of good quality, give arch support, be comfortable and be well cushioned, especially in the heel.

This cushioning absorbs the shocks to the body as the heel hits the ground. Running and jogging go much better with these shoes.


CAL-MAG

Calcium and magnesium supplements can be taken as a substitute for the CalMag Formula in HCOB 5 Nov 74, DRUGS, MORE ABOUT. Just ensure that the full daily requirement of each is taken daily. This will prevent muscle soreness from the exercising.

VEGETABLES

Green vegetables are okay during the program. To get the most benefit from them, they should be taken raw or steamed. Different lettuces, tomatoes and cucumbers are fine to take. The majority of the food eaten should still be fruit.

Vegetable juices are OK. A variety should be used throughout the program so that different nutrients and minerals can be gotten from the different vegetable sources.


PROTEIN

Predigested protein is not the only protein that need be taken. It was used on the original program to good effect, however, there are several good powdered protein supplements on the market. Check your health food store for data on these. Be sure to get one with a high protein, very low carbohydrate content, which has all 8 of the essential amino acids. The label should state or show that all of the essential amino acids are present.

SALT AND POTASSIUM

Salt (sodium chloride) is not mandatory on the program. It is only necessary as a treatment if the symptoms of salt depletion (heat exhaustion) occur. These are clammy skin, tiredness, weakness, headache, sometimes cramps, nausea, dizziness, sometimes vomiting and fainting.

As potassium is also lost in sweating, some of the above symptoms can come from potassium depletion. So, if salt does not handle the above symptoms then try either potassium gluconate tablets or “salt substitute” which is mainly potassium.

In the program, few of the above symptoms occurred when heavy fruit intake was occurring. This is due to the fact that there is sodium and potassium in fruit and vegetables. Consequently supplementing these minerals is not usually necessary if a lot of fruit and vegetables are consumed.


HEALTH

If a person does not feel better during this program after 3 to 4 weeks, a doctor can be consulted to check for endocrine problems or organ malfunctions as these can sometimes hinder a person’s progress on the program.

People with known heart conditions and high blood pressure or kidney conditions must do a program which is of a much lower gradient. An exercise program and diet must be worked out with a doctor.


GRADIENT

Doing this program gradiently is very important.

Here is a typical program sequence: First of all start jogging wearing the proper shoes. The first couple of days just jog 10 minutes, don’t worry about diet or vitamins or sweat suit. Just get out and jog.

The next couple of days jog 15 minutes. Continue increasing the jogging time gradiently until after 4 weeks you are up to 1 hour.

If you can get up to one hour running sooner, all the better. If you can run more than an hour a day regularly, that is even better. The more running and sweating, the better.

If you are so breathless that you can’t speak to another while you are running then you are straining too much. Cut the gradient back.

You can start taking vitamins anywhere in the first couple of weeks, but the best results occur if the vitamins and minerals are taken from the start.

During the first month of build up, you should cut out all sweets, especially refined sugars and flours and their products. If you are overweight, cut down on food quantity in this time. At the end of the month, meat should be eliminated and fruit and vegetables should be the source of food.

After 1 month you can start running with the sweat suit. You should be running a full hour pretty comfortably before you start with the sweat suit. Sweating when wearing the sweat suit will increase markedly so watch for salt depletion.


PROGRAM ODDITY

Very occasionally you will come across someone who has undergone extensive exercise and sweating for months and gotten rid of residual LSD. When starting on the LSD program, no further changes occur but there were earlier changes during the earlier sweating and exercise.

It is not just sweating that is necessary but also the increased circulation from the intensive exercise. LSD also has the effect of reducing circulation.

The point is, the case was sweated, exercised earlier and did get rid of the LSD. This is a very occasional phenomenon but has been known to occur.


EP

The evidence that there is no more LSD there, is that points 1 through 9 in HCOB 31 May 77, LSD are no longer present. The final adjudication of the completion of the LSD Sweat Program lies with the C/S in liaison with the Medical Liaison Officer.


L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:JD:nc Founder
Copyright © 1978 Assisted by
by L. Ron Hubbard Ens. Jim Dincalci
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED LRH Medical Researcher

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 1 MAY 1978
Remimeo
Cramming Off (Taken from LRH ED 140 INT)
C/Ses

Cramming Series 17

TECH QUALITY


My current concern is tech quality over the world. Whereas the majority of auditors do a good job, there are some who don’t, and it is these who have our reputation at stake.

The general outness has been traced (as usual) to out TRs and metering.

Lack of a Cramming in Qual Divs and even lack of Qual Divs is what has brought this about.

TRs and metering are out of the view of a C/S. He only sees what is written on the Auditor Report.

A Cramming should exist in every org and every bog should cause the auditor to be sent to Cramming on the material missed.

As TRs and metering are not visible to the C/S, Cramming should always add “Two hours TRs and metering” as a matter of course. This was the way it was when tech was more consistent.

A TR 1 that can’t be heard (or blows the pc’s head off), a TR 2 that consists of “That didn’t read. That read” and TR 4 that is pure Q and A, plus missed reads and bypassed F/Ns can wreck any program.

A Cramming in every org and required verification of TRs and metering will go a long ways to improve tech quality.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:nc
Copyright © 1971, 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 26 MAY 1978
Issue I
Remimeo
DIANETICS: URGENT COMMAND CHANGE

Ref: HCOB 26 May 197811 ROUTINE 3R REVISED
ENGRAM RUNNING BY CHAINS


It came to my attention the other day that Dianetics is being run using the wrong commands and even has some omitted procedure. This was quite a breakthrough to find as it explains some of the trouble that has been showing up with Dianetics throughout the world.

MOVING THROUGH THE INCIDENT

When a pc is first made to run an incident he is given the command to move through the incident to some certain time later. On the second run through the pc has been given the command SCAN through to the end of the incident. This second command is incorrect. The pc should be made to move through the incident with each run through.

Scanning an incident is another tech entirely and is covered in the early PABs under scanning but when you scan a pc during engram running you don’t get them back into the incident and couldn’t possibly discharge that incident. As early as Book One I found that you had to return the pc to the incident and MOVE them through and if they bounced then you would command them to RETURN TO THE INCIDENT as that is what you are after. So R3R Command C is changed to “MOVE THROUGH THE INCIDENT.”

RETURNING THE PC TO THE INCIDENT

It will happen in Dianetic running that something in the incident that the pc is running will command them off the incident. This is called a BOUNCER. The pc just bounces right off the incident. The way to handle this is quite simple you simply command the pc to RETURN TO THE BEGINNING OF THE INCIDENT and to move through the incident. Commanding the pc to RETURN TO THE INCIDENT will enable you to get the pc to move through it and the force of the incident will come off.

This is quite an interesting piece of tech that has been known and worked since the advent of Book One. It, unfortunately, fell out somewhere along the line and wasn’t being used. It is now being reinstituted and in fact its use is making a tremendous difference in Dianetics running right this very minute.


GETTING THE POSTULATES IN THE BASIC INCIDENT

Now and again a pc will run Dianetics whereby they F/N on the basic incident and have VGIs but no cognition has come off. The pc has not fully viewed the postulates in the incident here to obtain full end phenomena.

When this occurs and you have your F/N VGIs yet no cognition is voiced, ask the pc “Was there something that you postulated in that incident.” The results will be quite astonishing and the pc will have his or her full end phenomena and that will be it for that chain.

To not allow a pc to fully view the incident that is basic and get all the charge and postulates out of it will leave the case charged up and sooner or later the case will go sour on Dianetics.

There may be more than one postulate in the basic incident. You as the auditor want to get off the postulates in the basic incident accompanied by F/N and VGIs. This is your Dianetic end phenomena.

When the pc voices the postulate and has the full end phenomena there is no need to check further.

The auditor has to know his HCOBs on end phenomenas.


NARRATIVE HANDLING OF INCIDENTS

We just had a pc the other day that ran for 25 hours on one incident and when that pc was finished with the incident the results were miraculous—a changed person with changed activities in life. The old rule applies of it takes as long as it takes is really true with Dianetics narrative running or any other Dianetics for that matter.

Narrative running can take a long time to get the pc through and what you are interested in here is running the incident narrative to erasure and only going earlier similar if it starts to grind very badly.

Failure to properly run a narrative incident will give the auditor and C/S the idea that things don’t seem to handle on this case. It also gives the pc losses on handling things for himself. All that is needed is sufficient running of the narrative incident to its full end phenomena and this will no longer be the case as Dianetics does work except when it is not applied correctly. Part of the application of narrative running is to ensure that enough run throughs have occurred so that the incident is fully discharged.


URGENT EMPHASIS

Emphasis on the proper running of Dianetics cannot be stressed enough as it can make the difference between a well and happy preclear or one with losses in auditing, things not being handled and Dianetics getting a bad name when in fact it is the only technology ever known to handle the mind.

Dianetics, when properly applied, produces miracles so why settle for less. Apply it by the book and those miracles are yours to be had.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Assisted by
Paulette Cohen
LRH Tech Expeditor

LRH: PC:dr
Copyright © 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 2 JUNE 1978R
REVISED 14 JUNE 1978

(Revision in this type style)
Remimeo
Cram Off Hats
All Auditors
IMPORTANT


Cramming Series 18R


CRAMMING REPAIR ASSESSMENT LIST


HISTORY: I recently made an important technical discovery that a person, org or area can be totally bogged by a mis-cram or by an R/Ser operating under the guise of a “Cramming Officer.” In the particular instance, one R/Sing Cramming Officer had bogged an org and then a second R/Sing Cramming Officer took over to “repair it,” resulting in a nearly total crash.

To remedy this, I developed the following Cramming Repair List. In subsequent use of it, including people who had been mis-crammed elsewhere, the usage appeared quite miraculous.

It has been found that faulty, quickie or mis-cramming can result in continual goofs or an apparency of out-ethics as the person isn’t correcting. This list covers the basic errors that can occur in cramming. It has also been found that a Cramming Officer who has consistent overt products will mess up an area. This list is used to correct such cramming.

This list can be used by an auditor in session who finds the pc has bypassed charge on his past cramming. It is also used when a bog or impasse occurs during or following a cramming action.

Its main use is to clear up an org or area where it is found that one or more Cramming Officers have been messing it up. In such an instance, it is applied to every past or present staff member. In such an instance particularly, its use can result in a miraculous resurge of the org or area.

Needless to say it can produce a remarkable resurgence in a person who has a history of being mis-crammed.

The list is done in a session by an auditor who has a Qual OK to assess a prepared list and Qual OK to operate an E-Meter.

Auditor Instruction: In case of a wrong why, use L4BRA. In case of self-listing or out list, use L4BRA. In case of any read find out who and when as needed to handle the question. If any question reads keep at it until you F/N it. F/N every item on the list that reads, then F/N the whole list on a final assessment of it.

In calling these items to the pc call them as questions, not as statements. This is the case in this list or any other prepared list. Do not call them as statements as this will tend to evaluate for the pc and even invalidate him.

If the list does not F/N or if the cramming repair does not seem to be getting anywhere, do a C/S 53RK and return to and F/N the Cramming Repair List after you’ve handled the C/S 53RK.

NAME: DATE:_______________

1. HAVE YOU BEEN GIVEN A WRONG WHY? ________
(L4BRA . )

2. DO YOU HAVE A WRONG WHY? ________
(L4BRA.)

3. AS A RESULT OF CRAMMING ARE YOU SELF-LISTING? ________
(L4BRA.)

4. DO YOU SELF-LIST? ________
(L4B RA . )

5. WERE YOU CRAMMED OVER OUT RUDS? ________
(Find out which and handle E/S to F/N.)

6. DO YOU HAVE AN ARC-X? ________
(ARCU CDEINR E/S to F/N.)

7. HAVE YOU BEEN UPSET WITH SOMEONE’S HANDLING OF YOUR AREA? ________
(ARCU CDEINR E/S to F/N.)

8. HAVE YOU ARC BROKEN ANOTHER? ________
(ARCU CDEINR E/S to F/N.)

9. DO YOU HAVE A PROBLEM? ________
(Get what and E/S to F/N.)

10. HAVE YOU MADE ANY PROBLEMS FOR ANOTHER? ________
(E/S to F/N.)

11. DO YOU HAVE ANY WITHHOLDS? ________
(Get what and E/S to F/N.)

12. HAVE YOU WITHHELD THAT OTHERS HAVE WITHHOLDS? ________
(Handle as W/H. E/S to F/N.)

13. HAVE YOU BEEN CRITICAL OF ANOTHER? ________
(Get prior overt. E/S to F/N.)

14. HAVE YOU COMMITTED ANY OVERTS? ________
(Get what and E/S to F/N.)

15. HAVE YOU BEEN UPSET BECAUSE SOMEONE SEEMED MAD AT YOU? ________
(ARCU CDEINR E/S to F/N.)

16. DID YOU STILL HAVE A PROBLEM WHEN YOU LEFT CRAMMING? ________
(E/S to F/N.)

17. WAS CRAMMING A PROBLEM TO YOU? ________
(E/S to F/N.)

18. DID YOU FEEL WORSE AFTER BEING CRAMMED? ________
(Ind E/S to F/N.)

19. HAVE YOU BEEN TOLD ANYTHING F/N’D WHEN YOU FELT IT HADN’T? ________

(Find out what and ind. E/S. Handle what hadn’t really F/N’d.)

20. HAVE YOU FELT SOMETHING SHOULD HAVE F/N’D WHEN THE CRAMMING OFFICER/AUDITOR DIDN’T INDICATE IT HAD? ________
(Indicate. 2WC E/S to F/N. Rehab any O/Rs.)

21. HAVE YOU HAD MISUNDERSTOODS THAT YOU STILL MISUNDERSTOOD AT THE END OF CRAMMING? ________
(Get them and handle per Word Clearing tech.)

22. HAVE MISUNDERSTOODS BEEN MISSED? ________
(Get them and handle per Word Clearing tech.)

23. HAVE WITHHOLDS BEEN MISSED? ________
(Get what and E/S to F/N.)

24. HAS THE WRONG MATERIAL BEEN GIVEN YOU TO CLEAR UP A MISUNDERSTOOD? ________
(Find out what. Ind E/S to F/N. Clear up any MUs.)

25. HAS NO MATERIAL BEEN GIVEN YOU TO CLEAR UP A MISUNDERSTOOD? ________
(Find out what. Ind E/S to F/N. Clear up any MUs.)

26. DO YOU HAVE MISUNDERSTOODS NOW? ________
(Find out what. Handle per Word Clearing tech.)

27. DO YOU HAVE MISUNDERSTOODS THAT YOU HAVEN’T CLEARED UP? ________
(Find out what. Handle per Word Clearing tech.)

27a. WERE YOU MADE TO LOOK UP WORDS YOU ALREADY UNDERSTOOD? ________
(Indicate E/S to F/N.)

28. COULDN’T YOU UNDERSTAND THE CRAMMING ORDER?
(2WC E/S to F/N.) ________

29. HAVE YOU BEEN TOLD YOU SHOULDN’T HAVE BEEN SENT TO CRAMMING? ________
(Find out who and what. E/S to F/N.)

30. HAS THE CRAMMING OFFICER BEEN CRITICAL OF ANOTHER? ________
(Get who and what E/S to F/N. Then check for “Have you been similarly critical?” Get M/W/H.)

31. HAVE YOU FELT PTS TO YOUR AREA? ________
(Check for SP or get a full PTS RD.)

32. IN CRAMMING HAS ANYBODY INVALIDATED YOU? ________
(Find out who and what. Ind E/S to F/N.)

33. IN CRAMMING HAS ANYBODY EVALUATED FOR YOU? ________
(Find out who and what. Ind E/S to F/N.)

34. HAVE YOU GOOFED AND NOT TOLD ANYBODY? ________
(Find out what. Handle as a M/W/H. E/S to F/N.)

35. IS THERE SOME OTHER REASON FOR TROUBLE IN YOUR AREA? ________

(2WC E/S to F/N.)

36. ARE YOU HAVING GENERAL CASE TROUBLE? ________
(Find out what to F/N, C/S 53RK if necessary.)

37. DID THE CRAM INTERRUPT YOUR USUAL AUDITING? ________
(Ind E/S to F/N.)

38. DID THE CRAMMING OFFICER RUSH YOU? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)

39. WAS A CRAM QUICKIED? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)

40. DID THE CRAMMING OFFICER FAIL TO DRILL YOU? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)

41. WAS THERE NOTHING WRONG IN THE FIRST PLACE? ________
(Ind E/S to F/N.)

42. WAS THE CRAM DONE OVER SOME OTHER BYPASSED CHARGE? ________
(Find out what and handle.)

43. WAS THIS ASSESSMENT UNNECESSARY? ________
(Ind E/S to F/N.)

44. WAS THERE SOMETHING ELSE WRONG? ________
(Find out what and handle. GF if no joy.)


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

As assisted by
Special Tech Project

LRH:STP:dr.nc
Copyright © 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 15 JUNE 1978
Remimeo
URGENT IMPORTANT

The key to Expanded Dianetics is:

1. Incomplete or misdone Objectives.

2. Incomplete or misdone Drug Rundown including Sweat Program.

3. Incomplete or misdone Dianetics.

When these are not done, incomplete or misdone, one does not have any real chance of getting down to the basic evil purposes of the case and will at best run off locks and so the case won’t recover or will relapse.


LRH:nc L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright (3 1978 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED






HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 18 JUNE 1978
Remimeo

IMPORTANT

ROUTINE 3-R COMMAND
CHANGE

REVISES HCOB 26 MAY 1978 ISSUE 11
ROUTINE 3-R REVISED
ENGRAM RUNNING BY CHAINS


Routine 3-R FLOW ONE, STEP ONE command is changed as follows:

“Locate a time when you had a________.”

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Assisted by
Commodore’s Staff
LRH:AB:dr Captain
Copyright © 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard As ordered by
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED L. RON HUBBARD

[HCOB 26 May 1978 Issue II is not included in this volume since it is cancelled by HCOB 26 June 1978RA. See page 380 of this volume.]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 18 JUNE 1978R
REVISED 20 SEPTEMBER 1978
(Revisions in this type sty/e)
Remimeo
New Era Dianetics Series 4R

ASSESSMENT AND HOW TO GET THE ITEM

A great deal of material has existed about assessment of the preclear. In New Era Dianetics Dianetic assessment has been summarized and simplified and added to. These New Era Dianetics assessment steps are precise. And they will detect and isolate the things that have to be handled to make a pc a well and happy being.

It is important to understand what assessment is and what you are attempting to accomplish when doing an assessment.

If you simply understand that you are trying to find an item that reads well, brings in the pc’s indicators, in which the pc is interested, an item which was usefully worded and would run, you would have it.

In New Era Dianetics, several different kinds of assessment are used to get items to run out R3RA on the pc.

The New Era Dianetics Original Assessment Items

This is the first assessment done in New Era Dianetics. It has been known by various names, “Health Form,” “Preclear Assessment Sheet” and is now reissued with only minor changes as HCOB 24 June 78R New Era Dianetics Series 5R, ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT SHEET.

It contains the pc’s physical history and background, and gives the auditor and C/S a picture of the case. It is an assessment as it is done on the meter and enables the auditor and C/S to see what needs to be handled.

Original Item

The original item is a condition, illness, accident, drug, alcohol or medicine, etc. that has been given by the pc to the auditor. This will come from the Original Assessment Sheet, from another New Era Dianetics rundown or may simply be offered by the pc.

Original items tend to be general in character, such as “lame” or a medical condition, and are either lacking things you will find on the Preassessment List or are too broad to be audited. Pcs normally give items this way when asked for them on the New Era Dianetics Original Assessment Sheet, NED Series 5R.

Preassessment

Preassessment is a new procedure in New Era Dianetics. It is done with a prepared Preassessment List and determines what categories of somatics are connected to the original item, and which of these is the most highly charged.

It is called the preassessment because it comes before the assessment of the actual item to run out R3RA. (The item to be run out is now called the running item.)

Preassessment is done on the original item with the Preassessment List.

Preassessment List

This is found in New Era Dianetics Series 4-1.

A prepared list of categories of somatics which is assessed in connection with the original item. (The list includes pains, sensations, feelings, emotions, attitudes, misemotions, unconsciousnesses, sorenesses, compulsions, fears, aches, tirednesses, pressures, discomforts, dislikes, numbnesses.)

Preassessment Item

The largest reading item obtained on an assessment of the Preassessment List. This item is used to get running items.

LISTING FOR RUNNING ITEMS

The auditor now takes the preassessment item and makes a list on a separate sheet of paper and asks the pc, “What (preassessment item found) are/is connected with (original item found)?”

The auditor writes down exactly what the pc says in a column and notes the meter reads at the exact moment the pc ends the statement of the running item.

The result is a list called the “running item list.”

If the pc gives you an exact feeling (“feeling scared,” “a burning feeling in my ear,” “a sharp pain in my toe”) the feeling is simply run out R3RA Quad if it reads and the pc is interested.

An item which states a somatic and is runnable is called a running item. Running items are exactly stated pains, sensations, feelings, emotions, attitudes, misemotions, unconsciousnesses, sorenesses, compulsions, fears, aches, tirednesses, pressures, discomforts, dislikes, numbnesses.

If the pc gives you a general type item like “stomach problems,” a drug, alcohol, medicine, medical term or narrative, which does not state a feeling (etc.), the feelings (etc.) for the item must be found so they can be run. The preassessment is done to get running items.

Running Item

The auditor takes the best reading item on the running item list (possibly an LF or an LFBD or an instant F/N) and checks with the pc, “Are you interested in this item?” and if so it becomes the running item which you will run by R3RA Quad.

Running items are sometimes abruptly volunteered by the pc and if they are within the categories of the assessment list they can be run, but be careful of: 1) jumping onto some other subject than the original item you are trying to handle or 2) upsetting the pc because you refuse to audit it. Warning: If you go off New Era Dianetics assessment procedure you will be pot shooting all over a case and never finish it.

All this New Era Dianetics procedure is leading up to finding running items that will run and resolve the case. So the thing you are after in assessment is the running item and it is most accurately obtained as above.

This is done by taking the original item, say “stomach problems,” doing a preassessment on it, and with the preassessment item, finding a running item.

(Example: Stomach problems is the original item. A preassessment is done and “sorenesses” is the largest reading item on the Preassessment List. The auditor then lists for running items, using sorenesses, and gets “A dull soreness on my left side.” This is the running item, which will be handled with R3RA Quad.)


PREASSESSMENT

Previous to New Era Dianetics you would have taken a Dianetic item such as a drug or a chronic condition or an accident and you would have asked the pc to give you the attitudes, emotions, sensations and pains connected to the item.

I have just developed a new procedure on the handling and running of Dianetics. It is called the preassessment. This is how it works.

1. The auditor obtains an original item from the pc. This will be from a drug list, the Original Assessment Sheet or other New Era Dianetics rundown. (It will be a drug, a condition, an illness, an accident, etc.)

2. He then preassesses the feelings on the Preassessment List to find out which preassessment item is the most highly charged in connection with the original item.

3. From the preassessment item (the largest reading Preassessment List item) the auditor can get specific somatics called running items from the pc. These running items will be the ones the pc is most interested in.

4. The running item found in Step 3 is run R3RA Quad.

Example: The original item is “bronchitis.” The auditor assesses the Preassessment List below by asking the pc:

“Are__________connected with bronchitis?”
pains compulsions
sensations fears
feelings aches
emotions tirednesses
attitudes pressures
misemotions discomforts
unconsciousnesses dislikes
sorenesses numbnesses

He gets an LF on misemotions. This is the largest read.

“What misemotions are connected with bronchitis?”

As the pc tells him, the auditor takes them down, noting meter reads while the pc is giving the items. (And that’s all there is to the preassessment.)

PREASSESSMENT ITEM

This is in turn the largest reading item on the Preassessment List above and then subsequently lesser reading items from the same list are taken up.

With the preassessment item gotten, the auditor can list to find the running items.

(Example: The preassessment item is “misemotion.” The auditor asks, “What misemotions are connected with bronchitis?”)

He writes down all the answers the pc gives him, with their reads.

Feeling like I want to give up X
Worried about my lungs LFBD
Feeling angry about not breathing F
Scared to death sF


The auditor would first run “worried about my lungs” R3RA Quad and then would return to the next best reading item, in this case, “Feeling angry about not breathing. “
RUNNING ITEM

The auditor chooses the largest reading item the pc has given and checks interest for the next chain. This is the running item.

ACTUAL AUDITING

Having found the running item the auditor then runs it out R3RA Quad.

FINDING THE NEXT RUNNING ITEM

The auditor has a choice of taking a lesser reading item from the Preassessment List or the running item list or (safer) do a new preassessment on the same original item. (You don’t stop working on the original item until it is gone completely and forever. )

Having done a preassessment on the same original item you do a new running item list, take the best read (fall, LF, instant F/N) and use it as your new running item.

ASSESSMENT COMMANDS

Commands for the Original Assessment Sheet of the New Era Dianetics Rundown:

1) Ask the question on the Original Assessment Sheet. Write answer and note meter read.

2) “Are (preassessment item being called) connected with (original item being preassessed)? “

3) “What (largest reading preassessment item) are connected with (original item)?”

4) “Are you interested in running (largest reading or instantly F/Ning running item found in 3 above)?”

5) Go straight into R3RA Quad, using the item in 4 if the pc is interested.

HANDLING SOMATICS

The Preassessment List is designed to locate somatics which the auditor can then handle with R3RA.

By somatic is meant a pain or ache, sensation, misemotion, or even unconsciousness. There are a thousand different descriptive words that could add up to a feeling Pain, aches, dizziness, sadness, they are all feelings.

All chains are held together by the general various awarenesses which are named on the Preassessment List.

One generally identified difficulty given by the pc on the original assessment is, in actual fact, in almost all cases composed of pains, sensations, feelings, emotions, attitudes, misemotions, unconsciousnesses, sorenesses, compulsions, fears, aches, tirednesses, pressures, discomforts, dislikes and numbnesses as well as one or more postulates. It is very possible that any major Original Assessment item contains 3 or 4 full chains for each one of these.

Hence an auditor really hasn’t got a prayer of eradicating a major Original Assessment unless he runs 64 or more complete chains thoroughly and accurately. Some might give up with less and some might require many more.

If you follow the New Era Dianetics assessment procedure perfectly and flawlessly, well you have every chance of achieving a well and happy human being.

HANDLING NARRATIVES

A narrative is a story, an account, a tale.

For many years narratives were held in disrepute and auditors were sometimes warned against running them. The reason for this is that when you try to solve a case on narratives alone it takes several thousand hours of auditing.

However to abandon narratives totally is to abandon some of the most dramatic case changes you can get.

Occasionally the pc will come into a session after a physically or emotionally painful experience, an accident, illness, loss or great emotional stress. Running these incidents out narrative erases the psychic trauma the person has undergone and speeds recovery.

You sometimes find that a person’s whole life changed around the death of a relative or child or a divorce or an auto accident or some other similar catastrophe. This is usually found and handled in ACTION NINE in the HCOB 22 June 1978R New Era Dianetics Series 2R, NEW ERA DIANETICS FULL PC PROGRAM OUTLINE.

When running a narrative, one is running out the narrative incident. A narrative needs to be run and run and run on that one incident. You are running that incident to erasure and you only go earlier similar if it starts to grind very badly.

The trick in running narratives is to find the earlier beginning each time the person is moved through it. (See ACTION NINE, New Era Dianetics Series 2.)

A condition or circumstance without an incident is NOT narrative. An example of this would be “obstruction of justice.” It would not run as there is not an exact incident. “Hitting a cop” is a narrative. “Feeling sick about cops” is not a narrative as there is no story connected with it, but there is a somatic.

RUNNING NARRATIVES

To run a narrative item, the auditor must first find out exactly what happened with the pc, then, by asking the pc “What shall we call this incident?” he will have the preclear’s wording and can run it narrative using the New Era Dianetics narrative commands. One would run a narrative item ONLY if it reads well and the pc is interested in running it out.

Narrative handling to its full EP can give miraculous results, but it can take a long time to get the pc through it. A full Dianetic EP of postulate off (which IS the erasure), F/N and VGIs must be reached. If the pc gives a cognition which is not the actual postulate from the incident or doesn’t sound like it to the auditor, the postulate is asked for.

NARRATIVE ASSESSMENT COMMANDS

1) Ask the questions called for on the Original Assessment Sheet.

2) Note any original items that contain recent losses, illnesses, accidents, upsets or deaths and ask:

“Are you interested in handling (description of item on the Original Assessment Sheet)?”

3) If the pc signifies that he is, go immediately into R3RA Narrative.

ASSESSING TONE OF VOICE

The auditor does the assessing by asking the question as a question, not as a statement of fact. To assess the question as a statement tends to evaluate and can even invalidate the preclear.

You can go around asking questions with a tape recorder going. Play it back and you will notice the voice tone rises on a question and goes down on a statement. So the right way to assess the questions would be to have a slight upcurve at the end, and actually assess it as a question.

ASSESSMENT IS DONE BY THE AUDITOR BETWEEN THE PC’S BANK AND THE METER. THERE IS NO PARTICULAR NEED IN DIANETIC ASSESSING TO LOOK AT THE PC. JUST NOTE WHICH ITEM HAS THE LONGEST FALL OR BD. THE AUDITOR LOOKS AT THE METER WHILE DOING AN ASSESSMENT.

Rote procedure gets heavily in the road of a Dianetic assessment. The pc gives a list, the auditor doesn’t watch the reads and note them, then the auditor commonly goes back to assess the list. By that time the surface charge is off. He should have watched the meter in the first place and taken reads while the pc was originating the item. Why all this assessing of the finished list? Of course when you already have a list done by another with no reads marked on it, you have to read it off and mark what reads. And using a list a second time you have to read it off to the pc to see what reads.

In Dianetics one always handles an instant F/N first, then any LFBD, LF, F or sF, in that order. The largest reading items are the ones the pc can most easily confront. When the largest reading item is handled go on to the next biggest reading item (and so on) until all reading items have been handled. This same principle applies to all New Era Dianetics auditing. Take up the biggest reading areas and handle those first.

You may find there is something plainly visible that is wrong with the preclear, like a broken leg, yet it may not read at all. Instead the meter is reading on the pain in his arm. You do the standard action of handling the items that the meter reads on.

In assessing a prepared list such as the Preassessment List always take up the item which got an instant F/N first followed by the next largest read.

In a list like the running items list you continue listing until the pc says that’s all or you’ve got an F/N item. If you get in trouble right after listing a running item list on a pc and the pc seems upset and you are not a Scientology auditor, go get a Scientology auditor Class IV fast and have him repair the list for you as it may have become a Scientology list either through auditor error or inability to read a meter or missing a read or whatever.

The laws of listing and nulling always apply to Scientology lists and sometimes on rare occasions apply to a Dianetic list and can on these cases cause trouble.

Listing for a running item on the running item list usually doesn’t cause trouble as it is already taken from the Preassessment List and is not a very broad question.

This and a failure to follow New Era Dianetics assessment and R3RA procedure exactly or failure to actually erase the basic on a chain is about all the trouble you’d run into.

Review New Era Dianetics Series 1 on what is expected of a student.


LRH:lfg.dr L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1978 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 19 JUNE 1978

Remimeo
New Era Dianetics Series 3

OBJECTIVE ARC


I have recently added a new process to be done before the full battery of Objective Processes. It is called Objective ARC.

Objective ARC is the first Objective Process to be done on a pc. It is followed by CCHs 1-10, Op Pro by Dup. SCS on an object, SCS, and SOP 8C as covered in HCOB 11 June 57 Reissued 12 May 77 Training and CCH Processes, PAB 80, PAB 97, PAB 34, and HCOB 4 Feb 59 Op Pro by Dup.

The commands of Objective ARC are run 1-2-3, 1-2-3, three commands given repetitively.

The commands are:

“Look around here and find something that is really real to you.”

“Look around here and find something you wouldn’t mind communicating with.”

“Look around here and find something you wouldn’t mind being around.” (An alteration of the original command because the original command was too steep.)

The pc and auditor are ambulant.

This process will bite suddenly and bring a person up to present time. It has been known to crack cases.

Of all Objectives, this process tends to be the shortest. It often ends with a very bright cog after only a few commands.

The end phenomena of this process would be person in present time, cognition, and very good indicators, accompanied by an F/N.

The above will accomplish a great deal for the pc if done correctly and with flawless TRs.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:rb
Copyright © 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 20 JUNE 1978
Remimeo
All Auditors
New Era Dianetics Series 15

IDENTITY RUNDOWN


We have never before had a Dianetic process specifically directed to getting a pc into valence. This result has occasionally been achieved by Standard Dianetics as one of many miracles produced, but previous to this there has been no Dianetic RD which specifically lends itself to handling valences.

You can, of course, order them into valence in an incident but that isn’t in the realm of R3RA.

PROCEDURE

1. Have the pc make a list of all the things he has never wanted to have.

2. Do preassessment on those that read in 1. Quad R3RA reading items, first checking interest.

3. Have the pc list all the things he has never wanted to do.

4. Do preassessment on those that read in 3. Quad R3RA reading items, first checking interest.

5. Have the pc list all of the things he has never wanted to be.

6. Do preassessment on those items that read in 5. Quad R3RA reading items, first checking interest.

The end phenomena of this process is when the pc originates that he is in valence, or some similar remark such as for the first time he feels himself.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH: lfg
Copyright © 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 21 JUNE 1978

Remimeo
NEW ERA DIANETICS
SERIES 1


New Era Dianetics is a summary and refinement of Dianetics based upon 30 years of experience in the application of the subject.

In that 30 years I have found much that could improve results if properly applied.

And in that 30 years, many issues have been written by others that were a bit altered and some materials have been lost. New Era Dianetics corrects these points.

Also, recently, I have done additional research and have come up with a few breakthroughs.

In 1950, I said we should build a better Bridge.

Well, in 1978, here is a better Dianetics section of the Bridge.

Old-timers in Dianetics will only approve these upgrades. There is no invalidation of what they know already to be true. But there are refinements about which they are jumping with joy.

New Era Dianetics is even more acceptable, even more workable.

I did this review to move Dianetics back into the “miracles as usual” band and the student studying it and the auditor practicing it will find that if he follows its precision drills with precision he will be able to handle life and the spirit as never before.

Of course I cannot claim or guarantee that anyone audited on Dianetics or New Era Dianetics will become cured of illnesses which would best be handled by immediate medical treatment and I cannot promise any pc that all of his undesirable conditions will be eradicated since that depends on the state of training and the accuracy of application by the student.

THE STUDENT

What does a student need to know and do to acquire the skill of a Dianetic auditor?

0. The student needs to have completed the Student Hat. He needs to be able to handle study tech. Without that, his misunderstood words will wipe him out. Study tech is contained in the Student Hat. The definitions are in the Tech and Admin dictionaries and standard dictionaries. The student must not go by a single word he does not know the definition of.

1. He should know the background of Dianetics as contained in several books on the subject, particularly the Original Thesis and Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health.

2. He needs an E-Meter and must know how to handle it.

3. He should have good TRs as acquired in a TR course.

4. He should have a good grasp of Objective Processes, both to make him a better auditor, and to enable him to do full Drug Rundowns.

Objectives are actually Scientology processing but if a Dianetic auditor doesn’t know and cannot do them he is dependent on a Scientology auditor to finish up the Drug Rundown.

The training of a Dianetic auditor in Objectives is not as complete as a Scientology auditor’s. But it is sufficient to enable him to do those Objective Processes necessary to get a person off drugs or to get him in condition to run Dianetic processes.

5. He should have a good grasp of the materials of New Era Dianetics.

6. He should be able to make and assess lists of Dianetic items as called for in specific assessments of a preclear in order to complete rundowns and preclears.

7. He must be able to do TR 101 to 104 flawlessly. using the commands of New Era Dianetics.

8. He must know how to do Dianetic Assists.

9. He must be able to assess and handle a Dianetic Repair List and do repair actions.

10. He must be able to handle Dianetic remedies and all other actions called for in a complete Dianetic course or processing.

11. He needs to be able to apply what he knows.

If the student can acquire the above skills he will achieve fine results.

It does not require mile long checksheets to make a good Dianetic auditor.

It does require study and hard effective drilling.

And it requires a desire to help oneself and others and really make a better Bridge and a better world by putting it there in terms of faultless application.

Scientology goes on and is above Dianetics. But Dianetics is the solid base of all this research. So learn and apply it well.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH: ldv
Copyright © 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 22 JUNE 1978R
REVISED 16 SEPTEMBER 1978
Remimeo
(Revisions in this type sty/e)
(Ellipses indicate deletions)

This bulletin has been revised to give the rearranged steps and a new final step for the New Era Dianetics Drug Rundown.

New Era Dianetics Series 2R

NEW ERA DIANETICS FULL PC PROGRAM OUTLINE

As a person goes through life and lifetimes he collides with secondaries, losses, deaths of those he is closely connected with, injuries, accidents, illnesses, operations and emotional stresses. These of course are not all, but cover the main complaints and symptoms of pcs.

Dianetics lends itself to handle the current, past and occasional complaints and symptoms as above.

It achieves its results by addressing and handling the spirit and is in no way to be confused with medical or other practices.

The end phenomena of Dianetic auditing is a well and happy pc. These steps as laid out below if ALL DONE and with precision will give just that.

NEW ERA DIANETICS FULL PROGRAM OUTLINE:

THE ACTIONS OF THE NEW ERA DIANETICS FULL PROGRAM ARE TO BE RUN IN THE ORDER THEY ARE GIVEN. THE PRODUCT IS A WELL AND HAPPY PC AND THIS IS THE DIRECTION YOU GO, STEP BY STEP TO ACHIEVE THAT PRODUCT.

ACTION ONE: ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT SHEET

This sheet is thoroughly filled out with the pc on the meter. It gives you the pc’s history, what drugs and alcohol he has taken in this lifetime, illnesses, operations, present physical conditions, mental treatment, medicines and perception difficulties. (Ref: HCOB 24 June 1978R New Era Dianetics Series 5R, ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT SHEET).

At this point the data is taken only. Do not attempt to handle any of the items on this step. (Ref: HCOB 24 June 1978R NED Series 5R).

ACTION TWO: HANDLE ANY PTSNESS

It must be noted that you have to handle any PTSness before you can begin any auditing. Pcs who are PTS will not hold their gain. Therefore any PTSness must be handled before auditing is begun. (Ref: HCOB 10 Aug 73 PTS HANDLING, HCOB 20 Apr 72 SUPPRESSED PCs AND PTS TECH, HCOB 9 Dec 71RC PTS RD).

ACTION THREE: OBJECTIVE ARC

I have added a new process to be done before the full battery of Objective Processes. It is called Objective ARC. This is the first process to be done on a pc
and will bring a person up to present time. (Ref: Objective ARC is covered in HCOB 19 Jun 1978, New Era Dianetics Series 3, OBJECTIVE ARC).

ACTION FOUR: SWEAT PROGRAM

A Sweat Program will be necessary if the person has taken LSD or Angel Dust. It may also be indicated when a person has been subjected to exposure to toxic substances which have lodged in the tissue and fat of the body. In future times psychiatrists or others of ill repute may develop other compounds such as LSD which lodge in the systems; a Sweat Program may be indicated in these. (Ref: HCOB 15 July 71RA III Rev 27 Jun 78, Re-Rev 19 Sep 78, New Era Dianetics Series 9R, DRUG HANDLING).

ACTION FIVE: OBJECTIVES

A . . . battery of Objectives is done on this step. This consists of the following Objective Processes properly and fully done to their complete EP for each process: ... CCH 1-10, ... SCS on an Object and SCS.... (Note: SOP 8C and Op Pro By Dup are run on a later step.) (Ref: HCOB 15 July 71RA III Rev 27 Jun 78, Re-Rev 19 Sep 78, New Era Dianetics Series 9R, DRUG HANDLING).

ACTION SIX: HARD TR COURSE

On this course, the preclear will thoroughly do TRs 0-9. (Ref: HCOB 15 July 71RA III Rev 27 Jun 78, Re-Rev 19 Sep 78, New Era Dianetics Series 9R, DRUG HANDLING, HCOB 16 Aug 71R, TRAINING DRILLS REMODERNIZED, HCOB 7 May 68, UPPER INDOC TRs, BPL 18 Sep 78 New Era Dianetics Hard TRs Course).

ACTION SEVEN: CS-1

Before we can even begin a pc on Dianetics we have to indoctrinate him into what Dianetics is and what is expected of him as a pc.

This is standardly and effectively accomplished by using the Standard Dianetics CS-1, HCOB 9 Jul 78R, DIANETIC CS-1.

ACTION EIGHT: DRUG RUNDOWN QUAD

It has been proven time and time again that until you audit out, each by name, the drugs, alcohol and medicine a person has taken, he does not make good case gain.

A person who has been on drugs, alcohol or medicine seldom runs any other type of engram, seldom goes backtrack well, and is subject to somatic, emotional and perceptic shut-offs, making any other type of Dianetic or Scientology auditing a difficult activity.

Therefore if drugs, medicine or alcohol, or individual names of them read on the meter on the Original Assessment Sheet, they are handled FIRST AND FOREMOST .

(Note: You do not ask the pc for whole track drugs. You want only drugs, medicine or alcohol he has taken in this lifetime.)

In New Era Dianetics the Drug Rundown has five parts: 1) The Original Assessment in which the names of drugs, medicines or alcohol the pc has taken in this lifetime are obtained, 2) The running of each reading drug, medicine or alcohol Narrative R3RA Quad, 3) The preassessment of each of these and the running by R3RA Quad of the items, 4) The prior assessment to drugs or alcohol for each, 5) The final step of bringing the pc fully into PT and stabilizing him by the running of further Objectives, SOP 8C and Op Pro By Dup.

1. The Original Assessment

This has already been done as Action One. It may be necessary to get the preclear to add to the list and it is highly possible that he has taken more types of drugs in this lifetime than he remembered at the time the Original Assessment was done. You have to have all drugs, medicines and alcohol by their actual names as known to the pc. It is not enough to use an item like “drugs,” “alcohol” or “medicine” as you will get nowhere. They have to be “heroin,” or “penicillin” or “bourbon.”

2. Narrative Handling of Drugs

Before any other handling, the pc runs out EACH of the reading drugs, medicines or alcohols Narrative R3RA Quad. This is done FIRST.

3. The Preassessment

New Era Dianetics handling for drugs includes the use of the Preassessment List. This is a new procedure on the handling and running of Dianetics. Previous to this you would ask the pc for attitudes, emotions, sensations and pains connected with an item. Instead the preassessment is done. It ensures that every somatic is gotten off in connection with whatever you are handling. (Ref: HCOB 18 Jun 78R New Era Dianetics Series 4R, ASSESSMENT AND HOW TO GET THE ITEM).

Each item found by preassessment is run by R3RA Quad as soon as the running item is found in every case. Then one continues with further preassessment until all possible drugs, medicines and alcohols are fully handled R3RA Quad.

4. The Prior Assessment

After all reading drugs, medicines and alcohols have been preassessed and run out R3RA Quad, the prior assessment to drugs or alcohol is done. This step locates and runs out all the feelings, attitudes, misemotions, pains, etc. the pc had prior to first taking each drug, medicine or alcohol. (Ref: HCOB 15 Jul 71RA III, Rev 27 Jun 78 New Era Dianetics Series 9R, C/S Series 48RB, DRUG HANDLING).

ACTION EIGHT-A:

5. The Final Step—More Objectives

As a final step, the pc is brought fully into present time with further Objectives: SOP 8C and then Op Pro By Dup. each run to its complete EP.

This completes the Dianetic Drug Rundown.

ACTION NINE: RELIEF RUNDOWN

Where the Original Assessment Sheet has shown losses by death or other severe changes in a person’s life such as losses of position or pets or objects it will be found that the person’s life changed for the worse at that point.

The auditor spots these points of change either on the Original Assessment Sheet or by asking the preclear. These points are then handled with New Era Dianetics procedure.
.
It will be found that when all such great changes in a person’s life have been handled the person will experience a considerable relief about life. (Ref: HCOB 3 July 1978R, NED Series 10R).

ACTION TEN: DIANETIC REMEDIES—OPTIONAL

The Picture and Masses Remedy and the Past Life Remedy are optional and are only done when you run into trouble. They are run after the Drug Rundown because unhandled drugs are the cause of most of that trouble.

The Picture and Masses Remedy
(Ref: HCOB 22 Jul 69 HIGH TA ASSESSMENT
HCOB 24 Jul 78 DIANETIC REMEDIES)

Past Life Remedy
(Ref: HCOB 16 Jan 75 PAST LIFE REMEDY
HCOB 24 Jul 78 DIANETIC REMEDIES)

ACTION ELEVEN: COMPLETE HANDLING ON THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT SHEET

You have handled all drugs, alcohol and medicine and all losses the pc has had fully and completely. The pc is now set up to go ahead with handling the rest of his complaints and symptoms.

The full procedure of handling the remainder of this Original Assessment Sheet is laid out in full in HCOB 28 July 71RA Rev 25 June 78 New Era Dianetics Series 8R DIANETICS, BEGINNING A PC ON and HCOB 18 June 78R New Era Dianetics Series 4R ASSESSMENT AND HOW TO GET THE ITEM. Follow these issues exactly.

ACTION TWELVE: REASSESSMENT OF THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT SHEET

When all Original Assessment Sheet items are handled as above, the Original Assessment Sheet is reassessed. The pc’s memory will have improved if you’ve done a good job of auditing so far and his targets in processing will have changed.

So we reassess the Original Assessment Sheet and handle any now reading area.

(Ref: HCOB 4 Jul 78R New Era Dianetics Series 12R, SECOND ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT) .

ACTION THIRTEEN: DIANETIC STUDENT RESCUE INTENSIVE

This is an optional step to be taken if your pc is having any trouble with study. It takes up and handles any and all somatics connected with the subject of study.

A Student Rescue Intensive is not run until the pc has been completed up to ACTION ELEVEN as it would interrupt his program because drugs, if he has taken any, are a probable contributory cause to being unable to study. Also the Dianetic Student Rescue Intensive is not a substitute for proper Word Clearing of Dianetic, Scientology and earlier courses and training. It does however make the latter much more effective.

(Ref: HCOB 2 Jul 78 New Era Dianetics Series 11, DIANETIC STUDENT RESCUE INTENSIVE).

ACTION FOURTEEN: PREPARED ASSESSMENT FORM

This is an early step I developed in Dianetics which fell into disuse and abandonment. However it can produce some amazing results and so is being put back as a standard step in the running of Dianetics. It is done by assessing a prepared list of types of somatics and fully handling each one using New Era Dianetics.

When you have an F/Ning list and the pc is VGIs it is the end of this step.

The procedure and list is covered on HCOB 1 Jul 78 New Era Dianetics Series 13, DIANETICS PREPARED ASSESSMENT RUNDOWN.

ACTION FIFTEEN: DISABILITY RUNDOWN

This rundown handles anything the pc considers a disability; mental, physical or otherwise. It handles everything from being too short to not being able to speak Arabic or not wanting to go to parties. It takes each disability and handles it with R3RA.

(Ref: HCOB 29 June 78 New Era Dianetics Series 14, DISABILITY RUNDOWN).

ACTION SIXTEEN: IDENTITY RUNDOWN

We have never before had a Dianetic process specifically directed to getting a pc into valence. The Identity Rundown now handles that. It specifically takes up and handles valences the pc may be in by using the New Era Dianetics tech.

(Ref: HCOB 20 Jun 78 New Era Dianetics Series 15, IDENTITY RUNDOWN).

ACTION SEVENTEEN: AUDITING OUT SESSIONS—OPTIONAL

Now and then it is necessary to audit out an auditing session or all auditing. One does this by R3RA, running the incident narrative to erasure and only going earlier similar if it starts to grind very badly or, if all auditing, handling it session by session as a chain.

(Ref: HCOB 23 May 69 AUDITING OUT SESSIONS
HCOB 26 Jun 78RA New Era Dianetics Series 6RA
Issue II ENGRAM RUNNING BY CHAINS
HCOB 18 Jun 78R New Era Dianetics Series 4R
ASSESSMENT AND HOW TO GET THE ITEM).


IF YOU GET INTO TROUBLE

If you run into any trouble on these Dianetic steps, use the L3RF and handle all reading items to EP. Or go to Cramming on Dianetics. (Ref: HCOB 11 April 71RC L3RF).

SUMMARY

Completing all the above steps thoroughly and completely ensuring that all chains are run to full end phenomena is the only way you will have a well and happy pc.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:lfg.dr
Copyright © 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 23 JUNE 1978R
REVISED 22 SEPTEMBER 1978

Remimeo
(Revisions in this type style)
(Ellipses indicate deletions)


New Era Dianetics Series 16R


PRECLEAR CHECKLIST


INFORMATION: When a pc is ready to start Dianetics this form must be filled out with his name and commencing date and kept in the front of the pc folder.

It is his advanced program.

As each step of Dianetics is done, the auditor plus C/S must attest by that step that this pc has done the step thoroughly per HCOB 22 June 1978R New Era Dianetics Series 2R, New Era Dianetics Full PC Program Outline.

When all steps have been run and completed, the pc’s Dianetic folders, with this checklist included, get sent to the Qual Sec for full verification and attest before the pc is allowed to attest to Dianetic Case Completion.

After a grace period of 3 weeks after the date of this issue it will be a commevable offense for the auditor, C/S and Qual Sec to let any pc attest to Dianetic Case Completion without having thoroughly completed EACH step of this checklist.

PC NAME STARTING DATE______________
ORG COMPLETION DATE ___________

AUDITOR(s)__________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

Auditor C/S Qual Sec
Attest Attest Attest

STEP ONE: Original Assess
ment Sheet ________ ________ ________

STEP TWO: PTSness Handled ________ ________ ________

STEP THREE: Objective ARC ________ ________ ________

STEP FOUR: Sweat Program ________ ________ ________

STEP FIVE: Objectives (CCHs
1-10, . . . SCS on
an Object, SCS,..) ________ ________ ________

Auditor C/S Qual Sec
Attest Attest Attest

STEP SIX: Hard TRs ________ ________ ________

STEP SEVEN: Dianetic CS-1 ________ ________ ________

STEP EIGHT: Drug Rundown ________ ________ ________

STEP EIGHT-A: More Objectives
(SOP 8C and Op
Pro by Dup.) ________ ________ ________

STEP NINE: Relief Rundown ________ ________ ________

STEP TEN: (Optional) Picture
& Masses Remedy ________ ________ ________

Past Life Remedy ________ ________ ________

STEP ELEVEN: Complete Handling
on Original Assess
ment Sheet ________ ________ ________

STEP TWELVE: Second Original
Assessment Sheet ________ ________ ________

STEP THIRTEEN: (Optional) Student
Rescue Intensive ________ ________ ________

STEP FOURTEEN: Prepared Assess
ment Form ________ ________ ________

STEP FIFTEEN: Disability Rundown ________ ________ ________

STEP SIXTEEN: Identity Rundown ________ ________ ________

STEP SEVENTEEN: (Optional) Auditing
Out Sessions ________ ________ ________

STEP EIGHTEEN: After full attest
From Qual Sec—
PC DECLARE ________ ________ ________


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH: lfg. dr
Copyright © 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 24 JUNE 1978R
REVISED 22 SEPTEMBER 1978
(Cancels BTB 24 Apr 69RA,
Remimeo Preclear Assessment Sheet)
BPI
HGC (Revisions in this type style)
All Auditors

New Era Dianetics Series 5R

ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT SHEET

WHEN IS THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT SHEET DONE

This Original Assessment Sheet is done as the beginning action of Dianetics. It is done in a formal Dianetic auditing session in an auditing room with the pc duly signed up, and in session.

WHO DOES THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT SHEET

The auditor assigned to audit the preclear does the assessment. It is included as part of the preclear’s auditing time as it is valuable data collection on the preclear’s case, done with the preclear on the meter.

PURPOSE OF ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT SHEET

The purpose of this form is to provide essential data regarding the preclear to the C/S, the D of P and the auditor, and to better acquaint the auditor with the preclear at the onset of auditing.

HOW IS THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT SHEET DONE

The assessment is done with the preclear on the meter.

The preclear is given the R-Factor that you will simply be asking him for essential data about himself for the purpose given above.

The auditor notes down the data as the pc gives it. He does not take up the pc’s answers to the questions, except, when necessary, to make sure the question is answered and the auditor has the facts straight. TA at start and end of the assessment is noted, along with any TA action during the assessment. Needle reactions to the questions are noted when the question is given plus any needle reaction that occurs during the pc’s reply.

NEATNESS OF ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT SHEET

The data should be written plainly and neatly on the assessment sheet so that it is readable, as the information is wanted. Auditor does not delay or hold up the pc giving answers, however, while he completes admin.

WHERE DOES THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT SHEET GO WHEN COMPLETED

When completed, the Original Assessment Sheet is kept in the preclear’s folder. A note is made on the Summary Sheet of pc’s folder that the Original Assessment Sheet has been done.
___________

DATE:_______________

ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT SHEET

Name of pc: Age of pc:____________
Auditor: Org:_________________

TA Position at Start of Assessment:_________________________________________

A. FAMILY:

1. Is mother living? E-Meter Reaction___________________

2. Date of Death: E-Meter Reaction___________________

3. Pc’s statement of relationship with mother:_______________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

E-Meter Reaction

4. Is father living? E-Meter Reaction___________________

5. Date of Death: E-Meter Reaction___________________

6. Pc’s statement of relationship with father:________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

E-Meter Reaction

7. List brothers, sisters, and other relatives of the pc, date of death of any and E-Meter reaction:

Relation Date of Death E-Meter Reaction
____________________ _____________________ _____________________

____________________ _____________________ _____________________

____________________ _____________________ _____________________

____________________ _____________________ _____________________

8. Where and with whom do you live?____________________________________

E-Meter Reaction

9. Are you currently associated with anyone who is antagonistic to mental or spiritual treatment or Scientology?

(If yes, who?): E-Meter Reaction___________________

_________________________________

_________________________________

_________________________________

_________________________________

On questions 10 through 17 if the answer is “yes” find out who and E-Meter reaction.

10. Is anyone actively objecting to your getting treatment?





11. Has anyone insisted you get treatment?





12. Has anyone ever objected to your getting treatment?





13. Has anyone encouraged you to get treatment?





14. Has anyone ever objected to you getting better?





15. Has anyone ever assisted you in self-betterment?





16. Does anyone not like you the way you are?





17. Has anyone tried to make you change or be different?






B. MARITAL STATUS:

1. Married_______ Single_______ No. of times Divorced

2. Pc’s statement of relationship with spouse:



E-Meter Reaction


3. List any marital difficulties pc presently has:



E-Meter Reaction

4. If divorced, list reasons for divorce and pc’s emotional feeling about divorce:



E-Meter Reaction

5. List children, date of death of any child and E-Meter reaction:

Children Date of Death E-Meter Reaction
____________________ _____________________ _____________________

____________________ _____________________ _____________________

____________________ _____________________ _____________________

____________________ _____________________ _____________________


C. EDUCATION LEVEL:

State the level of schooling pc has had, university education, or professional training:



E-Meter Reaction


D. PROFESSIONAL LIFE:

State main jobs pc has held:

Job E-Meter Reaction












E. DRUGS: (NOTE: LIST DRUGS, MEDICINE OR ALCOHOL TAKEN THIS LIFETIME ONLY.)

1. Are you taking any drugs currently?

What Drug Date (How Long) E-Meter Reaction














Have you ever taken drugs?

What Drug Date (How Long) E-Meter Reaction













2. Are you taking any alcohol or alcoholic drink currently?

What Alcohol/
Alcoholic Drink Date (How Long) E-Meter Reaction











Have you ever taken alcohol or alcoholic drinks?

What Alcohol/
Alcoholic Drink Date (How Long) E-Meter Reaction











3. List any medicine currently or previously taken.

What When E-Meter Reaction







F. LOSSES:

What severe losses have you had in life that influenced it?

Loss Date Description E-Meter
Reaction









G. DEATHS:

What deaths have severely affected your life?

Loss Date Description E-Meter
Reaction











H. UPSETS:

Are you upset with or cross about anything or anyone at this particular time?

Upset Date Description E-Meter
Reaction











I. DANGERS:

1. Are you in any particular danger at this time?

Description E-Meter Reaction









2. Are there engrams that match this in the past?

(Note meter read.)

J. ACCIDENTS:

List any serious accidents pc has had, the date of such, any permanent physical
damage, and E-Meter reaction.

Accident Date Physical Damage E-Meter
Reaction











K. ILLNESSES:

List any serious illness pc has had giving date of each, any permanent-physical damage, and E-Meter reaction.

Illness Date Physical Damage E-Meter
Reaction











L. OPERATIONS:

List any operation, the date of each and E-Meter reaction.

Operation Date E-Meter Reaction







M. PRESENT PHYSICAL CONDITION:

List any bad physical condition pc presently has and E-Meter reaction to such.

Physical Condition E-Meter Reaction












N. PT ILLNESSES:

1. List any illnesses the pc currently has.

Illness Date E-Meter Reaction






2. Do you have any recurring physical ailment?



E-Meter Reaction


O. DISABILITY PAYMENT OR PENSION:

List any disability payment or pension received by the pc, what it is for, how much and for how long it has been received.

How E-Meter
What For Much Duration Reaction










P. ANY FAMILY HISTORY OF INSANITY:

E-Meter
Who What When Reaction










Q. EYES: E-Meter Reaction

Any tint in eye white

Eye Color


Color Blindness

Glasses


R. BODY WEIGHT: E-Meter Reaction

Overweight?

Underweight?


S. ANY PERCEPTION DIFFICULTIES:

What E-Meter Reaction








T. ANY PERCEPTION TROUBLE IN
FAMILY: E-Meter Reaction









U. SICK OR DISABLED FAMILY: E-Meter Reaction








V. EARLIER ALLIES OR CLOSE
FRIENDS: E-Meter Reaction







W. HUSBAND OR WIFE PHYSICAL
TROUBLES:

What E-Meter Reaction







X. ATTITUDE TOWARDS ILLNESS: E-Meter Reaction






Y. ATTITUDE TOWARDS TREATMENT: E-Meter Reaction






Z. ANY CURRENT TREATMENT IN
PROGRESS: E-Meter Reaction






AA. COMPULSIONS, REPRESSIONS AND FEARS:

List any compulsions (things pc feels compelled to do), repressions (things pc must prevent himself from doing) and any fears of pc.

Compulsions: E-Meter Reaction





Repressions: E-Meter Reaction





Fears: E-Meter Reaction





Are you trying to change something someone else doesn’t like?

What and Who E-Meter Reaction






BB. CRIMINAL RECORD:

List any crime committed by pc, prison sentence, if any, and E-Meter reactions:

Crime Sentence E-Meter Reaction









CC. INTERESTS AND HOBBIES:

List any interests and hobbies of pc.

Interests and Hobbies E-Meter Reaction






DD. ARE YOU HERE ON YOUR OWN SELF-DETERMINISM?

E-Meter Reaction


EE. PREVIOUS DIANETIC OR SCIENTOLOGY PROCESSING:

1. List auditors, hours, and E-Meter reaction to any processing done.

Auditor Hours E-Meter Reaction










2. List briefly processes run:



3. List goals attained from such processing:

E-Meter Reaction







4. List goals not attained from such processing:

E-Meter Reaction








FF. 1. Do you look on yourself as somebody else?

E-Meter Reaction







2. When you see pictures of the past do you see yourself from a distance?

E-Meter Reaction








GG. FORMER PRACTICES:

1. What practices or treatments have you engaged upon in the past?

Practice or Therapy Date E-Meter Reaction









2. Are you continuing any of the above in the present?









HH. What problems are you trying to solve by processing?

E-Meter Reaction







II. Have you ever done anything harmful to Dianetics, Dianeticists, Scientology, Scientologists or organizations? (Note any meter read.)












JJ. REALITY FACTOR:

You know of course that people sometimes get cross at the auditor or run away when they are withholding information from them and we don’t want you to do that.

Anything you tell me is confidential and is protected under ministerial confidence.

Is there anything we have missed or omitted while doing this assessment? (Carefully note any meter reads.)

Ask: “Is there anything you would care to tell me about this?”











State of needle at the end of the above




L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:ldv.dr
Copyright © 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 26 JUNE 1978RA
Issue II
REVISED 4 SEPTEMBER 1978
RE-REVISED 15 SEPTEMBER 1978
Remimeo
All Auditors (Revisions in this type style)
(Ellipsis indicates deletion)

CANCELS
HCOB 26 MAY 1978 Issue II
BTB 6 MAY 1969RA Issue II

New Era Dianetics Series 6RA

IMPORTANT: Included in the vital revisions of this bulletin are a change in the order of R3RA com mands and additional data on Dianetic EPs and postulates.


ROUTINE 3RA
ENGRAM RUNNING BY CHAINS


Ref: HCOB 23 Apr 69RII DIANETIC ERASURE & HOW TO ATTAIN
HCOB 2 Dec 69R RISING TA
HCOB 28 May 69R HOW NOT TO ERASE
HCOB 23 May 69R AUDITING OUT SESSIONS NARRATIVE
VERSUS SOMATIC CHAINS
HCOB 2 Apr 69RA DIANETIC ASSISTS
HCOB t3 Sep 78 R3RA ENGRAM RUNNING BY CHAINS AND
NARRATIVE R3RA—AN ADDITIONAL DIFFERENCE
HCOB 16 Sep 78 POSTULATE OFF EQUALS ERASURE


The search to unravel the mystery of the human mind was so long and so complex that it had many turnings. Methods were changed so as to be perfected as understanding increased in the research line. Unfortunately this was taken advantage of by some of questionable intent. Because there had been changes and perfecting actions they could introduce unworkable changes that would go relatively undetected.

Probably this is the fate of all subjects and why Man is in a state of high material cultural achievement yet does not have really workable equipment and is in a terrible mess, surrounded on every hand by a failing material culture.

Probably the heaviest hat I’ve worn in recent years is the recovery of lost Dianetic and Scientology tech and eradicating and correcting alterations introduced into the subject by others.

Given a knowledge of the composition and behavior of the time track, engram running by chains is so simple that any auditor begins by overcomplication. You almost can’t get uncomplicated enough in engram running.

In teaching people to run engrams in 1949, my chief despair was summed up in one sentence to the group I was instructing: “All auditors talk too much.” And that’s the first lesson.

The second lesson is: “All auditors acknowledge too little.” Instead of cheerily acking what the pc said and saying “Continue,” auditors are always asking for more
data and usually for more data than the pc could ever give. Example: Pc: “I see a house here.” Auditor: “Okay. How big is it?”

That’s not engram running, that’s just lousy “Q and A.”

The proper action is: Pc: “I see a house here.” Auditor: “Okay. Continue.”

The exceptions to this rule are non-existent. This isn’t a special brand of engram running. It is modern engram running. It was the first engram running and is the latest and you can put aside any complications in between.

The rule is ACKNOWLEDGE WHAT THE PC SAYS AND TELL HIM TO CONTINUE.

Then there’s the matter of being doubtful of control. Wrong example: Auditor: “Move to yesterday. Are you there? How do you know it’s yesterday? What do you see that makes you think....” FLUNK, FLUNK, FLUNK.

Right example: Auditor: “Move to the beginning of that incident and tell me when you are there.” (Pc answers.) “What do you see? . . . . . . . . . . Good.”

Another error is a failure to take the pc’s data. You take the pc’s data. Never take his orders.

EARLY ENGRAM RUNNING

No auditor who knew earlier than June 1978 engram running should consider he or she knows how to run engrams.

Routine 3RA is itself. It has no dependence on earlier methods of running engrams. Failure to study and learn R3RA “because one knows about engram running” will cause a lot of case failure.

If you know old-time engram running there is no attempt here to invalidate you or that knowledge or make you wrong in any way. Those are all ways to run engrams and gave you a better grasp on it. I only wish to call to your attention that R3RA is not old-time engram running.

ROUTINE 3RA

Engram running by chains is designated “Routine 3RA.”

It is a new triumph of simplicity. It does not demand visio, sonic or other perception at once by the pc. It develops them.


R3RA REVISED BY STEPS

The first thing the auditor does is to make sure the room and session are set up. This means, in other words, that the room is as comfortable as possible and free from interruptions and distractions; that the auditor’s meter is fully charged and set up and that the auditor has all the administrative supplies he will need for the session. Prepared correction lists for Dianetics must also be included.

He has the C/S for that session.

The pc is seated in the chair furthest from the door and is asked to pick up the cans.

The auditor checks that the pc has had enough to eat by doing the metabolism test and also checks that the pc has the correct sensitivity setting by having the pc squeeze
the cans and adjusting the sensitivity knob so that the needle registers one third of a dial fall when squeezing the cans.

The auditor then starts the session by saying, “This is the session” (Tone 40).

The auditor then puts in the R (reality) factor with the pc by telling the pc briefly what he is going to do in the session.

PRELIMINARY STEP:

Establish the type of chain the pc is to run by assessment. Ref: HCOB 18 June 78 New Era Dianetics Series 4, ASSESSMENT AND HOW TO GET THE ITEM.


R3RA COMMANDS

FLOW 1:

STEP ONE:

Locate the first incident by the command “Locate a time when you had_____.”

STEP TWO:

“When was it?” You accept any time or date or approximation the pc gives you. Do not attempt any dating drill.

STEP THREE:

Move the pc to the incident with the exact command, “Move to that incident.” (This step is omitted if the pc keeps telling you he is there already.)

STEP FOUR:

“What is the duration of that incident?” Accept any duration the pc gives you or any statement he makes about it. Do not attempt to meter him a more accurate duration.

STEP FIVE:

Move the pc to the beginning of the incident with the exact command: “Move to the beginning of that incident and tell me when you are there.”

STEP SIX:

Ask pc what he or she is looking at with the exact command: “What do you see?” (If the pc’s eyes are open, tell the pc first, “Close your eyes,” acknowledge him quietly for doing so and then give him the command.)

STEP SEVEN:

“Move through that incident to a point (duration pc said) later.”

STEP EIGHT:

Ask nothing, say nothing, do nothing (except observe the meter or make quiet notes) while pc is going through the incident. If pc comments before reaching the end say “OK, continue.”

STEP NINE:

When the pc reaches the end of the incident say only: “What happened?”


Take whatever pc says, acknowledge only as needful. Say nothing else, ask nothing else. When pc has told little or much and has finished talking, give him a final acknowledgement .

If the TA has risen (from its position at Step 1) the auditor immediately checks for an earlier incident (Step G). If no earlier incident, he asks for an earlier beginning to the incident (Step H).

If the TA is the same or lower, he runs the incident through again (Step A).

In going through an incident the second or successive times one DOES NOT ask for date and duration or any description.

A. (When the pc has told what happened and the auditor has acknowledged) “Move to the beginning of that incident and tell me when you are there.”

B. “Move through to the end of that incident.”

C. (When the pc has done so) “Tell me what happened.”

Ca. “Is that incident erasing or going more solid?” (TA rising means the incident has gone more solid so the question is unnecessary if TA is higher.)

If the incident is erasing, go through it again (Step D).

If it has gone more solid, ask for an earlier incident (Step G) and if no earlier incident, ask for an earlier beginning (Step H).

D. “Return to the beginning of that incident and tell me when you are there.”

E. “Move through to the end of that incident.”

F. “Tell me what happened.”

Fa. “Is that incident erasing or going more solid?” (TA rising means the incident has gone more solid so the question is unnecessary if TA is higher.)

If the incident is erasing, go through it again (Step D).

If it has gone more solid, ask for an earlier incident (Step G) and if no earlier incident, ask for an earlier beginning (Step H).

G. “Is there an earlier incident when you had a (exact same somatic)?”

Continue on down the chain of the SAME somatic using Steps 2-9, A, B. C, D, E, F. G. H. and EYE.

H. “Is there an earlier beginning to this incident?” or “Does the one we are running start earlier?” or “Does there seem to be an earlier starting point to this incident?”

(If not, give command D and put the pc through the incident again. If there is an earlier beginning, give command EYE.)

EYE. “Go to the new beginning of that incident and tell me when you are there.” (Followed by B. C.)


POSTULATE OFF EQUALS ERASURE

When it appears that you have reached the basic incident of the chain and that it is erasing, after each pass through, ask:


“Has it erased?”

The pc sometimes thinks the incident is erasing but it’s not erasing, so you have to go back to your G. H. EYE followed by 2-9, A-EYE. In some cases this can happen several times in one chain.

The postulate coming off is the EP of the chain and means that you have obtained an erasure. This will be accompanied by F/N and VGIs.

Getting the postulate is the important thing. Even if you get an F/N you don’t call the F/N UNTIL you’ve gotten the postulate, at which time you have reached the EP and end off on that chain.

If the pc says the chain has erased, but the postulate made during the time of the incident has not been volunteered by the pa ask:

“Did you make a postulate at the time of that incident?”

Only when the postulate has come off to F/N and VGIs can one consider that the full EP of a Dianetic incident or chain has been reached.

You must recognize what the postulate is when it comes up. If you overrun past the postulate you can really mess a pc up and he may need extensive repair. All you’re trying to get off the line is the postulate. That is what is keeping the chain there.

If the pc has given the postulate to F/N and VGIs, that is it. You have the EP of that chain.

GOING EARLIER

Ordinarily one runs an incident through twice, (Steps 1-9 then A-C), to unburden it and allow the pa to locate earlier incidents on the chain.

However, the TA rising on Step 9 is an indication that there is something earlier. If the auditor observes the TA rising, he should ask the pc if there is an earlier incident, using in the command the exact same somatic or feeling used in Step One. If there is no earlier incident he asks if there is an earlier beginning.

An auditor should never solidify a pays bank by putting him through an incident TWICE, when by observation of the TA it is c/ear that the incident has gone more solid by the end of the FIRST run through.

Checking for an earlier incident after the first run through (if the TA has risen) is the solution to this.

If, after the second pass through, when you have asked the pc “Is the incident erasing or going more solid?” and the pc doesn’t know or isn’t sure, ask for an earlier incident.

Never ask erasing/solid in the middle of an incident.


BOUNCERS

If the pc is out of the session, out of the incident, bounces from the incident, etc., you would have to have him or her RETURN to the beginning of the incident and move through the incident, returning the pc to the incident as necessary.

The pc who bounces out of an incident on a “bouncer” has to be put back into the incident and continue running it.


The commands to do this are: As soon as you have seen that the pc has bounced give him command D (“Return to the beginning of that incident and tell me when you are there.”), followed with E, F. Fa.


FLOWS 2, 3 AND 0

Step One and Step G (going earlier) commands for Flows 2, 3 and 0 are:

FLOW 2:

STEP ONE:

“Locate an incident of your causing another_____ (the exact somatic or feeling used in Flow 1).”

STEP G:

“Is there an earlier incident of your causing another_____ (the exact somatic or feeling used in Flow 1)?”

FLOW 3:

STEP ONE:

“Locate an incident of others causing others_____ (plural of the somatic or feeling used in Flow 1). “

STEP G:

“Is there an earlier incident of others causing others_____(plural of the exact somatic or feeling used in Flow 1)?”

FLOW 0:

STEP ONE:

“Locate an incident of you causing yourself_____(the exact somatic or feeling used in Flow 1).”

STEP G:

“Is there an earlier incident of you causing yourself_____(the exact somatic or feeling used in Flow 1)?”

Each of these Step One and Step G commands are run on the full verbatim 1-9, A-EYE steps as given herein.


NARRATIVE R3RA

A narrative item is often run to run out the physical experiences the person has just undergone. This could be for example an accident, illness, an operation or emotional shock.

However, a condition or circumstance without an incident is NOT narrative. It’s just an incorrect item. An example of this would be trying to run the item, “Obstruction of justice.” It would not run as there is no exact incident there.

Narratives are too often just run through once or twice and abandoned. This, unfortunately, leaves the incident still charged and affecting the pc. A narrative needs to
be run and run and run on that one incident. What you are doing is running the incident narrative to erasure and only going earlier similar if it starts to grind very badly.

Most narratives will run out by themselves without going earlier even though it takes a very long time but if you want to change somebody’s life, that’s how you can do it.

When you are running a narrative you always add the known incident to the command.

Using the earlier beginning command in running narratives is essential. For example: If the pc is running out a death of somebody closely related to him you will find that the incident actually started when he heard the phone ring, then, going back earlier to when somebody looked at him peculiarly, etc.

So using the earlier beginning command in narrative running is VITAL.

The commands for Narrative are:

FLOW 1:

STEP ONE:

“Return to the time you______(specific incident) and tell me when you are there.”

Steps 2-9 are followed (3 is omitted as you have already got the pc to the incident by giving him the first command, “Return to the time....”).

Earlier beginning (Step H) is checked after each run through the incident. If there is one, send the pa to the new beginning of the incident (Step EYE) then follow with Steps B and C.

If there is no earlier beginning, return the pa to the incident with Step A, followed by B and C, again checking earlier beginning (Step H) at the end of each run through the incident. On third and subsequent runs through the incident use steps D, E, F making certain to check for earlier beginning after each pass through, and only when the pa is obviously starting to grind and gets no place does one then use the command, “Is there an earlier similar incident?”


FLOW 2:

STEP ONE:

“Return to the time you caused another to/a (specific incident) and tell me when you are there.”

Steps 2-9 are followed (3 is omitted as you have already got the pc to the incident by giving him the first command, “Return to the time . . .”).

Earlier beginning (Step H) is checked after each run through the incident. If there is one, send the pc to the new beginning of the incident (Step EYE) then follow with Steps B and C.

If there is no earlier beginning, return the pa to the incident with Step A, followed by B and C, again checking earlier beginning (Step H) at the end of each run through the incident. On third and subsequent runs through the incident use Steps D, E, F. making certain to check for earlier beginning after each pass through, and only when the pa is obviously starting to grind and gets no place does one then use the command, “Is there an earner similar incident?”


FLOW 3:

STEP ONE:

“Return to the time others caused others to/a (specific incident) and tell me when you are there.”

Steps 2-9 are followed (3 is omitted as you have already got the pc to the incident by giving him the first command, “Return to the time....”).

Earlier beginning (Step H) is checked after each run through the incident. If there is one, send the pc to the new beginning of the incident (Step EYE) then follow with Steps B and C.

If there is no earlier beginning, return the pa to the incident with Step A, followed by B and C, again checking earlier beginning (Step H) at the end of each run through the incident. On third and subsequent runs through the incident use steps D, E, F. making certain to check for earlier beginning after each pass through, and only when the pc is obviously starting to grind and gets no place does one then use the command, “Is there an earlier similar incident?”


FLOW 0:

STEP ONE:

“Return to the time you caused yourself to/a (specific incident) and tell me when you are there.”

Steps 2-9 are followed (3 is omitted as you have already got the pc to the incident by giving him the first command, “Return to the time....”).

Earlier beginning (Step H) is checked after each run through the incident. If there is one, send the pa to the new beginning of the incident (Step EYE) then follow with Steps B and C.

If there is no earlier beginning, return the pc to the incident with Step A, followed by B and C, again checking earlier beginning (Step H) at the end of each run through the incident. On third and subsequent runs through the incident use steps D, E, F. making certain to check for earlier beginning after each pass through, and only when the pc is obviously starting to grind and gets no place does one then use the command, “Is there an earlier similar incident?”


SECONDARIES

Secondaries are run with the same commands as R3RA. If they are narrative secondaries they are run with the same commands as Narrative R3RA engrams.

The earlier similar command is “Is there an earlier similar incident?”

ALWAYS RUN NARRATIVE INCIDENTS TRIPLE OR QUAD FLOW AS ABOVE.

AUDITOR KNOWLEDGE OF COMMANDS

These commands and procedures as given above must be thoroughly drilled with TR 101, 102, 103 and 104 before any Dianetic auditing may be done on a pc.

Pcs can be messed up by incorrect and sloppy commands.



SPEED OF COMMANDS

Some pcs run fast and some run slow. An auditor must never rush a pc or hold him up when he is ready to go on with the next command. The auditor must never keep a pc waiting for him while he handles his admin or comm lags before giving the next command.

Timing and speed are especially crucial when the auditor gives the command to move through the incident after having told the pc to move to the beginning of the incident. With a slow command, the pc would wind up halfway through the incident before he receives the command to move through it.

The better an auditor knows his TRs, his process commands, his meter and admin the faster and more accurately he can operate. Speed is very important, especially when auditing fast pcs.

PC INTEREST

In doing R3RA it is necessary that (a) one chooses things the pc is interested in and (b) one does not force a pc to run things he is protesting being run on.


LAST INCIDENT FOUND

If you ask if there is an earlier beginning and you have already checked for an earlier incident and the pc says there is no earlier beginning, you do not just walk off from the one he was just running. You send the pc through it again and it will erase with full end phenomena or the pc will then be able to see an earlier incident and continue with the chain.

COMPLETING CHAINS

If you do sloppy R3RA and do one thing after another without getting the full EP of:

1) the actual postulate WHICH WILL BE THE ERASURE,

2) F/N,

3) VGIs,

you will get the pc stuck up on the track. You complete each chain to full EP as above, remembering that when the postulate comes off, THAT is your EP. The chain will have blown.

F/Ns

In running Dianetics you do not stop at the first sign of an F/N, you do not call F/Ns during the running. Dianetics runs only by asking the pc if it is erasing. You ignore F/Ns until the postulate has come off to F/N and VGIs. THEN you call the F/N and that’s it for that chain.


BLOWING BY INSPECTION

An auditor may occasionally encounter a pc who erases chains before he can even tell about them. Along about Step 3 of R3RA, the TA blows down, the needle F/Ns, the pc says, “It’s gone,” and VGIs come in. This is called blowing by inspection and occurs once in a while with a fast running pc on a light chain.

If it was basic for that chain and the auditor fails to recognize and handle it, the pc will go into another chain or a heavy protest.

ENDING SESSION

An R3RA session can be safely ended on a completed chain that ended with the full Dianetic EP as above stated....

This doesn’t mean the end of all Dianetic auditing. In the next session another assessment will turn up more unwanted feelings, etc.


ENDING DIANETICS

Dianetics is ended off only when a pc has become well and happy and remains that way.

And there you have it, engram running superior to any engram running ever done and giving superior and faster results.


SPECIAL NEW ERA DIANETICS RUNDOWN
FOR OTs

New Era Dianetics or any Dianetics is NOT to be run on Clears or above or on Dianetic Clears.

Clears and OTs are to be audited on the Special New Era Dianetics Rundown for OTs, which is available at Advanced Orgs and Flag. (Ref: HCOB 12 Sep 78 Dianetics Forbidden on Clears and OTs.)

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:lfg.mdf
Copyright © 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 28 JUNE 1978RA
Remimeo REVISED 4 SEPTEMBER 1978
All Auditors RE-REVISED 15 SEPTEMBER 1978

(Revisions in this type style)

New Era Dianetics Series 7RA

IMPORTANT: Included in the vital revisions of this Bulletin is a change in the order of R3RA commands.


R3RA COMMANDS

This is a short list on R3RA commands.

STEP 1: “Locate a time when you had_______ .”

STEP 2: “When was it?” (Note: You accept any time or date or approximation the pc gives you. Do not attempt any dating drill.)

STEP 3: “Move to that incident.” (This step is omitted if the pc keeps telling you he is there already.)

STEP 4: “What is the duration of that incident?” (Accept any duration the pc gives you or any statement he makes about it. Do not attempt to meter him a more accurate duration.)

STEP 5: “Move to the beginning of that incident and tell me when you are there.”

STEP 6: “What do you see?” (If the pc’s eyes are open, tell the pc first, “Close your eyes,” acknowledge him quietly for doing so and then give him the command.)

STEP 7: “Move through that incident to a point (duration pc said) later.”

STEP 8: If pc comments before reaching the end say “OK, continue.”

STEP 9: When pc has reached the end of the incident ask “What happened?”

If the TA has risen (from its position at Step 1) the auditor immediately checks for an earlier incident (Step G). If no earlier incident, he asks for an earlier beginning to the incident (Step H).

If the TA is the same or lower, he runs the incident through again (Step A).

In going through an incident the second or successive times one DOES NOT ask for date and duration or any description.

A. (When the pa has told what happened and the auditor has acknowledged) “Move to the beginning of that incident and tell me when you are there.”

B. “Move through to the end of that incident.”

C. (When the pa has done so) “Tell me what happened.”

Ca. “Is that incident erasing or going more solid?” (TA rising means the: incident has gone more solid so the question is unnecessary if TA is higher.)

If the incident is erasing, go through it again (Step D).

If it has gone more solid, ask for an earlier incident (Step G) and if no earlier incident, ask for an earlier beginning (Step H).

D. “Return to the beginning of that incident and tell me when you are there.”

E. “Move through to the end of that incident.”

F. “Tell me what happened.”

Fa. “Is that incident erasing or going more solid?” (TA rising means the incident has gone more solid so the question is unnecessary if TA is higher.)

If the incident is erasing, go through it again (Step D).

If it has gone more solid, ask for an earlier incident (Step G) and if no earlier incident, ask for an earlier beginning (Step H).

G. “Is there an earlier incident when you had a (exact same somatic)?”

Continue on down the chain of the SAME somatic using Steps 2-9, A, B. C, D, E, F. G. H and EYE.

H. “Is there an earlier beginning to this incident?” or “Does the one we are running start earlier?” or “Does there seem to be an earlier starting point to this incident?”

(If not, give command D and put the pc through the incident again. If there is an earlier beginning, give command EYE.)

EYE. “Go to the new beginning of that incident and tell me when you are there.” (Followed by B. C.)

When it appears that you have reached the basic incident of the chain and that it is erasing, after each pass through, ask:

“Has it erased?”

The pc sometimes thinks the incident is erasing but it’s not erasing, so you have to go back to your G. H. EYE, followed by 2-9, A-EYE. In some cases this can happen several times in one chain.


POSTULATE OFF EQUALS ERASURE

The postulate coming off is the EP of the chain and means that you have obtained an erasure. This will be accompanied by F/N and VGIs.

Getting the postulate is the important thing. Even if you get an F/N you don’t call the F/N UNTIL you’ve gotten the postulate, at which time you have reached the EP and end off on that chain.

If the pc says the chain has erased, but the postulate made during the time of the incident has not been volunteered by the pc ask:

“Did you make a postulate at the time of that incident?”

Only when the postulate has come off to F/N and VGIs can one consider that the full EP of a Dianetic incident or chain has been reached.

You must recognize what the postulate is when it comes up. If you overrun past the postulate you can really mess a pa up and he may need extensive repair. All you’re trying to get off the line is the postulate. That is what is keeping the chain there.

If the pc has given the postulate to F/N and VGIs, that is it. You have the EP of that chain.

GOING EARLIER

Ordinarily one runs an incident through twice, (Steps 1-9 then A-C), to unburden it and allow the pc to locate earlier incidents on the chain.

However, the TA rising on Step 9 is an indication that there is something earlier. If the auditor observes the TA rising, he should ask the pc if there is an earlier incident, using in the command the exact same somatic or feeling used in Step One. If there is no earlier he asks if there is an earlier beginning.

An auditor should never solidify a pc’s bank by putting him through an incident TWICE, when by observation of the TA it is c/ear that the incident has gone more solid by the end of the FIRST run through.

Checking for an earlier incident after the first run through (if the TA has risen) is the solution to this.

If, after the second pass through, when you have asked the pc “Is the incident erasing or going more solid?” and the pc doesn’t know or isn’t sure, ask for an earlier incident.

Never ask erasing/solid in the middle of an incident.


BOUNCERS

If the pc is out of the session, out of the incident, bounces from the incident, etc. you would have to have him or her RETURN to the beginning of the incident and move through the incident, returning the pc to the incident as necessary.

The pc who bounces out of an incident on a “bouncer” has to be put back into the incident and continue running it.

The commands to do this are: As soon as you have seen that the pc has bounced give him command D (“Return to the beginning of that incident and tell me when you are there.”), followed with E, F. Fa.


FLOWS 2, 3 AND 0

FLOW 2:

STEP ONE: “Locate an incident of your causing another_____(the exact somatic or feeling in Flow 1).”

STEP G: “Is there an earlier incident of your causing another_____(the exact somatic or feeling used in Flow 1)?”


FLOW 3:

STEP ONE: “Locate an incident of others causing others _____(plural of the somatic or feeling used in Flow 1).”

STEP G.: “Is there an earlier incident of others causing others_____ (plural of the exact somatic or feeling used in Flow 1)?”


FLOW 0:

STEP ONE: “Locate an incident of you causing yourself_____(the exact somatic or feeling used in Flow 1).”

STEP G: “Is there an earlier incident of you causing yourself_____(the exact somatic or feeling used in Flow 1)?”

The commands for Narrative are:


FLOW 1:

STEP ONE: “Return to the time you (specific incident) and tell me when you are there.”

Steps 2-9 are followed (3 is omitted as you have already got the pc to the incident by giving him the first command, “Return to the time....”).

Earlier beginning (Step H) is checked after each run through the incident. If there is one, send the pc to the new beginning of the incident (Step EYE) then follow with Steps B and C.

If there is no earlier beginning, return the pc to the incident with Step A, followed by B and C, again checking earlier beginning (Step H) at the end of each run through the incident. On third and subsequent runs through the incident use Steps D, E, F. making certain to check for earlier beginning after each pass through, and only when the pc is obviously starting to grind and gets no place does one then use the command, “Is there an earlier similar incident?”


FLOW 2:

STEP ONE: “Return to the time you caused another to/a (specific incident) and tell me when you are there.”

Steps 2-9 are followed (3 is omitted as you have already got the pc to the incident by giving him the first command, “Return to the time.... “).

Earlier beginning (Step H) is checked after each run through the incident. If there is one, send the pc to the new beginning of the incident (Step EYE) then follow with Steps B and C.

If there is no earlier beginning, return the pc to the incident with Step A, followed by B and C, again checking earlier beginning (Step H) at the end of each run through the incident. On third and subsequent runs through the incident use Steps D, E, F. making certain to check for earlier beginning after each pass through, and only when the pc is obviously starting to grind and gets no place does one then use the command, “Is there an earlier similar incident?”


FLOW 3:

STEP ONE: “Return to the time others caused others to/a (specific incident) and tell me when you are there.”

Steps 2-9 are followed (3 is omitted as you have already got the pc to the incident by giving him the first command, “Return to the time....”).

Earlier beginning (Step H) is checked after each run through the incident. If there is one, send the pc to the new beginning of the incident (Step EYE) then follow with Steps B and C.

If there is no earlier beginning, return the pc to the incident with Step A, followed by B and C, again checking earlier beginning (Step H) at the end of each run through the incident. On third and subsequent runs through the incident use Steps D, E, F. making certain to check for earlier beginning after each pass through, and only when the pc is obviously starting to grind and gets no place does one then use the command, “Is there an earlier similar incident?”


FLOW 0:

STEP ONE: “Return to the time you caused yourself to (specific incident) and tell me when you are there.”

Steps 2-9 are followed (3 is omitted as you have already got the pc to the incident by giving him the first command, “Return to the time....”).

Earlier beginning (Step H) is checked after each run through the incident. If there is one, send the pc to the new beginning of the incident (Step EYE) then follow with Steps B and C.

If there is no earlier beginning, return the pc to the incident with Step A, followed by B and C, again checking earlier beginning (Step H) at the end of each run through the incident. On third and subsequent runs through the incident use Steps D, E, F. making certain to check for earlier beginning after each pass through, and only when the pc is obviously starting to grind and gets no place does one then use the command, “Is there an earlier similar incident?”


SECONDARIES

Secondaries are run with the same commands as R3RA. If they are narrative secondaries they are run with the same commands as Narrative R3RA engrams.

The earlier similar command is “Is there an earlier similar incident?”

ALWAYS RUN NARRATIVE INCIDENTS TRIPLE OR QUAD FLOW AS ABOVE.

Auditors must be thoroughly drilled on these commands until they have them down cold using TR 101, 102, 103 and 104.

This must be done before the auditor audits the pc on Dianetics.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:lfg.dr
Copyright © 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 29 JUNE 1978
Remimeo
All Auditors

New Era Dianetics Series 14

DISABILITY RUNDOWN



This rundown is done by getting the pc to give you anything he considers a disability, mental, physical or otherwise.

This list can include anything from a withered foot to being too small to not being able to learn French.

Make a list of all items the pc gives you ensuring you get the meter read as the pc gives you the item.

Take the largest reading item and do a full preassessment on it. Check interest and handle each reading item from the preassessment Quad R3RA. Take up the next biggest reading disability and do a preassessment and handling on it.

Reassess/add to the original list. Use Suppress and Invalidate buttons as needed.

When you have exhausted the list of all reading disabilities and the pc says there are no more disabilities this rundown is complete.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:lfg.dr
Copyright © 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 1 JULY 1978

Remimeo

New Era Dianetics Series 13


THE DIANETIC PREPARED ASSESSMENT RUNDOWN
ACTION FOURTEEN


Many chains, locks, secondaries and engrams are available on any pc. But some of them are beyond the pc’s reality and ability and some of them are too featherweight to get any case gain. This rundown is designed to locate items that can be run R3RA. It is called the Dianetic Prepared Assessment Rundown.


EARLIER ASSESSMENT DONE

The very earliest assessment (1948) used was “What the pc could see” when he closed his or her eyes. This was then run.

This was followed by an arbitrary method of assigning necessary incidents to be run such as birth and prenatals.

The next earliest assessment (1949) was to ask each time for “the incident necessary to resolve the case.” An automaticity known as the “File Clerk” was depended upon, impinged on by finger snapping.

The next period (1951) concerned whole track exploration running whatever you could get to read on a meter.

The next period (1952) concerned overt engrams located by what the pc seemed to be doing physically.

This ended the Dianetic period when engrams were run to clear a case.

Variations of these assessments were revived from time to time in Dianetic uses, culminating in the 5th ACC where overt engrams were run with confront and great stress was laid on getting the postulates out of them. The meter and shrewd guesses played their part in assessments.

Significance and story content have no bearing on the rightness or wrongness of a chain selected. They are entirely incidental to judging the correctness of a chain.

1. The first action of this RD is to assess the following list:


infirmity ________
sickness ________
being unwell ________
bad feelings ________
unpleasant feelings ________
disagreeable feelings ________

soreness ________ panic ________
hurting ________ apprehension ________
ailment ________ qualms ________
complaint ________ alarm ________
a malady ________ timidity ________
a disorder ________ physical disabilities ________
damaged body parts ________ casualty ________
hurt body parts ________ distress ________
disabled body parts ________ bodily affliction ________
skin irritation ________ defective body parts ________
skin disorder ________ allergies ________
unwanted feelings ________ relatives ________
dental problems ________ jobs ________
an unwanted body condition ________ environment ________
unwanted states of the body ________ this area ________
an unwanted manner ________ upsets ________
depression ________ problems ________
infection ________ children ________
unwanted behavior ________ marriage ________
injuries ________ smells ________
mishap ________ machinery ________
perception troubles ________ matter ________
loss of a loved one ________ energy ________
impulses ________ space ________
crimes ________ time ________
urges ________ orgs ________
restraints ________ Dianetics ________
frights ________ Scientology ________
anxiety ________ auditors ________
terror ________ auditing ________
horror ________ preclears ________

2. You then take an item found as above and ask the pc to describe it briefly. Ask him, “In your own words briefly describe (item that read).”

3. Use the exact wording the pc gave you in 2. Treat that wording as an original item exactly as though it had been obtained on the Original Assessment List NED Series 5.

4. Handle the items in 3 above exactly as you would handle any original item or items in NED Series 4 (Assessment and How to Get the Item).

5. Exhaust all reading items on the above prepared list.

6. Reassess the prepared list and do 2 to 5 above.

7. When this prepared list no longer gives reads and only F/Ns you have finished Action Fourteen.

L3RE

If you run into any trouble an L3RE should be done immediately.

Done correctly, with standard R3RA and flawless metering the gains from this rundown will not be small.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:rb
Copyright © 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 2 JULY 1978
Remimeo
All Auditors
(Cancels BTB 9 Aug 1970R, Rev 10 June t974,
Dianetic Student Rescue Intensive.)


New Era Dianetics Series 11


DIANETIC STUDENT RESCUE INTENSIVE


Dianetic Student Rescue Intensive. This is an optional step to be taken if your pc is having any trouble with study.

The steps are very simple:

1. Assess: Being Trained Stress
Being Educated Education
Study Schools
Learning Teachers
Examination Enforcement
Misunderstoods

for best read.

2. Do a preassessment on the largest reading item from Step 1.

3. Find the running item, using standard preassessment procedure (ref. NED Series 4).

4. Run out the item you have found in Step 3 R3RA Quad.

5. Repeat the preassessment on the original item found in Step 1, and repeat the following steps 3 and 4 on that item.

6. Continue reassessing the Preassessment List on the original item and running out R3RA Quad the best reading running item until there are no further reads on the preassessment of that original item.

The intensive should be concluded when the pc is now happy about study.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:rb
Copyright © 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 3 JULY 1978R
REVISED 22 SEPTEMBER 1978
Remimeo
(Revisions in this type style)


New Era Dianetics Series 10R


RELIEF RUNDOWN


Where the Original Assessment Sheet has shown losses by death or other severe changes in a person’s life such as losses of position or pets or objects it will be found that the person’s life changed for the worse at that point. (See Sections F. G. H. and I of HCOB 24 June 78R New Era Dianetics Series 5R Original Assessment Sheet.)

The auditor spots these points of change either on the Original Assessment Sheet or by asking the preclear. These points are then run Narrative R3RA Quad.

If the Narrative R3RA Quad does not clean it up fully one goes to the preassessment step of New Era Dianetics Series 4R and carries on from there, but do not do this until the narrative is fully handled.

In running such incidents narrative it will be found that the clue to erasure lies in locating earlier beginnings each time the pc has been moved through the incident. It will be found that the pc finds earlier and earlier moments when he received the information that then built up to a catastrophe. This can even go back to a dream or a telepathic awareness or a premonition that the incident was going to occur. Narrative erasures often depend utterly on finding, after each run through, if there was any earlier beginning.

If the incident starts to grind (no change of TA or content) despite having repeatedly searched for an earlier beginning only then do you go into an earlier narrative incident but do so with caution as most narratives expertly run will erase all by themselves and running a chain of deaths for instance can go back an awfully long way.

When all such great changes in a person’s life have been found and erased the person should experience a considerable sense of relief about life.

If he does not, then treat the narrative, even though handled as a narrative, as an original item and preassess it to find other running items connected with it and treat it with R3RA full handling. Also do this if the narrative grinds and there is trouble going earlier.

Narrative chains properly run produce dramatic and miraculous case changes.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:rb.nc
Copyright © 1978
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 4 JULY 1978R
REVISED 22 SEPTEMBER 1978
Remimeo
(Revisions in this type style)


(Cancels HCOB 16 April 1969, HEALTH FORM, USE OF, and PASTORAL COUNSELING HEALTH FORM, Revised 22 July 69 and HCOB 19 May 1969, HEALTH FORM, USE OF, A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF AUDITING.)


Ref: HCOB 24 Jun 78R New Era Dianetics Series 5R
ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT SHEET
HCOB 25 Jun 78R New Era Dianetics Series 8R
DIANETICS, BEGINNING A PC ON
HCOB 18 Jun 78R New Era Dianetics Series 4R
ASSESSMENT AND HOW TO GET THE ITEM
HCOB 26 Jun 78RA New Era Dianetics Series 7RA
ROUTINE 3RA, ENGRAM RUNNING BY CHAINS



New Era Dianetics Series 12R


SECOND ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT



At the point in the New Era Dianetics Program, when the pc has fully completed his Drug Rundown and handled the items on the Original Assessment Sheet, the Original Assessment Sheet is REDONE.

The Second Original Assessment Sheet gives a comparison. The somatics and pains not mentioned in the second assessment can be considered to be gone.

A second form done gives the auditor and the C/S an indication of the actual improvement.

Additionally, the pc’s memory will have improved if you’ve done a good job of auditing.

So we reassess the Original Assessment Sheet and handle any additional items which come up.

In assessing this list the second time, mark SECOND ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT across the top of the sheet.

It is important to give your pc an R-Factor at this stage so he’ll not feel invalidated by doing this form again.

Let him know that you will be asking him questions from the Original Assessment Sheet for the purpose of picking up any new items which he may now remember and to make sure you’ve handled all the charge on the items you have already taken up. Ask him to answer each question as fully as he can even if he has already given the information in a previous