Volume X 1970-1976 C/S SERIES - Technical Bulletins

Volume X 1970-1976 C/S SERIES - Technical Bulletins

Сообщение auditor » 30 ноя 2016, 05:39

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


C/S SERIES


Volume
X
1970-1976

Download https://yadi.sk/i/N2b7zS7vzoYHU
_____________________________________________________________________



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

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


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







EDITORS’ NOTE

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

—L. Ron Hubbard

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

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

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

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





CASE SUPERVISOR SERIES
1970-1976


CONTENTS

23 Aug. 71 1 Auditor’s Rights
12 June 70 2 Programming of Cases 10
13 June 70 3 Session Priorities—Repair Pgms and Their Priority 16
14 June 70 4 The Return Program 21
15 June 70 5 Repair Example 24
16 June 70 6 What the C/S Is Doing 28
19 June 70 7 C/S Q and A 32
19 June 70 8 Chart of Human Evaluation 35
21 June 70 9 Superficial Actions 37
24 June 70 10 Repairing a Repair 42
25 June 70 11 C/S Series 11 44
25 June 70 12 Glossary of C/S Terms 48
30 June 70R 13R VIII Actions 50
3 July 70 14 C/Sing 2-Way Comm 54
16 Aug. 70 15 Getting the F/N to Examiner
(High, Low TAs and Chronic Somatics) 56
21 Aug. 70 16 Session Grading—Well Done, Definition of 59
26 Aug. 70 17 Incomplete Cases 62
11 Sept. 70 18 Chronic Somatic, Dianetic Handling of 64
6 Oct. 70 19 Folder Error Summaries 65
8 Oct. 70 20 Persistent F/N 67
10 Nov. 70 21 C/S Responsibility for Training 69
28 Nov. 70 22 Psychosis 72
17 Dec. 71R 23RA Interiorization Summary 76
28 Feb. 71 24 Metering Reading Items 79
5 Mar. 71 25 The Fantastic New HGC Line 81
6 Mar. 71 26 New Uses for the Green Form 86
6 Mar. 71 27 Long C/Ses 87
7 Mar. 71 RA 28 RA Use of Dianetics 89
7 Mar. 71 28RA-1 Use of Quadruple Dianetics 91
8 Mar. 71 29 Case Actions, Off Line 94
19 Mar. 71 30 C/Sing Auditor-C/Ses 96
31 Mar. 71 31 Programming and Misprogramming 99
4 Apr. 71RA 32RA Use of Dianetics 100
4 Apr. 71-1R 32RA-1R Use of Quad Dianetics 102
5 Apr. 71RA 33RA Triple Reruns 105

5 Apr. 71 33RA-1 Triple and Quad Reruns 108
6 Apr. 71 34 Non-F/N Cases 112
16 Dec. 71 RA 35RA Interiorization Errors 115
21 Apr. 71 R 36R Dianetics 118
21 Apr. 71-1R 36RB-1R Quadruple Dianetics—Dangers of 122
3 June 71 37R High and Low TA Breakthrough 127
15 June 71 37R Add. Hi-Lo TA Assessment Rules 131
16 June 71R 37RAdd.2R Low TA Assessing 132
26 June 71 37R Add. 3 C/S Series 37R Addition 3 133
26 May 71 38 TRs Course and Auditing—Mixing Major Actions 136
31 May 71R 39R Standard 121/2 Hour Intensive Programs 139
7 June 71 40 Low TAs 141
9 June 71 41 C/S Tips 142
9 June 71 42 C/S Rules 145
9 June 71 43 C/S Rules 147
10 June 71 44R C/S Rules—Programming From Prepared Lists 149
31 Oct. 71 44R Add. 44R—C/S Rules—The Sequence of Programs (BTB) 151
19 June 71 45 C/S Rules 152
19 June 71 46 Declares 153
20 June 71 47 The Supreme Test of a C/S 154
15 July 71 48R Drug Handling 156
15 July 71 R 49R Assists 159
15 July 71 50 C/S Case Gain 161
17 July 71 51 Out of Valence 162
19 July 71 52 Internes 163
24 Nov. 73RB 53RJ Short Hi-Lo TA Assessment C/S 165
28 July 71 54 Dianetics, Beginning a Pc on 168
8 Aug. 71 55 The Ivory Tower 170
25 Aug. 71 56 How To Get Results in an HGC 172
1 Sept. 71 57 A C/S as a Training Officer—A Program
for Flubless Auditing 176
7 Sept. 71 58 Programming Cases Backwards 182
14 Sept. 71 59 Dianetic List Errors 184
15 Sept. 71 60 The Worst Tangle 185
22 Sept. 71 61 The Three Golden Rules of the C/S—
Handling Auditors 186
28 Sept. 71 62 Know Before You Go 188
2 Oct. 71 63 C/Sing for New Auditors or Veterans 191
5 Oct. 71 64 F/Ning Auditors 193
6 Oct. 71 R 65R Auditing of Staff & Public (BTB) 194
3 Nov. 71 66 Auditor’s Worksheets 196
30 Nov. 71 R 67 The Code of a C/S (BTB) 197

8 Dec. 71 68 The C/S and Cramming Cycles (BTB) 199
12 Dec. 71R 69R Mandatory C/Sing Checklist (BTB) 200
3 Jan.72 69 Add. C/Sing Checklist 203
12 Dec. 71R 70R How To Write Up a Cramming Order (BTB) 204
19 Dec. 71 71 D of P Operates by OCAs 205
24 Feb. 72 71A Word Clearing OCAs 207
20 Dec. 71 72 Use of Correction Lists 209
23 Dec. 71 73 The No-Interference Area 211
16 Feb. 72 74 Talking the TA Down Modified 213
10 Apr. 72 75 PreOTs Don’t C/S 214
17 Apr. 72 76 C/Sing a PTS Rundown 216
19 Apr. 72 77 “Quickie” Defined 218
20 Apr. 72 78 Product Purpose and Why and WC Error Correction 220
24 Apr. 72 79 PTS Interviews 222
15 June 72 80 “Dog Pcs” 223
16 June 72R 81R Auditor’s Rights Modified 225
28 Dec. 72RA 81-1RA Auditor’s Rights Addition Revised (BTB) 227
10 Aug. 72 82 Dianetic HCO B—Interest 229
11 Aug. 72RA 83RA Correction Lists (BTB) 230
16 Aug. 72 84 Flubless C/Sing 233
16 Aug. 72-1 84-1 Flubless C/Sing in Missions (BTB) 235
13 Sept. 72 85 Catastrophes From and Repair of
“No Interest” Items 236
20 Jan. 73R 86RD The Red Tag Line (BTB) 237
15 Oct. 73 87 Nulling and F/Ning Prepared Lists 240
22 Oct. 73R 88R Tech Degrades (BTB) 241
20 Nov. 73 89 F/N What You Ask or Program 243
6 Dec. 73 90 The Primary Failure 244
17 Feb. 74 91 Mutual Out Ruds 246
8 July 74R 92R Word Clearing Errors 247
31 Aug. 74 93 New Grade Chart 248
25 Sept. 74 94 Reduction of Refunds—C/Ses and Overload 252
26 Oct. 75 95 “Failed” Cases 254
24 Oct. 76 96 Delivery Repair Lists 256
26 Oct. 76 97 Auditing Reports, Falsifying of 261
28 Oct. 76 98 Auditing Folders, Omissions in Completeness 262
25 Apr. 71R The Dianetic Case Supervisor’s Index (BTB) 265
Subject Index 277
Alphabetical List of Titles 292

LONG CONTENTS



C/S Series 1
HCO B 23 Aug 1971 AUDITOR’S RIGHTS, 1

Auditor responsibility for C/Ses,
Accepting the Pc (rights of refusal),
Accepting a C/S, 2
C/Sing in the chair, 2
Stale-dated C/S, 2
Ending the session—unworkable C/S, 2
Auditing over out ruds, 2
Inability to fly ruds, 3
Sessions far apart—out ruds, 3
Unreading items—checking for reads, 3
List trouble—L4, 3
High TA at session start, 4
Hopeful C/Sing and auditing, 4
Things done twice, 5
Copying lists or worksheets, 5
Ruds going out—why and what to do, 5
Case not handled, 6
Set up for major actions (defines Repair, Rudiments, Set Up, Major Action,
Grade, Program), 6
Program and Grade violations, 7
Ability attained—completion of action, 7
Unnecessary repair when Pc is running well, 8
False reports, 8
Auditor overts on Pcs, 8
Auditors don’t have cases, 8
What the Auditor did wrong, 9


C/S Series 2
HCO B 12 June 1970 PROGRAMMING OF CASES, 10

Program definition, 10
The master program, 10
Facts one has to accept to case supervise, 10
Three types of programs, 11
Basic Program, 11
Repair Program—Set-up Program, 11
Return Program, 11
Correct way to program, 12
Dispersal of actions, 12
Program necessity, 13
Steady on—the C/S holds a steady course, 14


C/S Series 3
HCO B 13 June 1970 SESSION PRIORITIES—
REPAIR PGMS AND THEIR PRIORITY, 16

Program errors, 16
Self-auditing, 16
EP of repair, 17
Consistent complaint, 17
Effect Scale, 18
BPC, 18
Overwhelm, 18
Auditor fault, 18
Pc in an overwhelm, 18
Ingenuity of a C/S, 19

C/S Series 4
HCO B 14 June 1970 THE RETURN PROGRAM, 21

When a Repair Pgm is changed into a Return Pgm, 21
Content of a Return Pgm, 22
Example of a Return Pgm, 22


C/S Series 5
HCO B 15 June 1970 REPAIR EXAMPLE, 24

Repair Program example, 24
Possible faults of a repair, 25
Note on VIII auditing, 25
Repair is a Tech Div action, 26
Repair of a Dianetic Pc, 26
C/S Q and A, 27


C/S Series 6
HCO B 16 June 1970 WHAT THE C/S IS DOING, 28

Force and words, 28
Low TAs, 28
High TA, 28
Mental masses, forces, etc. are what the C/S handles, 29
Pc search for significance, 29
The E-Meter and what it records, 29
Backwards C/Sing, 29
Reliable indicators for the C/S, 30
F/N abuse and “Quickies”, 30
Pc abilities, 31
What force is made up of, 31
C/S purpose, 31


C/S Series 7
HCO B 19 June 1970 C/S Q AND A, 32

Example of Q and A, 32
Three main ways a C/S can Q and A in C/Sing, 32
Pc C/S—C/S C/Sing what Pc says, 32
C/Sing on a Pc win, 33
C/Sing in agreement with Pc demands, 33
Caution—Pc data is used to parallel what the MIND does, 33


C/S Series 8
HCO B 19 June 1970 CHART OF HUMAN EVALUATION, 35

Use of Chart of Human Evaluation in C/Sing, 35
Self-auditing—manifestation of overwhelm, 35
Mannerism changes in Pc, 36
Changing the Pc, 36
C/S is changing the Pc’s position upward on the Chart of Human Evaluation, 36


C/S Series 9
HCO B 21 June 1970 SUPERFICIAL ACTIONS, 37

Cultural inclination to “Quickie”, 3 7
Short programs are for the birds, 3 7
Success stories and results—the target, 38
Sick Pcs—actions that can be done, 39
Gradient scales, 39
Short-cutting processes, folly of, 40
Speed liability and honest results, 40


C/S Series 10
HCO B 24 June 1970 REPAIRING A REPAIR, 42

There is a basic goof in a repair session for it to have gone wrong, 42
Danger of C/S wander in repair of repair, 42
Correct C/S procedure in repair of repair, 42
Auditor flubs, 43
Repair Pcs—those who need lots of repair, 43


C/S Series 11
HCO B 25 June 1970 C/S SERIES 11, 44

C/S data—color of paper for pgms, 44
C/S instructions always written, 44
High Crime for C/S not to write C/S instructions, 44
Points on case supervision, 44
Double folder danger, 45
Analyzing folders, 45
Reviewing folders, 45
The main question of a C/S, 46
Pcs and their Ethics record, 46
Auditing and Ethics actions, 46
Auditor admin, 46
Out admin, 46
Gross Case Supervisor errors, 47


C/S Series 12
HCO B 25 June 1970 GLOSSARY OF C/S TERMS, 48

Progress Program, 48
Advance Program, 48
Expanded Lower Grades, 48
Dianetic Clear, 48
Classification Chart, 49
Quickie Grades, 49
Dianetic Pcs, 49
Training, 49


C/S Series 13R
HCO B 30 June 1970R VIII ACTIONS, 50

The idea that the old is cancelled by the new, 50
VIII auditing—its aim and validity, 51
Resistive cases, 51
When do you use a GF 40, 51
OT IV Rundown—purpose and validity, 52
Case Supervisor actions, 52
VIII actions all valid and what is still “in”, 53


C/S Series 14
HCO B 3 July 1970 C/Sing 2-WAY COMM, 54

Reasons for C/S errors when C/Sing 2WC, 54
Rules of C/Sing 2WC, 54


C/S Series 15
HCO B 16 Aug 1970 GETTING THE F/N TO EXAMINER, 56

Unflat engram chains and high TA, 56
Reasons for high TA after F/N VGIs, 56
Solutions to these reasons, 56
Chronic somatics, 57
Program for a chronic somatic Pc, 57

High TA and illness, 58
Low TA at Exams, reasons for, 58


C/S Series 16
HCO B 21 Aug 1970 SESSION GRADING—WELL DONE, DEFINITION OF, 59

Definition of Well Done, 59
Definition of Very Well Done, 59
Definition of No Mention, 59
Definition of Flunk, 60
Flunks and when to retrain and on what, 60
Invalidation of Auditors, 60
Auditor handling by C/S, 61


C/S Series 17
HCO B 26 Aug 1970 INCOMPLETE CASES, 62

Definition of overshooting, 62
Definition of undershooting, 62
Quickie Grades and actions, 62
Complete cases, 63
Completion of an action—end it off, 63
Incomplete case and action—complete it, 63


C/S Series 18
HCO B 11 Sept 1970 CHRONIC SOMATIC, DIANETIC HANDLING OF, 64

Where to find the full rundown on Dianetic handling of a Pc with a chronic somatic, 64


C/S Series 19
HCO B 6 Oct 1970 FOLDER ERROR SUMMARIES, 65

Who does an FES, 65
Who pays for an FES, 65
Necessity for an FES, 65
Necessity for FES no reason to halt delivery, 65
Blind repair, when one is done and dangers of, 66


C/S Series 20
HCO B 8 Oct 1970 PERSISTENT F/N, 67

The bug behind Quickie Grades, 67
What to do with a persistent F/N or big win, 67
Gradual widening of an F/N, 67


C/S Series 21
HCO B 10 Nov 1970 C/S RESPONSIBILITY FOR TRAINING, 69

C/S is responsible for ability of Auditors to audit, 69
The three training stages in making an Auditor, 69
What the C/S does to get flubless Auditors, 70


C/S Series 22
HCO B 28 Nov 1970 PSYCHOSIS, 72

Percentage of human race insane, 72
Types of psychosis, 73
Definition of insanity, 73
The nature of man, 73
Techniques to handle or benefit the insane, 74
Pattern of behavior of the insane, 74

C/S Series 23R4
HCO B 17 Dec 1971R INTERIORIZATION SUMMARY, 76

Quads cancelled, 76
When is Int RD unnecessary, 76
When is Int RD overrun, 77
Repair of Int, 77
Two-way comm on Int, 77
C/Sing Int RD, 77
Interiorization is a remedy, 77
Disability of Auditor in running Int, 78
What the C/S does to win, 78


C/S Series 24
HCO B 28 Feb 1971 METERING READING ITEMS, 79

Gross auditing errors regarding metering, 79
Eyesight of Auditor, 80
Glasses worn by Auditor, 80
Wide vision of Auditor, 80
Confusions as to what is a reading item, 80
Suspect item or question that “did not read”, 80
Meaning of “non-reading item”, 80


C/S Series 25
HCO B 5 Mar 1971 THE FANTASTIC NEW HGC LINE, 81

The C/S form, 81
The new line and its results, 82
New sequence of HGC actions, 82
Above 600 hrs results in a second HGC, 84
The seniors in the HGC, 84
Cramming action and quality, 84
Dummy run the new HGC line, 85
Pc procurement, 85


C/S Series 26
HCO B 6 Mar 1971 NEW USES FOR THE GREEN FORM, 86

Method 5 assessment, 86
What to handle first, 86
Hidden Standard handling, 86
GF on a foreign language case, 86


C/S Series 27
HCO B 6 Mar 1971 LONG C/Ses, 87

Desirability of long C/Ses, 87
What to do if a long C/S is not completed, 87
Handling reduced by length of C/S, 87
Dianetic C/Ses, 87
Length of pgms, 87
Advance Pgms—where they start, 88
Thorough C/Ses, 88


C/S Series 28RA
HCO B 7 Mar 1971RA USE OF DIANETICS, 89
How to C/S a case for Triple Dianetics, 89
Engram list—example, 89
Int-Ext RD, 90
Auditor flubs, 90
Results of Triple Dianetics, 90
Dianetic remedies and Triple Flows, 90

C/S Series 28RA-1
HCO B 7 Mar 1971 USE OF QUADRUPLE DIANETICS, 91

How to C/S a case for Quad Dianetics, 91
Engram list—example, 91
Int-Ext RD, 92
Auditor checkout of Quad Dianetics, 92
Auditor flubs, 92
Promotion of Quad Dianetics, 93
Upper level Auditors, 93
Results of Quad Dianetics, 93
Dianetic remedies, 93


C/S Series 29
HCO B 8 Mar 1971 CASE ACTIONS, OFF LINE, 94

Life knocking ruds out faster than they can be audited in, 94
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, 94
Self-auditing, 94 Coffee shop auditing, 94
Touch and Contact Assists interrupting a general course of auditing, often to no F/N, 94
Study rundowns, 95
Illegal patch-ups, 95
People talking about their cases, 95
Advanced Course material insecurity, 95
Illegal drug use, 95


C/S Series 30
HCO B 19 Mar 1971 C/Sing AUDITOR - C/Ses, 96

Duty of the Org C/S, 96
What the C/S looks for, 96
Four categories the bad exam report comes under, 96
Dog cases, definition of and how to handle, 97
Auditor errors, how to handle, 97
Program errors, how to handle, 97
C/S Errors, how to handle, 98
Cramming, use of, 98


C/S Series 31
HCO B 31 Mar 1971 PROGRAMMING AND MISPROGRAMMING, 99

The three areas of technical application, 99
The routine basis of getting auditing into an Org, 99
How to raise auditing quality, 99
How to raise C/S quality, 99
How to raise programming quality, 99
The six principal gross errors in programming, 99


C/S Series 32RA
HCO B 4 Apr 1971RA USE OF DIANETICS, 100

Tripling earlier Dianetic items, 100
Full Flow Table, 100
Definitions of Flows 1, 2, 3 and 0, 100
Flow Zero command for the Introspection RD, 101
Narrative items and Full Flow Dianetics, 101
Multiple somatic items and Full Flow Dianetics, 101
Repair and Full Flow Dianetics, 101
Result of Full Flow Dianetics, 101
Offering Full Flow Dianetics, 101
OT warning, 101

C/S Series 32RA-1R
HCO B 4 Apr 1971-1R USE OF QUAD DIANETICS, 102

Tripling earlier Dianetic items, 102
Quadrupling earlier Dianetic items, 102
Int RD, 102
Reason to handle missing flows, 102
Full Flow Table, 103
Definitions of Flows 1 , 2, 3 and 0, 103
Flow Zero command, 103
Narrative items and Full Flow Dianetics, 103
Multiple somatic items and Full Flow Dianetics, 103
Repair and Full Flow Dianetics, 103
Result of Full Flow Dianetics, 104
Offering Full Flow Dianetics, 104
OT warning, 104


C/S Series 33RA
HCO B 5 Apr 1971RA TRIPLE RERUNS, 105

By-passed flows and mass, 105
The source of high TA, 105
Rehabbing past major actions, 105
Massy thetans, 105
Getting in all flows, 106
High TA and Triple Flows, 106
Pc not in trouble, 106
Pc in trouble, 106
Running Zero Flows, 107
Getting in Triple Flows—rehab or run, 107


C/S Series 33RA-1
HCO B 5 Apr 1971 TRIPLE AND QUAD RERUNS, 108

By-passed flows and mass, 108
The source of high TA, 108
Rehabbing past major actions, 108
Massy thetans, 109
Getting in all flows, 109
High TA and Quad Flows, 109
Pc not in trouble, 110
Pc in trouble, 110
Running Zero Flows, 110
Getting in Zero Flows—rehab or run, 110
Results of All Flows Rundown, 110


C/S Series 34
HCO B 6 Apr 1971 NON-F/N CASES, 112

What an Exam non-F/N indicates, 112
The answer to cases that don’t F/N at Exams, 112
Twelve things that can foul up a case, 113
The stable datum on cases that run well, 114


C/S Series 35RA
HCO B 16 Dec 1971RA INTERIORIZATION ERRORS, 115

An Int RD error is corrected as a first action, 115
The subject of Int must read before the Int RD is run, 115
High TA and Pc in trouble—what to look for, 116
Reasons for high TA, 116
Data on what Ext in session means, 116
Ext being an EP, 116
Doing a Dn C/S 1 on an unindoctrinated Pc before an Int RD, 117

C/S Series 36RB
HCOB 21 Apr 1971RB DIANETICS, 118

TRs, 118
Rehabbing chains, 118
Flubbed chains—how to handle, 119
Use of L3RD, 119
Overrun and Full Flow Dianetics, 119
How to handle firefights, 120
Who can run Dianetics, Dianetic Triples, Int-Ext RD, 120
C/S responsibility, 121
Risk involved in Full Flow Dianetics, 121
Introducing Full Flow Dianetics, 121


C/S Series 36RB-1R
HCO B 21 Apr 1971-1R QUADRUPLE DIANETICS—DANGERS OF, 122

Auditor errors in running Quad Dianetics, 122
Requirements to run Quad Dianetics, 122
TRs, 1 22
Rehabbing chains, 123
Flubbed chains—how to handle, 123
Use of L3RD, 123
Overrun and Full Flow Dianetics, 124
How to handle firefights, 124
Who can run Dianetics, Dianetic Quads, Int-Ext RD, 125
C/S responsibility, 125
Risk involved in Full Flow Dianetics, 125
Introducing Full Flow Dianetics, 125


C/S Series 37R
HCO B 3 June 1971 HIGH AND LOW TA BREAKTHROUGH, 127

The truth about “overrun”, 127
What makes the TA high, 127
Composition of an overrun, 127
The common denominators of a bank, 128
The list questions for process 37R, 128
What read to take on 37R assessment, 128
Cause of low TA, 129
End phenomena of 37R, 129
Note about flows and ridges, 129
Auditor qualifications to audit 37R, 130
Procedure re high or low TAs regarding Int RD and 37R process, 130


C/S Series 37R Addition
HCO B 15 June 1971 HI-LO TA ASSESSMENT RULES, 131

It’s vital to attain the correct EP of 37R, 131
Clearing flows before running 37R, 131
Repeated assessment, admin of, 131
Low TA needs thorough job on 37R, 131
Cramming on Auditors who can’t do 37R, 131


C/S Series 37R Addition 2R
HCO B 16 June 1971 R LOW TA ASSESSING, 132

What to do when there is an apparent EP of 37R yet TA goes low after EP, 132
Asking for an additional flow on 37R, 132
Trouble with high or low TA subsequently, 132


C/S Series 37R Addition 3
HCO B 26 June 1971 C/S SERIES 37R ADDITION 3, 133

What must be asked when one gets a BD F/N item, 133
What to do if Pc says it’s not his item, 133
What to do if TA goes high or low after 37R, 133
Run 37R with ruds in, 133 Clearing of flows, 133
Assess 37R slowly, 134 Additional flow to 37R, 134
How to arrange the assessment form of 37R, 134
Steps of 37R, 134 Don’ts of 37R, 134
37R special version—for Pcs who protest auditing, 135


C/S Series 38
HCO B 26 May 1971 TRS COURSE AND AUDITING—
MIXING MAJOR ACTIONS, 136

Don’t audit a person on TR Course or while doing a TR cycle, 136
Informing D of P, etc. re person on TRs, 136
Do not begin new programs to end old, 136
Obtain an F/N before starting next C/S action, 136
Points that bog a case, 136
TRs are a program, 137
Interjected pgms, 137
Life interjecting into a pgm, 137
Cross programming, 137
Visual idea of a cycle of action, 138


C/S Series 39R
HCO B 31 May 1971 STANDARD 121/2 HOUR INTENSIVE PROGRAMS, 139

Sell and deliver 121/2 hour intensives, 139
Sample Progress Program, 139
Advance Program, 139


C/S Series 40
HCO B 7 June 1971 LOW TAs, 141

Low TAs assess on 37R like high TAs, 141
The blow up F/N item, 141
What if the F/N dies and TA falls on a blow up item, 141
Blow up applies to 37R only, 141


C/S Series 41
HCO B 9 June 1971 C/S TIPS, 142

Out lists handled first before ruds, 142
No read Auditors—what to do, 142
Cramming on flubs, 142
R-Factors, correct use of, 142
Mixing starts of sessions, 143
Ways to start a session, 143
Do not use ARC Break procedures on getting high TA down, 143
Low TA quits by Auditors—how to handle, 143
Exam F/Ns after flubs—what to do, 143
C/S via—what it is and what to demand as a C/S, 143
Higher levels do not solve lower level failures, 144
C/S expertise and the successful C/S, 144


C/S Series 42
HCO B 9 June 1971 C/S RULES, 145

Complete cycles on the Pc, 145
Don’t re-repair, 145
Each step taken to its EP, 145
A sure way to solve a case, 145

Folder Summary—who does it, 145
Double actions, danger of, 145
Set up Pc for next major action, 146
Blaming the Pc—how to handle, 146


C/S Series 43
HCO B 9 June 1971 C/S RULES, 147

Never make trouble for the Pc, 147
Pc running well and F/N VGIs—let him roll, 147
What to do with the Auditor who flubbed yet Pc is F/N VGIs, 147
What to do with a case who isn’t running well, 147
Overrepair example, 147
Invalidating the Auditor, 147
The stable data of tech, 148


C/S Series 44R
HCO B 10 June 1971 C/S RULES—PROGRAMMING
FROM PREPARED LISTS, 149

What the prepared lists are, 149
The order in which the reads are handled, 149
List errors can cause high TA, 150
Never take a TA down with ARC Break rud or L1C, 150


C/S Series 44R Addition
BTB 31 Oct 1971 44R—C/S RULES—THE SEQUENCE
OF PROGRAMS, 151

Sequence of Progress Programs, 151
Things that prevent or slow case gain, 151
Processes are not to be extracted from Expanded Grades and standard programs, 151


C/S Series 45
HCO B 19 June 1971 C/S RULES, 152

Why the C/S C/Ses for exact tech application and not exclusively for result, 152
The secret of how LRH as C/S makes star Auditors, 152


C/S Series 46
HCO B 19 June 1971 DECLARES, 153

Responsibility of the C/S to send the Pc or PreOT to Declare, 153
Declare completes a cycle of action, 153
Who to send to Declare, 153
Who not to send to Declare, 153
What to do with the Pc who hasn’t made it, 153


C/S Series 47
HCO B 20 June 1971 THE SUPREME TEST OF A C/S, 154

A C/S C/Ses, an Auditor audits, a rundown as itself not as a botch of
several actions, with why, 154
Programming is an A to B action, 154
Auditing a process is an A to B action, 154
The supreme test of C/S and Auditor is begin at A and arrive at B, 155


C/S Series 48R
HCOB 15 July 1971 DRUG HANDLING, 156

A person who has been on drugs is one of the types of resistive cases, 156
What is meant by drugs, 156
Alcohol is included as a drug, 156
Those on drugs—what to do, 157
Drug engrams, 157
Full auditing rundown on drugs, 157
Drugs are done first, 157
Steps of Drug RD where only Dianetic auditing is available, 158


C/S Series 49R
HCO B 5 July 1971R ASSISTS, 159

The three types of assists, 159
Each assist must end with F/N, 159
Contact Assist, 159
Dianetic Assist, 159
Touch Assist, 160
Unconscious Pc—what to run, 160
Rules and points re assists, 160


C/S Series 50
HCO B 15 July 1971 C/S CASE GAIN, 161

How to handle C/Ses and Auditors who have the PTP of how
to get case gain for their Pcs, 161


C/S Series 51
HCO B 17 July 1971 OUT OF VALENCE, 162

OCA graph drops explained, 162
How to handle the out of valence Pc, 162


C/S Series 52
HCO B 19 July 1971 INTERNES, 163

Interne defined, 163
What an interneship is, 163
How a course graduate becomes an Auditor, 163
The OK to Audit system, 163
How to remedy a fumbling Auditor, 164


C/S Series 53RJ
HCO B 24 Nov 1973RB SHORT HI-LO TA ASSESSMENT C/S, 165

When to do a C/S 53RJ, 165
Handling of reads, 166


C/S Series 54
HCO B 28 July 1971 DIANETICS, BEGINNING A PC ON, 168

What to begin a Pc on Dianetics with, 168
Use of Pc Assessment Sheet, 168
How to handle Drugs, Accidents, Illness, Mental Treatment, Operations,
Medicine, Deaths, Family Insanity, Perception, 168
How to program what’s found on Pc Assessment Sheet, 169
Repair any flub within 24 hrs, 169
When to use the Health Form, 169


C/S Series 55
HCO B 8 Aug 1971 THE IVORY TOWER, 170


The Ivory Tower rule, 170
Consequences of breaking the Ivory Tower rule, 170
Auditor opinion, value of, 171
Worksheets and Pc response, value of, 171
Executive opinion, value of, 171
Family opinion, value of, 171


C/S Series 56, Auditor Admin Series 2
HCO B 25 Aug 1971 HOW TO GET RESULTS IN AN HGC, 172

How to improve tech results, 172
Definition of Administration, 172
Auditor’s work requires respect and service, 172
Organize to improve results, 173
Org wins and stats, 174
Remedy of low org wins and stats, 174


C/S Series 57
HCO B 1 Sept 1971 A C/S AS A TRAINING OFFICER—
A PROGRAM FOR FLUBLESS AUDITING, 176

Responsibility of the C/S to produce flubless Auditors, 176
What the C/S is trying to obtain, 176
The sequence of actions a C/S should take to attain flubless auditing, 177


C/S Series 58
HCO B 7 Sept 1971 PROGRAMMING CASES BACKWARDS, 182

The tools of auditing, 182
Examples of programming backwards, 182
Data needed by a C/S, 183
Knowledge needed by a C/S, 183
The tools of a C/S, 183


C/S Series 59
HCO B 14 Sept 1971 DIANETIC LIST ERRORS, 184

Dianetic lists acting as a list under the meaning of the Laws of Listing and Nulling, 184
Violent session ARC Breaks occur because of list errors, 184
The repair action to be done to correct list errors, 184
How to handle what reads in the repair action, 184
Some points a C/S must be alert to re listing, 184


C/S Series 60
HCO B 15 Sept 1971 THE WORST TANGLE, 185

Which is handled first in a repair of Int, lists and out ruds, 185
How Int, lists and ruds are handled when out, 185


C/S Series 61
HCO B 22 Sept 1971 THE THREE GOLDEN RULES OF THE C/S, 186

The handling of Auditors with these rules, 186
Finding the goof and sending the Auditor to Cramming, 186
Never inval the Auditor when no tech goof has occurred, 186
Recognize and acknowledge a technically perfect session, 186
Indicators regarding application of these rules, 186


C/S Series 62
HCO B 28 Sept 1971 KNOW BEFORE YOU GO, 188


The C/S should know what’s wrong with a case, 188
Effect of hunches by the C/S, 188
How the C/S gets data so he knows, 188
Combined action—prepared lists to get data and handle, 189
Broad shooting gets the data, 189
Evaluation and C/S Q & A, 189
Little flags—what they are and what they signify, 189
Tagging cases and handling of, 189
The Pc’s folder is the primary record, 190
What to assume when case does not run well, 190


C/S Series 63
HCO B 2 Oct 1971 C/SING FOR NEW AUDITORS OR VETERANS, 191

Difference in C/Sing for new Auditors and veterans, 191
Example of C/Ses, 191
When the C/S knows his tech—what most of his troubles come from, 191
How to C/S for new Auditors, 192


C/S Series 64
HCO B 5 Oct 1971 F/Ning AUDITORS, 193

Non-F/Ning Auditors, 193
What the C/S does with non-F/Ning Auditors, 193
Cramming done to F/N VGIs, 193
Every Auditor leaving Cramming should go through the Examiner, 193
What to do with an Auditor not F/Ning on a cramming cycle, 193


C/S Series 65R
BTB 6 Oct 1971R AUDITING OF STAFF & PUBLIC, 194

The publics of a C/S, 194
Staff C/S responsibility for the well-being of staff, 194
Overhauling of folders regularly by the C/S, 194
Who gets audited first on staff, 194
The C/S and Ethics reports, 194


C/S Series 66, Auditor Admin Series 15
HCO B 3 Nov 1971 AUDITOR’S WORKSHEETS, 196

C/S insists on good legible handwriting, 196
C/S misunderstoods from worksheets, 196
Solutions to illegible handwriting by Auditors, 196


C/S Series 67
BTB 30 Nov 1971R THE CODE OF A C/S, 197

The code of a C/S as regards his Auditors and their Pcs for whom he is C/Sing, 197


C/S Series 68, Cramming Series 9
BTB 8 Dec 1971 THE C/S AND CRAMMING CYCLES, 199

Cramming finds the real Why of an Auditor error, when an Auditor is sent to Cramming, 199
Report of the real Why to the C/S, 199


C/S Series 69R
BTB 12 Dec 1971R MANDATORY C/SING CHECKLIST, 200

Actions done by a C/S whenever he C/Ses any folder, given step by step, 200
What to check when C/Sing, 200 Three golden rules of C/Sing, 202

C/S Series 69 Addition
HCO B 3 Jan 1972 C/SING CHECKLIST, 203

Handling bogged cases, 203


C/S Series 70R, Cramming Series 8R
BTB 12 Dec 1971R HOW TO WRITE UP A CRAMMING ORDER, 204

The technology of how to write up a cramming order, 204
What to order to be crammed, 204
What to request Cramming to inspect and handle, 204


C/S Series 71
HCO B 19 Dec 1971 D OF P OPERATES BY OCAs, 205

What the D of P is regarding functions, duties and title, 205
What the D of P must know to do his job, 205
The D of P and IQ tests, OCA and Aptitude tests, 205
The left and right side of an OCA graph, 205
What to do when any side of an OCA graph is not in the desirable range, 205
Tone and appearance of Pc, value of—to the D of P, 205
The Registrar’s functions as to graphs where there is no D of P, 205
The D of P with a Pc backlog and ARC Broken field, 205
The business of the D of P, 206
The first thing the D of P has to know, 206
The second thing the D of P has to know, 206
Duties of a D of P are covered in C/S Series 25 along with others, 206


C/S Series 71A
HCO B 24 Feb 1972 WORD CLEARING OCAs, 207

Illegal word clearing of tests, 207
Holding a constant, 207
Never answer questions or clear up words on a test, 207
Examiner meter check question, 207
Success meter check, 208
Examiner and Success must know about False TA HCO Bs, 208
Safeguarding the test line, 208


C/S Series 72
HCO B 20 Dec 1971 USE OF CORRECTION LISTS, 209

The workability of correction lists, 209
The only things which prevent a correction list from working, 209
Metering—where Auditor’s meter must be placed, 209
Metering faults of Auditors, 209
The cramming action when a correction list is said to be blank, 209
TRs—their effect on a correction list, 209
Types of correction lists and their use, 210
Correction lists are a primary tool of a C/S, 210
Trying to solve cases without using correction lists can’t be done, 210
Methods of use of correction lists, 210
Use Method 5 with inexpert Auditors, 210
Green Form always done Method 5, 210
L1C always done Method 3, 210
The tools of a C/S, 210
What the C/S is and does, 210


C/S Series 73
HCO B 23 Dec 1971 THE NO-INTERFERENCE AREA, 211

The No-Interference Area, 211
Examples, 211

Exception—drugs, 211
Repairs of Grades not made or failed, 211
TRs done during or before solo auditing study, 211
TRs incomplete should be completed, 212
Losing game to throw a major rundown in between R6 and OT III, 212
Set-up before R6 includes Dianetics, 212
Auditing skill—improving it between R6 and OT III, 212
Sources of failure on Solo, 212
Summary—R6 to OT III a closed band, 212


C/S Series 74
HCO B 16 Feb 1972 TALKING THE TA DOWN MODIFIED, 213

A skill to be preserved—a rare action, 213
High or low TA at session start, 213
High TA may be due to out Int RD, either not done or botched, 213
Call for a C/S if TA high or low at session start, 213
Doing C/S 53 as a standard action, 213
No need to talk the TA down, 213


C/S Series 75, Solo C/S Series 13
HCO B 10 Apr 1972 PREOTS DON’T C/S, 214

Solo PreOT who is required to do his own C/S violates “continued session rule”, 214
Solo C/S C/Ses, 214
Several solo sessions, 214
C/Sing line, 215
PreOT doing his own C/Ses—worst features, 215


C/S Series 76
HCO B 17 Apr 1972 C/SING A PTS RUNDOWN, 216

C/Sing a PTS Rundown—references, 216
Knowing why the PTS RD is done, 216
PTS must be handled properly on lines, 216
Data—PTS SP tech checksheet plus additions, 217
PTS situation—getting it handled, 217
End phenomena attained when person is well and stable, 217


C/S Series 77
HCO B 19 Apr 1972 “QUICKIE” DEFINED, 218

PTS Rundown—its checks on lines, 218
Completing actions, 218
PTS RD product = a Pc no longer PTS, 218
Definition of complete, 218
Clearing words of commands, 218
Pcs not understanding words of commands, 219
Remedies of the quickie impulse, 219
Quickie tendencies or false stats—remedy, 219


C/S Series 78
HCO B 20 Apr 1972 PRODUCT PURPOSE AND WHY AND
WC ERROR CORRECTION, 220

Product purpose, Why and WC errors—correction, 220
Listing, 220
Listing errors and repair action—correct item must BD and F/N, 220
Item found out of session and reconstructing the list, 220
Self-auditing, commonest reason for, 220
Reaction due to wrong list item or a wrong list, 221
Out lists—suspect these when lowered tone, violence or blows occur, 221
Non-Auditors finding items on PTS people, 221

Communication of the term “PTS”, 221
Repairs—stemming from untrained people using meters—
C/S handling these in regular session, 221
These worksheets become part of the Pc folder, 221
C/Ses to include those repairs before going on with the regular pgm, 221


C/S Series 79, Expanded Dianetics Series 5
HCO B 24 Apr 1972 PTS INTERVIEWS, 222

PTS Interviews—what they ask, 222
An ill person is PTS, 222
SP is PTS to SPs, persons, things, locations no matter how SP, 222
PTS makes trouble, 222
PTS condition is a problem, 222
When interviewed a wrong item may be found, 222
Worksheets must be kept, 222
The interview should end on an F/N, 222
Inteviewer must know TRs, meter work, 2WC and PTS tech, 222


C/S Series 80
HCO B 15 June 1972 “DOG PCs”, 223

Remedy for an Auditor with “dog Pcs”, 223
Remedy for a C/S who agrees that there are “dog Pcs”, 223
What “dog Pcs” are traced back to, 224


C/S Series 81R
HCO B 16 June 1972R AUDITOR’S RIGHTS MODIFIED, 225

The major Why of falling hours, incomplete programs, and other confusions, 225
The abuse of the Auditor’s right to choose Pcs, 225
What refusing to audit is an admission of, 225
Auditor’s right to choose Pcs modified, 225
“Dog Pcs” are problems in repair, 225
D of P and Tech Services have a right to assign Pcs to Auditors, 226
Stats of C/Ses and Auditors, D of P and Dir of Tech Services, 226
“The road to truth is begun with honesty” LRH, 226


C/S Series 81-1RA
BTB 28 Dec 1972RA AUDITOR’S RIGHTS ADDITION REVISED, 227

Auditor’s right to use exact correction list to repair a specific auditing action, 227
C/S OK not required to do a correction list on first red tag, 227
Second red tag needs C/S clearance, 227
Counting auditing hours lost on a salvage red tag session is cancelled, 227
Penalty for red tag not handled, 227
Daily study, 227


C/S Series 82, Expanded Dianetics Series 6
HCO B 10 Aug 1972 DIANETIC HCO B—INTEREST, 229

When “interest” is not checked, 229
The requirement on drug items, evil purposes, and intentions, 229
Quickie Drug Rundowns, 229
Repairing cases and “no interest” items, 229

C/S Series 83RA
BTB 11 Aug 1972RA CORRECTION LISTS, 230

Auditor requirements to do correction lists, 230
When and how to use: L1 C, 230
Green Form, 230
False TA Checklist, 230

C/S 53, 230
LIX Hi-Lo TA List, 230
Int Rundown Correction List, 230
L4BR, 231
L3 RD, 231
GF 40XRR, 231
PTS RD Correction List, 231
Word Clearing Correction List, 231
Study Correction List, 231
Drill for using correction lists, 231
Auditor cramming, 232
EP of a Repair Program, 232


C/S Series 84
HCO B 16 Aug 1972 FLUBLESS C/SING, 233

The C/S makes sure tech courses are taught well, 233
The C/S makes sure there is a Cramming Officer in Qual, 233
C/S standard handling of Auditors, 233
“A falsified auditing report puts the Auditor at once at retrain . . .” LRH, 233
“OT Zero and TR 0 are the keys to good auditing” LRH, 233
Electronic attest, 234


C/S Series 84-1
BTB 16 Aug 1972-1 FLUBLESS C/SING IN MISSIONS, 235

A Mission Auditor needing retraining is sent to the local org for his retrain cycle, 235


C/S Series 85, Expanded Dianetics Series 7
HCO B 13 Sept 1972 CATASTROPHES FROM AND REPAIR OF
“NO INTEREST” ITEMS, 236

The common factor in several failed cases, 236
“The Pc will blow or go sour or not recover” LRH, 236
The solution to unrun “no interest” items, 236
“Don’t ask for interest on intentions, evil purposes and drug items” LRH, 236
Repair of stumbling cases that have had a “Drug Rundown” or Expanded Dianetics, 236


C/S Series 86RD
BTB 20 Jan 1973RD THE RED TAG LINE, 237

When a folder is red tagged, 237
How the red tag is handled, 237
The C/S removes the red tag when the Pc is F/Nng, 238
Daily actions to keep the red tag lines in, 238
The Examiner verifies that all red tags have been handled within 24 hours, 238
The red tag line also applies to Solo Auditors, 238
Penalty for violation of the 24 hour rule, 239


C/S Series 87
HCO B 15 Oct 1973 NULLING AND F/Ning PREPARED LISTS, 240

What a prepared list is, 240
The use of suppress and invalidate buttons and misunderstood word tech, 240
“. . . when the Auditor cannot get a prepared list to F/N, serious auditing errors are
present which will defeat a C/S”—LRH, 240


C/S Series 88R
BTB 22 Oct 1973R TECH DEGRADES, 241

The handling of a tech degrade situation, 241
Evidences of a tech degrade situation, 241

Local LRH Comm is responsible for investigatory action, 241
Policy Letters used in handling a tech degrade situation, 241


C/S Series 89
HCO B 20 Nov 1973 F/N WHAT YOU ASK OR PROGRAM, 243

Auditor Q & A, 243
The Auditor must F/N the original action, 243
Results when Auditor doesn’t F/N the original action, 243
The remedy for Auditor Q & A, 243
The results of C/S Q & A, 243
The remedy for C/S Q & A, 243


C/S Series 90
HCO B 6 Dec 1973 THE PRIMARY FAILURE, 244

The most common reason for failed sessions, 244
Remedy for an Auditor who can’t get reads on lists, 244
Requirements for making a list read, 245
The primary cause of C/S failure, 245


C/S Series 91
HCO B 17 Feb 1974 MUTUAL OUT RUDS, 246

Definition of “mutual out ruds”, 246
C/S checks for mutual out ruds, 246
Handling of mutual out ruds, 246


C/S Series 92R
HCO B 8 July 1974R WORD CLEARING ERRORS, 247

WC M1, 2, 4 and 5 (when done on a meter) require that words be F/Ned, 247
Word clearing errors are red tabbed, 247
All word clearing worksheets are placed in Pc folders, 247
Case troubles and word clearing errors, 247
Correction of word clearing errors, 247
Handling of high or low TA at start of WC session, 247
“Non-session” worksheets should go into Pc folders, 247

C/S Series 93
HCO B 31 Aug 1974 NEW GRADE CHART, 248

Changes in the Grade Chart, 248
Drug Rundown and Life Repair, 248
Expanded Dianetics, 248
Grade II, 248
Solo set-ups, 249
The full list of Grades showing where the various RDs fit, 249
The Grade Chart and programming, 249


C/S Series 94
HCO B 25 Sept 1974 REDUCTION OF REFUNDS—C/Ses AND
OVERLOAD, 252

Overloaded C/Ses—cause of out tech and huge refund ratio, 252
Irreducible minimum C/S postings, 252
Additional types of C/Ses, 252
What is overload, 253


C/S Series 95
HCO B 26 Oct 1975 “FAILED” CASES, 254

There are no failed cases, only failed C/Ses and Auditors, 254
Faults in Auditors who can’t make lists read, 254
Practice makes a good Auditor, 254
The source of out tech is only laziness and dishonesty, 254
Cure for any no-case-gain or failed cases, 255


C/S Series 96
HCO B 24 Oct 1976 DELIVERY REPAIR LISTS, 256

There’s nothing wrong with your CF, your pc, your student, staff member or
your own delivery that a prepared list won’t handle, 256
The “Prepared Lists” system, 256
The only reason ever found for prepared lists not working, 256
Qual “Okay to Audit” Checksheets, 256
A C/S must know what lists to use, 257
Prepared lists for preclears, 257
Prepared lists for students, 258
Prepared lists for staffs, 259
Word lists for prepared lists, 259
Translated lists for non-English speaking orgs, 260


C/S Series 97
HCO B 26 Oct 1976 AUDITING REPORTS, FALSIFYING OF, 261

There are many ways of falsifying an auditing report, 261
The person whose auditing reports have been falsified is easy to spot in
folders and records, 261
The penalty for knowingly falsifying an auditing report, 262


C/S Series 98
HCO B 28 Oct 1976 AUDITING FOLDERS, OMISSIONS IN
COMPLETENESS, 263

Omissions from folders and complete loss of folders is a very serious matter, 264
The commonest (and most senseless) omissions from folders, 264
Loss of a pc’s folder and omissions from a pc’s folder shall be actionable by a
Committee of Evidence, 265



























HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 23 AUGUST 1971
Remimeo
All Auditors
Acad Level IV (HCO B 24 May 1970 Revised)
Class VIIIs
HGCs
Class VIII Checksheet C/S Series 1
Class VI Checksheet
Class III Checksheet
C/S Course Checksheet
HSST AUDITOR’S RIGHTS
Internes
(Revised to update and delete the O/R list
and add Auditing Over Out Ruds.
All changes are in this type style. )


AUDITOR RESPONSIBILITY FOR C/Ses

An auditor who receives a Case Supervisor direction (C/S) of what to audit on a pc is NOT discharged of his responsibility as an auditor.

THE AUDITOR HAS A SERIES OF RESPONSIBILITIES THAT ARE PART OF EVERY C/S HE GETS TO AUDIT.

ACCEPTING THE PC

No auditor is required to accept a specific pc just because the pc is assigned to him.

If an auditor does not believe he can help that particular pc or if he dislikes auditing that particular pc the auditor has a right to refuse to audit that pc. The auditor must state why.

The Case Supervisor, Director of Processing or Director of Review, nor any of their seniors, may not discipline the auditor for refusing to audit a particular pc.

An auditor who refuses to audit his quota of hours or sessions is of course subject to action.

Thus refusing to audit a particular pc, so long as one is not refusing to audit other pcs, is not actionable.

“I do not wish to audit this pc because______. I am willing to audit other pcs,” is the legal auditor statement in the matter.

Some pcs get a bad name with some auditors, some don’t appreciate the auditing, some conflict with a particular auditor’s own personality. There are such instances. It does not mean certain pcs cannot be helped by others.

It is also true that an auditor who dislikes a pc may not do a good job so the rule also has a practical side to it.

One auditor disliked young men and did a bad job on them. Another disliked old ladies and chopped them up in session. One pc had messed up several Scientologists and couldn’t find anyone to audit him at all.

We are not auditing people to make amends to the world.

Thus an auditor has a right to reject or accept the pcs he is given.

ACCEPTING A C/S

When the auditor gets a C/S to do on a case and if he thinks it is not the correct thing to do he has the right to reject the C/S for that pc and require another one he can agree to.

The auditor does not have the right to start doing a C/S and change it during the session except as noted below.

The auditor may NOT C/S in the auditing chair while auditing the pc. If he has NO Case Supervisor at all the auditor still audits from a C/S. He writes the C/S before session and adheres to it in session. To do something else and not follow the C/S is called ‘‘C/Sing in the chair’’ and is very poor form as it leads to Q and A.

STALE DATED C/S

A C/S that is a week or two old or a Repair (Progress) Pgm that is a month or two old is dynamite.

This is called a “Stale Dated Pgm’’ or a ‘‘Stale Dated C/S” meaning it is too old to be valid.

It should have been done sooner. The pc of last week when the C/S was written may have been well and happily employed but a week later may have headaches and reprimand from the boss.

It is dangerous to accept a Repair (Progress) Pgm if it is old.

The auditor who sees his C/S is old and sees the pc has Bad Indicators is justified in demanding a fresh C/S giving his reasons why.

A program written in January may be completely out of date in June. Who knows what may have happened in between.

Use fresh C/Ses and fresh Pgms.

Stale Dates only occur in poorly run backlogged Divisions anyway. The real remedy is reorganize and hire more and better auditors.

ENDING THE SESSION

When the C/S he has is proving unworkable during the session, the auditor has a right to end the session and send the folder to the C/S.

Ending the session is totally up to the auditor.

If the auditor just doesn’t complete an action that was producing TA and could be completed it is of course a flunk. Such a case is just not running a basic engram the one more time through that would bring the TA down and give a proper end phenomena. This and similar actions would be an auditor error.

The judgement here is whether or not the auditor’s action is justified in ending the session.

Even though he may have made an error, the auditor cannot be blamed for the ending off of the session as that is totally up to him. He can be given a flunk for the error

AUDITING OVER OUT RUDS

Auditing a pc on something else whose ruds are out is a MAJOR AUDITING ERROR.

Even if the C/S omits ‘‘Fly a rud” or “Fly ruds” this does not justify the auditor auditing the pc over out ruds.

The auditor can do one of two things: He can Fly all ruds or he can return the folder and request ruds be flown.

The DIANETIC AUDITOR is not excused from auditing over out ruds and in an HGC must be specially cautioned not to do so but return the folder for a new C/S. Better still he should learn to Fly ruds.

INABILITY TO FLY RUDS

If an auditor cannot get a rud to F/N, cannot get any rud to F/N, he is justified in starting a Green Form.

The auditor solution to no F/N on ruds is to do a GF whether the C/S said to or not.

This is an expected action.

It is understood the auditor would use Suppress and False in trying to Fly ruds.

SESSIONS FAR APART

When a pc has not had a session for some time, or when a pc gets sessions days apart, RUDS MUST BE FLOWN. Otherwise the pc will get audited over out ruds. This can develop mental mass.

Optimum session scheduling is a series of sessions or a whole program done in a block of sessions close together. This prevents the world from throwing the pc’s ruds out between sessions.

Giving sessions far apart barely keeps up with life. The auditing time is absorbed in patching life up.

Rapid gain gets above life’s annoyances and keeps the pc there.

UNREADING ITEMS

When an item the auditor has been told to run doesn’t read on the meter, even when the auditor puts in Suppress and Invalidate on it, the auditor MUST NOT do anything with the item no matter what the C/S said.

It is expected he will see if it reads and use Suppress and Invalidate on it. And if it still doesn’t read he will be expected NOT to run it.

LISTS

When an auditor whose C/S told him to list “Who or what______” or any list question finds that the list question does not read, the auditor MUST NOT list it.

When doing a list ordered by the C/S it is assumed that the auditor will test it for read before listing and that he will NOT list an unreading question. (A read is an actual fall, not a tick or a stop.)

LIST TROUBLE

When an auditor has trouble doing a list and getting an item it is expected he will use a Prepared List like L4B to locate the trouble and handle it.

As it is very hard on a pc to mess up a list it is expected the auditor will handle the situation then and there with no further C/S directions.

HIGH TA

When the auditor sees the TA is high at session start yet the C/S says to “Fly a rud” or run a chain, the AUDITOR MUST NOT TRY TO FLY A RUD and he must not start on a chain.

Trying to bring a TA down with ARC Brks or ruds is very hard on a pc as ARC Breaks aren’t the reason TAs go up.

Seeing a high TA at start the Dianetic auditor or Scn auditor up to Class II does not start the session but sends the folder back to the C/S and for a higher class auditor to do.

Seeing a high TA at start the Scientology auditor (Class III or above) (a) checks for exteriorization in a recent session and if so the session is ended and the C/S is asked for an “Interiorization Rundown”; (b) if the pc has had an Interiorization Rundown the auditor asks the C/S for permission to do a “C/S Series 53’’ or a Hi-Lo TA assessment or whatever the C/S indicates. The Int RD may have been (usually is) overrun and needs rehab or correction and it is usual to check it—it is included in a “C/S 53’’ and a Hi-Lo TA.

These actions are expected of the auditor even when not stated in the C/S.

GOING ON HOPING

When a case is running badly session to session the LAST thing you do is go on hoping, either in auditing or C/Sing.

“Let’s try _____”, ‘‘Then this”, “Then this”, is not going to solve the case.

YOU GET DATA. You can get data by a White Form (Pc Assessment Form). You can get data from a GF fully assessed (Method 5). You can get data by 2-way comm on various subjects. You can have the D of P interview and get answers. You can even ask his mother.

You look for case errors. You study the folder back to where the pc ran well and then come forward and you’ll find the error every time.

DO NOT JUST GO ON SESSION AFTER FAILED SESSION HOPING. That’s pure idiocy.

You get data! from prepared lists, from life, from the pc, from the folder.

FIND THE BUG!

Ah, good Lord, he is a Pinkerton Agent sworn to secrecy! He does yoga exercises after every session. He was tried for murder when he was 16 and nobody has run the engram of it.

Various auditors ran the same engram chain four times

An auditor ran Int RD twice.

After Power she had her baby and nobody ran the delivery.

He doesn’t like to talk but is a “Grade Zero”!

A dozen dozen reasons can exist

An auditor does NOT let a C/S C/S hopefully. He refuses the C/Ses until a Folder Error Summary is done and the bug found.

THINGS DONE TWICE

By carelessness the same rundowns can be called for twice and done twice or even more.

A Folder Summary inside the front cover must exist and must be kept up.

Over it there must be a program on which the case is being audited. But just because it’s covered, never neglect entering a session and what was run on the Folder Summary (FS).

If Hold it Still is ordered, see if it was run before.

Don’t let major Rundowns be done twice.

DIANETIC ITEMS must NEVER be run twice. Dianetic lists must not be scattered through a folder. Bring them together and keep them together and being brought forward.

COPY

Don’t copy Dianetic lists or worksheets from notes or items from lists.

Keep all admin neat and in the original form.

Copying makes errors possible.

RUDS GOING OUT

When the ruds go out during the session the auditor recognizes the following:

Pc Critical = W/H from auditor
Pc Antagonistic = BPC in session
No TA = Problem
Tired = Failed Purpose or no sleep
Sad = ARC Break
Soaring TA = Overrun or Protest
Dope Off = By-passed F/N or not enough sleep
No Interest = Out Ruds or no interest in the first place.

An auditor who isn’t sure what it is but runs into trouble with the pc (except on lists which he handles at once always) is smart to end off the session quickly, write down the full observation and get it to the C/S.

The auditor who is an old hand and knows what he is looking at as per above scale (and the C/S the C/S would give) handles it promptly.

Pc Critical = W/H = pull the W/H.
Pc Antagonistic = BPC = assess proper list (such as L1 C) and handle.
No TA (or case gain) = Problem = locate the problem.
Tired = no sleep or Failed Purpose = check which it is and handle.
Sad = ARC Brk = locate and handle, Itsa earlier Itsa.
Soaring TA = O/R or Protest = find which and handle. Such an O/R is usually by rehab.
Dope Off = lack of sleep or BP F/N = check on sleep, or rehab F/N.

No Interest = no interest in first place or Out Ruds = check for interest or put in ruds.
List goes wrong = BPC = handle or do L4B or any L4 at once.
Ruds won’t fly = some other error = assess GF and handle.

The auditor has no business trying to do the C/S given when it collides with and isn’t designed to handle any of the above.

If the previous session disclosed such an error and this session C/S was designed to handle and doesn’t, the auditor should end off and the next C/S should be “2-way comm for data”.

CASE NOT HANDLED

When the auditor or the Examiner collides with a pc who is asserting his case has not been handled, there should not be a new set of actions based on little data but the auditor should end off and the C/S should order a “way comm on what hasn’t been handled”.

The auditor should not at once take this up as part of any other C/S.

In other words an auditor doesn’t change the C/S to a 2-way comm on something not called for by C/S.

MAJOR ACTIONS

An auditor should never begin a major action on a case that is not “set up” for it.

As this can occur during a session it is vital to understand the rule and follow it. Otherwise a case can be bogged right down and will be hard to salvage as now a new action to repair has been added to an unrepaired action. Now, if the auditor starts a major action on a case not “set up” we get 2 things to repair where we only had I as the major action won’t work either.

Repair = patching up past auditing or recent life errors. This is done by prepared lists or completing the chain or correcting lists or even 2-way comm or prepchecks on auditors, sessions, etc.

Rudiments = setting the case up for the session action. This includes ARC Brks, PTPs, W/Hs, GF or O/R listing or any prepared list (such as L1C, etc).

Set up = getting an F/N showing and VGIs before starting any major action. It means just that—an F/N and VGIs before starting any major action. Such may require a repair action and rudiments as well.

Major Action = any—but any—action designed to change a case or general considerations or handle continual illness or improve ability. This means a Process or even a series of processes like 3 flows. It doesn’t mean a grade. It is any process the case hasn’t had.

Grade = a series of processes culminating in an exact ability attained, examined and attested to by the pc.

Program = any series of actions designed by a C/S to bring about definite results in a pc. A program usually includes several sessions.

The vast bulk of auditing errors come about because C/Ses and auditors seek to use a Major Action to repair a case.

It is a responsibility of an auditor to reject a C/S which seeks to use one or more major actions to repair a case that isn’t running well.

The auditor must understand this completely. He can be made to accept a wrong C/S for the pc and even more importantly can in his own session make the error and mess up the case.

Example: Pc has not been running well (no real TA or had a grumpy Exam report). Auditor sees C/S has ordered a major action, not a repair by prepared lists, ruds, etc. The auditor must reject the C/S as he will be made to fail in session by it.

Example: Auditor gets a C/S, “(1) Fly a rud; (2) Assess LX3; (3) Run 3-way recall, 3-way secondaries, 3-way engrams on all / / X items”. The auditor can’t get a rud to fly. Does the LX3. In other words he flunks by failing to SET UP the case. It could also go this way. Auditor can’t get a rud to fly, does a GF, gets no F/N. He MUST NOT begin a major action but MUST end off right there.

It is fatal to begin any new process on the case designed to change the case if the case is not F/N VGIs.

The pc who starts processing for the first time and is surely not F/N VGIs must be set up by repair actions! Simple rudiments, life ruds, O/R list on life, even assessing prepared lists on life, these are repair actions. The pc will sooner or later begin to fly. Now at session start you put in a rud, get F/N VGIs and CAN start major actions.

So the auditor has a responsibility not to be led up a garden path by a C/S which orders a major action on a pc who isn’t repaired or by not being able in session to get an F/N VGIs by repair.

The only exceptions are a touch assist or life ruds or the Dianetic assist all on a temporarily sick pc. But that’s repair isn’t it?

PROGRAM VIOLATIONS

When an auditor receives a C/S and sees that it violates the pc’s program he should reject it.

The pc, let us say, is supposed to finish his Dianetic Triples but is suddenly being given a Group Engram Intensive. That violates the program and also the grade.

If the pc is running badly, a repair should be ordered. If not, the program should be completed.

Example: An effort is being made to get the pc to go backtrack. This is a program containing several major actions which probably consists of several sessions. Before this program is complete and before the pc has gone backtrack, the C/S orders “(1) Fly a rud, (2) 3 S & Ds”. The auditor should recognize in 3 S & Ds a major action being run into the middle of a program and reject it. The correct action is of course the next backtrack process.

GRADE VIOLATIONS

A pc who is on a grade and hasn’t attained it yet must not be given major actions not part of that grade.

Example: Pc is on Grade I. C/S orders a list having to do with drinking. It is not a process on that grade. It could be done after Grade I is attained and before Grade II is begun. The C/S is incorrect and should not be accepted.

ABILITY ATTAINED

Now and then before the full major action is complete or before all the grade processes are run, the pc will attain the ability of the grade or the end phenomena of the action.

This is particularly true of valence shifters or Interiorization Rundowns and can happen in grades.

The auditor should recognize it and, with the F/N VGIs always present at such moments, end off.

I know of one case who had a huge cog about Interiorization on Flow I Engrams and was pushed by both C/S and auditor to do Flows 2 and 3 who bogged so badly that it took a long while—weeks—to straighten the case out.

The ability itself gets invalidated by pushing on.

On the other hand this should never be taken as an excuse. “I think he cogged to himself so we ended off.” It must be a real “What do you know!” sort of out-loud cog with a big F/N and VVGIs and directly on the subject to end off a major action or a program or a grade before its actions are all audited.

REVIEWING REVIEWS

An auditor who gets a C/S or an order to repair a case that is running well should reject doing the action.

I have seen a case ordered to repair who had Ext Full Perception Doing Great. The repair bogged the case. The case then got running well again but a second C/S ordered a new repair which of course bogged it. Then major actions were done. The case was again repaired and rehabbed and became ok. Three times the auditor should have said NO.

FALSE REPORTS

The vilest trick that can be played on a pc is for an auditor to falsify an auditing report.

It may be thought to be “good Public Relations” (good PR) for the auditor with the C/S.

Actually it buries an error and puts the pc at risk.

INTEGRITY is a hallmark of Dianetics and Scientology.

Just because psychiatrists were dishonest is no reason for auditors to be.

The results are there to be gotten.

False reports like false attests recoil and badly on both the auditor and pc.

OVERTS ON PCS

When an auditor finds himself being nattery or critical of his pcs he should get his withholds on pcs pulled and overts on them off.

An auditor who goes sad is auditing pcs over his own ARC Break.

An auditor worried about his pc is working over a Problem.

Getting one’s ruds in on pcs or C/Ses or the org can bring new zest to life.

AUDITORS DON’T HAVE CASES

In the chair no auditor has a case.

If breath shows on a mirror held to his face he can audit.

Faint afterwards if you must but see that the pc gets to the Examiner with his F/N.

Then get yourself handled.

“WHAT HE DID WRONG”

An auditor has a right to know what he did wrong in the session that went wrong.

Most often a sour session occurs only when the rules and data in this HCO B have been violated.

But an auditor’s TRs can go out or his listing and nulling is in error.

After a session that went wrong somebody else (not the auditor) should ask the pc what the auditor did. This sometimes spots a false auditing report. But it also sometimes is a false report by the pc.

In any event, the auditor has a right to know. Then he can either correct his auditing or his know-how or he can advise the C/S the pc’s report is untrue and better repair can be done on the pc.

Savage action against an auditor is almost never called for. He was trying to help. Some people are hard to help.

Not only does an auditor have the right to be told what was wrong but he must be given the exact HCO B, date and title, that he violated.

Never take a verbal or written correction that is not in an HCO B or tape.

Don’t be party to a ‘‘hidden data line’’ that doesn’t exist

“You ruined the pc!” is not a valid statement. ‘‘You violated HCO B page____” is the charge.

No auditor may be disciplined for asking, ‘‘May I please have the tape or HCO B that was violated so I can read it or go to Cramming. “

If it isn’t on a tape, a book or an HCO B I T IS NOT TRUE and no auditor has to accept any criticism that is not based on the actual source data.

“If it isn’t written it isn’t true’’ is the best defense and the best way to improve your tech.

These are the rights of the auditor with relation to a C/S. They are all technical rights based on sound principles.

An auditor should know them and use them.

If an auditor stands on these rights and gets beaten down he should put all the facts before his nearest OTL or SO ship as something would be very wrong somewhere.

Auditing is a happy business—when it is done right.


LRH:nt jh L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright ©1970, 1971 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

[OTL means Operation-Transport Liaison which was a Sea Organization office that managed orgs or an area and was a forerunner of the Flag Operations Liaison Office (FOLO).]
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 12 JUNE 1970
Remimeo

C/S Series 2


(C/S Series 1 is “Auditor’s Rights”,
HCO B 24 May 1970, not so marked.)



PROGRAMMING OF CASES



Every action taken on a Case by a CASE SUPERVISOR (or an auditor doing his own C/S actions) should be part of a definite outlined PROGRAM for that case.

PROGRAM Definition—A program is defined as the sequence of actions session by session to be undertaken on a case by the C/S in his directions to the auditor or auditors auditing the case.

The master program for every case is given on the Classification and Gradation Chart issued from time to time. The earliest of these Charts was 1965 followed by 1st December 1966 followed by 1st January 1968 followed by 1st December 1969. The reissues of the Chart are done to improve the communication of the data on the Chart. The program factor has not much changed since its earliest issue. Tapes about this Chart were made for the SHSBC at its first issue and of course remain valid. The processes called for on the Chart are all part of the SHSBC or for upper levels part of the SH and AO Confidential materials. From time to time they are reissued but they remain standard and have been so since the first issue of the Chart.

The Chart and its materials have now and again been neglected or disregarded and THE NEGLECT HAS RESULTED IN FIELD FLAPS AND DOWN STATS.

Omitting this gradient of processes not only stalls cases but results in a case manifesting out-grade phenomena.

A pc must attain the full ability noted on the Chart before going up to the next level of the Chart.

Telling the pc he has made it is of course evaluation.

The outnesses which have occurred surrounding this Chart are hard to believe. They consist of total abandonment of the Chart, degrading and losing all its lower grade processes, feeding a pc at Dianetic level data at Class VI and telling him, who has not made Dianetics yet, he is now Clear, cutting down all processes from the Chart bottom up to IV to be able to do them in 2l/2 minutes, neglecting all levels up to OT V and then trying to put in a few lower grades and sending on to OT VI, having the pc after one trivial session attest all abilities at once and many other errors.

This is crazy driving. If a bus were driven along a road this way it would soon be wrecked and back where it started but in an ash heap.

Genius in C/Sing is normally required only when some former driver wrecked the thing instead of driving it right in the first place.

To Case Supervise one has to accept the following facts:

1. Dianetics and Scientology work.

2. The subjects are serious subjects not experimental toys.

3. The basics and fundamentals are stated early in the period of development and have not changed.

4. The “newest and latest” is usually a recovery of basics and better statements of them.

5. The purpose of the subject has not altered and continues to be the attainment of ability and freedom for the individual.

6. That things which were true early in the subjects are still true.

7. That the mind responds on a gradient of improvement not suddenly like a bomb explosion.

8. That the Classification and Gradation Chart and all its processes and steps IS the basic program of any case.

9. That all other programs are efforts to get the pc or pre-OT back on the basic program.

10. That there is no hidden data line and that the materials and procedures are refined mainly to facilitate use and communication of them.

11. That auditing is for the pc, not the org or the auditor.

12. That major processes are done to improve the case.

13. That repair is undertaken to eradicate errors made in auditing or the environment which impede the use of major processes.

14. That a case has to be programmed by the C/S to get it advancing as it should have been in the first place on the Classification and Gradation Chart.

15. That a C/S is not being called upon to develop a new Chart for the case but only to get the case back on the basic Chart and get it done.


3 PROGRAMS

There are then 3 types of Programs:

1. THE program laid out in the Classification and Gradation Chart. (Called The Basic Program.)

2. Repair Programs to eradicate case mishandling by current life or auditing errors. (Called a Set-Up Program.)

3. Major actions to be undertaken to get the case back on the Class Chart from wherever he has erroneously gotten to on it. (Called a Return Program.)

It has been a very common C/S action to disperse away from a program laid out. This has been happening ever since the first issue of the Class Chart and has been a principal source of trouble for C/Ses.

This happens in several ways:

1. Not knowing the importance of the Class Chart.

2. Not knowing basics.

3. Falling for SP propaganda that “we don’t use that now”, “the material is old”, “it’s only background data”, etc, that deteriorates what one does know and could use.

4. Failure of auditors to give good sessions and do the Usual required in a session.

5. Abandonment of the C/S’s own Repair or Return Program—usually because of false auditor reports or operating on insufficient data from the pc.

The correct way to go about all this is to:

A. Repair the case thoroughly with minor actions like GFs, prepared lists, ruds, two-way comm.

B. Acquire adequate data on the pc.

C. Complete any C/S Return Program begun.

D. Get the pc back on the Class Chart without any processes of the grade skipped.

E. Run the case on the Class Chart.

F. Repair any departures or errors made in life or auditing.

G. Get the pc back on the Class Chart.

DISPERSAL

Not following any program is a complete exercise in non-sequitur (means one step does not follow the last but is different and unrelated).

In giving a pc process after process that are not related to each other and follow no Repair Program or Return Program is non-sequitur in the extreme.

If processes were remarks one would get a sequence of processes given the pc sounding like this. “The submarine just went by so we will order a hundred tons of bread. There wasn’t any beer so birds are seldom seen. The dance was very fast so we fixed the carburetor. He has very long hair so we decorated his father’s tomb.”

“Give pc Scn Triples then do his Dianetics then fix up his hidden standard,” would be a series of crazy non-sequitur C/Ses. Nothing is connected to or proceeds from anything. That would be a dispersed program for sure.

It actually happens horribly enough. Study a Class Chart and then look through some old folders. At once, the sequence of processes ordered sounds like “The submarine just went by so order a hundred tons of bread.”

Such C/Sing has no cause and effect in it. A person totally ignorant of basic cause and effect gets “Pc nattery. Run Dianetics.” “Pc’s case not advancing. Do Grade 0.” The cause of the pc condition is not understood. A nattery pc has withholds. A case not advancing has problems. That’s real actual basic tech (see Auditor’s Rights HCO B for the table). This data is over 15 years old at this writing, is part of proper Academy courses and the SHSBC and is even in Class VIII materials. The reasons for the pc’s behavior or trouble are not mysterious reasons never revealed. They are all very well given in course materials.

Here is an actual case, a folder I examined of a pc who is now in trouble and needing a Repair and Return Program.

Pc was an accident prone (person who is apparently dedicated to having accidents). Very low aptitude score (about 30). Had been skipped over almost the entire Class Chart and given Power.

To handle accident proneness was given CCHs. This cured it.

Had Exteriorized so was given Interiorization Rundown without a 2-way comm session.

Pc subsequently developed bad somatics. (Dianetics was never flattened or completed.)

A quarter of an inch of Examiner’s reports wherein the pc was asking for help or medicine to get rid of somatics was then put one by one into the folder.

Despite this the “C/S” saw “Va” on the pc’s folder and ordered R6EW.

More Examiner’s calls collected.

The pc ran one item, making one mark on a worksheet and attested R6EW.

More Examiner’s reports collected, pc reporting self ill.

“C/S” seeing R6EW attested ordered pc to Clearing Course.

Pc did one brief session attested Clear.

More Examiner’s reports into folder, pc in pain and now in Ethics trouble.

“C/S” ordered pc to OT I.

Pc spent 35 minutes on OT 1 in terror of it, hastily attested, had 5 accidents in 3 days.

Folder sent to me as a “baffling case”.

So the correct actions now have to be taken.

1. Repair pc with every list known to Man or Beast to get off BPC collected in these overwhelming levels.

2. Repair pc in errors in current life.

3. Return Program the pc by running simple things, 2-way comm, to give pc some wins in actual case gain by maybe handling by 2-way comm minor this life or childhood upsets with family, maybe putting in ruds on some early subject that turns up.

4. Put pc back on the Class Chart TO COMPLETE THE INCOMPLETE GRADE (Dianetics) to its full end phenomena as per Class Chart.

5. Bring the pc on up the Class Chart using all processes for each grade and honestly attesting each grade in turn.

It’s all a shame because the pc had a lose on status. She wanted to be Clear and OT, was actually on it and never walked up the stairs to get to it.

PROGRAM NECESSITY

One can see from all this the NECESSITY of working by program on a case.

Even when one starts an honest program for the case one can get thrown off of it and begin to do something else.

If the pc goes exterior, of course, one has to handle by Interiorization Rundown before the case can be audited at all. But that’s no reason to then skip all the grades! A pc can go exterior at any point. Thus it must be handled when it occurs. But that does not mean anything happened to one’s program or the Class Chart. Exterior or Interior, a pc unflat on Dianetics (not attained the ability marked on the Class Chart) is unflat on Dianetics!

And a pc who is unflat on Dianetics will have out lower grades.

Jumping processes on the Class Chart set the pc up to fall on his head later. An “OT VI with problems” is really just an unflat Grade I. And until Grade I is flattened to permanent Ability Attained on the Class Chart, he remains an unflat Grade I.

A C/S who gets wound up in this sort of skipped everything and made nothing, of course has an awful mess on his hands. He can feel as lost as Hansel or Gretel. But waiting to get covered up by leaves is for the birds.

If one finds the pc off the road, the thing to do is return the pc to the road at the point he didn’t walk it AND THERE ARE NO SHORTCUTS FOR THE MIND.

The utter despair and insane barbarism psychiatry descended into was patient lost, psychiatrist lost, patient crazy, psychiatrist into insane sadism.

So maybe the first lesson a C/S really has to learn is:

THERE IS A KNOWN ROAD OUT.

There is no shortcut, it has to be walked every inch of it.

And therefore the greatest enemy of the C/S is the SP who says “that’s all old” “we don’t use that now” “that’s just background data” and thereby obscures the actual road.

And another enemy is the pc who screamingly demands to be put up to Clear at once so he won’t have this awful headache!

STEADY ON

Thus the measures a C/S takes to hold a steady course will profit him greatly in the end with good solid gains for the pc.

As the pc should no longer be a total humanoid by Class IV the lower grade gains are the most important of all.

A C/S who puts a Class Chart into every folder he handles is doing a wise thing. Even if it’s big, clumsy, hard to handle, it is at least thorough.

If on it he marks in red things the pc has gotten to falsely and if in green things the pc made from the bottom walking an honest road, he knows where he is at! Seeing the whole training cycle half of the Chart continue blank means that much more ignorance and trouble for the pc in making his gains stably.

If the C/S put his Repair Program on a Red sheet in the folder and dated it out session by session to be audited until it was DONE and all flubs made in doing it also marked in and repaired, the C/S wouldn’t lose his place in the book. For a red sheet stands out in amongst other folder papers. A red sheet with a “folder error summary” on one side of it and the C/S’s Repair Pgm on the other keeps the pc’s progress located. When that Red sheet is done it should be signed by the C/S as DONE which retires all errors to that point.

A bright blue sheet giving the C/S RETURN PGM properly dated also gives one a chance to not get steered off. A new Red Repair Pgm sheet fixing up errors occurring in doing the Blue sheet can be pushed into the folder but the Blue sheet can be resumed again.

The Blue sheet completed should find the pc back on the Class Chart.

A list of processes run tallied up by the auditor each session keeps the C/S from repeating a process and gives him the Dn items used singly to be done triple.

While all this Admin may seem time consuming, lack of it mounts up into valuable AUDITOR TIME being thrown away.

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

C/Sing is a road. It has milestones. When the pc didn’t pass one honestly he got lost.

There’s no reason for pc, auditor and C/S to all get lost.

The C/S has an exact road to hold to, return to and repairs to get done so the pc can get moving on the Return Pgm and the Class Chart which IS the road.

It took too many trillions to find this road for it to be neglected. For if the C/S neglects it people won’t arrive anywhere but get lost as well.

The right idea is the road.


LRH:kjm.rd 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 13 JUNE 1970
Remimeo

C/S Series 3

SESSION PRIORITIES
REPAIR PGMS
AND THEIR PRIORITY


When a pc has had an incorrectly run session, one that did not wind up with F/N Cog VGIs, it is often harmful to delay the repair session.

Most cases of pcs becoming ill or having accidents stem from

A. Major Errors in Programming the case.

B. Delay in Repairing a goofed session.

There have been several examples recently of pcs ending session with an unflat process after which the repair session was delayed for several days or even weeks and the pc came down with a cold or had some minor accident or got in Ethics trouble.

Thus Repair has priority.


PROGRAM ERRORS

Under A. a major error in programming lays the case open to having goofed sessions and exposes the auditor to some risk of making errors. The reason for this is that the pc gets overwhelmed or bogged simply by not coming up through all the processes of each level on the Class Chart.

Let us say the pc is trying to make it on R6EW Solo Study but keeps having Problems with it and can’t get on with it.

The uninformed C/S orders a Student Rescue Intensive. This is all right as far as it goes. But a more searching look into the records is likely to find that this pc had exactly 10 minutes on the whole of Grade I!

The Out-Program is far more likely to play havoc with this pc than just problems. He is possibly in doubt as to case gains and his reality is poor and yet he is being exposed to the highly restimulative materials of an upper level to which he has never climbed.

A direct effort now to put in problems Grade I also puts an auditor at risk.

Instead of merely being able to run problems as he would have been able to earlier, the pc is in some sort of overwhelm and is nervous or scared or believes he is at fault some way. He will look everywhere but in the right direction.

The answer to an incorrectly programmed case is, of course, a repair program and the sooner the better.

Such repair programs must be very light. Prepared lists to find charge, 2 way comm on various subjects, take a walk. And such a repair program MUST NOT

(a) Let the pc dive into rough heavy charge, or

(b) Be overdone to total boredom.


SELF AUDITING

Some pcs “self audit”, which is different than Solo auditing since it has no meter or session and is just wandering about the bank (some overwhelmed pcs self audit in Solo wandering all over the place).

This is a symptom of session or study or life overwhelm.

It requires a Repair Program.


EP OF REPAIR

The End Phenomena of a Repair Program is the pc feeling great and feeling he can get Case Gain.

A good, clever Repair Program produces what badly programmed cases would consider total recovery.

It is a good idea to have the pc attest to

“I have had definite gains from the recent sessions and feel great.” Or with a hearty “Yes” to “Does Scientology really work for you.”

Oh, you say, how could that much gain come from just repair?

Well, Repair is almost always being done on a pc who was overwhelmed by life or auditing in the first place.

Life we know has a way of overwhelming people.

When a person is overwhelmed by life, an auditing error is more likely to occur.

When Incorrect Programming occurs, then any auditing on it can add up to more overwhelm which adds up to more errors.


CONSISTENT COMPLAINT

The pc whose Examiner forms routinely have a sour note in them should not be continued on the Class Chart or any Return Program.

He is a Repair pc and nothing else.

If you get the idea that any lower level can produce large changes in a person you will see that lower level processes are being mis-programmed if they are producing only the gains of Repair actions.

The sign of mis-programming is most often seen in Examiner reports where the pc’s comments or demands are “for more auditing” or “Got to have a session” or “wasn’t really handled” or sour comments or cracks.

When you examine some folders you will see some pc has more than his share of this.

That’s a sign to LIGHTLY DO IT.

The wrong way to go is plunge!

I have seen a C/S order 2 major actions in one session after a bad session on a pc in a DESPERATE effort to reach the case!

The exact reverse is required.

Repair the case by:

I. Patch the session goof.

II. Use prepared lists for locating session charge in past sessions.

III. Use prepared lists and two way comm on items found.

IV. Get ruds in on periods of the pc’s life.

V. Get ruds in on parts of the pc’s body that are ailing.

This is not a model Repair Program but only a sample of one. It isn’t a model because the pcs have different things wrong with them.

But you could blindly do all of the above and still wind up with case gain and a win for a staggering pc.

Then you would do a Return Pgm to get the pc back on the Class Chart. But not until then.

I have seen a pc stagger along for years getting auditing (of a sort) while still retaining a set characteristic or somatic who when handled with very mild processes had a case gain and then returned to the Class Chart HAVE A COMPLETE CHANGE OF THE CHARACTERISTIC.


EFFECT SCALE

A C/S can get into the lower end of the effect scale and feel that desperate that he begins to throw away every major process he can order on the pc, even 2 or 3 per session! But the direction of win was LIGHTER not heavier action.

Sort of like “this sparrow keeps getting bowled out with rocks. Let’s try real artillery on him!”

If one is trying to make a better sparrow he should lay off the rocks and lighten it up, not step up the barrage! Some cotton tufts might do wonders! Might even make the sparrow reach!

The basic trouble with ALL past efforts at “psychotherapy” and “religious uplift” and “self betterment” and healing was:

The more desperate the situation the more desperate was the remedy used.

The right answer is:

THE WORSE THE CONDITION THE LIGHTER THE REMEDY REQUIRED.

Dealing with psychotics in an institution you would find that “Hello” pleasantly said would do more for cases than all the drug firms and electric shock machines and brain icepicks have ever done in all their existence.

Well if it applies to psychotics, it applies surely to people that aren’t.

Simple interest and listening can crack an awful lot of overwhelmed cases that would only bog further if not first repaired.

BPC

The exact BPC of the last session handled is always the first action in Repair Programming.

This is the exact BPC. An unfinished Dianetic Chain is BPC. So get it handled. The wrong list item is heavy BPC so get it handled.

And get this BPC off now! Now! Don’t wait 2 days or a week. Repair it on priority.


OVERWHELM

Don’t always blame the auditor. He may goof and he shouldn’t. But if his procedure and TRs were reasonably correct, how come the pc got a tangled session.

If the auditor has a usually good record and you get a goofed session, then realize the pc is a bit troublesome and was not running standardly.

Of course this doesn’t excuse student goofs or plain lousy auditing. But when the auditor does all right, then the case must be in an overwhelm of some sort.

So we have 2 variables here for C/S decision.

x1-Auditor fault?

or

x2-Pc in an overwhelm?

There is a decision here to be made by the C/S. It’s resolved by folder inspection and knowledge of the auditor.

All right—Auditor usually okay. That eliminates x1. So we have a pc in overwhelm? Look over past record of pc. Runs okay. That cancels x2.

So we repair that one session and its goof and continue with the Return Pgm or the Class Pgm whichever the pc was on.

What if x1 showed lots of bad sessions by the auditor and x2 showed pc usually okay. Investigate auditor’s auditing and send to Cramming for TRs, etc.

What if x 1 Auditor okay and x2 pc has lots of trouble?

NOW we get to an overwhelmed pc.

You see how it’s sorted out by the C/S?

From inspecting two things only the C/S can decide what’s to be done now. If the decision isn’t clear-cut get the auditor looked into and the pc asked about the auditor’s actions and his own case. If his “case has lots of trouble” skip worrying the auditor further unless that discloses other errors on other cases.

Okay. So the pc is running badly. So he’s in an overwhelm.

Inspection will reveal one or more of three things.

1. Case didn’t come up the Class Chart right.

2. Case being run in a temporary Life overwhelm.

3. Former errors not repaired.

1 and 3 may both exist.

The correct C/S action is a Repair Program in any case. If 3 is true you engage in that first.

If 2 is true you use Repair actions on life as the second part of your Repair Program.

If 1 is true you will also have a Repair Program to lay out first in any event and just include it in.

Write it all up on a red sheet and follow the sheet session by session as you C/S.

You will now have handled the overwhelm if your Repair Pgm is good and fully done and not brushed off at the first sign of VGIs in the pc at Examiner.

If 1 is true you now do a Return Pgm. This of course is what processes you’re going to get run to fill in the processes that haven’t been run to get the Class Chart all done and the pc back up to where he was. He has run some after all.


INGENUITY

The genius and bright ideas of a C/S are not exerted with major processes ever. Only the Interiorization Rundown after the pc exteriorized or when it is discovered he has and possibly a Student Rescue or a sickness assist are the exceptions to this.

One doesn’t Repair with major processes! That’s like “The engine wouldn’t run so he hit it with a sledge hammer.”

Ingenuity is required of a C/S only in the area of repair.

Locating BPC is rather standard in repair action.

But fishing up the case by 2 way comm and little prepchecks and getting in ruds on things or times require a certain flair in a C/S.

I recall one pc who was staggering on engrams, couldn’t talk to people and was a general mess. The wrong action would be to run a major grade like Comm on the pc. The pc had to be handled with 2 way comm of some sort. Yet she couldn’t talk auditing or anything else fluently enough about anything to clear anything up. I asked her what would it be awful to say and she went scarlet, hemmed and hawed and blurted out “Swearing!” So we 2 way commed about it! What a torrent! Recovered completely. Recovered so well she thought that was all there was to auditing and was immensely gratified!

Another pc had lost his job and couldn’t face any part of it. I 2 way commed what his job had consisted of. He promptly went out and got another.

Sometimes it takes a lot of sessions and a lot of reading worksheets to find subjects.

BUT IF YOU CAN PERSUADE AUDITORS TO MARK EVERY FALL AND BD IN 2 WAY COMM SESSIONS you will find exactly where the pc is hung up and ordering 2 way comm on that and related things does wonders.

But all repair isn’t two way comm. Touching things is a very good way to handle repairs. Cars, typewriters, airplanes, or book pictures thereof or anything or any picture of anything also works.


The “touch assist” is a little fragment of a whole array of “touch”.

Cases sometimes flinch at remembering anything at all. The answer is touch things and “Reach and withdraw” is part of this and is used in repair.

TRs (all of them 0 to IX) are so good in repair action that they actually cure 50% or more drug addicts when run for weeks in groups such as on the HAS Course. It is even reported that when run on people still on drugs over periods of weeks they come off the drugs of their own volition. TRs are a fine unlimited repair action.

Prepared lists run on all sorts of things can repair a whole life.

“Look at me. Who am I?” is used in a Repair Session when a pc goes too wild to audit. (An exception is list errors when the only remedy is a fast L4A.)

Mimicry is actually too high for Repair.

Repair is its own subject.

The only demand in Programming it is to give priority to recent auditing errors or recent life catastrophes.

Many cases obviously have to begin processing with a Repair. Life overwhelm is the reason. And an S & D can be far too steep.

Next to skimping lower grades, Repair is too little used.

And it is needed. And the urgency is to not let things go too long unrepaired.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:nt.rd
Copyright © 1970
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 14 JUNE 1970
Remimeo

C/S Series 4


THE RETURN PROGRAM


When a case has been repaired, there is always a Return Program made up by the C/S.

It is handwritten on a blue sheet of paper that is easily spotted in a folder.

When the Repair Pgm has been concluded, the case is considered to be “set up” for a Return Pgm.

The exact point where a Repair Program is changed into a Return Program is when the case has had some wins and is in far better shape than he was when he first began to be audited (which means his first ever auditing).

The point is also identifiable as the point where the person feels more outflowing and less overwhelmed if at all.

This is obviously a point of case change.

The common and incorrect practice of looking for case change as the only benefit from processing should be relegated to Repair End Phenomena.

Processing is actually measured by the gradual increase in ability. Step by step these increases in ability walk up the Class Chart and ability is the measure of progress.

The C/S who is looking for THE solution to a case, the one shattering bang of total effect on the pc, has set himself for continuous losses in C/Sing. For there is no one action that totally changes a case from bottom to top in one fell swoop. The C/S who thinks there is continually fiddles hopefully. A case has MANY things to be handled, not one.

There is no one single wrongness or out-point in a case. A case is a collection of out-points. He hurts, he can’t talk, he has problems, he is ARC Broken, he has service facs, he is stuck in incidents, etc, to just mention a few such out-points.

A radio receiver that has been many times broken and is a heap of twisted parts, is not going to get repaired, much less improved by a radio repairman finding one huge error in it and correcting that. He’ll have to correct a lot of minor errors in it before any major error even shows up.

The “One-shot clear” idea of the uninformed of 1950 is impossible. When a person goes onto the Clearing Course after missing the lower grades he just doesn’t make it at all. He often can’t even get reads.

It takes many miles of road, past many “case changes” to get up the gradient scale to top ability.

A Repair Program takes the case from where it has falsely gotten to on the Class Chart and gets off the overwhelm with light processes.

The Return Program begins when the case is no longer so overwhelmed and is getting wins from the Repair Program.

THE RETURN PROGRAM CONSISTS SIMPLY OF WRITING DOWN IN SEQUENCE EVERY NEEDFUL STEP AND PROCESS MISSED ON THE CLASS CHART BY THE CASE WHICH ARE NOW TO BE DONE.

Example:

A case has falsely gotten to R6EW Solo and isn’t making it well.

The C/S writes up a light process but extensive Repair Program (first on auditing, then on life).

The case achieves the EP of repair in case changes and less overwhelm.

The C/S now examines the 2-way comm sessions and Examiner’s reports to establish what levels are out. No change = Level 1. Lots of ARC Brks = Level 2.

The C/S lists all the Level 1 and Level 2 processes the pc did not get done and this is the Return Program.

When these are done and the pc has made it, the C/S has the pc honestly back at R6EW on the Class Chart and continues to follow the Class Chart.

Needful repairs also sometimes have to be done in getting the Return Pgm done. In each case a new Repair Program is done. The old Return Program looked over but probably just continued.

Example of a case at OT 1 now completely repaired:

Case has somatics = Dn Level Unflat

Makes others guilty = Level IV Unflat

Dramatizes = R6EW Unflat.

The Return Program consists of completing Dn, rehabbing comm, all Level IV processes, Redo R6EW, rehab Clear, return to OT I.

That completes the Return Program.

In other words, when the case, found in trouble at a level, is fully repaired and winning, the C/S studies the current data on the case to establish the major levels that are out (each Level has an error and an ability) and then gets these into a Program which then session by session is followed.

The program which can be completed in one session will never be written as there is no such program.

A program is the consecutive layout of what has to be done in the next many sessions.

The basic program is the Class and Grade Chart.

The Return Program is the return to the false point reached by getting honestly done all the points missed on the road.

The pc who can’t attest a grade ability at any point has to have:

1. A Repair Pgm.
2. A Return Pgm.

It is a truism that the grade he can’t seem to make is not the grade. An earlier grade is out if the processes of any one grade, properly run, do not achieve that grade.

The earliest error is of course a failure to achieve the lowest grade there is. What is out here is that the case needed to be started on a Repair Pgm for life. Now, that skipped, one has to do a Repair on both auditing and life.

The Return Pgm is easy in this instance as it just puts the pc back on what he was on, the first level. But this is the only instance where a pc is restored by the C/S to the level he was on without an extensive Return Program.

So a Return Pgm always follows the Repair Pgm.

And a Return Program consists of putting the pc over road sections he missed on the road up.

A Return Pgm is concluded and retired when the pc is back on the grade he falsely had reached before the Repair and Return were done, and is now making that grade.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:nt.rd
Copyright © 1970
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 15 JUNE 1970
Remimeo


C/S Series 5


REPAIR EXAMPLE


Pc X was rushed through lower grades in 20 minutes, given Power to no result, was fed cognitions on upper level material and when run on Dianetics was found “stuck in present time”. After two bogged sessions this pc, who had come from a far place, came to Flag where I took over (not very pleased).

The actual rundown outlined as a Repair Program (see C/S Series 3) was as follows on 2 81/2” x 13” red cards to be kept in pc’s folder.

PC X
REPAIR PGM

I LAST ERROR REPAIRED 27.5.70

II. BOGGED SESSION 6/6/70
Repaired 11/6/70 (too long a wait but done).

III. Two Way Comm on what did you experience in Power Processing Successful 1/6/70 (Revealed all Lower Grades out, Clear Cog fed him, unable to really run Dn.)

IV. L4A assessed on each list run on him, one list at a time as he recalls it.

V. Auditor Auditing Prepcheck.

VI. Gains Prepcheck.

VII. An assessed GF done to get each charge found off.

VIII. 2 Way Comm How Do You Feel About Auditing Now? Completes auditing cycle. Repair.

IX. 2 way comm on life before Scn. (Note all Falls and BDs.) To C/S.

X. C/S to pick up items out of IX and Prepcheck each one that still reads when called off (one to be called then run, no assessment).

XI. Two way comm on rough areas When have you had a rough time? Note all Falls and BDs. To C/S.

XII. C/S to list all F or BD items. Prepcheck each one.

XIII. 2 way comm What possessions have you had? To C/S.

XIV. C/S to list all F—BD Items and Prepcheck.

XV. L1B in auditing and 2 way comm on gains.

XVI. C/S Note what period of his life pc hung up in. Auditor to put in ruds on it.

XVII. Find out what body part or area hurts. Put in Ruds on it.

(Pgm can be extended to be sure pc has had wins and is in better condition than was in before auditing and no longer overwhelmed or can be cut if this occurs before then.)

(Return Pgm begins with TRs 0-9, on up the Class Chart as needed to get his abilities and ends off with a full repair of Power, rehabbing Pr Pr 4 and 5 and running 6 to EP and checking lists. He will then be back on Class Chart properly. )
-------------

This is not a Repair Pgm to be copied particularly. It is given as an extent of Repair which would then be done session by session and ticked off by the C/S as he ordered each new step.

The No. IV L4A prepared list would be wholly assessed for each specific list.

The V and VI are a whole list of things not given here, common to such a step, but containing no dynamite-type things like “SPs” or “Overwhelm” or other things like the names of major processes.

Note that everything from I to VIII are strictly auditing repairs.

IX to XVII handle life areas.

This case should have been started in auditing with a Life Repair Pgm such as given from IX to XVII. Had he been on drugs as a habit (or just shaky about life) TRs O to 9 could have begun his auditing followed by Life Repair IX to XVII.

NEW DEVELOPMENT

These actions of Repair before level auditing are a new development as such but 2 way comm and these actions are all from the early ‘60s SHSBC.

POSSIBLE FAULTS

Evaluation, Q and A and an inability to listen resulting in the auditor chopping comm would be the chief reasons any errors would creep into the sessions given in the Repair Program. As these might not show up in the auditing reports, if the Repair Pgm sessions did not result in gain the C/S would have the auditor’s auditing checked for these points of Evaluation, Q and A and comm chop. The sessions are actually very easy to run and could be done by an Academy Class III or better by a Class VI.

NOTE ON VIII
AUDITING

VIII Auditing presumed, when developed, that lower grades were still being delivered.

VIII Auditing and Training are fully valid. They are, as the Class infers, a high level of auditing and remain so.

The sequence of recent development has been:

VIII Auditing to Standard

Dianetic HDC-HDG auditing to Standard Dianetics

C/Sing for all levels

C/Sing below levels

C/Sing to handle the neglect of lower grades and SHSBC data which are being gotten back in rapidly.

The C/S is therefore confronted with cases without lower grades and the earliest and reissued Class Chart neglected.

The mania for Quickie Lower Grades and the acts by a few who fed upper “cognitions” and other evaluation to pcs wrecked for a while a part of the bridge and made it impassable.

Much of the current C/S work should take this into consideration. The Repair Pgm given above is not as long as it could be and certainly would be no shorter.

The IX to XVII are a brief layout of how new cases could be handled BEFORE any actual level auditing as a guarantee of real gains. This is a whole zone of action (pre-Level, pre-Dianetics) becoming increasingly necessary by the decline of the culture as visible in pcs now beginning processing as different from those even up to 1962.

These IX to XVII steps would also work on institutional cases but one should take it even easier.

I repeat, this Repair Pgm I to XVII is an EXAMPLE and its numbers are not useful as different Repair Pgms would be designed by the C/S for the pc. Many other things could be done, none of them heavy or desperate.

The C/S should caution any Registrar NOT to sell with the name “Repair Pgm”. This is entirely technical and not PR or Sales. It is just Auditing as far as the Registrar is concerned.

Had Pc X been processed on all earlier grades in a scramble before 1962, one would list and then rehab every process run as part of the Return Pgm. Such a step would be done as the last step however of the Return Program as a prelude to straightening out the highest grade falsely attained before Repair. The rehab would not be a substitute for running all the processes of the levels not previously run. Rehab is no part of Repair.

TECH ACTION

We have fallen into a belief that any repair is done in Review. Review is now the place the pc goes when the C/S gives up.

Repair is a Tech Div Action and counts as hours of auditing delivered. Auditing is auditing. Obviously 2 25 hour intensives could be consumed in a Life Repair before a new pc ever came near even an assessment of the minus scale of the first Class Chart much less a level!

In Academies, students may get anxious to “get their grades practiced” and so may skip repair actions needful. Thus upper level students should audit lower level students.

DIANETICS

Pcs audited only on Dianetics in franchises and centers will make some astonishing physical and even mental improvements. The larger percentage will do so.

However, a C/S will find some have had physical gains “without finding out about it”. The reality factor has not increased to any degree.

Such pcs of course get a long Repair Program and are then given a Return Program to Dianetics, their highest level.


The sample Repair Pgm above fits such pcs as well as one that attained higher levels before it was found that lower grades were out.

There are no variables in what the pgms are:

1. Pc bogs or not gaining.
2. Repair Pgm outlined and concluded.
3. Return Pgm outlined and concluded.

What the C/S puts in the Repair Pgm and what he puts in the Return Pgm can be very variable indeed.

C/S Q AND A

The only fault I’ve seen in a C/S trying to outline 2 way comm could be called a “C/S Q and A”.

The pc has a big win about “Frogs”. A huge cog F/N VGIs changes his life.

The Q and A C/S is to order “Frogs two way commed”.

The system one uses is not to use pc wins as items to further handle. That stifles (overruns) the win. It’s an ability gained.

One should be able to write off win items as gains and let the pc have them. And use items pc mentions that read (shows he has Reality on them) to push up to new wins.

The C/S in looking into 2 way comm for things to handle finds his prizes in subjects that read but haven’t F/Ned.

The cycle is find an item that reads, push it to F/N cog GIs. Leave that. Find
another that reads. Push it to F/N cog VGIs. Leave that. Find another. . . .. etc.

2 way comm with the auditor marking F, LF, LLF, BDs, etc gives the C/S worksheets to pick new items out of. The C/S looks to see if any of these were the subject of any F/N. If so he crosses them off. He orders prepchecks or two way comm on the items that read and haven’t F/Ned.

That’s the way the C/S gets his Instructions to Auditor for the exact actions of the Repair Pgm steps he has already outlined.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:nt.kjm.rd
Copyright © 1970
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 16 JUNE 1970
Remimeo
(Reissued & corrected 3 Oct. 71. Only change—
[page 79] word “arrived” corrected to “aimed”.
Correction in this type style.)

C/S Series 6


WHAT THE C/S IS DOING

In Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health considerable stress is placed on the words and phrases in engrams. This is still functional. However as I did further research I found that (a) many pcs were unable to get the words in the engram and (b) the apparent force of the words was derived wholly from the pain, emotion, effort contained in the engram. In Standard Dianetics the words in an engram play no major role in the auditing.

The use of the words to de-aberrate and concentration on phrases in engrams is valid but junior in force to the pain, misemotion, etc in the engram. Thus if you run out the force the words drop into insignificance. This is often how the pc gets cognitions: the words and meaning concealed in the engram are changing value and devaluating. The pc can then think clearly again on a subject previously pinned down by the force. Get the force out and the words take care of themselves and need no special handling.

The meaning of things plays a secondary role in processing to forces.

Thetans find counter-forces objectionable. Almost all chronic (continual) somatics have their root in force of one kind or another.

In that the handling of things with bodies involves force to greater or lesser degree, incapability and derangement of mental values is proportional to the thetan’s objection to force.

This objection descends down to a wish to stop things. It goes below that into overwhelmedness in which propitiation and obsessive agreement manifest themselves.

LOW TAs

The low TA is a symptom of an overwhelmed being.

When a pc’s TA goes low he is being overwhelmed by too heavy a process, too steep a gradient in applying processes or by rough TRs or invalidative auditing or auditing errors.

A low TA means that the thetan has gone past a desire to stop things and is likely to behave in life as though unable to resist real or imaginary forces.

HIGH TA

Chronically high TAs mean the person can still stop things and is trying to do so.

However, all one has to do is restimulate and leave unflat an engram chain to have a high TA. High TA is reflecting the force contained in the chain.

An “over-run” means doing something too long that has engrams connected with it which means an engram chain with too many engrams on it being restimulated by life or auditing. Hence Over-run.

If this overrun persisted unhandled eventually the pc would be overwhelmed and one, in theory, would have a low TA.

MENTAL MASSES

Mental masses, forces, energy are the items being handled by the C/S on any pc.

If the C/S loses sight of this he can wander off the road and go into the thickets of significance.

Engrams, secondaries, locks all add up to mental masses, forces, energies, time, which express themselves in countless different ways such as pain, misemotion, feelings, old perceptions and a billion billion thought combinations buried in the masses as significances.

A thetan can postulate or say or reason anything. Thus there is an infinity of significances.

A thetan is natively capable of logical thought. This becomes muddied by out-points held in by mental forces such as pictures of heavy experiences.

As the masses and forces accumulated and copied from living build up, the logic potential becomes reduced and illogical results occur.

PC SEARCH

The pc is continually searching for the significance of a mass or force—what is it, why is it.

The C/S is easily led astray by this.

All forces in the bank contain significances.

All forces can be unburdened and lightened up by the various procedures of auditing.

The search of the pc is for significance.

The action of the C/S is reduction of forces.

THE E-METER

The E-Meter records what force is being discharged in every slash, fall and blowdown. The amount of TA per session is the C/S’s index of gain.

Note that a discharged process no longer gives TA and gives case gain.

The amount of significance recovered or realized by the pc only shows up as cognitions.

As the TA works off the case, then one has two indicators:

1. There is needle and TA action.

2. The pc cognites.

One shows that force is coming off. Two shows that thought is releasing from force.

BACKWARDS C/Sing

If a C/S processes toward significance only he will get cases that do not progress.

The needle action detects not so much significance as where the force is.

Diving toward significance the C/S winds up shortening grades, looking for “magic one-shot buttons” and overwhelming cases by shooting them on up the grades while levels remain loaded with force.

RELIABLE INDICATORS

When a pc gets no more TA action on Level I he will have made Level I and will know it. He will therefore attest to “No problems”.

The reliable indicators are TA action and cognitions while a level is still charged.

Diminished TA action and cognitions mean the purpose of the level has been reached.

A feeling of freedom and expansion on a subject is expressed in a normal TA and a loose needle.

The pc will now attest to an ability regained.

F/N ABUSE

To process only to F/N and even chop off the cognitions on a process abuses the indicator of the F/N.

You can find many pcs who bitterly resent F/N indications. They have been:

A. Not run on all the processes of a level;

B. Still have force on the subject;

C. Were chopped off before they could cognite.

The ARC Break in this is UNFINISHED CYCLE OF ACTION.

The proper End Phenomena for a process is F/N Cognition VGIs. Now look at that carefully. That is the proper end phenomena of a PROCESS. It is not the end phenomena of a LEVEL or even of a TYPE of process.

Let us say there are 15 possible Scientology processes for orienting a pc in his present location.

To run one of these 15 and say, “F/N that’s it. You’re complete,” is a Quickie impatient action that rebounds on the pc eventually. If there are 15, run 15 !

Possibly the pc on no. 12 will cognite he’s really right where he is. Only then could you cease to work at it.

An F/N Cog VGIs tells you a process is finished, not a whole class of actions!

Thus 2l/2 minutes from 0 to IV is not only impossible, it is murderous. It will result in an overwhelm, a low TA or a high TA eventually.

Level I says, amongst other things, “Problems Processes”. There are certainly half a dozen. Each would be run to F/N Cog VGIs. When these and the other processes of the Level are run, the pc will come to have no further reaction to problems and will be able to handle them.

A cognition in lower levels is not necessarily an ability regained. Thirty or forty cognitions on one lower level might add up to (and probably would) the realization that one is free of the whole subject of the level.

It is safe to run more processes. It is unsafe to run too few.

PC ABILITIES

It is not enough for the pc to have only negative gains of deleting force. Sooner or later he will have to begin to confront force.

This comes along naturally and is sometimes aided by processes directly aimed at further confront. “What problem could you have?” sooner or later is needed in one form or another.

What force can the pc now handle?

All auditing in a body—and any living in a body—makes a being vulnerable. Bodies break, suffer, intensify pain.

Sooner or later a pc will go Exterior. The Interiorization Rundown must be ordered as the next action or you will have a pc with a high TA. 2-way comm Ext-Int must be given in a following session (not the same one) so the full cognitions will occur.

After this the pc is less subject to the body and his ability to confront force will improve.

Do not be too worried or surprised if after this the pc has some minor accident with the body. Exterior he forgets its frailty. However, such things are minor. He is “learning how to walk” a new way and will run into chairs! He gets this figured out after a while.

Pcs sometimes improve their ability to handle force while interior so as to have mysterious headaches or new body pressures. Inevitably they have been exterior and need Interiorization run. They were just using too much force while still inside !

Thus force is the thing, significance very secondary.

Force of course is made up of time, matter, energy, flows, particles, masses, solids, liquids, gasses, space and locations. All this gets inherently handled in processes published long since.

The pc tends to dive for the thought imbedded in the force. He will tell you he’s being processed to find out who his parents were or why he is sterile or who did him in, etc, etc. The C/S who chases after this is a deerhound illegally chasing mice!

C/S PURPOSE

The C/S is there to make certain that the pc makes gains and attains the actual abilities of the level.

The C/S is for the pc.

C/S auditor control exists only to keep the auditing standard, the TRs good, the processes ordered done and to End Phenomena each one.

No other reasons for C/Sing exist.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH: nt.rd
Copyright © 1970, 1971
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 19 JUNE 1970
Remimeo


C/S Series 7


C/S Q AND A


Just as an auditor can Q and A so can a C/S.

As you know Q and A is the incorrect 2-way comm action of wandering off the question by feeding the pc what the pc said as a Question, the Answer is taken as the next auditor’s Question. Many various outlines of what Q and A is already exist and this is just to refresh the subject. Example: Student Auditor is ordered “2-way comm on cities,” by the C/S which is okay. But it can be Q and Aed like this: Student: “Tell me what you think about cities.” Pc: “They’re cold.” Student: “What about cold?” Pc: “I don’t like it.” Student: “What else don’t you like?” Pc: “Well ...... old men.” Student: “What about old men?” Pc: “They’re obnoxious.” Student: “What else is obnoxious?” Pc: “.....” Well you remember all about that. It’s maddening and shows no auditor control and certainly doesn’t handle the original C/S subject of “cities”.

There are three main ways in which a C/S can Q and A in C/Sing.

PC C/S

Pc goes to Examiner on own volition and says, “I am ill. I need my ruds flown.”

A C/S Q and A would be “Fly ruds.”

Pc on his own goes to Examiner and says, “I am upset about my job.”

C/S writes “L1B on job.”

You get the idea. The first one is therefore Q and Aing with Exam statement of pc.

This is varied by taking a pc’s note or letter or report and accepting what the pc says is wrong. Like “I’m PTS to my husband.” And then C/Sing “2-way comm on husband.”

Naturally the ancient law applies here. If the pc knew what it was it would not be wrong and would as-is. Pc coming up to Exam saying, “It’s my husband!” with F/N Cog VGIs would be what would happen if it was the husband. And that would be great but of no real value to C/S except pc has had a win and not to now use “husband”.

Give you an actual example: Pc in Solo ruds found she hated George. It F/Ned. Next audited session pc was saying she hated George. Wrote a note about George. C/S did not notice the outness. Ordered LIB on George and in a 2-way comm got little or no TA, continued to be ill. The fact is it wasn’t George at all and not even a terminal. Pc had gone up one grade too many, hit an overwhelm, the earlier 6 grades were out! Correct action was to have done a general repair the moment a pc suddenly and mysteriously caved in and got ill on a new level! The pc never should have been going on up grades for the last 6 grades!

The tendency to toss it all off with a Q and A not only didn’t handle but obscured the real situation.

C/Sing A WIN

The second Q and A is to C/S a pc win.

Pc in 2-way comm mentions cats and more cats and cats and finally at the end of session has a big F/N Cog VGIs on cats.

The C/S sees all this “cat” mention and orders “Prepcheck cats.”

That is a very cruel sort of Q and A.

Another version of it of course is to see a pc reach a full End Phenomena on a series of processes like an unmistakable pc-volunteered valence shift and keep on going into an inval. Correction is to rehab of course.

Yet another version is to pull a w/h and then keep pulling it so the pc doesn’t think it’s gone. Correction is to rehab of course.

The TA often goes high or low on these Q and A actions and Inval-Eval actions are ordered and the release point rehabbed.

NEXT GRADE PLEASE!

The third Q and A a C/S can pull is to agree to the pc’s demands for the next grade despite all contrary indicators.

“I’m ready for Clear now!” says the pc full of somatics whose R6EW wasn’t really done and who can’t talk.

The Registrar, execs and others push on this also.

The D of P and C/S have total authority on this. They should be diplomatic. “He can have the grade of course but I will have to prepare him for it,” is the best answer. “Please make arrangements for Clear preparation—25 hours.”

If the C/S doesn’t hold the fort on this the pc put into the next grade who isn’t ready will fall on his head.

If this pressure from the pc (in any version) continues, have him sign a waiver “I will not hold the org or any principals responsible and waive any refund if I am put on next grade.” That either gets home or he says okay and signs. So put him on the grade and hope he doesn’t fall on his head—and if he does, now demand he get the hours needed to get fixed up so he can really make it.

A D of P or C/S often have other pressures exerted on them that are not technical in nature such as economics, ambition, status symbols (of having a high grade regardless of a headache) and have to cope with these diplomatically. But any but tech considerations are dangerous to entertain.

SUMMATION

Of these 3, 2 are concerned with letting someone else C/S. Like an engineer letting someone else plan the railroad.

And the third is also slightly in that nature, consisting of not noticing the pc’s wins and using them with which to C/S.

CAUTION

This doesn’t mean the pc is always wrong. He is generally right when he says he’s overwhelmed or upset. He’s almost always wrong when he says what
overwhelmed him or what BPC was out WHEN SIMPLY SAYING IT DOES NOT CORRECT THE CASE OR PRODUCE F/N VGIs.

You always use the pc’s data one way or another in that you are paralleling what the MIND does. That’s reads. Not what the pc says.

Remember that what’s really wrong lies in the field of mass, energy, space, time, form and location. As these are eased up (by Standard Dianetics and 18 years of Scientology actions and processes) thoughts come to view. So if you Q and A with thoughts already in full view, you never really ease up the bank. That’s why Q and A with significance is not done.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:nt.rd
Copyright © 1970
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 19 JUNE 1970
Issue II
Remimeo


C/S Series 8


CHART OF HUMAN EVALUATION


Science of Survival’s Chart of Human Evaluation is a study for C/Ses and is of great use.

When you find the pc on one of its columns you can see if the pc stays there or falls back there.

Standard Dianetics opened this chart to full use for C/Ses. 18 years of Scientology processes and know-how are to a large degree evolved from this chart.

IF A PC IS STAYING AT A LEVEL OF THE CHART OR FALLS ON IT you know he is running above his level.

Processing Changes Conditions.

If it doesn’t improve them (or the pc’s behavior) then the pc’s Reality is not being reached. It can be plus or minus, above or below. It is seldom that the pc’s reality is higher than the processes used and really only occurs when a grade honestly run is rerun. Then you get pc protest as he’s made that.

Pcs who get sick suddenly are being run far too high on the Class Chart. Pcs who don’t change are also being run too high.

Behavior, mannerisms are the index. DO THESE CHANGE? If they do the pc is improving. If they drop lower on the Human Evaluation Chart the pc is in overwhelm.

PICKING THOUGHTS OUT OF FORCES IN THE BANK BRINGS A NO CHANGE.

In other words you can park a pc by continuing nothing but think processes which address only significance.

SELF AUDITING

Self auditing is the manifestation of being overwhelmed by masses etc and pulling only think out of the bank. Pulling out think then pulls in more force which gives more self audit.

Not all self audit is bad. The pc eventually realizes it’s forces! After a few tens of thousands of hours! If he knows all the answers.

A good push against a wall is worth a hundred hours of self auditing. And it’s force.

HUMAN EVALUATION

This famous chart (in use by the way by an airline and several other areas, and which had to be printed as desk blotters for personnel people at one time) could easily be expanded in numbers of vertical columns to include all behavior.

The C/S is at a disadvantage as he doesn’t see pcs. But he can have a mannerism item filled in on a Summary Report. “Mannerisms______” “Mannerism changes _____”

This serves.

It also serves to look at the psychosomatic column of the chart and a pc’s Health Form.

CHANGING THE PC

The pc will change in ideas when he changes his relationship to forces.

Tons of processes do this.

Objective Processes have to be run in on a pc now and then.

Somatics passing through in a session are a definite clue to force change. The no-somatic pc is either high as an angel or being run too high.

You don’t have to run directly at force for forces to change in the pc.

One 2 way comm I did with a pc released his hold on a huge bundle of forces!

The body responds badly to forces.

The conflict between protecting or using a body and being as a thetan able to withstand large forces gets so mixed up in a pc he can wind up as a force-shy thetan !

STANDARD PROCESSES

Standard processes such as those in use for 18 years handle this when fitted into their levels.

What the C/S has to realize is that he is (a) producing an optimum rate of change in the pc if he is C/Sing well and (b) changing the pc’s position upward on the Chart of Human Evaluation.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder



LRH:nt.rd
Copyright © 1970
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 21 JUNE 1970
Remimeo

C/S Series 9



SUPERFICIAL ACTIONS


One of the reasons Scientology tended toward disuse in the late 1960’s was not its workability. It was a growing cultural disinclination to do things thoroughly.

“Fast, quick results” was interpreted as seconds or minutes. In old psychotherapy as practiced in the 19th Century it required ONE YEAR of weekly consultation to see if anything could be done about a case and FOUR MORE YEARS to produce a meager superficial result. Compared to that two or three hundred hours of processing was nothing.

As we began to dominate this field in terms of persons handled and results obtained, psychiatry invented “instant psychiatry” by which no result was gotten in no time.

SPEED became the primary consideration of the culture. Jet planes, fast cars “saved time”. But an old Chinese, when told by a driver that he had saved 4 minutes in speeding back from town asked, “What are you going to do with the 4 minutes?”

Time itself is a basis of aberration. Dropping time out is the consideration of factory managers of production lines as “the faster something can be made the more you have of it”. But look at this again. Something can be done so fast it isn’t done at all! The difference between a very fine camera and a cheap one is speed of manufacture. Cheap cameras don’t get their parts carefully machined or matched—they don’t fit together—they break, cease to work. A fine gun can be told by the lack of tool marks on the hidden places. A cheap gun’s inner bolt is a mess of scars. It isn’t smooth in operation. It didn’t take much time to make but it also jams and freezes up when you try to use it. Maybe you’ve heard of “hotter than a 2 dollar pistol”. A 2 dollar pistol is “hot” because it’s so quickie made it usually blows up and blows off a hand.

There is a point where SPEED is simply a cover for a cheap worthless product.

Let us take a filthy room. A lazy housekeeper comes in and sweeps a few bits of dust under the carpet, leaves soot all over the windows and garbage on the mantle and says it’s clean. Somebody else not afraid of work spends an hour at it and leaves a really clean room.

SHORT PGMS

A short pc program is economically and efficiently for the birds.

In the first place a C/S has to know the extent of his tech well to be able to think up light processes in quantity.

If one heard a C/S say, “But I don’t have time to spend an hour doing a long program for the pc,” one is listening to something peculiar. If one spent an hour or two doing up a real long 20 action program to repair the pc, then for the next 20 C/Ses it takes only a few minutes to look over the session and order the next action on the list. If one had no program one would have to study the folder each time. One actually saves C/S time by doing long programs both to repair and to get the pc back on the Class Chart where he’d gotten to.

Further, auditing is sold by the hour and it WASTES money and income and pcs to short program them.

“Yes but we sell result! If we can get 200 pcs done in 100 auditing minutes we
would make £18,233 clear profit .. “

Well the cruel answer to that was when orgs began to do that on lower grades they didn’t attain the result on the pc and stats went DOWN!

Power was once priced against the fact of 50 to 100 hours of auditing. It retained the price and by cutting out all End Phenomena or real gain it was at last being given in 20 minutes. And after just so many years of this economic dishonesty, SHs crashed! They had sold out the real value of the product for a quick buck. The “field” became “ARC Broken” and few takers came to an SH. It is a very long hard road back. And it is a very costly one.

“Quickie Grades”, instead of making fortunes for one and all, crashed the whole Scientology network.

BECAUSE QUICKIE RESULTS ARE LAZY AND DISHONEST.

Let’s just face up to the facts of life!

Selling out the integrity of the subject for a buck wrecks the subject.

SUCCESS

The real stat of an org is Success Stories.

Honest grades and time spent in C/Sing and in auditing to obtain them add up to success for the individual, the org, its field, the country and the planet.

The time it takes to process somebody is how long it takes to get each single result available. It is not how slowly or quickly it is done. A book is not a good book if it takes 7 years to write. And a bad book isn’t always written in 2 weeks. It takes as long to write a good book as you get a good book. The result is the result and TIME IS JUST AN ENTERED ARBITRARY.

A person who overwhelms at Grade IV is an easily overwhelmed person. It might take 50 hours just to repair the case and the person’s life. That might be 20 or 30 steps on the program.

If the C/S can’t dream up 8 or 9 ways to repair past auditing and 15 or 20 ways to repair a life, then it’s time to go back and read The Original Thesis, Evolution of a Science, DMSMH, 8-80, 8-8008 and listen to a hundred or so SHSBC tapes.

“Yes, but I have no time to .” Well, that’s also saying “It can’t be done well.”

But there is time. If anyone looked over his area he would be able to throw out the time-wasting actions if it comes to that.

“Look. I’m the C/S, the D of P and have to audit 3.......”

That’s a statement that the job has already been done so badly that no persons show up to take over the extra hats! And the no-result programs cripple the economics and that becomes no help.

I have seen Mary Sue take over an HGC that had tons of unsolved cases and too few auditors and have watched her solve one case at a time and within 2 weeks have 35 auditors and no backlogs and in six weeks no unsolved cases! She was using the “old”, “historical”, “background”, “we don’t use them anymore” processes!

So it not only can be done, it is the thing to do.

That org’s stats soared. It became solvent. It ran at a high run and was a happy org.

SICK PCs

When there are sick people on a list one doesn’t just “give a Dianetic Assist” and send to a doctor and write them off.

If one knows his tech, there was a reason the person got sick. One also knows a sick person goes into overwhelm easily.

One can do a touch assist, a contact assist, two-way comm, ruds on the accident, ruds before the accident, Dianetic Assist, medical treatment, life ruds, HCO B 24 July ‘69, two-way comm on suppression, 3 S & Ds, assessment for area of illness, prepcheck on area, ruds on area, hello and okay 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 HCO B 24 July ‘69, more ruds, assessment of failed purposes, two-way comm on the sickness.

That’s not a program. It’s just a helter-skelter 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. And in a program auditing repair comes before life repair.

EXPECTANCY

Now if a C/S or an auditor has a magical complex, he expects ONE process to run a person from wog to OT VI and in ONE minute.

The missing knowledge is “gradient scales”. Stairs and ladders have steps and rungs. It takes TIME to climb a tower.

The magical complex thinks of processes as incantations or charms. A person C/Sing would always be trying to find THE process the pc should be run on. The think is that THE process, once discovered, would take no time at all and the pc would magically become well!

Pardon me, but that’s pure goofiness.

And it would set the C/S up for constant FAILURE.

One sees such a person scrambling through processes, trying to guess “which one which one which one. Oh there’s one! Now we run it for 3 minutes on the pc. Oh dear. It didn’t work. He isn’t well. Let’s see what’s here still. Scramble scramble. Oh, here’s one. This green paper is probably the right color. Auditor! Run this on the pc. Oh dear, it didn’t work. He isn’t well yet. So! We will take these 5 major processes and run them all in one session and add six grades. Do that! Do it! It’s a desperate situation. Oh dear, the pc blew. Well I guess the subject doesn’t work or I’m a failure ...”

That is NOT how one should C/S.

If a workman was supposed to cure an ox hide and was told salt would do it and he had a magical complex, what would he do. Well, he might take a small salt shaker and sprinkle the corner of the hide (thinking the right thought) and find that the hide rotted in a few days. He could then conclude salt didn’t cure ox hides. If someone kept hammering at him to cure ox hides with salt and he kept sprinkling the corner (knowing it wouldn’t work) he’d get a very odd idea about his orders! But who would suspect that this workman thought it was magic! An honest rubbing of salt all over and into the ox hide is the meaning of “salt will cure ox hides”!
But that would take work. It would take TIME! It would have to be honestly and thoroughly done. But one would have cured ox hides and gotten shoes and a profit and pay and everything for one had a product.

Magical thought in auditing isn’t likely to give anyone a product of really able people!

SHORT-CUTTING PROCESSES

Processes can be short-cut as well as programs.

Take an early (means basic, useful, usable) version of Rising Scale. There are 18 pairs. Each pair should be run to F/N, Cog, VGIs.

An auditor told to run Rising Scale can run along the 18 pairs until one F/Ns. And leave it.

The process has been short-cut. And with that shortcut went its ability to restore fertility!

So one hears Rising Scale will sometimes restore fertility or change eyesight. Orders it done. It is done to 1 F/N. No real result occurs.

Or take Dianetics. Dianetics can be chopped “to save TIME”. First feeble flutter of an F/N, no Cog, no VGIs, auditor barking “Did it erase? Did it erase?” Final result, no real gain. There goes the subject. Half an hour to run the chain, no extra 30 seconds for the real F/N, the Cog, the VGIs.

SO ONE WASTES A RESULT FOR THE SAKE OF SAVED TIME.

THE AGE

It is a symptom of the age that there is no time. But in the Data Series PLs one finds that “omitted time” is a basic insanity.

That a body lives only about 70 years puts an awful limit on Man.

Man’s Empires endure at most only about 300 years if that.

70 years is not enough time to make a real career and 300 years is not enough time to even groove in a civil service.

Man pays for it with poor lives and rotten governments.

But it doesn’t take 70 years or 300 years to process a pc. A year maybe up to homo novis. A few years to OT. Even traveling it casually slow.

25 hours to repair someone’s life and 50 to 100 hours to get him up to no somatics with Dianetics is pretty satisfactorily fast.

What’s this take? A week to repair. 2 to 4 weeks for full Dianetics. At 25 hours a week. That’s very little.

And it’s enough to tell him to get trained so he can have all he wants.

SPEED LIABILITY

When speed is the consideration, not results, you get a very cheap camera or car. And you can expect it to fall apart very soon. You also get a cheap reputation.

We are in the Leica and Cadillac and Rolls Royce product class without trying.

Why settle for “Quickie Grades”?

You get no students that way and that’s the heavy org income. You get no expanding field. And you won’t ever get a cleared planet.

We’ve learned all this the hard way. So let’s not let it go unheeded.

The place to handle the situation is with C/Sing.

And to gain the co-operation of C/Ses to make results real results by insisting that speed is the fast road to poverty in the long run.

If the C/S burden is too heavy, start pushing training. Then you’ll get help.

Honest C/Sing gives an honest result.

It takes as long to correct a case as it takes. It takes as long to make a person well as it takes. It takes as long to get a real lasting grade result as it takes.

And that’s a lot longer than the time spent on it in the late 60’s.

ALL pcs “have to be OT tomorrow”. Why let them C/S their case by demanding it only take 2 minutes?

Self C/Sing is no more effective than self auditing.

Registrars as well as pcs try to grab the C/S hat. “I will sell you a marital intensive because you have such a bad cold.” And Execs, “Run this staff member on money.......”

Well, a C/S’s hat is the C/S’s. And he should wear it for honest results. And damn others trying to C/S and wreck his job.

THERE ARE NO CONSIDERATIONS WHICH FORGIVE ANY RESULT THAT IS NOT THOROUGH AND HONEST FOR EVERY PROGRAM OR GRADE.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:dz.rd
Copyright © 1970
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED















LRH TAPE LECTURE
21 June 1970

7006C21 SPEC LECT Expanded Grades and Training

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 24 JUNE 1970

Remimeo
C/S Series 10


REPAIRING A REPAIR

When a pc is on a Repair cycle it is quite horrible to have a bad (goofed) session occur.

Why?

Well the pc is on a Repair cycle because he is overwhelmable. A goofed session is more overwhelm. AND it was goofed on a process type which was already what you would use for Repair. So NOW what do you do?

The answer of course is to sort out the real error. If you can’t find it readily in the worksheet have the Examiner ask the pc what the auditor did.

Then having found the actual goof, you have it repaired by rehab of the BP F/N or an L1B using “Method 3” in assessing the prepared list.

The goofs are fortunately few in type.

There HAS to have been a basic goof for a Repair session to have gone wrong.

So when one goes wrong, you really search the worksheet until you find it and if it isn’t visible get the pc asked.

These goofs are pretty elementary. The auditor possibly doesn’t know that a TA can go DOWN by overwhelming by overrun or way up by overrun. So a usual goof in Repair is overrun of an F/N or an item that F/Ned or a list that F/Ned.

Example: In a Repair Pgm a GF is called for. Auditor clears a couple items, suddenly hits a hot one, pc gets F/N, Cog, VGIs. Auditor (told to get all the charge off the GF overlooks senior data—let pc have a win, GFs often raise hob with the TA if run further than THE item) goes on down the GF list past the F/N VGIs hunting for new charge. Pc’s TA goes to 1.6 ! Pc cogs he has a stuck picture. TA 1.6. “End of sess.”

Now what do we do. Well, a new factor now enters in.

C/S WANDER

The pc was on a precise Repair Pgm, is only at VI out of XVIII steps.

But the pc is rough. Rough running. Diverges, critical, boggy.

And now he is stuck into a goofed session and we have to repair a repair!

A C/S at this point can wander. He can Q and A. The WHOLE REPAIR PGM CAN GET DEPARTED FROM AND THE PC REALLY BOGGED.

When faced with Repairing a Repair Pgm session watch it! Don’t wander!

The C/S procedure is this:

1. Find in the W/S or from the pc the exact goof.

2. Repair that goof by rehab, indicating BPC or two way comm, depending on the error.

3. DO NOT ORDER A NEW DIFFERENT NON-PGM ACTION.

4. Continue the PGM.

It is here a C/S can go adrift. New actions crossing the original program can soon have C/S, pc and Auditor chasing over hill and dale. It is a fatal pursuit.

About the only time you change a Repair Pgm once outlined is to extend it or lighten it. But in that case do a whole new Pgm.

You will find 2 way comm is lighter than a Prepcheck.

Let us say pc was doing great on 2 way comm. Gets into a Prepcheck session and goes out the bottom.

In such a case the Prepcheck is repaired of any goof noted in it and 2 way comm that session—and it comes out all right. If no goof can be located, 2 way comm it and it will be okay.

An Auditor can throw a list not ordered into a Repair Pgm by finding the TA high at session start and doing an O/R list and goofing the list. It would already be dicey to list a pc who is on a Repair Pgm. To then goof ordinary laws of listing and nulling can get grim.

The first C/S action to repair the repair is of course to get the list corrected with an L4A. You can often spot the listing goof as a C/S. It’s usually an O/R of an O/R list or an incomplete list or an “unnecessary list”. It’s poison to list a pc on a Repair Pgm, however. 2 way comm it.

If a check for Exteriorization reveals it, you have no choice but to do an Interiorization Rundown. That’s a common reason. But if the pc is already flinching at engrams, limit the Interiorization to 3 way Recall and note it clearly that he’s only 3 way Recall of Int.

AUDITOR FLUBS

Student or new Auditors produce the most flubs. It is therefore good to keep them off repair actions or Repair Pgms.

The commonest flubs are failing to trim the meter and ignoring the F/N at “3.1”, yet sitting right there running the pc up to 4.0 without ever asking, “Have we by-passed a release point?”

Poor TRs, not having 2 way comm down, neglecting pc origin or chopping comm are probably next in order of frequency.


REPAIR PCs

Remember that pcs who need lots of repair are DELICATE cases. Feather touch is the watchword.

They are not all that easy to audit. They can cause Auditors and C/Ses to disperse.

Such pcs are afraid of force and easily get engulfed if pushed hard into the bank.

So lightly, lightly.

And exact repair of any flub.

And get back to the program! Mid program is no time to become inventive.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder



LRH: sb .rd
Copyright © 1970
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 25 JUNE 1970
Remimeo


C/S SERIES 11



The following HCO Bs have been combined in this issue:

HCO B 31 Aug ‘68 “Written C/S Instructions”
HCO B 1 Sept ‘68 “Points on Case Supervision”
HCO B 11 Sept ‘68 “Case Supervisor Data”
HCO B 17 Sept ‘68 “Gross Case Supervision Errors”
HCO B 17 Sept ‘68 “Out Admin—Liability”
HCO B 22 Sept ‘68 “Auditors must always ....”
HCO B 8 Oct ‘68 “Case Supervisor—Folder Handling”
HCO B 15 Mar ‘70 “Double Folder Danger”
HCO B 29 Mar ‘70 “Auditing and Ethics”

and reference to LRH ED 101 Int “Popular Names of Developments”.


C/S DATA

Case Supervision instructions are always written. A Case Supervisor always writes his C/S instructions on a separate sheet of paper for the pc folder.

Repair Programs (now called Progress Programs) are on red sheets.

Return Programs (now called Advance Programs) are on bright blue sheets.

All C/Ses are written in duplicate (a carbon copy is made). The C/S keeps the carbon copy for reference in case the original ever gets lost.


HIGH CRIME

It is a High Crime for a Case Supervisor not to WRITE in a preclear’s folder what the case supervised instructions are and a High Crime for an auditor to accept verbal C/S instructions.

To commit this crime causes:

1. Extreme difficulty when doing a folder error summary as there is no background of what was ordered and why.

2. Gives the auditor leave to do anything he likes as not in writing.

3. Is open to misduplication and can cause squirrel processes to be run and so mess up a preclear with Non-standard Tech.

Any C/Supervisor found guilty of this from this date is to be removed as this could only be considered a deliberate attempt to mess up preclears.


POINTS ON CASE SUPERVISION

1. Check your orders to find out if auditor did them.

2. Check to see if commands correct and if pc’s reaction was expected reaction for those commands.

3. Check any list and find out if there was mislisting.

4. Advise against a background of Standard Tech.

5. Order any errors corrected or get the case on further up the grades.

6. Beware of over-correction.

7. Beware of false, pessimistic or over-enthusiastic auditor reports. They are detected by whether the case responded to usual actions as they all do.

8. Beware of talking to the auditor or the pc.

9. Have implicit confidence in Standard Tech. If it is reported not working the auditor’s report is false or the application terrible but not reported.

10. Above all else hold a standard and NEVER listen to or use unusual solutions.


DOUBLE FOLDER DANGER

When a preOT 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 preOT 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 preOT 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.

PreOTs 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.

CASE SUPERVISOR—FOLDER HANDLING

Analyzing Folders

Go back in the folder to the session where the preclear was running well and come forward from it doing a folder error summary.

Reviewing Folders

In reviewing a folder, the first thing to do is to look at the C/S to see if it was done.

Use the Summary Sheet to get the Auditor’s attitude and pc mannerism changes.

Use the Auditor’s Report Form to get the time of processes.

Read and take all your data from Worksheets and compare it to and see that C/S was complied with and ensure Standard Tech was applied.

If you can’t read the reports, send it back to have the Auditor over-print illegible words. Never try to case supervise (C/S) an illegible worksheet as you’ll only run into headaches.

The After Session Examiner’s Report gives you the first clue of how suspicious you should be in examining the folder and whether or not auditing reports contain falsities.

Standard Tech

You’re never led by anything into departing from Standard Tech. The only reason it doesn’t work is that it hasn’t been applied.

The main question of a Case Supervisor is:

WAS IT APPLIED?

If you follow this exactly, you’ll never miss.


CASE SUPERVISOR DATA

A Case Supervisor should watch for Ethics record of pcs who have been C/Sed.

If they fall on their head, get into low conditions, the folder should be reviewed.

Most probably the auditor did not do what was ordered and, if folder looks okay, chances are the auditing report is false as something is wrong or pc would not be in trouble.

AUDITING AND ETHICS

Cases undergoing Ethics actions, Comm Evs, amends projects or low conditions should not be audited until the Ethics matter is cleared up and complete. It only louses up their cases to audit them when under such stress.


ADMIN

Auditors must always put the pc’s grade or OT level very prominently on the Auditing Report.

A Case Supervisor cannot properly C/S a case without having this data.

To not do this is out admin.


OUT ADMIN—LIABILITY

Much has been said about the importance of admin in auditing but auditors just aren’t getting it—so ........ it now becomes a LIABILITY to have out admin in pcs’ folders.

Folders are to be submitted with the latest session on top. Auditor’s report form is stapled to Worksheets which are dated, numbered and in order, latest on top. Summary Report is then attached to the auditing report and W/Ss with a paper clip. This of course is as well as the usual admin such as legible writing, re-writing illegible words, marking reads and F/Ns, and all End Phenomena, etc.

The C/S instructions for that session go under that session, so you get C/S 4/6/68, Auditing Session 4/6/68, C/S 5/6/68, Auditing Session 5/6/68, C/S 7/6/68, etc, etc.

As the whole purpose of Class VIII is to minimize the time in auditing, by doing perfect Standard Tech, this cannot be done if it takes 15 minutes to put the folder in order, so it can then be case supervised, so it can then be audited.


GROSS CASE SUPERVISION ERRORS

1. FAILING TO USE PROGRESS AND ADVANCE PROGRAMS WHEN NEEDED.

2. Ordering unnecessary repairs.

3. Trying to use repair processes to get case gain instead of getting the pc onto the next grade.

4. Not writing down C/S instructions, but giving them to an auditor verbally.

5. Talking to the auditor re the case.

6. Talking to pc re his case.

7. Failing to send pc to examiner if you’re unsure why his folder has been sent up for C/S.

8. Being reasonable.

9. Not having enough Ethics presence to get his orders followed.

10. Issuing involved repair orders.

11. BIGGEST GROSS CASE SUPERVISION ERROR for C/S is not to read through the pc folder.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder




LRH:sb.rd
Copyright © 1970
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 25 JUNE 1970
Issue II
Remimeo

C/S Series 12


GLOSSARY OF C/S TERMS


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 re-named 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 starrated 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. Only this route will now be sold. There are no Dianetic or Scientology single—triple or “Quickie Lower Grades” any more.

DIANETIC CLEAR:

There is such a state. It is not however attained by feeding people Scientology cognitions as was done in L.A. Only about 25% go actually Clear on Dianetics. A Dianetic Clear or any other Dianetic pc now goes on up through the grades of Scientology and onto the proper Clearing Course. The Dianetic Clear of Book I was clear of somatics. The Book I definition is correct. This is the End Phenomena of Dianetics as per the Class Chart and Book 1. 25%, no more, make Dianetic Clear

accidentally. They still need Expanded Lower Grades to make Scientology Clear. Becoming a Dianetic Clear does not stop them from getting Power Processing. Modern Power is to its total End Phenomena.

CLASSIFICATION CHART:

This chart “Classification and Gradation Chart” has been reissued many times. All issues are more or less valid. To save print, the processes run column appears in “Processes Taught” on the Auditor side of the Chart. A11 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. A11 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 Dianetics until no somatics, then go up through 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
Copyright © 1970
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 30 JUNE 1970R

(Revised 6 March 73. Changes on following three pages
in this type style.)
Remimeo
C/S Series 13R

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 HCO B (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 HCO B on Auditor’s Rights (C/S Series 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 OT 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, 1950-1969 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 do 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 a while 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

HCO B 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 (HCO B 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 is definitely not 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. / 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 HCO B 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


LRH: dz.nt.rd
Copyright © 1970, 1973
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 3 JULY 1970

Remimeo

C/S Series 14


C/Sing 2 WAY COMM



The C/S is liable to make most of his C/S errors in C/Sing 2 Way Comm.

The reasons for this are

1. 2 way comm IS auditing.

2. The errors that can be made in any auditing can be made in 2 way comm;

3. Untrained or poorly trained auditors do not always respect 2 way comm as auditing.

4. Errors in 2 way comm become masked since the procedure is loose.

5. Earlier C/Ses on the case may have missed the easily missed 2 way comm errors.

RULES OF C/Sing 2 WAY COMM

A. The C/S must recognize that 2 way comm is auditing. Therefore it follows all the rules of auditing.

B. Any error that occurs in other auditing can occur in 2 way comm auditing. Errors in a 2 way comm session must be carefully looked for as they easily can be masked in the worksheet.

C. Auditors must be persuaded by the C/S to make notation of auditing essentials in 2 way comm as of senior importance to pc’s text (which is also made note of in the W/S).

D. The questions asked in 2 way comm can be very incorrect just as rote processes can be.

E. An auditor must be trained as a 2 way comm auditor (Class II). Otherwise he will Evaluate, Q and A and commit other faults.

F. If an ARC Break occurs early in a 2 way comm session and is not handled as such the rest of the session is audited over an ARC Break and can put a pc into a sad effect.

G. A pc with a PT problem not being handled in the 2 way comm will get no gain.

H. A pc with a W/H in a 2 way comm session will become critical, nattery and/or get a dirty needle.

I. Two way comm processes must be flattened to F/N. If an F/N doesn’t occur then the subject didn’t read in the first place or the auditor Qed and Aed or evaluated or changed the subject or the TRs were out or the pc’s ruds were out.

J. A two way comm subject chosen must be tested for read in that session before being used for 2 way comm.

K. Improper 2 way comm questions can plunge the pc into an out rud situation not then handled. “Is anything upsetting you?” or any mention of upsets by the auditor is the same as asking for an ARC Break. “Has anything been troubling— worrying you lately?” is the same as asking for a PTP. “Who aren’t you talking to?” is asking for W/Hs.

L. The subject of major processes should be kept out of 2 way comm C/Ses, auditors’ questions and 2 way comm assessment lists (ARC Brks, Problems, overts, changes or any major auditing subject, as they are too heavy, being the buttons of the bank).

M. The C/S should only let Class II or above auditors do 2 way comm sessions.

N. A rud going out in a two way comm session must be put in by the auditor.

O. A 2 way comm session should end in an F/N.

P. Auditors whose 2 way comm sessions do not end in F/N must be taught to check the subject for read before using, not to Q and A, not to Evaluate and given a refresher on 2 way comm tapes and HCO Bs.

Q. In a 2 way comm session that flubs the C/S must be careful to isolate the errors just as in any other auditing session that flubs and put them right.

R. A 2 way comm subject that reads on test and doesn’t F/N on 2 way comm must be checked for O/R (if TA went up) and rehabbed by the 1965 Rehab method, or Prepchecked or just continued.

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

The whole point to all of this is that a 2 way comm session IS auditing. It is delivered by the auditor, C/Sed and remedied like any other session.

Also it is usually being run on a delicate pc who is more affected by errors than pcs being given other processes.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder



LRH: sb.rd
Copyright © 1970
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED











[This HCO B is amended by BTB 10 July 1970, 2-Way Comm-A Class III Action, which is based on LRH C/Ses. It says, “Rules E and M are changed from ‘Class II’ to ‘Class III’.”]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 16 AUGUST 1970
(Corrected and re-issued 3 Nov 1970)
Remimeo
Dn Checksheet
Class III C/S Series 15
Class VI
C/S Checksheet
GETTING THE F/N TO EXAMINER
(High, Low TAs and Chronic Somatics)


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 (l) 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 L4A, LIB, 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.

Any correct Standard Dianetic Auditing will eventually handle. But it is usual to do a PICTURE REMEDY (see HCO B 5 June 1969).

A pc who has a chronic somatic would get programmed like this:

I Repair (Progress) Pgm until pc feeling better.
II Picture Remedy with all reading and interest items Dn triple full Dn EP.
III Health Form—with all reading and interest items Dn triple full Dn EP.
IV Somatics of the area with all reading and interest items Dn triple full Dn EP.
V Run the engram chain of the incident (operation, accident, etc) he believes caused it. R3R triple.
VI HF to F/N on the HF itself and attest full Dianetic result as per Class Chart.

That’s maybe 50 hours, all done in Dianetic triples, of course, in steps II to VI.

IF the Dianetic Auditing is standard and to Dianetic EP (F/N Cog VGIs) you will see this pattern at the Examiner or a few minutes after session.

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.

Another pass at the HF finds it F/N and pc can and will attest Dianetics.

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 l.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.

Note: The new Hubbard Consultant Assessment List is now under test at this writing and may become essential as a pre-repair function and if so would be before repair in the chronic somatic list of actions as a pgm.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH: sb.rd
Copyright © 1970
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 21 AUGUST 1970
Remimeo
C/S Checksheets
Checksheets C/S Series 16
Dn Checksheet

SESSION GRADING
WELL DONE,
DEFINITION OF


A “well done” to an auditor requires a precise meaning. It is not given by the C/S because an auditor is a friend or because he would be offended if he didn’t get one.

“WELL DONE” GIVEN BY THE C/S FOR A SESSION MEANS THE PC HAD F/N VGIs AT THE EXAMINER IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE SESSION.

This then presupposes that session lines include an Examiner even if it’s a receptionist and it includes the use and understanding of Exam Reports. (See HCO PL 26 Jan ‘70, Issue III, or any rewrite and Exam tech.)

It presupposes the Examiner has a meter to hand and that the pc makes a statement.

Thus, if there are no Exam Reports there can’t be a well done given, eh? True enough. A C/S who C/Ses without Exam Reports done by a different person than the auditor is asking to fly blind and to get auditor “PR” (public relations or brag) and false auditing reports.

No F/N at Exam no well done.

This is harsh as early on pcs often get no F/N at Examiner. BUT IN EVERY CASE THERE ARE CURRENT EARLIER TECH ERRORS ON THE CASE when the F/N doesn’t get from the session to the Examiner. It is also harsh because the failure to get the F/N to the Examiner could be a C/S error! But (see HCO B 24 May ‘70, “Auditor’s Rights”, C/S Series 1), the auditor should not have accepted the C/S.

The C/S could be too heavy, or the case needed a repair first or the process ordered is not part of a proper program.

HOURS SUCCESSFULLY AUDITED INCLUDES ONLY “WELL DONE” OR “VERY WELL DONE” SESSIONS.

VERY WELL DONES

An auditor gets a “VERY WELL DONE” when the session by worksheet inspection, Exam Report inspection is:

1. F/N VGIs at Examiner.

2. The auditing is totally flubless and by the book.

3. The whole C/S ordered was done without departure and to the expected result.

NO MENTION

A no mention of well done or very well done or anything simply means:

1. F/N did not get to Examiner.

2. No major auditing errors exist in the session.

FLUNKS

A FLUNK is given when:

1. The F/N did not get to Examiner and didn’t occur at session end.

2. Major errors or flubs occurred like no EP, multiple somatic, unflown ruds, etc.

3. The C/S was not followed or completed.

4. Auditor’s Rights listed errors occurred.

5. No F/N and BIs at Examiner.

The exact error must be noted on the worksheet and in the next C/S along with the Flunk.
FLUNK AND RETRAIN

When an auditor does not improve but continues to get NO MENTIONS and FLUNKS, he requires retraining.

Such retraining must include:

1. Cleaning up all Misunderstoods of tech.

2. Cleaning up willingness to audit.

3. Cleaning up overts on people and pcs.

4. Examination by inspection of TRs.

5. Starrating material missed or not grasped as per session troubles.

INVALIDATION

Invalidative remarks should not be made by a C/S. Experience has shown they do no good and also do harm.

But there are 2 methods of invalidating an auditor’s auditing:

1. Let him go on flubbing and getting no results.

2. Direct invalidation of his intentions or future or potential.

In 1, nearly all auditors who stop auditing never really knew how to audit in the first place or have gross misunderstoods or have accumulated intentional or unintentional overts on pcs or have been too harshly invalidated. When they don’t really grasp the ease and simplicity of auditing they get into other troubles.

A really well trained, smooth auditor never gets any real charge on his case on the subject of auditing.

When you let an auditor flub, the whole subject gets invalidated and he loses his value because he goes into doubt. This can be said with complete confidence today as the whole of Dianetics and Scientology is there and it works very very well indeed IF IT IS USED AND IF THE C/SING AND AUDITING IS CORRECT AND FLUBLESS.

AUDITOR HANDLING

The C/S is really not just the Case Supervisor, he is also the auditors’ handler.

Like a boxer’s trainer or a star’s director, the C/S handles his guys. They are all a bit different, auditors. There are prima donnas and meek mousey ones and steady-on ones and all kinds.

They get the credit for the sessions from the pcs most often. They really don’t like not to be C/Sed.

And they VALUE the well dones and the very well dones and they flinch at the flunks. And the honest ones know all about it before they turn it in. And some don’t mention the flub but think you’re a fool if you miss it.

So it’s important to have a constant in assigning what the auditor is given for the session.

WELL DONE AUDITING HOURS are all that’s valid for a stat.

So a C/S must be very exact and correct in his determination of well done, very well done, no mention and (forlornly) a flunk.

This should remove argument from the matter and bring certainty.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder




LRH:rr.rd
Copyright © 1970
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 26 AUGUST 1970
Remimeo
C/S Book
Class VIII Checksheet
Class VIII
C/S Series 17


INCOMPLETE CASES


OVERSHOOTING and UNDERSHOOTING are two very defeating errors in C/Sing.

OVERSHOOTING would be defined as going beyond a completion or completing a completion.

In such a circumstance the pc for instance reaches an F/N VGI point in Review and then the C/S decides to handle the case in Review.

Example: 2 or 3 sessions have been goofed. Review patches them all up to F/N VGIs all okay. Then a C/S C/Ses to Review the case to repair the errors. The case feels invalidated, caves in, needs further repair.

I have seen more than one folder where this cycle has been done three times! In one of these an action had to be taken to patch up a goof so the pc could go back onto a grade. The goof was patched up to F/N VGIs. The correct action would have been to put the pc back on the incomplete grade. But no, a new Review cycle was laid out, audited, pc caved in. A new cycle to repair this was entered in upon. It was successful. The pc got F/N VGIs at Exam. The C/S ordered a new Review of the case, the case caved in, was then patched up and finally got an F/N VGIs. And was ordered to be reviewed ..........

Studying what was wrong with the cases I found the above. I ordered an assessment of a list, got “unnecessary actions” and got the cases back onto the incomplete cycle of the grade and they did fine.

This can be done with a grade. It was the fault of early Power.

UNDERSHOOTING would be to leave a cycle incomplete and go off to something else.

Example: Case sent to Review or given a Review session to repair goofs. One goof is handled but there are three to handle. Case returned to the grade before being set up.

This can be so bad that the case never made any grade at all.

The modern Repair (Progress) Pgm as outlined in this C/S series takes care of this.

QUICKIE GRADES AND ACTIONS

Quickie grades left us with a totality of incomplete cases.

You look over a folder and you see the pc at “OT IV”. The folder is thick. He has had lots of auditing. He has aches and pains, problems, makes people wrong.

Probably he could be audited for another thousand hours without ever coming right! Unless there was an orderly program to complete his case level by level on the Class and Grade Chart.

It would take a Repair (Progress) Pgm and then an Advance Pgm that included each grade to completion.

He would have to have his ruds put in, any flubs at once handled session to session, just to complete Dianetics. Finally, his chronic somatics gone, he would F/N on the Health Form and that would complete his Dianetics with his attestation.

And so on right on up the Grades, each one done fully to the voluntary declare for that grade as per the Grade and Class Chart.

In doing Dianetics, Grades, etc you still have to get in ruds and handle the case so it is set up for each major action and repair the flubs at once when they occur.

While completing an action you have to keep the case running, not audit over ARC Brks, PTPs, W/Hs and flubs.

The best answer is NO FLUBS. But when they occur they must be repaired in 24 hours.

When repaired (and not re-repaired and re-re-repaired with overshoots) you get the case back on the same cycle that was incomplete.


COMPLETE CASES

A case is not complete unless the lowest incomplete Grade Chart action is complete and then each completed in turn on up.

As you look over current folders who have had years of auditing, some of them you generally don’t find any completed actions and you do find overshoots on Reviews.

It is not the least bit hard to handle these cases. This C/S series shows you how. Auditing and Life Repairs (Progress), Advance Pgm completing fully each incomplete grade.

The C/S is blessed who follows these two rules:

RECOGNIZE A COMPLETION OF AN ACTION AND END IT OFF.

RECOGNIZE AN INCOMPLETE ACTION AND COMPLETE IT.

Don’t overshoot, don’t undershoot.

Follow the rules.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder





LRH:rr.rd
Copyright © 1970
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 11 SEPTEMBER 1970
Remimeo
Dn Checksheet
Class III C/S Series 18
Class VI
Class VIII
C/S Checksheet CHRONIC SOMATIC,
DIANETIC HANDLING OF

The full Dianetic handling of the pc who has a chronic somatic is given in the HCO B C/S Series No. 15, of 16 August 1970, “Getting the F/N to Examiner”.

This HCO B calls the fact to attention. It could get overlooked or be hard to find again as the title of HCO B 16 August does not indicate it directly.

LRH: sb.rd 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 6 OCTOBER 1970
Remimeo
C/S Hats
C/S checksheet
C/S Series 19


FOLDER ERROR SUMMARIES


A folder error summary, (FES) is usually done by a student especially an interne well taught, learning his practical tech or by an auditor especially hired to do FESs.

It requires many hours to put a folder in sequence and then to list all errors in it.

It should NEVER be done by a working C/S who is responsible for an org’s delivery flow.

COST

It is costly to do an FES and where possible the cost, duly consulting the pc, should be borne by the pc as a special service.

It can be directly paid for or simply deducted from auditing hours purchased.


NECESSITY

A good C/S looking over a folder usually goes back to the last time the pc was doing really well and notes actions necessary from that point.

Programs of a lengthily audited case (fat folder) usually cover LIB, L3A, L4A lists and usually take up 2-way comm on earliest sessions and earliest auditing ever given (for auditors). Thus an FES is not vital in all cases.

I like to have an FES done so I can compare areas covered by the pc in 2-way comm and be sure they come up in subsequent repair sessions.

Also where I can see a lot of bad lists existed, I want to be able to assure they get handled.

Thus an FES is useful.

On Flag, an FES is carefully done so as to detect areas of out tech in the world. This is called “the Flub Catch System”.

Auditors and C/Ses so detected are sent to cramming in their areas to smooth out their tech knowledge or TRs, all to improve delivery of tech.

Flub Catch makes an FES vital on Flag.

Higher orgs have a similar interest in an FES.


HALTING DELIVERY

To halt delivery because of a missing folder or to do a long time-consuming FES is of course contrary to the need to deliver auditing and can result in a no-auditing situation worse than a Blind Repair.

BLIND REPAIR

When no FES is done, one is doing a Blind Repair. The Progress Pgm and Advance Pgm may have holes in them.

However there are only five areas of danger:

1. Flubbed lists.

2. A bad series of evaluative sessions should be detected and directly handled.

3. Flubbed Power.

4. Extended or flubbed Interiorization.

5. Missed grades.

If a C/S doesn’t know about these it may be that the case will not properly repair and he also does not know what Advance Program to do.

But as these are specific areas they can be done on a Blind Repair by making them into a list and getting them meter checked.

Example: Pc has lost his folder. Has been audited for several years on and off. One can clear the idea of lists “Someone written down items you say to a question” and see if it gets a read and if so do L4A Method Three “On Lists”. One can ask if any auditor ever told the pc what to think and if that reads 2-way comm or prepcheck those sessions by that auditor. Power can be checked by rehab unless the person has gone Clear on the Clearing Course since at which time Power will not need repair. The commands of Interiorization Rundown can be checked with 2-way comm or rehabbed. What won’t rehab you run. Missed Grades can be checked, rehabbed or run including any Expanded Grades. The pc usually recognizes the process if it has been run.

Thus one can wander through a Blind Repair without fouling up the case and add to it the inevitable actions common to all Progress Pgms.


SUMMARY

An FES has value. It is valuable to the pc to get one done. It is a long and extensive action. It can be sold directly or removed from hours bought. It is of vast interest in training auditors and should be done by already trained internes or specially hired auditors. It is NOT done by a C/S and it is NOT used to halt all delivery of auditing and jam up the C/S lines. A lost or delayed folder is not a barrier to a very well trained C/S who has starrated a C/S Course. An FES is very useful and tends to eradicate any mystery for a C/S.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder








LRH: sb.td
Copyright ©1970
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 8 OCTOBER 1970

Remimeo
C/Ses
All Auditors
Level 0 C/S Series 20
HGC Checksheet

PERSISTENT F/N


A FLOATING NEEDLE can persist.

This fact tells you at once why you cannot do three major actions in a row in the same ten minutes.

This was the bug behind “Quickie Grades” (0 to IV in one session. This also occurred in Power when it was run all in one day). The auditor would attain a bona fide full dial F/N. The pc was still cogniting, still in a big win. The auditor would “clear the next process command”, he would see an F/N. He would “clear the next process command”, and see an F/N.

BUT IT WAS THE SAME F/N!

Result was that processes 2 and 3 WERE NEVER RUN ON THE CASE.

This is really what is meant by “Quickie Grades”.

In 1958 we got real Releases. You could not kill the F/N for days, weeks.

Several processes had this effect. Today’s real Clear also goes this way. You couldn’t kill the F/N with an axe.

By running a lot of Level Zero processes, for instance, you can get a real swinging unkillable F/N.

It not only gets to the Examiner, it comes in at the start of the next day’s session!

Now if in one session you ran all of Level Zero and went on up to Level One, you would just be auditing a persistent F/N. The pc would get no benefit at all from Level One. He’s still going “Wow” on Level Zero.

If you ran Level Zero with one process that got a big wide floating F/N and then “ran” Level I, II, III and IV, you would have just a Level Zero Release. The pc’s bank was nowhere to be found. So next week he has problems (Level I) or a Service Fac (Level IV) and he is only a Grade Zero yet it says right there in Certs and Awards log he’s a Grade IV. So now we have a “Grade IV” who has Level I, II, III and IV troubles!

A session that tries to go beyond a big dial-wide drifting floating F/N only distracts the pc from his win. BIG WIN.

Any big win (F/N dial-wide, Cog, VGIs) gives you this kind of persistent F/N.

You at least have to let it go until tomorrow and let the pc have his win.

That is what is meant by letting the pc have his win. When you get one of these dial-wide F/Ns, Cog, VGIs WOW you may as well pack it up for the day.


GRADUAL WIDENING

In running a Dianetic chain to basic in triple you will sometimes see in one session a half dial on Flow 1, 3/4 of a dial on Flow 2, a full dial on Flow 3.

Or you may have 4 subjects to two-way comm or prepcheck in one session. First action 1/3 dial F/N. Then no F/N, TA up. Second action l/2 dial F/N. Then no F/N. Third action 3/4 dial F/N. Fourth action full dial-wide floating swinging idling F/N.

You will also notice in the same session-long time for 1st action, shorter, shorter, shorter for the next three actions.

Now you have an F/N that anything you try to clear and run will just F/N WITHOUT AFFECTING THE CASE AT ALL.

If you audit past that you are wasting your time and processes.

You have hit an “unkillable F/N”, properly called a persistent F/N. It’s persistent at least for that day. Do any more and it’s wasted.

If an auditor has never seen this he had better get his TR0 bullbait flat for 2 hours at one unflunked go and his other TRs in and drill out his flubs. For that’s what’s supposed to happen.

F/Ns on pcs audited up to (for that session) a persistent F/N always get to the Examiner.

If you only have a “small F/N” it won’t get to the Examiner. However, on some pcs maybe that’s good enough. May take him several sessions, each one getting a final session F/N a bit wider. Then he gets an F/N that gets to the Examiner. After that, well audited on a continuing basis, the F/N lasts longer and longer.

One day the pc comes into session with a dial-wide floating swinging F/N and anything you say or do does nothing whatever to disturb that F/N.

It’s a real Release man. It may last weeks, months, years.

Tell him to come back when he feels he needs some auditing and chalk up the remaining hours (if sold by the hour) as undelivered. Or if sold by result, chalk up the result.

If the F/N is truly persistent he will have no objections. If it isn’t, he will object. So have him come back tomorrow and carry on whatever you were doing.


SUMMARY

The technical bug back of Quickie Grades or Quickie Power was the Persistent F/N.

This is not to be confused with a Stage 4 (sweep, stick, sweep, stick) or an ARC Broke needle (pc Bad Indicators while F/Ning).

This is not to be used to refuse all further auditing to a pc.

It is to be used to determine when to end a series of major actions in a session.


LRH: rr.rd 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 10 NOVEMBER 1970
Remimeo
All Class VIIIs
C/S Checksheet IMPORTANT
ADD TO CKSHTS URGENT


C/S Series 21


C/S RESPONSIBILITY FOR TRAINING


The C/S is fully and entirely responsible for the ability of his auditors to audit. This has been true for 20 years but it gets neglected. This neglect gives us (a) Flubby Auditing (b) Fad tech.

If auditing is flubby it is the C/S who is responsible. In the first place he permitted bad course training without screaming. In the second place he does not persuade or force auditors to correct their tech in cramming after flubs.

Since flubby auditing is the primary reason for no results, an area where tech is bad tends to ride fads or grab “the newest and latest” and hope it will crack cases whereas doing the usual without flubs is what cracks the cases.

If I find an auditor whose sessions I am C/Sing has failed to flatten a chain, I assume not that the pc is difficult but that the auditor does not know about (1) Only running items that read, (2) Multiple somatics, (3) Narrative chains and that his TRs are bad. I spot what it is from the session worksheet and say what it is and order the auditor to cramming (or to be crammed if there is no cramming) on the materials and on TRs always.

I cannot C/S with flubby auditors. The pile of C/S folders grows. Any review has to be reviewed and my C/Ses just aren’t getting done. If auditors I am C/Sing for are green I can count on a 4+ times increase in my C/Sing time. If my auditors are flubby C/Sing that should require 11/2 hours takes 61/2 hours. This is by actual timing.

I have no objection to working with green or newly trained auditors. BUT IF I DO I RETRAIN THEM.

The C/S who accepts an auditor from any course as a trained auditor is an optimist.

There are three training stages.

A. Course Study, theory and practical.

B. Student Auditing.

C. Professional Auditing.

The C/S has to do with C. When A and B are very poor the job at C is much harder so the C/S should call it forcefully to attention of Course Supervisors. And then get a fast retrain going under himself.

Retraining is an inevitable part of a C/S’s job. No matter how good the course may have been the actual practice of auditing gives the new auditor different importance values. Also his hat has changed from a student hat to a real auditor’s hat.

As a C/S works with an auditor he trains him. He also may order the new auditor audited.

Essentially the C/S has to shift the new auditor’s hat from a “what’s it say?” to a “Now I do.”

With a whole green crew of auditors I give as a C/S a daily auditors’ conference. I make sure my Tech Services is on the ball so auditors get in 5 or 6 hours in 5 or 6 hours, not in 10 or 12 hours while they wait for pcs or go find them. That gives them auditor admin and study time. Then I can have a conference. This conference does not violate any ivory tower as I don’t C/S on their data of pcs. I find their questions and get them answered and I give them the reasons behind certain C/Ses.

Then daily daily daily I meet any flub with an order to cramming on the material flubbed and on TRs. And I keep their overts pulled.

A green auditor with me as a C/S has a very arduous time of it. There is no invalidation. Quite the contrary. The message is YOU CAN AUDIT. YOU CAN GET RESULTS. GET WISED UP AND GET ON WITH IT.

One flub, one retrain in cramming.

A lot of auditors are around who learned to audit with me as a C/S after their training. In the majority of cases they became fantastic auditors. In some few cases they went elsewhere before they could be fully trained.

The magic of it all is simply: 1 flub, 1 retrain in cramming on that point.

Mostly I didn’t even pull them off the pc.

The fuzzy muzzy state of most graduated students needs handling. It is handled by the C/S.

The object of a C/S is to handle and improve cases. He can’t do that with flubby auditors. So he has to make auditors out of students. If he does he can then achieve his object.

If the C/S wears this part of his hat he really wins. He seldom has to unravel anything tough. He just C/Ses and the auditors audit EVENTUALLY. But every new auditor he gets is certain to lengthen the C/S’s working day and lessen his results unless the C/S realizes that there is ON THE JOB TRAINING and gets it done.

Training includes the auditor’s staff hat and his knowledge of Tech and Qual Divisions. This would be true even in a Franchise or the field. They might not have the divisions but they have all the functions!

Recently a C/S had to get about 60 people audited fast. She had seven auditors assigned. She did not assure that these auditors were knowledgeable on the courses they had had and she did not wear the training hat of a C/S. She wound up with herself and one auditor doing the whole 60. The excuse was, the other auditors “couldn’t audit”.

It would have been far faster in terms of audited pc-hours to have rapidly crash-programmed the seven auditors through a refresher, cleaned up their misunderstoods and overts in a co-audit and then, using them, to shove them into cramming on the materials of any flub and TRs for each goof. She would have made seven auditors into stars and she would have gotten the 60 pcs fully audited completely and rapidly with minimal flubs. She would have had 60 Dianetic and Expanded Grade completions, 60 terrific beings AND IN LESS TIME.

Morale goes to pot only when auditors do not get results.

Her basic error was assuming auditors should be able to audit. This isn’t true of any auditor who has not served an apprenticeship under a competent C/S.

An auditor who has been auditing 10 years, when he starts to audit for me the first time, I put on my C/S training hat and no matter how good or how poor he was when he began I make him a better auditor.

A C/S who doesn’t do this is letting the team down and badly.

A C/S who doesn’t do this will spend hours daily trying to puzzle out the solution to messes made.

A C/S who doesn’t do this fills up a field with flubbed cases regardless of his own skill in C/Sing. He is liable to sink into doubt, then treason and blow.

The C/S who wears his training hat and does do this leads a smooth life, is respected by his auditors and is valuable beyond gold.

To do this a C/S must himself be able to audit and to know his materials well enough to state which ones have to be crammed and never introduce strange ideas.

Such a C/S will never have a revolt and will never have to dream something up or ride new fads because he is getting excellent results straight along for a happy org and public.

I trust a C/S to do this.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:sb.rd
Copyright © 1970
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 28 NOVEMBER 1970
Remimeo
Class VIIIs
Class VIII Chksheet
C/S Series 22


PSYCHOSIS


Through a slight change of procedure on certain preclears I have been able to view the underlying motives and mechanisms of psychosis.

Very possibly this is the first time the mechanisms which bring about insanity have been fully viewed. I must say that it requires a bit of confronting.

The alleviation of the condition of insanity has also been accomplished now and the footnote in Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health concerning future research into this field can be considered fulfilled.

The things a C/S should know about insanity are as follows:

HIGHER PERCENT

About 15% to 20% of the human race apparently is insane or certainly a much higher percent than was estimated.

The truly insane do not necessarily act insane visibly. They are not the psychiatric obvious cases who go rigid for years or scream for days. This is observed only in the last stages or during temporary stress.

Under apparent social behavior the continual crimes knowingly committed by the insane are much more vicious than ever has been catalogued in psychiatric texts.

The actions of the insane are not “unconscious”. They are completely aware of what they are doing.

All insane actions are entirely justified and seem wholly rational to them. As they have no reality on the harmful and irrational nature of their conduct it does not often register on an E-Meter.

The product of their post duties is destructive but is excused as ignorance or errors.

As cases in normal processing they roller coaster continually.

They nearly always have a fixed emotional tone. It does not vary in nearly all insane people. In a very few it is cyclic, high then low.

All characteristics classified as those of the “suppressive person” are in fact those of an insane person.

The easiest ways for a C/S to detect the insane are:

1. Pretending to do a post or duties, the real consistent result is destructive to the group in terms of breakage, lost items, injured business, etc.

2. The case is no case gain or roller coaster and is covered under “PTS symptoms”.

3. They are usually chronically physically ill.

4. They have a deep but carefully masked hatred of anyone who seeks to help them.

5. The result of their “help” is actually injurious.

6. They often seek transfers or wish to leave.

7. They are involved in warfare with conflicts around them which are invisible to others. One wonders how they can be so involved or get so involved in so much hostility.

TYPES

The German psychiatric 1500 or so “different types of insanity” are just different symptoms of the same cause. There is only one insanity and from it springs different manifestations. Psychiatry erred in calling these different types and trying to invent different treatments.

DEFINITION

Insanity can now be precisely defined.

The definition is:

INSANITY IS THE OVERT OR COVERT BUT ALWAYS COMPLEX AND CONTINUOUS DETERMINATION TO HARM OR DESTROY.

Possibly the only frightening thing about it is the cleverness with which it can be hidden.

Whereas a sane person can become angry or upset and a bit destructive for short periods, he or she recovers. The insane mask it, are misemotional continuously and do not recover. (Except by modern processing.)

THE NATURE OF MAN

Man is basically good. This is obvious. For when he begins to do evil he seeks to destroy his memory in order to change and seeks to destroy his body. He seeks to check his evil impulses by inhibiting his own skill and strength.

He can act in a very evil fashion but his basic nature then makes it mandatory that he lessens himself in many ways.

The towering “strength” of a madman is a rarity and is compensated by efforts at self-destruction.

Man’s mortality, his “one life” fixation, all stem from his efforts to check himself, obliterate his memory in a fruitless effort to change his conduct and his self-destructive habits and impulses and losses of skills and abilities.

As this rationale proves out completely in processing and fits all cases observed, we have for the first time proof of his actual nature.

As only around 20% are insane, and as those who previously worked in the mental field were themselves mainly insane, Man as a whole has been assigned an evil repute. Govemments, where such personalities exist, listen to the opinion of the insane and apply the characteristic of 20% to the entire hundred percent.

This gives an 80% wrong diagnosis. Which is why mental science itself was destructive when used by states.

TECHNIQUES

The only technique available at this writing which will benefit the insane is contained in all the overt-motivator sequences and Grade II technology.

At Flag at this writing new improvement on this exists but it is so powerful that slight errors in use can cause a psychotic break in the insane. It therefore will only be exported for use by specially trained persons and this programming will require quite a while.

MEANWHILE it helps the C/S to know and use these firm rules:

ALWAYS RUN DIANETIC TRIPLES.

Never run Singles. The overt side (Flow 2) is vital. If you only run Flow 1 Motivators, the pc will not recover fully. Further running Flow 1 (Motivator only) any psychotic being processed will not recover but may even trigger into a psychotic break. If one never ran anything but motivators, psychotic manifestations would not erase.

DEPEND ON EXPANDED GRADE II TECHNOLOGY TO EASE OFF OR HANDLE THE INSANE.

Don’t keep asking what’s been done to him as he’ll trigger.

A new discovery on this is that when you run out the motivator the person gets a higher reality on his overts. If you ran out all his motivators he would have no reason for his overts. If these are not then run out he might cave himself in.

PATTERN OF BEHAVIOR

The APPARENT pattern of insane behavior is to come in (ask for processing, go on staff, etc) with the advertised intention of being helped or helping, then mess up either as a pc or on post, then state how bad it all is and leave. It looks obvious enough. He came, found it bad, left.

That is only the APPARENT behavior. APPARENT REASONS.

Based on numerous cases, this is the real cycle. Hearing of something good that might help these hateful awful rotten nasty people, the psycho comes in, wrecks this, upsets that, caves in this one, chops up that one and WHEN SOMEBODY SAYS “NO!” the psychotic either

(a) Caves himself in physically or

(b) Runs away.

The psychotic is motivated by intent to harm.

If he realizes he is harming things he shouldn’t, he caves himself in. If he is afraid he will be found out, he runs.

In the psychotic the impulse is quite conscious.

CONCLUSION

None of this is very nice. It is hard to confront. Even I find it so.

Freud thought all men had a hidden monster in them for he dealt mainly with the psychotic and their behavior was what he saw.

All men are not like this. The percentage that are is greater than I supposed but is a long way from all men.

Sometimes one only becomes aware of these when things are getting worked on and improved. They stay on as long as it can be made bad or there is hope it can be destroyed. Then when attention is given to improvement they blow.

Artists, writers often have these types hanging around them as there is someone or something there to be destroyed. When success or failure to destroy or possible detection appears on the scene they blow, often as destructively as possible.

Orgs are subjected to a lot of this. A psychotic sometimes succeeds in blowing off good staff. And then sooner or later realizes how evil he is acting and sickens or leaves.

The society is not geared to any of this at all. The insane walk around wrecking the place and decent people think it’s “human nature” or “inevitable” or a “bad childhood”.

As of this writing the insane can be handled. The proof of any pudding is the processing. And this is successful. It is also rather swift. But, as I say, it is so swift the special technique has to be done by the specially trained flubless auditor.

For a long while I’ve realized that we would have to be able to handle insane people as the psychiatrist is fading. I have had opportunity to work on the problem. And have it handled. Until it is fully released, the C/S will benefit greatly from knowing the above as these come on his lines far more often than he has suspected.

The insane can be helped. They are not hopeless.

I trust this data will be of use.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH: rr.rd
Copyright © 1970
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


[Referred to by HCO B 10 May 1972, Robotism, Volume VIII, page 127.]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 17 DECEMBER 1971R
Remimeo (HCO B 2 December 1970 Revised)
Int RD (Revised 30 March 1974)
Checksheet


C/S Series 23RA


INTERIORIZATION SUMMARY
(Revised and updated to include 1971 Int HCO Bs)
All changes are in this type style.


INTERIORIZATION CAN BE BADLY MISRUN.

The following HCO Bs cover Interiorization Rundowns.

HCO B 5 Mar 1971 “Exteriorization and High TA”
HCO B 11 Apr 1970 “Auditing Past Exterior”
HCO B 6 May 1970 “Blows—Auditing Past Exterior”
HCO B 30 May 1970 “Interiorization Intensive—2-Way Comm”
HCO B 20 Aug 1970 “Exteriorization Rundown Musts”
HCO B 24 Sept 1971 “Urgent—Interiorization Rundown”
HCO B 29 Oct 1971 “Int Rundown Correction List Revised”
HCO B 16 Dec 1971 C/S Series 35R (Revised) “Interiorization Errors”
HCO B 17 Dec 1971R C/S Series 23RA (this HCO B)

The examination of Interiorization Rundowns done in the field discloses that some auditors engaged in running it have not been fully checked out on it. HCO PL 26 Aug 1965 gives the correct way to do a starrate checkout. Clay demos must also be correctly done. These are covered in HCO B 11 Oct 1967 and HCO B 30 Oct 1970. These HCO Bs on Int Rundown, Starrates and Clay Demos plus HCO PL 20 July 1970, Issue III, 2-WC as below, make the necessary pack for checking out an auditor before letting him near an Int Rundown. And all Interiorization materials as above MUST BE CHECKED OUT STARRATE AND IN CLAY before a C/S permits one of his auditors to run it on a pc.


QUADS CANCELLED

“The disadvantages of Quad Dianetics outweigh any advantages in actual practice.

“Flow Zero is therefore cancelled as part of Dianetics and Lower Grades. “(LRH HCO B 15 July 71, “Quads Cancelled”.)


UNNECESSARY

“The words ‘went in’ and ‘go in’ MUST be said to the pc and cleared on the meter. If there is needle action, one runs an Int RD as per the Int Rundown Pack.

“If there aren’t any reads one does NOT do an Int Rundown on the pc as it is unnecessary and classifies as ‘running an unreading item’.

“When this test is omitted you get an unnecessary Int RD being done on a pc.

“This will eventually have to be repaired.


“FLUBBED R3R

“When the auditor does not do flubless auditing errors occur in the auditing itself. These will hang up an Int RD.

“OVERRUN

“It usually happens that an Int RD is overrun. It goes flat on Secondary F2, let us say. The auditor keeps on going past the win.

“This will hang up the Rundown.

“One of the ways an overrun occurs is the pc goes exterior during it. Yet the auditor keeps on.

“Another way is pc has a big Cog, big win. Auditor keeps going on with the RD.” —LRH (HCO B 24 Sept 71, ‘‘Urgent—Interiorization Rundown’’)


REPAIR OF INT

“If even years after an Int RD the pc has a high TA or a low TA, then Int trouble is at once suspected and the original Int RD and any repair of it is suspected and must be handled. “—LRH (From the LRH original HCO B C/S Series 35R, Revised 16 Dec 71, ‘‘Interiorization Errors”) (Handle it by HCO B 29 Oct 71, “Int Rundown Correction List Revised”.)

TWO-WAY COMM

There is a two-way comm step that follows a day or so after an Interiorization Rundown .

An auditor doing this step, preferably the same auditor, MUST BE CHECKED OUT ON TWO-WAY COMM.

No C/S should permit any auditor to do any 2-way comm until the auditor has been checked out on HCO PL 20 July 1970, Issue III, “Two-Way Comm Checksheet”. One can obtain these tapes easily from Pubs (as the Sea Org has recently forced in this line and quality and delivery). Pending such tapes one can certainly get the rest of the materials on the checksheet done by the auditor and let him do 2-way comm while being very watchful as a C/S.

C/SING INT

The correcting of an Interiorization Rundown is far harder than making sure that auditors can do the usual in the first place.

Nearly all a C/S’s hard work comes from auditors not well trained on courses (indifferent courses) and failing to check auditors out well on the materials before permitting them to deliver a new rundown.

The correction of Int is hard since until it is complete, other auditing is inadvisable. One, however, gets the Int Rundown done.


“INT IS A REMEDY

“The Int RD is not understood as a REMEDY. It is not something you do on all pcs.

“Pc goes Exterior in auditing.

“Later his TA goes high.

“Then you do an Int RD.

“You test Int for read as above. If it BDs you do an Int RD.

“You just don’t do one because a pc goes exterior.

“One reason unnecessary Int RDs get done is that the Registrar sells one. That makes the Reg a C/S. So the C/S and auditor run it.

“Maybe it wasn’t needed.

“So if it wasn’t needed it will eventually have to be repaired.”—LRH (HCO B 2
Sept 71, “Urgent—Interiorization Rundown”) (Repair with an Int RD Correction List Revised, HCO B 29 Oct 1971.)

The Interiorization Rundown is a REMEDY designed to permit the pc to be further audited after he has gone exterior.

The Int Rundown is NOT meant to be sold or passed off as a method of exteriorizing a pc. This is very important.

It is general auditing on usual Dianetics and Scientology actions that brings about Exteriorization.

When the pc goes or is found to be exterior one then orders the Interiorization Rundown. Otherwise the TA will misbehave.

The rundown is a REMEDY USED AFTER EXTERIORIZATION HAS OCCURRED BY REASON OF GENERAL AUDITING.

Anxiety to get exterior will prompt a pc to buy and a Registrar to sell an Interiorization Rundown. It is in effect just more auditing as far as the Registrar is concerned. When a pc has gone exterior the Registrar can insist on his buying enough hours for the remedy.

The Int Rundown stabilizes the exteriorization and makes it possible to audit the pc further.

DISABILITY

If an auditor can’t smoothly audit a rundown as simple as an Int Rundown, then he is exposed as being unable to run Standard Dianetics and should be cleared of his misunderstoods and overts and retrained.

The only real trouble one gets into on an Int Rundown stems from the inability of the auditor to run a smooth, good TRed R3R session. Pcs are not hard to run on it.


C/S WINS

A C/S cannot win at all if he is continually having to make up for flubby auditing by the auditor.

Therefore the C/S must be very sure his auditors are fully checked out on things they are to run before running them.

If there is no Qual Staff Training Officer or no Cramming, a C/S can fully afford to do the training and cramming himself. Otherwise he will lose far more than that time in C/Sing for auditors not checked out.

By the skill of his auditors you know the C/S. Not by his unusual solutions after flubs.

The Int Rundown is too easy to do to have any trouble—the trouble comes when the auditors are not checked out beforehand, starrate and in clay on new things the are to run.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:MH:ntm.rd (Updated with recent
Copyright © 1970, 1971 ,1974 LRH data by order of
by L. Ron Hubbard L. Ron Hubbard by
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Training & Services

[HCO PL 20 July 1970, Issue III, Two-Way Comm Checksheet, Bureau) mentioned above was revised on 25 November 1974 as a BPL.]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 28 FEBRUARY 1971
Remimeo
HGC Auditor
Checksheet C/S Series 24
Academy Level 0
Checksheet
Dn Cse Checksheet IMPORTANT

METERING READING ITEMS

(NOTE: Observation I have recently done while handling a C/S line has resulted in a necessary clarification of the subject of “a reading item or question” which improves older definitions and saves some cases.)

It can occasionally happen that an auditor misses a read on an item or question and does not run it as it “has not read”. This can hang up a pc badly if the item was in fact a reading item or question. It does not get handled and exists in records as “No read” when in fact it DID read.

THEREFORE ALL DIANETIC AUDITORS WHOSE ITEMS OCCASIONALLY “DON’T READ” AND ALL SCIENTOLOGY AUDITORS WHO GET LIST QUESTIONS THAT DON’T READ MUST BE CHECKED OUT ON THIS HCO B IN QUAL OR BY THE C/S OR SUPERVISOR.

These errors come under the heading of Gross Auditing Errors as they affect metering.

1. An Item or Question is said to “Read” when the needle falls. Not when it stops or slows on a rise. A tick is always noted and in some cases becomes a wide read.

2. The read is taken when the pc first says it or when the question is cleared. THIS is the valid time of read. It is duly marked (plus any blow down). THIS reading defines what is a reading item or question. CALLING IT BACK TO SEE IF IT READ IS NOT A VALID TEST as the surface charge may be gone but the item or question will still run or list.

3. Regardless of any earlier statements or material on READING ITEMS, an item does not have to read when the auditor calls it to be a valid item for running engrams or listing. The test is did it read when the pc first said it on originating it or in Clearing it?

4. That an item or question is marked as having read is sufficient reason to run it or use it or list it. Pc Interest, in Dianetics, is also necessary to run it, but that it did not read again is no reason to not use it.

5. When listing items the auditor must have an eye on the meter NOT necessarily the pc and must note on the list he is making the extent of read and any BD and how much. THIS is enough to make it a “reading item” or “reading question”.

6. In Clearing a listing Question the auditor watches the meter, NOT necessarily the pc and notes any read while clearing the question.

7. An additional calling of the item or question to see if it read is unnecessary and not a valid action if the item or question read on origination or Clearing.

8. That an item is marked as having read on an earlier Dianetic list is enough (also checking interest) to run it with no further read test.

9. To miss seeing a read on an origin or clearing is a Gross Auditing Error.

10. Failing to mark on the list or worksheet the read and any BD seen during pc origination or clearing the question is a Gross Auditing Error.

EYESIGHT

Auditors who miss reads or have poor eyesight should be tested and should wear the proper glasses while auditing.

GLASSES

The rims of some glasses could obstruct seeing the meter while the auditor is looking at the worksheet or pc.

If this is the case the glasses should be changed to another type with broader vision.

WIDE VISION

A good auditor is expected to see his meter, pc and worksheet all at one time. No matter what he is doing he should always notice any meter movement if the meter needle moves.

If he cannot do this he should use an Azimuth Meter and not put paper over its glass but should do his worksheet looking through the glass at his pen and the paper—the original design purpose of the Azimuth Meter. Then even while writing he sees the meter needle move as it is in his line of vision.

CONFUSIONS

Any and all confusions as to what is a “reading item” or “reading question” should be fully cleaned up on any auditor as such omissions or confusions can be responsible for case hang-ups and needless repairs.

NO READ

Any comment that an item or question “did not read” should be at once suspected by a C/S and checked with this HCO B on the auditor.

Actually non-Reads, a non-reading item or question means one that did not read when originated or cleared and also did not read when called.

One can still call an item or question to get a read. That it now reads is fine. But if it has never read at all, the item will not run and such a list will produce no item on it.

It is not forbidden to call an item or question to test it for read. But it is a useless action if the item or question read on origination by the pc or clearing it with him.

IMPORTANT

The data in this HCO B, if not known, can cost case failures. Thus it must be checked out on auditors.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder



LRH:nt.rd
Copyright © 1971
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 5 MARCH 1971
Remimeo

C/S Series 25


THE FANTASTIC NEW HGC LINE
(A marvelous new C/S Auditor line has just
been piloted in for HGCs.)


In the new C/S line the Auditor, in his Admin time at the end of the day, or when he has no preclears, does Folder Error Summaries or Progress and Advance Programs for his pcs and does the C/S form for the Tech C/S as well as adds the day’s process and the length of the session and amount of Admin time on that folder to the inside front cover of the folder, with the process run and result.

If his programs and C/Ses are acceptable to the Tech C/S, the Auditor gets full Well Done Auditing Hour credit on his stat.

The Auditor logs his sessions for the day in the general HGC Auditor’s log and his Admin time is also logged.

This Admin time is subtracted from the bought hours of the pc where auditing is sold by the hour.

Where Auditors are so engaged and the new folder routing line is in use, this C/S form is used:

Full blank page.

Pc’s Name (Red) Date

Auditor’s Name (Red) Class of Auditor required next sess.

(Session Grade) left blank

Auditor’s comment (Red) or think about the case if he wishes.

The next C/S

1. Blue

2. Blue

3. Blue

4. Blue

Auditor Signature (Red)

The Auditor does not grade his own session. He leaves this blank.

The correctly Admined folder is then given to Tech Services which routes it (usually with the Auditor’s other folders for the day) to the C/S.

The C/S looks it over (it is HIS final responsibility for the case being run right).

The C/S looks to see if the Examiner form taken by the Examiner at session end F/Ned. If it did not he leaves the grade line blank as it is a No Grade session (see F/N
and well done hours) as the Auditor gets no hour credit for the session. If the C/S and other Admin is ok he writes OK with his initial in the session grade space. If none of it is okay he leaves it blank and does the C/S form or programs completely new. In this last case he enters a subtract figure in his log for the auditing time for the week against that Auditor’s name.

If the Exam form F/Ned, but the Admin is not okay and the session actions were not okay the C/S writes “Well Done by Exam” on his own new C/S in its proper place and ignores the form and subtracts the Admin time in his book to subtract the Admin from the Auditor’s week’s stat.

If the session was not okay with no F/N at Exams yet the Admin and next C/S are ok, the Auditor loses the session time in the C/S but gets the Admin time credited to his week’s stat. The C/S subtracts the session time in his book, not the Admin time.

Of course, as we hope is usually the case, if the Auditor did the C/S, did a correct session, got an F/N at Exam and did the Admin and next C/S is correct, then the C/S marks “Very well done” in the blank space for session grade with his initial. After inspection, this would be the sole action of the C/S regarding that folder.

By the C/S writing in the session grade (Very well done, well done, okay, flunk, to cramming) the Auditor is receiving acknowledgement for his work and is not just acking himself.

THE NEW LINE

The Ideal Folder-C/S line can shift the number of well done hours from a ceiling of 250-300 to 600-800 with one C/S. No matter how many Auditors an org has, older lines put a 250-300 top ceiling on the org’s well done hours.

When hours could go above 600 due to the available Auditors (20 or 30), a new parallel line has to be manned by a new C/S, new D of P and another Examiner and more Tech Services personnel.

Despite how hard the C/S and anyone else in tech works, a line not so run will ceiling at about 250 hours, no matter how many Auditors are hired.

A C/S using the old lines can C/S for about 5 working Auditors only with the line running any old way. And even so will work himself half to death.

In trying to get pcs handled, Auditors will be added. The C/S will not be able to handle his job. The line, being faulty, gets pegged at about 250 hours no matter how hard the C/S and Admin people work.

With the same C/S and Tech Services people, and a correct new line, 24 to 30 Auditors will be kept busy at their 5 hours a day (given auditing rooms) and the stat will be able to rise to 600 to 800.

NEW SEQUENCE

1. Auditor picks up his pc folders and his pc schedule list at Tech Services at the start of his day from the LEAVING rack.

2. Tech Services (having a duplicate list) begins sending pcs to him (using Tech Pages).

3. The Auditor gives the session.

4. The Auditor leaves the folder in the Auditing room at session end and takes the pc to the Examiner.

5. The Examiner simply does the Exam form on a meter with no folder. He sends the Exam form (hand route) to Tech Services.

6. The Auditor returns at once to his auditing room and a Tech Page has a pc there waiting for him.

7. Having done all his pcs for the day, the Auditor carries his folders to the Auditor Admin Room.

8. Tech Services has placed the Exam forms in the Auditor Admin Room and sees they get into the Auditor’s basket and the folder.

9. The Auditor does the complete Admin of the session.

10. The Auditor does any program needed for future sessions.

11. The Auditor C/Ses the folder for the next session.

12. The Auditor marks in a box (2 columns) on a sheet stapled to the inside front cover the process, the Exam result, the session time and the Admin time he has just put in.

13. The Auditor hands his completed folders in to Tech Services.

14. Tech Services gets the folders to the C/S using a Folder Page who comes on late and works the C/S’s hours.

15. Fed the folders rapidly by the Folder Page who is standing in the C/S area, the C/S does his C/S work. If the Folder Page is fast, removing folders and putting the new one in, chasing up data and other bits for the C/S, the time of C/Sing even when done very carefully will be found to average 3 to 5 minutes a folder even when some require full programming (but not FESing). This makes a ceiling of about 100 folders (sessions) a day for the C/S, an output of 30 Auditors. Needless to say the C/S and the Auditors have to know their business and Qual Cramming is used extensively both for new material and for flubs both in auditing and C/Sing by Auditors.

16. The Folder Page gets the folders over to the D of P office preserving the piles per Auditor as much as possible.

The C/S posts the data he wants Auditors to know or do on the AUDITORS’ BOARD of the Auditors’ Admin Room. He turns in his Cramming Orders into the D of P basket. This finishes his actions.

Where there is a senior Review C/S there is a hot spur line from the C/S to the senior C/S and back to the C/S. This is not necessarily an instant line. It can be a 12 hour lag line. In orgs where a C/O or Exec Dir or Product Officer or Org Officer is also a very skilled C/S this hot line would probably be in. New tech in use, fantastic completions and utter dog cases nobody can make anything out of go on this senior C/S hot spur line. There are very few of these, only two or three a day in a very busy org. The senior C/S “does” these and sends them back to the C/S. They are then sent on as usual to the D of P.

17. The Director of Processing comes on duty very early. The C/Sed folders will all be there. The D of P has assignment master sheets that are kept up by the D of P.

The D of P does the day’s schedules, a list for each Auditor. The lists preferably have a few too many pcs on them.

The D of P can tell what Class of Auditor is required for the next session because the Auditor has marked it in in the upper right-hand corner of the C/S for the next session.

When the D of P has the lists done the folders are placed in the “leaving” rack of Tech Services and Tech Services, now up and about, is given the lists and gets to work on the scheduling board, moving the names about to agree with the lists.

Tech Services does any room shifts or handlings at this time.

18. The D of P now goes to the Auditor Admin Room and begins to muster Auditors from her muster list as they come in and gets them over to Tech Services.

19. A Cramming personnel will be in there trying to get any crammings scheduled.

20. Tech Services hands out folders (which are in neat piles for each Auditor) and schedules to the Auditors as they turn up and handles any arguments or shifts in sequence.

21. Tech Pages are on phones or running to round up pcs and get them going to sessions, which work continues all day.

22. The D of P interviews any hung-up or curious pcs or as requested by the C/S or gets new Auditors or keeps up Admin. This goes on until the C/S comes in when the DofP is off.

23. The Auditor picking up his folders begins the cycle all over again at ( 1 ) above.


ABOVE 600

When the well done hours go above 600 a week, A WHOLE NEW HGC is put in duplicating the first, with its own C/S, D of P, T/S, auditing rooms and Auditor Admin Room. It would be HGC Section Two or HGC2 with the original being HGC1 .

A special second Cramming would have to be provided in Qual for it.

At first they would share new hours and build up independently. More HGCs are added to the Department at each multiple 600 wd hours.


SENIORS

The two chief seniors in the area are the C/S (for tech) and the D of P (for Auditors and bodies).

It is the D of P who must see that Auditors exist and are on post.

It is Tech Services who sees pcs are rounded up and audited. The D of T/S is actually in charge of pcs and all folder files and all board keep-up work.

The D of P should have some tech training. The D of T/S need not have any. The C/S of course is the Tech Expert and should be an HSST.

If there are no Auditors it is the D of P’s neck.

If there are no C/Ses it is the C/S’s neck.

If there are no folders it is the D of T/S’s neck.

And if there are no auditing rooms it is the D of T/S’s neck.

If signed-up scheduled pcs don’t get to session it is the D of T/S’s neck.

If there are no NEW pcs it is the D of P’s neck who should begin to shoot Dissem Secs and Registrars and procure new pcs on a by-pass for the org.

From this a table of seniors and duties can be made.


CRAMMING

You will notice no pcs are sent to Review on this new line. Review actions are done in Tech as a patch-up in Tech. The Qual Sec is responsible for overall tech quality BUT DOES IT BY CRAMMING C/Ses or Auditors.

Thus Cramming is a busy street.

Cramming must be good, check-outs excellent.

If an Auditor doesn’t grasp a C/S he has received he gets help from Cramming.

Auditors new to the HGC are given a fast hard grooving in in Cramming or a Qual Interne Course. (New Auditors never audit until grooved in.)

Tech will be as good as the Cramming Officer can cram.

This line is grooved in by the HAS and kept in by Qual. Or if there is no Qual, it is kept in by the HAS who will find no Qual very embarrassing.


DUMMY RUN

The line should be dummy run by folders, “pcs” and Auditors until they understand it.

People are often totally unaware of lines and get very sloppy.

Thus this line has to be drilled hard on old and new tech personnel. All must know this exact line.

It is a good line.

Fully in, it raises the well done hours stat from 250 per week maximum at total overload to an easy 600 to 800.

Auditors must audit five hours a day, 25 minimum per week of well done hours for any bonus to be paid at all. In the SO they get no pay at all much less bonuses if short on their 25.

Tech Services and an unenergetic D of P or a bad Dissem Sec and Registrar set-up can cause a no pc situation. And often do unless pushed.

But counting FESes and Admin in on an Auditor’s wd time helps slack periods to even out. And one Auditor can FES and program folders for others or from files if he is left adrift and short-timed by the D of P or D of T/S or until the Tech Division forces the Dissem Div and Distribution Div to really get on the ball and wear their hats on pc flow.


PROCUREMENT

The D of P has always had new pc procurement responsibility when all else failed or even when it didn’t.

Old folders, for example, are a marvelous source of new auditing repairs and intensives. An FES done on an old folder and a letter to “come in and get audited before you fall apart” is excellent pc procurement, usually neglected by Registrars. Any procurement by a D of P is legitimate.

Auditors who have no pcs can write procurement letters and have for 20 years.


SUMMARY

This is a beautiful line. It has been piloted hard.

It will serve as well as it is checked out, drilled in and used.

This line is the key to affluence from pcs alone.

(But if the org isn’t training Auditors heavily, you’ll soon have no Auditors to be on it and the org will not gain its high income low cost cushion from training.)

This line is the answer to really getting auditing done in an area.


LRH:nt.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1971 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 6 MARCH 1971
Issue I
Remimeo

C/S Series 26

NEW USES FOR THE GREEN FORM


The Green Form comes into its own with a new method of use.

A lot of cases have been cracked lately using the GF in a new way.

Designed as the Qual tool in 1965 it came into disrepute by getting assessed item by item to an F/N. This made it F/N on a rud.

Thus the whole battery of tricks in the GF never get used on a pc.

There is another assessment Method. Method 5. It is “once through marking the length and BD of all reads”.

One can then C/S “Assess GF once through”.

Actually one usually says,

“GF + 40 Method 5”.

This means the auditor (usually on a case that is messy or just as a routine part of a Progress Program) just rat-a-tat-tat assesses the lot, marks the reads’ length and BDs.

The C/S action that follows—the “Handle” consists of putting a red half swirl around each that read and then doing the C/S for it.

List outness is always handled first. Then ruds like ARC Brks, W/Hs and PTPs. Then more or less by the longest reads.

It makes a long, long C/S in cases that are boggy.

One uses engram running on it whenever he gets a chance as in “drugs”.

Hidden standards are listed on a “Who/what would have______(the symptom)?” and “O/W on the item found”.

A lot of old processes get a chance on these GF reads. It isn’t all “2-way comm on_______”.

Foreign Language cases who do not have English as a native tongue and people who don’t understand a lot have to have the GF items cleared. One takes the reads while clearing the Question, of course.

Designed as a Case Cracker, this new use of the Green Form restores it to a mighty weapon.

Since I redeveloped ways to assess and began to really use this Green Form, I’ve seen several very rough ridgy cases fall apart.

So it is a very cheerful re-discovery. And it is highly urged.


LRH:mes.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1971 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 6 MARCH 1971
Issue II
Remimeo


C/S Series 27



LONG C/Ses


A long C/S is far more desirable than a short C/S in all but the most sickly and feeble cases.

In doing a long C/S, the auditor can also end it off where an F/N goes 3i4 to a dial wide and looks like it will persist. The pc has a win.

A long C/S also permits an auditor to adjust his own length of session.

If the C/S isn’t complete on that day, one simply adds (1) “Fly a rud” and (2) “Continue C/S of (yesterday).”

By having a whole Progress Program (repair) laid out on a red sheet and clipped with its green Advance Pgm (grade chart) inside the front cover, over the session summary, the guidance for the case is right there. This gets checked off as done.

The C/S could consist of half the program or even (in shorter programs) all of it.


Handling

One speeds a line by taking repeated handlings out of it.

Less sessions mean less handling.

Thus the session is more economical if long.

Getting the pc and folder rounded up 5 times when it means the same number of hours to do it 2 times saves wear and tear.

This is the benefit of very long C/Ses.


Dianetic C/Ses

Dianetic sessions often go 5 or even 8 hours.

One tries to do all the flows of an item in one session.


Length of Pgms

When auditing the public, not staff, you long program.

In a Progress (repair) Program you try to throw the whole bag of tricks at them.

These are not only repairs, when you do a Progress Program. You throw in a lot of other bits like 2-way comms on BD items.

You now have a Hi-Lo TA List to assess and an Expanded Green Form.


Advance Programs

All Advance (gradesheet) Programs start lower than the pc was if the pc got in trouble where he was.

Often a grade is obviously out below where he is graded.

Let us say he is a bogged “Grade IV”. Well, he couldn’t be a Grade IV. So the Advance Program (green paper) that you do picks him up at Grade 0 or even Dianetics.

A bogged “OT I” the other day began to win when

(a) given a long long Progress Program, and

(b) shoved back to Grade III on the Advance Program and brought on up all the way including OT I before going on to OT II!


Thorough C/Ses

Thus you can have long C/Ses only when you have long programs already done and pinned to the inside of the front cover, a pink one for Progress (non grade) and a green one for Advance (back up the grades).

Don’t try to save auditing time. Save instead repeated handlings.

This does not go into “over-repair”. A Progress Pgm contains all sorts of bits like 2-wc on “What do you feel you owe your family” (as the pc is always getting off about his family in Ruds).

The advance of a case is the amount of charge you get off it.

Long C/Ses ease your Admin lines greatly.

They also give less chance of having ruds go out between sessions.

Short sessioning has its uses—small children, sick people, psychos.

But long sessions save time in the long run and get the job done.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:mes.rd
Copyright © 1971
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 7 MARCH 1971RA
Remimeo Revised 6 April 1974
HGC Auditors
Dn & Scn C/S Series 28RA
Checksheets
C/Ses USE OF DIANETICS

Revised per HCO B 15 July 71, Issue I, “Quads Cancelled”
(Revisions in this type style)

Where a case has only been run on single flow Dianetics (Flow 1 ) one goes back to the first Dianetic item ever run of which record can be found and does F1, F2, F3 in that order.

To C/S a case for Triple Dianetics it is best to first lay out a Scientology repair, making sure the case is flying, then list out the items already run on Single and Triple. Then get them run so that all three flows are complete on each item in sequence from first to last.

This includes any LX items, former practice, drugs or any other engram running. These, like Dianetic items, are listed in their correct sequence of former running.

Then the missing flows are run.

A rehab step of the flows already run is not necessary. This rehab of a flow already run to EP is usually used only when there is question about its having gone to F/N Cog VGIs. In C/Sing for Triples one COMPLETES any flow of an item found that did not F/N. This is indicated on the Item list.

DOING THE LIST

The Item list is done by the auditor in his admin time for well done time credits.

All former Dianetic items ever run are listed and what flows have been run on them and to what end phenomena.

Example: Engram List
3 Sept 69 Sadness (exact wording that was used) F1
4 Sept 69 A Bored Feeling F1 Bogged
6 Sept 69 An Apathetic Outlook F1 Bogged
6 Nov 69 LX Agonized F1 F2 F3
7 Nov 69 Former Therapy F1 F2 F3
F2 Bogged
9 Nov 69 Earlier Practices F1 Bogged
10 Nov 69 A Horrible Sadness F1 Bogged
5 July 70 Int RD F1 F2 F3
F3 Bogged
6 July 71 An Awful Pressure F1 Bogged

Such a list is then handled from the earliest forward by:

(a) Completing the bogged flow and
(b) Completing the missing flow.

INT-EXT RD

This is handled in its proper sequence on the list if the TA is not high or very low.

If the TA on the pc is currently high, Int is handled before any other action is done and all three flows are run on it.

A drug chain also makes a high TA if in existence or unflat.


FLUBS

If any auditor has a poor record of getting Dianetic Results, of bogged flows, etc, he needs an HDC Retread. His drills and TRs are out or he is committing Gross Auditing Errors.

Dianetics gives remarkable results only when flawlessly done.

The commands must be precisely given and all commands 1-9 A-D are used. It is NEVER shorted “because the pc did it”.

C/Sing

It should be realized Dianetics is its own field of C/Sing. This remains the same in Triple Dianetics.

RESULTS

Triple Dianetics, including the rerun actions, produces some very startling new

Well done Dianetics always has produced fine results.

Triple Dianetics almost doubles the gain.


REMEDIES

Any and all Dianetic Remedies and general technology remain in full use. They are not changed at all. Only Triple Flows are added in each case.

Good Luck.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:mes.ntm.rd
Copyright © 1971, 1974
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED












HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 7 MARCH 1971
REISSUED 13 JANUARY 1975
Remimeo
HGC Auditors
Dn & Scn
Checksheets C/S Series 28RA-1
C/Ses


USE OF QUADRUPLE DIANETICS



With the introduction of QUADRUPLE DIANETICS the problems of how to C/S it arise.

This rule is followed:

IN ALL BUT HCO B 24 July 69 DIANETIC ASSISTS WHERE IT CAN BE USED AT ONCE, THE FOURTH FLOW—O—MUST BE RUN ON ALL ITEMS FORWARD FROM THE FIRST DIANETIC ITEM EVER RUN ON THE CASE IF THE PC IS QUAD AND THE FLOW O READS.

Where a case has already had Flows 2 and 3 run on Singles, one goes back and runs Flow 0 on those items if it reads.

Where a case has only been run on Single Flow Dianetics (Flow 1) one goes back to the first Dianetic Item ever run of which record can be found and does F 2, F 3, F 0 in that order checking the command for read before running it, and then verifying the F 1.

To C/S a case for Quad Dianetics it is best to first lay out a Scientology repair, making sure the case is flying, then list out the items already run on Single and Triple. Then get them run so that all four flows are complete on each item in sequence from first to last.

This includes any LX items, former practice, drugs or any other engram running. These, like Dianetic items, are listed in their correct sequence of former running.

Then the missing flows are run if they read.

A rehab step of the flows already run is not necessary. This rehab of a flow already run to EP is usually used only when there is question about its having gone to F/N Cog VGIs.

In C/Sing for Quadruple one COMPLETES any flow of an item found that did not F/N. This is indicated on the item list.


DOING THE LIST

The item list is done by the Auditor in his admin time for well done time credits.

All former Dianetic items ever run are listed and what flows have been run on them and to what end phenomena.

Example:
Engram List

3 Sept 69 Sadness (exact wording that was used) F 1
4 Sept 69 A Bored Feeling F 1 Bogged
6 Sept 69 An Apathetic Outlook F 1 Bogged
6 Nov 69 LX Agonized F 1 F 2 F 3
7 Nov 69 Former Therapy F 1 F 2 F 3
F 2 Bogged
9 Nov 69 Earlier Practices F 1 Bogged

10 Nov 69 A Horrible Sadness F 1 Bogged
5 July 70 Int RD F 1 F 2 F 3
F 3 Bogged
6 July 71 An Awful Pressure F 1 Bogged

Such a list is then handled from the earliest forward by:

(a) Completing the bogged flow and

(b) Completing the missing flow, if it reads.


INT-EXT RD

This is handled in its proper sequence on the list if the TA is not high or very low.

If the TA on the pc is currently high, Int is handled before any other action is done and all four flows are run on it with the understanding that a pc run Triple on Int must have the Flow 0 checked for read before running it.

A drug chain also makes a high TA if in existence or unflat.


AUDITOR CHECKOUT

BEFORE RUNNING ANY DIANETICS QUADRUPLE EVER Y AUDITOR HDC, VI, VII, VIII AND C/Ses MUST BE CHECKED OUT THOROUGHLY ON THE QUAD DIANETICS CHECKLIST:

BTB 6 May 69R “Routine 3 R Revised” issue ll
HCO B 4 Jan 71 “Exteriorization and High TA”
HCO B 23 Jan 71 “Exteriorization”
BTB 1 Dec 70R ‘ “Dianetics Triple Flow Action”
BTB 20 May 70 ‘ TR 103, 104 Rundown”
HCO B 7 Mar 71 “Use of Quadruple Dianetics”
Reissued 13.1.75 C/S Series 28RA-1
HCO B 4 Apr 71 “Use of Quad Dianetics”
Reissued 13.1. 75 C/S Series 32RA- 1
HCO B 5 Apr 71 “Triple and Quad ReRuns”
Reissued 13.1. 75 C/S Series 33RA- 1
HCO B 21 Apr 71 “Quadruple Dianetics—Dangers Of”
Reissued 13.1. 75 C/S Series 36RB- 1

Any other HCO B of subsequent issue on this subject.

THERE IS A PACK ON THIS SUBJECT AVAILABLE FROM FLAG.


FLUBS

If any Auditor has a poor record of getting Dianetics Results, of bogged flows, etc, he needs an HDC Retread. His drills and TRs are out or he is committing Gross Auditing Errors.

Dianetics gives remarkable results only when flawlessly done.

The commands must be precisely given and all commands 1-9 A-D are used. It is NEVER shorted “because the pc did it”.

THUS ANY HDC TO AUDIT QUAD DIANETICS MUST:

(A) HAVE A RECORD OF GOOD FLUBLESS DIANETIC AUDITING or

(B) MUST HAVE A RETREAD UNDER A COMPETENT SUPERVISOR and

(C) MUST BE STARRATED (for true, not just checked) ON THE ABOVE CHECKSHEET OR THE FULL QUAD PACK.


C/Sing

Quad Dianetics, with the above, otherwise C/Ses the same as general DIANETICS.

It should be realized Dianetics is its own field of C/Sing. This remains the same in Quad Dianetics.

PROMOTION

Quad Dianetics should be promoted only when you have Dianetic Auditors, the Auditors checked out and okayed to audit as above and when you CAN DELIVER.

IVs or VIs should be available to do the Progress Pgms and steps.


UPPER LEVELS

When the IVs VIs VIIs VIIIs or IXs are checked out as above, they should use Quad Dianetics to handle any and all Engram steps called for in general auditing.

That they are upper level Auditors does not make it less necessary to do the above.


RESULTS

Quad Dianetics, including the rerun actions, produces some very startling new gains.

Well done Dianetics always has produced fine results.

Quad Dianetics almost doubles the gain.


REMEDIES

Any and all Dianetic Remedies and general technology remain in full use. They are not changed at all. Only the zero flow is added in each case.

Good Luck.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:ntjh
Copyright ©1971, 1975
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 8 MARCH 1971
Remimeo

C/S Series 29

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 2 wc Int-Ext 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, HCO B 24 July 69) 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 2 wcs 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 TRs 0 to 9 and an HAS Course (modern).

Drug chains are rehabbed and run out by Dianetics.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH:mes.rd
copyright © 1971
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 19 MARCH 1971

Remimeo
C/S Checksheet
All Auditors’ Hats
C/S Series 30



C/Sing AUDITOR-C/Ses


When auditors do their own C/Sing, the Org C/S has the additional duty of making certain their C/Ses are correct as well as their sessions.

Therefore the Org C/S (which post is now even more vital) has the duty of

1. Seeing that all auditor flubs are handled in a cramming action on the flubbed action.

2. Seeing that all auditor-as-a-C/S errors are handled in a cramming action on the C/S Series.

Normally a C/S handles his post on the Fantastic New HGC Line, HCO B 5 Mar 71, C/S Series 25, on a fast flow basis. But he is looking for

(a) “Dog cases”—pcs not running well

(b) Auditor errors

(c) Auditor Program errors

(d) Auditor C/S errors.

Those that are F/Ning VGIs at Examiner he lets go through fast verifying the exam report and the next C/S.

The moment he sees a contrary exam report (F/N with natter or BIs, high TA or low TA with any statement or no statement) he has to decide

(a) Dog Case?

(b) Auditor Error?

(c) Program Error?

(d) Auditor C/S Error?

In any of the above the Org C/S takes over and handles what he finds. He must also require a cramming action on any (b) auditor error (c) program error or (d) auditor C/S error.

The Org C/S then does it right himself.

In any event it is the Org C/S who is fully responsible for all the cases.

That the Org C/S finds a program or C/S wrong does not then cause the auditor-as-a-C/S to cease to C/S. Quite the contrary. Even if every program or C/S he writes is wrong and has to be rewritten he still takes all the actions of the auditor-as-a-C/S.

DOG CASES

Category (a) is the case who just isn’t running well.

The wrong answer to a dog case is to go on auditing and wasting hours hopefully.

The RIGHT answer is to STUDY the case carefully. The Folder Error Summary, the Folder session summary, the sessions, all have to be studied.

The standard C/S action of going back to when the pc was running well and coming forward for the error is very much in use.

Such a case is the result of a FLUB always. Example: High TA case on Power run on and on with TA in the sky. A careful FES and study of folders revealed that 2 years before, Power had been completed! Every current action was a brutal overrun! Yet the same C/S and ten separate auditors failed to see it! Indicating it and 2wc on the earlier Power handled the O/R. Example: Case RD not running well at all, TA going high. A careful study of the folder session summary at length discovered that the pc had not F/Ned on 2 way comm Int-Ext. 2wc on this point discovered a total mess of command clearing on the Int RD. This opened the door. Pc thereafter ran beautifully. Example: Pc a total nattery mess every session. Careful study found a tiny remark on the white form about going to a psychiatrist. 2wc on it and the antagonism toward auditing and the withhold of having once gone crazy vanished. Case ran well.

Careful study is the clue. The Auditor as a C/S may not put in the time needed to really sort the case out.

A current FES of recent auditing can also be ordered. This often reveals a lot of oddball goofs which when handled make the case run well.

The Org C/S is supposed to be the old master on solving these dog cases by careful study.

Heavy laurels to the auditor-as-a-C/S who spots the knot that is tangling the case up.


AUDITOR ERRORS

The errors of auditors can be so various one only looks to see if the actions of the auditor are standard when the Org C/S has to intervene.

Then the outnesses show up.

Example: Pc’s TA shooting up at session end. Examine the previous C/S. Calls for L1B. Examine session. Auditor is found to be ITSAING ARC Breaks, no ARCU CDEI, no earlier similar.

Action ordered, pick up the BD ARC Brk and do ARCU CDEI and carry it E/S to F/N.

Action ordered. Auditor to Cramming to do Pattern of Bank, why earlier? and how to fly ruds.

Always find and handle auditor goofs by Cramming. You’ll never have an HGC unless you do.

PROGRAM ERRORS

When an auditor-as-a-C/S program is poor, the Org C/S redoes it, sends the Auditor to Cramming on the relevant parts of the C/S Series or tech materials.

C/S ERRORS

When an auditor-as-a-C/S is found to have written a bad C/S that got by but didn’t work or when the next C/S is wrong, the Org C/S sends the auditor-as-a-C/S to Cramming to do the relevant part of the C/S Series or the tech that applies.


CRAMMING

An org that has no sharp, hot Cramming Section in the Qual Div—well God help it.

That org’s tech will always be shaky if not outright criminal.

Students need a Cramming or they never really learn not to goof. Where there’s no insistence they do not learn.

HGC Auditors need a Cramming. They go stale. New HCO Bs aren’t understood unless energetically checked out. The C/S in the Tech Div is at total risk where he is not backed up by Cramming.

The new HCO B 5 Mar 71, C/S Series 25, the new line, demands a Cramming as no auditor is likely to learn to C/S.

You can’t risk fast flow with no Cramming to fall back on.

And an org’s tech will never improve unless it has a Cramming for HGC auditors and course students.

Qual has to have a library of HCO Bs and course packs and books to really stay on the ball. Then its Cramming is hot, on the point, specializing mainly in finding what the auditor has neglected or misunderstood and getting it done.

Cramming and use of it is the key to a fully satisfied field and an expanding org.

The big plus points of the new HGC line are huge increases in delivery volume, very cocky never-blow auditors who get wins, an enthusiastic field, and last but not least, newly trained and competent C/Ses who guard tech by knowing a correct C/S!

The new line increases speed.

At the same time it requires greater technical safeguards.

The new HGC line won’t work unless you have a competent Qual Cramming and an Org C/S who knows his business and detects and pitchforks all flubs in auditing and C/Sing into the fast hands of a hot no-nonsense Cramming Officer.

The new line of HCO B 5 Mar 71 is a great success.

It greatly increases delivery quality as well as volume if this HCO B is stressed in putting the new line into action.



L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:mes.rd
Copyright © 1971
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 31 MARCH 1971
Remimeo

C/S Series 31

PROGRAMMING AND MISPROGRAMMING

There are three important areas of technical application:

1. Auditing Cases.
2. Case Supervising Cases.
3. Programming Cases.

Auditing generally should be gotten into an org on the routine basis of:

1. Get Auditing Volume UP.
2. Get Auditing Quality UP.
3. Get C/Sing Volume UP.
4. Get C/Sing Quality UP.
5. Get Programming Volume UP.
6. Get Programming Quality UP.

To do it in any other sequence is to organize before producing or to inhibit production.

Auditing quality is raised by getting in Cramming and getting Cramming done.

C/S quality is raised by C/S study of cases and the Qual Sec Cramming the C/S.

Programming quality is raised by getting FESes done so that the action does not block production and Cramming or Programming and then studying the case to make the Programming more real and effective.

MISPROGRAMMING

1. Programming a case without data is risky. Dropping out the FES step, not getting White Forms done, etc, short-cutting on data in general can cost tremendous amounts of lost auditing.

2. Doing a vague general hopeful program of Repair (Progress) trusting something will come up is ineffective. With data on the person’s life even on a pc never before audited, one can hit the key points even if only with 2-way comm on them. Cases that have been audited and are boggy are so for a reason. Programming without finding that reason can be very ineffective and result in few wins.

3. Running a new major program into an incomplete major program can be as deadly as failing to flatten a process before starting another process only more so.

4. Failing to end off a program when its End Phenomena is achieved is another gross error.

5. Being too ignorant of the basic bank and the tech theory (as different than processes) is another barrier to programming.

6. Not Programming at all.

The above six are the principal gross errors in programming.


LRH: mes.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1971 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 4 APRIL 1971 RA
REVISED 24 MARCH 1974

Remimeo
C/S Series 32RA

USE OF DIANETICS
(Revised per HCO B 15 July 1971, Issue I,
“Quads Cancelled”—Revisions in this type style.)


It is mandatory important urgent that one does not audit three flow items until one has brought all earlier Dianetic Items into three flows.

TRIPLE

On a case where only Flow One (Single) has been run, you don’t suddenly run a Triple (F1, F2, F3) such as on the LX Class VIII lists until one has run the earliest Dn item ever run (or that can be found) on Dn Triple and then on forward on Triple up to the LX.

REASON

Auditing additional flows while earlier items remain Single restimulates the missing flows and stacks them up as mass. They can make a pc uncomfortable until run.

All the missing flows (that were not run) are still potential mass.

This mass restimulates like something too late on the chain when a flow not run on earlier items is run on later items.

Auditing itself is a sort of time track. The earliest session blows the later sessions.

FULL FLOW TABLE

Before running Triple Dianetics one makes a table of earlier items run. Like this:

Full Flow Table

Flow
Date Item Previously Run Must Run

2/3/62 Guf Shoulder F 1 F 2, 3
3/3/67 Gow in Foot F 1 F 2, 3
30/4/67 Chow in Chump F 1 F 2, 3
29/9/68 LX Anger F 1, 2, 3
LX Peeved F 1, 2, 3
4/10/69 Feeling Numb F 1, 2, 3
5/9/70 EXT RD F 1, 2, 3
9/10/70 Feeling of Goof F 1, 2, 3
10/10/71 Dn Assist on Head F 1 F 2, 3

FLOWS

F 1 is FLOW ONE, something happening to self.

F 2 is FLOW TWO, doing something to another.

F 3 is FLOW THREE, others doing things to others.

F 0 as run in the Introspection RD is FLOW ZERO, self doing something to self.

R3R COMMANDS

Standard R3R Commands are used on Triple Dianetics.

They are the subject of another HCO B.

The Zero Command for the Introspection RD, however, is very easy being “Locate an incident of (loss or emotion) (pain and unconsciousness) when you caused yourself to have a(an) (item)” with the other commands of R3R as usual.

NARRATIVE

The question will come up, do we Triple Narrative items or Multiple somatic items.

The test is, did the flows already run F/N when they were originally run. If they did, include them. If they didn’t run exclude them.

This does not mean you omit everything that didn’t run.

REPAIR

While auditing this FULL FLOW DIANETICS you will find various chains that did not F/N when originally run.

These are included and should be concluded to F/N. This means one has to find out if they by-passed the F/N, went too early, jumped the chain, etc. Usually an L3RD assessed on that faulty action will give the answer. It is easy to make these old flubbed chains F/N unless you work at it too hard. Usually the reason they didn’t is visible on the old worksheet. The auditor forgot to ask for Earlier Beginning or by-passed the F/N or jumped the chain or tried to run it twice forgetting he’d run it before. Corny errors.

RESULT

The result of doing a FULL FLOW DIANETIC ACTION on a case is quite spectacular. The shadowy remains of somatics blow, mass blows and the pc comes up shining.

OFFERING FFD

Offering the public Full Flow Dianetics must include the cost of C/S work since it is sometimes lengthy. It is best to sell the action at a flat price that’s more than adequate to cover the auditing as well as the hours of FESing and FF table making as the time can be quite long.

The auditing can be remarkably brief. The greatest amount of time is usually spent on the C/Sing and table making.

A C/S must liaise with the Dissem Sec and Treasury Sec on selling it or he’ll find the org is losing money doing the C/Sing and tables.

A nice big fat flat price, not by hours, is best.

OT WARNING

When doing Triple Dianetics on Clears and OTs (and a very few others) it may be found that many chains are now missing or are just copies of the original. Don’t be disturbed. Pc says they’re gone now they’re gone. Just F/N the fact and carry on with the next flow or item.


LRH:ams.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright ©1971, 1974 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


[Added to by HCO B 4 April 1971-1R, Addition of 13 January 1975, Revised 22 February 1975, C/S Series 32RA-1 R, Use of Quad Dianetics, which is on page 377.]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 4 APRIL 1971-1R
ADDITION OF 13 JANUARY 1975
REVISED 22 FEBRUARY 1975
Remimeo
(Cancels HCO B 4 Apr 71, Reissued 13 Jan 75, same title.
Does NOT cancel HCO B 4 Apr 71RA, Rev. 24 Mar 74,
C/S Series 32RA, which is still valid.)

(Changes in this type style)


C/S Series 32RA-1R


USE OF QUAD DIANETICS


With the introduction of Quadruple Dianetics it is mandatory important urgent that one does not audit four flow items until one has brought all earlier Dianetic items into four flows.

TRIPLE

This also applies to Triple Dianetics. On a case where only Flow One (Single) has been run, you don’t suddenly run a Triple (F1, F2, F3) such as on the LX Class VIII Lists until one has run the earliest Dn item ever run (or that can be found) on Dn Triple and then on forward on Triple up to the LX.


QUAD

However, one would now not bother to run only Triples forward. He would locate the earliest Single or Triple (if no Single Flow) item and run it Quadruple by now running the missing flows. In the case of a pc run Triple, Flow 0 is checked for read before running it.

INT RD

In doing an INTERIORIZATION RUNDOWN one mustn’t suddenly introduce the 4th flow (F Zero).

If the case has only had Triples in Dianetics one mustn’t suddenly introduce a Flow Zero on INT. The case should be done on Triple Flow INT.

THEN all earlier Dn items in sequence run are:

(a) Listed from W/S or Folder Summaries.

(b) Brought up to current by running in all the missing flows of Quad.

(c) The INT RD fourth flow is audited in when one gets to it IF IT READS.


REASON

Auditing additional flows while earlier items remain Single or Triple restimulates the missing flows and stacks them up as mass. They can make a pc uncomfortable until run.

All the missing flows (that were not run) are still potential mass.

This mass restimulates like something too late on the chain when a flow not run on earlier items is run on later items.

Auditing itself is a sort of time track. The earliest session blows the later sessions.


FULL FLOW TABLE

Before running Quad Dianetics one makes a table of earlier items run. Like this:


FULL FLOW TABLE

Flow
Date Item Previously Run Must Run

2.3.62 Guf Shoulder F1 F2, 3, 0
3.3.67 Gow in Foot F1 F2, 3, 0
30.4.67 Chow in Chump F1 F2, 3, 0
29.9.68 LX Anger F1, 2, 3 F0
LX Peeved F1, 2, 3 F0
4.10.69 Feeling Numb F1, 2, 3 F0
5. 9.70 Int RD F1, 2, 3 F0
9.10.70 Feeling of Goof F1, 2, 3 F0
10.10.71 Dn Assist on Head F1 F2, 3, 0


FLOWS

F1 is FLOW ONE, something happening to self.

F2 is FLOW TWO, doing something to another.

F3 is FLOW THREE, others doing things to others.

F0 is FLOW ZERO, self doing something to self.


R3R COMMANDS

Standard R3R Commands are used on Quad Dianetics.

They are the subject of another HCO B.

The Zero Command however is very easy being “Locate an incident of (loss or emotion) (pain and unconsciousness) when you caused yourself to have a(an) (item)” with the other commands of R3R as usual.


NARRATIVE

The question will come up, do we Triple or Quad Narrative items or Multiple somatic items.

The test is, did the flows already run F/N when they were originally run. If they did, include them. If they didn’t run exclude them.

This does not mean you omit everything that didn’t run.

REPAIR

While auditing this FULL FLOW DIANETICS you will find various chains that did not F/N when originally run.

These are included and should be concluded to F/N. This means one has to find out if they by-passed the F/N, went too early, jumped the chain, etc. Usually an L3RD assessed on that faulty action will give the answer. It is easy to make these old flubbed chains F/N unless you work at it too hard. Usually the reason they didn’t is visible on the old worksheet. The auditor forgot to ask for Earlier Beginning or by-passed the F/N or jumped the chain or tried to run it twice forgetting he’d run it before. Corny errors.


RESULT

The result of doing a FULL FLOW DIANETIC ACTION on a case is quite spectacular. The shadowy remains of somatics blow, mass blows and the pc comes up shining.

OFFERING FFD

Offering the public Full Flow Dianetics must include the cost of FESing, FF table making, and C/S work since it is sometimes lengthy. The auditing can be remarkably brief. The greatest amount of time is usually spent on the C/Sing and the table making.

FFD is offered to the public in intensives as per HCO B 31 May 1971R, C/S Series 39R, “Standard 12 1/2 Hour Intensive Programs”. Admin time spent on C/Sing, FESing and FF table making should be deducted from the Intensive Hours purchased by the pc. This must be made known to the public when purchasing the service.

When offering FFD it should be called Quadruple Dianetics—4 times more powerful than previous auditing.

A C/S must liaise with the Dissem Sec and Treasury Sec on selling it or he’ll find the org is losing money doing the C/Sing and tables.


OT WARNING

When doing Quadruple Dianetics on Clears and OTs (and a very few others) it may be found that many chains are now missing or are just copies of the original. Don’t be disturbed. Pc says they’re gone now they’re gone. Just F/N the fact and carry on with the next flow or item.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:nt .rd
Copyright © 1971, 1975
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 5 APRIL 1971RA
Remimeo REVISED 8 APRIL 1974
All Auditors
C/Ses
Class VIII
C/S Series 33RA


TRIPLE RERUNS

(Revised per HCO B 15 July 71 Issue I
“Quads Cancelled”—Revisions in this type style.)



LAW: WHEN ONE OR MORE OF THE THREE 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 by-passed flows.


BY-PASSED 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 by-passed 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.

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 Exteriorization Remedy is based on having gone out (later) after he went in (earlier). So Exteriorizing can stick him. (People buy the Ext 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 by-passed 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 done.

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 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 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 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 Triple.

IT WOULD BE A WASTE OF TIME NOW TO RUN IN ONLY SINGLES.

So all C/Ses and Auditing actions are “Rehab or Run F1, F2, F3” when getting in all flows on things run to date.

HIGH TA

When you are sure an EXT RD has been done correctly and its 2wc went F/N and the TA later goes high, you check the EXT 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 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. Bring all his auditing up to Triple.

(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 by-passed 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 Triple.


RUNNING ZERO FLOWS
(As run in the Introspection RD)

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 Triple 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


LRH:mes.ntm jh.rd
Copyright ©1971, 1974
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

[This HCO B is added to by HCO B 5 April 1971, Reissued 13 January 1975, C/S Series 33RA-1, Triple and Quad Reruns, page 380. ]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 5 APRIL 1971
Remimeo REISSUED 13 JANUARY 1975
All Auditors
C/Ses
Class VIII
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 by-passed flows.


BY-PASSED 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 by-passed 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 by-passed 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 by-passed 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 by-passed 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 done.

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 Fl 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 Fl, 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 by-passed 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


LRH:nt jh
Copyright © 1971, 1975
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 6 APRIL 1971

Remimeo
Class VIII
All C/Ses
All Auditors
C/S Series 34


NON F/N CASES


When cases do not bring an F/N VGIs to the Examiner, it is the signal to study the whole case anew and find the bug or bugs that keep it from running and get them handled.

Recently I took over a whole series of these non F/N VGI at Examiner cases and very very carefully studied each one. IN EVERY EXAMINER NON F/N CASE I FOUND FLAGRANT OUT TECH IN (A) THE PROGRAMMING (B) THE C/SING AND (C) THE AUDITING. All three outnesses existed.

These cases were taken as all the Non F/N Exam reports on a line containing hundreds of folders and over 600 w.d. hours a week. So you can see that these errors had been missed by expert C/Ses and Auditors. The errors were missed because HOPE was being used instead of study.

There was a hope that just routine C/Ses and auditing would work it out eventually.

The fact of non F/N at Examiner was not given sufficient importance.

The fact is that many who F/Ned at the Examiner had small flaws in them yet still got by.

The Exam Non F/N indicates FLAGRANT OUT TECH in the Programming and the C/Sing and the auditing. That’s what it takes.

After a bug is found and corrected the case still may not F/N at the Examiner for a while. But after that while is passed the failure to give the Examiner an F/N means another bug and more study.

One case I found had had a major grade done twice two years apart. This was pointed out and rehabbed. But after 2 or 3 sessions the TA remained high. A restudy now found Recall Flow 2 of the Exteriorization Rundown had been run months ago to FIN and then continued for dozens of commands with the TA rising to 4.5. This was then repaired. The case then began to F/N at the Examiner. It now runs like an ordinary case.

There is always a bug, not necessarily current, often very old, in these Exam Non F/N Cases. There are sometimes two or three bugs.

The answer is NOT go on C/Sing and hope.

The answer IS, study and find the bug.

Cases run on triples after a long list of singles is a type of bug.

Cases exteriorizing and then getting no Ext RD is another bug.

Cases given false reads or already run w/hs, cases who don’t tell their cogs, cases who were on drugs but drugs were never run, cases that Rockslammed but no crime found, any of the GF 40 or GF reading items, cases with lists out, cases that are always sad or tired .. well these types of cases are the usual bugged cases. But even they sometimes F/N if only to roller coaster.

The general rule of going back to where the case was running well and coming forward still holds. But an audit past Exteriorization can be before that and only eventually catch up.

General repair is harmful when a big bug exists.

Every case I examined had a big bug. Flagrant god-awful overruns, messed up Exteriorization Rundown, three major programs begun, each incomplete, engram after engram botched and run to high TA then walked off from. The errors were real! They had been sitting there for some time unnoticed. Session after session mounting up into piles of wasted auditing.

Sick pcs are another indicator. Pc F/Ns at Exam, then reports sick. Look behind it you find some wild program, C/S and auditing error.

So the answer is to STUDY THE CASE.

Get a total FES done if one has never been done. Get a current FES done or do it yourself.

Then examine the programs and the FESes and Folder Summaries and suddenly you’ll find it.

Fortunately there aren’t many things that can really foul a case up.

1. Overruns concealed within work sheets. Major grades twice.

2. Auditing past Exterior or flubbed Ext RDs.

3. Earlier unrun flows restimulated by later runs on those flows.

4. GF + 40 Items.

5. Never handled out lists.

6. Undetected drugs or drugs never handled by Dianetics.

7. False reads called (as in w/hs that “won’t blow”).

8. Hidden standards.

9. Long Duration ARC Brks.

10. Impractical or inapplicable programs.

11. Major actions started never completed.

12. Overrepair.

There can be combinations of these.

So there aren’t many. It’s really knowing what is right so well that the wrong shows up like skywriting.

Sometimes the errors are silly. A bogged Dianetic case had gotten tons of VI repair.

The C/S, an VIII, had never realized Dianetic C/Sing is its own brand of C/Sing. He didn’t shift gears to Dianetic C/Sing when C/Sing Dianetics sessions. The auditor way back had not known that when the pc originates “It’s erased” and the TA remains high, his correct action is one more A B C D. This C/S had then tried Class VI remedies instead of telling the auditor “Flatten or rehab the last chain”.

When the chains left unflat were rehabbed all was suddenly well.

Another case was interrupted for a year on a major action and when returned to auditing was begun on a long, long repair program. Inches of folder later the interrupted program was found and resumed and the case did great. All that “hopeful” repair was lost work. Ten minutes of case study would have saved twenty hours of useless repair.

The stable datum is CASES MODERATELY WELL PROGRAMMED, C/SED AND AUDITED RUN WELL.

So cases that don’t run well (unchanging Exam natter comment, Non F/N) have a BIG error in Programming, C/Sing and Auditing.

Look well and you will find it. And if that isn’t it, there was another to be found as well.

If you can’t find the folder or data in it you should take every imaginable measure to acquire more data. D of P Interviews, 2wc sessions, telexes to his last org and telegrams to his auditors. But get data from somewhere somehow.

Soon, when hours pick up and skill, all auditing will be sold by package not by hours. So learn economy of hours!

An auditor or C/S who really knows his theory and has a good grasp of practical application knows the right way. From that he can easily see how things are wrong.

An ounce of case study is worth ten pounds of wasted sessions.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder




LRH: nt.rd
Copyright © 1971
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 16 DECEMBER 1971 RA

REVISED 19 SEPTEMBER 1974
Remimeo
Int RD Checksheet
C/S Series 35RA

All changes are in this type style.


INTERIORIZATION ERRORS

(References: HCO B 11 Apr 71 RA “L3RD”
HCO B 27 Mar 71 “Dianetic Erasure”)


Almost all the errors in an Interiorization Rundown are Dianetic errors. Most are very ordinary, even corny.

IT IS VITAL TO CORRECT AN INT RD ERROR AS A FIRST ACTION.

There is one Int RD error that is not a purely Dianetic error and that is the error doing anything else at all before an Int RD is done properly or an Int RD error is fully corrected.

The Int RD error may be simply that “Went In” and “Go In” did not read on the meter yet Int was run. This classifies as “running an unreading item”.

Or the Int RD could have been overrun. It goes flat on Secondary F2, let us say. The Auditor keeps on going past the win. This will hang up the Rundown. One of the ways an overrun occurs is the pc goes exterior during it. Yet the Auditor keeps on. Another way is pc has a big cog, big win. Auditor keeps going on with the RD.

When a pc is exteriorized by auditing and is then audited further without being given an Interiorization Rundown, his TA will go high or low and he may be very upset. Heavy masses may come in and he may also get ill.

Int RD errors also may go back to earlier Dianetic errors. A number of unflat incidents invite the overrun of these if they also occur on a Dianetic chain.

To clean up a balled-up Int RD chain or incident one may have to find and clean up the Dianetic error it is sitting on during the clean-up of the Int RD error.

Int RD errors, goofs, etc, are handled by using an Int RD Correction List Revised, HCO B 29 Oct 71R.

Auditors who can’t run ordinary R3R with great success should not be let near an Interiorization RD as their lack of smoothness in handling Dianetics will wreck the Int RD.

CLASS IV, HDC AUDITORS

An excellent Class IV HDC Auditor can easily repair a messed-up Interiorization Rundown after a folder study and by use of an Int RD Correction List Revised, HCO B 29 Oct 71R.

A Class IV HDC Auditor with an excellent Dianetic Record of wins can be given an Int RD to do or to correct IF HE IS STARRATED ON THE INT PACK AND THE TWO-WAY COMM PACK.

REPAIR

Wherever you see a TA high and a pc in trouble your first suspicions should be:

1. Audited past Ext in Auditing without an Int RD being done.

2. Int RD botched by being unnecessary (“went in” didn’t read) or overrun or Auditor goofs in the session.

3. A previously messed-up Dianetic action has gotten fouled up with the Int RD.

4. The Int Command was improperly cleared (such as “means go in and out again” “means trapped” “meant leaving” etc).

5. Firefights and worries over the high or low TA have ensued after an Int ball-up has occurred.

6. Some major action like grades or items of Power have been run twice.

7. A C/S has hopefully kept on getting the pc audited without detecting the real reason as a flubbed Int RD.

PERCENTAGES

The percent of misrun Int RDs is high, many being unnecessary or overrun.

The liability of leaving them unrepaired is high.

Reasons for high TA are averaging out close to 100% as an unrun or a flubbed and unrepaired Int RD.

EXT IN SESSION

When a pc Exteriorizes in session it is the End Phenomena for that process or action. One gently ends off in any case. Then if after the fact of going exterior in auditing, a pc’s TA goes high, then you do the Int RD. You test Int for a read (test “went in” and “go in” per HCO B 24 Sept 71, “Interiorization Rundown”) and if it reads you do an Int RD.

You just don’t do one because a pc goes exterior.

Maybe it wasn’t needed. So if it wasn’t needed it will eventually have to be repaired.

If even years after an Int RD the pc has a high TA or a low TA then Int trouble is at once suspected and the original Int RD and any repair of it is suspect and must be handled.

The Int RD Correction List Revised, HCO B 29 Oct 71R, has been designed to straighten out Int RDs. L3RD handles the Dianetic errors. Where Int RD Correction Lists have been done and the pc still has headaches, the C/S handles with AESPs (listed separately) that would make him interiorize.

There is no real trick to either running a correct Int RD or repairing a flubbed one.

The whole clue is whether or not the Auditor can audit plain ordinary garden variety R3R.

So when ANY Auditor audits a pc past Exterior and the pc’s TA goes high he should be checked out fully on the Int RD Checksheet so he won’t continue to commit the error.

And when ANYONE is going to run an Int RD he must:

A. Be an expert Dianetic Auditor and Class IV.

B. Be Starrated on all the Int RD Pack.

And when any C/S is confronted with high TAs or low TAs and doesn’t handle at once by getting an Int RD properly run or properly repaired he must be rechecked on the Dianetics Pack and the Int RD Pack.

DN C/S 1

A very careful Dianetic C/S 1 must be done on a previously unindoctrinated pc before he is run on an Int RD.

Otherwise it’s all too new.

A C/S 1 isn’t auditing.

The pc who can’t do what the Auditor says or can’t correct an erroneous action is lost.

A fully safe pc would be one who when he goes Ext in Auditing is made to do an HDC at once before he even gets any ruds put in and not audited again until he is an HDC. He’d be a pc who was relatively safe.

A pc who does what an inexpert Auditor says without question can really get fouled up ! Uneducated pcs require really flawless topnotch Auditors. The Auditor who can audit an uneducated pc is a jewel. He really has to know his business. Because the pc does whatever he says. And if he says wrongly, then there goes the session. Ever notice pc corrections in a worksheet? “I think you by-passed an F/N.” “This feels overrun.” “I had Grade I last year.” Such Auditors are not fully enough trained to handle wholly green pcs!

SIMPLICITY

Honest fellows, it’s as easy to run an Int RD as it is to run “an ear pain”.

It isn’t even mysterious or tough.

IT IS ONLY VERY IMPORTANT TO DETECT WHEN IT NEEDS TO BE DONE OR REPAIRED.

There are no mysteries.

Some Auditors have got me feeling like I’m trying to teach them to chew soft bread!


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder



LRH:nt.rd
Copyright © 1971, 1974
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 21 APRIL 1971 RB
REVISED 8 APRIL 1974
Remimeo REISSUED 21 SEPTEMBER 1974
All Auditors
Class VIII C/S Series 36RB
Dn Checksheet
Int-Ext Chksht (Revised per HCO B 15 July 71, Issue I
“Quads Cancelled”)
(Revisions in this type style.)

This HCO B has been reissued as C/S Series 36RB.
HCO B 21 April 1971RA C/S Series 36RA,
‘‘Dianetics—Getting in All Flows’’,
is cancelled.


DIANETICS

(Applies also to Int-Ext Rundown.)
(Ref HCO B 4 Apr 71 RA, C/S Series 32RA,
and HCO B 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.

Metering can miss every F/N or give “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.

Floating needles 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 L3RD on it and handle according to the L3RD.


L3RD

Using the new L3RD (HCO B 11 Apr 71 RA) 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 ABCD, then two-way comm on it with no ABCD is not going to complete it.

L3RD 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 L3RD 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 F/N. You have to use R3R 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.

L3RD 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 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 L3RD fast and handle what reads the way it should be handled according to the L3RD.

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 L3RD.

L1C is not of great use in a Dianetic ARC Brk. L3RD is.

If the pc remains ARC Broken, try L3RD again, particularly the whole L3RD.

A Scientology session would be handled with some other list (L1C, L4BR, etc). A Dianetic session, including and especially FFD, is handled with L3RD.

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 L3RD 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 Triples and an Int-Ext RD. Auditors not so handled can get pcs into serious trouble with these things.

A safe course is to use Triples on new, never audited before pcs. Those begun on Triples, use then only Triple flows.

Another safe way is to use FFD only on OT IIIs or OT IVs and done only by fully qualified FFD auditors who are also OT III.

The safest course is to require special drilling and cramming on auditors who are already known for their results by actual success story stats and call FFD and Int-Ext RD a skilled specialty.

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 HDC 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
Copyright © 1971, 1974
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED














[This HCO B is added to by HCO B 21 April 1971-1R, Addition of 13 January 1975, Revised 22 February 1975, C/S Series 36RB-1R, Quadruple Dianetics-Dangers of, page 383.]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 21 APRIL 1971-1R
Remimeo
All Auditors ADDITION OF 13 JANUARY 1975
Class VIII REVISED 22 FEBRUARY 1975
Dn Chksht
Int-Ext Chksht (Cancels HCO B 21 Apr 71, Reissued 13 Jan 75, same title.
Does not cancel HCO B 21 Apr 71RB, Reissued 21 Sept 74,
C/S Series 36RB, which is still valid. )

C/S Series 36RB-1R

QUADRUPLE DIANETICS
DANGERS OF

(Applies also to Int-Ext Rundown)

(Ref HCO B 4 Apr 71-1R, Addition of 13 Jan 75, Revised 22 Feb 75,
C/S Series 32RA-1R, and HCO B 5 Apr 71, Reissued 13 Jan 75, C/S Series 33RA-1)


In observing Quad Dianetics in the hands of Scientology Auditors not specially briefed or who had additives and figure-figure on how to move a case already run on Singles and Triples into Full Flow,

INVARIABLY THEY OVERRAN.

This makes getting Quad Dianetics in on a case dangerous unless the Auditor has the hang of it.

The flagrant (and I do mean flagrant) errors found consisted of (a) not being able to run precise Standard Dianetics in the first place; (b) re-running already erased chains “to find if they were flat”; (c) Out TRs to a wild extent; (d) refusing utterly to accept pc’s data; (e) faulty metering; (f) complete ignorance of the Auditor’s Code, notably committing the crime of Invalidating the pc; (g) running unreading Flows when catching a pc up to Quad.

REQUIREMENTS

Anyone essaying to run Quad Dianetics MUST BE CRAMMED on his R3R, the use of L3RD, all data on Quad Dianetics (as per references above and including HCO B 27 Mar 71, “Dianetic Erasure”), his basic TRs, his metering and the Auditor’s Code, and this HCO B.

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.

Metering can miss every F/N or give “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.

Floating needles can be overlooked by an Auditor. In Quad 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 a 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 anymore 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 L3RD on it and handle according to the L3RD.


L3 RD

Using the new L3RD (HCO B 11 Apr 71 RA) is a Dianetic action.


A Scientology Auditor erroneously can try to use it as a 2-way comm type of list. If a chain needed one more ABCD, then 2-way comm on it with no ABCD is not going to complete it.

L3RD has its own directions. Questions not marked with directions are used to indicate the fact. This can amount to 2-way comm as the pc chews it over. But L3RD 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 F/N. You have to use R3R 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.

L3RD 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 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.

Already flat zero flows are not uncommon. The zero flattened on the original Triple. Thus getting in that zero flow again is an overrun.

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 L3RD fast and handle what reads the way it should be handled according to the L3RD.

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 L3RD.

L1C is not of great use in a Dianetic ARC Brk. L3RD is.

If the pc remains ARC Broken, try L3RD again Method 5.

A Scientology session would be handled with some other list (L1C, L4B, etc). A Dianetic session, including and especially FFD, is handled with L3RD.

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 L3RD 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 Quad only on new never audited before pcs. Those begun on Triples, use then only Triple flows.

Another safe way is to use FFD only on OT IIIs or OT IVs and done only by fully qualified FFD Auditors who are also OT III.

The safest course is to require special drilling and cramming on Auditors who are already known for their results by actual success story stats and call FFD and Int-Ext RD a skilled specialty.


C/S RESPONSIBILITY

Any trouble a C/S is running into comes from the factors of TRs, metering, Code and incomplete or false Auditor’s 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 HDC 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, FFD grossly overrun, 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.rd
Copyright © 1971, 1975
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 3 JUNE 1971

Remimeo
VIII Checksheet
All VIIIs
Class IX C/S Series 37R
Dept 10s
All C/Ses REVISED

(C/S Series 37, HCOB 19 May 71 and C/S Series 37
Addition, HCOB 21 May 71, have been cancelled
and are not for use. They are replaced by this
HCOB, C/S Series 37R.)

MUST BE CHECKED OUT *RATE
AND IN CLAY BEFORE USE!


HIGH AND LOW TA BREAKTHROUGH


High and Low TAs have been a longtime puzzle and stumbling block to Auditors.

The usual definition of OVERRUN is “gone on too long” or “happened too often”. This causes high TAs to occur.

In examining a few failures on using “overrun”, I have found that underlying this there is a more basic principle.

When a thetan believes something is “overrun” or “has gone on too long” or “was done too often” he is expressing only a symptom of another mechanism.

The truth is A THETAN CAN DO ANYTHING FOREVER.

To Audit “overruns” is auditing toward an untruth. Thus if carried on as a process it is really an out of ARC Process.

That which makes a thetan believe something can be overrun is the EFFORT TO STOP or THE EFFORT TO STOP HIM.

The effort to stop something, when generalized, becomes a “stop everything” and IS the entrance point of insanity. This has been known since 1967. But I did not earlier connect it with the OVERRUN phenomenon.

When a thetan has a long chain of efforts to stop or a chain of efforts to stop him (mixed up with protest, of course, and shame, blame and regret and other human emotion and reaction) he accumulates ridges. These make mass.

This mass makes the high TA.

In truth it is not possible to kill a thetan, so therefore any effort to stop a thetan would only have partial success. So the chain is also full of INCOMPLETES.

An incomplete cycle of action causes ARC Breaks.

Thus an OVERRUN is full of MASS and ARC Breaks!

As you possibly recall from the material of about 1955 the one process you must not run on a pc is “Look out of here and find something you can go out of ARC with.” This sends him into a dwindling spiral.

The common denominators of a bank are OUT OF ARC and STOP!

Thus if too long a list of “What has been Overrun” is required to obtain the first BD F/N item the listing action may very well restimulate much more bank than can easily be handled on some pcs.

As these are also the pcs with very high TA, if one lists for overrun and runs much too long a list to get his first BD F/N item, the pc can be heavily restimulated.

Listing errors or upsets can make this, then, too uncomfortable a proceeding for a pc and should NOT now be done.

And if it doesn’t work on some pcs in the hands of some auditors, it must therefore be cancelled. Any recommendation on VIII Course to do it is cancelled.

The theory is correct as given on the VIII Course. There, a few items were intended. But now some very long lists have come up on some pcs which made the pc uncomfortable and were hard for the auditor to handle. Thus the BD F/N item overrun list must not be done.

CONTINUE is then the Reverse Action to overrun. Continue equals Survival.

The REVERSE to overrun therefore can be run as a process, to wit, “What would you be permitted to continue?” or “What could be Continued?”

This however would not be very successful. Thus the listing action is recommended as the process to use.

LISTS

SEVEN Lists can be done on Overrun itself by using the in-ARC Approach.

Assess A. Self to another

B. Another to self

C. Others to others

D. Others to self

E. Self to self

F. Another to others

G. Others to another

Ordinarily the biggest read or any read has located a flow that will run and will be most real to the pc. But this is not true in handling overruns. The most stopped or rising read is where he’s really hung. To get a TA down list the most stopped read or the rise of the read or the item that raised the TA when called. This is ONLY true of Overruns.

The list questions for the above are:

If A stopped: “What could you continue to do to another?”

If B stopped: “What could another continue to do to you?”

If C stopped: “What could others continue to do to others?”

If D stopped: “What could others continue to do to you?”

If E stopped: “What could you continue to do to yourself?”

If F stopped, list “What could another continue to do to others?”

If G stopped, list “What could others continue to do to another?”

The “Most stopped read” would be one that really froze the needle or caused it to rise or caused the TA to RISE such as 3.5 to 3.6.

The lists would be listed to a BD F/N item, Cog, VGIs. Actually the list could be listed forever. But the pc will get an item he likes and that F/Ns. He is then given his item. One does NOT null such lists unless one has really goofed.

ALL the lists A, B, C, D, E, F and G can be listed. To get a TA DOWN you list the flow that sends the TA UP. Then reassess for the next that sends the TA up, etc.

LOW TA

The same exact thing causes LOW TAs. The flow could be said to have overwhelmed the pc.

Exactly how you read the list for Low TA will be given in another HCOB after further tests are made. In theory it would go lower on assessment.

Please note that OUT TRs on the part of auditors is the most frequent cause of low TAs. TR 1 that drives the pc out through the back of his head can cause a low (below 2.0) TA on a lot of pcs.

END PHENOMENA

The End Phenomena, the “EP” of a TA HANDLING RUNDOWN would be all lists assessed or listed to F/N and the pc’s needle doing a persistent continual F/N for days. This means an F/N, wide, that nothing can kill.

DEPT 10

The Department of Special Cases should have auditors who can do this rundown by the book and with perfect results. It is really a Dept 10 technique.

FLOWS NOTE

There are about seven flow directions that can be used or listed. (1) Self to another, (2) Another to self, (3) Others to others, (4) Self to others, (5) Others to self, (6) Another to others, (7) Others to another.

“Flow” is an electronic flow in a direction. In Phoenix, Arizona, in 1952 an “Oscilloscope” (has a face like a radar, shows wave patterns and directions) was once hooked up to an E-Meter movement and showed that a mental flow will flow just so long in one direction. By reversing the repetitive commands when the left-right directional flow slowed, the flow turned around and flowed right-left then slowed, etc. So actual electrical flow occurs in response to the directional command (like “self to another”). Also it jams up when run too long on an average human because his mind has “overruns” in it already.

“Ridges” and masses come about from a conflict of flows opposing or being pulled back as in withholds.

High TAs are caused by two or more flows opposing thus making a mass or ridge.

Low TAs are caused by overwhelm by flows.


The thetan thinks of them as overruns and so quits on a subject or wishes he could.

This is why the TA behaves as it does on life and certain subjects.

There is no real reason why a flow can’t go on forever in one direction unless a thetan tries to stop it. Then it ridges and makes mass which then reads on a TA.

AUDITOR QUALIFICATIONS

An Auditor must be a master at Listing and Nulling in order to touch such Actions as these lists. To foul up on listing on an already fouled-up pc is quite out-tech !

An auditor’s TRs should have been passed the Hard Way.

His metering must be excellent and flawless.

His command and use of the Auditor’s Code must be complete.

He should himself have had case gain.

He must have a full checkout on this HCO B and be able to do it in clay.

And as I say, he must know the subject of Listing and Nulling so well, he can always list smoothly to a BD F/N item with never a quiver.

INTERIORIZATION RUNDOWN

This HCO B does not change the Interiorization Rundown in theory or in practice.

It does however give this procedure.

1. On a high or low TA pc check for Exteriorization in auditing.

2. If pc has gone Ext in Auditing make sure he has not had an Ext-Int RD earlier before giving him another.

3. If an earlier Int RD exists repair, complete or rehab it. Often an Int RD is itself overrun. An L3B on it will show what is wrong with the earlier one. Some poor High TA pcs have had 2 or 3 Ext-Int RDs! All run past the EP.

Some Ext-Int RDs went totally flat on the secondaries! Or on the recalls. All else was overrun.

4. If no earlier Ext-Int RD was done, then do one.

5. If the check of the Ext-Int RD situation shows it not to be the reason, or was the reason but the TA goes high or low days later, then DO THIS TA HANDLING RD.

As pc high and low TAs have been blocking auditing for a lot of auditors this discovery and its remedy is Delightful news!

LRH:nt.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1971 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 15 JUNE 1971
Remimeo

C/S Series 37R
Addition


HI-LO TA ASSESSMENT RULES


In assessing and listing the Continue process it is VITAL to continue to assess the seven flows and list until the entire list widely F/Ns.

There can be more than seven lists taken from the seven flows.

One finds a rise or blow up item, does a list on it, then reassesses ALL seven flows, finds the next most rising item, lists then and assesses ALL seven flows and finds the next most stopped or rising item and lists that. One just keeps this up.

Eventually on assessing the seven flows you can only get a stopped needle. Then a slowed or killed F/N. One uses these for lists. Sometimes toward the last they blow on indication and cog.

The end of it all is the auditor assessing the seven flows without being able to disturb a wide wide persistent F/N.

THAT is the EP of the 37R process. There is no other EP. If not done to that EP the 37R process is incomplete.

CLEARING FLOWS

The idea of flows should be cleared with the pc before assessment is done.

One can do this by getting the pc to draw them.

Don’t confuse the pc with this clearing and make sure he is not confused before assessing the seven flows.

REPEATED ASSMT

One can take a sheet of paper lengthwise and write the seven flows along the left edge with lines to the right. By putting in dividing vertical lines one then has 10 or 12 assessments laid out ready to do.

LOW TA

Unless one does a THOROUGH JOB to the 37R End Phenomena on a low TA case the TA will continue to go low in future sessions.

A low TA takes more times through the assessments and listing than a high TA.

CRAMMING

Auditors who can’t do this well must be fully crammed on reading a needle and TA on stops, rises and blow ups.

The result, if properly done, is invariably good.


LRH:nt.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1971 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 16 JUNE 1971 R
Issue IV
Remimeo (Corrected and Reissued)


C/S Series 37R

Addition 2R


LOW TA ASSESSING


If after an apparent EP of a wide F/N on the last assessment, the pc then has a low TA at the Examiner or subsequently has a low TA, one must NOT start a new program as the existing one (37R) is incomplete.

The correct C/S for an apparent 37R EP which then went sour would be

1. L4B Method 3 and handle.

2. Ask if there is another flow not yet touched. Note its read as it is described and list it.

3. Reassess the existing and the additional flows for any slightest slow or choke and list it.

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

Should there still be trouble with low or high TA subsequently, it lies in the area of overts and withholds which blow loose on the Continue process. This is true because overts and withholds add up to stopping something which is discontinuance.

The next process (when all possible thoroughness has been taken with 37R yet trouble of high or low TA persists) has not yet been released.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:nt.rd
Copyright © 1971, 1973
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 26 JUNE 1971
Remimeo


C/S Series 37R

Addition 3


37R is a very beefy process.

It has been combined into L9S, HCO B 17 June 71, and is best done as part of this full rundown.

37R works on anyone, regardless of TA or state of case. Neither it nor L9S are used only on bad off cases. They work on both the worst and the best.

In doing 37R the items are sometimes very heavy and it takes the pc a bit to accept them. Therefore when one gets a BD F/N item, one asks “Is_____your item?” If he says yes, indicate it to him by saying “_____is your item.” The meter should give a fall and the F/N will widen.

If the pc says it is NOT his item, ask the question again and continue to list. The pc will put the item back on the list usually for it was his item. But he has to list further to realize it. He can also fail to put it back on the list and if so and he is getting restless in listing, give him the BD F/N item again and he’ll buy it.

A very big item that alters the pc’s whole concept of things with big cogs and 2 wc is a good place to stop a session. 37R doesn’t all have to be done in one session. When you begin a new list before the last item is discharged the pc can get a bit overwhelmed. This is a “nice” point, not a vital one.

Also the big item will often cause the next assessment to be a bit hard as the pc’s attention remains tied up in it for a while.

If after 37R the pc’s TA later goes up or down again out of normal 2.0 to 3.0 range the action to do is an L4B in general on 37R. It usually picks up the cognitions and confirms rather than corrects. L4B reads on wrong item. Auditor says which one. Pc gives it. Quite usually it’s a right item pc hasn’t cogged on.

After the L4B, one can again run 37R. However, a better action is to

Fly all ruds Continue with L9S.

RUDS

When Ruds are out during 37R a pc can feel strange. Of course with a high or low TA you can’t get the ruds in.

So you can do a list of 37R and as this will F/N the meter, you can get in all ruds.

FLOWS

The pc may have NO idea of flows. So before assessing the first time one must clear “flows”. The pc must understand that these words self to another mean a flow from himself to any another, etc.

If while clearing the word “flow” and “flows” you watch your meter also you will get your first blow up of the TA.

ASSESS SLOWLY

By reading a flow and waiting a moment, you give the TA time to rise.

You can assess too rapidly and find that the TA has gone up, but which of the last items did it go up on? By proceeding a little more slowly you will be sure.

ADDITIONAL FLOW

There is another flow.

H. ANOTHER TO ANOTHER.

This should be added to your assessment sheet.

ASSESSMENT FORM

An assessment form can be printed. The flows A to H (adding the new one above) are put in on the left-hand edge of the paper held the long way. They can be repeated A-H and A-H. Lines and boxes lead out for repeated assessments.

This makes it easier for the auditor.

STEPS 37R

1. Clear the word “flow”.

2. Clear the idea of flow (watch meter) for each flow A to H so you have no misunderstoods.

3. Assess the listing sheet. Take the biggest Blow Up or speeded rise (if no big Blow Up).

4. Mark it on the assmt form and W/S.

5. Fit it into the Q on a separate listing sheet, What could _____continue to do to_____ ?

6. Ask the Question of the pc.

7. Get the pc to give you items.

8. Write the items down while watching the meter. Mark needle reads or BDs. Put down TA reads regularly on the list.

9. Get the first item that Blows down (or up) and F/Ns.

10. Ask pc if_____is his item.

11. If pc says Yes, say, “_____is your item.” Circle it on listing sheet and mark the F/N and “Ind” for Indicated to pc. If pc says No, continue to list. Pc will put item back on the list, at which time do 10 and 11 above. Pc will accept it. If he goes on and begins to protest, give him the first BD F/N item and do 11 and 12. He will accept it.

12. Mark item and TA and any 2 wc on the item or cogs on the W/S.

DON’TS

Don’t do this process without

(a) Checking out on C/S Series 37R, with Additions 1, 2 and this one, 3.

(b) Do I hrs confront and I hour reach and withdraw on your meter.

(c) Dummy running the 12 steps above with no pc but all the paper and tools until it is a faultless action.

(d) Don’t call pc’s attention to the meter with comments or stares or looks of horror or edginess or fumbles.

(e) Have smooth, perfect TRs.

(f) Follow the Auditor’s Code.

USING L9S

If used in conjunction with L9S then L9S should also be drilled on dating and locating and dummy run.

SESSION FORM

These processes and rundowns are done in a streamlined session form.

SPECIAL 37R

The various flows of Auditor to pc can be run and indeed an assessment of many subjects or dynamics can be assessed by rise and then flow patterned as in Auditor-pc below.

This Special 37R is mentioned here but will be laid out in full for other subjects in another issue.

Pcs who have protest on auditing can be done in this way.

The flows are

Auditor to pc ________

Pc to Auditor ________

Auditors to pc ________

Pc to Auditors ________

Pc to Self ________

Auditor to Self ________

Aside from list change—Auditor-pc is done like general 37R.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH: nt.rd
Copyright © 1971
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED



[HCO B 17 June 1971, L9S, referred to on first page of this issue, is a Flag Only issue and is not in these volumes. ]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 26 MAY 1971
Remimeo
Basic Cse Super Hat
D of P Hat C/S Series 38
C/S Hats
Tech Sec
TRS COURSE AND AUDITING
MIXING MAJOR ACTIONS


With the use of TRs The Hard Way on basic courses, auditors and students, a rule must be laid down:

A PERSON ON A TR COURSE OR IN PROGRESS ON A TR CYCLE MAY NOT ALSO BE AUDITED.

And a second rule:

HGC ADMIN AND THE D OF P MUST BE INFORMED OF ENROLLMENTS ON TR COURSES OR TRS IN CRAMMING AND MUST SO MARK A PC’S FOLDER WITH DATE.

And a third rule:

IN AN ADVANCED ORG THE ADV CSE ADMIN MUST ALSO BE INFORMED OF STUDENTS ENROLLING ON A TR COURSE.

And a fourth rule:

A SIGN MUST BE PLACED IN QUAL AND IN A TR CLASSROOM “WHILE WORKING ON TRS AND UNTIL THEY ARE PASSED, DO NOT ACCEPT AUDITING.” IN AN AO OR SH THIS READS “WHILE WORKING ON TRS AND UNTIL THEY ARE PASSED, DO NOT ACCEPT AUDITING OR DO SOLO.”

The reason for these rules lies in the major C/S rules:

DO NOT BEGIN NEW PROGRAMS TO END OLD.

DO NOT START A NEW ACTION BEFORE COMPLETING THE EXISTING ONE.

And the auditor rule:

OBTAIN AN F/N BEFORE STARTING THE NEXT C/S ACTION. IF UNABLE TO DO SO, NEVER BEGIN THE NEXT C/S ACTION BUT END SESSION AND RETURN THE FOLDER TO THE C/S.

The surest way in the world to bog a case is to:

1. Begin a new process without obtaining an F/N on the one just run.

2. Begin a major action without completing the old one.

3. Begin a major action without setting up a case with ruds and F/Ns.

4. Begin a new program without completing the old one.

5. Start several programs without finishing any.

6. Enter a new major action into a case already in progress on another incomplete major action.

I have seen a case on as many as five major actions with none complete. And when I see this the first thing I take up is the first unflat incomplete program and get it finished, then the next, then the next. The case comes out all smooth.

Example: Case is on but not complete on Dianetic auditing. Switched to grades. Incomplete on grades, gets a Prog Pgm. Incomplete on a Prog Pgm, shifted to Power.

The only apparent exception is a repair. A case can be repaired if bogged PROVIDING THE ORIGINAL ACTION IS REHABBED IF O/R OR COMPLETED TO EP.

A Progress Pgm may reach EP before the written up program is completed.

Thus a Process Completion is defined as the END PHENOMENA of the process. A Program is complete when the END PHENOMENA of the Program is attained.

TRs

Any course or program containing TRs 0-4, 6-9 or Admin TRs is a major program in itself. It produces case gain—if run right—and has an End Phenomenon.

Further, by actual experience when a person is on a real (not a patty-cake and weak) TR Course and is also being audited at the same time, the C/S and Auditor if they don’t know the person is also on TRs can be utterly baffled and worried as the case does not run right. “What did I do?” “What C/S was wrong?” “Look, his TA is high.” “Now it’s low.” “Last session he____.” And the C/S and auditor engage in efforts to handle the odd case behavior. But the person, unknown to them, was also on a real TR Course and his case was changing!

INTERJECTED PGMS

You can also run into this same oddity with a mystic who does “bathe the body in light” every night or a wife whose husband audits her between HGC sessions or a self-auditor.

The principle is the same. The C/S and auditor are going down Wellbeing Street and hidden trucks keep dashing out of alleys and running into the pc.

LIFE

The reason auditing should be done in intensive packages, not l hour a week or a session a month lies in the fact that LIFE can run a new action in on a pc.

It’s a great way to waste auditing to let a pc have a session once a week. You can’t even keep his ruds in if he lives in any confusions.

So nothing is done for the case, all the auditing goes to handle the life interjections!

CROSS PROGRAMMING

A case runs on cycles of actions. This is true in the auditing comm cycle. It is true in a process cycle. It is true in a program cycle.

New things being crossed into old incomplete things make a sort of ARC Break situation like a cut comm cycle.

One could do everything with a process or a program OR A COURSE that you find on an L1C. It would not be very wise.

No case gain can be created by lack of a comm cycle in an auditor, lack of an action cycle in processes or messing up a program cycle.

If you don’t believe it, run an L1C on a pc with “Processes” and “Programs” and “Courses” as a prefix. You’d be amazed. Further the fellow who doesn’t reach the EP of a Course is likely never to use that material or be faulty with the subject.

Usual study courses like admin or tech give case gain. One can carry on with auditing parallel to them. But still expect a case to change a bit by study and baffle a C/S once in a while. But a real TR Course produces changes up and down and up that are not possible to also audit around. So they don’t mix.

VISUAL IDEA

To get a visual idea of this:

Optimum:
Start Change End
TR Course I------------------------------I--------------------------I
Start Change End
Pgm 1: I------------------------------I--------------------------I
Start Change End
Pgm 2: I------------------------------I--------------------------I



LRH:nt.sb.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1971 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 31 MAY 1971R
REVISED 21 OCTOBER 1971
Remimeo


C/S Series 39R


STANDARD 121/2 HOUR INTENSIVE PROGRAMS


The sale of 121/2 hour Intensives modifies earlier versions of Advance Programs (Grade Chart) since a C/S now needs everything he can get a pc audited on. It is not now a question of selling the public anything with a name. You just sell 121/2 hour Intensives. The C/S decides what to run and runs all he can as lengthily as he can. Refunds come from not enough auditing. Gains come from auditing in large blocks of hours such as 1 to 6 121/2 hr Intensives, always delivered at 121/2 hrs per week or weekend.

SAMPLE PROGRESS PROGRAM

Repair Program.
(Can include GF.)
Life Repair
C/S Series 53
(Int Repair or Int RD wherever indicated and if reading.)
GF 40X Revised Method 3
Dianetic C/S I
Engram Handling of, R3R Triple
GF 40X Revised.

ADVANCE PROGRAM

C/S 54 (omit running things already run in GF 40X)
Dianetics R3R Triple to Completion (Any Ruds or repair needed during Dianetic actions. )
ARC St Wire Triple
Grade Zero Expanded Triple (or Ex Single if you don’t have the Triple processes in)
Grade I Expanded Triple (or Ex Single if you don’t have the Triple processes in)
Grade II Expanded Triple (or Ex Single if you don’t have the Triple processes in)
Grade III Expanded Triple (or Ex Single if you don’t have the Triple processes in)
Grade IV Expanded Triple (or Ex Single if you don’t have the Triple processes in)
(Any repairs above at any place during above, using GF, etc.)
Power Set-up: Life Ruds and G Form
Power Triple
Va
R6EW

Clearing Course
OT I
OT II
OT III to attest
OT VII
OT III Expanded to attest
L-10 (when released)
OT IV
OT V
OT VI
Rehab OT VII
Any higher OT grade.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder



LRH:nt.rd
Copyright © 1971
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 7 JUNE 1971

Remimeo

C/S Series 40


LOW TAs


As per C/S Series 37R, further work was done on low TAs.

LOW TAs ALSO ASSESS ON RISE JUST LIKE HIGH TAs.

There is no difference of procedure except that a low TA can blow UP to 2.0 + and F/N.

Thus one can’t say using 37R on a low TA case, “List to a BD F/N item” as it may be a Blow UP F/N item.

The TA may be at 1.8 in listing and when the F/N item goes on the list, the TA will blow UP to 2.0 or 2.1 and F/N.

Further if the F/N promptly dies, and the TA falls, one lists further until one blows up, the F/N continues and the pc is pleased with it.

Assessment on a low TA is done on RISE for the item listed or a Blow UP, just as in the case of high TAs.

When you list a low TA’s falling flow (in assessing the seven flows) and use it for the Continue list the pc can get very unhappy and will get even more overwhelmed.

Thus low TA or high TA, list the 7 flows for rise or blow UP and list the one that rose most. This is true of the first and every other flows assessment.

Realize this blow UP rule only applies to 37R and the Continue list and is not used in any other listing.

37R works on low TAs like a bomb!


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder




LRH:sb.rd
Copyright © 1971
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 9 JUNE 1971
Issue I
Remimeo



C/S Series 41



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 L4B.

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 “L4B 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 “2 wc what do you have your attention on?”

“Fly a rud if no F/N.”

“Fly all ruds.”

“2 wc 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 3.5 OR ABOVE ON ARC BREAKS.

LOW TA QUITS

Some auditors see a TA sink below 2.0 and then won’t continue the 2 wc 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 and 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 2 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, HCO Bs 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.rd
Copyright © 1971
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 9 JUNE 1971
Issue II
Remimeo

C/S Series 42


C/S RULES



COMPLETE CYCLES

Don’t leave cycles incomplete on a case.

If a C/S starts a 37R and the auditor goofs, correct the auditor and then get the 37R completed. Don’t disperse and do something new.

If you have a program going and it’s goofed, repair the auditor and the goofed pc and continue the program you began on the case.

Repair (Progress) Programs are ended when the pc is flying nicely. When a repair hits that, don’t re-repair.

On Advance Programs, take each step to its EP. Don’t suddenly start something new.

A sure way to solve a case is go back and find the earliest incomplete program, complete it and so on up to PT.

Keep your “finger in the book” on a case. Don’t lose your place. That’s done by having the current pgm on the inside front cover, paper clipped on, and checked off with each step done. When it’s done, put a new pgm on top of it.

Insist that auditors keep up the inside front cover folder summary each session with their auditing time and admin time in the box. This FS is a 2 column set of boxes, date, what’s run, F/N or bogged and time.

By seeing Admin is in you can keep your place in the book or study back rapidly to find what’s been done.

DOUBLE ACTIONS

The deadliest faults on cases are running the same action or grade twice. This drives TAs up through the roof.

Example: Power done in ‘65. Done again in ‘69!

Example: Grade IV done in ‘69, done in ‘70.

You find the case isn’t doing well or find the error. In doubles, rehab by date of the first time it was done.

I’ve seen Interiorization done three times on one pc, Power twice and the same Dianetic Chains run over and over. And people wondered “Why is the TA high” !

So when you order a major action always check to see if it’s ever been done before! Save you grief. And if a major action won’t run, suspect it may have been done before.

SET-UPS

Always set up a case fully for the next major action.

Don’t overrepair. But be sure the case is not sick, has had good exam forms and does well.

Then C/S the next major action.

BLAMING THE PC

Never blame the pc. Many it is true are dog cases.

But even dog cases can be handled.

When you find auditors (or feel yourself) blaming the pc, get the overts and withholds run out.

Once I got the most splendid sessions out of an HGC. I had the auditor’s overts and withholds checked on each auditor before he went into session. It was just research, but my it worked! Those were the smoothest sessions! Pcs began to fly!

Too many times one blames the pc only to find later that the auditor’s TRs were ghastly and that a major action had been run twice. Such discoveries make a C/S out of a C/S.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:sb.rd
Copyright © 1971
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 9 JUNE 1971
Issue III
Remimeo

C/S Series 43


C/S RULES


TROUBLE FOR THE PC

Never make trouble for the pc.

When a pc is running well let it roll. The C/S can spot a possible error but the pc is Wide F/N VGIs at the Exam, let it go.

Chew the auditor, send to Cramming. But don’t throw the well running pc into extensive repair—don’t break into a winning program harshly. It gives the pc a loss.

The pc who isn’t running well is the one you repair. Don’t keep a pc going on and on, running badly with no case study. Study the case folder, find the right why by going back to where the pc was running consistently well and then come forward for the error. It will be in the exact next session.

If the pc wasn’t ever audited before, you go into his life of course, with a GF + 40 Method 5 and handle and other Life repairs.


OVERREPAIR

Any Repair or Progress action has reached its End Phenomena when the pc is running well again.

This is peculiar to the Repair or Progress program.

Wrong Example: Pc was on Grade III, fell on his head. C/S studied case, found out lists, wrote an extensive Repair Pgm and C/S. Half way through repair the pc again was flying. C/S continued the repair. Pc bogged. C/S C/Sed the pc to flying again. C/S continued the repair. Pc bogged.

Right Example: Pc falls on his head on Grade III. C/S writes a Repair Pgm and C/S. Auditor finds the out list, corrects it. Pc flies. C/S puts pc at once back on Grade III to complete.

AUDITOR INVAL

An auditor can be invalidated by a C/S by having a lot of questionable tech points thrown at him.

The auditor’s data gets shaky.

If no decision was ever made—is not in HCO Bs and tapes—is not to hand and can’t be referred to by HCO B and tape, then a C/S should not be making the point.

Example: Auditor extends a list three more items beyond an F/N. C/S chops him. There is no such rule. The pc maybe wouldn’t accept the item until he listed a few more. Result is a firefight between C/S and auditor, simply because it isn’t a valid point.

HCO Bs and Tapes are the stable data that form the agreement between the auditor and the C/S. “If it isn’t written (or spoken on tape) it isn’t true.”

Don’t wander off known tech points in C/Sing.

Never shake an auditor’s data by advancing data not on HCO Bs and Tapes.

Always know your data, your HCO Bs and Tapes and refer the auditor to them in Cramming.

Cramming MUST have a library of all materials.

A hidden data line can build up in C/S-Auditor lines (or course lines or Cramming lines) that CAN UNSTABILIZE ALL TECH AND DENY FURTHER RESULTS.

The decay of tech in areas begins with hidden data lines that ARE NOT TRUE.

So use and refer to HCO Bs and Tapes and leave all other points alone. Your auditors will become confident and certain and Tech will improve.

It’s enough just to insist on the usual.

Then auditors and cases will fly.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:sb.rd
Copyright © 1971
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 10 JUNE 1971
Issue I

Remimeo

C/S Series 44R


C/S RULES

PROGRAMMING FROM PREPARED LISTS


There are many vital prepared lists.

King of these is the Green Form. The additional No. 40 items are the original Seven Resistive Cases. The best way to do a GF + 40 is Method 5 (once through), lengths of reads and BDs marked and C/S to then write a C/S for it.

Hi-Lo TA is also such a list, also done Method 5.

Any such prepared list can be done Method 5 and the C/S to then write a C/S.

But L4B (Lists correction), L3B (Dianetic errors) and L1C (ARC Brks and bypassed charge) are usually done Method 3 (auditor assesses to a read, gets the action done, and/or earlier similar to an F/N, not going on until his action has resulted in an F/N and then going on to complete handling and F/Ning each read he gets).

When the C/S has a list assessed Method 5 he expects usually to get it back with the reads and then write the C/S for it. Sometimes he asks for a GF + 40 and a Hi-Lo TA both to be done Method 5.

Now the question comes up, which reads does the C/S write up to be handled first? And second? And third? Etc. In other words how does he arrange the C/S the auditor is to do now? What sequence are the items handled in?

These rules apply:

Handle an Out Int RD first.

Handle anything connected with “Lists” (meaning Listing and Nulling Lists) first if Int isn’t out. Like “Listed past right item,” reads. The C/S would get that handled FIRST. Always handle list errors first. And usually do an L4B additionally, Auditor to handle. A pc can get sick after a listing error and you can’t get auditing done when lists are out.

Doesn’t want auditing, why, is then handled if it read.

Next C/S to handle anything to do with rudiments. ARC Brks, PTPs and W/Hs take precedence in that order.

(Listing errors are first, before ARC Brks because an apparent ARC Break after a listing error can only be handled by getting the charge off the list.)

Anything that looks like a withhold comes next.

After that one just takes the lengths or BD of reads. Take the biggest reads before you take the smaller ones, once you have C/Sed for Lists, doesn’t want auditing and Ruds and evident other withholds.

The only confusion that one can get into is a very high TA. But List errors can cause high TAs. Next in frequency is withholds.

Never C/S to take a TA down with an ARC Brk rud or an L1C. Never.

You can C/S to “talk a TA down” only when there are no list errors or withholds reading on a GF.

Of course an Interiorization Rundown error is a primary target. But you don’t have that once it’s handled. You will get a soaring TA if Int is out. L3B is a potent tool to order for Int outnesses, the auditor handling as he goes, Method 3.

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

So the above gives you the rules by which you C/S from assessed prepared lists.

Basically—when Int is out, auditing will drive the TA up.

When lists are out nothing will handle but lists and L1C won’t nor will ruds.

When ruds are out nothing else will straighten up and you mustn’t order auditors to audit with out ruds.

Doesn’t want auditing can come from a bad L & N list. Or out Int. Or out ruds. Previous bad auditing can be cured by L1C on previous bad auditing. The craziest out auditing I ever ran into was an auditor using reads and F/Ns when there were none and failing to take up or flatten reads he did get. So there can be variations on bad auditing and there can be, to our shame, false auditing reports. The best C/S is to find what auditor and find out what the error was. Bad TRs on a poor TR Course where the pc was a student (False passes and invalidated wins) can also cause “doesn’t want auditing”.

“Protest” is a frequent reason for high TA and is a cousin to “doesn’t want auditing” and is handled by checking “Lists” for read and doing an L4B if it reads or finding the out ruds or other BPC as in L1 C.

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

As there are so many combinations of reading items from prepared lists, you have to C/S according to these general principles.

These rules serve as a steadying guide that you’ll find win for you.


LRH:sb.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1971 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


[This HCO B is added to by BTB 31 October 1971, Reissued 2 July 1974, C/S Series 44R Addition, C/S Rules- The Sequence of Programs, which is in the C/S Series Volume, page 151. ]

B O A R D T E C H N I C A L B U L L E T I N

31 OCTOBER 1971
C/Ses Reissued 2 July 1974 as BTB
Auditors
Cramming CANCELS
HCO BULLETIN OF 31 OCTOBER 1971
SAME TITLE

(Addition to HCO B 10 June 71, Issue I)

C/S Series 44R Addition

44R—C/S RULES
(Programming From Prepared Lists)
THE SEQUENCE OF PROGRAMS

Progress Programs (Repair) also follow the sequence laid out in HCO B 10 June 71, Issue I—C/S Series 44R.

The first action of a Progress Program would of course be to ensure that any reasons for False TA per HCO B 24 Oct 71, “False TA”, were handled.

The Progress (Repair) Program MUST then handle the following:

Int Rundown (or Int repair if RD already done and Int still reads).

Repair of past listing actions.

Doesn’t want auditing and all out ruds.

Full drug handling per C/S Series 48R.

Full handling of Psychiatric and Psychoanalytic treatment, etc, handled R3R Narrative Triple. (Data from GF40XR and Pc Assessment Sheet.)

Incomplete or tangled Engram chains and other things may also need handling to fully repair the Pc. The various prepared lists are used to get all the data on what needs handling on a Progress Program.

Any other reason for resistiveness as a case.

These things above are the things that prevent or slow case gain. Just handling them correctly and fully gives the case terrific wins. Failure to handle them sets the Pc, the C/S, and the Auditor up for losses.

Once the Pc’s case is fully repaired with the Progress Program he is then set up for excellent gains and will be very auditable. He is now put onto the Advance Program which completes any incomplete Grade cycles and fills in any missing ones as it takes him up the Grade Chart. (See C/S Series 39R, 31 May 71 Revised 21 Oct 71.)

Processes should not be extracted from the Expanded Grades and other standard programs, for use in Progress Programs (Repair) or “Special Programs” but should be taken from other sources, so as not to break up the standard program for later use on the case.

Written from notes on an
LRH Lecture to Senior Tech
Personnel 30 Oct 71.
Training & Services Aide
Reissued as BTB
by Flag Mission 1234
I/C: CPO Andrea Lewis
2nd: Molly Harlow
Authorized by AW
BDCS:SW:AL:MH:BW:rnh.rd for the
Copyright © 1971, 1974 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 19 JUNE 1971
Issue I
Remimeo

C/S Series 45


C/S RULES


A C/S never C/Ses exclusively for result. He C/Ses for exact tech application. If what occurs he’ll also get his result. If a goof still wins, the C/S stomps on the goof.

This prevents auditors getting hung on an accidental win. The wins a C/S wants are exact tech application.

If a C/S can finally get auditors exactly auditing the exact processes with exact TRs, metering and Code everybody then wins all the time.

So the pc got an F/N at the Exam after the auditor failed to do the final run through, leaving the TA high at session end. That’s a goof. To hell with the F/N at Exams or how PR the pc was. That is a goof. The C/S stomps on it.

Never give a “very well done” on wins only. Give them on tech exactness. Got an Exam F/N not quite by the book. That’s only “well done”. Got an Exam F/N and did it by the book is the “Very well done”.

We know the tech works. That’s no surprise. Perfect application by the Auditor is what the “Well Dones” and “Very Well Dones” are for.

The moment a C/S loses sight of this point he has started his team on a downgrade that will wind up with everyone losing, org, auditors and pcs.

That’s the secret of how I as a C/S make star auditors. If it’s by the book, hurrah. If it isn’t by the book then a pc dial-wide F/N VGI rave at Exams gets, from me, a flunk! on the auditor. With a good plain why.

The Very Well done means “You applied the tech splendidly”. It does not mean “You helped the pc”. We know the standard tech will do that.

So watch this point. It’s an awful big one. It will make your auditors into stars or bums.

Auditor runs a narrative chain. Gets away with it. Pc F/N VGIs at Exam. My C/S includes “Auditor to cramming on HCOBs covering types of items.”

Now please recognize that auditors for whom I C/S do make it and go on making it. Well, in addition to knowing the subject, this is the one thing I do that is not always done by C/Ses.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:nt.rd
Copyright © 1971
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 19 JUNE 1971
Issue II
Remimeo

C/S Series 46


DECLARES


It is the C/S’s responsibility that a pc or Pre OT is sent to Declare?

This is not an Admin point I’m making. It is a technical point.

Every so often a pc is found hung up in not having declared and attested the state attained.

A Declare Completes his cycle of action and is a vital part of the action.

One never forces or feeds one to the pc. I recall one org where the entire tech and income structure crashed, the C/O and several personnel had to be removed because they were forcing “clear cogs” on their Dianetic pcs who hadn’t had them (and then telling them they couldn’t be audited further on Scientology) (Connie Broadbent, ASHO, March ‘70).

So this goes 2 ways.

THE PC OR PRE OT WHO KNOWS HE MADE IT MUST BE SENT TO EXAMS AND C & A TO ATTEST.

THE PC OR PRE OT WHO HASN’T MADE IT MUST NEVER BE SENT TO EXAMS TO DECLARE AND ATTEST.

This gives us a third:

PCs AND PRE OTs WHO HAVEN’T MADE IT MUST BE HANDLED UNTIL THEY HAVE MADE THAT SPECIFIC DECLARE, EVEN THOUGH IT MEANS SIGNING UP FOR MORE AUDITING.

TRUTH is the keynote, the essence, the point here.

All the “PR” (slang for promotional talk) in the world will not supplant truth.

The pc KNOWS he made something. Therefore he must be sent to declare it whether it’s a standard grade or not!

The pc who hasn’t made it KNOWS he hasn’t and so when forced to declare or ordered to attest tends to cave in.

His concept of the validity of the org and honesty of Scientology depends on this, and really on this alone.

The correct declare or not declare decision of the C/S is a vital C/S action.


LRH:nt rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1971 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 20 JUNE 1971
Remimeo

C/S Series 47



THE SUPREME TEST OF A C/S

(Reference HCO B August 19, 1967, The Supreme Test
which must be read with this HCO B)


A C/S or auditor who knows his tech is able to hold the line on any given action in auditing or C/Sing and not mix up.

One C/Ses Dianetics purely. Not Dn, Cl VI, Class VIII, Dn, Class VI.

One C/Ses or audits a Rundown as itself, not as a botch of several actions run into it.

So this brings to view that some can run the process or program for A to B.

And some, worse luck,

(a) Go from A to G to Q to A and wonder why they don’t arrive at the B of result.

(b) Some go from A to B all right but when at B go right on past it.

Both, actually, are a type of non-confront. The A.G.Q.A can’t confront and disperses off arriving at B. The A beyond B hasn’t confronted B and so doesn’t recognize B.

The ability to confront the pc and the session and parts of the session permits one to accurately go from A to B.

Proving this, perception reduces in ratio to overts. Accept that fact as it’s true. If you run O/W on an auditor regarding the pc he is to audit, the auditor will give a perfect session to that pc. Why? He can confront because he can see.

Programming is simply an A to B action. The road is all laid out.

Auditing a process is a simple A to B Action.

What if you had an auditor who half way through Level Zero with no completion found a picture, did Dianetics on it, didn’t flatten the R3R because pc cogged it was like his mother and the auditor did O/W on mother in the middle of the engram!

The pc would be a mess! B was run away from.

Same way with programming that isn’t handled.

What if you had an auditor who got an F/N Cog VGIs and continued the same process to TA 5.6? He got to B and kept right on going.

You should look into some folders where the C/S or auditor dispersed off B or where B was reached with no halt.

The most recent examples I’ve seen have been taking processes out of one Rundown and using them in another Rundown all in an effort to achieve a maximum effect when the error that was present came from failure to complete 2 earlier programs.

The correct action would have been to complete the earliest program left incomplete and then complete the next incomplete program, not scramble parts of two new programs.

A to B is a cycle of action. A clean one.

It is best to keep it so.

The Supreme Test of an Auditor or a C/S is to make Auditing go right—by the book.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:nt.rd
Copyright © 1971
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 15 JULY 1971
Issue III

Remimeo
Dianetics Checksheet
All Dn Auditors
All C/Ses
IMPORTANT


URGENT


C/S Series 48R


DRUG HANDLING


See: HCO B 28 Aug 68, Issue II, “Drugs”
HCO B 29 Aug 68, “Drug Data”
HCO B 23 Sept 68, “Drugs & Trippers”
Refer: HCO B 19 May 69, “Drug and Alcohol Cases
PRIOR Assessing”
HCO B 12 Aug 69 (HCO B 10 Dec 68 Updated),
Confidential—”Case Supervisor Actions”
(Page 24 Resistive Case 220D.) [Now BTB]

(In this revision of HCO B 4 July 71, C/S Series 48,
Quad [4] Flow has been changed to Triple Flow.
There is no other change.)

A person who has been on Drugs is one of the “Seven types of resistive cases”. (These types are found on the Scientology Green Form No. 40.)

In other words, someone who has been on drugs does not make good case gain until the drugs are handled. The same somatics will come back again. The case roller-coasters—goes up and down.

Drugs since 1962 have been in very widespread use. Before then they were rare. A worldwide spread of drugs occurred. A large percentage of people became and are drug takers.

By drugs (to mention a few) are meant—tranquilizers, opium, cocaine, marijuana, peyote, amphetamine and the psychiatrist’s gift to Man, LSD, which is the worst. Any medical drugs are included. Drugs are drugs. There are thousands of trade names and slang terms for these drugs.

ALCOHOL is included as a drug and receives the same treatment in auditing.

They are supposed to do wonderful things but all they really do is ruin the person.

Even someone off drugs for years still has “blank periods”. The abilities to concentrate or to balance are injured.

The moral part of it has nothing to do with auditing. The facts are that:

(a) People who have been on drugs can be a liability until the condition is handled in auditing.

(b) A former drug user is a resistive case that does not make stable gains until the condition is handled.

(c) Auditing is the only successful means ever developed for handling drug damage.

THOSE ON DRUGS

On persons who are currently on drugs, it is necessary to take them through a special TR Course while they are still on them. They gradually come off of them voluntarily in most cases without painful “withdrawal symptoms” (which is the term for the agony and convulsions caused, particularly in the case of heroin takers, by just stopping the drug. Alcoholics are of course included.)

DRUG ENGRAMS

People who have been on drugs are sometimes afraid of running engrams.

In fact, it is almost a way to detect a “druggie”.

The drugs, particularly LSD and even sometimes antibiotics or other medicines to which the person has an allergy, can turn on whole track pictures violently.

These tend to overwhelm the person and make him feel crazy. Some of these people are afraid to confront the bank again.

The TR and other steps of the special TR Course improve their confront.

If a person “doesn’t like Dianetics” and doesn’t want to be run on engrams, it is necessary to put them on the special course. If Dianetics has been run but poorly, it should of course be repaired fully with an L3B (List used to correct Dianetic errors). But if the person still flinches, the Special Course successfully completed will handle. It contains recall steps giving the pc a chance to confront the bank more easily and get used to it.

FULL AUDITING RUNDOWN

A full auditing rundown on drugs, all done on the same pc, would be:

1. Special TR Course for ex-drug users or alcoholics.

2. Pc Assessment Form.

3. Class VIII Drug Rundown Triple (done by a Class IV or VI).

4. By a Dianetic Auditor: Pains, emotions, sensations, attitudes connected with drugs (or alcohol), R3R Triple.

5. Prior Assessment to Drugs, Triple R3R, Dianetic Auditor.

This can be followed by routine Triple Dianetics to EP for the grade.

DONE FIRST

Drugs are done first. They are NOT done after the Health Form and regular Dianetics.

Why? Because Drugs make a resistive case! Regular Dianetics will get loses.

Any current Dianetic case failures are from flubby Dianetic auditing or the person has been on Drugs or alcohol which were not handled by Dianetics.

It hasn’t harmed anyone to omit drugs. But it made it hard or impossible to get stable case gain.

THUS ANY DIANETIC PC WHO HAS HAD DRUG HANDLING OMITTED MUST BE RUN ON DRUGS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE BEFORE MORE AUDITING IS GIVEN.

I repeat, drugs or alcohol in most instances make a resistive case so the point must be handled before the case will attain and hold case gain.

ANY PC WHO IS NOT MAKING IT IN AUDITING SHOULD BE CHECKED FOR A DRUG OR ALCOHOL HISTORY.

DISCOVERY

In investigating a series of cases who were not making it, I found in each one that the person had been on drugs or alcohol and that drugs or the alcohol had not been run out.

Drug data was not covered fully enough in the Dianetics pack. Only Prior Assessment to Drugs was given.

Thus I find several Dianetic pcs were only run on the Prior Assessment to Drugs. This is not good enough.

DIANETICS ONLY

Where Dianetic Auditing only is available and the rest of the rundown given above is not, drugs can still be handled by a Dianetic Auditor in this way with this Dianetic Pgm.

1. PC Assessment Form.

2. Full C/S 1, also doing the TRs well with the pc.

3. Write down the drugs from the pc assessment form. Take the one that reads best on the meter.

4. List, what pains, emotions, sensations or attitudes are connected with taking (the drug).

5. Take the best reading Dianetic item from the list in (4). Run R3R Triple.

6. Complete items on the (4) above with R3R Triple.

7. Take another drug from (3) above that reads.

8. Repeat (4).

9. Repeat (5).

10. Use up the whole list in (4) above in this way until the entire list of drugs F/Ns when called.

11. Do Prior Assessment to Drugs (or alcohol). R3R Triple.

12. Triple R3R on any missing flows of earlier Dn items run.

13. Do Health Form.

14. Proceed with routine Triple Dianetics.

This program is the one that would be done at step 4 in the full Drug Pgm above that includes the TR Course and Class VIII Rundown.

However, when only Dianetic Auditors are available, at least the above Dianetic Program must be done.


This repairs an omission in the Dianetic pack and unblocks the case gain of a great many pcs on whom a drug or alcohol history was never noticed or handled.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH: nt. rd
Copyright ©1971
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 5 JULY 1971 R
Revised & Reissued 8 June 1974

(Only changes the 2nd last & 4th last paras.)
Remimeo
C/S Series 49R

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.

A severe injury or illness case 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 HCO B 9 Oct 67, Assists for Injuries. [See BTB 18 Feb 74, same title.]

DIANETIC ASSIST

Done in session on the meter. EP Pain Gone. Cog. F/N.

See HCO Bs
12 Mar 69 Issue II, Physically Ill Pcs and Pre OTs
24 Apr 69 Dianetic Use
14 May 69 Sickness
20 May 69 Issue II, Dianetics (Dn Auditing Assists) [see BTB 10 Dec 74, VI]
23 May 69 Narrative Versus Somatic Chains
24 July 69 Seriously Ill Pcs
27 July 69 Antibiotics
15 Jan 70 The Uses of Auditing
21 June 70 C/S Series 9, Superficial Actions (Sick Pcs)
1 Dec 70 Dianetics—Triple Flow Action [now BTB I Dec 70R, same title]
5 Jan 71 Going Earlier in R3R (Dn Auditing Assist) [see BTB 10 Dec 74]
8 Mar 71 C/S Series 29, Case Actions, Off Line
15 Mar 71 Assists—A Flag Expertise Subject [see page 335]

TOUCH ASSIST

Done off the meter by an auditor on the pc’s body. EP Pain Gone. Cog. F/N.

See HCO Bs
9 Oct 67 Assists for Injuries [see BTB 18 Feb 74, same title]
5 May 69 Issue I, Touch Assists [cancelled, see Volume IX, page 502]
22 July 70 Touch Assist—An Improvement on Spinal Adjustment
23 Aug 70 The Body Communication Process [cancelled by BTB 10 Dec 74] 15 Mar 71 Assists—A Flag Expertise Subject [see page 335]

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 TRIPLE.
________

This is important tech. It saves pain and lives. Know it and use it.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:nt.rd
Copyright © 1971, 1974
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED





[The second last paragraph originally read, “DIANETIC ASSISTS CAN BE RUN TRIPLE OR QUAD.” The change in the fourth last paragraph simply corrected a typographical error.]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 15 JULY 1971
Issue II
Remimeo

C/S Series 50


C/S CASE GAIN


Some C/Ses get audited over the present time problem “How to get case gain.”

Working with pcs who sometimes don’t can become a minor PTP.

This is also true of some auditors.

The way to C/S this is to run it triple PTP, but in this sequence:

THE C/S

1. 2WC Have you ever had a problem in getting case gain for another? E/S to F/N.

2. 2WC What solutions have you had in getting case gain for another? E/S to F/N.

3. 2WC Have others ever had a problem getting case gain for others? E/S to F/N.

4. 2WC What solutions have others had getting case gain for others? E/S to F/N.

5. 2WC Have you ever had a problem getting case gain for yourself? E/S to F/N.

6. 2WC What solutions have you had getting case gain for yourself? E/S to F/N.

Once handled it ceases to be a problem when one does it in the future.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH: nt.rd
Copyright © 1971
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 17 JULY 1971
Remimeo
C/Ses
Testing Personnel C/S Series 51
Class IX Checksheet

OUT OF VALENCE

(OCA Graph)


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 triples for each assessed item from these lists is a way to handle.

Completing any cycle the pc is on is of course fundamental. And even if the pc goes on to next grade the graph will improve.

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.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH: nt .rd
Copyright © 1971
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 19 JULY 1971
Remimeo

C/S Series 52

INTERNES


The word INTERN or INTERNE means “An advanced graduate or a recent graduate in a professional field who is getting practical experience under the Supervision of an experienced worker”.

An Interneship then is serving a period as an Interne, or an activity offered by an org by which EXPERIENCE can be gained.

Interneships have been arranged this long while for every auditing class.

The apprenticeship of an auditor is done as an org Interne.

C/Ses very often have Internes on their lines and sometimes have trouble with getting them to audit.

The WHY of this is that the Interne seldom knows the definition of the word “Interne” (which is as above). They sometimes think they are still students. They do not know this fact:

A COURSE GRADUATE BECOMES AN AUDITOR BY AUDITING.

That means LOTS of auditing.

The failure of “auditors” is that they go from one level to the next, HDC to IV to VIII, without ever becoming an auditor for that Class.

Thus you can get a silly situation where a Class IX can’t audit or C/S well. Thus you get tech going out.

An HDC graduate who doesn’t then audit under an experienced Case Supervisor who knows and demands the standard actions rarely gets to be an HDC AUDITOR. It takes tons of hours to make a real Dianetic auditor who can toss off standard sessions and get his routine miracles.

So if an HDC doesn’t INTERNE, but simply goes on to the Academy Courses or SHSBC he has skipped his apprenticeship as a Dianetic Auditor.

If he gets his Class VI and never Internes but goes on to VIII well, we now have somebody who has long since lost touch with the reality of why he is studying.

Therefore you CAN’T take a Class VI graduate who was never a Dianetic Auditor and Interne him as a VI. He’ll goof-goof-goof. So you have to Interne him as an HDC.

WHEN he can turn out flawless Dianetic sessions on all kinds of pcs you can Interne him as a IV etc.

In other words you have to catch up all neglected Apprenticeships.

I don’t care if the guy is an VIII, if he wasn’t ever a Dianetic Auditor and a Class VI Auditor and isn’t Interning as an VIII then he is only a provisional.

Flubby auditors are the biggest time wasters a C/S has. If auditors on his lines aren’t good, he’ll take forever to get his C/S work done. And he won’t get results.

The answer is, regardless of Class as a course graduate, a C/S MUST INTERNE HIS AUDITORS FOR EACH INTERNESHIP MISSED ON THE WAY UP.

The “ok to audit” system is used.

One takes any graduate and Internes him on the lowest Interneship he has missed. He reviews his material, gets his drills checked, gets his misunderstood words cleared

and gets an “ok to audit” for that level. If he goofs he is crammed. And sometimes wholly retreaded. The “ok to audit Dianetics” would be his first okay. This suspends if he has to retread.

When he then has turned out pcs, pcs, pcs, pcs, 5, 6, 8, 10 hours a day for weeks and weeks and is a total success as a Dianetic Auditor, he can go on up.

At first as a Dianetic Interne he is part time studying Dianetics. Then as he gets flawless and while he is getting experience and practice on Dianetics, he can gradually phase over into re-studying his next Interneship, usually IV or VI.

Then one day he is word cleared, checked out on his drills, and he qualifies for “ok to audit” for IV or VI.

Now it begins all over again. Flubs—Cramming, midnight oil, audit audit cramming audit audit new word clear new drill work audit audit audit audit 5, 6, 8, 10 hours a day.

Now he is a IV or VI auditor.

His next real step is a VI or VII Interne at an SH. If he has been a good IV Interne Auditor his VI Interneship after his SHSBC will be a VII Interneship. VII is an Interne activity.

When he’s an Auditor that can do VI and Power, he is ready for VIII and IX.

If he is going to be a good VIII-IX auditor he will Interne in an AO or SH under an experienced C/S.

Now when he goes to his own org, you have a real honest to goodness C/S. And as a C/S he must know how you use Interneships to make auditors.

Wherever this function is neglected, you don’t get auditors. You get doubtful students and out-tech.

On Flag C/Ses have to catch up every missed Interneship to make a high volume high quality auditor.

The world renowned Superiority of Flag Auditors is built just like I am telling you here.

There is no reason just that same quality can’t be built in any org.

One does it by the Interne method.

By using this method you get IN tech and high volume.

Any auditor in any org that is limping and fumbling simply has never been properly Interned.

The way to remedy it is to set up a good Cramming that uses only HCO Bs and has them available (and no verbal tradition), a Good Word Clearer and a Qual “okay to audit” Interne system. The Internes are a Section in Qual. They have a Course Supervisor. They study and audit cram audit cram study audit, audit audit audit.

And one day you have IN tech and high volume high Class auditing all over the place.

Otherwise you just have a bunch of students, in doubt, chewing on their misunderstood words and failed tech.

There IS a right way to go about it.

It is by Interneship.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH: nt .rd
Copyright © 1971
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 24 NOVEMBER 1973RB
(Cancels HCO B 24 Nov 1973, Rev. 12 Nov 1974)
Revised & Reissued 22 March 1975
Remimeo


C/S Series 53RJ



SHORT HI-LO TA ASSESSMENT C/S


This is the basic prepared list used by Auditors to get a TA up or down into normal range. A GF Method 5 may also be used after TA is in normal range to get pc’s case handled better.

____________________________________PC Name_____________________ Date

1. Assess pc Method 5 on this sheet. (Go down the list calling off the items to the pc, watching the meter. Mark any Tick, SF, F, LF, LFBD [to what TA], Speeded Rise or Blow Up.) NOTE: A C/S 53RJ should be reassessed and all reads handled until it F/Ns on assessment.

A. Interiorization _________ Have others committed _________
Went in _________ overts on others _________
Go in _________ Not saying _________
Can’t get in _________ Problems _________
Want to get out _________ Protest _________
Kicked out of spaces _________ Don’t like it _________
Can’t go Audited over out ruds _________
Feel sad _________
B. List errors _________ Rushed _________
Overlisting _________ Tired _________
Wrong items _________ ARC Brk _________
Upset with giving _________ Upset _________
items to auditor _________ Can’t get it
Wrong date _________
Wrong location _________ D. Drugs _________
Wrong Why _________ LSD _________
Wrong Indication _________ Alcohol _________
Wrong PTS Item _________ Pot _________
Medicine _________
C. Some sort of W/H _________
Are you withholding E. Engram in restimulation _________
Something _________ Same engram run twice _________
Is another withholding Can’t see engrams too
something from you _________ well _________
Are others withholding Invisible _________
something from others _________ Black _________
False withhold _________ Loss _________
Withholds gotten off Lost _________
more than once _________
Has another committed F. Same thing run twice _________
overts on you _________ Same action done by
Have you committed another auditor _________
any overts _________

G. Doing something with K. Can’t have _________
mind between sessions _________ Low havingness _________
Some other practice _________
L. PTS _________
H. Word Clearing errors _________ Suppressed _________
Study errors _________
M. Something went on too
I. False TA _________ long _________
Wrong sized cans _________ Went on by a release
Tired hands _________ point _________
Dry hands or feet _________ Overrun
Wet hands or feet _________ Auditor kept on going _________
Loosens can grip _________ Over-repair _________
Wrong hand cream _________ Puzzled why auditor
keeps on _________
J. Auditor overwhelming _________ Stops _________
Interruptions _________
Feel attacked _________ N. Something else _________
Something wrong with Physically ill _________
F/Ns _________
Overrun F/Ns _________ O. Repairing a TA that
Missed F/N _________ isn’t high _________
Items really didn’t read _________ Repairing a TA that
False reads _________ isn’t low _________
Bad auditing _________ Faulty Meter _________
Incomplete actions _________ Nothing wrong _________
Invalidation _________
Evaluation _________ P. False Exam Report _________
Couldn’t get auditing _________ Waited at Exam _________
Upset by Examiner _________


2. Use only the small falls or falls or BDs. The rises will however show where mass lies.

A. If A or any of the A Group, and the pc has had an Int RD, do an Int RD Correction List, and handle the reads. (HCO B 29 Oct 71 R, Revised 14 May 74.)

If the pc has never had an Int RD, then give him a standard Int RD providing you have checked out on the Int-Ext pack and are good at R3R.

B. If any of these read, do an L4BR on the earliest lists you can find that have not been corrected. Lacking these do an L4BR in general. You can go over an L4BR several times handling each read to F/N until the whole L4BR gives nothing but F/Ns. Handle a Wrong Why or Wrong Indication or Wrong PTS Item per C/S Series 78.

C. If any of these, handle with 2wc and earlier similar to F/N. If more than one reads do biggest read first and then clean up each of the others E/S to F/N. If all read on assessment you have to get an F/N for each or 20 F/Ns. On overts and withholds, get what, and E/S to F/N. On out ruds, find which rud and handle. (See GF40RB, HCOB 30 June 71R, Revised I Dec 74.) Feel sad, handle the ARC Break. (Feel sad = ARC Brk of long duration.)

D. Rehab releases on each “drug” taken to F/N. Complete the Drug RD per C/S Series 48R after handling all reads on this assessment. If pc has had a Drug RD, do L3RD on it, and handle.

E. If any of these, do L3RD and handle according to what is stated to do on L3RD.

F. Clean up any protest and inval and rehab to F/N.

G. Find out what it is. If Yoga or Mystic exercises or some such 2wc E/S it to first time done, find out what upset had occurred before that and if TA now down do L1C on that period of pc’s life.

H. If Word Clearing, do a Word Clearing Correction List, handle all reads. If Study errors, 2wc E/S to F/N, and add a Study Correction List to the pc’s program.

I. False TA is wrong cans. Use HCO Bs 24 Oct 71, 12 Nov 71R, 15 Feb 72, 18 Feb 72, 29 Feb 72R, 23 Nov 73, all on False TA. Then clean up the bypassed charge with (1) Assess for best read (a) TA worries, (b) F/N worries. (2) Then 2wc times he was worried about (item) E/S to F/N. (3) Rehab any overruns due to False TA obscuring F/Ns.

J. These are auditor errors. Low TA is generally caused by overwhelming TRs and incomplete actions. A high TA can be caused by an auditor overrunning F/Ns or failing to call them. Or trying to assess through an F/N and mistaking an F/N right swing for a read. An F/N can be obscured and mistaken for a read if Sensitivity too high. These items are all 2wc E/S to F/N. Auditors who made them need Cramming badly or retread.

K. Can’t have or Hav. Find correct Havingness process and remedy.

L. PTS or Suppressed. Check for SP or get a full PTS RD.

M. Find out what. Clean up any protest. Rehab to F/N on each (or date to blow, locate to blow, if qualified).

N. 2wc to find what. Note BD item. If BD item covered by one of these categories handle per instructions. If not just 2wc to F/N and get further C/S instructions for handling if necessary.

O. Get pc to tell you about it briefly. If correct then indicate to F/N. Go E/S and indicate it if no F/N on first. If False TA handle per I above.

P. Indicate and 2wc to F/N.

General. Handle Int RD (A) if it reads at all before handling rest as nothing will go right if Int is still out. For the remainder prefer to handle any BD group if you get a BD. If in doubt about what to do, return to the C/S.


Revised by

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:nt jh
Copyright © 1973,1974, 1975
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 28 JULY 1971
Remimeo

D I A N E T I C S


C/S Series 54


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 A PC ASSESSMENT SHEET, HCO B 24 April 1969.

This is VITAL.

DRUGS


IF YOU GET ANY TA ACTION OR READS ON DRUGS EVEN IF THE

PC SAYS “NO” THE FIRST DIANETIC ACTION IS THE THIRD PAGE OF

HCO B 15 July 1971, Issue III.

If the pc is currently on Drugs, then a Special Drug TR COURSE IS VITAL until the pc is off them. Then do the third page of HCO B 15 July 1971, Issue III.

ACCIDENTS

If you get a read on Part E of Assessment Form, Accidents, run them out Narrative R3R Triple.

ILLNESS

If Illness Part F Assessment Form reads, run it out Narrative R3R Triple.

MENTAL TREATMENT

If Mental Treatment reads, run it out Narrative R3R Triple.

OPERATIONS

If Operations Part G reads run the reading one out Narrative R3R Triple.

MEDICINE

If Medicine Part M reads TREAT IT HCO B 15 Jul 71, Iss III, as it reacts like any other drug but pcs don’t sometimes think of medicines as drugs when they are.

DEATHS

If Deaths of relatives, etc read on Part 7, run them out Narrative as SECONDARIES R3R TRIPLE.

FAMILY INSANITY

If Part L reads on a member of the family going insane, run it out Narrative SECONDARIES R3R TRIPLE.

PERCEPTION

Lack of perception (sight, hearing, etc) comes from overts and improves when Flow 2 is done on any of the above or any R3R.

PROGRAM

The C/S Programs the Case from the Assessment Form as above, using Drugs or Medicine first and the rest by largest reads first.

Narrative Items or incidents were used for years with great effect. BUT THE ITEM MUST BE DONE R3R TRIPLE and is once in a while very long.

REPAIR

Repair by L3B ANY FLUBBED DIANETIC SESSION OR CHAIN WITHIN 24 HOURS. Do not let it go unrepaired.

HEALTH FORM

WHEN any and all of the above are handled, then and only then proceed with the usual Health Form by item.

The pc in many cases won’t be able to run engrams at all unless you run out drugs 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.

_________

This is CORRECT Dianetic Programming.

MAKE DIANETICS WORK FOR YOU.

Program it correctly. C/S it correctly.

It won’t work unless used on where the pc’s attention is.

IT WILL WORK IF YOU USE IT.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:nt.rd
Copyright © 1971
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 8 AUGUST 1971
Remimeo

C/S Series 55

THE IVORY TOWER


It has been stated before that the Case Supervisor is most successful when he supervises in seclusion.

This is called the IVORY TOWER rule.

It comes from the practical experience that in C/Sing thousands of cases the only few mistakes I made (and repaired) were when I listened to the opinion of the auditor or saw the pc.

This can be quite fatal to a case’s progress.

The fantastic results I achieve as a C/S mainly stem from not permitting what I know of tech and cases to be clouded by “Human Emotion and Reaction” (a Scn Public Relations term) by others.

Part of a C/S’s duty is to get the case through it despite auditor opinions and flubs or the opinions of others.

A C/S has no political or personnel opinions. He can of course have his own opinions of the pc’s case. But he is the FRIEND of the pc even when being harsh.

Often the C/S, unseen by the pc, is sometimes never suspected but quite often adored by those for whom he C/Ses. One often sees this in success stories, “Thank you, thank you to my great auditor (name) and the C/S (name) and Ron.” Sometimes it’s only the auditor. But mos. pcs know the C/S is there.

This awareness is also a great trust and it is a trust that is earned by great results and is never betrayed.

To the majority of pcs, then, it is a trio—always in the same order—his auditor, his C/S and myself.

He trusts us. And we do our best for him.

We don’t change our actions, then, if he is a dope addict, a wife beater, a criminal, a degraded being or an upstat (one who has high statistics) and a sterling person.

When we are researching, C/Sing or auditing, we do our best for him.

We have nothing to do with whether his seniors like him or for that matter whether we like him.

It is our job. We hold it in trust.

In our hands is his future, his sanity, his immortality.

It depends on us whether he survives and lives a full life or whether he goes into limbo.

If we do our duty, when we know and do our jobs, he achieves everything. When we don’t, he is gone.

No priest or fancied idol has ever been endowed with more cause over the beingness of another than a C/S and his auditor. This isn’t my opinion or my feeling about it. It’s the way pcs look at it.

Actually one can’t really state the full actuality of it.

The pc is justified in trusting us when we keep up to date on our tech, know our job, take every care that a good job is done and do our duty.

AUDITOR OPINION

Some auditors develop overts and withholds on pc and color their auditing reports with critical remarks about a pc = more withholds.

A C/S who pays much attention to these opinions is foolish. When they get too bad on too many pcs, get the auditor’s overts and withholds pulled as he’ll begin to flub.

The Worksheet and What the pc said or did is important. The opinions aren’t.

An auditor has a right to refuse to audit certain pcs as long as he audits others. That’s as it should be.

But a lot of “dog cases” are just unsolved cases that can be solved. Some are very difficult, true, but the difficulty is finding the bug. Some pcs are rather wild in conduct. But they solve too.

So an auditor’s opinion is not a study of the case. Talking to an auditor about a case he is auditing is not of any technical value to a C/S.

Again, a case does not know what is wrong with it or it would as-is and wouldn’t be wrong. So talking to a case about his case is a waste of time for a C/S. Some write huge notes to a C/S. The only value in all this is to analyze whether it’s a hidden standard or an ARC Brk or a w/h or a PTS matter. TECHNICAL considerations are all that enter in looking over such.

EXECUTIVE opinion is the world’s worst source of data on a pc. No C/S should ever take what seniors say about a junior. It’s all Human Emotion and Reaction. It’s not tech.

FAMILY, husbands, wives, fathers, mothers, brothers and sisters, aunts and uncles are of little value to listen to about a case. The most they could give you would be a list of accidents or illness or time in a home. But beware, they may be worse off than the pc.

No. The C/S is the pc’s safest friend.

The pc trusts the C/S and the auditor. Or he wouldn’t sit still at all.

Sometimes he only trusts me. And that’s the time I have to trust you.

And I do.



LRH:nt.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1971 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 25 AUGUST 1971
Re-issued 2 November 1972 as
Remimeo


Auditor Admin Series 2

C/S Series 56


HOW TO GET RESULTS
IN AN HGC


Obtaining excellent case results is an ADMINISTRATIVE not a wholly technical function.

Auditors and C/Ses are often weak on Administrative. They think general tech results improve only by more tech study. If they continue to think this way they wind up squirreling. For they are working on a wrong target for improvement, a wrong WHY or reason.

Auditing is a team activity. The day of the individual country doctor is dead. Even if an individual field auditor starts out as an individual he goes one of two directions—he overworks and squirrels himself into failure or he builds up a team—may only be a receptionist and an apprentice auditor but he is still building up a team. I have never seen individual auditors succeed over a long period. Failing to form or become part of a team, they eventually fade out or squirrel.

The reason is simple enough.

These rules apply:

TO IMPROVE TECH RESULTS YOU MUST IMPROVE ADMINISTRATION.

And I don’t mean just writing better in folders.

DEFINITION

ADMINISTRATION consists of the formation and handling of the lines and terminals involved in production.

Unless an auditor understands this fully, he will never insist on a Tech Sec, a Tech Establishment Officer, D of P, C/S, Examiner, Pages, Folder Admin and himself will begin to omit keeping a Folder Summary and then omit the session actions and then, with big loses, retire from it all.

If I were an auditor and saw some of these things missing, I’d be liable to say, “Are you guys kidding? I thought we were here to audit pcs.”

Without the correct pattern of lines and terminals YOU DON’T GET RESULTS, you get headaches, mad neighbors and refunds.

Auditing on lines, an auditor should regard himself as a highly skilled expert, a technical specialist whose work requires respect and service.

And Case Supervising on lines, a Case Supervisor should consider himself a sort of Czar whose word is so law even the Exec Director thinks several times before he approaches—duly servile of course and bowing the prescribed three times as he exits.

A Class XII on Flag is listened to by others with a hush even if he is only commenting on the weather.

These are the stars of the team. Their worldwide reputation for smooth flubless auditing is an administrative result!

Short of space, overloaded, short of admin personnel, turning out the highest well done hours in the world, Flag’s Div IV produces because of an Admin system.

The highest of these C/Ses and auditors goes to Cramming if he misplaces a comma or drops a TR 1.

If the sessions’ exams at Examiner drop from 90% F/N the whole place gets overhauled.

Folders are Folder Error Summaried by an FES section. The Folder Summary is kept up each session (or Cramming). The folder is studied and C/Sed. The D of P assigns the sessions. The C/S is done correctly (or Cramming). The folder travels on its lines. The tests are done.

In short it is a complex but constantly flowing pattern of moving pcs, folders and examinations interspersed with testing and interviews and re-registration.

There is a right way to do it.

RESULTS

If an org has only 65% of its sessions F/N VGIs at Examiner the right answer is to organize the place.

Why?

Well, the first answer is that the third dynamic is stronger than the first dynamic.

An auditor auditing alone is a first dynamic. The pc is a first dynamic. As it is the auditor plus pc that must be greater than the reactive mind, one can easily work the rest out.

If the auditor is part of a functioning third dynamic, not just an individual, the auditor plus pc versus the bank is a LOT more than the bank.

Another answer is that an auditor knows the pc, if only because of sessions, and personal opinion enters into it. That is not a pure technical view as a C/S’s must be.

Another answer is that an auditor in a group gets more auditing done.

Individually practicing auditors often fail because nobody is taking care of the auditor as a person. Further they get loses. No one sends them to Cramming. When they get loses they often start squirreling. Then they really get loses.

That ends them as auditors.

An auditor working in a good on policy organization is given service. He does get sent to Cramming. He does keep his tech updated. He gets wins. When he doesn’t he’s put back on standard tech. So he happily keeps going and makes lots of happy people.

So if I were auditing in a group I would insist as a condition of work that Div IV and Div V be good on policy divisions, fully organized with no nonsense.

I know whereof I speak. As a part-time duty I work as a consulting C/S with a good IV and a good V. Sometimes I have had to take over the whole C/S line. When the organization bogs in any way I know the whole thing is heading toward

single-handing the lot. So I get the lines back in and get people to Cramming and get the F/N at Examiner ratio approaching 100% again.

Thus, the advice you get about C/Sing is live-live-live, not canned theory.

ORG WINS

Being on administrative lines to all orgs, I can tell you pointblank that

THEIR STATS DEPEND ON THEIR VOLUME AND QUALITY OF SERVICE.

That isn’t propaganda. It’s pure fact.

The F/N-no F/N at Examiner ratio tells you at once if Divs IV and V are organized and operating or if they are just fooling about.

At 50% to 75% F/N at Examiner the administrative functions of Divs IV and V are stinking bad. C/S Series 25 is out. Cramming is out. Hidden data lines exist. HCO Bs, books and tapes are not used.

The public, at that % of F/N, will stay away in droves. Registrars will go batty and adopt “Hot Prospect Systems”.

The staff will go low pay and the execs will be a perpetual dark shade of purple from yelling. The cash-bills ratio will be the subject of finance missions and the neighbors will be phoning the police.

Why?

Because an org is itself a technical delivery organization and 50% to 75% F/N at Examiner is an overt product.

The Academy has already failed to apply student study tech and word clearing. Qual is a joke.

There is no library of tech available and if available isn’t read.

The org as a tech service delivery unit is treating its public to a no-auditing situation and will get in trouble.

REMEDY

The way to remedy is to get on policy with tech organization.

Put in a Qual with word clearing and a library and cramming.

Put in the C/S Series 25 Tech lines.

Tolerate NO out-tech or out-admin in folders.

Dummy run the lines until they’re in.

Cram Cram Cram C/S and auditor and tech personnel flubs whenever they occur.

Get the organization functioning.

Your F/N at Examiner ratio will climb straight up to 90% 95% 98%.

By actual test pcs will flood in, Reg lines will get easy, success stats soar.

More auditors more C/Ses, more organization. A second, a third HGC.

And the more thoroughly the admin lines are manned the better the tech lines work.

This conclusion came from actual inspections of orgs and studies of their stats.

Orgs should be selling more training than processing.

But why train if you can’t interne them in a good Qual and HGC? They’ll never amount to anything as auditors unless they work in an organization that is on tech and on policy.

So you need an HGC.

Tech, done in a proper administrative framework, works.

Some orgs really don’t believe they could ever attain the flubless auditing quality of Flag.

But they can.

It is even easy.

It is even easier to attain flubless quality of auditing than any other kind.

You put in a real on policy admin pattern in IV and V. You begin with a Qual Interne Course.

You send to Cramming for any C/S or auditing error no matter how minute.

The results come up.

The errors cease.

You’re a success! If you do it.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH: nt .rd
Copyright © 1971, 1972
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 1 SEPTEMBER 1971
Issue I
Remimeo

C/S Series 57


A C/S AS A TRAINING OFFICER
A PROGRAM FOR FLUBLESS AUDITING


It is wholly and entirely up to the C/S whether or not his auditors ever come to be FLUBLESS AUDITORS. Auditing flubs are the main things that make a C/S’s job long and hard and the main thing that denies his pcs high results.

For example-with competent auditors I can C/S the day’s folders in 21/2 hours. With green flubby auditors the same number of folders takes 61/2 hours.

The answer plainly is to groove the auditors in until they are flubless. And this is what a competent C/S does.

Because he has internes on his lines and because any group of auditors can be bettered, the training officer part of the C/S hat is one which is always worn.

Also, if the Tech-Qual administrative set-up is nonextant or a confused mess, the errors in folders and various upsets react suppressively both on the C/S and auditors and they—both C/S and auditors—make mistakes. So the administrative lines and terminals must be there.

Thus a C/S out of self-defense is not merely a training officer of auditors but of other Tech-Qual personnel as well.

Officially this hat belongs with the other terminals. But to coordinate the operation, the C/S has to have a large amount of know-how about the lines and terminals of Tech and Qual. As it is the C/S who is directing the running of cases and as the lines and terminals exist only to obtain auditing results in volume with high quality, no C/S can afford to neglect his duties as a training officer. Otherwise he will promptly drown.

The folder flow must be smooth with no flaps. The auditor-pc assignments must be smooth with no lost auditing time. The sessions must occur. The auditors who flub must be promptly handled. The Cramming Officer in Qual must know his business. The C/S depends on him to get the kinks out of the auditors’ tech and its application.

The processing must be paid for adequately or there will be no funds to hire enough terminals and, indeed, there would be no HGC at all. The C/S is trying to obtain Volume, Quality and Viability.

By experience volume comes from the whole org working and the auditors auditing correctly without lost hours spent in fumbles and repairs. Quality comes from smooth Tech-Qual lines and hatted terminals and the auditors auditing flublessly.

It is not that the C/S is in charge of the whole org. But every point where a C/S is having trouble is where an org terminal has broken down. Therefore a C/S has every right to INSIST upon hatted functioning terminals.

The C/S has a definite effect upon the efficiency of an org’s personnel. He can ensure the staff gets audited either on his lines or from Dept 13. And he can insist on quality staff staff auditing for it will help keep his own post going.

Tech works. It works splendidly. The materials are there. Read, understood and applied, FLUBLESS AUDITING occurs.

It is so easy to C/S just for cases using standard actions. All puzzles come from FLUBS.

The sequence of actions a C/S should take to attain Flubless Auditing could be listed more or less in this order.

1. Make sure his own tech is up to date and do part-time study or retread where needed.

2. Make sure he has no misunderstood words the length and breadth of the subject.

Get Word Clearing Method 2 on every major tech writing, each HCO B or P/L if it comes to that. Then get Word Clearing Method 1 to full EP.

3. Practice locating the bugs in “failed cases” or “dog cases” long in auditing until the C/S knows it was an application failure, an auditor failure or a former C/S failure.

4. Study out the terminals and lines necessary IN YOUR ORG, physically going over them, to

(a) Get a pc in.
(b) Get an auditor employed.
(c) Get a pc assigned to an auditor.
(d) Get auditor and pc together in an auditing room.
(e) Get the pc examined.
(f) Get the folder turned in for C/Sing.
(g) Get an auditor to Cramming and back.
(h) Get a pc to Ethics and handled.
(i) Get a D of P to interview pcs, muster auditors, do assignments and other D of P duties.
(l) Get a pc to attest.
(k) Get a pc to Success.
(I) Get folders FESed.
(m) Get folders stored and found.
(n) Get folders made up or neatly covered.
(o) Get supplies for auditors.
(p) Get an area for auditor admin.
(q) Get an area for pcs to wait.
(r) Get the various boards made and kept up.
(s) Get stats kept and reported.
(t) Get bonuses paid.
(u) Get pcs handled when adrift on lines.
(v) Get a Qual in.
(w) Do his own job.
(x) How to get and keep all this and any more points going all at once rapidly.

He will now know the scene and can achieve a more ideal scene by insisting the Org Officer (emergency) or the HAS (permanently) handle. Now it all gets less confusing as one understands what is out when it is out.

5. Set up a close fast line with the Cramming Officer so that auditors who flub are in actual fact rapidly straightened out and gotten back to auditing without great time loss.

6. Fend off and refuse to give tech advice as such. KNOW WORD CLEARING SERIES 16 THOROUGHLY and get a great reality on it and insist that the Qual Sec and Cramming Officer know it, use it and hammer away with it. Otherwise such weird tech confusions will be floating about that even the C/S gets confused and begins to wonder if the material IS in the books and bulletins!

7. Gather up a Tech and Admin Library for fast reference for personal use.

8. Get in a system whereby every flub by an auditor, a D of P, a Div IV or V Admin personnel, a page, anyone that flubs as it affects the C/S in ANY way gets a Cramming chit with the exact reference to be crammed on. Keep a carbon of the chit, send the original to Cramming, get the chit back when done and marked off on the carbon. Keep the Admin of it simple but the execution of it TOTALLY effective.

9. The Qual Sec, Cramming Officer and Interne Supervisor are the close technical links with the C/S. In technical matters the C/S is senior. Sometimes the C/S is sent to Cramming by the Qual Sec and should accept and do it gracefully. Sometimes there is a Senior C/S in the org (the Assistant Guardian, ED or some other senior exec may be an HSST or even a Class X). In such a case he has the right to cram or send any of these terminals (or any other terminal) to Cramming. Including any Senior C/S, and including any C/S for another Department or for crew or in the Guardian’s Office, these terminals constitute the tech hierarchy of the org: Senior C/S, C/Ses, Qual Sec, Cramming Officer and the Interne Supervisor and they have to hold a hard technical line. The Tech Sec is mainly concerned with production and administration and a Tech Establishment Officer is concerned with establishing. It can happen that a Tech Sec or TEO are also very well trained technically and if so are part of this technical hierarchy but they are not necessarily so. Therefore there is a sort of ex-officio technical committee on the subject of technical matters composed generally of the Senior C/S, C/Ses, Qual Sec, Cramming Officer and Interne Supervisor that monitors the quality of HGC and Dept 10 auditing. The Director of Training can be advised concerning the results of his students after graduation in order to remedy his training and as such is a part of the Committee, as can be the Tech Sec. Most narrowly and most continually Tech quality is between the C/S and the Cramming Officer. More widely, the Senior C/S, Qual Sec and Interne Supervisor enter in. And in the widest sense, the Tech Sec, Tech Establishment Officer and Director of Training enter in. It is an error to suppose the C/S and auditors are the technical monitors of the org. They are the main technical personnel. But a C/S can waste tons of time by talking to or with auditors beyond an auditors’ conference and can really get whizzing if he spends the same time with the Cramming Officer who then crams auditors and with the Interne Super who then persuades internes to function. Knowing who is as important in organization as knowing how. So hold some meetings small and large and thresh out the bugs.

10. Missing materials is a C/S point of upset.

“What is a Course” Policy Letter can be out on tech courses to a degree that you wouldn’t believe. Not only no routing form or roll book but NO MATERIALS.

The Books, HCO Bs, tapes MUST be available. They exist. It is suppressive to run a course without them. Pubs Org, CLOs have them. Financial Planning can’t deny this necessity as they’re what their income comes from.

Qual MUST have a complete and safeguarded library for use in Cramming actions.

Under Omitted Materials would be omitted meters and at this writing there is no restriction on these and supply is abundant.

The “no materials” gag is the last straw for a C/S.

Future auditors won’t have a clue and current auditors will have no way to find out.

So the C/S must not permit “economy” or plain laziness or “we sent a despatch three months ago” to get in the road of materials. IT IS CHEAPER TO PUT SOMEBODY ON A PLANE WITH A CHEQUE TO BRING THEM BACK than to do without materials.

So a C/S should definitely defend himself against a “no materials” blockage and handle it.

11. No Study. When one has materials and particularly when one is getting new materials a breakdown can occur when the materials, especially new ones, aren’t read.

A technical person must keep up with the advances in technology. That is true of any profession.

A primary failure of new technology is (you won’t believe it but it is true) the materials aren’t read before the process is tried!

I have even caught Class IXs out on this, believe it or not, so don’t think it can’t happen.

Process G is received. Auditors audit it. Process fails. Why? Auditors never read the bulletin first!

SO BE SURE YOUR AUDITORS READ THE MATERIALS AND CHECK OUT BEFORE THEY DO THE PROCESS.

Write C/Ses like this — “Auditor to Cramming to check out on HCO B . When attested, do the following 1. ,,

Do this on new materials and, on new auditors, on any materials you believe he may goof.

Why have the first 12 pcs on Process G go sour just because the auditor only glanced at the commands and missed the tech?

Interiorization Rundowns are still in this category in some areas. The auditor doesn’t study and Clay demo the pack before doing them. So they fail.

Now and then Power hits the same snag.

So, simple as it seems, get new materials read and checked out in Cramming as the first part of a C/S on them!

And get new materials read.

And keep up on them yourself.

12. Hidden Data Line trouble can wreck an HGC (and the org and field).

A “Hidden Data Line” is a pretense that certain data exists outside of HCO Bs, books and tapes. It can include “data in HCO Bs is conflicting” and “nowhere does it say how to ______”. This is deadly and a C/S should work hard to stamp it out. THE CAUSES OF A HIDDEN DATA LINE OR IMAGINED CONFLICTS IS A FAILURE TO USE WORD CLEARING METHODS TWO AND THREE ON COURSES AND A FAILURE TO USE AND ONLY USE METHOD TWO IN CRAMMING. A C/S can go straight up the wall trying to grapple with these omissions and eventually begin to believe that it takes 500 Cramming chits to make an auditor who still isn’t made and that flubless auditing can’t be done from HCO Bs, books and tapes. As soon as a C/S finds his Cramming orders getting too thick he should check

(a) Is Method 2 (meter) Word Clearing used hard in Cramming as a first action?

(b) Are Methods 2 and 3 Word Clearing in use constantly on tech courses?

(c) Is Method 1 Word Clearing (full rundown) available and faultlessly done on every auditor?

Get these points IN.

Poof! The Hidden Data Line vanishes. (See Word Clearing Series 16.)

Word Clearing has been around for years but people sometimes are themselves so fogged by misunderstood words that they don’t hear you at all when you say USE WORD CLEARING!

13. Invalidation kills auditors. So don’t chew on them any harder than is necessary to get the job done.

Get “To Cramming” to mean, “normal procedure even for Class XIIs” .

We had one student who every evening gasped with relief that he hadn’t been sent to Cramming. We finally found out that he was really terrified he would be found out for false study stats!

Only when an auditor refuses to go to Cramming do you begin to push.

The auditor sent to Cramming to do an action must not do the action on another pc until he has been to Cramming on it.

This can “hold up production” in somebody’s mind. But how an auditor can produce anything while flubbing is someone else’s misunderstood, not mine. He can’t. Better five hours in Cramming and one good session than no Cramming and five goofed sessions.

The real invalidation of an auditor is failing at tech. So don’t let them fail. “Johnny, your TRs are too hard to hear. Get over to Cramming and get hearable” is perfectly acceptable. If it is correct.

So Invalidation could be defined as

(a) letting an auditor lose

(b) correcting things he does right.

That’s about the extent of invalidation.

14. Auditor morale depends not on PR (Public Relations) or phoney stats. It depends on actual, honest completions.

A well trained auditor allowed to get completions will have high morale.

Thus, a C/S must push an auditor toward

(a) Flubless tech

(b) Completions

You keep pushing and he’ll make it.

You don’t push or push on the wrong things and he won’t.

As to completions try to get auditors to do the whole program so something is completed. This is for the auditor not the pc. The Auditor’s Code on a frequent change of auditors was written for pcs. But it also applies to auditors. Let them complete programs. Even if they spend half the day in Cramming. Don’t yank them off cases. And don’t let your D of P assign auditors to different cases or he’ll soon have downtone apathetic auditors who never see what their auditing finally does for one particular pc.

Auditor Morale has little to do with anything but the above two things.

Also if you have those two things in as a C/S, you will see something new happen. Pcs will be around slapping auditors on the back and cheering the org and the place becomes a very happy place.

So work for auditor morale with pushing them relentlessly toward flubless tech and toward completions.

____________


The above actions are numbered. If a C/S were to work to get these in, one by one, and if he then went over them again and again, he would wind up about the most complimented upstat C/S anywhere around.

These are the giant points to get in while plugging along each day C/Sing the usual and handling the noise.

The way to get out of cope is to organize. And these fourteen points give a sequence of organizational steps that lift one out of cope and into a smooth productive time of it.

The org would become very prosperous.

The staff would be very happy.

The field would be delighted.

Just remember that when you reach an average 700 well done auditing hours, you better have a new C/S in training and persuade him to follow himself these 14 points in a new and necessary additional HGC.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:sb.nt.rd
Copyright © 1971
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 7 SEPTEMBER 1971
Remimeo

C/S Series 58


PROGRAMMING CASES BACKWARDS


When you see a case that has struggled along through 200 hours of processing without much gain you sometimes see a C/S has only recently ordered, or has not ordered at all as yet, an Interiorization RD check and a Green Form No. 40 Expanded. That would be programming backwards.

The tools of auditing are the Grade Chart Processes and the numerous correction lists.

Like a gardener, a C/S has the choice of numerous tools to raise a flower.

If you were to see a gardener digging holes with the lawn mower and cutting grass with a spade, you would say he needed to be checked out on the use of his tools, what each is for.

Similarly, running Power on someone who needs Dianetics, doing a life repair on someone who is ready for R6EW, would be a misuse of tools.

Similarly, going on auditing someone on Dianetics who desperately needs his ruds put in or an Interiorization Rundown is wasting auditing and messing up a preclear.

Let me give you some examples I have seen recently:

A. Case audited through many major actions since his Int RD. Auditor and C/S in despair. Pc not progressing. A C/S 53 disclosed the Int RD was faulty and its repair was also faulty. Int Rundown was handled. Case began to run. Months of auditing had been wasted. Needed had been a C/S 53 where out Int would have shown.

B. After 200 or more hours of no change in his personality graph (Oxford Capacity Analysis) the pc came up with the withhold that he was a homosexual and also that he did not know what “Scientology” meant. About 2 years of auditing had been wasted. Needed had been Word Clearing and rudiments.

C. After scores of hours of no-win auditing and no graph change it was finally decided to run a GF 40X and found the person practised witchcraft!

D. After a year of auditing on major grades all wasted it was finally found that the person had had a leg injury he was trying to cure that required only a simple Dianetic assist. Today that would be a C/S 54. He had never had a Pc Assessment Form.

E. After racing from POWER to OT III without doing any real auditing or having any change, it was found on a GF 40X that the whole world had been unreal and the person could not begin to face the idea of looking at pictures or the bank and had not been able to since her first drug experiences. Needed had been Objective Processes, CCHs, Op Pro by Dup, etc which get a drug addict to look and be aware.

All these are simple if flagrant errors in ordering the right program actions.

In order to be able to say what should be done on the case, one has to have three things:

1. Data about the case.

2. A knowledge of what lists are available.

3. Auditors who can do the actions required.

From a C/S point of view, all these things are under the C/S’s control.

DATA

In the Class VIII materials the 7 Resistive Cases are described. The full lot of them are now found in GF 40X.

There are numerous other lists for assessment.

If a C/S really doesn’t know his lists he can order them all, Method 5 and take his choice of symptoms.

Also a C/S can have the pc simply asked questions.

From this data a C/S knows why the case is not running well and can order the actions to remedy it.

If nothing is wrong, complete the earliest incomplete grade on the Grade Chart.

KNOWLEDGE

A C/S who is well Word Cleared on his materials and has studied on the courses knows what things hang a case up more than what other things.

This gives one the knowledge necessary to choose what lists.

Case no case gain then it’s GF 40X.

And to keep from auditing over an out Int RD there is C/S 53.

And for chronic aches and pains there is C/S 54.

And for “might be anything” there’s a GF.

What lists and actions that can be done are for is very easy to sort out.

AUDITORS

If a C/S’s auditors aren’t flubless or expert one needs to get in a Cramming and needs to get hired and interned lots of new auditors. C/S Series 57, “A C/S as a Training Officer”, solves a lot of this. And a Tech Establishment Officer is vital to keep it solved.

Then auditors, the numbers and quality of, are not on the C/S’s plate as a continual problem. Scientologists want to audit. They will go on auditing as long as you make them audit well enough and C/S for them well enough to keep them winning on pcs.

SUMMARY

So the tools of the C/S are

1. Data from pcs.
2. Knowledge of list uses.
3. Knowledge of the Grade Chart.
4. Auditors.
5. The organization of delivery.


LRH:nt rd L RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1971 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 14 SEPTEMBER 1971
Remimeo
Also Dn Text

C/S Series 59


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 HCO B 1 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 L4B—HCO B 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 L4B 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 HCO B 14 Mar 71 “F/N Everything” or, preferably the list is found in the folder and properly handled in accordance with what read on L4B.

ALL 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 can be run by recall, by secondaries and by engrams as found in Class VIII materials. It is usually run by engrams, triple, R3R.

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) L4B is the correction list used in such cases.

Very few Dianetic lists behave this way but when they do they must be handled as above.


LRH:nt.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1971 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 15 SEPTEMBER 1971
Remimeo
C/S Series 60

THE WORST TANGLE

Sometimes a C/S gets a terrible tangle handed to him as follows.

1. INTERIORIZATION RUNDOWN IS UNDONE OR MESSED UP.

2. FAULTY LISTS HAVE BEEN DONE.

3. THE PC IS IN A HEAVY ARC BRK WITH PTPs AND W/Hs.

Now each one of these three things “must be done first”.

Auditing cannot be done with Int messed up except to handle the Int RD.

Auditing cannot be done over bad lists without repairing the lists.

Auditing cannot be done over out ruds without putting the ruds in.

So WHAT does the C/S do?

There is fortunately a different degree of upset in these three things.

Int RD trouble is worse than list trouble is worse than out ruds.

Therefore the correct C/S would be to

1. Repair Int

2. Repair Lists

3. Put in Ruds.

1. Repair Int RD is done by using L3B on each flow. And (on Flag) by dating to blow and locating to blow.

2. Lists are repaired with L4B on each list, preferably with the list available and preferably with the actual list repaired (such as added to if incomplete or correct item found and given to pc).

3. And if the pc also had out ruds THESE ARE NOW PUT IN WITH “Have you been audited over an (ARC Brk, PTP, w/h)?” as the pc has been.

It will all come out all right if properly done. Very few pcs get that messed up. But when they do even they can be untangled.

If a lot of engrams were also run on top of that and these are also in the mess, repair them last as a fourth action. And don’t forget to send auditors responsible to Cramming and report C/Ses who get a case that snarled up.

C/S Series 53 is written with the above sequence of handling. But it omits ARC Brks (as these don’t raise or lower TA out of normal range). And C/S Series 53 as it is designed only for high or low TA does not cover the trick of putting in the ruds as “Were you audited over an (ARC Brk, PTP, w/h)?” as it purposely has to omit ARC Brks.

Hope this helps.


LRH:nt.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1971 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 22 SEPTEMBER 1971
Remimeo

C/S Series 61


THE THREE GOLDEN RULES
OF THE C/S

HANDLING AUDITORS


There are three firm rules in handling auditors which make the difference between good auditors and poor auditors or even having auditors or no auditors at all.

1. NEVER FAIL TO FIND AND POINT OUT AN ACTUAL GOOF AND SEND THE AUDITOR TO CRAMMING.

2. NEVER INVALIDATE OR HARASS AN AUDITOR FOR A CORRECT ACTION OR WHEN NO TECHNICAL GOOF HAS OCCURRED.

3. ALWAYS RECOGNIZE AND ACKNOWLEDGE A TECHNICALLY PERFECT SESSION.

By reversing these three things a C/S can wreck and blow every auditor in the place.

By always doing these three things correctly the C/S winds up with splendid auditors.

An auditor who knows he goofed and yet gets a well done doesn’t think the C/S is a good fellow. He holds the C/S in contempt and his auditing worsens.

An auditor who didn’t goof and yet is told he did becomes bitter or hopeless and begins to hate the C/S.

The test of a C/S in the auditor’s eyes is “Is he spot on?” meaning is the C/S accurate in giving the right program, the right C/S, spotting the goof and ordering Cramming, and being well enough trained to see and commend a well done.

You never get Bad Indicators in an auditor or student when you state the truth.

You only get Bad Indicators when your statement is not true.

“PR” (Public Relations cheery falsehoods) has nothing to do with getting good indicators.

Good indicators in auditors are made with TRUTH.

“You goofed, go to Cramming, do TRs 101 to 104 until you cease to alter commands.”

“Well done by Exams. Practice Handwriting so I don’t take so long reading your worksheets.”

“This F/N VGIs at session end and the Bad Exam Report do not agree. Is there any way this report was falsified? Is there any goof you didn’t write down?”

or

“Very well done” on a very well done totally ON Tech, ON Admin and Correct Auditor’s C/S session.

Auditors work well even for a bad tempered C/S when that C/S is always “Spot on” with program, C/S, Auditor’s grade or censure of auditor and TO CRAMMING.

Auditors like a businesslike accurate C/S.

A “good fellow” C/S who “lets it slide” and says nothing becomes a very bad fellow indeed in auditors’ eyes.

A C/S who doesn’t recognize and who invalidates good auditing is looked on as a suppressive even when it’s just ignorance.

The Golden Rules of C/Sing are

1. Never fail to find and point out an actual goof and send the auditor to Cramming.

2. Never invalidate or harass an auditor for a correct action or when no technical goof has occurred.

3. Always recognize and acknowledge a technically perfect session.

Only those C/Ses who follow these Golden Rules are truly loved by their auditors.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder



LRH: nt.rd
Copyright © 1971
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 28 SEPTEMBER 1971
Remimeo
(corrected and reissued)


C/S Series 62



KNOW BEFORE YOU GO


A C/S may and should know exactly what is wrong with a case.

When he “knows” by hunches or intuition and does not bother to confirm or make a wider effort, he can miss the case entirely.

Example: C/S says to himself—I know what’s wrong with Joe. His wife. So I’ll C/S “O/W on your wife”.

Some of the time the C/S will be right. This gives him a win and confirms him in sloppy C/Sing. He does not bother to know before he C/Ses.

A C/S who gets a low percentage of cracked cases and a low percent of F/N VGIs at Examiner usually fails to “know before he goes”. He just goes, which is to say he just writes programs and C/Ses without finding out enough about the case.

A skilled C/S may very well be able to figure out exactly what’s wrong with the case. That’s his job. But how does he find out anything about the case at all?

The answer is very simple. So simple it gets missed. THE C/S GETS DATA ON THE CASE.

How does he do this?

The broadest, most used answer to how to know is prepared lists. These have all sorts of questions on them that read or don’t read. There are lots of these lists beginning with the famous PC Assessment Form. There are all sorts of lists. An end product of any list is DATA ON THE PC ONE USES TO PROGRAM AND C/S THE CASE.

The next answer to how to get data is lists prepared by the C/S himself and which are assessed by the Auditor.

Another answer is 2-way comm on questions written by the C/S. “What do you consider hasn’t been handled on your case?” is a jewel which gives you the hidden standard to List and Null and run Who or what would have to BD F/N Item and O/W on the item found. But there are dozens more. “How do you feel about your family?” “R Factor: The C/S is concerned about your saying your case sags after wins in auditing. Could you tell me exactly what happens and what your history has been on this?” There is no limit to such questions. And, if taken from what the pc says to Examiner or from auditors’ comments on Worksheets, they will usually F/N. But mainly they give data.

When regular actions fail, there is always the D of P. “D of P to Interview Richard Roe and find out what he’s trying to do in session. Also how he looks, mannerisms, etc.”

Data, Data, Data. Now you have a picture of this case.

COMBINED ACTION

Usually, by prepared lists issued or from C/S prepared lists, the C/S finds and gets handled by the auditor in the same session much of what is wrong. This combines finding out with handling.

Any prepared list carried to F/N on each read (Method 3) or the indicated action done will give case gain. Maybe it’s all the case gain one could ask for.

But such reads even if F/Ned and the text in the Worksheet give the C/S new data about this case.

BROAD SHOOTING

Even if he now KNOWS, the C/S does not narrowly shoot at one target. He gives alternatives as well in his C/S.

Example: C/S knows pc is concerned about F/Ns. He does not necessarily just write “Prepcheck F/Ns”. Instead the C/S writes “Assess Auditors, Auditing, Dianetics, Scientology, F/Ns, Processing, false reads. Prepcheck each reading item, taking largest read first.” This gives a broader band, more chance of hitting the button needed.

There are many ways to do this. Example: You “know” it is a misdefined word. You don’t C/S “Find the misdefined word”. You write, “Assess Method 3 and Handle the Word Clearing Correction List”. For you see, the session might also have been run over an out rud.

EVALUATION

To abruptly C/S everything the pc has just said is a Q and A. But worse, it can lead to evaluation.

LITTLE FLAGS

Pc Remarks are like little Flags that may signal a much deeper deposit of aberration. Only the little flag shows. “I don’t like women,” can uncover a whole background. “I keep getting this pain in my side” opens the door to a whole chain of operations and one to be done next week!

But by the broad rule, the C/S doesn’t dive at it. He says “Pc has pain in side. I . C/S 54.”

Not “List the somatics in his side”. But a whole coverage of accidents, illnesses. One will also have a side pain as a result. “Appendicitis Operation” is enough to give anyone a pain in the side if never audited out!

TAGGING CASES

A C/S who sees a case is thick foldered and not well tags the case “Resistive”. There are 7 resistive cases listed in the Class VIII material. For this the C/S has “GF40 Expanded Method 3” and then handles the lists and engrams indicated in it in his next C/S.

If this doesn’t handle, the case is in an out Ethics situation that should be looked into.

The C/S mentally tags the easy ones and the tough ones. The tough ones he plays on the Resistive Cases side.

The C/S can also find an auditor considers a fast case a bad case when it is just a fast case.

PRIMARY RECORD

The primary record is the pc’s folder. When the case does not run well it can be assumed that the case is

(a) Resistive
(b) Errors have been made in auditing.

These two assumptions are valid in all cases which do not easily resolve. They are both valid because the case, being resistive, was running poorly, was hard to audit and C/S earlier.

From the folder, from prepared lists, from C/S’s own additions to prepared lists, from C/S’s own prepared lists, from 2wc on questions and from D of P Interviews one can get ENOUGH DATA TO INTELLIGENTLY PROGRAM AND C/S A CASE.

All this may seem very obvious. BUT, in word clearing the most Common C/S error has been to fail to order a Word Clearing Correction List done. Instead one reads, “Correct the last word found”. This misses that the whole thing may be being done over a withhold or ARC Break. It might be another word entirely. So a C/S who does this risks the wrong target. He is not C/Sing broadly enough.

Also one sees a repair or life program consisting of two or three special processes and without any lists at all.

One also sees a program which seeks to handle several things the C/S “knew” were wrong followed by “8. C/S 53, 9. GF 40X, 10. C/S 54.” Having gone, this program then seeks to find out. It’s quite backwards.

Thus the C/S who goes before he knows is going to have an awful lot of no F/Ns at the Examiner.

The watchword is KNOW BEFORE YOU GO.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:nt.rd
Copyright © 1971
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 2 OCTOBER 1971
Remimeo


C/S Series 63



C/SING FOR NEW AUDITORS OR VETERANS


There is a considerable difference between C/Sing for internes and new auditors and C/Sing for veterans.

This shows up mainly in C/Sing prepared lists.

For an interne or new auditor or one who is not very experienced or expert, the rule is that a C/S gives as little thinking to do as possible in the session.

It is enough for such an auditor to do the actions. It is too much to also ask him to use judgment or work something out while auditing.

A veteran on the other hand knows the tools so well that he can also figure out what to do.

Example:

C/S for non-veteran:

1. Assess GF Method 5 and return to C/S.

C/S for a veteran:

1. Assess GF Method 5 and Handle.

It is quite a trick to assess a whole list, then take the biggest reads and handle. It is quite beyond an auditor who is still worrying about his TRs or how you run a meter.

In an effort to speed up lines or escape work, a C/S can err badly in this. It becomes mysterious why Word Clearing Correction List ceases to work, why F/Ns are few at the Examiner.

Giving an inexperienced auditor the responsibility for assessing a list and also handling it is in fact asking him to audit and to a faint degree C/S in the chair. It is quite beyond a green auditor.

Given that he knows his Tech, most of a C/S’s troubles come from

(a) Asking green auditors to follow C/Ses for which they have not studied the HCO Bs or on which they have not been crammed,

(b) C/Sing for green auditors to decide something in session or combine actions such as assessing and handling without a new C/S in between,

(c) Not sending the auditor (green or veteran) to Cramming for every goof,

(d) Having no Cramming.

It takes a while to make an auditor.

The C/S is responsible for all actions in the session. He has only himself to blame if he is asking someone to C/S for him in the chair.

It is easier to plan out and write up the needed GF actions (or any other list) from the Method 5 reads than it is to correct a messed-up handling. It does not save any time at all but more than likely makes new problems for the C/S.

It is very easy to have even a green auditor assess some prepared list. One can even now say, “Take the list just assessed and do 2wc on each item I have marked. Carry each E/S to an F/N before leaving it.” The C/S simply puts a dash ahead of each item that read in the assessment.

The C/S can also number the items in different order than the list (because of better programming or bigger reads) and have each one handled to F/N.

An L3B can be ordered “Method 5” and then the C/S can get it back and precisely order what’s to be done with its reads. And in what sequence.

This is true of any prepared list.

The only small hitch is that a C/S has to be there and available so as not to stall the session. Even so, in the long run it is faster because less mistakes are made. Assess—send to C/S—handle. Instead of “Assess and Handle”.

This even applies to a C/S 53 or C/S 54 or White Form or GF 40X. Any prepared list.

Perhaps this will greatly improve your F/N VGI ratio.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:mes.rd
Copyright © 1971
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 5 OCTOBER 1971
Remimeo
Qual Hats
Tech Estab C/S Series 64
Officers

F/Ning AUDITORS


Students who study well are said to be F/Ning students.

An auditor who is auditing well could be said to be F/Ning the whole time.

When an auditor goofs or is having a rough time because of his own TRs and misunderstood words and lack of data, he is not F/Ning.

A C/S who lets an auditor struggle along without insisting on a Cramming being in existence and without sending an auditor to Cramming on each goof is actually condemning the auditor to a miserable time.

When an auditor’s production is low and when he is making goofs, he is not an F/Ning auditor. This shows up heavily in the Exams of his pcs. These Exams will drop away from F/N VGIs.

An auditor should be sent to Cramming when his production is low or he goofs in order to get his TRs, misunderstood words and lack of data remedied.

Cramming should be carried out until he is F/N VGIs.

EVERY AUDITOR LEAVING CRAMMING SHOULD GO THROUGH THE EXAMINER.

The Exam report with TA and needle state and indicators should be done exactly like a pc report.

Compliance reports on the Cramming cycle should have the Exam report attached so the C/S can see if the fault was remedied. If it was, then it will be F/N GIs.

This also puts Cramming on its toes.

An auditor, just crammed, who doesn’t F/N VGI should be hauled straight back into Cramming for the cycle is incomplete or invalidative or faulty in some way.

Cramming Officers who win on auditors and students are F/Ning Cramming Officers.

C/Ses who send auditors to a good Cramming for every goof will wind up as F/Ning C/Ses.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder



LRH:sb.rd
Copyright © 1971
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

B O A R D T E C H N I C A L B U L L E T I N

6 OCTOBER 1971R
Issue I
Remimeo Revised & Reissued 14 January 1975 as BTB
(Revision in this type style)

CANCELS
HCO BULLETIN OF 6 OCTOBER 1971
Issue II
SAME TITLE


C/S Series 65R



AUDITING OF STAFF & PUBLIC

(See HCOPL 20 July 1970, “Cases and Morale of
Staff”, HCOPL 8 Sept 70, “Examiner’s 24 Hour
Rule”, HCOPL 13 Jan 71, “Exam 24 Hour Rule
(Additional Information)”, HCO B 25 Sept 74, C/S
Series 94, “Reduction of Refunds—C/Ses and Over
load”, HCO PL 26 Sept 74, “Important—New Case
Supervisor Postings”.)


Just as the PR man has his own “Public” so does the Case Supervisor.

C/Ses are responsible for the case condition and well-being of all their public Pcs and C/S for these Pcs, not for the Registrar or the Org Execs. If well audited, those Pcs will go on to training and will also enhance the Org’s reputation in the field, which will make other public desire the services of the Org.

The Staff C/S is responsible for the well-being of the staff in his organization as per HCO PL 20 July 70, “Cases and Morale of Staff”. If the staff are regularly audited and patched up, then they will be happier, they will have more R on Scientology and the Org will function better. This is classified under correction of the machine (Product 2) whereas auditing of paying Pcs would be correction of the product (Product 4 in the Product Org Series).

The Staff C/S would regularly overhaul the folders and note the outnesses which need correcting. In other words, if a staff member slumps (PTS) he is priority for a session. Somewhere along his auditing history he was flying. Then somebody came along and did a goofy action, which has lain dormant in the folder waiting to be rectified, while he received more auditing. Hence FOLDER ERROR SUMMARIES. There is always one big “WHY” such as an overrun Exteriorization Remedy.

Staff members classified as “24 hour repair’’ must get auditing first. Those who are doing well can be audited after the “24 hour cases” have been pulled out of the mud.

The C/S must keep Ethics notified as to the progress of roller coastering staff members as well as PTS paying preclears.

An executive who suddenly goes “splooie!” should receive immediate attention. He probably had something badly upset him in his environment, or else he recently had some lists done—which most probably look fine. However, we know that a sudden heavy ARC Break like that is probably a wrong item.

The worst ARC Breaks were caused by a bad list. C/S Series 53 and GF No. 40X Revised will unearth these.

The Staff C/S can keep a tally of staff as to their condition in a log book. I.e. good and bad. A new C/S who comes on post and finds 35 24-hour repairs out of a staff of 50 would be suspicious (think of the paying Pcs who just never showed up for more!).

He would embark on a project to have these cases investigated (by folder inspection) and handled.

When the staff is in “F/N” condition then the Staff C/S would concentrate on getting his staff up the Grade Chart.


Lt. Quentin Hubbard
Class XII C/S

Notes from a lecture with

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Revised & Reissued as BTB
by Flag Mission 1234

I/C: CPO Andrea Lewis
2nd: Molly Harlow

Approved by
The Commodore’s Staff Aides and
The Board of Issues
for the
BOARDS OF DIRECTORS
of the
CHURCHES OF SCIENTOLOGY
BDCS:CSA:Bofl:AL:MH:QH:mh.rd
Copyright © 1971, 1975
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 3 NOVEMBER 1971
Remimeo
Re-issued 6 November 1972 as

Auditor Admin Series 15

C/S Series 66


AUDITOR’S WORKSHEETS


A very fast way for a C/S to do himself in is to fail to insist on GOOD LEGIBLE HANDWRITING.

When a C/S has auditors who can’t write well and rapidly, he gets misunderstood words when he tries to read the worksheets.

One temporary solution is to make the auditor block print the word in red above each hard to read word. Some auditors go to an extreme of block printing the whole WIS.

The more permanent solution is to have Auditors in Cramming practice writing WELL and CLEARLY no matter how slowly and then, maintaining the same clarity, speed it up. The auditor after many such practice sessions winds up writing clearly and fast. This can be increased until an auditor can write clearly as fast as people talk.

The occasional headaches a C/S might get are not from the restim of the case he’s studying but are from the words on W/Ses he can’t make out.

If a C/S does not insist on both block print clarification and auditor writing practice, he will wind up not reading worksheets and may even get foggy about certain cases.

A remedy is to go back to the first folders not understood and get the words clarified and then keep this C/S Series HCO B IN.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


PS: In the 19th Century secretaries wrote beautiful copperplate longhand faster than a man could talk. So don’t say it can’t be done.











LRH:nt.kjm.rd
Copyright © 1971, 1972
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

B O A R D T E C H N I C A L B U L L E T I N

30 NOVEMBER 1971 R

Remimeo Corrected & Reissued 16 December 1971
All Auditors (correction next page, no. 17)
All C/Ses Revised & Reissued 17 July 1974 as BTB
to Starrate
on receipt
CANCELS
HCO BULLETIN OF 30 NOVEMBER 1971
SAME TITLE

(The only revision is on this page, References section.
HCO PL 15 Nov 69 is now BPL 15 Nov 69R.)


C/S Series 67


THE CODE OF A C/S

References:
HCO B 15 Nov 69 Case Supervision, How It Goes Non-Standard
BPL 15 Nov 69R Rights and Duties
HCO B 17 Sept 68 Gross Case Supervision Errors
HCO B 22 Sept 71 The Three Golden Rules of the C/S
(C/S Series 61)
HCO B 19 June 71 C/S Series 46, Declares


This is the Code of a C/S as regards his Auditors and their Pcs for whom he is C/Sing.

1. I promise to know my Dianetics and Scientology totally cold up to the Level at which I am C/Sing.

2. I promise never to look for some imagined error in Tech Data but always to look for and find the real error in the auditing, programming or C/Sing.

3. I promise never to treat a case as “different”.

4. I promise that if I cannot find the reason why a session has failed from the folder that I will suspect a False Auditing Report and get the Pc asked about the session and get data as to why it failed.

5. I promise never to punish an Auditor for querying a C/S.

6. I promise to refrain from discussing or mentioning data from Pc folders socially.

7. I promise to correct my Auditors’ application of Tech positively without invalidation.

8. I promise that I will order the Auditor to Cramming or retraining for any flunked session.

9. I promise never to order an unnecessary repair.

10. I promise never to use repair processes to get case gain when the Pc needs the next grade.

11. I promise never to give verbal C/S instructions but always to write them down.

12. I promise never to talk to the Auditor about the case.

13. I promise never to talk to a Pc about his case.

14. I promise to send the Pc to the Examiner or D of P, to get data, if unsure why the folder has been sent up for C/S.

15. I promise never to be reasonable as a C/S.

16. I promise to maintain sufficient Ethics presence to get my orders followed.

17. I promise never to issue involved repair orders.

18. I promise never to follow C/S advice from a Pc but I will accept the Pc’s data.

19. I promise that I will ALWAYS read through the Pc folder before C/Sing a case.

20. I promise I will always have the folders of cases in trouble casewise, ethically or medically reviewed to find the Out Tech.

21. I promise never to put a Pc on a grade to “solve his case”.

22. I promise to always order a repair of a misaudited grade until the End Phenomena has been achieved.

23. I promise to advance the Pc up the Grade Chart in the proper sequence.

24. I promise never to order a grade run that the Pc is not set up for.

25. I promise never to indulge in the practice of “hopeful C/Sing”.

26. I promise never to C/S a session I cannot read but will instead return it to the Auditor for clarification.

27. I promise to make every effort to find and point out an actual goof and send the Auditor to Cramming.

28. I promise never to invalidate or harass an Auditor for a correct action or when no Technical goof has occurred.

29. I promise to recognize and acknowledge a Technically perfect session.

30. I promise to see that a Pc or Pre-OT who knows he has made an EP is sent to Exams and C&A to attest.

31. I promise never to send a Pc or Pre-OT who hasn’t made it to declare and attest.

32. I promise to see that Pcs and Pre-OTs who haven’t made it are handled until they have made that specific Declare.

33. I promise to complete cycles of action on the Pc and never start a new one while an old one is still incomplete.

34. I promise to ensure that the Auditors for whom I am C/Sing continue to improve in skill and training level.

35. I promise to maintain a standard of the highest Professional conduct.


Flag Dept 12 C/S

Reissued as BTB
by Flag Mission 1234

I/C: CPO Andrea Lewis
2nd: Molly Harlow

Authorized by AVU
for the
BOARDS OF DIRECTORS
of the
CHURCHES OF SCIENTOLOGY
BDCS:SW:AL:MH:RL:mh.rd
Copyright © 1971, 1974
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

B O A R D T E C H N I C A L B U L L E T I N

8 DECEMBER 1971
Reissued 3 July 1974 as BTB
Remimeo
All C/Ss CANCELS
cramming Officer HCO BULLETIN OF 8 DECEMBER 1971
Hat SAME TITLE


Cramming Series 9

C/S Series 68


THE C/S AND CRAMMING CYCLES


A fast way for any C/S to go into Doubt about the skills of his Auditors is to send them to Cramming and get only a “done” back.

Cramming is there to find the real cause of any error. So if the real WHY is not made known to the C/S he has a “something is wrong with Joe’s TRs” which hangs up in time and never is resolved.

A response from Cramming to an order from the C/S to “check his TRs—Pc’s TA went low in session—” which states: “I checked his TRs and they are good. But he audited the Pc in a room that was overhot and the cans were too big. He has been drilled on Auditor’s Code and session environment handling and HCO Bs on TA Errors and now has this down pat. It won’t happen again,” leaves the C/S in no doubt as to what really happened. What’s more he can order this repaired on the Pc by a “2wc on times he felt worried about his TA or F/Ns” taken E/Sim to F/N (which will clear it up).

Furthermore the Auditor now knows that the C/S knows what the real error was, doesn’t get hung with a withhold or a false idea about his TRs from the C/S.

In essence one is putting the Exact Truth on the line.

So the following rule is now mandatory in all HGCs and Quals:

THE CRAMMING OFFICER IS ALWAYS ON ANY CRAMMING ORDER TO REPORT THE EXACT OUTNESSES FOUND OR THE EXACT SESSION GOOFS, WITH ANY ADDITIONAL DATA, IN DETAIL, TO THE C/S.

A C/S receiving a Cramming Order back giving no Why or an unreal Why that does not make sense when compared with the session and its results MUST return the Cramming Slip to the Cramming Officer requiring the Why be found or the wrong Why abandoned and the real Why found and corrected.

A good C/S should know his Data Series down cold and be able to spot such outpoints at once. He would go over the session with the Cramming Officer and point out what it is he wants handled.

This data is not theoretical but is taken from actual practical experience in C/Sing.

Flag Dept 12 C/S
Reissued as BTB
by Flag Mission 1234
I/C: CPO Andrea Lewis
2nd: Molly Harlow
Authorized by AVU
for the
BOARDS OF DIRECTORS
of the
CHURCHES OF SCIENTOLOGY
BDCS:SW:AL:MH:RL:mh.rd
Copyright © 1971, 1974
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

B O A R D T E C H N I C A L B U L L E T I N

12 DECEMBER 1971R
Remimeo Revised & Reissued 1 August 1974 as BTB
Auditors (Revision in this type style)
Internes
C/Ses
CANCELS
HCO BULLETIN OF 12 DECEMBER 1971
SAME TITLE


C/S Series 69R


MANDATORY C/SING CHECKLIST


These are the actions, compiled from earlier LRH HCO Bs, that are always done by a C/S whenever he C/Ses any folder.

All the C/Sing data in the world would be of little use if these mandatory actions were omitted.

1. INSPECT THE EXAMINER’S REPORT to see if the Pc thought the session was okay and if the Examiner’s notation of TA, needle and indicators shows it was F/N GIs.

2. INSPECT THE PRE-SESSION C/S to see what was previously ordered done.

3. INSPECT THE LAST SESSION to see if the C/S was done. (Check that each separate part of the C/S was done.)

4. INSPECT IN THE WORKSHEET THAT EACH STEP OF EACH PROCESS OR ACTION WAS CORRECTLY DONE INCLUDING CORRECT COMMANDS USED AND EXPECTED PC RESPONSE FOR THOSE COMMANDS. (For Dianetics this would be the 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 sequence and A, B, C, D, etc. to see if it was standard. Other processes and actions have their own steps—which the C/S must know in order to be in compliance with the High Crime PLs.)

5. INSPECT CAREFULLY THAT ALL LISTING ACTIONS HAVE BEEN CORRECTLY DONE; find out if there was mislisting.

6. INSPECT THAT F/N, COG, AND VGIs OCCURRED AT THE END OF EACH PROCESS AND ACTION (each chain in Dianetics) AND AT SESSION END.

(Text is seldom read unless the session did not go well. If you can’t read the reports, send them back to have the Auditor overprint illegible words. Never try to C/S an illegible worksheet.)

7. HAVE THE EXAMINER ASK THE PC WHAT THE AUDITOR DID IF THE AUDITING REPORTS DON’T SHOW THE ERROR AND SEEM FALSE (i.e. Auditor’s account of session doesn’t match Pc’s statement and indicators at Examiner).

8. GIVE THE SESSION A GRADING OF VERY WELL DONE, WELL DONE, WELL DONE BY EXAM, NO MENTION OR FLUNK depending on what was found in above points.


VERY WELL DONE if all the above points are okay and the session is exactly by the book.

WELL DONE for F/N, VGIs at session end and at Examiner—no major tech errors but not exactly by the book.

WELL DONE BY EXAM for F/N, VGIs at session end and at Examiner but Admin and session actions not OK.

NO SESSION GRADE MENTION if the session end was F/N, VGIs but the F/N wasn’t present at the Examiner—provided there were no major tech errors in the session.

FLUNK FOR ANY OF THE FOLLOWING:

F/N did not get to Examiner and was not present at session end.

Major errors or flubs occurred like no EP, multiple somatic run, unflown ruds, mislisting, etc.

C/S not followed or completed.

Auditor’s Rights errors occurred.

No F/N and BIs at Examiner, etc.

9. WRITE OUT IN TRIPLICATE ON ANY OUT TECH AND AUDITOR GOOFS— INDICATE THE RIGHT OUTNESSES AND CRAMMING CYCLES FOR THEM. One copy goes to D of P to Auditor, one copy goes to Cramming Officer and one copy is kept as a check to see that the order is done.

10. NOW INSPECT—IS THE CASE RUNNING WELL AND IS IT CORRECTLY PROGRAMMED? DO WE JUST CONTINUE? DO WE REPAIR RECENT GOOFS AND CONTINUE? DO WE NEED FULL FES OR LISTS TO FIND THE BUG IN THE CASE AND THEN REPAIR THAT (INCLUDING PREVIOUS INCOMPLETE CYCLES)?

11. NOW CHECK THE AUDITOR’S C/S FOR THE NEXT SESSION—DOES IT FOLLOW THE PROGRAM FOR THE CASE IN THE FRONT OF THE FOLDER OR DOES IT Q AND A AND GO OFF IN ANOTHER DIRECTION?

A. Does it recommend to continue with the next action on the case program, if the case is doing well and the last session went okay?

B. Does it recommend the necessary brief repair action and then continue the program actions if the case has been running well but there has now been an error on the case?

C. Does it recommend a program to debug and handle the case if it is not running well or has started to do poorly in life (Ethics conditions, accidents, etc.) (including use of lists to get data or an FES, etc.)?

It is the C/S responsibility to ensure that all Ethics, medical and other relevant reports are included in the Pc folders and that Pcs are not audited while under heavy ethics actions.

12. APPROVE THE EXISTING C/S IF I T IS OKAY IN LINE WITH THE ABOVE, OTHER WISE CORRECT IT OR WRITE UP AN ENTIRELY NEW C/S.


13. WRITE UP A CRAMMING ORDER ON THE C/SING ACTION IF THE AUDITOR WAS WAY OFF ON HIS C/S (OR ADD THIS TO THE EXISTING CRAMMING ORDER FOR THAT SESSION).

14. “If the case is not running well and generally, the C/S goes back to the point where the case WAS running well (good wins) and comes forward. The largest bug on the case often will be in the session later than the last good one. The C/S should correct the bad session. Where this does not resolve the case, a study for incomplete programs and other outnesses should be made with a program to complete and handle. “ LRH

IMPORTANT:

Keep the three Golden Rules of C/Sing always in the above actions. They are:

1. NEVER FAIL TO FIND AND POINT OUT AN ACTUAL GOOF AND SEND THE AUDITOR TO CRAMMING.

2. NEVER INVALIDATE OR HARASS AN AUDITOR FOR A CORRECT ACTION OR WHEN NO TECHNICAL GOOF HAS OCCURRED.

3. ALWAYS RECOGNIZE AND ACKNOWLEDGE A TECHNICALLY PERFECT SESSION.
__________

The C/S must drill on this bulletin until he knows each point by number just the way a Dianetics Auditor is required to know points 1 to 9 and A to D. He can also keep a copy of this bulletin on the wall over his desk, to refer to until he knows the sequence cold. Even then he should refer to it from time to time to ensure he drops out none of the steps.

Auditors writing up C/Ses for the next session must refer to this bulletin also.

___________

(This BTB is compiled from earlier C/S Series HCO Bs and from the following earlier LRH HCO Bs:

HCO B 1 Sept 68 “Points on Case Supervision”
HCO B 11 Sept 68 “Case Supervisor Data”
HCO B 8 Oct 68 “Case Supervisor—Folder Handling”
HCO B 28 June 69 “C/S—How to Case Supervise Dianetics Folders”.)

Training & Services Aide
From C/S Coaching Actions
by
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revised & Reissued as BTB
by Flag Mission 1234
I/C: CPO Andrea Lewis
2nd: Molly Harlow
Authorized by AVU
for the
BOARDS OF DIRECTORS
of the
CHURCHES OF SCIENTOLOGY
BDCS:SW:AL:MH:BW:mh.rd
Copyright © 1971, 1974
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 3 JANUARY 1972

Remimeo
Auditors
Interns
C/Ses

C/S Series 69 ADDITION



C/SING CHECKLIST

(If a copy of C/S Series 69 is
posted on the wall, also post this.)


Nothing in this checklist for C/Sing relieves the auditor or C/S from full knowledge of the entire C/S Series. Nothing in the C/S Series is changed by this checklist.

ADDITION

No. 10. Add. The time-honored way of seeing what has to be repaired in a Case not running well is:

GO BACK IN THE FOLDER TO WHERE THE CASE WAS RUNNING WELL AND COME FORWARD.

The major error or departure is in the very next session after that. The bugs after the high point should be repaired as the fast action to set the case going again.

The repair and handling of bogged cases is the finest skill of a C/S. Really it is why he is there.

To do this he has to know the C/S Series thoroughly, know all the materials of all levels he is C/Sing better than the auditor.

The use of prepared lists, WC Correction List, Green Form, C/S 53, Hi-Lo TA, GF 40 RR, Int-Ext Corr List, L1C and others, including “Have Examiner ask the pc what happened in session” are used to get information and correct as well as folder studies. KNOW BEFORE YOU GO.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder




LRH:nt rd
Copyright © 1972
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

B O A R D T E C H N I C A L B U L L E T I N

12 DECEMBER 1971 R
Issue XIV
Remimeo Reissued 9 July 1974 as BTB
Cramming Offs Revised 26 November 1974
C/Ses
CANCELS
BTB OF 12 DECEMBER 1971
Issue XIV
SAME TITLE

Cramming Series 8R

C/S Series 70R


HOW TO WRITE UP A CRAMMING ORDER


There is a certain technology on how to write up a Cramming Order.

1. Isolate and state briefly the exact outnesses (in the Pc folder or staff member area).

2. Order those HCO Bs or PLs crammed.

The Cramming Officer also looks in a slightly wider circle around the data flunked and locates which basic is involved (i.e. Auditor’s Code, TRs, metering, handling a session, handling the Pc as a Being, or student basics and staff basics) and gets that crammed, too.

The Cramming Officer is not bound to accept any Cramming Order if his own investigation proves that something else entirely needs correction. It is part of the Cramming Officer’s responsibility to prevent Wrong Target correction. According to Qual Senior Datum, the Cramming Officer must not take orders but must do his own investigation and handling. It will be found that there is usually a valid corrective action to be made. He does not just waive the cycle if the original order is incorrect. He finds out what is really wrong and corrects that.


Written & Revised by CS—5
Ensign Judy Ziff

Commodore’s Staff Aides

Approved by the Board of Issues
for the
BOARDS OF DIRECTORS
of the
CHURCHES OF SCIENTOLOGY

BDCS:BofI:JZ:mh.rd
Copyright © 1971, 1974
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 19 DECEMBER 1971

Remimeo

C/S Series 71


D OF P OPERATES BY OCAs


A Director of Processing is a director of PROCESSING of cases.

All his functions are involved with this. He MUST understand his title and what its duties involve.

It is his job to get people PROCESSED.

To do this he has to KNOW (a) what people there are to be processed, (b) how much processing they will need, (c) what facilities can be maintained and expanded to get processing done and (d) to see that the processing is paid for and occurs.

The D of P does not have to be a C/S or to know C/Sing.

ALL HE HAS TO KNOW OF TECH IS HOW TO READ AN OCA, IQ, APTITUDE AND OTHER TESTS.

He does not even have to open a folder. If all he ever looked at was a pc’s OCA (Oxford Capacity Analysis or by some other name) the D of P would win every time.

If the D of P considered his job as “To raise OCAs with paid for processing and to be sure the pc is happier” he would be performing his duties.

To raise OCAs one has to know how to “read” an OCA. That’s easy. It says how right on its border. Unacceptable, Needing Improvement, Desirable, etc.

An OCA with any point on the left side of the graph in low or undesirable range means the pc is out of valence. Any low point on the right side of the graph means the pc is crazy.

If the graph is not in the desirable range and the pc happy and looking better, the HGC has not done its job yet.

The D of P goes wholly on the idea of MORE AUDITING when he wants to raise a graph or IQ.

It’s not up to the D of P what is audited only that auditing is done. The C/S, if he knows his business, will say what is audited. The D of P just knows MORE AUDITING.

A D of P can tell by the OCA improvement and improvement of TONE and APPEARANCE of the pc and what the pc says in an interview whether the required high quality result has been achieved. If it has not, then it’s MORE AUDITING.

The REGISTRAR can have very similar functions as to graphs and where there is no D of P the REGISTRAR must do these things.

A D of P who has a backlog is a dog. It means he isn’t getting auditors or recruiting Academy students or getting people to Auditor Interne and isn’t BEING by DEFINITION a D of P.

If there is an “ARC Broken field” look at the D of P. He didn’t see that the OCA was raised and that the pc was happy before he left the org.

A good D of P has a potential processing line of EVERY OCA EVER GIVEN BY THE ORG.

He is in the business of raising graphs and making people happy with their auditing IN PAID VOLUME. If his HGC isn’t turning out 700 well done hours a week, he’s failing. If he is, he’s a success. If he turns out more, a second HGC is needed.

The traffic cop is the D of P.

He has to know what traffic he will have and what traffic he does have.

He can be defeated by a poor registrar, a poor C/S and a poor Qual. Therefore he has the right to demand these people get hatted. But he only has the right if he himself is hatted and doing his job. Given that he can demand Comm Evs.

If a D of P exists, knows his job and does it an org will become prosperous.

The first thing he has to know is the meaning of his TITLE.

The second thing is that his job is getting OCA graphs raised IN PAID FOR VOLUME.

(By current US rates a D of P should be running at least a $17,000 cash gross of auditing through an HGC each week to be considered a competent D of P.)

Any “field ARC Breaks” is a direct reflection on the D of P. He didn’t raise graphs and see people were happy before leaving.

During periods when the post of D of P was empty or “not on the org board” or not filled, the org has slumped.

The post is very important.

It is also a very simple, direct post.

Its duties are covered in C/S Series 25 along with others. But his use of the OCA is not listed there.

Procurement of auditors is currently the weakest point of a D of P’s duties. Without this he cannot deliver volume. I have known Ds of P to train auditors themselves to have auditors and others to train Academy Graduates after the course to have quality.

There are no limits on what a D of P can do—

So long as he is DIRECTING PROCESSING and RAISING OCAs in paid volume.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder



LRH:nt.rd
Copyright © 1971
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 24 FEBRUARY 1972
Remimeo
Div 6 Personnel
Tech Personnel C/S Series 71A
Qual Personnel


WORD CLEARING OCAs


An illegal practice has been uncovered in which the words on the Oxford Capacity Analysis, American Personality Analysis and other tests have been word cleared by testers and Directors of Processing.

Example: Pc does an OCA (or any test) that shows a state of case in July. He gets auditing. He takes another test that shows what the auditing did by August. If somewhere along this line a test I/C or D of P word clears him on the test, the test-will change. Entering this variable wipes out any possibility of establishing what the auditing did for the case.

Example: If a child is measured as to height and then fed certain foods to see if he will grow and then someone changes or stretches the tape by which he was measured, you can’t find out if the food did any good.

In science this is known as holding a constant.

We don’t give a hoot in hell if the pc understands the test or not. The next time he takes it he’ll probably have the same misunderstoods but he’ll have a change of opinion or even have a new cleverness or better memory and the test will change.

Therefore none of these things may ever be done:

1. Never tell the pc the right answers to a test.

2. Never tell a pc to look up words on a test he doesn’t understand.

3. Never word clear the question sheet for a pc on any test.

4. Never answer a pc’s question as to what a question means.

DO THESE THINGS

A. Be sure any test person grasps this HCO B fully so he knows what a test is and why we test people.

B. Never let a person who falsely reports routinely near a test line.

C. Safeguard test answer sheets from being known or seen by unauthorized personnel.

D. Use 2nd test and 3rd test question sheets, each different from the 1st one. (Tests are issued this way.)

E. Give other tests (Aptitude or OTIS etc) to compare with the second or third OCA or APA if it is in doubt to see if the OCA has been “word cleared” or falsified.

F. Groove in Examiners: Give a meter check on ALL ATTESTS at the Examiner. “Do you have any doubts or reservations concerning attesting to (whatever the attest is) ?” Note any INSTANT read (a latent surge can occur as a protest). This
question is asked before the question asking him if he wants to attest. E.g. “Do you have any doubts or reservations concerning attesting to Word Clearing Method I complete?” No instant read. Then ask the attest question “Would you like to attest to______?”

Never let an Examiner permit any attest or pass to even be asked for if the meter tone arm is high or low or not F/Ning. If an INSTANT read is gotten on the first question above, the Examiner does not ask the second question, and sends the folder back to the C/S.

G. Require a meter check at Success with the TA position and needle behavior noted on the Success form. Those with high or low TA and/or not F/Ning are not valid success stories. The success person makes the meter check after the story is written, notes it without pc seeing it and smiles and acks. He does not refuse the story as it will ARC Break the pc. But he must call it to the attention of the Dist Sec and Qual Sec that a false attestation and poor result came from Div IV and it must be taken off Div IV’s stat.

H. Both Examiner and Success must know of the False TA HCO Bs so they don’t put the pc on wrong cans or use cans when the auditor used footplates.

This safeguards our test line.

The test line is a check on C/S and auditing quality. We are not trying to find out if Dianetics and Scientology work. We know that. We are trying to find out by test, Examiner and Success if it is being properly taught and applied in Div IV and Dept of Pers Enhancement.

HONESTY is a primary requirement on test lines. PR types that falsify to attain status or seem good fellows need not apply for these posts and shouldn’t be on them.

THE PC OR STUDENT DEEP DOWN KNOWS WHETHER HE HAS MADE IT OR NOT.

If you or tests tell him he’s made it when he hasn’t he will get a false opinion of you and doubt you.

If you tell him he hasn’t made it when he has he will get a false opinion of you.

He will think you don’t know your business and blow.

SANITY is basically HONESTY and TRUTH.

When false data or altered data is entered this is ABERRATION.

So be honest and run a sane D of P, Examiner, Success and TEST line.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH: ne.rd
Copyright © 1972
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 20 DECEMBER 1971

Remimeo


C/S Series 72


USE OF CORRECTION LISTS


A current survey shows that the weakest point in C/Sing done in orgs is failure to use Prepared Lists for Case Correction.

There are some other points. For some reason C/Ses are being inventive instead of following the C/S Series and doing standard repairs and grades.

Probably the failure to use Prepared Correction Lists derails the use of standard actions.

There are very few actions which do not have their own Correction Lists.

THERE IS NOTHING IN DIANETICS AND SCIENTOLOGY AS MIRACULOUSLY WORKABLE AS CORRECTION LISTS.

The only things which prevent the list from working are

(a) AUDITOR’S METERING

(b) AUDITOR’S TRs.

METERING

When the auditor’s meter is habitually placed where he cannot see (1) The meter needle, (2) The worksheet and (3) The pc WITH ONE DIRECTED LOOK, then he misses reads.

All three have to be seen at once.

The faults are

i) Eyesight poor

ii) Glasses rims obscure one while looking at another

iii) Position of the meter.

It is a Standard Cramming action to look into these points WHENEVER A CORRECTION LIST IS SAID TO BE BLANK.

For example a GF is done by Auditor A on Monday. It is done again by Auditor B on Tuesday. Reads are found by B. This means Auditor A is missing reads.

THIS IS FAR MORE COMMON THAN BELIEVED.

TRs

When an auditor can’t be heard or is overwhelming the pc the list won’t be valid.

An auditor’s TRs show up more quickly on a Correction List than anything else.

A pc ARC Broken by TRs 0 to IV will not read properly on a Correction List.

NUMBERS OF LISTS

The number of Correction Lists is large.

It is unthinkable to do Word Clearing without ever using a WC Corr List. Yet we find folders with bogged Word Clearing sessions where the list was never used.

There is the Green Form for general case upset, the Green Green Form for Solo, L 1 C for ARC Brks over a period, L3B for Dianetic bogs, L4B for listing and nulling goofs, Int RD Corr List for Int-Ext corrections, a Power Corr List for Power, GF 40R for resistive cases, C/S 53 and Hi Low TA for TA misbehavior, L7 for Clearing Course, and others.

C/Ses trying to “solve cases” without using Correction Lists is like trying to repair flat tires without puncture patches—it just CAN’T BE DONE.

THE PRIMARY TOOL OF A C/S IS PREPARED CORRECTION LISTS.

It is not inventive ways of “solving cases”.

METHOD OF USE

Where you have inexpert auditors you always order Method 5, which is just a full rapid assessment. Then the C/S sorts out the reads and C/Ses what to do as very well covered on the lists themselves and the C/S Series.

Then the auditor does the C/S.

A Green Form is always done this way. It will bog on any other method like 3.

There are different methods of handling lists. L1C is always done Method 3, carrying each read as it is found Earlier Similar to F/N.

A GF 40R is done Method 3 and then the engrams are run for each read where engrams are indicated.

It’s up to a C/S to use Correction Lists, to coach his auditors into proper list use and to get corrected any misuse.

A C/S who can’t or doesn’t use Prepared Correction Lists isn’t a C/S at all but a “person puzzled about cases”.

Correction Lists, standard programs and the Grade Chart and Grade Commands and materials.

These are the tools of the C/S.

There are NO others.

A C/S is one who uses these things. He is Supervising that they are used when they are supposed to be.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
LRH: nt.rd
Copyright © 1971
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 23 DECEMBER 1971
Remimeo

Solo C/S Series 10

C/S Series 73


THE NO-INTERFERENCE AREA


From R6 Solo to OT III one does not do anything except keep the pc winning for R6 Solo to OT III.

This is the critical band of the Gradation Chart.

On Flag it was learned the hard way that you don’t do other major auditing actions between these two points.

Example: Action—Completed R6, Clear and OT I, then a Dianetic Completion was attempted. Result—failure. Right Action—Complete Dianetics before R6. Right Action—let it go until OT III well begun, then complete Dianetics.

Example: Pre OT doing OT II. A new PTS RD is done. Failure. Right Action-do it before R6 or after OT III.

Example: R6 done. Drug RD given. Result. Poor. Right Action—Do Drug RD before R6.

EXCEPTION

It will be found that a pc cannot confront doing Solo Grades. The reason will be found to be Drugs. All pcs who “cannot run engrams” CAN run Drug Engrams. They are afraid because they get into the bank heavily when on Drugs. Only Drugs can be run.

So a pc who has “done R6 and Clearing Course but hasn’t made it” will be found to be a rabbiting (frightened and running away) druggie. He can and will run Drug Engrams.

Thus the right action is to do a full Drug Rundown, then start the pc all over again at R6.

It is an exception only because he hasn’t done his Solo anyway.

REPAIRS

Where a Pre OT hasn’t made the grade of a Solo level (or gets sick afterwards) a full repair must be done and the failed grade must be completed before he goes on up.

It is possible to repair a Pre OT between R6 and OT III so long as you are not trying to handle his whole case but only repairing the grade he missed.

TRs

Never order TRs after Solo Materials study or before OT III is attested.

TRs should be done before or during Solo Auditing study but not after materials are issued. And the TR Course may not be done from then on to OT III.

A partially completed earlier TR Course found to be hanging up a pc on Solo Grades can be handled to completion and should be. This does not mean long additional hours of TR 0. It usually means word clearing on the TR materials and rehab.

MAJOR ACTIONS

It is a very losing game to throw a major rundown in between R6 and OT III. Such as L10 after Clearing and before OT I. The result is a mess.

The way to recover such a blunder is to get the pc rehabbed or to a rest point and then finish up the Solo Grades to OT III attest and then complete the rundown.

SET UP

It is therefore VERY important that a pc be fully set up including Dianetics before he is let onto R6 Solo materials study.

AUDITING SKILL

None of this states that you cannot improve a pc’s auditing skill between R6 and OT III (excepting only TRs).

BIG wins are to be had by doing so.

THE MAJOR CAUSE OF FAILURE ON SOLO GRADES IS THE INABILITY TO AUDIT.

You can take a Pre OT who didn’t really make Clear or OT I and move him back to R6 study and retread him as an auditor and then let him move back up the line and he’ll win.

The sources of failure on Solo are

1. No Drug RD.
2. Dianetics Incomplete.
3. Case not set up.
4. Inability to audit.

SUMMARY

Realize that from R6 to OT III you have a closed band for other major actions.

So don’t let people onto R6 Auditing who have points 1-4 out.

If it has happened, patch it up as you can and let the pre OT get on with it.

Then after the first OT III attest, do whatever you like or that needs to be done before sending him on to OT IV.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:nt.rd
Copyright © 1971
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 16 FEBRUARY 1972
Remimeo
All Tech
Terminals C/S Series 74
All Auditors
Franchise
TALKING THE TA DOWN MODIFIED


The expertise of talking the TA down should be preserved. It is a skill.

But we have had high and low TAs solved for nearly a year and don’t have to talk them down anymore as a constant action.

Auditors SHOULD know how to do it, and then use it as a rare action.

The right way to handle a high TA is to:

Do HCO B 24 Oct 71, HCO B 12 Nov 71, HCO B 15 Feb 72, each named FALSE TA if it has not been done by the auditor on the pc.

THEN if TA is high don’t talk it down or do unusual solutions, do a C/S Series 53 or a Hi-Lo TA Assessment and handle. The Int-Ext Correction List is done as indicated and so is the Word Clearing Correction List.

As far as a C/S is concerned, when the pc’s TA is seen to be high at session start, he should order as follows: “Check as per False TA HCO Bs” then when that is done he orders “C/S Series 53 Assess and return to me”. Or “Hi-Lo TA Assessment and return to me”. He then rapidly C/Ses the required actions.

He should have a standing order with all his auditors:

IF TA IS HIGH OR LOW
AT SESSION START DO
NOT CONTINUE THE
SESSION BUT SEND FOR
A C/S.

An auditor should not in fact talk a TA down, we know now, as he may be auditing over an Out Interiorization Rundown, either not done or botched.

It therefore saves time if other auditing is not done when the TA is high.

In general practice it will now be considered standard for an auditor, Dianetic or upper class, to not start a session over a high TA but to call for a C/S.

And where there is no C/S it will be considered standard for an auditor, seeing a high TA, to at once do a C/S 53 Method 5 (assessing it all), and then handling.

THERE ARE EXACT
REASONS FOR A TA
BEING HIGH AND
THESE TODAY ARE
EASILY HANDLED.

There is no need to talk a TA down. It is faster to directly locate the reason it is up.

Smoothly handling such situations is the mark of an expert.



LRH:ne.bh L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1972 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 10 APRIL 1972
A/Courses
(Cancels HCO B 31 July 71 Issue II
Corrected “Solo C/Sing”)

URGENT

C/S Series 75

Solo C/S Series 13


PREOTS DON’T C/S


HCO B 31 July 71 Issue II Corrected required PreOTs to C/S their folders for the next session.

I did not write this HCO B.

Research has proven that a Solo PreOT who is required by any C/S to write a C/S for his next session can be put into that next session action.

This C/Sing for himself his own next session violates the “continued session rule” wherein an auditor does not “finish” a session by telling the pc “the process will be continued in the next session”.

This puts the pc into continued sessions and in Solo can put the PreOT from Solo auditing to self auditing. There is a vast difference between the two. Solo auditing occurs in session with a meter. Self auditing is out of session wondering and chewing on bank.

A Solo PreOT must NOT self audit.

He ends the session he has done when he ends session on his worksheet.

He then goes to Examiner and gets his exam. The Examiner sends the completed Exam form to Solo Admin who puts it in the folder.

The Solo C/S, then, from his study of the folder, does the next C/S for the PreOT in proper C/S form. This is a diagonal 2 green stripes on the left-hand corner of the sheet, the PreOT’s name and date in black. The C/S itself is in black pen.

The PreOT takes this C/S and does it in his next session.

In rare instances when the PreOT is going really well, the C/S permits him to do several sessions. The C/S can tell from Exam forms that all is well. This MUST carry a notice “Come in at once to the D of P if you cease to audit or run into trouble. Do this C/S in the next several sessions. Come in for a new C/S the moment you feel this C/S is complete and are ready for a new C/S.”

When no Exam forms come in the Solo D of P chases the pc up.

If a Solo Exam form is bad the Examiner must mark it “Urgent Attn Solo C/S.” IN RED.

Solo Admin must alert the D of P who chases up the pc.

Tab is kept on ALL Solo pcs on lines by the D of P and if one falls off lines the

fact must be visible to the Solo D of P who keeps a board on sessions with all PreOTs’ names on it !

The above is the correct C/Sing line.

The worst features of a PreOT doing his own C/Sing are:

1. He is not a trained C/S.

2. Sudden ideas pop up he wants to handle instead of going on and he gets into an offline action when he should keep going.

3. A PreOT can “rabbit” (run away from the bank) by proposing a C/S that does not make him confront it.

4. And Last but far from least, a “C/S” by a PreOT is an invitation to the Solo Case Supervisor to Q and A with it. (Q and A means to just repeat whatever another says as a lazy way out.)

____________

Pc + Auditor is greater than bank.

In Solo Auditing

C/S + PreOT is greater than bank.

____________


PreOTs do NOT C/S their own folders!

____________


THE PREOT DOES KEEP UP HIS SESSION SUMMARY EACH SESSION.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder



LRH:mes.rd
Copyright © 1972
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 17 APRIL 1972
Remimeo

C/S Series 76


C/SING A PTS RUNDOWN



References: HCO B 9 Dec 71 PTS Rundown
HCO B 20 Jan 72 PTS Rundown Addition
HCO B 13 Feb 72 PTS RD Additional
Issue II LRH Data
HCO PL 5 Apr 72 PTS Type A Handling
HCO B 16 Apr 72 PTS Correction List
HCO B 17 Apr 72 C/S Series 76
C/Sing a PTS RD (this HCO B)
Any subsequent issues.



The whole point of a PTS Rundown is to make a person not PTS any longer.

The point is not to just run some processes. It is to have a person all right now.

To really understand this rundown, one would have to know what PTS is in the first place and why one was doing the rundown.

This would apply to the auditor as well as the C/S.

PTS means POTENTIAL TROUBLE SOURCE. It means someone connected to a person or group opposed to Scientology.

It is a TECHNICAL thing.

It results in illness and rollercoaster and IS the CAUSE of Illness and rollercoaster.

When you do a PTS RD on a pc CORRECTLY he or she should no longer be ill or rollercoaster.

BUT THIS INCLUDES THE PERSON HANDLING HIS PTS CONDITION IN THE REAL UNIVERSE NOT IN JUST HIS BANK.

An auditor and C/S must see that the person is:

(a) Handled properly in HCO or by the D of P if HCO isn’t there so that the person handles the PTS Connection itself. (See HCO PL 5 April 72, “PTS TYPE A HANDLING”.)

(b) Do the RD correctly (see reference HCO Bs above).

(c) D of P Interview the person AFTER the RD is “complete” to be sure the person is now all right (not PTS).

(d) Watch the person’s folder for any new signs of illness and rollercoaster and if these occur find out what was missed by assessing PTS RD CORRECTION LIST. (See HCO B 16 April 72.)

(e) Handling the PTS RD CORR LIST.

(f) Re-interviewing to be sure the person is all right now.

DATA

Anyone handling or auditing or C/Sing PTS cases should have done the PACK “PTS, SP TECH” Pack I & Pack 2 which are based on HCO PL 31 May 71 which is the CHECKSHEET for available tech and policy on this subject.

To this checksheet (HCO PL 31 May 71) must be added these issues:

HCO B 9 Dec 71 PTS Rundown
HCO B 20 Jan 72 PTS Rundown Addition
HCO B 13 Feb 72 PTS RD Additional
Issue II LRH Data
HCO PL 5 Apr 72 PTS Type A Handling
HCO B 16 Apr 72 PTS Correction List
HCO B 17 Apr 72 C/S Series 76
C/Sing a PTS RD (this HCO B)
Any subsequent issues.

PTS SITUATIONS

The hardest thing to get across about a PTS situation is that it IS the reason for continued illness and rollercoaster (loss of gains).

The condition does exist. It is in fact common.

We do have the auditing tech to handle now.

The material has to be applied correctly just like any other material.

The reason we do the rundown is not to do some sessions or sell some auditing or just explain why the person is like that. We do the rundown so the person will no longer be PTS.

The (EP) End Phenomenon of the PTS RD is attained when the person is well and stable.

As a C/S you MUST put a YELLOW TAB marked PTS on a PTS PC Folder that stays on until the person is NO LONGER PTS.

If you do NOT do this there will be about 25% of your pcs or more that YOU WILL BE IN CONTINUAL TROUBLE WITH! Because you will be C/Sing auditing for a person who is PTS, will be ill, will rollercoaster because the person has NOT been handled to EP on being PTS.

These people, by the way, will tell you, “Oh, I’m not PTS.” “But your father is suing the org.” “Oh yes, I know, but it doesn’t bother me. Besides my illness is from something I ate last year. And I rollercoaster because I don’t like the Examiner. But I’m not PTS.” The mystery is solved when you find they haven’t a clue what the letters mean or what the condition is, so give them a copy of HCO PL 5 Apr 72 and let them read it. If they still want to know more give them HCO PL 23 Dec 65. (Remembering it has to be Word Cleared Method 4 or he won’t have a clue even if he reads it.)

We are on no campaign to rid the world of suppressives when we are handling a PTS pc. But facts are facts and tech is tech.

In handling a PTS person as a C/S you are on a borderline of policy violation unless you make the person do what it says in HCO PL 5 April 72 first. That handles the situation itself. Then you can handle the person with the PTS Rundown.

It is a great rundown. Like any other it has a standard way of going about it.




LRH:mes.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright ©1972 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 19 APRIL 1972

Remimeo

C/S Series 77


“QUICKIE” DEFINED


The reason an auditor can say he doesn’t “quickie a rundown” (and none ever say they do) is because he has no definition for the word QUICKIE.

The word has been used to designate rundowns that were not completely and fully done.

It is not a slang word.

In the dictionary you will find “Quickie also quicky: something done or made in a hurry. Also: a hurriedly planned and executed program (as of studies).”

What happens in auditing, for instance, is a “Grade Zero Expanded” is “done” by just doing a single flow to its first F/N.

That is obviously “quickie”.

A more subtle one is to do a “PTS Rundown” with no Ethics action to begin and no check for stability, holding gain and not ill a week or two after the RD. Only if both these actions were done would one have a “Complete PTS Rundown” as it would give a PRODUCT = A PC no longer PTS.

So what makes a Quickie “completion” quickie?

Is it length of time? Not necessarily.

Is it fewness of processes? Not necessarily as Power can be done quickie simply by not hanging on for the EP and only going to F/N.

To define COMPLETE gives us the reverse of Quickie.

“COMPLETE: To make whole, entire or perfect; end after satisfying all demands or requirements. “ A Completion is “the act or action of completing, becoming complete or making complete”.

So “completing” something is not a loose term. It means an exact thing. “End after satisfying all demands or requirements” does not mean “doing as little as possible” or “doing what one can call complete without being detected”.

Anything that does not fully satisfy all requirements is QUICKIE.

So “quickie” really means “omitting actions for whatever reason that would satisfy all demands or requirements and doing something less than could be achieved”.

In short a quickie is not doing all the steps and actions that could be done to make a perfect whole.

Standard auditing actions required for ages that auditors cleared each word of each command. Yet when they went quickie they dropped this. When this was dropped, GAINS ON 75% OF ALL PCS LESSENED OR VANISHED. We are right

now achieving spectacular wins on pcs just by clearing up commands and words on all lists. We are finding that these pcs did not recover and NEVER BEFORE HAD BEEN IN SESSION even though previously “audited” hundreds of hours.

By omitting an essential action of clearing commands, processing did not work because the pc never understood the auditing commands!

So quickie action did not save any time, did it? It wasted hundreds of hours!

Quickie Programs are those which omit essential steps like Vital lists or 2wcs to get data. FESs for past errors are often omitted.

To slow down the torrent of quickie actions on clearing commands HCO P/L 4 Apr 72 Issue III “Ethics and Study Tech” has Clause 4 “An auditor failing to clear each and every word of every command or list used may be summoned before a Court of Ethics. The charge is OUT TECH.”

Ethics has to enter in after Quickie Tech has gotten in. Because quickie tech is a symptom of out ethics. HCO P/L 3 April 72 (Est O Series 13) “Doing Work” and HCO P/L 4 Apr 72 (Est O Series 14) “Ethics” are vital know-how where a C/S is faced with Quickie actions—or flubby ones that will not cure.

Essential Quickie Tech is simply dishonest. Auditors who do it have their own Ethics out in some way.

To be sure their confront is down.

There are numerous remedies for the quickie impulse. The above mentioned Policy Letters and plain simple TR 0 are standard remedies. TR 0 properly done and completed itself usually cures it.

Quickie study in ‘67 and ‘68 almost destroyed auditing quality. LRH ED 174 Int which really pushes in Study Tech will achieve the primary reason for quickie-the auditor didn’t understand the words himself.

Wherever Quickie tendencies or false stats (the quickest quickie possible) show up, the above P/Ls had better be gotten into full use fast.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder




LRH: mes.rd
Copyright © 1972
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 20 APRIL 1972
Issue II
Remimeo
C/S Series 78

PRODUCT PURPOSE AND WHY AND
WC ERROR CORRECTION

Where untrained Auditors are finding Whys for a Danger Formula, or post purposes or post products as called for in the Est O System you will get a certain amount of error and case disturbance. Such upsets also come from word clearing by incompetent persons.

The C/S should look for these especially when such campaigns are in progress. He should suspect them as a possibility when a case bogs.

A C/S must be sure all such papers and worksheets get into pc’s folders.

A common repair action is to

1. Do an assessment for type of charge.

2. Handle the charge found by the assessment done.

3. Fly all the reading items found on such assessments by 2wc or direct handling.

4. Suspect LISTING ERRORS on any Why or purpose or product found even though no list exists and reconstruct the list and L4B and handle it.

5. Handle word clearing of any type in or out of session with a Word Clear Correction List done in session by an Auditor.

6. When word clearing is too heavy on the pc or doesn’t clean up suspect he has been thrown into implants which are mostly words or the words in some engram. As Implants are actually just engrams, handle it with an L3B.

LISTING

Any item found out of session or by a non-auditor is suspect of being a Listing and Nulling (L&N) error even though no list was made.

TODAY A CORRECT L&N ITEM MUST BD AND F/N.

So treat such items as you would list errors and try to reconstruct the list and either confirm the item or locate the real item (may have been invalidated and suppressed) or extend the list and get the real item.

The real item will BD F/N.

One can establish what the situation is with a post purpose, a Why or a product or any other such item by doing an L4B.

SELF AUDITING

The commonest reason for self auditing is a wrong or unfound L&N item.

People can go around and self list or self audit trying to get at the right Why or product or purpose after an error has been made.

REACTION

NOTHING PRODUCES AS MUCH CASE UPSET AS A WRONG LIST ITEM OR A WRONG LIST.

Even, rarely, a DIANETIC LIST can produce wrong list reactions. Ask the pc for his somatics and he blows up or goes into apathy. Or blows. Or attacks the auditor.

ALL of the more violent or bad reactions on the part of the pc come from out lists.

Nothing else produces such a sharp deterioration in a case or even illness.

OUT LISTS

Therefore when one gets a sharp change in a case (like lowered tone, violence, blows, “determination to go on in spite of the supervisor”, long notes from pcs, self C/Sing, etc, etc, the C/S SUSPECTS AN OUT LIST.

This outness can occur in regular sessions even when the item was said to BD F/N.

It can occur in “Coffee shop” (out of session auditing of someone), or by Est Os or poorly trained or untrained staff members or even in life.

PTS

When such actions as finding items by non-auditors are done on PTS people the situation can be bad, so one also suspects the person to be PTS to someone or something.

“PTS” does not communicate well in an assessment question so one says, “Someone or something is hostile to you” and “You are connected to someone or something that doesn’t agree with Dianetics or Scientology.”

REPAIRS

The main things to know when doing such repairs are (a) that such situations as wrong lists or upset people can occur in an org where untrained people are also using meters and (b) THAT IT IS UP TO THE C/S TO SUSPECT DETECT AND GET THEM HANDLED IN REGULAR SESSION.

Do not ignore the possible bad influence.

As the good outweighs the bad in such cases, it is not a correct answer to forbid such actions.

It is a correct answer to require all such actions and worksheets become part of the folder.

One can also persuade the D of T or Qual to gen in the people doing such actions. And do not ignore the effect such actions can have on cases and do not neglect to include them in C/Ses before going on with the regular program.

They can all be repaired.

LRH:nt.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1972 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 24 APRIL 1972
Issue I
Remimeo
D of P
Auditors C/S Series 79
Ethics
Officers Expanded Dianetics Series 5

PTS INTERVIEWS
(Reference HCO B 17 April 72, C/S Series 76)


Interviews to discover a PTS condition are done on a meter with all reads marked.

The Interview asks (a) about persons who are hostile or antagonistic to the pc, (b) about groups that are anti-Scientology, (c) about people who have harmed the pc, (d) about things that the pc thinks are suppressive to the pc, (e) about locations that are suppressive to the pc and about past life things and beings suppressive to the pc.

In doing the Interview the Interviewer must realize that a sick person is PTS. There are no sick people who are not PTS to someone or a group or something somewhere.

A somewhat suppressive pc will find the good hats suppressive. This does not relieve his condition. He is PTS to SP people, groups, things or locations, no matter how SP he is.

He can have been audited by someone he knew in an earlier life and who goofed the session. A few auditors have since been declared. Not because they goofed but because they were SP.

However, some PTS pc will make trouble for good people because that is what PTS means (Potential Trouble Source). So do not buy all the good people he is PTS to.

Further, when you do get the person or group or thing or location the PTS person will F/N VGI and begin to get well.

The PTS condition is actually a problem and a mystery and a withdrawal so it is sometimes hard to find and has to be specially processed (3 S&Ds) to locate it. Usually it is quite visible.

Don’t have a sick, rollercoaster pc appear for Interview and then say “not PTS”. It’s a false report. It only means the Interviewer did not find it.

The pc sometimes begins to list in such an Interview and such an Interview where a wrong item is found has to be audited to complete the list or find the right item. (See C/S Series 78, HCO B 20 Apr 72, Issue II.)

So Interview worksheets are VITAL.

The Interview should end on an F/N.

The Interview is followed by the Ethics action of HCO PL 5 April 72 or other Ethics actions such as handling or disconnection and posting as called for in policy. An Interviewer has to use good TRs and operate his meter properly and know 2-way comm and PTS tech.

Some Interviewers are extremely successful.

Such Interviews and handling count as auditing hours.

When properly done, plus good auditing on the PTS RD, well people result.



LRH:mes.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1972 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 15 JUNE 1972
Remimeo
Cramming
IMPORTANT

C/S Series 80


“DOG PCs”


AN AUDITOR WHO CANNOT AUDIT, WHOSE TRs ARE OUT, WHOSE METERING IS BAD AND WHO NEVER KEEPS THE CODE ALWAYS SAYS HIS PCs ARE DOGS.

When you find an auditor on this route, the remedy is:

1. Show him this HCO B and explain to him that an auditor is not likely to get any real results when he is so out of ARC with pcs.

2. P/L 3 May 72, 2 lists L & N by an auditor.

3. Get off his overts and omissions on pcs and pull his w/hs.

4. Check out his meter position so that he can see needle, paper and pc all in the same look without eye shift and drill him to do so.

5. Educate his left thumb so that he corrects a TA on BDs and catches the F/N and doesn’t leave the needle stuck to the right of the dial while the pc F/Ns and corrects only after the F/N has been O/R.

6. Make him do an Electronic attest and get his TRs up to where the pc has a chance to be in session.

7. WC M4 him on his materials so he isn’t swimming in misunderstoods.

8. Tell him there are no dog pcs now and get busy and help them out.

WHOLE HGC

An entire HGC can go bad this way. Shortly afterwards it will disintegrate and you will have few or no auditors left.

Some auditor who is covering up his overts, false bonuses or false stats begins it and it becomes “fashionable” to call various pcs dogs. Then other auditors, finding this an easy way to justify not trying hard, follow suit.

Next thing you have no HGC.

C/S ERROR

A C/S can err by being too critical of auditors. Or worse he can err by agreeing about what dogs the pcs are. If he does HE HAS NOT REALIZED THAT HIS C/S EFFORTS ARE BEING WASTED BY THE AUDITOR’S OVERTS, FALSE REPORTS, METERING, CODE AND TR FLUBS.

The way to handle this in the C/S is:

1. 3 May 72 P/L.

2. M4 on the C/S Series.

3. Require he listen to and okay ok to audit tapes.

4. Get him to come down on critical auditors with the above cramming action.

Suddenly this C/S will begin to get wins.

CASES

Every “dog pc” investigated traced to incompetent programming, C/Sing, out TRs, bad metering, Code breaks and bad lists.

By forcing an auditor to cool off his opinions and properly handle the pc, each one of these “dog pcs” has begun to fly.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder




LRH: ne.rd
Copyright © 1972
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 16 JUNE 1972R
REVISED 27 FEBRUARY 1975
Remimeo

C/S Series 81R

(Revisions in this type style on next page
to make D of P and D of Ts stats very clear)



AUDITOR’S RIGHTS MODIFIED


It occasionally (rarely) happens that an HGC’s line stops and programs do not get finished and pcs go unaudited or sent to Ethics or Cramming instead of getting their programs completed.

It also happens that a D of P becomes incapable of getting auditors to audit per the schedule he writes.

121/2 hour intensives drop out. Auditing falls back to the bit and piece game.

The C/S finds all his work in programming wasted as the programs stale date or just get abandoned.

Hours fall. Lines tangle. Tech Services cannot get assignments done.

THE MAJOR WHY OF THIS AND MANY SUCH CONFUSIONS CAN BE TRACED TO AN ABUSE OF “AUDITORS’ RIGHTS” IN PICKING AND CHOOSING PCS ON THE GROUNDS OF “FEELING THEY CANNOT HELP THE PC”.

This “right” is also abused by auditors seeking pcs who F/N easily at the Examiner.

See HCO B 15 June 72, C/S Series 80, “Dog Pcs”.

The refusal to audit is in fact an admission, in most cases, of a feared inability to audit.

Therefore, an auditor may only refuse to audit a pc if a direct personal relationship exists such as husband and wife or some friend’s wife or familial relationship.

An auditor advising others about this or that “dog case” or seeking to exclude pcs from auditing by abusing his “right to choose pcs” is SUBJECT TO COMM EV AND SUSPENSION OF CERTIFICATES UNTIL RETREADED.

For the real why of it is his inability to handle TRs, meter, use the Code or apply Tech.

Nearly every “Dog Pc” has out lists or incomplete chains or is not being run on what needs to be handled. In other words they are simply problems in repair which modern tech handles easily. The drug case who is audited on grades but has had no drug rundown is an example of misprogramming.

The C/S can get many loses and the whole HGC go into a bedlam where you have auditors refusing to audit. Their reasons given are false. The real reasons involve fast F/Ns and bonuses or out TRs, metering, Code breaks and tech.

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.

121/2 hour intensive plans blow up where auditors choose their own pcs.

STATS

The stats of C/Ses and auditors may only be HOURS AUDITED with FES and admin hours separately noted.

The D of P’s stat may only be fully completed cases.

When the stats are this way the C/S can get his programs done without worry.

The D of P can get cases completed.

The D of Tech Services has only completed cases and course completions-for a stat.

HONESTY

Sanity is truth.

Truth is sanity.

The road to truth is begun with honesty.

There was the story of the “man who sold his soul for a mess of pottage” (soup). We could parallel this with the Auditor who sold his case gain for a mess of false stats.

An honest clean job and an honest clean line are the milestones of the road to truth.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder




LRH:sb.nt.rd
Copyright © 1972, 1975
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

B O A R D T E C H N I C A L B U L L E T I N

28 DECEMBER 1972RA
Revised 20 November 1973
Remimeo Revised & Reissued 25 July 1974 as BTB
Auditors
C/Ses
CANCELS
HCO BULLETIN OF 28 DECEMBER 1972R
SAME TITLE


C/S Series 81-1RA


AUDITOR’S RIGHTS ADDITION REVISED

(Reference: HCO PL 8 Sept 70R, Rev. 18 Nov 73,
“Examiner’s 24 Hour Rule”, and HCO PL 13 Jan 71,
“Exam 24 Hour Rule”.)



It is the established right of an Auditor to use the exact Correction List to repair a specific auditing action, when required.

An Auditor does not have to obtain C/S OK to do a Correction List for a specific auditing action so long as the Auditor has a legal Qual Okay to Audit that specific Correction List.

An Auditor is expected to take a Pc who has red tagged back into session immediately and handle with the right Correction List for that process or rundown, or as authorized in the original HCO B 23 Aug 71, “Auditor’s Rights”.

It is strictly forbidden for an Auditor or any other Auditor to take a Pc back into session without C/S clearance, after the fact of a second red tag. The Auditor has only one chance to repair the Pc with the right Correction List. If this does not handle, the Pc is still red tagged and the folder must be gotten to the C/S fast and the Out Tech corrected within 24 hours of the original red tag.

The earlier issue of this Bulletin which permitted Auditors to count auditing hours lost on a salvage red tag session is cancelled.

Additionally, if a red tag Pc is NOT handled immediately by the Auditor concerned, the existing penalty of loss of the auditing hours which resulted in the Red Tag session is DOUBLED. For example, if the Auditor audited a 2 hour session, he is penalized 4 hours if he fails to take his Pc straight back into session.

This DOUBLE penalty is purely for the Auditor concerned and does NOT affect or change other penalties connected—the Examiner’s 24 Hour Rule per HCO PL 8 Sept 70R and the Paid Comps penalty per HCO B 30 Aug 71 RC, Rev. 6 Feb 74.

The intention here is to increase Auditor responsibility for the preclear and eradicate the incidence of Out Tech.

Qual Secs must get in on Policy daily HGC Auditor and Interne study, TRs and drills period. This will eradicate Out Tech and increase daily stats. Continuous restudy, TRs and drills, done on a daily basis, will create a crack team of Auditors. The datum that the number of times over the materials equals certainty and results still stands. If an Auditor is not flubless to his Class of training, Superliterate or not, he has areas of misunderstoods and nonapplication to be found and handled.

The first responsibility of an Auditor is his preclear and getting that preclear through, by application of flubless tech.


Written & Revised by
Ens. Judy Ziff
CS-5

Revised & Reissued as BTB
by Flag Mission 1234

I/C: CPO Andrea Lewis
2nd: Molly Harlow

Authorized by AVU
for the
BOARDS OF DIRECTORS
of the
CHURCHES OF SCIENTOLOGY

BDCS:SW:AL:MH:JZ:mh:jh
Copyright © 1972, 1973,1974
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 10 AUGUST 1972
(Amended & Reissued 28 March 1974
—only change is Series No.)
Remimeo

Expanded Dianetics Series 6

C/S Series 82


DIANETIC HCO B
INTEREST


On two certain subjects the “Interest?” question is omitted from Dianetic R3R patter.

On drugs and when running Evil Purposes or Intentions one does NOT ask the pc if he is interested in running the item.

The requirement on both drug items and intentions is that the item read on the meter (suppress and inval can be used) and has not been run by R3R previously.

Many pcs, it has now been found, have replied “No, no interest” on a drug item, the item has not been run and the pc then continued to have trouble with drugs.

Checking back pcs who returned to drugs after auditing showed “drug rundowns” that were so brief as to be nothing. One pc who had been on LSD for years had only a I hour quickie drug rundown. Later this person relapsed.

Tracing this, in each case the “Interest?” question had been used and the pc had replied “No interest” BUT MEANT “I’M NO LONGER INTERESTED IN DRUGS.”

So Drug items that have read are run R3R without asking for interest. The command is simply omitted.

In Expanded Dianetics the same thing has occurred in running Evil Purposes or Intentions. The Auditor asked the pc if he was interested in running the item and the pc said “No” and so it went untouched. But the pc had it confused with interest in doing the purpose and missed running it and then fell on his head later. Tracing the case back it was found that R/Ses and such had not been run due to the pc saying “No Interest”.

Nothing bad will happen if the item is run.


C/S RESPONSIBILITY

The C/S must keep telling his auditors, on drugs or Expanded Dianetics, “Omit asking for interest on R3R on these (drug) (intentions). Run them if they read on the meter.”

REPAIR

In repairing cases it is good sense to check this point on drugs and intentions to see if they were neglected in R3R due to “no interest”.

If so, then have them run and the case will suddenly do well.



LRH:nt.ntm jh L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1972, 1974 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

B O A R D T E C H N I C A L B U L L E T I N

11 AUGUST 1972RA
Revised 18 September 1974
(Revision in this type style)
Remimeo
CANCELS
HCO BULLETIN OF 11 AUGUST 1972
SAME TITLE


C/S Series 83RA


CORRECTION LISTS


This BTB gives the major correction lists used in auditing with a brief statement of their use, EP and relation to Grade Chart.

“IMPORTANT NOTE: AUDITORS MUST BE EXCELLENT ON TRs AND METERING AND ASSESSMENT DRILLS BEFORE BEING PERMITTED TO TOUCH ONE OF THESE LISTS AS THEY OTHERWISE MISREAD, CALL WRONG READS, GET NO READS, DRIVE TA UP OR DOWN AND BOTCH THE CASE UP FURTHER. USE CRAMMING ON TRs AND METER BEFORE LETTING AN AUDITOR DO ONE OF THESE LISTS.” —LRH.

L1C: Used by auditors in session when an upset occurs, or as ordered by C/S to handle ARC Breaks, sad, hopeless or nattery pcs. It is assessed Method 3. It can also be done M5 on a very ARC Broken pc. EP is area of BPC handled with pc F/N and VGIs. The L1C is not continued beyond a good cog with VGIs and a wide F/N.

GREEN FORM: 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. Assessed M5 to provide data for the C/S then each read handled in accordance with C/S Series 44R. EP is each read handled to its EP. May be reassessed after handling all reading items if heavily charged on first assessment. Can also be done M3 to a good win and F/N VGIs.

FALSE TA CHECKLIST: (HCO B 29 Feb 72, Revised 23 Nov 73) Normally done early in auditing, especially if TA high or low. Prevents unnecessary repair due to wrong cans or grip. Is usually only done once. Do not suddenly interject this action into the middle of a session nor change from cans to footplates mid-session due to TA going high.

C/S 53RH: This is the basic list to get TA up or down into normal range. Assessed M5, reading items handled then reassessed, etc. to F/Ning assessment. Done well with good basic auditing this action should not need to be frequently repeated on a case. TA going high or low in later auditing after C/S 53RH already fully handled is normally handled with the correction list for that action (e.g. L4BR when TA high after listing or WCCL on word clearing, etc.). EP is C/S 53RH F/Ning on assessment with TA in normal range.

LIX HI LO TA LIST: (BTB 1 Jan 72) Normally used for further handling if high or low TA recurring after C/S 53RH completed. Does not supersede individual correction lists where TA went high or low on a specific auditing action. Assessed M5 and each reading item handled to its EP. EP of list is all reading items handled and TA in normal range.

INT RUNDOWN CORRECTION LIST: (HCO B 29 Oct 71, Revised 14 May 74) Used when Int Ext reads on any repair list and the Int RD has already been done or corrected, when a bog occurs on the Int RD itself, or if pc upset after Int RD and/or TA gone high or low immediately after. Don’t re-run Int RD—use the correction list. EP is all reading items handled to F/N, EP of Int RD, and Int Ext no longer reading.

L4BR: (HCO B 15 Dec 68, Revised 2 June 72) Used for assessment of all listing errors, when trouble occurs on a listing process, when TA goes high or pc gets sick or upset after a session which included listing actions. Does not require C/S permission to use by an auditor within a session when trouble on listing occurs. Always assessed M5 and all reads handled (largest reads first). Used to handle individual lists or listing in general in which case the list can be reassessed after first handling if heavily charged on first assessment. EP is all reads handled to F/N with correct items found and indicated and pc no longer upset by the listing action. Should be taken to F/Ning list for full EP of List correction. There is no limit to the number of times it can be
used but an auditor who requires frequent use of L4BR needs cramming on basic auditing and L&N so he does it right the first time.

L3RD: (HCO B 11 April 71 RA, Revised 8 March 74) Used for locating and handling all errors and trouble in R3R actions. Assessed M3 with each reading item handled in full per instructions and continued further only if TA or upset remains unhandled. Is not taken to F/Ning assessment except when used in Dianetic Track Repair RD. EP is difficulty handled with pc F/N VGIs and again running well on R3R.

GF40XRR: (HCO B 30 June 71, Corrected & Reissued 13 Jan 72) Used to handle resistive cases (TA in normal range but not responding well to auditing). Assess M3 with all reading items taken to F/N per instructions, then handled in depth with L&N and R3R processes. Normally done only once if done properly. EP is all reading items handled, pc no longer resistive and making good progress in auditing. Note that a pc can be made to appear resistive by poor basic auditing and failure to use the right correction list when needed.

PTS RD CORRECTION LIST: (HCO B 16 April 72) “This Correction List is assessed and handled after a PTS Rundown has been done on the pc. It also serves as a checklist of expected actions with the Rundown.”—LRH. It is always assessed M5. EP is pc no longer upset, each reading item taken to EP.

WORD CLEARING CORRECTION LIST: (WCCL) (BTB 21 July 71, Revised 31 March 72, 30 Dec 72) Used to handle any upsets or high or low TA occurring during or shortly after word clearing. If a pc gets sick after word clearing, don’t start running R3R, use the WCCL. If TA goes high during or shortly after word clearing, don’t use a C/S 53RH, use the WCCL. This list can be overused by using every time the TA starts to go high in word clearing instead of simply completing the clearing of the word or subject started. Assessed M5. EP is all reading items handled to F/N and pc again running well.

STUDY CORRECTION LIST: (BTB 4 Feb 72, Revised 5 Oct 72) Used to handle outnesses in a person’s earlier studies which prevent him from progressing well in current study or make him antipathetic towards study. Done as part of the Primary Correction Rundown. It is not used as a substitute for correct application of study tech on the person’s current course. Assessed M5. EP is all reading items fully handled and an F/Ning list on final assessment. The full EP of pc willing and able to study well would require each step of Primary Correction RD completed in sequence if pc had been having study trouble. (Ref: HCO B 30 March 72, Revised 30 May 72.)

AUDITING TOOLS DRILL

It is vital that any auditor or C/S knows exactly which correction list to use and when to use it. This is particularly true of auditors in session who can and must use the L1C, L4BR, L3RD or WCCL in session when trouble occurs in order to quickly remedy the action and complete the session successfully without having to end off prematurely for C/S instructions.

For this purpose the auditing tools drill has been developed by LRH. In this drill the coach has a pile of the various correction lists, holds each up in any order and asks, “When do you use this?” “How do you use it?” Auditor must answer correctly without comm lag. When the auditor can do this without error coach then varies the drill by giving session situations and auditor must state the appropriate corrective action to be taken.

A flunk is always handled by having the student restudy the relevant HCO B (never by coach interpretation). Any disagreement or confusion is handled by appropriate word clearing on the materials concerned.

REPAIRING THE PC INSTEAD OF THE AUDITOR

Excessive use of repair lists and having to redo correction lists already done results from flubby auditing. Don’t just carry on repairing the pc. Get the auditor crammed especially on basic auditing, especially TRs and metering. Then you can get the pc rapidly and effectively repaired and back onto the Gradation Chart.

“DO NOT LET AN AUDITOR TOUCH SUCH LISTS ON A PC UNTIL HE HAS BEEN CRAMMED ON TRs, METERING AND ASSESSING.”—LRH.

HANDLING TROUBLE BEFORE IT OCCURS

To use a correction list in session every time the TA starts to go up or pc gets misemotional is Q&A and will slow up auditing tremendously. The correct action is to be an expert in basic auditing,
to know the action you are running, and run the process to its EP. TAs do go high and low during processes. Pcs do sometimes get misemotional when running certain actions. This doesn’t call for a correction list as there is nothing to correct. One simply completes the process.

GRADATION CHART

The EP of a Repair Program is stated in C/S Series 3 as “the pc feeling great and feeling he can get case gain”. It does not say every correction list or every repair action ever devised having been run on the pc.

If one goes past the EP of repair you then will have to repair the pc.

THE CASE GAIN AVAILABLE TO THE PC IS CONTAINED IN THE PROCESSES OF THE GRADATION CHART WHICH IS THE BASIC AUDITING PROGRAM OF EACH PC.

Failure to repair a pc who does need repair denies that pc the gains obtainable from processes. Repairing a pc who is doing well or continuing to repair a pc beyond the EP of repair also denies the gains of auditing.

The solution is to be an expert in basic auditing, know the processes down cold, know uses of correction lists and use them only when required and then use them correctly and get the pc back onto the Gradation Chart with a minimum of delay.


Training & Services Aide
Revised & Reissued as BTB
by Flag Mission 1234
I/C: CPO Andrea Lewis
2nd: Molly Harlow
2nd Revision by CS—4
Approved by
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
BDCS:LRH:RS:MH:AL:BL:nt.rd for the
Copyright © 1972,1974 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 16 AUGUST 1972

Remimeo
C/S Series 84

FLUBLESS C/SING


A C/S cannot C/S flublessly while he has ANY Auditors flubbing.

The standard procedure is

1. The C/S makes sure Tech Courses are taught okay and raises hell until they are.

2. C/S makes sure Qual has a Cramming Officer and crams him until he gets flubless Cramming and can Supervise TRs, do WCing Method 7, Method 6, Method 4, can correct metering and has packs to hand for reference.

3. The C/S follows a very standard handling of auditors:

A. 1 error of any kind—instruct by reference to HCO B.

B. A second error of any kind—send to Cramming and get the Auditor crammed at once, without any loss of auditing time but before the Auditor is allowed to audit further. (This is 2 hours, not 2 days!)

C. A third error of any kind—RETREAD, wherein the Auditor’s weak areas are located and the Auditor has to M7, M6, M4 and restudy the materials of that area. This takes the Auditor back to Step A.

A retread under a good Super takes 4 or 5 days.

Now if the Auditor again errs he goes to Step A.

If he goes the route again he hits RETRAIN and is retrained fully like any other student. His PRD is done or verified and he goes through the course starting with basic books. This puts the Auditor back to A.

But if he now lands at RETRAIN again he is given a full and complete RETRAIN from his earliest contacts with the subject.

It is highly unlikely he will flub further but if he does, he should not be on auditing at all.

FALSE REPORTS

A falsified Auditing report puts the Auditor at once at retrain as he is not sufficiently aware of the potentials of the subject to know he can get results and does not have to be dishonest.

TR 0

OT Zero and TR 0 are the keys to good auditing.

2 C/Ses were found in orgs who “wouldn’t let the Auditors do TR 0 because of their cases”. Both orgs had horrible stats and bad results and ARC Broken fields.

OT Zero and TR 0 are a routine action for Auditors. They do TRs in spare time, not because they are being Crammed, just to get professional.

Every Cramming Order includes TRs, especially Zero, to also be done on the auditor’s own time.

This gets the Auditor up to really Confronting. His errors come mainly from an inability to confront (and from faulty metering or misunderstoods or out ethics).

OT Zero and TR 0 are the keys to flubless auditing.

ELECTRONIC ATTEST

Auditors using LRH tapes and electronic attest (and with OT Zero, TR 0, metering, and Mis Us cleaned up and Ethics in) become very spectacular auditors in terms of results.
Results bring pride.

Auditors who get results are happy auditors. And the above is how, the standard how, to get them to get results.

EASY C/SING

Only if he spends some of his time TRAINING, as above, can a C/S ever get down to really C/Sing cases and getting programmes DONE.

SUMMARY

The above is the way I C/S and handle Auditors as a C/S.

I long since found that the flubby Auditors were the ones who consumed the C/S time. The ratio is 21/2 hours to 61/2 hours wherein it only takes me 21/2 hours to C/S piles of folders when I have the auditors auditing honestly and flublessly and it takes me 61/2 hours when I have some flubbers.

It is neither kind nor decent to let Auditors lose. Only when I (or MSH) have not been doing the C/Sing has auditing gone wrong in any area where I was.

This is traced directly to the drop-out of the above actions. So it is the above actions which give standard results and any C/S who omits them (to be a good fellow, or “these are my friends”) is an Auditor killer.

Auditors sometimes achieve a high status and are “above being crammed”. Well watch it, watch it because they will fall on their heads with a crash.

An auditor is not unlike a race horse. He needs a lot of care and handling. And he needs his periodic drills and exercises or he goes sloppy. Like a race horse, a good auditor is very, very valuable. And all good auditors are made by C/Ses!

The proof is that even the best go bad when they no longer have a tight C/S rein. Experience has taught that. The exceptions are very, very few and you don’t have any of them.

It takes me about 3 or 4 weeks to get an auditor through his course and doing a good flubless job. The majority of Scientologists want to be auditors. So you have Auditor scarcity? That’s a laugh.

It’s the C/S! The Course Super, the Cramming Officer.

And it’s done just exactly as above.

Given the materials, there is no other answer. So stop dreaming of hiring or getting perfect Auditors.

The ones you have are fine. Get more.

And do the above! ! !

The auditors must not blame the pc (nor must you), the C/S must not blame the auditor.
It’s you, the Course Super and the Cramming Officer. And mainly you the C/S.

You can and must build a corps of good auditors.

Or you’ll never make it as a C/S.

And listen, if you don’t make it as a C/S, where’s the world?



LRH:nt.bh L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1972 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

B O A R D T E C H N I C A L B U L L E T I N

16 AUGUST 1972-1
Addition 24 October 1972
Remimeo
Missions
HCO B 16 August 1972
Reissued 16 July 1974 as BTB

CANCELS
HCO BULLETIN OF 16 AUGUST 1972-1
SAME TITLE



C/S Series 84-1



FLUBLESS C/SING IN MISSIONS

(Ref: HCO B 16 Aug 72, C/S Series 84, “Flubless C/Sing”)


If an Auditor who is practising in a Mission reaches the point where he should be retrained, as per the bulletin, he is sent to the local Org for his retrain cycle.

Per HCO PL 23 Nov 69, “Allowed Technical Services”, a Mission may not run Academy Levels, which necessitates the above statement.


Mike Davidson
Franchise Officer WW

Reissued as BTB by
Flag Mission 1234

I/C: CPO Andrea Lewis
2nd: Molly Harlow

Authorized by AVU
for the
BOARDS OF DIRECTORS
of the
CHURCHES OF SCIENTOLOGY


BDCS:SW:AL:MH:MD:mh.rd
Copyright © 1972, 1974
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 13 SEPTEMBER 1972

Remimeo (Amended & Reissued 28 March 1974
All Dn & Ex Dn —only change is Series No.)
Auditors
Class VIII DIANETICS
C/Ses
Expanded Dianetics Series 7

C/S Series 85

CATASTROPHES FROM AND REPAIR OF
“NO INTEREST” ITEMS


I have done a review of several failed cases which blew or went bad after auditing.

THE COMMON FACTOR IN EVERY ONE WAS CASE BY-PASSED DUE TO “NO INTEREST”.

The auditor finds a reading drug item or an evil purpose and proposes to run R3R on it. The auditor asks if the pc is interested in running it. The pc says, “No.” The auditor does not run it. BANG, we have a BY-PASSED CASE.

The pc will blow or go sour or not recover.

One of these cases was unchanged after “a drug rundown”. He had a pair of eyes that looked like blank discs. Check of folder showed all major drug items “not run due to no interest”. The solution was to recover the lists, run the items that had read R3R triple and complete the case.

Another one blew. His folder was examined. Every evil purpose had been left unrun! Of the items from the “Wants Handled Rundown” the intentions were mislisted. The drug rundown failed due to “no interest”.

Each flubbed case I am finding has had his drug items and evil purposes left unrun on R3R due to “no interest”.

So DON’T ASK FOR INTEREST ON INTENTIONS, EVIL PURPOSES AND DRUG ITEMS.

IF THEY READ, RUN THEM!

REPAIR

1. On any stumbling case that has had a “drug rundown” or Expanded Dianetics get the Folder FESed to see if reading items were left unrun on R3R Triple. List them chronologically, early to late.

2. Get the case back, with an R factor of “Incomplete”.

3. Run every one of those unrun drug items, intentions and Evil Purposes.

4. If the items don’t now read, then get in Suppress and Invalidate on them.

5. If the case bogs do L3RD Method 5 and Handle on that chain only.

6. Go on with the action and complete it.


LRH:sb.ntm.rd L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1972,1974 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

B O A R D T E C H N I C A L B U L L E T I N

20 JANUARY 1973 RD
Pc Examiner Revised 4 May 1976
Qual Sec
Tech Services CANCELS
Senior C/S BTB 20 JANUARY 1973RB
C/Ses SAME TITLE
&
BTB 20 JANUARY 1973RC
(Piloted on Flag for 9 months)
SAME TITLE


C/S Series 86RD


THE RED TAG LINE

(Corrections in this type style)

Ref: HCO PL 8 Sep 70RA Examiner’s 24 Hour Rule
HCO PL 13 Jan 71 Exam 24 Hour Rule
HCO PL 20 Jul 70 Cases and Morale of Staff
BTB 6 Oct 71R C/S Series 65R
Auditing of Staff & Public

There is a precise line for handling Red Tags which must be put in and maintained.

A Red Tag is a large red card placed on the outside front cover of a Pc folder which indicates that a REPAIR SESSION must be done within 24 hours. An FES may be called for but does not waive the 24 hr rule.

A Red Tag is placed on the front of a folder by the Pc Examiner, C/S, Senior C/S or Qual Sec for one or more of the following reasons:

A. No F/N at Exams after a session, word clearing, product or post purpose clearing or Why Finding or 3 May 72 PL or PTS Check.

B. Roller-coaster bad exam report within a few hours of a session.

C. Pc ill within a few days of any major case action, or word clearing, product or post purpose clearing or Why Finding or 3 May 72 PL or PTS Check.

D. Flunked Declare of any major action or Grade, accompanied by a BER.

This pertains to staff and students as well as HGC Pcs.

The Red Tag Line is handled in the following manner:

1. PC RED TAGS, AS PER A—D ABOVE.

2. EXAMINER PAPER CLIPS A RED TAG TO THE EXAM FORM, LOGS THE EXAM IN THE EXAMS LOG BOOK IN RED AND BODY ROUTES (OR GETS IT BODY ROUTED BY QUAL PAGE) THE EXAM FORM INTO THE HANDS OF THE DTS FOR IMMEDIATE HANDLING. THE DTS NOTIFIES THE D OF P.

3. If red tagged after a session the Auditor is expected to take the Pc back into session for the appropriate correction list. If this has been done yet the Pc remains red tagged the Auditor must immediately write up the session for the C/S. The DTS in this case verifies that one or the other of these actions is occurring.

4. The D of P is responsible for seeing that an Auditor is assigned to the Pc.

5. The DTS is responsible for seeing that the folder gets to the C/S and that all necessary arrangements are made to get the Pc and Auditor into session as rapidly as possible.

6. The C/S is responsible to see that the folder is immediately C/Sed and the Auditor corrected. He puts the exam Red Tag on the folder.

7. Once the folder is C/Sed the DTS ensures that the session takes place.

8. After the session is given and Pc is now F/Ning, the Auditor, Pc and folder revert to routine traffic lines. The C/S would remove the red tag at this point.

9. ALL red tags must be seen by the Snr C/S preferably before the next session. This may not always be possible in orgs where the Senior C/S has other duties.

In no case should this take more than 24 hours and, in most, it should be handled the same afternoon or evening.

None of this, of course, relieves the Auditor (even if taken off the case by reason of retread, retrain or higher class Auditor needed) of his responsibility for seeing that his Pc is rapidly handled and F/Ning again.

As the HGC operates on Intensive Auditing, bit and piece repair actions would be disruptive of scheduling and delivery. For that reason an Org would do well to invest in a Qual Emergency Review Auditor to handle Word Clearing and Why Finding flubs, assists for loss, illness and injury, student review, etc. In that case the DPE and Qual Page would substitute for D of P and DTS in the line. The HGC would handle its own red tags as part of their intensives.

In order to ensure no red tagged Pcs get lost, on lines and not handled in 24 hours the following must be done:

Pc Examiner sends a daily list at the end of each day of all Red Tags to the Cramming Officer and Senior C/S. For the C/S this provides a confirmatory line against his own marked Red Tags for the day. For the Cramming Officer, this provides data on who should be sent for Cramming. If those persons do not report for Cramming within 24 hours, the Cramming Off must report to the Dir Correction or Qual Sec for investigation and handling. The Examiner must verify that any Red Tagged Pc has been handled within 24 hours or report any not handled to the Senior C/S, Qual Sec and Dir I & R for investigation and handling. When handled he crosses off the Red Tag in his log.

AOs AND SOLO

All the above applies to Solo Auditing also and a Red Tagged Solo Auditor must keep himself available for a Cram, Solo Repair C/S or Review Session. His folder would get immediate C/S attention.

_________

Regardless of whether the Red Tag was handled or not any non-F/N session logged by the Examiner is included in the Senior C/S F/N Percentage stat. The Pd Comps bonus for F/N percentage remains as per the Pd Comps BTB.

A D of P is well advised to have an Auditor on standby who is not assigned regular Pcs, to handle Red Tag repair sessions when the Auditor cannot complete the action, through retread or retrain required.


The Qual Sec and Senior C/S are responsible for getting this line in and drilled and the Qual Sec is responsible for maintaining it. A wall chart should be made up for drills and Chinese School.

PENALTY

“Penalty for violation of the 24 Hr Rule is loss of a day’s stats for the Division, the day being that day when the unrepaired flub occurred and subtracted at the time the flub is found”—HCO PL 8 Sep 70RA, EXAMINER’S 24 HOUR RULE.

If all on the line assume their share of responsibility for the well-being of Pcs, the penalty should never occur.

Revised by
Msm John Eastment
CS-5

Approved by
Guardian WW
FB Advisory Council
FB Exec Council
Commodore’s Staff Aides
The Board of Issues

Revisions Authorized by AVU
for the
BOARDS OF DIRECTORS
of the
CHURCHES OF SCIENTOLOGY

BDCS:SW:BI:CSA:FBEC:FBAC:JK:JE:ldv.rd
Copyright © 1973,1975, 1976
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 15 OCTOBER 1973

Remimeo
C/S Series 87


NULLING AND F/Ning PREPARED LISTS


A prepared list is one which is issued in an HCOB and is used to correct cases. There are many of these. Notable amongst them is C/S 53 and its corrections.

It is customary for the auditor to be required to F/N such a list. This means on calling it that the whole list item by item is to F/N.

Now and then you get the extreme oddity of a list selected to exactly remedy the case not reading but not F/Ning.

Of course this might happen if the list did not apply to the case (such as an OT prepared list being used on a Grade IV, heaven forbid). In the case of lists to correct listing, and in particular the C/S 53 series, it is nearly impossible for this situation to occur.

A C/S will very often see that the auditor has assessed the list on the pc, has gotten no reads, and the list did not F/N.

A “reasonable” C/S (heaven forbid) lets this go by.

Yet he has before him first-class evidence that the auditor

1. Has out-TRs in general,

2. Has no impingement whatever with TR-1,

3. Is placing his meter in the wrong position in the auditing session so that he cannot see it, the pc and his worksheet,

4. That the auditor’s eyesight is bad.

One or more of these conditions certainly exist.

To do nothing about it is to ask for catastrophe after catastrophe with pcs and to have one’s confidence in one’s own C/Sing deteriorate badly.

An amazing number of auditors cannot make a prepared list read for one of the above reasons.

Putting in suppress, invalidation or misunderstood words on the list will either get a read or the list will F/N.

The moral of this is that prepared lists that do not read F/N. When prepared lists that do not read do not F/N or when the auditor cannot get a prepared list to F/N, serious auditing errors are present which will defeat a C/S.

In the interest of obtaining results and being merciful on pcs, the wise C/S never lets this situation go by without finding what it is all about.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:rhc.nt.rd
Copyright © 1973
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

B O A R D T E C H N I C A L B U L L E T I N

22 OCTOBER 1973R

Remimeo Revised & Reissued 25 August 1974 as BTB
Qual Hats (Revision in this type style)
Snr C/S Hat
C/S Hat CANCELS
Auditor Hats HCO BULLETIN OF 22 OCTOBER 1973
LRH Comm Hat SAME TITLE
HAS Hat
Ethics Officer
Hat
C/S Series 88R


TECH DEGRADES


If it is found in investigating any situation in the Tech Division or Qual Division that a degrade of Tech has occurred—that the procedure and theory laid out in HCO Bs, Tapes or Books has been downgraded in any way—without effective action to eradicate it at once, the following Policy Letters should be made the subject of extensive and thorough checkouts and implementation programmes, and the basis of Ethics action for relevant Crimes or High Crimes as warranted.

They may be used for the same purpose if Tech or Qual stats are down and do not rise despite standard and routine actions to handle them—indicating hidden suppression of Tech which has not been located and indicated, and which should quickly come to light if these PLs are honestly checked out and accurately applied at once throughout Tech and Qual and Dept 3.

This would greatly assist any investigatory action to find a Why and a Who. When this investigation is complete, the programme to handle should include backing up these Policy Letters as an essential organizing action.

The local LRH Comm is primarily responsible for this action whenever it is needed but no other executive need wait for the LRH Comm to act on the matter if the situation brooks no delay (and any downgrade of Tech is an extremely serious matter) but must inform the LRH Comm who is counted on to support the action if any reasonable evidence is presented that it is necessary. A steep drop or continued Emergency in Tech or Qual GDSes are by themselves sufficient evidence.

Supplementary issues giving sample programmes for enforcement of these PLs will be forthcoming.

Since any situation involving downgrade of Tech implies the existence of Crimes and High Crimes (including the condoning of the downgrade), all personnel in Tech and Qual will be depended on to co-operate fully with actions to enforce these PLs so as to assist investigators to clear them of complicity in the downgrade if it is found to exist.

Misuse of this BTB to bring about loss of traffic in Tech or Qual would be the subject of Ethics action per this BTB. There must be evidence pointing to a definite suspicion of downgrade, so as not to handle something which isn’t there. But the fact of ordering and enforcing these PLs is not itself actionable unless it results in loss of traffic, this loss not being caused by a degrade from other causes.

The HCO Policy Letters are:

14 Feb 65 “Safeguarding Technology”
Reissued 7 June 67

1 July 65 “Ethics Chits”
18 Oct 67 III “Policy and HCO B Alterations”

7 Feb 65 “Keeping Scientology Working”
Reissued 15 June 70
17 Jun 70 “Technical Degrades”
26 Oct 71 “Tech Downgrades”



LRH Pers Comm

Revised & Reissued as BTB
by Flag Mission 1234

I/C: CPO Andrea Lewis
2nd: Molly Harlow

Authorized by AVU
for the
BOARDS OF DIRECTORS
of the
CHURCHES OF SCIENTOLOGY
BDCS:SW:AL:MH:KU:mh.rd
Copyright © 1973, 1974
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 20 NOVEMBER 1973
Remimeo Issue II
All Levels
Flag Internes C/S Series 89

F/N WHAT YOU ASK OR PROGRAM

Ref: HCO B 23 Dec 72 Integrity Processing Series 20
HCO B 21 Nov 73 The Cure of Q and A

When an Auditor asks one question but F/Ns something else it is simply a version of QandA.

Example: AUDITOR: Do you have a problem? PC: (ramble-ramble) I was thinking of last night’s dinner. AUDITOR: That F/Ns.

Every few folders you pick up, if you can find examples of this:

The Auditor is not trained not to Q and A.

He is NOT getting answers to his questions.

When the Auditor starts something (such as a question or process) he MUST F/N what he started EVEN THOUGH HE DID SOMETHING ELSE DURING IT AND GOT AN F/N ON SOMETHING ELSE. HE MUST F/N THE ORIGINAL ACTION.

The result can be:

(a) Missed W/H phenomena.
(b) High or low TA an hour after the pc “F/Ned at Examiner”.
(c) A stalled case.
(d) An undone program.
(e) An unhandled pc.
(f) Continual need for repair programs.

To get this disease out of an HGC requires that Auditors go through an Anti-Q and A handling.

C/S Q AND A

C/Ses can also Q and A. They simply handle whatever the pc originates to the Examiner or Auditor, over and over and on and on.

The result is:

A. Incomplete Programs.
B. Tripled or quadrupled C/S effort as the case never seems to get solved.
C. Loads of repair programs.

Yet a C/S who does it will never look for it as THE primary error being committed.

The remedy is to have the C/S do an Anti-Q and A program.


LRH: nt.jh L. RON HUBBARD
Copyright © 1973 Founder
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

[IP Series 20 has been converted to BTB 23 Dec 72R, IP Series 17R, Volume IX, page 289.]

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 6 DECEMBER 1973
Remimeo

C/S Series 90


THE PRIMARY FAILURE


References: HCO B 28 Feb 1971, C/S Series 24,
“Metering Reading Items”, and
HCO B 15 Oct 1973, C/S Series 87,
“Nulling and F/Ning Prepared Lists”.


A C/S who cannot get a result on his pcs will find the most usual biggest improvement by getting the offending Auditors’ ASSESSING handled.

We used to say that “the Auditor’s TRs were out” as the most fundamental reason for no results.

This is not specific enough.

THE MOST COMMON REASON FOR FAILED SESSIONS IS THE INABILITY OF THE AUDITOR TO GET READS ON LISTS.

Time after time I have checked this back as the real reason.

It became evident when one could take almost any “null” (no read) list in a pc’s folder, give it and the pc to an Auditor who COULD assess and get nice reads on it with consequent gain.

Example: Pc has a high TA. C/S orders a C/S 53RF. List is null. Pc goes on having a high TA. C/S gets inventive, case crashes. Another C/S and another Auditor takes the same pc and the same list, gets good reads, handles. Case flies again.

What was wrong was:

(a) The Auditor’s TR 1 was terrible.

(b) The Auditor couldn’t meter.

REMEDY

One takes the above two reference HCO Bs and gets their points fully checked on the flunking Auditor.

The C/S gets the Auditor’s TR 1 corrected. In doing the latter one may find a why for the out TR 1 like a notion one must be soft-spoken to stay in ARC or the Auditor is imitating some other Auditor whose TR 1 is faulty.

QUAL CRAMMING

It can happen that these actions are reported done in Qual and the Auditor still flubs.

In this case the C/S has to straighten out Qual Cramming by doing the above reference HCO Bs on the Cramming Officer and getting the Cramming Officer’s TR I ideas unscrewed and straight.

REQUIREMENTS

It takes correct metering and IMPINGEMENT to make a list read.

If the auditor does not have these, then drug lists, Dianetic lists, correction lists will all go for nothing.

As the prepared list is the C/S’s main tool for discovery and correction an auditor failure to get a list to respond or note it then defeats the C/S completely.


SUMMARY

THE ERROR OF AN AUDITOR BEING UNABLE TO GET A LIST TO READ ON A METER IS A PRIMARY CAUSE OF C/S FAILURE.

To win, correct it!


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:nt. jh
Copyright © 1973
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 17 FEBRUARY 1974
Remimeo

C/S Series 91


MUTUAL OUT RUDS


It has been known for many many years that the phenomenon of “Mutual Out Ruds” existed.

This means TWO OR MORE PEOPLE WHO MUTUALLY HAVE RUDS OUT ON THE WIDER GROUP OR OTHER DYNAMICS AND DO NOT GET THEM IN.

Example: A husband-wife co-audit team never run O/Ws on the rest of the family because both of them have similar overts and so consider it usual.

Example: Prisoners engaged in co-auditing (as in Narconon) may have similar overts, withholds, ARC Brks and/or problems with the rest of society and so do not think of handling them as out-ruds.

Example: Two top class auditors co-auditing, have similar overts on the junior auditors and the org and so never think to get them in.

THIS CAN STALL CASES!

A C/S has to take this factor into account wherever he has a possibility of its occurring.

In one instance mutual out ruds went so far as four auditors, co-auditing, agreeing never to put their overts down on W/Ses “so they would not lose reputation”. Needless to say all four eventually blew.

If the C/S had done a routine check for mutual out ruds, this whole scene would have been prevented and four beings would not have ruined each other.

IN ANY SITUATION WHERE A SMALL PORTION OF A LARGER GROUP IS ENGAGED IN CO-AUDIT THE C/S MUST CHECK ROUTINELY FOR MUTUAL OUT RUDS.

This could even apply to an org or vessel which was separate from the rest of society around it: its members could develop mutual out ruds from the rest of society and cases could fail on this point.

Be alert to MUTUAL OUT RUD SITUATIONS AND HANDLE BY GETTING THEM IN ON THE REST OF THE SURROUNDING PEOPLE OR SOCIETY.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder




LRH:ams.rd
Copyright © 1974
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 8 JULY 1974R
Issue II
REVISED 24 JULY 1974
Remimeo

C/S Series 92R
(Revisions in this type style)



WORD CLEARING ERRORS
(Applies to Methods 1, 2, 4 and 5
done on a meter.)


The attention of the C/S is called to the revised Word Clearing Series 32RA which requires words be F/Ned and to HCO B 8 July 74 of the Word Clearing Series which requires word clearing errors be RED TABBED and that all Word Clearing worksheets be placed in folders.

Case troubles have occasionally been traced to metered W/Cing over a High TA or failure to F/N words.

This is a hidden area from the C/S unless W/C worksheets are included in folders and the RED TAB system for non-F/N at conclusion is used. Only in this way is a C/S able to get all the data.

Correction of W/C errors is done by a Word Clearing Correction List.

High TA or Low TA at start of a W/C session is usually handled by C/S 53RG.

All “non-session” worksheets such as why finding, contact or touch assists and Word Clearing should go into the pc’s folder.

None of this can be used as an excuse not to word clear somebody. Make a C/S handle that TA fast and Red Tab the folder until handling occurs. Then do the Word Clearing.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH:nt.rd
Copyright © 1974
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 31 AUGUST 1974
Remimeo
Tech Secs
C/Ses URGENT
Auditors
Registrars
C/S Series 93


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 HCO B 31 May 74, “Unhandled Drugs and Ethics”. Some orgs have taken this HCO B so literally however, that they have taken pcs off Adv Cses Grades, refused to do Assists on ill pcs and some showed pcs the HCO B and invaled their gains.

This was not the intention of the HCO B. 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.

EXPANDED DIANETICS

Ex Dn by the way belongs after Grade IV Expanded.

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 answer is to bring the pc up the Grade Chart to Expanded Grade IV then do his Ex Dn.

The prerequisites for Ex Dn are covered on HCO B 23 April 74, Ex Dn Series 22, “Expanded Dianetics Requisites”. Add to that Expanded Grades up to IV and you have it.

GRADE II


Some orgs specialize in Grade II, especially on org staff. The pc is always getting Integrity Processing 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 HCO B 8 Jan 72R, Revised 8 July 74, Solo C/S Series 11 R.

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 HCO Bs 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 EXPANDED.


DIANETICS, means:

C/S 54—Complete handling of Pc Assessment Form begun with Drug RD.

Health Form—Fully handled to full F/N Assessment.

EXPANDED GRADE 0—As issued.

EXPANDED GRADE I—As issued.

EXPANDED GRADE II—As issued, including Integrity Processing.

EXPANDED GRADE III—As issued.

EXPANDED 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 HCO B 23 April 74, Ex Dn Series 22.

Introspection RD—Where pc ill, introverted or in a psychotic break.

R3R all E. Purps.

OCA Left-hand Side Handling—As issued.

OCA Right-hand Side Handling—As issued, with PTS RD as necessary.

POWER PROCESSING GRADES V & VA—Only prerequisites are Drug RD and Grade IV.

SOLO GRADE VI, means:

Solo Set-ups—Done at SH or AO per Solo C/S Series 11 R.

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.


PROGRAMMING

The C/S Series, especially the early HCO Bs, numbers 1-13R, 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

LRH:nt.rs.rd
Copyright © 1974
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 25 SEPTEMBER 1974
Remimeo
All Execs
All Tech and URGENT—IMPORTANT
Qual Divs

C/S Series 94


REDUCTION OF REFUNDS
C/Ses AND OVERLOAD


When a C/S is overloaded, he is a potential cause of OUT TECH.

He may try to make up time by not reading worksheets of Auditors, by failing to do Folder Error Summaries, by not taking time to write Cramming Orders and neglecting other C/S duties.

Recent evaluation has shown that OVERLOADED C/Ses CAN BE THE REASON FOR A HUGE REFUND RATIO IN THE ORG’S GI-CGI.

Any non-tech person such as the Ethics Officer can tell at once when a C/S is either not working or overloaded. THE HANDWRITING IN THE WORKSHEETS CAN’T BE READ, WORDS ARE NOT CLARIFIED IN RED, NO FESes ARE SEEN IN FOLDERS AND NO CRAMMING ORDERS EXIST TO MAKE AUDITORS DO HANDWRITING DRILLS TO WRITE FAST AND WELL.

Proper C/S posting was piloted by me on Flag years ago. The existing technical executives failed to export it to orgs.

The irreducible minimum C/S postings are:

SENIOR C/S who handles bugged cases and very upper level actions and keeps the other C/Ses functioning well. He is the highest classed C/S in the org. He is responsible for proper handling and results on all cases. (This is a hat I usually wore in an area.)

EXPANDED DIANETIC C/S who does only Expanded Dianetics.

GRADE C/S who C/Ses Grade pcs.

DIANETIC C/S or C/Ses who handle all routine C/Sing of Dianetics including Drug Rundowns.

There are several other C/S posts. In AOs additionally there are Solo C/Ses. In Saint Hills there are Power (Class VII) C/Ses.

As an org expands it can have additional types of C/Ses. Some of these are:

REVIEW C/S who reviews tech case failures, taking this load off the Senior C/S.

STAFF CASES C/S who C/Ses for audited staff.

STUDENT AUDITING C/S who C/Ses student sessions.

AO REVIEW C/S who C/Ses for fast review on Adv Cse Students.

CO-AUDIT C/S where a Co-Audit exists separate from HGC lines.

WHAT IS OVERLOAD?

When a C/S can’t read every worksheet and study and program every case he has, due to time, he is overloaded.

WASTED C/Ses

To get a Class VI or even a Class IV to C/S lower action folders is a waste of C/Ses since it is easy to train Dianetic C/Ses.

SUMMARY

TRAIN AND POST enough C/Ses and watch the GI go up and refunds go down.

It is not enough just to get Auditors and more and more Auditors.

DON’T OVERLOAD C/Ses. GET MORE OF THEM!


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder


LRH: nt .rd
Copyright © 1974
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 26 OCTOBER AD25
Remimeo
All Students
All HGC Auditors
All C/Ses C/S Series 95
All Internes


“FAILED” CASES


There are no failed cases. There are only failed C/Ses and Auditors.

In a recent test; this was proven conclusively. A number of no-case-gain, slow- case-gain, sickie and “failed cases” were rounded up. Using well trained Flag Auditors and the most basic of lists, every one of these cases was soon flying.

At another time, lists which had been “nulled” by a group of trainee Auditors were then taken over, on the same pcs, same lists, and renulled by Class Xs. Over half the reading items had been missed by the trainees—they simply couldn’t make the list read on the pcs. Yet the lists were as alive as skyrockets. The pcs, under the trainee Auditors, had accumulated all manner of by-passed charge by having reading items ignored. And in some cases, having non-reading items given attention.

To a trainee, all this seems incredible and mysterious. He does not realize how very bad his metering can be, how faint and fainting his TR 1. He has numerous tricks which defeat him—such as keeping his sensitivity on 32 for a pc who only requires sensitivity 1, whereas the Auditor misses all his F/Ns as he can’t keep the needle at set. He doesn’t put his meter so he can see pc, paper and meter dial all in the same scope of vision and misses the reads. His Auditor presence is so poor and his attitude so unprofessional that the pc isn’t really in session. His own introversion prevents him from really observing the pc’s tone or reaction.

All these faults can be cured and HAVE to be before an Auditor can call himself a real Auditor. Short of that he is just a fooling-about dilettante. And he has “failed pcs”.

It takes hard sweating work to get good enough to be a real Auditor. It takes hours and hours and hours of TRs the hard way. It takes a high degree of honesty that includes never faking and going by misunderstoods in his materials, always being honest in his auditing reports, constant practice with his metering, drills with the tone scale and a large degree of self-discipline.

It isn’t “talent” that makes the good Auditor. It is practice and more practice until he himself knows first that he didn’t know and then knows that he really knows.

The source of out tech is only laziness and dishonesty. Someone who is afraid of work thinks he can PR the C/S and the pc, fumble his way through and succeed out of fakery. That route is failure. And it ends in “failed cases”. Don’t be a psychologist or psychiatrist. That was their route.

In the hands of a thoroughly trained and drilled Auditor, Scientology works and works splendidly.

There are no dog cases, no “ncgs”, no failed cases.

But there are “Auditors” who don’t study and drill hard enough to become real Auditors. And there are C/Ses who don’t know their business and who don’t keep up their study and are too lazy to FES or read sessions or cram their Auditors.

There are an awful lot of excellent Auditors and many very fine C/Ses. But in some local areas, where verbal tech gets going and ethics is out, the quality sags. And there you have ncgs and slow pcs and “failed cases”.

Want to know how lazy your C/Ses and Auditors are? How many ncgs and failed cases do you have around? If you have any at all, tech in your area is out.

A C/S 53RJ taken to F/Ning list and a GF40X taken to an F/Ning list will cure any ncg or failed case. BUT it has to be done by an Auditor who has sweated it out doing the checksheets of Qual required to make a list read.

So do not send to find the real who when cases bog or “fail”. Don’t blame and repair cases. Repair the Auditors and C/Ses.

It not only can be done. It is easier to do it than wrestle around with an “ARC Broken field”.

And it not only can be done, it MUST be done.


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:nt.rd
Copyright © 1975
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 24 OCTOBER 1976
Remimeo



(LRH ED 257 INT of 1 December 1974
Revised and Reissued as an HCOB)
(Revisions in this type style)



C/S Series 96




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 74R Issue I
QUAL OKAY TO OPERATE AN E-METER

(2) Board Policy Letter 14 Nov 74 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 71RB
QUAL OK NO. 5R, INTERNSHIPS 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 1973RB, C/S SERIES 53RJ” 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 1972RA, “LIX HI-LO TA REVISED.” This is the same list as C/S 53RJ above. It has been brought up to date. It gives the whole question for each subject as in C/S 53RJ 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. The 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 l9 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 1971RA, 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 3 RB, “L3 EXD RB.” This is the prepared list for Expanded Dianetics.

8. HCO BULLETIN 29 FEBRUARY 1972R, “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 53RJ) 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 53RJ 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- I .” 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 outpoints 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-1C Assessment by Dynamics.) This gets those dynamics that are charged and handles them. Increases social personality and even can shift valences.

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

There is a whole package of processing, mainly by prepared lists, in Integrity Processing, issued as its own series and now being reissued.

There are great Solo Lists for Solo Repair used on Advance Courses.

And 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

All revisions by
Materials Chief FB

As approved by
L. Ron Hubbard

LRH:RS.nt
Copyright © 1976
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 26 OCTOBER 1976
Remimeo Issue I
All HCOs
All Tech Divs (Also issued as HCO PL 26 Oct 76
All Courses Issue I, same title.)




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 re-study or re-drilling 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 by-passed 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 variance 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,
All Tech Divs same title )
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 clearer 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

B O A R D T E C H N I C A L B U L L E T I N

25 APRIL 1971R
Revised & Reissued 22 November 1974 as BTB
Remimeo
HSDC
Dianetic
Auditors
C/Ss
CANCELS
HCO BULLETIN OF 25 APRIL 1971
SAME TITLE



THE DIANETIC CASE SUPERVISOR’S INDEX


This C/S’s Index is for use in Case Supervising Dianetic Auditing.

See also the Dianetic references in:

BTB 18 Dec 71R C/S Series Zero R
“Index of C/S Series HCO Bs & BTBs
by Title and Subject”
BTB 18 Dec 71-1R C/S Series Zero Updated
“Chronological Index of C/S Series
HCO Bs and BTBs by Title and Subject”
BTB 18 Dec 71-2R C/S Series Zero A
“Subject Index of C/S Series by
Alphabetical List of Subjects”

Dianetic C/Sing is its own zone of technology.

Dianetic and Scientology C/Sing Technologies are different in many respects and must not be mixed. These technologies are complementary to each other in the long overall view of case handling. The rule is simply that whenever a preclear is being run on Dianetics, at any case or Grade level, the rules of Dianetic Case Supervision apply.

Dianetics can be run on any Grade of preclear or Pre-OT if necessary. It can even be run on a preclear who has had only a C/S No. 1 and no other auditing. The need for Dianetic Auditing can and does occur at any case level.

The advent of “Expanded Grades” and the C/S Series of HCO Bulletins and Triple Flow Dianetics does not cancel the basics of Dianetics Case Supervision; these developments clarify and complement Dianetic Case Supervision.

Dianetics is Dianetics. It is for use.

The use of this Dianetic C/S’s Index will help you to achieve the maximum gains attainable with Dianetics.

Use it.

___________


THE DIANETIC CASE SUPERVISOR’S INDEX

This index lists categories of preclear “situations” and HCO Bulletins and BTBs that give the proper handling for the situations.

Preclear situations are listed in the left-hand column.

HCO Bulletins and BTBs giving the proper handling of the situations are listed in the right-hand column.

There are spaces provided for additional HCO Bs to be added to each category as they may be issued in the future. It is expected that a person using this index would keep it up to date himself.

SECTION I: USUAL SITUATIONS AND ACTIONS


Starting a preclear = HCO B 5 Apr 69 (reissued 26 May 70),
“New Preclears”

Note: When R3R is run for the = HCO B 12 June 70, “Programming of Cases
first time as at any later time it is
run Triple Flow. See Section III = HCO B 23 Aug 71, “Auditor’s Rights”
for C/S data on Triple R3R.
= HCO B 28 July 71, C/S Series 54, Dia
netics, Beginning a Pc On”

= HCO B 19 Apr 72, C/S Series 77, “ ‘Quickie’
Defined’’

= BTB 24 Apr 69R, “Preclear Assessment
Sheet”

= BTB 12 July 69, Issue IV, “Starting Dia netics on Pcs Who Have Had Scientology
Auditing”

= BTB 8 Jan 71 R, “Auditing CS-1 for Dia netics and Scientology”

=

Health Form and R3R = HCO B 19 May 69, “Health Form, Use of”

= “Pastoral Counselling Health Form”—
Revised 22 July 69

= HCO B 9 Aug 69, “Case Folder Analysis, Dianetics” (section under Health Forms)

= HCO B 28 Feb 71, “Metering Reading Items”

= HCO B 28 July 71, C/S Series 54, “Dianetics, Beginning a Pc On”

=

=

Pc has had Dianetic Auditing on = See Section III of this Index

Flow 1 or Dianetic Triples but = HCO B 7 Mar 71 RA, C/S Series 28RA “Use
not on all items of Dianetics”

= HCO B 4 Apr 71 RA, C/S Series 32RA,
“Use of Dianetics”

= HCO B 5 Apr 71RA, C/S Series 33RA,
“Triple Reruns”

= HCO B 21 Apr 71RB, C/S Series 36RB,
“Dianetics”

=

=

Assessment of existing lists for any = HCO B 29 Apr 69, “Assessment and Inter
regular Dianetic Auditing est”

= HCO B 21 May 69, “Assessment”

= HCO B 26 Apr 69, “Somatics”

= HCO B 27 Jan 70, “Narrative Items Explained”

= HCO B 29 Jan 70, “Null Lists in Dianetics”

= HCO B 28 Feb 71, “Metering Reading Items”

= HCO B 24 July 69, “Seriously Ill Pcs”

= “Pastoral Counselling Health Form”
Revised 22 July 69

= HCO B 14 Mar 71R, “F/N Everything”

= HCO B 14 Sept 71, C/S Series 59,
“Dianetic List Errors”

= HCO B 20 Apr 72, Issue II, C/S Series 78,
“Product Purpose and Why and WC Error
Correction”

= HCO B 10 Aug 72, C/S Series 82,
“Dianetic HCO B—Interest”

= HCO B 13 Sept 72, C/S Series 85,
“Dianetics—Catastrophes from and Repair of
“No Interest’ Items”

= HCO B 6 Dec 73, C/S Series 90,
“The Primary Failure”

= BTB 24 Nov 71 R, “Pressure Somatics in
Dianetics”

=

=

Reassessment of Existing Lists = Same as above for assessment of existing lists
for any regular Dianetic Auditing.

Item found last session = HCO B 28 Feb 71, “Metering Reading Items”

= HCO B 14 Mar 71 R, “F/N Everything”

=

=

=

=
Trouble with a Specific Area = HCO B 24 July 69, “Seriously Ill Pcs”

(Chronic Somatic) = HCO B 9 Aug 69, “Case Folder Analysis,
Dianetics” (section under Special Cases)

= HCO B 16 June 70, C/S Series 6, “What the
C/S is Doing”

= HCO B 16 Aug 70 (corrected & reissued 3
Nov 70), C/S Series 15, “Getting the F/N to
Examiner”

= HCO B 5 July 71 R, C/S Series 49R,
“Assists”

= HCO B 11 July 73, “Assist Summary”

= HCO B 6 Jan 74, “Assist Summary Addition”

= HCO B 15 July 70 (corrected & reissued 25
Nov 70), “Unresolved Pains”

= HCO B 19 July 69, “Dianetics and Illness”
(especially second page re specific area)

= HCO B 16 Dec 71RA, C/S Series 35RA,
“Interiorization Errors”

=

=

Pc Exterior = HCO B 4 Jan 71 (corrected & reissued 3 Oct
71), “Exteriorization and High TA”

= HCO B 17 Dec 71R, C/S Series 23RA,
“Interiorization Summary”

= BTB 24 July 73, “Pregnancy and Auditing”



SECTION II: DIANETIC REMEDIES

Pc Physically ill = HCOB 12 Mar 69, “Physically Ill Pcs and
Pre OTs (with a note on Drugs)”

= HCO B 19 July 69, “Dianetics and Illness”

= HCO B 27 July 69, “Antibiotics”

= HCO B 17 Oct 69, “Drugs, Aspirin and
Tranquilizers”

= HCO B 24 July 69, “Seriously Ill Pcs”

= HCO B 9 Aug 69, “Case Folder Analysis,
Dianetics” (re: Physically Ill Pcs and Special
Cases)

= HCO B 28 June 69, “C/S—How to Case
Supervise Dianetics Folders”

= HCO B 15 Mar 71, “Assists—A Flag Expertise
Subject” [revised & replaced by 23 July 71,
same title]

=
= HCO B 13 June 70, C/S Series 3,
“Session Priorities—Repair Pgms and their
Priority”

= HCO B 5 July 71R, C/S Series 49R,
“Assists”

= HCO B 23 July 71 (corrected 4 May 72),
“Assists—A Flag Expertise Subject”

= HCO B 23 Aug 71, C/S Series 1,
“Auditor’s Rights”

= HCO B 24 Aug 71, Issue II,
“Assists Addition”

= HCO B 11 July 73, “Assist Summary”

= HCO B 6 Jan 74, “Assist Summary Addition”

=

Pc Stuck in this Lifetime = HCO B 19 May 69, “Drug and Alcohol
Cases—PRIOR Assessing”

= HCO B 3 Oct 69R, “Dianetic Remedies”

= HCO B 23 Aug 71, C/S Series 1,
“Auditor’s Rights”

=

Pc out of valence = HCO B 13 May 69, “Peculiarities”
Also folder getting fat with little
gain = HCO B 9 Aug 69, “Case Folder analysis,
Dianetics”

(See HCO Bs listed for Pc Physical- = HCO B 28 June 69, C/S—How to
ly Ill in addition to these) Supervise Dianetics Folders

= HCO B 17 July 71, C/S Series 51,
“Out of Valence”

= BTB 26 Nov 71 (corrected 30 Dec 71),
“Out of Valence—220H”

=

TA High or Low or Bad Indicators = HCO B 23 Aug 71, C/S Series 1,
appearing but not necessarily due “Auditor’s Rights”
to Out Rudiments or illness
= HCO B 16 June 70, C/S Series 6,
“What the C/S is Doing”

= HCO B 19 June 70, “C/S Q and A”

= HCO B 16 Aug 70 (corrected & reissued
3 Nov 70), C/S Series 15,
“Getting the F/N to Examiner”

= HCO B 28 June 69, “C/S—How to
Case Supervise Dianetics Folders”

= HCO B 9 Aug 69, “Case Folder Analysis,
Dianetics”

= HCO B 16 July 69, “Urgent—Important”

= HCO B 8 June 70, “Low TA Handling”

= HCOB 11 Apr 71RA, “Important—L3RD
Dianetics and Int RD Repair List”

= HCO B 8 Mar 71, C/S Series 29,
“Case Actions, Off Line”

= HCO B 5 Apr 71RA, C/S Series 33RA,
“Triple Reruns”

= HCO B 6 Apr 71, C/S Series 34,
“Non F/N Cases”

= HCO B 21 Apr 71RB, C/S Series 36RB,
“Dianetics”

= HCOB 3 June 71, C/S Series 37R,
“High and Low TA Breakthrough”

= HCO B 24 Nov 73RA (cancels 31 Dec 71RC), C/S
Series 53RI, “Short Hi-Lo TA Assessment C/S”

= HCO B 16 Feb 72, “Talking the TA Down Modified’’

= HCO B 20 Nov 73, C/S Series 89,
“F/N What You Ask or Program”

= HCO B 6 Dec 73, C/S Series 90,
“The Primary Failure”

= HCO B 16 Dec 71RA, C/S Series 35RA,
“Interiorization Errors”

= HCO B 27 Mar 71, “Dianetic Erasure”

= HCO B 23 May 69, “Auditing Out Sessions—
Narrative Versus Somatic Chains”

= HCO B 22 July 69, Issue II, “High TA Assessment”

= HCO B 1 Jan 72RA (revised 20 Nov 74),
“LIX HI-LO TA List Revised”

= BTB 26 Apr 69, “Bad Indicators”

=

Out-Ruds Situation = HCO B 23 Aug 71, C/S Series 1,
“Auditor’s Rights”

= HCO B 17 May 69, “TRs and Dirty Needles”

= HCOB 17 Apr 69, “Dianetic Case Supervision”

= HCO B 9 Aug 69, “Case Folder Analysis,
Dianetics”

= Scientology List Actions such as L1 C List
(Class III or above) for handling Out Ruds.

= HCO B 11 Apr 71RA, “L3RD—Dianetics
and Int RD Repair List”

= HCO B 26 Apr 71, “TRs and Cognitions”

= HCO B 14 Sept 71, C/S Series 59, “Dianetic
List Errors”

Something Not Handled = HCO B 23 Aug 71, C/S Series 1,
“Auditor’s Rights”

= HCO B 16 Aug 70 (corrected & reissued 3
Nov 70), C/S Series 15, “Getting the F/N to
Examiner”

= HCO PL 7 Apr 70RA (revised 29 Sept 74)
Scientology “Green Form” Method 5 Assess ment (Class III or above) for finding the
trouble.

=


Chains Left Unflat = HCO B 22 July 69, “High TA Assessment”

(Also see TA High or Low cate- = HCO B 17 Apr 69, “Dianetic Case Super
gory above) vision”

= HCO B 23 Aug 71, C/S Series 1,
“Auditor’s Rights”

= HCOB 11 Apr 71RA, “L3RD—Dianetics
and Int RD Repair List”

= HCO B 27 Mar 71, “Dianetic Erasure”

= HCO B 13 June 70, C/S Series 3,
“Session Priorities—Repair Pgms and their
Priority”

= HCO B 16 Aug 70 (corrected & reissued 3 Nov 70),
C/S Series 15, “Getting the F/N to Examiner”

= HCO B 6 Apr 71, C/S Series 34,
“Non F/N Cases”

= HCO B 20 Nov 73, C/S Series 89,
“F/N What You Ask or Program”

= HCO B 16 June 70, C/S Series 6,
“What the C/S is Doing”

= BTB 3 Oct 69R, “Dianetic Remedies”

= BTB 10 June 72R, “The L3RD Rundown—
Dianetic Track Repair”

=

Pc Anaten In Session = HCO B 23 Aug 71, C/S Series 1,
“Auditor’s Rights”

= BTB 3 Oct 69R, “Dianetic Remedies”


=


Child Not Running Well = BTB 8 Jan 71 R, “Auditing CS-1 for Dia
netics and Scientology”

=

=

=
Pc Physically Injured = HCO B 15 Mar 71, “Assists—A Flag Expert
ise Subject” [revised & replaced by 23 July
(See also: Physically Ill) 71, same title]

= HCO B 23 May 69, “Auditing Out Sessions—
Narrative Versus Somatic Chains”

= HCO B 14 May 69, “Dianetic Assists”
NOTE: This HCO B is not to be used as the
source of R3R procedure.

= HCO B 13 June 70, C/S Series 3,
“Session Priorities—Repair Pgms
and their Priority”

= HCO B 28 Nov 70, C/S Series 22,
“Psychosis”

= HCO B 8 Mar 71, C/S Series 29,
“Case Actions, Off Line”

= HCO B 5 July 71 R, C/S Series 49R,
“Assists”

= HCOB 23 July 71 (corrected 4 May 72),
“Assists—A Flag Expertise Subject”

= HCO B 24 Aug 71, Issue II, “Assists Addition”

= BTB 22 July 70, “Touch Assist—An
Improvement on Spinal Adjustment for
Medical Doctors and Practitioners”

= BTB 7 Apr 72R, “Touch Assists—Correct Ones”

=

=

Area of Physical Injury Not Fully = HCO B 19 July 69, “Dianetics and Illness”

= HCO B 16 Aug 70 (corrected & reissued 3
(See also: Trouble with a Specific Nov 70), C/S Series 15,
Area) “Getting the F/N to Examiner”
(for handling Chronic Somatic)

= HCO B 13 June 70, C/S Series 3,
“Session Priorities—Repair Pgms and their
Priority”

= HCO B 7 Sept 71, C/S Series 58,
“Programming Cases Backwards”

=

=

Drugs and/or Alcohol = HCO B 19 May 69, “Drug and Alcohol
Cases—PRIOR Assessing”

= HCO B 12 Mar 69, “Physically Ill Pcs and
Pre OTs (with a note on Drugs)”

=

=

=

= HCO B 8 Mar 71, C/S Series 29,
“Case Actions, Off Line”

= HCO B 15 July 71, Issue III, C/S Series 48R,
“Drug Handling”

= HCO B 28 July 71, C/S Series 54,
“Dianetics, Beginning a Pc On”

= HCO B 25 Oct 71, “Drug Drying Out”

= HCO B 23 Dec 71, C/S Series 73,
“The No Interference Area”

= HCO B 23 Sept 68 (reissued 22 Jan 72),
“Drugs & Trippers”

= HCO B 10 Aug 72, C/S Series 82,
“Dianetic HCO B—Interest”

= HCO B 13 Sept 72, “Dianetics— Catastrophes
from and Repair of ‘No Interest’ Items”

= BTB 7 June 69, “How to Make a Person Sober”

= BTB 7 July 71 R, “Resistive Cases—
Drug Handling”

= BTB 25 Oct 71R, “The Special Drug Rundown”

=

Pc Having Difficulty with Study = HCO B 23 Nov 69R (revised 26 June 73),
“Student Rescue Intensive”

= BTB 9 Aug 70R, “Dianetic Student Rescue
Intensive”

= BTB 8 Jan 71 R, “Auditing CS-l for Dianetics
and Scientology”


SECTION III: TRIPLE DIANETICS

Starting or Running Triple Dia- = HCO B 5 Oct 69, “Triple Flows”
netics
= HCO B 23 Aug 71, C/S Series 1, “Auditor’s
Rights” (re: High TA at start of session)

= HCO B 11 Apr 71RA, “Important—L3RD—
Dianetics and Int RD Repair List”

= HCO B 7 Mar 71 RA, C/S Series 28RA,
“Use of Dianetics”

= HCO B 4 Apr 71RA, C/S Series 32RA,
“Use of Dianetics”

= HCO B 5 Apr 71RA, C/S Series 33RA,
“Triple Reruns”

= HCO B 12 Apr 71, “Exteriorization Errors”

= HCO B 21 Apr 71RB, C/S Series 36RB,
“Dianetics”

= BTB 1 Dec 70R, “Dianetics—Triple Flow
Action”

False TA = HCO B 24 Oct 71, “False TA”

= HCO B 12 Nov 71R, “False TA Addition”

= HCO B 15 Feb 72, “False TA Addition 2”

= HCO B 18 Feb 72, “False TA Addition 3”

= HCO B 29 Feb 72R, “False TA Checklist”

= HCO B 23 Nov 73, “Dry and Wet Hands
Make False TA”


SECTION I V: C/S HANDLING OF THE GOOFING AUDITOR

Auditor Goofing = HCO B 10 Nov 70, “C/S Responsibility for
Training”

= HCO B 16 July 69, “Urgent—Important”

= HCOB 15 Nov 69, Issue II, “Case Super
vision, How it Goes Non-Standard”

= HCO B 15 Nov 69, “Case Supervision Audit
ing and Results”

= HCO B 19 Mar 71, “C/Sing Auditor-C/Ses”

= HCO B 5 Mar 71, C/S Series 25, “The Fan
tastic New HGC Line”

= HCO B 26 Apr 71, “TRs and Cognitions”

= HCO B 28 Apr 71, “Okays to Audit in
HGCs”

= HCO B 19 June 71, C/S Series 45, “C/S
Rules”

= HCO B 19 July 71, C/S Series 52, “Internes”

= HCO B 23 Aug 71, C/S Series 1, “Auditor’s
Rights”

= HCO B 1 Sept 71, Issue I, C/S Series 57,
“A C/S as a Training Officer—A Program
for Flubless Auditing”

= HCO B 22 Sept 71, C/S Series 61, “The
Three Golden Rules of the C/S”

= HCO B 20 Dec 71, C/S Series 72, “Use of
Correction Lists”

= HCO B 20 Nov 73, Issue I, “Anti-Q&A TR”

= HCO B 6 Dec 73, C/S Series 90, “The
Primary Failure”

= HCO B 27 Jan 74, “Dianetics—R3R Com
mands Have Background Data”

= HCO B 16 Dec 71RA, C/S Series 35RA,
“Interiorization Errors”

= HCO B 9 June 71, C/S Series 41,
“C/S Tips”

= HCO B 21 Aug 70, C/S Series 16,
“Session Grading—Well Done, Definition of”

= HCO B 30 Apr 71, “Auditing Comm Cycle”

= CRAMMING ON THOSE ACTIONS
WHICH ARE BEING GOOFED!

= BTB 16 Mar 71, “Student and Course Morale
—Tough Checkouts & Coaching”







Flag Org Correction Chief

Revised & Reissued as BTB

by Flag Mission 1234

I/C: CPO Andrea Lewis
2nd: Molly Harlow

Authorized by AVU
for the
BOARDS OF DIRECTORS
of the
CHURCHES OF SCIENTOLOGY


BDCS:SW:AL:MH:DM:nw.mh rd
Copyright © 1971, 1974
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

SUBJECT INDEX

CASE SUPERVISOR SERIES



A auditing (cont.)
grade processes to EP, 30 (C/S 6)
A to B programming, 154 (C/S 47) of staff and public, 194 (C/S 65R)
ability attained, 7 (C/S 1) quality, 99 (C/S 31)
invalidated, 8 (C/S 1) skill, improvement of, between R6 and
accepting, OT III, 212 (C/S 73)
a C/S, 2 (C/S 1) standard, 57 (C/S 15)
the pc, 1 (C/S 1) auditor(s)(‘s),
accident prone, 12 (C/S 2) Admin Room, 83 (C/S 25)
accidents, if reads run out narrative R3R Board, 83 (C/S 25)
Triple, 168 (C/S 54) checkout of Quad Dianetics, 92
action, ordering a major, 145 (C/S 42) (C/S 28RA-1)
admin, auditor, 81 (C/S 25) Cramming and flubless, 183 (C/S 58)
administration, definition of, 172 (C/S 56) data, 147,148 (C/S 43)
administrative function and excellent case errors, 97 (C/S 30),122 (C/S 36RB-1R)
results, 172 (C/S 56) flubs, 43 (C/S 10), 90 (C/S 28RA),
Advance Program, 48 (C/S 12), 88 (C/S 27), 92-93 (C/S 28RA-1)
13940 (C/S 39R), 145 (C/S 42); handling, 61 (C/S 16)
see also Return Program inexperienced, 191 (C/S 63)
age, symptom of the—there is no time, 40 (C/S 9) inval, 147,148 (C/S 43)
alcohol included as a drug, 156,157,158 (C/S 48R) leaving Cramming go through Examiner, 193
All Flows Rundown, 110 (C/S 33RA-1) (C/S 64)
analyzing folders, 45 (C/S 11) minimum hours of, 85 (C/S 25)
ancient law—pc who “knows” what is wrong, morale depends on honest completions, 180
32 (C/S 7) (C/S 57)
anti-Q & A handling, 243 (C/S 89) opinion, 171 (C/S 55)
AO confidential materials, 10 (C/S 2) responsibility, 1 (C/S 1), 228 (C/S 81-1RA)
apathy, handling, 184 (C/S 59) rights, 1, 9 (C/S 1)
apparent behavior and the insane, 74 (C/S 22) rights, abuse of, 225 (C/S 81R)
application, C/Ses for exact tech, 152 (C/S 45) rights addition revised, 227 (C/S 81-1RA)
apprenticeships, auditor, 163 (C/S 52) rights and correction lists, 227 (C/S 81-1RA)
assess flows slowly, 134 (C/S 37R Add. 3) rights modified, 225 (C/S 81 R)
assessing, low TA, 132 (C/S 37R Add. 2R) worksheets, 196 (C/S 66)
assessment, writing up C/Ses, 200, 201, 202 (C/S 69R)
form 37R, 134 (C/S 37R Add. 3) Azimuth meter, use of, to see reads, 80 (C/S 24)
Hi-1o TA rules, 131 (C/S 37R Add.)
low TA, 141 (C/S 40) B
repeated, 131 (C/S 37R Add.)
Sheet, Pc, 168 (C/S 54) backtrack, getting the pc to go, 7 (C/S 1)
assists, 159 (C/S 49R) backwards C/Sing (towards significance), 29-30
and Exams, 159, 160 (C/S 49R) (C/S 6)
Contact, 159 (C/S 49R) bad exam reports, 96 (C/S 30)
Dianetic, 159 (C/S 49R) Basic Program, 11 (C/S 2), 22 (C/S 4)
interrupting auditing, handling of, 94-95 begin Dianetics with Pc Assessment Sheet, 168
(C/S 29) (C/S 54)
Touch, 160 (C/S 49R) behavior—mannerisms as an index to change, 35
Touch and Contact, 94 (C/S 29) (C/S 8)
worksheets, 247 (C/S 92R) blank periods, 156 (C/S 48R)
attest, pc to, when he’s made it, 153 (C/S 46) blind repair, when no FES is done, 66 (C/S 19)
auditing, blow downs,
and Ethics, 46 (C/S 11) and falls, 20 (C/S 3), 29 (C/S 6)
and TRs, 136 (C/S 38) and length of reads, 149 (C/S 44R)

SUBJECT INDEX—CASE SUPERVISOR SERIES


blow up, changing the pc, 36 (C/S 8)
item, 131 (C/S 37R Add.) charge, by-passed, last session, 17,18, 19
F/N item, 141 (C/S 40) (C/S 3)
blue sheet, the Return Program is on, 14 Chart,
(C/S 2), 21 (C/S 4) Classification, 49 (C/S 12)
boggy cases, 86 (C/S 26) Gradation, 211 (C/S 73), 232 (C/S 83RA)
breakthrough, high and low TA, 127 (C/S 37R) new Grade, 248-51 (C/S 93)
broad shooting, C/S can give alternatives of Human Evaluation, 35 (C/S 8)
in a C/S, 189 (C/S 62) checking for,
bug, C/Sing and finding the case, 112 (C/S 34) meter reading items, 79 (C/S 24)
bullbait using processes or implants forbidden, reads, 56 (C/S 15)
95 (C/S 29) reads while clearing the idea of lists, 66
buttons, (C/S 19)
using restimulative materials to push checklist, mandatory C/Sing, 200 (C/S 69R)
someone’s, 95 (C/S 29) checkout on materials by auditors, 179
suppress and invalidate, 3 (C/S 1) (C/S 57)
by-passed, choosing pcs, 225 (C/S 81R)
case and “no interest” items, 236 (C/S 85) chronic aches and pains, 183 (C/S 58)
charge of last session, 18,19 (C/S 3) chronic somatic(s), 28 (C/S 6), 57 (C/S 15)
Dianetic handling of, 64 (C/S 18)
C Class Chart, 21 (C/S 4), 248-51 (C/S 93)
in every folder, 14 (C/S 2)
case (s), Classification and Gradation Chart is the
actions, off line, 94 (C/S 29) master program, 10 (C/S 2), 250 (C/S 93)
auditors don’t have, 8-9 (C/S 1) clearing,
bogs, how to repair, 220 (C/S 78) commands, reads gotten on, 142 (C/S 41)
can be repaired, 137 (C/S 38) words in tests forbidden, 207 (C/S 71A)
completed, 63 (C/S 17) words on GF, 86 (C/S 26)
disturbance and whys, 220 (C/S 78) code of a C/S, 197-98 (C/S 67)
dog; see dog cases coffee shop auditing, 94 (C/S 29)
errors, 4 (C/S 1) cognitions, chopping, abuses indicator of F/N,
gain, 151 (C/S 44R Add.), 161 (C/S 50) 30 (C/S 6)
has somatics, 22 (C/S 4) complete,
non-F/N, 112 (C/S 34) cycles on a case, 145 (C/S 42)
not handled, 6 (C/S 1) definition of, 218 (C/S 77)
people talking about their, 95 (C/S 29) completion, quickie, 218 (C/S 77)
resistive, 156, 157 (C/S 48R), 189 (C/S 62) conference, daily auditors’, 70 (C/S 21)
study, find the right Why, 112, 113, 114 confront, processes aimed at further, 31 (C/S 6)
(C/S 34), 147 (C/S 43) Contact Assist, 159 (C/S 49R)
supervision errors, gross, 47 (C/S 11) Continue Process, 128 (C/S 37R)
tech errors on a, 59 (C/S 16) copying lists or worksheets, 5 (C/S 1)
that don’t run well, 114 (C/S 34) correcting of an Int RD, 77 (C/S 23RA)
trouble and WC errors, 247 (C/S 92R) correction lists, 209 (C/S 72), 230 (C/S 83RA)
ways to bog a, 136-37 (C/S 38) and red tags, 227 (C/S 81-1RA)
way to solve a, 145 (C/S 42) auditor Okay to Audit, 227 (C/S 81-1RA)
catastrophes from and repair of “no interest” C/S OK to do, 227 (C/S 81-1 RA)
items, 236 (C/S 85) drill for, 231-32 (C/S 83RA)
CCHs, to handle accident proneness, 12 (C/S 2) L3RD, 119 (C/S 36RB), 123 (C/S 36RB-1R)
ceiling WDAH, 82 (C/S 25) method of use, 209-10 (C/S 72)
chain(s), PTS Rundown, 216 (C/S 76)
engram, 28 (C/S 6), 56-57 (C/S 15) TRs and metering, 230 (C/S 83RA)
failed to flatten, 69 (C/S 21) use of, 230-32 (C/S 83RA)
flubbed, 119 (C/S 36RB), 123 (C/S 36RB-1R) corrective actions, when done, 250 (C/S 93)
rehabbing, 118-19 (C/S 36RB), 123 course graduate becomes an auditor, 163
(C/S 36RB-1R) (C/S 52)

SUBJECT INDEX—CASE SUPERVISOR SERIES


courses with no materials, 178-79 (C/S 57) C/S, C/Ses, C/Sing (cont.)
cramming, invalidation, 60 (C/S 16),147 (C/S 43)
and auditor errors, 233 (C/S 84) long, 87 (C/S 27)
and auditors, 233 (C/S 84) next, 81 (C/S 25)
and excellent checkouts, 84 (C/S 25) Org, 96 (C/S 30)
and the C/S, 233 (C/S 84) postings, irreducible minimum, 252 (C/S 94)
auditors who flub to, 142 (C/S 41) preOTs don’t, 214 (C/S 75)
chit, 178 (C/S 57) PTS Rundown, 216 (C/S 76)
C/S, 164 (C/S 52) purpose, 31 (C/S 6)
cycles and the C/S, 199 (C/S 68) Q & A, 27 (C/S 5), 32-34 (C/S 7),
finding the misunderstood, 98 (C/S 30) 243 (C/S 89)
Hi-1o TA assessment, 131 (C/S 37R Add.) Q & A, results from, 243 (C/S 89)
order, 199 (C/S 68) Quad Dianetics, 91 (C/S 28RA-1)
order, how to write up a, 204 (C/S 70R) quality, 99 (C/S 31)
raises auditing quality, 99 (C/S 31) responsibility, 121 (C/S 36RB), 125
to get flubless auditors, 183 (C/S 58) (C/S 36RB-1R)
C/S, C/Ses, C/Sing, responsibility and checking interest on
53, use of, 230 (C/S 83RA) drug items, evil purposes or intentions,
and auditor admin, 82 (C/S 25) 229 (C/S 82)
and cramming cycles, 199 (C/S 68) responsibility for training, 69 (C/S 21)
and Cramming Officers, 233 (C/S 84) rules, 14546 (C/S 42),14748 (C/S 43),
and Exam reports, 96 (C/S 30) 152 (C/S 45)
and flubby auditors, 233 (C/S 84) rules—programming from prepared lists,
and overload, reduction of refunds, 252-53 149-50 (C/S 44R)
(C/S 94) rules—the sequence of programs, 151
and publics, 194 (C/S 65R) (C/S 44R Add.)
and tech courses, 233 (C/S 84) short, 87, 88 (C/S 27)
as a training officer, 176 (C/S 57) stable datum, 114 (C/S 34)
auditor, 83 (C/S 25) standard handling of auditors, 233 (C/S 84)
auditor-C/Ses, 96-98 (C/S 30) standing order to auditors, 213 (C/S 74)
auditors writing up, 201 (C/S 69R) supreme test of a, 154-55 (C/S 47)
backwards (towards significance), 29-30 thorough, 88 (C/S 27)
(C/S 6) three golden rules of the, 186 (C/S 61)
case gain, 161 (C/S 50) tips, 14244 (C/S 41)
checklist, 203 (C/S 69 Add.) tools of a, 183 (C/S 58)
data, 44 (C/S 11) Triple Dianetics, 89 (C/S 28RA)
easy, 234 (C/S 84) twenty-four hour rule, 194 (C/S 65R)
error, 223 (C/S 80) two-way comm, 54-55 (C/S 14)
errors, 98 (C/S 30) types of, 252 (C/S 94)
expertise, 144 (C/S 41) variables, 144 (C/S 41)
failure, 39 (C/S 9) via, 14344 (C/S 41)
failure, primary cause of, 24445 (C/S 90) vital action, 153 (C/S 46)
firm rule for, 45 (C/S 11) wander on repairing a repair, 42 (C/S 10)
first lesson, 14 (C/S 2) with all folders to hand, 45 (C/S 11)
folder handling, 4546 (C/S 11) written instructions, 44 (C/S 11)
for new auditors or veterans, 191 (C/S 63) current program inside pc folder, 145 (C/S 42)
for non-veterans, 191 (C/S 63)
genius, 10 (C/S 2),19 (C/S 3) D
glossary of terms, 48 (C/S 12)
handles post fast flow, 96 (C/S 30) daily study, 227 (C/S 81-1RA)
handling auditors, 61 (C/S 16) data,
handling auditors, 3 rules, 186 (C/S 61) for C/S, 183 (C/S 58),189 (C/S 62)
hard work, 77 (C/S 23RA) HCO Bs and tapes are stable, 148 (C/S 43)
in the chair, 2 (C/S 1) deaths are run out, 168 (C/S 54)
Int, 77 (C/S 23RA) decay of tech, 148 (C/S 43)

SUBJECT INDEX—CASE SUPERVISOR SERIES


Declare(s), double (cont.)
C/S’s responsibility, 153 (C/S 46) major rundowns, 5 (C/S 1)
pc to, 153 (C/S 46) Power, 97 (C/S 30)
delicate cases, pcs needing lots of repair downgrade, departure from exact processes, 152
are, 43 (C/S 10) (C/S 45)
delivery, C/S halting, 65 (C/S 19) dramatizes = R6EW unflat, 22 (C/S 4)
Dept 10, 37R Process done in, 129 (C/S 37R) dropped OCA graph, 162 (C/S 51);
destimulate, takes 3-10 days to, 56 (C/S 15) see also OCA(s)
Dianetic(s), drug(s),
Assist, 159 (C/S 49R) and cannot run engrams, 211 (C/S 73)
auditor and ruds, 3 (C/S 1) and roller coaster, 156 (C/S 48R)
beginning a pc on, 168 (C/S 54) and TRs, 157 (C/S 48R)
Case Supervisor’s index, 257 done first, 157 (C/S 48R)
Clear, 48 (C/S 12) engrams and alcohol, 156 (C/S 48R)
C/S 1 , for unindoctrinated pc, 117 former user, 156 (C/S 48R3
(C/S 35RA) full auditing rundown, 157 (C/S 48R)
C/Sing, 90 (C/S 28RA), 91 (C/S 28RA-1) handling, 156-58 (C/S 48R)
HCO B—interest, 229 (C/S 82) reads on, 168 (C/S 54)
list errors, 184 (C/S 59) Rundown and Grade Chart, 248, 249
pcs, 49 (C/S 12) (C/S 93)
person doesn’t like, 157 (C/S 48R) Rundown and Life Repair, 248 (C/S 93)
Ouad; see Ouad Dianetics use engram running on, 86 (C/S 26)
remedies, 90 (C/S 28RA), 93 (C/S 28RA-1) dummy run, HGC line should be, 85 (C/S 25)
results, 90 (C/S 28RA), 93 (C/S 28RA-1)
Triples, 7 (C/S l); see also Triple(s)
unable to run standard, 78 (C/S 23RA) E
unflat on, 13-14 (C/S 2)
Director of Processing; see D of P eight (VIII),
discharged process, 29 (C/S 6) actions, 50 (C/S 13R)
discovery,whycasesweren’tmakingit, 158 auditing for OTband, 51 (C/S 13R)
(C/S 48R) end phenomena of,
dispersal (on programming), 12 (C/S 2) 37R Process, 131 (C/S 37R Add.)
Dn C/S l for unindoctrinated pc, 117 a process, 30 (C/S 6)
(C/S 35RA) repair, 17 (C/S 3)
D of P, TA Handling RD, 129 (C/S 37R)
Interview, 188 (C/S 62) engrams,
operates by OCAs, 205 (C/S 71) cannot run, and drugs, 211 (C/S 73)
pressures on, 33 (C/S 7) chain unflat, 28 (C/S 6)
schedule, 83 (C/S 25) chains unflat, 56 (C/S 15)
Solo, keeps tabs on pcs falling off lines, drug, 157 (C/S 48R)
214-15 (C/S 75) list, 89 (C/S 28RA), 91-92 (C/S 28RA-1)
dog cases, 97 (C/S 30), 225 (C/S 81 R); secondaries, locks, 29 (C/S 6)
see also dog pcs words and phrases, 28 (C/S 6)
can be handled, 146 (C/S 42) EP; see end phenomena
locating the bugs, 177 (C/S 57) error(s),
many are just unsolved cases, 171 (C/S 55) auditor, and Cramming, 97, 98 (C/S 30)
the Why behind, 224 (C/S 80) C/S, 98 (C/S 30)
dog pcs, 223 (C/S 80); see also dog cases Dianetic and Int, 115 (C/S 35RA)
don’ts regarding 37R, 134-35 (C/S 37R Add. 3); gross, in programming, 99 (C/S 31)
see also thirty-seven R (37R) in an Int RD, 115 (C/S 35RA)
double, program, 97 (C/S 30)
actions, 145 (C/S 42) Ethics,
folder, 45 (C/S 11) action after PTS Interview, 222 (C/S 79)
Int, 112 (C/S 34) enters after quickie tech, 219 (C/S 77)
major grades, 112 (C/S 34) record, C/S should watch for, 46 (C/S 11)

SUBJECT INDEX—CASE SUPERVISOR SERIES


evaluation, firm rule for C/S, 45 (C/S 11)
and the C/S, 189 (C/S 62) first error correction is Int, 115 (C/S 35RA)
auditor, 25 (C/S 5) fixation, one life, 73 (C/S 22)
Chart of Human, 35-36 (C/S 8) flatten chain, failed to, 69 (C/S 21)
telling the pc is, 10 (C/S 2) flow (H), additional, 134 (C/S 37R Add. 3)
evil impulse, checking, 73 (C/S 22) flows,
Exam, Examiner, assess slowly, 134 (C/S 37R Add. 3)
and meter checks, 207 (C/S 71 A) by-passed, 105 (C/S 33RA), 108 (C/S 33RA-1 )
F/Ns after flubs, 143 (C/S 41) by-passed, and repair, 105 (C/S 33RA),
getting the F/N to the, 56 (C/S 15) 108 (C/S 33RA-1)
pattern at, 57 (C/S 15) clearing, 131 (C/S 37R Add.)
reports, bad, 96 (C/S 30) definition of, 100 (C/S 32RA), 103
reports, no, 59 (C/S 16) (C/S 32RA-1 R)
sour forms, 17-18 (C/S 3) missing, and mass, 100 (C/S 32RA), 102
unchanging natter at, 114 (C/S 34) (C/S 32RA-1R)
Expanded Dianetics, note, 129-30 (C/S 37R), 133 (C/S 37R Add. 3)
and the Grade Chart, 248, 250 (C/S 93) overrun, 107 (C/S 33RA), 110 (C/S 33RA-1)
prerequisites, 248, 250 (C/S 93) unrun, 105,106 (C/S 33RA), 108,109
Expanded Lower Grades, 48 (C/S 12) (C/S 33RA-1)
experience and interneships, 163 (C/S 52) Flow Zero, 100 (C/S 32RA), 102,103
Ext, exterior, exteriorization, (C/S 32RA-1R), 107 (C/S 33RA),
do Int RD if check reveals, 43 (C/S 10) 110 (C/S 33RA-1)
in session is end phenomena for that and Int-Ext RD, 92 (C/S 28RA-1 )
process or action, 116 (C/S 35RA) command, 103 (C/S 32RA-1R), 109
pc going, handle by Int-Ext, 13 (C/S 2) (C/S 33RA-1)
pc will go, 31 (C/S 6) command for Introspection RD, 101
run twice, 112 (C/S 34) (C/S 32RA)
eyesight should be tested, 80 (C/S 24) flubbed,
cases and “no interest” items, 236
(C/S 85)
F R3R, 76 (C/S 23RA)
flubby auditors, 163 (C/S 52)
fads in areas where tech is bad, 69 (C/S 21) Flub Catch System, 65 (C/S 19)
failed, flubless,
cases and “no interest” items, 236 (C/S 85) auditors, 176 (C/S 57)
cases are auditor failures, 254 (C/S 95) C/Sing, 233 (C/S 84)
cure for, 255 (C/S 95) C/Sing in Missions, 235 (C/S 84-1)
sessions, most common reason for and flubs,
remedy, 244 (C/S 90) auditor, 43 (C/S 10), 90 (C/S 28RA),
failure, C/S, 39 (C/S 9) 92-93 (C/S 28RA-1)
fall and BD in 2-way comm, 20 (C/S 3) best answer is no, 63 (C/S 17)
false, cramming, 69 (C/S 21)
reports, 233 (C/S 84) Exam F/Ns after, 143 (C/S 41)
TA Checklist, 230 (C/S 83RA) flunk(s),
TA HCO Bs, 208 (C/S 71A) and retrain, 60 (C/S 16)
falsely gotten to R6EW, 22 (C/S 4) TA producing action left incomplete is a,
family, 2 (C/S 1)
don’t listen to, about a case, 171 (C/S 55) tech not by the book is a, 152 (C/S 45)
insanity, run out, 169 (C/S 54) when given, 60 (C/S 16)
fantastic new HGC line, 81 (C/S 25) F/N,
fast flow, C/S handles post, 96 (C/S 30) abuse, 30 (C/S 6)
FES(es); see Folder Error Summary and word clearing, 247 (C/S 92R)
finding the bug on a case, 113 (C/S 34) at Exam, 152 (C/S 45)
firefights and unrun or overrun chains, 120 at Examiner and session grading, 59
(C/S 36RB), 124 (C/S 36RB-1R) (C/S 16), 82 (C/S 25)

SUBJECT INDEX—CASE SUPERVISOR SERIES


F/N (cont.) Grade(s),
gradual widening, 67-68 (C/S 20) II, 24849 (C/S 93)
persistent, 67 (C/S 20) II and the Grade Chart, 249-50 (C/S 93)
same, 67 (C/S 20) definition of, 6 (C/S 1)
to Examiner, 56 (C/S 15) Expanded Lower, 48 (C/S 12)
what you ask or program, 243 (C/S 89) incomplete cycle of the, 62 (C/S 17)
F/Ning auditors, 193 (C/S 64) Lower, processes, 53 (C/S 13R)
Folder Error Summary(ies), 4 (C/S 1), Ouickie, 49 (C/S 12)
65 (C/S 19), 81, 85 (C/S 25) Ouickie, and actions, 62-63 (C/S 17)
and admin time, 85 (C/S 25) use all processes, 13 (C/S 2)
cost borne by pc, 65 (C/S 19) violations, 7 (C/S 1)
current, 97 (C/S 30) Grade Chart, 232 (C/S 83RA)
folders, analyzing, 45 (C/S 11) new, 248-51 (C/S 93)
Folder Summary, 5 (C/S 1),173 (C/S 56) gradient scales, 39 (C/S 9)
force, grading, session, 59-60 (C/S 16)
is made up of, 31 (C/S 6) graphs, OCA, 162 (C/S 51); see also OCA(s)
run out the, 28 (C/S 6) green,
foreign language cases need GF items cleared, Advance Program, 87 (C/S 27)
86 (C/S 26) auditor, 191-92 (C/S 63)
Four (IV) Rundown, OT, 52 (C/S 13R) Form, 86 (C/S 26),149 (C/S 44R),
Full Flow Dianetics, 100 (C/S 32RA), 103 230 (C/S 83RA)
(C/S 32RA-1R) Form and method of use, 210 (C/S 72)
and OTs, 120 (C/S 36RB), 125 (C/S 36RB-1R) paper, Advance Program, 88 (C/S 27)
offering, 101 (C/S 32RA), 104 (C/S 32RA-1R) group processing and Grade Chart, 249 (C/S 93)
repair, 101 (C/S 32RA), 103-04
(C/S 32RA-1R)
requires flawless C/Sing and auditing, 121 H
(C/S 36RB), 125 (C/S 36RB-1R)
result, 101 (C/S 32RA), 104 (C/S 32RA-1R) handle Int first on the case, 149 (C/S 44R)
Full Flow Table, 100 (C/S 32RA), 103 handling auditors,
(C/S 32RA-1R) 3 rules, 186 (C/S 61)
by C/S, 61 (C/S 16)
handwriting,
G c/s insists on legible, 196 (C/S 66)
order to practice, 186 (C/S 61)
gain(s), hasn’t made it, pc who, 153 (C/S 46)
case, and drugs, 156 (C/S 48R) HDC,
holding, 218 (C/S 77) Cl IV auditors can repair a messed-up Int,
negative,31 (C/S6) 115(C/S35RA)
no case, 138 (C/S 38) pcs after going Ext do, 117 (C/S 35RA)
pc becoming more himself, 162 (C/S 51) Health Form,
physical, 26-27 (C/S 5) after Pc Assessment Form, 169 (C/S 54)
rapid, 3 (C/S 1) part of chronic somatic program, 57
solid, 14 (C/S 2) (C/S 15)
study gives case gain, 138 (C/S 38) HGC,
genius, a whole new, 84 (C/S 25)
in C/Sing, 10 (C/S 2) disintegration, 225 (C/S 81R)
of a C/S, 19 (C/S 3) fantastic new line, 81-85 (C/S 25), 96
getting the F/N to the Examiner, 56 (C/S 15) (C/S 30)
GF 40 for resistive cases, 51-52 (C/S 13R) how to get results in, 172 (C/S 56)
GF 40XRR, 231 (C/S 83RA) splendid sessions, 146 (C/S 42)
glasses obstructing seeing the meter, 80 Hidden,
(C/S 24), 209 (C/S 72) Data Line, decay of tech, 148 (C/S 43)
glossary of C/S terms, 48 (C/S 12) Data Line, stamping it out, 179-80 (C/S 57)
goofs are few in type, 42 (C/S 10) Standards, process for, 86 (C/S 26)

SUBJECT INDEX—CASE SUPERVISOR SERIES


High Crime for a C/S not to write C/S inexperienced auditor, 191 (C/S 63)
instructions, 44 (C/S 11) insane behavior, apparent pattern of, 74
high TA, (C/S 22)
and ARC Breaks, 143 (C/S 41) insanity, 169 (C/S 54)
and exteriorization, 4 (C/S 1),106 definition of, 73 (C/S 22)
(C/S 33RA), 109-10 (C/S 33RA-1) higher percent of, 72 (C/S 22)
and flows, 105 (C/S 33RA), 108 (C/S 33RA-1), insecurity, Advanced Course material, 95
129-30 (C/S 37R) (C/S 29)
and illness, 58 (C/S 15) institutional cases, steps IX to XVII work
and low TA breakthrough, 127 (C/S 37R) on, 26 (C/S 5)
and word clearing, 247 (C/S 92R) instruct by reference to HCO B, 233 (C/S 84)
chronic, 28 (C/S 6) Int; see interiorization
or low, 117 (C/S 35RA) intensives, 121/2 hour, 139 (C/S 39R)
or low on Q & A, 33 (C/S 7) interest,
right way to handle, 213 (C/S 74) on drug items, 229 (C/S 82)
same action or Grade done twice, 145 (C/S 42) on drugs, 236 (C/S 85)
source of, 105 (C/S 33RA), 108 (C/S 33RA-I) on evil purposes or intentions, 229
usual reasons for, 56 (C/S 15) (C/S 82), 236 (C/S 85)
higher levels, assessing pcs to, 144 (C/S 41) interiorization,
Hi-1o TA assessment, errors, 115 (C/S 35RA)
and Int RD, 4 (C/S 1) handled first, 149 (C/S 44R)
rules, 131 (C/S37RAdd.) isaremedy,77(C/S23RA)
Short, 165-67 (C/S 53RJ) remedy, 109 (C/S 33RA-1)
honesty, Rundown,
and test lines, 208 (C/S 71A) a Dianetic action, 120 (C/S 36RB),
of an auditor, 226 (C/S 81R) 125 (C/S 36RB-1R)
of Scientology, 153 (C/S 46) and Flow Zero, 92 (C/S 28RA-1), 102
hours, (C/S 32RA-1R)
not counted on a salvage red tag session, Corr List, 116 (C/S 35RA), 230
227 (C/S 81-1RA) (C/S 83RA)
successfully audited, 59 (C/S 16) possible exceptions to, 19 (C/S 3)
how to, procedure, 130 (C/S 37R)
get results in an HGC, 172 (C/S 56) repair, 185 (C/S 60)
write up a cramming order, 204 (C/S 70R) when handled, 90 (C/S 28RA), 92
human, (C/S 28RA-1), 151 (C/S 44R Add.)
emotion and reaction, 170 (C/S 55) summary, 76-78 (C/S 23RA)
Evaluation Chart, 35 (C/S 8) interne(s), 163 (C/S 52)
definition of, 163 (C/S 52)
I doing FESes, 65 (C/S 19)
Interviews, PTS, 222 (C/S 79)
ideal folder-C/S line, 82 (C/S 25) invalidate button, use of, 3 (C/S 1)
if it isn’t written it isn’t true, 9 (C/S 1), invalidated, repairing handled repairs makes
148 (C/S 43) case feel, 62 (C/S 17)
ill, invalidation,
pc physically, 94 (C/S 29) auditor, by C/S, 147 (C/S 43)
pcs becoming, 16 (C/S 3) kills auditors, 180 (C/S 57)
illegal patch-ups, 95 (C/S 29) remarks by C/S, 60 (C/S 16)
illness, item(s),
cause of, 216 (C/S 76) blow up F/N, 141 (C/S 40)
high TA and, 58 (C/S 15) confusions on reading, 80 (C/S 24)
run out narrative R3R Triples, 168 (C/S 54) Dianetic, never run twice, 5 (C/S 1)
incomplete cases, 62 (C/S 17) flows of, 129-30 (C/S 37R)
indicators, found out of session, 220 (C/S 78)
reliable, TA and cognitions, 30 (C/S 6) giving the pc the, 133 (C/S 37R Add. 3)
untruths and auditor bad, 186 (C/S 61) metering reading, 79-80 (C/S 24)

SUBJECT INDEX—CASE SUPERVISOR SERIES


item(s) (cont.) list(s) (cont)
running an unreading item and Int, 76 reconstruct the, 220 (C/S 78)
(C/S 23RA) repair, 185 (C/S 60)
suppress and invalidate on an, 3 (C/S 1) trouble and C/S directions, 3 (C/S 1)
unreading, 3 (C/S 1), 56, 58 (C/S 15), trouble and prepared lists to handle, 3
80 (C/S 24) (C/S 1)
wrong, and upset case, 221 (C/S 78) use of correction, 209 (C/S 72), 230-32
Ivory Tower, 170 (C/S 55) (C/S 83RA)
listing out of session, 220 (C/S 78)
J long C/Ses, 87 (C/S 27)
lost folder, 66 (C/S 19)
judgment in, low TA(s), 28, 29 (C/S 6),141 (C/S 40)
C/Sing for auditors, 191 (C/S 63) and flows, 129 (C/S 37R)
ending session, 2 (C/S 1) and word clearing, 247 (C/S 92R)
assessing, 129 (C/S 37R), 132
K (C/S 37R Add. 2R)
assessment, 141 (C/S 40)
key out, engrams or secondaries or locks, 56 case, thorough job must be done on, 131
(C/S 15) (C/S 37R Add.)
know before you go, 188 (C/S 62) overwhelming flow and out TRs can cause,
knowledge, a C/S’s, 183 (C/S 58) 129 (C/S 37R)
pc in apathy, overwhelmed or run on flat
L or unreading item, 58 (C/S 15)
quits, 143 (C/S 41)
L1 C, 230 (C/S 83RA) same action will bring it up again, 143
L3RD, 119 (C/S 36RB), 123-24 (C/S 36RB-1R), (C/S 41)
231 (C/S 83RA)
L4BR, 231 (C/S 83RA) M
L9S,
using, 135 (C/S 37R Add. 3) major action(s),
works on all cases, 133 (C/S 37R Add. 3) and case set-ups, 6 (C/S 1)
L IX Hi-1o TA List, 230 (C/S 83RA) and No-Interference Area, 212 (C/S 73)
Library, Cramming must have a, 148 (C/S 43) definition of, 6 (C/S 1)
life, mixing, 136 (C/S 38)
interjections, reasons for intensives, 137 major auditing actions, 211 (C/S 73)
(C/S 38) mandatory C/Sing checklist, 200-02 (C/S 69R)
pc’s, if not audited before, 147 (C/S 43) mannerism changes, C/S request for, 36 (C/S 8)
Repair and Drug Rundown, 248 (C/S 93) mass and overrun, 127 (C/S 37R)
Repair and Grade Chart, 249 (C/S 93) massy thetans, 105-06 (C/S 33RA), 109
Repairs (Progress), 63 (C/S 17) (C/S 33RA-1)
lighter not heavier action regarding Effect meaning of things secondary to forces in
Scale, 18 (C/S 3) processing, 28 (C/S 6)
list(s), medicine, treat like drugs, 168 (C/S 54)
Dianetic, and wrong list reactions, 221 mental,
(C/S 78) masses-forces-energy, 29 (C/S 6)
errors, Dianetic, 184 (C/S 59) treatment, run out, 168 (C/S 54)
handle after Int, 149 (C/S 44R), 151 meter check at Success, 208 (C/S 71A)
(C/S 44R Add.) metering,
numbers of, 210 (C/S 72) and correction lists, 209 (C/S 72)
out, 221 (C/S 78) and failed sessions, 244 (C/S 90)
out of valence, 162 (C/S 51) reading items, 79-80 (C/S 24)
outness, 86 (C/S 26) reading items, data unknown can cost case
prepared, 149 (C/S 44R), 151 (C/S 44R Add.) failures, 80 (C/S 24)
prepared, and C/S data, 188 (C/S 62) Method 3, 210 (C/S 72)
question not reading, 3 (C/S 1 ) Method 5, how to do GF, 86 (C/S 26)

SUBJECT INDEX—CASE SUPERVISOR SERIES


method of use of correction lists, 210 (C/S 72) operations, run out if reads, 168 (C/S 54)
mighty weapon—new uses for the Green Form, 86 opinion, auditor, not important, 171 (C/S 55)
(C/S 26) optimum rate of change and standard
mimicry and repair, 20 (C/S 3) processes, 36 (CjS 8)
misprogramming and programming, 99 (C/S 31) order, C/S standing, 213 (C/S 74)
mixing major actions, TRs Course and auditing, Org C/S responsible for all cases, 96 (C/S 30)
136 (C/S 38) out,
more auditing, pcs who haven’t made it sign up of ARC, 128 (C/S 37R)
for, 153 (C/S 46) of valence, 162 (C/S 51)
motivator, pc will not recover fully if only points, a case is a collection of, 21 (C/S 4)
run, 74 (C/S 22) points, a C/S should spot, 199 (C/S 68)
mutual out ruds, program plays havoc with pcs, 16 (C/S 3)
handling, 246 (C/S 91) ruds, mutual, 246 (C/S 91)
routine check for, 246 (C/S 91) tech, flagrant, and non-F/Ning pcs, 112
(C/S 34)
N TRs, 129 (C/S 37R)
TRs and failed sessions, 244 (C/S 90)
nature of man, basically good, 73 (C/S 22) TRs, remedy for, 244 (C/S 90)
never, overload, what is, 253 (C/S 94)
blame the pc, 146 (C/S 42) overrepair, 147 (C/S 43)
make trouble, 147 (C/S 43) and thorough C/Ses, 88 (C/S 27)
new, overrun(s),
Grade Chart, 248 (C/S 93) and Full Flow Dianetics, 119-20 (C/S 36RB),
items from worksheets for C/S, 27 (C/S 5) 124 (C/S 36RB-1R)
uses for the Green Form, 86 (C/S 26) and Int, 77 (C/S 23RA)
no, flagrant, 113 (C/S 34)
materials on tech courses, 178-79 (C/S 57) listing for, 128 (C/S 37R)
mention, session grading, 59-60 (C/S 16) listing questions, 128 (C/S 37R)
read auditors, 142 (C/S 41) reverse action is continue, 128 (C/S 37R)
variables in what the pgms are, 27 (C/S 5) TAs go high on, 56 (C/S 15)
no-case-gain, remedy for, 255 (C/S 95) to audit, 127,128 (C/S 37R)
no interest, overshooting defined, 62 (C/S 17)
and Exp Dn on evil purposes or intentions, overt-motivator, running, 74 (C/S 22)
229 (C/S 82), 236 (C/S 85) overts on pcs, critical auditor, 8 (C/S 1)
items and Drug Rundowns, 229 (C/S 82), overwhelm,
236 (C/S 85) at Grade IV, 38 (C/S 9)
No-Interference Area, 211 (C/S 73) earlier Grades out, 32 (C/S 7)
non-confront and the C/S, 154 (C/S 47) handling the pc in, 17,18-19 (C/S 3)
non-F/N, indicates need of Repair and Return, 51
at Exam, flagrant out tech, 112 (C/S 34) (C/S 13R)
cases, 112 (C/S 34) pc generally right when says he’s
note on VIII auditing, 25 (C/S 5) overwhelmed or upset, 33 (C/S 7)
not making it, pc who is, 157 (C/S 48R) too steep a gradient or heavy a process, 28
nulling and F/Ning prepared lists, 240 (C/S 6)
(C/S 87)
P
O
pc,
objection to force by thetans, 28 (C/S 6) Assessment Form, 4 (C/S 1)
OCA(s), Assessment Sheet, begin Dianetics with,
D of P operates by, 205 (C/S 71) 168 (C/S 54)
graph, dropped, 162 (C/S 51) assignment, 226 (C/S 81R)
graph, out of valence, 162 (C/S 51) doing well, 65 (C/S 19)
word clearing, 207-08 (C/S 71A) in trouble, 106-07 (C/S 33RA), 110
OK to Audit, 163-64 (C/S 52) (C/S 33RA-1)

SUBJECT INDEX—CASE SUPERVISOR SERIES


pc (cont.) procurement,
in trouble and TA high, 116 (C/S 35RA) letters, 85 (C/S 25)
not in trouble, 106 (C/S 33RA), 110 new pc, 85 (C/S 25)
(C/S 33RA-1) product purpose and Why and WC error
reality and no change, 35 (C/S 8) correction, 220 (C/S 78)
search, 29 (C/S 6) program(s), programmed, programming,
too wild to audit, 20 (C/S 3) Advance; see Advance Program
when he’s made it sent to attest by C/S, and misprogramming, 99 (C/S 31 )
153 (C/S 46) and the C/S Series, 250 (C/S 93)
who knows what is wrong, 32 (C/S 7) and the Grade Chart, 250 (C/S 93)
perception, case incorrectly, 16,17 (C/S 3)
improves on flows, 169 (C/S 54) cases backwards, 182-83 (C/S 58)
reduces in ratio to overts, 154 (C/S 47) chronic somatic, 57 (C/S 15)
persistent F/N, 67 (C/S 20) crash training of auditors, 70 (C/S 21)
personal relationships and auditor’s rights, cross, 137-38 (C/S 38)
225 (C/S 81 R) current, on inside of folder, 145 (C/S 42)
pink paper, Progress Program is on, 88 definition of, 6 (C/S 1),10 (C/S 2)
(C/S 27) Dianetic, and drugs, 158 (C/S 48R)
plus points, the big, 98 (C/S 30) Dianetics, correct, 169 (C/S 54)
points on case supervision, 4445 (C/S 11) dispersing away from, 11 (C/S 2)
Potential Trouble Source; see PTS EP, 147 (C/S 43)
Power, errors, 97 (C/S 30)
done twice, 97 (C/S 30),145 (C/S 42) from prepared lists, 149-50 (C/S 44R)
repair, 24-25 (C/S 5) from White Form, 169 (C/S 54)
PRD and auditor flubs, 233 (C/S 84) for flubless auditing, 176-81 (C/S 57)
preOTs don’t C/S, 214-15 (C/S 75) hopeful, 99 (C/S 31)
prepared lists, intelligently, 190 (C/S 62)
and auditor eyesight, 240 (C/S 87) interjected by pc, 137 (C/S 38)
and metering, 240 (C/S 87) length of, 87 (C/S 27)
and misunderstood words, 240 (C/S 87) long, saves C/S time, 37 (C/S 9)
and out TRs, 240 (C/S 87), 244 (C/S 90) major errors in, lay case open to
and the C/S, 240 (C/S 87) goofed sessions, 16 (C/S 3)
and use of suppress and invalidate necessity of working on a case by, 13
buttons, 240 (C/S 87) (C/S 2)
combine finding out with handling, 189 of cases, 10 (C/S 2)
(C/S 62) of fat folder cases cover lists, 65 (C/S 19)
failure to use, 209 (C/S 72) principal six errors of, 99 (C/S 31)
F/Ning, 240 (C/S 87) Progress; see Progress Program
give C/S new data, 189 (C/S 62) quality, 99 (C/S 31)
not reading and not F/Ning, 240 (C/S 87) quickie, 219 (C/S 77)
requirements, 245 (C/S 90) recovery, 48 (C/S 12)
prepcheck, 2wc lighter than, 43 (C/S 10) Repair; see Repair Program
pressures on D of P, 33 (C/S 7); Return; see Return Program
see also D of P sequence of, 151 (C/S 44R Add.)
primary, short-cutting, 40 (C/S 9)
failure, 244 (C/S 90) standard 121h hour intensive, 139 (C/S 39R)
record is the pc’s folders, 190 (C/S 62) three types, 11 (C/S 2)
process(es), TRs are a major, 137,138 (C/S 38)
37R; see thirty-seven R (37R) visual idea, 138 (C/S 38)
jumping, 14 (C/S 2) violations, 7 (C/S 1)
misprogrammed lower level, 17 (C/S 3) winning, 147 (C/S 43)
short-cut, 40 (C/S 9) Progress Program, 44 (C/S 11), 48 (C/S 12),
should not be extracted, 151 (C/S 44R Add.) 87, 88 (C/S 27),145 (C/S 42),151
unflat, repair has priority, 16 (C/S 3) (C/S 44R Add.); see also Repair Program
use all for each Grade, 13 (C/S 2) sample, 139 (C/S 39R)

SUBJECT INDEX—CASE SUPERVISOR SERIES


protest and high TA, 150 (C/S 44R) Quad Dianetics (cont.)
psychiatrist is fading, 75 (C/S 22) safe actions, 125 (C/S 36RB-1R)
psychiatry descended into insane barbarism, use of, 91-93 (C/S 28RA-1), 102-04
14 (C/S 2) (C/S 32RA-1R)
psychosis, description of, 72-73 (C/S 22) Quadruple Dianetics, dangers of, 122
psychotic, (C/S 36RB-1R)
being, 74 (C/S 22) Qual,
motivation of, 74 (C/S 22) Cramming and auditor flubs, 244 (C/S 90)
PTP, 57 (C/S 15) library, 98 (C/S 30)
PTS, qualifications, auditor, 130 (C/S 37R)
alternative wording, 221 (C/S 78) quality,
Interviews, 222 (C/S 79) C/S, 99 (C/S 31)
Rundown, of auditing raised, 99 (C/S 31 )
Correction List, 231 (C/S 83RA) programming, 99 (C/S 31)
makes a person not PTS, 216 (C/S 76) questions,
product is a pc no longer PTS, 218 reading, 79-80 (C/S 24)
(C/S 77) unreading, 3 (C/S 1)
situation is the reason for illness and quickie, 38 (C/S 9)
loss of gains, 217 (C/S 76) defined, 218-19 (C/S 77)
SP tech, 217 (C/S 76) Drug Rundown, 229 (C/S 82)
staff, 194 (C/S 65R) Grades and action, 62-63 (C/S 17)
Grades crashed whole of Scientology
network, 38 (C/S 9)
Q Grades, technical bug behind, 68 (C/S 20)
Q and A, lower Grades, 26 (C/S 5)
and F/Ns, 243 (C/S 89) Power technical bugs, 68 (C/S 20)
C/S, 27 (C/S 5), 32-34 (C/S 7)
C/S, and programs, 243 (C/S 89) R
C/Sing a win, 33 (C/S 7)
next Grade please, 33 (C/S 7) R3R,
with F/Ns, the results of, 243 (C/S 89) commands, used on Quad Dianetics, 103
with significance, 34 (C/S 7) (C/S 32RA-1R)
Quad Dianetics, commands, used on Triple Dianetics, 101
and Dianetic remedies, 93 (C/S 28RA-1) (C/S 32RA)
and Int RD, 102 (C/S 32RA-1R) flubbed, 76 (C/S 23RA)
and OTs, 104 (C/S 32RA-1R) R6EW, falsely gotten to, 22 (C/S 4)
and upper level auditors, 93 (C/S 28RA-1) rabbit, a preOT can, 215 (C/S 75)
auditor checkout of, 92 (C/S 28RA-1) rabbiting druggie, 211 (C/S 73)
auditor errors in running, 172 (C/S 36RB-1R) reach and withdraw, 20 (C/S 3)
cancelled, 76 (C/S 23RA) read,
C/Sing, 91 (C/S 28RA-1) no, suspected by C/S, 80 (C/S 24)
dangers of, 122-26 (C/S 36RB-1R) the most stopped, 128 (C/S 37R)
flows, 103 (C/S 32RA-1R) reading items, 149-50 (C/S 44R)
getting in all flows, 102 (C/S 32RA-1 R), data unknown can cost case failures, 80
109 (C/S 33RA-1) (C/S 24)
and firefights, 110 (C/S 33RA-1) metering, 79-80 (C/S 24)
and repair, 103-04 (C/S 32RA-1R) reads gotten on clearing commands, 142
rehab or run, 110 (C/S 33RA-1) (C/S 41)
multiple somatic items, 103 (C/S 32RA-1 R) red sheet, Repair Program is on, 14 (C/S 2),
narrative items, 103 (C/S 32RA-1R) 44 (C/S 11)
promotion of, 93 (C/S 28RA-1) red tab word clearing errors, 247 (C/S 92R)
requirements to run, 122 (C/S 36RB-1R) red tag,
reruns, triple and, 108 (C/S 33RA-1) and use of correction lists, 227 (C/S 81-1 RA)
results of, 93 (C/S 28RA-1), 110 auditor is expected to handle, 237
(C/S 33RA-1) (C/S 86RD)

SUBJECT INDEX—CASE SUPERVISOR SERIES


red tag (cont.) Repair Program (cont.)
daily action, 238 (C/S 86RD) example, 24-25 (C/S 5)
line, 237-38 (C/S 86RD) gets off overwhelm, 21 (C/S 4)
Pc Examiner makes a daily list of all programming, BPC, 18 (C/S 3)
red tags, 238 (C/S 86RD) the case, 17 (C/S 3)
penalty for not handling, 227 (C/S 81-1RA), using lists and errors in current life, 13
239 (C/S 86RD) (C/S 2)
second, 227 (C/S 81-1RA) when done, 250 (C/S 93)
when a folder is red tagged, 237 (C/S 86RD) report(s),
who takes it off, 238 (C/S 86RD) after session Examiner’s, 46 (C/S 11)
reduction of refunds—C/Ses and overload, auditor’s, 46 (C/S 11)
252-53 (C/S 94) out admin—liability, 4647 (C/S 11)
refusing to audit pcs, 1 (C/S 1) resistive cases,
reason why, 225 (C/S 81 R) an VIII development now on GF, 51
Registrar sells auditing not “Repair Pgm”, (C/S 13R)
26 (C/S 5) won’t make case gains until drugs are
rehab, handled, 156 (C/S 48R)
correction action on wins is rehab, not resistive, tagged by C/S, 189 (C/S 62)
repair, 33 (C/S 7) result(s),
of chains, 118-19 (C/S 36RB), 123 honest C/Sing gives honest, 41 (C/S 9)
(C/S 36RB-1R) orgs didn’t attain result on the pc, 38
of chains left unflat, 113-14 (C/S 34) (C/S 9)
on Grade done twice, 112 (C/S 34) reorganize to get, when only 65% F/Ning
past major action, 105 (C/S 33RA), sessions occur, 173 (C/S 56)
108 (C/S 33RA-1) retrain, retraining, 233 (C/S 84)
remedy, auditors, 69 (C/S 21)
for auditor who says his pcs are “dogs”, auditors from Missions, 235 (C/S 84-1)
223 (C/S 80) flunk and, 60 (C/S 16)
for C/S who agrees with auditor about retread, 233 (C/S 84)
“dog pcs”, 223-24 (C/S 80) Return Program(s), 11, 14 (C/S 2), 21 (C/S 4);
for org, 174-75 (C/S 56) see also Advance Program
Int is a, 77-78 (C/S 23RA) definition and example, 22 (C/S 4)
lighter for the worse off case, 18 (C/S 3) is for return to the false point, 22 (C/S 4)
repair(s), repairing, 221 (C/S 78) now called Advance Programs, 44 (C/S 11)
a repair, 4243 (C/S 10) old, 22 (C/S 4)
action, product purpose and Why and word Review C/S looks over the sessions, 83 (C/S 25)
clearing error correction, 220 (C/S 78) reviewing,
an auditor, 232 (C/S 83RA) folders, 4546 (C/S 11)
and case gain, 232 (C/S 83RA) reviews, 8 (C/S 1)
and Full Flow Dianetics, 101 (C/S 32RA) R-factor, never give future or past, 142
and high TA, 116 (C/S 35RA) (C/S 41)
and “no interest” items, 229 (C/S 82), ridges and flows, 129 (C/S 37R)
236 (C/S 85) rise, use of in 37R on low TAs, 141 (C/S 40)
and preOTs, 211 (C/S 73) Rising Scale, 40 (C/S 9)
definition and data on, 6 (C/S 1) risk of FFD, Int-Ext RD and Power, 121
delays in, 16 (C/S 2) (C/S 36RB), 125 (C/S 36RB-1 R)
Dianetic, of flubs by L3, 169 (C/S 54) roller-coaster, 72 (C/S 22)
for pc running badly, 4 (C/S 1) and drugs, 156 (C/S 48R)
of Int, 77 (C/S 23RA) rudiments, ruds,
Program, 62 (C/S 17),145 (C/S 42); and GF, 3 (C/S 1)
see also Progress Program and high TA, 4 (C/S 1)
accepting a new, 2 (C/S 1) and long C/Ses, 87 (C/S 27)
and their priority, 16 (C/S 3) and sessions far apart, 3 (C/S 1)
dated session by session, 14 (C/S 2) auditing over out, 2-3 (C/S 1),149,150
EP of, 17 (C/S 3), 232 (C/S 83RA) (C/S 44R)

SUBJECT INDEX—CASE SUPERVISOR SERIES


rudiments, ruds (cont.) seniors,
definition and data, 6 (C/S 1) C/S (for tech) and D of P (for auditors
getting one’s own in, 8 (C/S 1) and bodies), 84 (C/S 25)
going out and handling, 5-6 (C/S 1) in tech, 178 (C/S 57)
handle after Int and lists, 149 (C/S 44R), sequence,
151 (C/S 44R Add.) new, Tech Services lines, 82-84 (C/S 25)
in 2-way comm, 54-55 (C/S 14) of programs, 51 (C/S 44R Add.)
inability to fly, 3 (C/S 1) overt-motivator, 74 (C/S 22)
life knocking out, 94 (C/S 29) session(s),
mutual out, 246 (C/S 91) by-passed charge, 18,19 (C/S 3)
out, don’t audit with, 2-3 (C/S 1),149, continued, rule, 214 (C/S 75)
150 (C/S 44R) C/S for several, 214 (C/S 75)
out during 37R, 133 (C/S 37R Add. 3) Dianetic, 87 (C/S 27)
put in after Int and list repair, 185 economical, 87 (C/S 27)
(C/S 60) ending the, 2 (C/S 1)
suppress and false, 3 (C/S 1) grading by C/S, 59-60 (C/S 16)
rule; see also rules grading form, 81 (C/S 25)
auditor, F/N before next C/S action, 136 grading—Well Done, definition of, 59
(C/S 38) (C/S 16)
blow up and 37R, low TAs, 141 (C/S 40) logged, 81 (C/S 25)
broad, and C/Sing, 189 (C/S 62) priorities-Repair Programs and their
continued session, 214 (C/S 75) priority, 16 (C/S 3)
firm, C/S only with all folders to hand, running badly, 4 (C/S 1)
45 (C/S 11) scheduling and programs, 3 (C/S 1)
general, return to where case was running splendid HGC, 146 (C/S 42)
well, 113 (C/S 34) starts, don’t mix them, 143 (C/S 41)
mandatory, Cramming Of ficer in all that went wrong, 9 (C/S 1 )
HGCs, 199 (C/S 68) violent, ARC Break, 184 (C/S 59)
the Ivory Tower, 170 (C/S 55) set up(s),
rules; see also rule definition, 6 (C/S 1)
c/s; see c/s rules for next major action, 146 (C/S 42)
exact tech application, 152 (C/S 45) when Repair Program concluded case is,
firm, on auditing the insane, 74 (C/S 22) 21 (C/S 4)
first aid, 160 (C/S 49R) seven flows, 131 (C/S 37R Add.)
Hi-1o TA assessment, 131 (C/S 37R Add.) Sheet, Pc Assessment, 168 (C/S 54)
major C/S, for TRs Course, 136 (C/S 38) short-cutting,
of C/Sing 2-way comm, 54-55 (C/S 14) processes, 40 (C/S 9)
three golden, of the C/S, 186-87 (C/S 61) programs, 40 (C/S 9)
to improve tech results you must improve short Hi-1o TA assessment C/S,
administration, 172 (C/S 56) 165 (C/S 53RJ)
TR Course and auditing, 136 (C/S 38) sickly and feeble cases, 87 (C/S 27)
two, complete and incomplete actions on sick pcs,
a case, 63 (C/S 17) a lot of things to do for, 39 (C/S 9)
an indicator of wild program, C/S and
auditing error, 113 (C/S 34)
S sick person is PTS, 222 (C/S 79)
significances, no change when only
sanity is basically honesty and truth, 208 addressed, 35 (C/S 8)
(C/S 71A) significance, the search of the pc is for, 29
self-auditing, (C/S 6)
and handling, 94 (C/S 29) simplicity of running Int, 117 (C/S 35RA)
manifestation of overwhelm, 35 (C/S 8) skill,
reason for, 220 (C/S 78) and talking the TA down, 213 (C/S 74)
symptom of session or study or life auditing, improvement of, between R6
overwhelm, 16-17 (C/S 3) and OT III, 212 (C/S 73)

SUBJECT INDEX—CASE SUPERVISOR SERIES


solo, TA(s) (cont.)
D of P keeps tabs on all solo pcs, 214-15 Hi-Lo, assessment rules, 131 (C/S 37R Add.)
(C/S 75) low; see low TA
failure on, 212 (C/S 73) masses and ridges, 127 (C/S 37R)
pcs on lines, 214 (C/S 75) short Hi-Lo, assessment C/S, 165
set-ups, 249 (C/S 93) (C/S 53RJ)
somatics, chronic; see chronic somatics talking the TA down modified, 213 (C/S 74)
speed liability, 4041 (C/S 9) team activity, auditing is a, 172 (C/S 56)
stable data, HCO Bs and tapes are the, 148 tech,
(C/S 43) action regarding repair, 26 (C/S 5)
staff is the public of a Staff C/S, 194 advice, giving, 178 (C/S 57)
(C/S 65R) degrades, 241 (C/S 88R)
stale-dated, degrades and down stats, 241 (C/S 88R)
C/S, 2 (C/S 1) degrades, handling, 24142 (C/S 88R)
pgm, 2 (C/S 1) degrades, policy covering, 24142 (C/S 88R)
stalled cases and mutual out ruds, 248 exactness, 152 (C/S 45)
(C/S 91 ) out, flagrant and non-F/Ns, 112 (C/S 34)
standard, pages, 84 (C/S 25)
121/2 hour intensive programs, 139 (C/S 39R) Services, 82 (C/S 25)
auditing, 57 (C/S 15) Services, new sequence, 82-84 (C/S 25)
auditing actions, 218 (C/S 77) suppressive person, 162 (C/S 51)
tech, was it applied, 46 (C/S 11) technical point, sending pc to attest, 153
standing order from C/S to his auditors, 213 (C/S 46)
(C/S 74) testing for read, 54 (C/S 14)
stats of, test person, 207 (C/S 71A)
auditors, 226 (C/S 81R) tests,
C/S, 226 (C/S 81R) and D of P, 205-06 (C/S 71)
the D of P, 226 (C/S 81R) OCA, etc., 207 (C/S 71A)
stop, effort to, 127 (C/S 37R) thirty-seven R (37R),
study, don’ts regarding, 134-35 (C/S 37R Add. 3)
Correction List, 231 (C/S 83RA) Hi-Lo TA assessment rules, 131
rundowns, 95 (C/S 29) (C/S 37R Add.)
success, low TA assessing, 132 (C/S 37R Add. 2R)
meter check at, 208 (C/S 71A) process commands, 128 (C/S 37R)
stories, real stat of an org, 38 (C/S 9) ruds, 133 (C/S 37R Add. 3)
Summaries, Folder Error; see Folder Error special, 135 (C/S 37R Add. 3)
Summaries steps, 134 (C/S 37R Add. 3)
summary, three golden rules of the C/S—handling
each session, 145 (C/S 42) auditors, 186 (C/S 61)
session, and preOTs, 215 (C/S 75) tick, note, 79 (C/S 24)
superficial actions and fast quick results, 37 tone,
(C/S 9) emotional, 72 (C/S 22)
suppress button, use of, 3 (C/S 1) improvement of, 205 (C/S 71)
suppressive, lowered, 221 (C/S 78)
pc, 222 (C/S 79) tools of,
person, 72 (C/S 22) a C/S, 183 (C/S 58)
supreme test of a C/S, 154 (C/S 47) auditing, 182 (C/S 58)
symptoms of insanity are from the same cause, Touch Assist, 160 (C/S 49R)
73 (C/S 22) and reach and withdraw, 20 (C/S 3)
exception to Repair Pgm, 7 (C/S 1)
T training,
a pc who has trouble needs, 49 (C/S 12)
TA(s), C/S responsibility, 69-71 (C/S 21)
goes up after 37R, 133 (C/S 37R Add. 3) of ficer of auditing, 176 (C/S 57)
high; see high TA stages, 69 (C/S 21)

SUBJECT INDEX—CASE SUPERVISOR SERIES


Triple(s), V
always run Dianetic, 74 (C/S 22)
and OTs, 101 (C/S 32RA) valence,
and Ouad reruns, 108 (C/S 33RA-1) out of, 162 (C/S 51)
C/Sing, 89 (C/S 28RA) shifter, LX1 LX2 LX3 can be done triple,
Dianetic, 7 (C/S 1) 52 (C/S 13R)
Flow Dianetics, 89 (C/S 28RA)
Flows, 100 (C/S 32RA) W
getting in all flows, 106 (C/S 33RA)
and firefights, 107 (C/S 33RA) waiver, 33 (C/S 7)
and repair, 101 (C/S 32RA) well done auditing hour, 81 (C/S 25)
rehab or run, 107 (C/S 33RA) “well done”, definition of, 59, 61 (C/S 16)
multiple somatic items, 101 (C/S 32RA) what the C/S is doing, 28 (C/S 6)
narrative items, 101 (C/S 32RA) Why, Cramming finds the real, 199 (C/S 68)
PTP for C/S, 161 (C/S 50) widening of F/N, 67-68 (C/S 20)
reruns, 105 (C/S 33RA) wide vision in session, 80 (C/S 24)
safe actions, 120 (C/S 36RB) win, let the pc have his, 67 (C/S 20)
TRs, 118 (C/S 36RB), 122-23 (C/S 36RB-1R) wins,
and correction lists, 209-10 (C/S 72) a C/S wants, 152 (C/S 45)
and Cramming, 20 (C/S 3) as items, 27 (C/S 5)
and drugs, 20 (C/S 3),157 (C/S 48R) org, 174 (C/S 56)
and No-Interference Area, 211-12 word clearing,
(C/S 73) and F/Ning each word, 247 (C/S 92R)
Course and auditing—mixing major actions, Correction List, 231 (C/S 83RA)
136 (C/S 38) each word of each command, 218 (C/S 77)
major program, 137,138 (C/S 38) errors, 247 (C/S 92R)
trust earned by great results, 170 (C/S 55) OCAs, 207 (C/S 71A)
truth and declares, 153 (C/S 46) on auditors, 178, 179-80 (C/S 57)
two-way comm, worksheets,
in repair, 16 (C/S 3) auditor’s, 196 (C/S 66)
on BD items in repair, 87 (C/S 27) Contact Assist, 247 (C/S 92R)
ruds in, 54-55 (C/S 14) “non-session”, 247 (C/S 92R)
rules of C/Sing, 54-55 (C/S 14) PTS Interview, 222 (C/S 79)
Touch Assist, 247 (C/S 92R)
U Why finding, 247 (C/S 92R)
word clearing, 247 (C/S 92R)
unconscious pc, audited off a meter, 160 worst tangle, 185 (C/S 60)
(C/S 49R)
undershooting, a defeating error, 62 Y
(C/S 17)
unflat, yellow tabs on folder of PTSs, 217 (C/S 76)
chain left, 69 (C/S 21)
engram chains, 28 (C/S 6), 56 (C/S 15) Z
on Dianetics, 13,14 (C/S 2)
process has priority, 16 (C/S 3) Zero Flow, 100 (C/S 32RA), 102,103
R6EW, 22 (C/S 4) (C/S 32RA-1R), 107 (C/S 33RA),
unreading question, 3 (C/S 1) 110 (C/S 33RA-1)
unrun flows, 113 (C/S 34) and Int-Ext RD, 92 (C/S 28RA-1)
use of, and Introspection RD, 101 (C/S 32RA)
correction lists, 209 (C/S 72) command, 103 (C/S 32RA-1R), 109
Dianetics, 89 (C/S 28RA), 100 (C/S 33RA-1)
(C/S 32RA)
Quad Dianetics, 102 (C/S 32RA-1R)
Quadruple Dianetics, 91 (C/S 28RA-1)

CASE SUPERVISOR SERIES

ALPHABETICAL LIST OF TITLES



Assists (5 July 71R, C/S 49R) 159 Dangers of Quadruple Dianetics
Auditing of Staff & Public (21 Apr. 71-1 R, C/S 36RB-1 R) 122
(BTB 6 Oct. 71R, C/S 65R) 194 Declares (19 June 71, C/S 46) 153
Auditor’s Rights (23 Aug. 71, C/S 1) 1 Dianetic Case Supervisor’s Index, The
Auditor’s Rights Addition Revised (BTB 25 Apr. 71R) 255
(BTB 28 Dec. 72RA, C/S 81-1 RA) 227 Dianetic Handling of Chronic Somatic
Auditor’s Rights Modified (11 Sept. 70, C/S 18) 64
(16 June 72R, C/S 81R) 225 Dianetic HCO B—Interest
Auditor’s Worksheets (3 Nov. 71, C/S 66) 196 (10 Aug. 72, C/S 82) 229
Beginning a Pc on Dianetics Dianetic List Errors
(28 July 71, C/S 54) 168 (14 Sept. 71, C/S 59) 184
Case Actions, Off Line (8 Mar. 71, C/S 29) 94 Dianetics (21 Apr. 71RB, C/S 36RB) 118
Catastrophes From and Repair of “No Dianetics, Beginning a Pc on
Interest” Items (13 Sept. 72, C/S 85) 236 (28 July 71, C/S 54) 168
Chart of Human Evaluation D of P Operates by OCAs
(19 June 70, C/S 8) 35 (19 Dec. 71, C/S 71) 205
Chronic Somatic, Dianetic Handling of “Dog Pcs” (15 June 72, C/S 80) 223
(11 Sept. 70, C/S 18) 64 Drug Handling (15 July 71, C/S 48R) 156
Code of a C/S, The “Failed” Cases (26 Oct. 75, C/S 95) 254
(BTB 30 Nov. 71 R, C/S 67) 197 Fantastic New HGC Line, The
Correction Lists (5 Mar. 71, C/S 25) 81
(BTB 11 Aug. 72RA, C/S 83RA) 230 Flubless C/Sing (16 Aug. 72, C/S 84) 233
C/S and Cramming Cycles, The Flubless C/Sing in Missions
(BTB 8 Dec. 71, C/S 68) 199 (BTB 16 Aug. 72-1, C/S 84-1) 235
C/S as a Training Officer, A—A Program F/Ning Auditors (5 Oct. 71, C/S 64) 193
for Flubless Auditing F/N What You Ask or Program
(1 Sept. 71, C/S 57) 176 (20 Nov. 73, C/S 89) 243
C/S Case Gain (15 July 71, C/S 50) 161 Folder Error Summaries
C/Ses and Overload—Reduction of (6 Oct. 70, C/S 19) 65
Refunds (25 Sept. 74, C/S 94) 254 Getting the F/N to Examiner
C/Sing a PTS Rundown (High, Low TAs and Chronic Somatics)
(17 Apr. 72, C/S 76) 216 (16 Aug. 70, C/S 15) 56
C/Sing Auditor-C/Ses (19 Mar. 71, C/S 30) 96 Glossary of C/S Terrr.s
C/Sing Checklist (3 Jan. 72, C/S 69 Add.) 203 (25 June 70, C/S 12) 48
C/Sing for New Auditors or Veterans Handling Auditors—The Three Golden
(2 Oct. 71, C/S 63) 191 Rules of the C/S (22 Sept. 71, C/S 61) 186
C/Sing 2-Way Comm (3 July 70, C/S 14) 54 High and Low TA Breakthrough
C/S Q and A (19 June 70, C/S 7) 32 (3 June 71, C/S 37R) 127
C/S Responsibility for Training Hi-Lo TA Assessment Rules
(10 Nov. 70, C/S 21) 69 (15 June 71, C/S 37R Add.) 131
C/S Rules (9 June 71, C/S 42) 145 How To Get Results in an HGC
C/S Rules (9 June 71, C/S 43) 147 (25 Aug. 71, C/S 56) 172
C/S Rules (19 June 71, C/S 45) 152 How To Write Up a Cramming Order
C/S Rules—Programming From Prepared (BTB 12 Dec. 71R, C/S 70R) 204
Lists (10 June 71, C/S 44R) 149 Incomplete Cases (26 Aug. 70, C/S 17) 62
44R—C/S Rules—The Sequence Interiorization Errors
of Programs (16 Dec. 71RA, C/S 35RA) 115
(BTB 3 1 Oct. 7 1, C/S 44R Add.) 151 Interiorization Summary
C/S Series 11 (25 June 70, C/S 11) 44 (17 Dec. 71 R, C/S 23RA) 76
C/S Series 37R Addition 3 Interest—Dianetic HCO B
(26 June 71, C/S 37R Add. 3) 133 (10 Aug. 72, C/S 82) 229
C/S Tips (9 June 71, C/S 41) 142 Internes (19 July 71, C/S 52) 163

Ivory Tower, The (8 Aug. 71, C/S 55) 170 Repair Example (15 June 70, C/S 5) 24
Know Before You Go Repairing a Repair (24 June 70, C/S 10) 42
(28 Sept. 71, C/S 62) 188 Repair Pgms and Their Priority—Session
Long C/Ses (6 Mar. 71, C/S 27) 87 Priorities (13 June 70, C/S 3) 16
Low TA Assessing Return Program, The (14 June 70, C/S 4) 21
(16 June 71R, C/S 37R Add. 2R) 132 Sequence of Programs, The—44R—C/S
LowTAs(7June71,C/S40) 141 Rules(BTB31 Oct.71,C/S44RAdd.) 151
Mandatory C/Sing Checklist Session Grading—Well Done, Definition
(BTB 12 Dec. 71R, C/S 69R) 200 of (21 Aug. 70, C/S 16) 59
Metering Reading Items Session Priorities—Repair Pgms and
(28 Feb. 71, C/S 24) 79 Their Priority (13 June 70, C/S 3) 16
Mixing Major Actions—TRs Course and Short Hi-Lo TA Assessment C/S
Auditing (26 May 71, C/S 38) 136 (24 Nov. 73RB, C/S 53RJ) 165
Mutual Out Ruds (17 Feb. 74, C/S 91) 246 Standard 121h Hour Intensive Programs
New Grade Chart (31 Aug. 74, C/S 93) 248 (31 May 71R, C/S 39R) 139
New Uses for the Green Form Superficial Actions (21 June 70, C/S 9) 37
(6 Mar. 71, C/S 26) 86 Supreme Test of a C/S, The
No-Interference Area, The (20 June 71, C/S 47) 154
(23 Dec. 71, C/S 73) 211 Talking the TA Down Modified
Non-F/N Cases (6 Apr. 71, C/S 34) 112 (16 Feb. 72, C/S 74) 213
Nulling and F/Ning Prepared Lists Tech Degrades
(15 Oct. 73, C/S 87) 240 (BTB 22 Oct. 73R, C/S 88R) 241
Out of Valence (17 July 71, C/S 51) 162 Three Golden Rules of the C/S, The
Persistent F/N (8 Oct. 70, C/S 20) 67 —Handling Auditors
PreOTs Don’t C/S (10 Apr. 72, C/S 75) 214 (22 Sept. 71, C/S 61) 186
Primary Failure, The (6 Dec. 73, C/S 90) 244 Triple and Quad Reruns
Product Purpose and Why and WC Error (5 Apr. 71, C/S 33RA-1) 108
Correction (20 Apr. 72, C/S 78) 220 Triple Reruns (5 Apr. 71RA, C/S 33RA) 105
Program for Flubless Auditing, A—A C/S TRs Course and Auditing—Mixing Major
as a Training Officer Actions (26 May 71, C/S 38) 136
(1 Sept. 71 , C/S 57) 176 Use of Correction Lists
Programming and Misprogramming (20 Dec. 71, C/S 72) 209
(31 Mar. 71, C/S 31) 99 Use of Dianetics (7 Mar. 71RA, C/S 28RA) 89
Programming Cases Backwards Use of Dianetics (4 Apr. 71RA, C/S 32RA) 100
(7 Sept. 71, C/S 58) 182 Use of Quad Dianetics
Programming From Prepared Lists (4 Apr. 71-1R, C/S 32RA-1R) 102
—C/S Rules (10 June 71, C/S 44R) 149 Use of Quadruple Dianetics
Programming of Cases (7 Mar. 71, C/S 28RA-1) 91
(12 June 70, C/S 2) 10 VIII Actions (30 June 70R, C/S 13R) 50
Psychosis (28 Nov. 70, C/S 22) 72 Well Done, Definition of—Session Grading
PTS Interviews (24 Apr. 72, C/S 79) 222 (21 Aug. 70, C/S 16) 59
Quadruple Dianetics—Dangers of What the C/S Is Doing
(21 Apr. 71-1R, C/S 36RB-1R) 122 (16 June 70, C/S 6) 28
“Quickie” Defined (19 Apr. 72, C/S 77) 218 Word Clearing Errors
Red Tag Line, The (8 July 74R, C/S 92R) 247
(BTB 20 Jan. 73RD, C/S 86RD) 237 Word Clearing OCAs
Reduction of Refunds—C/Ses and (24 Feb. 72, C/S 71A) 207
Overload (25 Sept. 74, C/S 94) 252 Worst Tangle, The (15 Sept. 71, C/S 60) 185
























Cumulative Index

INDEX INSTRUCTIONS

An index is an arranged analysis of the contents of a book or set of books for the purpose of detailed reference.

In the Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology, several methods of locating desired material are available.


CONTENTS

Each volume has at the front a Contents which lists in chronological order each issue in that volume. It is used where you know the date or approximate date of an issue.

PERIODICALS BY ISSUE NUMBER

Following the Contents in Volumes I, II, III, IV and VI, there is a list of Periodicals by Issue Number. Use it to look up an issue when you know its type and issue number.

LONG CONTENTS

At the front of each volume, following the Contents, and list of Periodicals by Issue Number, there is a Long Contents. This is a more detailed contents listing, also arranged in chronological order, which lists the series number where applicable, the date, the title, pertinent sub-headings and the major subjects of each issue in the order in which they appear. It can be used to quickly locate major subjects covered in a particular time period.


SUBJECT INDEX

The Subject Index is at the back of each volume immediately following the text pages. It is arranged alphabetically with references under headings the reader is likely to seek. It is used when you know the approximate year (which volume) of the data you are seeking.

ALPHABETICAL LIST OF TITLES

Following the Subject Index, there is an Alphabetical List of Titles for issues contained in that volume. This is a fast way to find the issue you are seeking when you know the title or approximate title.


CHRONOLOGICAL TAPE LIST

Although it is not immediately apparent, there is also a Chronological Tape List contained in these volumes. To use it just look up the chronological volumes (first eight volumes) at or near the date you are seeking and you will find lectures given by LRH at the time. You can also often find tape lectures covering subjects you are interested in by looking up one of the other reference lists, locating key issues on the subject, then by turning to these in the text pages, locate tapes given on that subject, as, particularly in the SHSBC period, bulletins were issued which summarized data found more fully on tapes of same or similar date.


CUMULATIVE INDEX

The Cumulative Index will be found at the back of Volume X, the C/S Series Volume, following the Subject Index. It is basically an alphabetical integration of the ten subject indexes.

Purpose

The purpose of the Cumulative Index (and of its sub-indexes in each volume) is to indicate the location of specific data about a chosen subject, to lead one to further data about a subject (data which might be unknown and thus not looked for), to cross-reference related subjects, to clarify the use of terms and abbreviations by making them easily locatable in their context, to give definitions and references to definitions of terms, and to make it possible to do an embracive study of a subject, using the index as a guide through the collected technical writings of L. Ron Hubbard.


Alphabetical Order

The alphabetical order takes account of each letter in turn through the full entry even if it consists of several words. Thus process levels comes after processing check.

Definitions are placed in chronological order under the main heading and before the alphabetized sub-entries.

Numerals (entries beginning with a figure) are placed after the alphabet. Thus 8C, 37R Rundown, etc., are found after the letter Z.

Symbols ("/", "X", etc.) are put after the numerals.


Arrangement of Entries

The word or phrase one first looks up is the main entry. If there is a section of entries (usually two or more) that would have the same main entry or relate to the same main entry then the section is indented so the main entry stands out.

e.g. certificates,
auditor, purpose of, I-400
cancellation of auditor's certificates, reason for,
IV-30, 96
provisional certificates, I-52
requirements for permanent certificates, I-65
restoration of certificates IV-34
suspension, line for, I-66
why all begin with the word "Hubbard", III-288

The page reference is given in the form volume-page number, thus I-400 means page 400 in Volume I.

The main entry may have a sub-entry that has further sub-entries. These are indented further to let the sub-entry stand out.

e.g. Learn(ing),
by observing or experiencing, I-190
isn't memorizing, III-424
lag and process lag, III-I 8
process, discipline of imagination essential, I-324
rate, III-17, 20
defn, the rate one will permit ideas to inflow,
III-28
aberration and learning rate, relationship bet-
ween, III-15
consequences, III-20
dissemination, use of "learning rate" in, III-20, 21
governs reading time, III-22
increasing ~ rate by drill usually only increases
familiarity and automaticity, III-22
learning lag and learning rate, III-I9, 20
through rnimicry, I-31
willingness to, III-79

The sign ~, called a swung dash, used particularly in the individual volume subject indexes to save space, indicates that the main entry is understood to be read at that point.


Cross References

In addition to data being referenced under one main heading and then the same data being referenced under alternative headings, there are two other forms of crossreferencing. These are:

The see reference which is used when the information is provided under another heading elsewhere in the index.

The see also reference which leads the reader to material on closely related subjects, or to other sources for material on the subject.

LRH Books of the period are also referred to in cross references (for abbreviations of titles used see the Technical Dictionary ).


Chronology

As the first eight volumes are arranged chronologically, the volume-page number code serves as a guide to the time period of the references, the lowest volume-lowest page number being the earliest material.

A square bracket with a year, e.g. [1955], following an entry indicates that the data is from that year. This is used where it was necessary to more clearly indicate the time period of the reference.

The chronology of the material is important as it shows both the evolution of the subject, and, where there is any conflict, the later material supersedes the earlier.

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

These volumes make "Having the correct technology" easy.

"Knowing the technology" should be greatly assisted by the index.

Thus there should be no stops to the first two points of Keeping Scientology Working.

These technical volumes together with the third dynamic technology contained in the Organization Executive Course books provide the tools with which to reach the goals of Scientology, and so "give to earth a culture of which we can be proud".

























CUMULATIVE INDEX

CUMULATIVE INDEX


1950 -1975


aberration(s), aberrative, aberrate (cont.)
A evidences of an aberrated area, VI-196
factor in living is loss, I-296
A=A=A, identification is most easily present when freeing of valences remedies pain and aberration,
time sense is awry, V-330 IV-105
A=A=A mechanism, I-8, 105 from being inhibited or being enforced, I-191
abandon (Secondary Scale level), IV-303 fundamental of aberration: all wrong actions are
abandonment of cases, II-479 result of an error followed by an insistence on
abbreviations and symbols of Dianetics and Scien- havingbeenright, V-322
tology, VI-79 general causes of mental aberration, I-242
aberration(s), aberrative, aberrate, genius and aberration, I-130
defn., I-76; see also Original Thesis geographical areas, their role in, I-448
defn, is mainly the overwhelming of teammates goals terminal is that valence into which pc has
(wrong target), II-397 interiorized and which carries the goal, modi
defn., “a crooked line”; from Latin aberratio, a fier and aberration which pc attributes to self,
wandering from, and errare, to wander or to IV-419
err, VI-197 graphic representation of, I-159,160
all possible, I-157 help, relationship to aberration; see help
analytical mind, incredibly resistant to, I-37 how to clean up aberration [1960], IV-7
and psychosomatic illness and ability, II-109 how to get pc over any condition or aberration he
and time, II-224 is agonizing to get rid of, IV-44
are hard to keep, one has to work at it, VII-240; ingredient of truth maintains it in force, II-143
IX-65 is a chain of vias based on a primary non-confront,
artists are not benefited by ~, VIII-232 IX-310
basic aberration is withheld flow, V-16 is composited of unknowns, therefore pc can’t tell
basis of, is a non-confront, IX-309, 310 what is to be run, V-76
causes of, I-244 justice, savage, why it aberrates, VIII-172
common denominator of aberration (mental de- man is basically good, only his ~ are bad, VI-346
rangement), mechanics of; see Science of Survival
cessation of creation, II-433 other people’s causation is not aberrative, IV-19
interiorization into past and unawareness of O/W, what pc has done to others is aberrative, not
PT environment, V-50 what has been done to him, IV-92
surrounded by things you cannot understand, pc need but become aware of actual cause of an
III-109 aberration to have it vanish, VI-58
communication and aberration, pc never has done anything in this life that aber common denominator of, III-28 rated him, VI-l99
communication itself is not aberrative, misuse personality; see aberrative personality
and withhold of communication is, III-518 psychiatry’s basic assumption: shock cures aber cut communication with the mass causes aber- ration, IV-103
ration, remedy of, III-147 Q and A is simply postulate aberration, VIII-230
person becomes as aberrated as he cannot com- radiation, aberrative character of, III-52
municate, as he is overwhelmed by other reasoning with, won’t work, I-59
determinisms, as he himself dare not as- relationshipbetween~andlearningrate,III-15
sume cause points, III-466 resolution of, I-244
communication lag index as test of, I-351 savage justice aberrates, why, VIII-172
considered in a passive and active way, VI-197 Scien,tology’s basic assumption: a being without
consists of a number of lessons which a person has aberration will be good, ethical, artistic and
learned too well, III-18 powerful, IV-104
consists of wrong-way assistance, IV-122 self-determined (not other-determined) flows can
contagion of; see DMSMH be aberrative, V-14
due to engrams, I-60 self-determinism, aberrative, is end product of fai dwindling spiral of aberration related to interest, lures to help, IV-I91
communication, control and help, IV-120 single source of aberration is time, V-277, 287
education and ~,III-18, 29 social aberration is a composite of individual aber effects are created by the person who has them, rations, IV-45
IV-38, 104 somatics, aberrations, circuits and problems are
evaluation, method of running, I-454 postulate-counter-postulate situations, IV-414

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


aberration(s), aberrative, aberrate (cont.) able, getting well or able depends on establishing
source of, VI-160, 340 truth, VII-449
that he thinks he is not the thetan is the aberra- abortion, I-119
tion, I-267 abridged style auditing; see auditing, abridged style
thetan is holding himself in a state of stupidity, absolute,
aberration and even insanity, IV-38 accuracy; in real universe entities of time, space~
third and fourth dynamic aberration, how it distance, energy and thought cannot be com comes about, IV-45 puted with absolute accuracy, I-73
time itself is a basis of aberration, VII-87 precision, I-74
totality of, is basically considerations a thetan is unobtainable, I-73
making, II-437 right and wrong, I-70
training, how it can de-aberrate, IX-310 truth, I-71
why looking at or recognizing source of ~ in abstractions,mind uses, I-74
processing “blows” it, makes it vanish, IX-310 abundance of terminal, II-502
aberrative personality; see also merchants of fear; Academy; see also training
suppressive person goal of, III-25, 250
born out of decline of ability of individual to no cases at Academy, III-309
produce, I-477 stable data: new auditors should be able to audit
characteristics of, I-473 in HGC [1961 ], IV-329
communication lag of, I-475 teach fundamentals of Scientology, V-52
computation of, I-475 training, III-309
continuing to reappear in pc’s thoughts and pro- unit one and two, IV-330
cessing, I-474 ACC; see Advanced Clinical Course
method of processing, I-474 acceptance,
two common denominators to all, II-2 by authority or agreement, I-124
aberree, I-19 level; see New Slant on Life
ability, abilities, level of an audience, II-154
aberration and psychosomatic illness and ability, of counter-effort, I-169
II-109 Acceptance Level Processing, I-491
accent on ability, II-106; see also Dianetics ‘55!; how it is done and what it does, I-485
NSOL overt-motivator sequence and, II-8
ambitions much greater than, I-37 specialized list, I-492
attained, X-7 version of Expanded Gita, I-485
attained as an EP, VII-48, 361 accepting,
creative, I-399 a C/S, VII-44, 356; X-2
creative, loss of, I-395 the pc—rights of refusal, VII-44, 355; X-1
differentiation, I-245 accessibility; see also Notes on the Lectures
gain is pc’s recognition that pc can now do things of children, 145
he could not do before, III-428 of psychotics, I-60
invalidated, X-8 accident prevention, III-7
madness is compounded of disarranged~, III-170 industrial, I-115
neuroses and psychoses are exaggerated, con- accident prone, I-9, 116; X-12
centrated abilities, III-169 CCHs used to handle, VII-58
observation, I-376 when audited, usually loses this unwanted charac
of viewpoint, I-375 teristic, VI-348
past life abilities, III-80 accidents,
processing is measured by gradual increase in abili- after ~ people should be audited, VII-2
ty, VII-69 if reads run out narrative R3R Triple, X-168
psychiatrist sees in every ability an insanity, III- illness and bacterial infection predetermined by
170 spiritual malfunction and unrest, II-153
recall, relation to, I-9 occur in presence of suppression, VIII-211, 237
regained, gradient scale of, V-342 run out narrative R3R, VII-339
rehabilitatlon of, II-517, 555;III-79 using assists on, III-262, 263; VII-417, 418
technique, III-82 accused, don’t run a process that makes pc feel ac
to change, II-304 cused, V-441
to create, II-304 ache and pain have a memory for which person will
to think, defn., capability of mind to perceive, not take responsibility, I-210
pose and resolve specific and general problems, acknowledge(ment)(s), II-255; III-543; IV-247, 250;
I-77 VII-249; see also TRs, TR 2
Ability Release, Grade IV- Release, VI-98 a control factor, III-349

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


acknowledge(ment)(s) (cont.) actor, “stage manners”, VIII-293; IX-498
all auditors acknowledge too little, V-292 acts, bad, defn, those acts which cannot be easily
and evaluation, difference between, II-255 experienced at the target end, III-432
auditor must always acknowledge what the pc has actual, defn, what is really true; that which exists
said, II-235 despite all apparencies; that which underlies
big or multiple acknowledgement is taught at the way things seem to be; the way things
Level II- to shut pc off when pc is going off really are, II-408
subject, V-501 additive questions by auditor, VIII-160
cycle, VII-244; IX-69 adjectival commands, beware running, IV-50
did the pc receiveit, II-206 “adjustment to the environment”, a false theory,
double acknowledgement, I-152
by auditor causes OCA/APA drop in comm administration,administrative;seealsoAuditorAdmin
level, III-334 Series, IX-1
cause and avoidance of, III-308 defn, a form of communication, II-386
E-Meter dependence is created by invalidation or defn, consists of keeping certain communication
poor acknowledgement by auditor, V-334 terminals in place and making sure that the
half-acknowledgement, defn, ways of keeping pc proper particles go to and through the proper
talking by giving pc feeling he is being heard terminals, II-386
and yet not chopping with overdone TR 2, defn, formation and handling of lines and termi
V-501 nals involved in production, VII-365; IX-3, 5
its general use is putting a period to the communi- defn, X-172
cation cycle, III-349, 350 admin personnel, takes about 2 admin personnel
maintaining 2-way comm, II-216 to keep a tech personnel going, VI-402
mis-acknowledgement is only and always a failure a piece of truth; see Dianetics Today
to end the cycle of a command, III-543 auditing requires administration, VII-365, 375;
mood can be expressed by, III-383 IX-5
of children, III-110 auditor admin; see auditor admin
of the preclear, II-205 auditor, wonderful, with poor admin could flop,
over acknowledgement, defn, acknowledging be- II-387; see also auditor admin
fore pc has said all, V-336 cramming, IX-96
perfect acknowledgement, what it communicates, C/Ses, long C/Ses ease admin lines greatly, VII-
III-349 187
premature, details in folder, IX-21; see also auditor admin
effects of, VII-252, 253 ethics, tech, admin sequence, VIII-78, 172
leads to inadvertent withholds, VI-26 function and excellent case results, X-172
or late-or-never acks result in same thing, pc majority of troubles are ~ not technical, II-386
running on and on and on, VI-138 personnel need TRs and drilling as much as tech
result of, IX-78 personnel, IX-118
ultimate in ~ would be end of universe, III-351 Post Purpose Clearing, admin of, VIII-363
what to acknowledge, II-255 proper way to plan, II-387
why stress on acknowledgement, III-349 PTS Rundown, administrative tech of, VIII-95
action(s), recruiting staff, tech/admin ratio, VIII-12
defn., motion or movement; an act; a considera- smoothness, necessary to knock out the enemy,
tion that motion has occurred, II-407 II-388
automatic, II-409 Whys, below, there is usually an Ethics situation,
bad, defn, I-293 VIII-100
consistent and inconsistent, I-212 administrator Q and A, VIII-223
cycles of; see cycles of action admiration, I-416
from an idea flows the energy and forms necessary defn., is a particle which unites and resolves all
to action, II-245 types of energy, particularly force, I-437
good, defn., I-293 absence alone permits persistence, I-375
is causative, I-209 and critical are a dichotomy, III-245
only realization of actions done will key out a dissolves force, force cancels admiration, I-416
GPM, V-435 effect of insufficient ~ from sexual partners,
ordering a major, X-145 I-385
phrases, I-191 happiness is a state of admiration of things, I-437
command value of; see DMSMH; SOS love is human manifestation of admiration, I-437
requires space and time, I-293 most valuable part of attention interchange, I-382
scale of, I-378 particle or flow, I-311
action, cycles of; see cycles of action substance of communication line, I-382

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


Admiration Processing, basis of, I-311 affinity (cont.)
admired, those things which are not, persist, I-311, defn, characteristic of energy as to its vibration,
383 condensation, rarefaction, and, in physical uniadoption, problem of, I-120 verse, its degree of cohesion or dispersion,
ads, newspaper ads, where to place, II-353 I-381
Advanced Clinical Course, II-346 defn, pattern or velocity of particle creates degree~
ACC and HPA/HCA, III-206 of affinity, I-466
ACC Auxiliary Procedure, III-301 defn, co-existence, II-136
ACC Clear Procedure [1958], III-311, 322, 369 defn,likingordislikingofsomething,II-247
omit “What part of that can you confront defn, ability to occupy the same space as some best?” from ACC Clear Procedure, III-369 thing else, II-412
ACC Preparatory Process schedule for running defn, consideration of distance, whether good or
engrams [1959], III-389 bad, II-412
units, II-135 defn, love, liking or any other emotional attitude,
Advanced Course(s), VII-466; see also auditing, Solo II-412,413
do not mix TRs with Solo or ~, VII-341, 466 defn, actually the consideration of distance,
insecurity of material, VII-l 92 III-139
Advanced Organizations(s), defn, space and willingness to occupy the same
confidential materials, X-10 space of, VI-261
Solo levels are only available at, VIII-23 defn, emotional response, feeling of affection or
AdvancedProcedure;seeAPA lack of it, of emotion or misemotion conAdvance Program(s) [earlier called Return Program], nected with life, VII-29 1
VII-57, 69, 187, 419; X-II-, 14, 21, 48, 88, affinity-reality-communication, understanding 139-40, 145 interrelationship, II-247; see also ARC triangle;
defn, major actions to be undertaken to get case POW
back on Class Chart from wherever he has and reality exist to further communication, I-381;
erroneously gotten to on it; written on blue see also ARC triangle
sheet, VII-57; IX-27 a variable quality, II-412
defn, writing down in sequence every needful below apathy affinity proceeds into solidities such
step and process missed on Class Chart by case as matter, II-413
which are now to be done, VII-70 child is full of, I-98
defn, putting pc over road sections he missed on conceived to be comprised first of thought, then
roadup,VII-71 of emotion which contains energy particles,
defn, was called a “Return Program” in C/S and then as a solid, II-413
Series; name is changed from “Return” to embraces the distance part of communication for “Advance” as more appropriate; it gets pc mula, II-136
really up to where he should be, VII-98 emotional scale: Effort and Know down to Mys definition and example, X-22 tery Scale, II-136
is for return to the false point, X-22 Emotion and Affinity Scale; see Scn 0-8
now called Advance Programs, X-44 getting in communication with basic personality
old, X-22 through, I-60
overwhelm would indicate need of a Repair and is never identification, I-98
Return, VII-101 level of hate, agreement is solid matter and com rehab of processes on Return Program, VII-74 munication is bullets, II-414
Repair and Return Programs, use of, VII-69, 70 lines to data, Supervisors, don’t cut, II-163
repair while doing, IX-27 tends to break down slightly where individual is
sample Advance Program, VII-70, 263 too demanding, VII-240
should contain Expanded Lower Grades, Triple, weakest corner in ARC triangle, III-139
VII-432 Affinity Process, “What would you like to con
start lower than pc was if pc got in trouble where front?”, III-463, 536
he was, VII-l 87 “afraid to find out” type of case, V-36
written on bright blue sheets, VII-60, 69, 94 age and auditing, III-34
AEI Treble Assessment(s), VIII-277, IX-252, 256 age flash, I-16
aesthetic band, I-418; see also Scn 8-80 age, symptom of the age-there is no time, X-40
affinity;seealsoARC;SOS;Scn8-8008;CMSCS agitation and excitement of pc actually a loss of
defn, as used in Dianetics is close to meaning of havingness, II-337
“like”, I-98 agree (Secondary Scale level), IV-305
defn, type of energy and can be produced at will, agreement,
I-350 is reality, I-350
defn, opinion about particles and sensation, I-351 reality = mass or agreement, VI-261

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


agreement (cont.) ambitions much greater than ability, I-37
with environment forces consistency, I-212 A.M.A.’s proposed principles of medical ethics, III-2
with preclear, I-305 American Personality Analysis; see OCA/APA
ailment, physical, cure before auditing, I-420 America, “only one” computation, and afraid of an
aims of Hubbard Dianetic Research Foundation, I-13 effect, I-480
aims of Scientology, I-317 anaesthetic or unconsciousness, complete silence
alcohol; see drugs, alcohol mandatory, II-430
allergy, example of handling, IV-65 analysis, case; see case analysis
All Flows Rundown, X-l 10 analytical action, engram inhibits, I-31
results of, VIII-288, 382 Analytical Dianetics, I-27
all style auditing; see auditing, all style analytical inspection, primary characteristic of reac
ally, allies, tive mind is response to a situation without
defn, person from whom one had sympathy and analytical inspection, III-269
was dependent upon, VI-343 analytical mind(s)(‘s), I-27; see also mind; reactive
defn., person from whom sympathy came when mind;somaticmind;thetan;DMSA~H
pc was ill or injured, VII-26 defn, combines perceptions of immediate en assumption of valence on death of, II-9 vironment, of past (via pictures) and estima chronic psychosomatic illness pc has is usually tions of future into conclusions which are
counterfeit of illness suffered by , I-19 based upon realities of situations, II-429
pc is as occluded as he has lost allies, I-363 defn., consists of visual pictures, either of past or
alteration(s), IX-426 of physical universe, monitored by and
and misunderstood words, VII-382 presided over by knowingness of thetan, II-429
at the bottom of all alteration of meaning or ability to mimic,l-31
action is a misunderstood word, IX-426 and reactive minds, principal difference between,
alter-is, alter-isness, I-381
defn, covert avoidance of an order, VI-193 awareness characteristics of, when low on scale,
alter-is auditor, changes when the pc changes, I-382
V-75 betterment of ~ and control of reactive mind,
alter-is commands, tendency of pc to, relation to I-346
Change Processing, IV-256 can be processed directly, I-387
alter-isness and not-isness, cycle of, of any per- capable of,
ception, II-300 developing its own energy, I-382
and degraded beings, VI-193 resistance and action, I-29
auditing Problems cures it in a case, IV-354 vision, I-426
basis of alter-is, VI-193, 291 characteristic actions of energy produced by ~,
degraded beings, why they alter-is orders or don’t I-384
comply, VI-193 characteristics of, I-27
of orders and tech is worse than non-compliance, contents of, I-32
VI-193 Dianetic processes evolved by paralleling analyti poor results and alter-is come from can’t-apply, cal mind action, I-33
VI-90 how it remembers, I-33
squirrels are only Case Levels 7 or 6 dramatizing ~ keynote of: one knows what one is concluding
on Scientology instead of their track, V-327 and what he is doing, II-429
alternate commands; see commands, alternate misconception regarding the ~, I-30
Alternate Confront [process], IV-116, 121 of auditor and preclear have greater power than
commands of, III-547; IV-140 reactive mind of preclear, principal thing that
Help used in conjunction with Alternate Confront makes therapy possible, I-33
and Havingness, IV-108, 110 of group, I-87
stabilizing tool, IV-122 organic seat, I-29
“What can you confront?” “What would you power over reactive mind, I-33
rather not confront?”, IV-I 10, 118 powers of, I-32
Alternate Create, commands of, III-547 prime operating mechanism of ~,I-34
altitude, processed directly, I-387
defn, is the factor that makes a pc receive and reactive mind, analytical mind and somatic mind,
execute an auditing command, IV-134 three main divisions, II-429
auditor altitude, I-20 resistant to aberration, I-37
relation to effect of individual on group, I-92 role of the, I-28
teacher altitude, level of, I-131 vs. body and mest, I-420
aluminium electrodes, don’t use, IV-460; see also when it becomes aware of a point in the reactive
E-Meter cans mind, makes it vanish, VI-57

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


analytical thought, I-380 antibiotics (cont.)
Prehav Scale is not a picture of analytical thought, often do not function unless illness or injury is
it is a picture of reactive thought, IV-331 also audited, VI-371, 422
analytical, validate the analytical and neglect the reac- anti-perspirant for wet hands, use of, ~/III-416
tive, I-163 anti-Q and A handling, X-243
analytical vs. reactive, response of pc, IV-88, 331 Anti-Q and A TR, VIII-221
analyzer, I-32 antisocial act done and then withheld sets pc up to
analyzing folders, X-45 become “an ARC breaky pc”, VI-22
anaten; see also coma; unconsciousness antisocial behavior, basic reason for, VI-179
defn.,analyzerattenuation,l45 antisocial personality, VI-177; see also social per
defn., physiological manifestation of randomity of sonality; suppressive person; ISE
effort, I-168 attributes of, VI-177, 178,179,181
demonstration of loss of havingness, II-334, 371; social vs. antisocial personality, VI-183
VIII-123 test that declares only antisocial personality with pc with loss of havingness will agitate or go out also being able to identify social personali anaten and tend to be upset in general, ty would be itself a suppressive test,VI-180
III-1 87 anxiety,
ensues when one direction of command is run too cause and remedy, I-379
long, III-220 chronic low tone, insecurity, can stem from pro
flow run too long in one direction gives uncon- longed physical illness, I-420
sciousness, V-121 malnutrition and anxiety can produce symptoms
or agitation, cause of in running Terrible Trio, of insanity, IV-82
II-396 state of, explained, VI-18
when pc goes more anaten than when not being AO; see Advanced Organization
audited, he is in grip of real or affected code APA, American Personality Analysis; see OCA/APA
break and is out of session, II-322 apathy,
anchor point(s), case, I-495
defn., any particle or mass or terminal, II-14 handling, X-184
defn., points which are anchored in a space dif- misery and desire for suicide and death, cause of,
ferent to the physical universe space around a V-252
body, II-432 only goal of psychiatrist, II-475
and pain in the head, III-98 on Universe or Beingness Processing, cause of and
communication is an, I-465 remedy, II-44
don’t drive in anchor points by shoving things at pc in apathy generally doesn’t know he has a PTP,
or gesturing toward pc, V-161; VII-251 III-177
of body, III-151 pc in grief or apathy, cause and remedy of [R2,
putting out anchor points, I-361 R3], V-251
space exists by reason of, II-14 pc rises in tone up to lower levels of Tone Scale,
wasting, I-333 he comes up to apathy, V-419
anger, antagonism and resentment are most fixative pcs with low TAs are more or less in ~, VII-124
emotions, I-267 “total-apathy-won’t-answer” [Dn] session upset,
Anglo-American, probable cause of, VII-392
civilization, first new civilization since the Roman what it is, I-383
Empire, II-400 apparency,
in industrial push spiritual message was lost, II-401 defn, appears to be, as distinct from actually IS,
animal, II-407
rehabilitation of sick animal, I-389 time is actual but is also an apparency, V-330
therapy, I-338 apparent behavior and the insane, X-74
animating a pc is not auditing, II-247 applause, I-383
answer(s), application, apply,
automatic, II-235 “can’t-apply”, condition of, results of and hand
flash, I-16 ling, VI-90
is an opposite side to problems, III-321 case supervision is done against thoroughness and
antagonism, I-205, 267 exactness of technical application, VI-424;
antagonistic pc = BPC = assess proper list (such as X-152
L1C)andhandle,VII-46,359 checkouts must consult ability to apply, VI-205
antibiotics, gap between mere knowledge and application of
administering of, effects of, VIII-403-08 that knowledge, VI-89
allergy to, can turn on whole track pictures vio- if you can’t get the technology applied then you
lently, VII-328 can’t deliver what’s promised, VI-4

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


application, apply (cont.) ARC (cont.)
what can prevent, IX-472 knowingness is higher than ARC, II-136
why C/S C/Ses for exact tech application and not lines, group, effect of tampering with, I-141
exclusively for result, VII-284 loss of havingness in an auditing session can be
appointments once made, keep them all, II-97 repaired by repair of ARC of session, III-157,
apprenticeships, auditor, X-163; see also interneships 177,187
aptitude, loss of, is more important than loss of havingness,
low, handling of, VII-34 III-157
relation to misunderstood definitions, VII-294, low, whole answer to it is contained in victim,
IX-394 III-5 1 6
Aquinas, Saint Thomas, is an early forerunner of ofthepreclear,ll-314
Scientology, III-514 processing and, I-103
arbitrary, role in education, VII-232
defn. ,I-87 scanning, I-186
principle of the introduction of an, I-87 sudden increase in, I-102
time, the one arbitrary, I-245 test if auditing is working, did it increase pc’s
ARC, VII-240, 291; see also affinity; ARC breaks; ARC, II-246
ARC Processes; communication; reality; under- tone is established by ARC, III-104
standing; NOTL; SOS triangle, II-412;III-92, 136; see also CMSCS
defn, understanding and time, VI-261 affinity, reality and communication, relation
all after charge is based on prior ARC, V-442 ship of, I-350
angry man, ARC of, VII-291 affinity, reality and communication, theory of,
as complete identification, I-486 I-98
auditing consists of discovering a spark of ARC co-existence is superior to ARC triangle and
and, by processes and ARC, fanning it into a mechanics of living, II-136
proud flame, II-247 common denominator to all of life’s activities,
auditors fail to make pc feel they are interested in II-412
pc when they handle him with poor ARC, communication most important factor of, I-
III-242 334, 464
basis of tho Scientology Tone Scale, II-413 formulation of, I-464
breaks;seeARCbreaks law, a communication to be received must
care should be taken not to heavily run an out-of- approximate the affinity level of the person
ARC type process, command which asks for to whom it is directed, II-413
out-of-affinity moments, out-of-reality mo- not an equilateral triangle, II-413
ments and out-of-communication incidents, the way it is used, III-104
V-441 very spacious at the level of serenity and com
cause of auditor having low ARC, III-516 pletely condensed at level of matter, II-413
CCH and ARC, III-92,174 weakest corner is affinity, III-139
CCHs, ARC in the CCHs, V-46 understanding and life, interrelationship of, II-246
common denominators of bank are out of ARC whenanothertriestochopyourARC,III-105
and stop, VII-269 with existence, V-347
control by ARC is taught in Comm Course, III- with the preclear, II-237
242 ARC break(s), ARC broken, III-296; IV-377; V-293,
don’t go out of ARC with pc with too little 2-way 438; VI-16, 433; VIII-370; IX-268; see also
comm, II-489 ARC; ARC Break Processes; rudiments
don’t run an out of ARC process, VII-268 defn., assignment of responsibility for a sudden
down, I-101; see also ARC break drop in affinity, reality or communication, III-
drops in pc’s, II-314, 322; see also ARC break 364
equates into understanding, VII-291 defn., A-affinity, R-reality, C-communication, a
essence of auditing is ARC handled and controlled break in any one of the three which has caused
by auditor, V-426 upset in past, VII-386; IX-430
factors,measure by ethic level, I-91 ARC always must precede an ARC break, VI formal auditing is control by ARC, III-242 261
in auditing, defn., A = ability to be in or at a are restimulated but missed or partially missed
distance from something; R = ability to withholds, VIII-178, 179
co-exist with something; C = ability to trans- assessment(s), V-306, 338, 352, 418; see also
mit thought between two or more points, III- ARC breaks, handling
311 by-passed charge assessment and ARC break
keeping pc in session is done with good ARC, assessment, two different actions, V-470;
III-243 see also Book of Case Remedies

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


ARC break(s) (cont.) ARC break(s) (cont.)
assessment(s) (cont.) cause of ARC breaks (cont.)
continuing assessment after pc has cognited high percentage of ARC breaks occur because
invalidates pc’s cognition and cuts itsa line of failure to understand pc, V-162; VII
and may cause a new ARC break, V-418 251, 428; IX-76
don’t ever do an ARC break assessment until incomplete cycle of action causes ~, VII-268
pc has given up trying to untangle it, V-338 leaving an overt touched on case and calling it
four ways of using lists, V-306 clean will cause a future ARC break with
how to do, V-306, 345, 469 auditor, V-439
if pc’s attention is still on auditor correct missing a withhold or not getting all of it is
charge has not been found, V-346 sole source of ARC break, V-23
isn’t auditing because it doesn’t use auditing people do not ARC break on known charge; it
comm cycle, V-469 is always hidden or earlier charge that
L-1, General ARC Break Assessment, V-307 causes ARC break, V-347, 417
L-2, listing sessions, assessment sessions, V-307 prime source of ARC break in engram running
L-3, R3R engram running by chains, V-308 sessions is by-passing charge by time mis
L4, Routine 3N, GPMs, all Goals sessions, handling by auditor, V-287
V-308 Q and A causes ARC breaks by by-passing
natter is handled by ARC break assessment, charge,V-283, 285, 419
V-332 source of all ARC breaks is BPC, V-281, 306,
often has to be done through a dirty needle, 417
V-306 when something becomes unlocatable it can
purpose of ARC break assessment, V-346 cause an ARC break, VI-18
sources of trouble in doing ARC break assess- charge left after (later) (nearer pt) than where
ments, V-348 auditor is working hardly ever causes ~, V-282
uses for ARC break assessments, V-345 comes up in session must be handled, VIII-409
what it consists of, V-469 commands for ARC break, PTP and M/W/H, VI
what it requires in an auditor, V-345 259
auditing is not possible in presence of ~, V-468, communication becomes a contest of overts in the
469 ARC breaky case, IV-120
auditing over top of ~ can reduce a graph, hang pc cycle of the ARC break, V-253, 417
up in sessions or worsen case, V-470 difficulties, III-304
auditor ARC breaks pc by demanding more than dirty needle, its cause is cut itsa or an Ll session
is there, V-439 ARC break, V-384, 414
auditor or student who has trouble with an “ARC double ARC break; see Book of Case Remedies
breaky pc”, how to handle, V-58 dropped havingness and ARC break, how to dis auditor taking order from pc causes pc to ARC tinguishbetween,III-157, 177
break, IV-374 effect on true group, I-137
blows, ~don’t cause blows;M/W/Hs do, VI-22 E-Meter and ARC breaks, V-102, 362; see also
by-passed charge, V-281, 285; see also cause of E-Meter
ARC breaks ARC breaks stop a meter from reacting, V-73,
does not always = ARC break, but ARC break 96,102, 361, 362
always = by-passed charge, V-417 E-Meter can go dead in presence of monstrous
is never what pc says it was if pc is still ARC ARC break and it can go gradiently dull in
broken, V-465 presence of out rudiments, V-96, 361
never do a by-passed charge assessment on an E-Meter can go out if ARC break is present,
ARC broken pc, V-469 IV-442, 450
canhide rock once found, III-300 E-Meter doesn’t register on ARC broken pc,
cause of ARC breaks, IV-442
all ARC breaks stem from missed withholds, E-Meter is invaluable in locating by-passed
V-58 charge and curing an ARC break, V-418
charge restimulated and left prior to where engrams containheaviest ARC breakwith thetan’s
auditor is working can cause an ARC break, environment and other beings, V-291
V-282, 290, 416 false reads on W/Hs and asking for some W/Hs
cut pc off, get in more actions than pc is more than once will ARC break pc, VIII-409
allowed to answer and you’ll have a dirty “field ARC breaks” is a direct reflection on
needle, then stuck TA and then an ~, D of P, VII-463
V-419 finding and indicating clears the ARC break; if it
double question [Q and A] is primary source doesn’t clear on what you find, then you
of ARC breaks and out rudiments, V-74 haven’t found it, VII 6

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


ARC break(s) (cont.) ARC break(s) (cont.)
generality causing ARC break, handling of, VI-17 overt, ARC break, problem, relation between, IX handling ARC breaks, III-437; V-469; see also 275
ARC break assessment overt, auditor ARC breaks pc by demanding more
don’t use a process, find the missed charge, than is there or leaving overt undisclosed that
V-284 will later make pc upset with auditor, VIII-370
find and indicate the correct BPC, V-281, 282 overt, leaving overt touched on case and calling it
“Have I done something you feel is wrong in clean will cause a future ARC break with audi
this session?” “Describe it to me”, III-296 tor, IX-268
in R3R, V-293, 300 overts, don’t ARC break pc in getting overts off,
primary error, handling as an ARC break when V-464, 468
pc really has a M/W/H, VI-22 pc becomes critical of anything outside engram
with Routine 3H, VI-239 (room, auditor, Scientology, the technology) it
Havingness is a must on any Responsibility Pro- is an ARC break, V-293
cess in presence of ARC breaks, IV-36 pc can always be told what has been missed and
Help and ARC breaks, IV-85 will almost always settle down at once, V-282
high percentage of ARC breaks occur because of pc in an ~ is in grip of reaction which was in
failure to understand pc, IX-76 incident, now fully on automatic, V-286, 417
if pc knows what charge it is he does not ARC pc never knows why the ARC break, V-282, 417
break or he ceases to be ~,V-347,465 pc permitted to be responsible for session will
is a disorder, III-378 ARC break, IV-373
is only thing that will depress a profile, III-437 pc who refuses to answer has an ARC break or a
Level VI ARC breaks, VI-18 withhold, IV-175
listing errors, why they are handled before ARC pc who seems to have a lot of ~ is a “withholdy
breaks, VII-280 pc”, not an “ARC breaky pc”, VI-22
living, two conditions of, ARC broken, not ARC permitted auditor statements, V-464
broken, V-347 prevention, IV-373
look for overts and withholds on ARC breaky pc, primary sources of ARC breaks are all under the
IV-6 heading of “no auditing”, IV-421
lots of ARC breaks = Level 2 is out, VII-70 PTP or withhold, don’t mistake for an ~, VI-77
L1C handles ARC broken, sad, hopeless or nattery PTPs, overts and ARC breaks, V-468; see also
pcs, VII-203 BCR
missed withholds and ARC breaks, V-20, 23, 58 restless or ARC breaky pc, how to handle, IV-43
bottom of ARC breaks is a M/W/H, VI-22 retard results, III-382
how to distinguish between, VI-22 returning to moment when occurred, I-103
natterings, upsets, ARC breaks, critical tirades, rudiment, if you miss on one rudiment the next
are restimulated but missed or partially even if really hot can seem to be null by reason
missed withholds, V-26 of ARC break, V-105
no ARC breaks when missed withholds have rule: if pc ARC breaks, issue no further auditing
been cleaned up,V-58 commands until pc and auditor are satisfied
pc ARC broken, how to check for missed cause of ARC break has been located and
withholds, IXo___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ V-418
never discipline or Q and A with ~ pc, V-286 sad, auditor who goes sad is auditing pcs over his
OCA/APA; see also OCA/APA own ARC break, VII-362
ARC breaks worsen the graph, IV-217 sad effect, pc will go into a sad effect if you don’t
only an ARC break can lower one, VI-16 find ~ but instead continue the process, VI-16
whole line (or majority of points) drops means sad, pc sad = ARC break = locate and handle, itsa
ARC breaks with auditor, III-334 earlier itsa, VII-46, 359
occurs on a generality or a not there, VI-16 session ARC breaks, caused by running pc over his
out list can make an ~ that can’t be handled by head, IV-44
ARC break but only by L4B, VII-273 session ARC breaks, running O/W to handle, IV overrun is full of mass and ARC breaks, VII-268 43

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


ARC break(s) (cont.) ARC Straight Wire (cont.)
TA, never touch ARC breaks on a high TA, IX- Cause ARC Straight Wire, IV-51
224 commands and how to run, III-111, 316
TA, never try to get a TA down from 3.5 or above commands for, VI-261
on ARC breaks, VII-274, 281 cyclic aspect of, III-317
thetan will dream up ARC breaks to exteriorize new [1963]: “What attitude was not received?”
hisattentionfrom a PTP, III-304 “What reality was not perceived (seen)?”
to tell pc what his PTP is and then audit what “What communication was not acknowl auditor said it was will inevitably ARC break edged?”, V-284
pc, V-463 SOP 8 Step VI, I-392
TRs, pc ARC broken by TRs 0 to IV will not read triple, valuable action to do before, VIII-389
properly on a correction list, VII-465 TR 11, III-69, 316
TR 5N is ARC break handling, III-353 using next-to-last list of Self Analysis in Scien
two conditions under which pc violently protests tology, VIII-121
aboutARCbreaks,III-303 ARC Tone Scale, processes plotted on the, II-131,
when pc doesn’t change despite skillful ARC 138; see also Tone Scale
break handling, locating and indicating, it was arguments, caused by failure to handle originations,
a withhold in the first place, VI-22 III-371; VIII-183
when pc is talking and you’re getting no TA you Army Alpha, psychometry, I-40; see also tests
already have an ARC break or are about to get arrive (Secondary Scale level), IV-299
one, V-336 art(s)(‘s), I-375; see also artist; Art Series, IX-487
withauditors, III-430 defn., a word which summarizes the quality of
withholds, PT problems and ARC breaks can stop communication, VI-83; IX-489
a case, IV-210 audience, art for self-satisfaction vs. audience,
yanking pc’s attention to the auditor is the source VIII-196; IX-493
of a lot of ARC breaks, IV-43 communication, art follows the laws of, IX-489
ARC break needle, VI-73, 145, 265 communication is primary target, IX-490
defn., floating needle with TA above 3.0 or below decline of art forms, VI-85
2.0, VI-373 degree of, involved in processing, I-301
defn., floating needle between 2.0 and 3.0 TA form or activity, one must conceive of the be position with bad indicators, VII-11 7 holder, IX-491
defn., pc bad indicators while F/Ning, VII-145 forms, rhythm in, IX-501
bad indicators always accompany, VI-275 for self-satisfaction vs. audience, VIII-196; IX-493
can occur with TA between 2 and 3, VI-275 fundamentals of art, VI-83
descriptionofARCbreakneedle,VI-176 general spectator is generally unaware of tech
ARC Break Process(es) [1963], V-284 nique; that is zone of art’s creators, IX-495
Co-Audit ARC Break Process, commands of, having abused arts, how to handle, IV-195
V-319 how good does a work of art have to be to be
ARC Break Processes (old R4-H renamed R-3-H), good,VIII-196, 198,199, 200
Grade III Release, VI-95; see also Routine 3H is certainty, I-362
ARC Break Straightwire, III-453, 489 least codified of human endeavors and most mis cannot be run on a case that is motivator hungry, understood, IX-489
III-397 living itself can be an art, IX-491
CCH-50 is its processing number, III-363 no communication is no art, IX-490
commands of and how to run, III-363, 389 originality, too much can be a liability, IX-489,
good and bad points of, III-364 490
is very useful in husband-wife co-auditing teams, perfection, defn., quality obtainable which still
III-364 permits delivery of communication, IX-490
to as-is ARC breaks, III-489 perfection vs. communication, VI-84
works well on medium level pcs, III-381 professional form must be there first, or the mes
ARC Process, commands of, V-95 sage will not transmit, IX-497
ARC Processes, dub-in case should be running ~ as professional in arts is one who obtains communi case is over-charged for engrams, V-293 cation with art form at minimum sacrifice of
ARC Processing; see Dianetics ‘55! technical quality, IX-490
ARC Process 1961, IV-442 quality alone has an emotional impact, VIII-199;
ARC Release [1965 |, VI-96 IX-496
ARC Straight Wire, I-290; II-545; III-69, 294, 316; quality and form, VIII-199; IX-496
see also Straight Wire rhythm in art forms, VIII-299
as a training process, III-483 self-satisfaction, art for self-satisfaction vs. audi
can crack neurotic cases, VI-175, 261 ence, VIII-196; IX-493

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


art(s)(‘s) (cont.) as-is, as-ised, as-ising, as-isness (cont.)
technique of art, VIII-197 requires taking responsibility, III-555
technique should not rise above level of worka- to really as-is you have to make perfect duplicate,
bility for purpose of communication, IX-490 II-299
to be good must have technical expertise itself unless time track is made available it cannot be
adequate to produce an emotional impact, as-ised by pc and so remains aberrative, V-276
IX-495 users of drugs cannot as-is, do not get TA, nor do
why much originality can be a liability, VI-83 they have cognitions, VI-245
works of, are soul food of all people, IX-493 aspirin,
arthritis, arthritic, actions of aspirin and other pain depressants, VI- defn, chronic somatic of depository type, I-272 443
defn, structurally, deposit of calcium, or other pc taking aspirin, handling of, VI-444
mineral, in area which has been restricted by that innocent seeming painkiller, can produce
old injury, I-272 havoc in auditing if not detected, VI-445
arthritic hands give high TA, VII-423 “asserted”, another name for suggested, used mainly
arthritis cases and polio, experiment on curing, in checkout, and occasionally in routine nul
II-331 ling when pc is declaring “It is my goal”,
handling of, I-272 V-119
occursatthreeplacesontonescale,I-272 assess(ing), assessment(s), IV-124, 324; V-208; VI- processing of chronic arthritic, I-272 266, 388; see also listing; listing and nulling
Technique 80, reduction of, I-273 defn, discovering what has overwhelmed pc, III
artist(s)(‘s); see also art 465
are not benefited by aberration, VIII-232 defn, inventory and evaluation of pc, his body
are subject to actions of psychotics, VII-158 and his case to establish processing level and
auditor is both a technician and an ~, I-305 procedure, III-484
must work to be good at it, IX-496 defn, whole action of obtaining a significant item
rehabilitating, VI-85, 219; IX-491 from pc [1962], V-203
relation to his audience, IX-491 defn, locating on a prepared list, one item; listing
Scientology is a must, if he would succeed with- and nulling means the pc lists, VI-266
out heartbreak, IX-491 defn, pick out the thing that will run, VI-388
technically flawless performance provides channel actions of, do not apply to listing and nulling,
for what he is presenting, IX-495 VI-266
artistic perfection, search for, isresult of past failures ARC break assessments; see ARC break assess
to communicate, IX-491 ments
artistic production, one has an audience of people, assess flows slowly [C/S 37R], X-l 34
not critics, IX-493 assessment for individual Why of evaluator taking
as-is, as-ised, as-ising, as-isness, II-223 a long time to evaluate, VIII-145
and persistence, II-226 auditor has to have impingement on pc to, IX-224
auditor + pc as two pole system to ~, mass, auditor looks at meter while doing an assessment,
VII-238 VI-388
chronically tired pc who is not eating won’t get auditors who can’t assess lists, results of, VIII-426
TA for there’s no as-is of locks, V-434 by Elimination (SOP Goals), IV-265
cognition is as-ising aberration with realization by goals to get a Help terminal, IV-124
about life, VII-230 by needle, audit by tone arm, rock slam is ap communication tends to as-is mass, III-138 parent exception to, IV-284, 318
itsa line is a report on what has been as-ised, by-passed charge assessment is auditing because
VII-243 you clean every tick of needle on list being
it takes lower grades to raise pc’s cause level so assessed, V-469; see also by-passed charge
that pc, on reaching Grade VI-, can as-is the assessment
bank, V-433, 434 by-passed charge, pc will feel better moment right
mass, as-isness of, V-49 type of by-passed charge is identified by assess
pc’s ability to as-is or erase in a session is directly ment and indicated by auditor, V-418
proportional to the number of good indicators by TA, no assessment list is continued in Levels I
present in session, VII-258 to III beyond seeing a TA move until that TA
pc who makes no gain is the pc who will not as-is, motion is handled, V-373
who will not confront, V-36 Case Assessment, IV-214; see also Preclear Assess person out of valence does not easily as-is his ment Sheet
bank, VI-426 case using dynamics graph, I-293
reactive mind straightens out by ~ its content, Change List of Problems Intensive, IV-414
VII-230 development of assessments, V-300

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


assess(ing), assessment(s) (cont.) assess(ing), assessment(s) (cont.)
Dianetic assessment; see Dianetic assessment repeated assessment, VII-282; X-131
Dianetic assessment list; see Dianetic assessment rising needle treated as a null needle in assessment,
list IV-273, 333
done by auditor between pc’s bank and meter, Routine 3D assessment; see Routine 3D
VI-388 R2H assessment; see Routine 2H
dynamic assessment, III-407 R3R assessment; see R3R
for clearing intensive, Pre-Clearing Scale, V-l 66 service facsimiles, VI-l 89
for Help terminals, Regimen 1, IV-128 slow assessment; see slow assessment
form 37R,X-134 SOP Goals assessment; see SOP Goals assessment
for new change (Problems Intensive), IV-415 terminal improperly assessed, how to detect dur
HGC preclear assessement, IV-108 ing auditing, IV-132
Hi-Lo TA assessment; see tone arm tone arm and assessment, VI-388
interest and assessment, VI-357 tone arm assessment, V-369, 372
is not auditing unless one is Auditing by List, to wait more than three seconds before uttering
VI-76 next word on list is complete waste of auditing
Know to Mystery Scale assessment; see Know to time, IV-332
Mystery Scale assessment Treble assessment, AEI; see Treble assessment
laws of assessment, IV-131 Trouble Area assessment, VIII-83
listing and assessment, weakest applied point in what assessment is prevented by during 2-10,
our tech, VI-212 2-12, 3GAXX, 3-21, V-203
listing and nulling vs. assessment, VI-266; see also which assessment method to use, VII-51, 465;
listing and nulling X-230
list, two ways to use, VI-210 why assessment is done, VI-357
list, you don’t begin, until you get an F/N, IX-224 Why, assessment to find the Why for failed audi
low TA, X-132, 141; see also tone arm, low tors and bogged cases, VI-92
LX 1, VI-267; see also LX lists 3DXX assessment; see Routine 3DXX
make sure it was the bank the meter read, not 3GAXX assessment; see Routine 3GAXX
breath or body motion, V-394 Assessment Confirmation by DofP [SOP Goals],
method of assessment of correction lists, VII-51, HCO WW Form CT2, IV-229
465; see also prepared lists, correction lists Assigning Identity [learning process], III-31
Methods 1 to 4, VII-51 assist(s), V-141, 505; VI-150; VII-322, 335, 364,
Method 3, do not read list while looking at pc, 415; X-159
VII-3 1 6 defn, an action undertaken by a minister to assist
Method 5 is once through marking length and BD the spirit to confront physical difficulties
of allreads,VII-185,280 which can then be cared for with medical
Method 6 is a method of ~ used in Cl XII auditing methodology by a medical doctor as needful,
where each question on list is assessed by look- III-259
ing at pc and asking him directly, IX-l 80 defn, an action undertaken by a minister to assist
never assess medical terms or symptoms, VI-352 the spirit to confront physical difficulties, VII
of a case on lower rungs of processing using Know 415
to Mystery Scale, III-460 defn, assisting individual to heal himself or be
of help, IV-l 19 healed by another agency by removing his
of pc using be, do, have and space, time, energy, reasons for precipitating, and prolonging his
I-296 condition and lessening his predisposition to
OT-3 Procedure assessments; see OT-3 Procedure further injure himself or remain in an intoler
OT-3A Procedure assessments; see OT-3A Pro- able condition,VIII-l9l;seealsoDnToday
cedure accidents, using assists, III-262, 263; VII-417, 418
Pc Assessment Sheet; see Preclear Assessment and Exams, X-159, 160
Sheet areas to use assist on, VIII-189, 190
pc does not have to think or answer before needle Auditing Assist, VI-3 18
responds, IV-331 Auditor’s Report, Crime to give assist without
pc interest as a method of assessment, V-325 making, VI-364
pc still has somatics, no further items on assess- begun by “This is the assist” and ended by
ment list read, cause of and handling, VII-ll “That’s it”, VI-150
PE Co-Audit assessment, IV-70 be professional and definite in assists, III-261;
Prehav assessment; see Prehav assessment VII-416
prepared lists; see prepared lists “Close your eyes and look at my fingers”, VII-415
prior assessment, one has to assess what was Contact Assist;see Contact Assist
wrong before or prior to cure, VI-377 Dianetic Assist; see Dianetic Assist

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


assist(s) (cont.) association (cont.)
difference between formal session and assist, of things, or thoughts, or classes, is considered all
III-259, 260 right but is half way to lazy thinking, IV-123
different to auditing at large, VII-415 Associative Processing, I-269
Double Terminaling is an assist, I-352 “Technique 100” or, I-269
excellent assist but limited process, I-329 assumption; see also History of Man
drug “five days” rule need not apply to assists, and birth, I-439
VIII-192 occurs within a few minutes after birth, III-226
drugs, assist given over drugs, how to handle later, of beingness, III-257, 258, 271; see also valences
VIII-192 safe, V-357; see also service facsimiles
end phenomena of, VII-322, 335 assumption points of Scientology, sciences and other
Exam Reports, assists must be followed by, VII- subjects, IV-102
167,191, 322, 335; X-159, 160 astigmatism, a distortion of image, is only an anxiety
first aid always precedes an assist, III-262; VII-417 to alter the image, III-39
for PT location by Comm Process, III-547 astral body,
has a very finite purpose, VI-150 is an aberration, III-414
healing, assist is entirely outside field of, VIII-l91 spirit is not, II-428
in an assist you always count on fact that thetan astral walking, II-11
himself would, if he could, do right thing, atheism, I-38
III-262 atheist, what makes an, I-204
interrupting auditing, handling of, X-94-95 A to B programming, X-154
is auditing on several dynamics, III-262 atom(s),
is different from auditing as such in that it lacks defn, composed wholly of motion, I-214
any Model Session, V-505 different realities about, I-101
“Keep it from going away” as assist, III-263, 264 atomic age, IV-102
like a session, has a beginning and an end, Audi- atomic bomb, II-362, 374; see also radiation
tor’s Code is observed and auditing comm facts about and protection from; see radiation; ALL
cycle is used, but it lacks any Model Session, About Radiation
V-505 race between Scientology and, II-450
Locational Processing as assist, VII-415 what are you going to do about it, II-292
medical treatment, assist is not substitute for, atomic radiation; see radiation
III-264; VIII-189 attack, defense of anything is untenable; only way to
necessary in lower zone of auditing, VIII-206 defend anything is to attack, II-157
on body by Communication Processes, III-547 attackers of Scientology had criminal records, II-167
on children, III-554 attack from psychiatrists, II-267
O/Wisbestrepetitiveprocessfor,V-99 attacking entheta with too much entheta enturbu recovery, assist greatly speeds recovery, VIII-189 lates, I-163
Remedies A and B are not always used as assists, attacking self, I-190
V-507 attacks, form of organization to handle, I-412
rules of, VII-323 attention,
“Shut your eyes and look at my fingers”, VII-418 ARC break assessment: if pc’s attention is still on
spirit, assist is entirely in field of spirit, VIII-191 auditor correct charge has not been found,
summary, VIII-189 V-346
steps, VIII-191, 237 attention gets stuck, only thing wrong with
techniques which comprise an assist, III-260; thetan, II-317
VII-415 attention valence; see valence, attention
Temperature Assist; see Temperature Assist bank merely expresses a recording of past atten Touch Assist; see Touch Assist tion fixations, III-428
types: Auditing, Contact, Dianetic, Touch, de- case whose attention is solidly fixed on some scribed, VI-3 18 thing, VIII-262
types of assists, VII-322 central valence or terminal is built in to demand
worksheets, X-247 total attention from pc, IV-406
mustbe done,VII-191 clearing is a gradient process of finding places
association; see also Scn 8-8008 where attention is fixed and restoring ability
differentiation and association are two principles of pc to place and remove attention under his
of mind, III-150 own determinism, III-428
free association, I-269; II-226, 467 communication and, VIII-185
Help resolves cases because it is the basis of all concern of two viewpoints is, I-382
association, IV-ll9 consequences of fixed attention, relation to no
leads to identification, IV-l 19 “case gain”, III-428

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


assist(s) (cont.) association (cont.)
difference between formal session and assist, of things, or thoughts, or classes, isconsidered all
III-259, 260 right but is half way to lazy thinking, IV-123
different to auditing at large, VII-415 Associative Processing, I-269
Double Terminaling is an assist, I-352 “Technique 100” or, I-269
excellent assist but limited process, I-329 assumption; see also ~istory of Man
drug “five days” rule need not apply to assists, and birth, I-439
VIII-192 occurs within a few minutes after birth, III-226
drugs, assist given over drugs, how to handle later, of beingness, III-257, 258, 271; see also valences
VIII-192 safe, V-357; see also service facsimiles
end phenomena of, VII-322, 335 assumption points of Scientology, sciences and other
Exam Reports, assists must be followed by, VII- subjects, IV-102
167,191, 322, 335; X-159, 160 astigmatism, a distortion of image, is only an anxiety
first aid always precedes an assist, III-262; VII-417 to alter the image, III-39
for PT location by Comm Process, III-547 astral body,
has a very finite purpose, VI-150 is an aberration, III-414
healing, assist is entirely outside field of, VIII-191 spirit is not, II-428
in an assist you always count on fact that thetan astral walking, II-11
himself would, if he could, do right thing, atheism, I-38
III-262 atheist, what makes an, I-204
interrupting auditing, handling of, X-94-95 A to B programming, X-154
is auditing on several dynamics, III-262 atom(s),
is different from auditing as such in that it lacks defn, composed wholly of motion, I-214
any Model Session, V-505 different realities about, I-101
“Keep it from going away” as assist, III-263, 264 atomic age, IV-102
like a session, has a beginning and an end, Audi- atomic bomb, II-362, 374; see also radiation
tor’s Code is observed and auditing comm facts about and protection from; see radiation; ALL
cycle is used, but it lacks any Model Session, About Radiation
V-505 race between Scientology and, II-450
Locational Processing as assist, VII-415 what are you going to do about it, II-292
medical treatment, assist is not substitute for, atomic radiation; see radiation
III-264; VIII-1 89 attack, defense of anything is untenable; only way to
necessary in lower zone of auditing, VIII-206 defend anything is to attack, II-157
on body by Communication Processes, III-547 attackers of Scientology had criminal records, II-167
on children, III-554 attack from psychiatrists, II-267
O/W is best repetitive process for, V-99 attacking entheta with too much entheta enturbu recovery, assist greatly speeds recovery, VIII-189 lates, I-163
Remedies A and B are not always used as assists, attacking self, I-190
V-507 attacks, form of organization to handle, I-412
rules of, VII-323 attention,
“Shut your eyes and look at my fingers”, VII-418 ARC break assessment: if pc’s attention is still on
spirit, assist is entirely in field of spirit, VIII-191 auditor correct charge has not been found,
summary, VIII-189 V-346
steps, VIII-191, 237 attention gets stuck, only thing wrong with
techniques which comprise an assist, III-260; thetan, II-317
VII-415 attention valence; see valence, attention
Temperature Assist; see Temperature Assist bank merely expresses a recording of past atten Touch Assist; see Touch Assist tion fixations, III-428
types: Auditing, Contact, Dianetic, Touch, de- case whose attention is solidly fixed on some scribed, VI-318 thing, VIII-262
types of assists, VII-322 central valence or terminal is built in to demand
worksheets, X-247 total attention from pc, IV-406
must be done,VII-191 clearing is a gradient process of finding places
association; see also Scn &8008 where attention is fixed and restoring ability
differentiation and association are two principles of pc to place and remove attention under his
of mind, III-150 own determinism, III-428
free association, I-269; II-226, 467 communication and, VIII-185
Help resolves cases because it is the basis of all concern of two viewpoints is, I-382
association, IV-ll9 consequences of fixed attention, relation to no
leads to identification, IV-l 19 “case gain”, III-428

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


attention (cont.) audit(ed)(ing),
control pc’s attention, V-30 defn, consists of discovering a spark of ARC and,
cycle of demand for, I-382 by processes and ARC, fanning it into a proud
fixed attention, manifestation and result of, flame, II-247
VIII-262 defn, that process of bringing a balance between
introversion and attention, VIII-262 freedom and barriers, II-366
invalidation is basically non-attention, I-443 defn, verbal exercising of a patient (preclear) in
master one action and center people’s attention exact Scientology processes, II-441
upon it, V-432, 433 defn, that process which restores confidence in
needle fall shows what form of mest and life confronting and undoes necessity to confront
attention is fixed upon, IV-54 thought, time, life, energy, matter and space,
pc who is having lots of PTPs has attention very III-311
fixedonsomething,IV-61,62 defn, reversing of other-determined flows by
R3R, interest is only absorbed attention and a gradient scales, putting pc at cause again,
desire to talk about it, V-301 III-465
(Secondary Scale level), IV-298 defn, any system which reduces charged condi
span of child is short, III-553 tion of time track without reducing but in
unfixing attention, III-428 creasing awareness and decisionability of pc is
by violence throws a case downscale, III-428 valid processing, any system which seeks to
must be done by increasing ability to reach handle charge but reduces pc’s awareness and
and withdraw from specific thing or person decisionability is not valid processing but is
on which attention is fixed in bank, III-428 degrading, V-287
unit; see attention unit defn, auditor gives pc something to answer, pc
yanking pc’s attention to auditor is source of a lot answers it and when pc has answered it to his
of ARC breaks, IV-43 satisfaction, auditor acknowledges it, V-426
Attention by Duplication 9, No. 4 [process], II-395 defn, a contest of maintaining rightnesses so that
Attention Objective Decision Repetitive [process], we can delete wrongnesses, VII-258
VIII-263 defn, an action by which wrongnesses can be
Attention Subjective Repetitive [process], VIII-262, deleted from case to degree that rightnesses are
263 present in session, IX-83
attention unit(s), defn, a series of methods arranged on an increas as case progresses toward Clear, I-26 ingly deep scale of bringing pc to confront the
money is attention unit of social group, I-371 no-confront sources of his aberrations and
pulling of attention units up to present time on a leading him to a simple, powerful, effective
necessity level, I-113 being, IX-3 10
attest; see also declare ability, processing is measured by gradual increase
pc may only attest one grade at a tmme, VII-80 in ability, VII-69
pc to, when he’s made it, X-153 above pc’s level gives no gain, VII-85
pc who can’t attest a grade ability at any point has abridged style auditing, V-501
to have a Repair Program and Return Program, sticks to essentials and drops rote where it
VII-70 impedes case advance, V-502
when to send pc or pre-OT to attest, VII-285 acknowledgements in, III-543
attitude(s), action of ~ is withdrawing communications, I-368
are after the fact of an evil purpose in a psycho administration, auditing requires, VII-365, 375;
case, IX-149 IX-5
C/S and auditor, IX-5 advertising auditing as “personal relations”, II-261
Dianetic breakthrough came in assessing only age and auditing, III-34
somatics, sensations, emotions, attitudes, VII-9 all style auditing, V-503
Hubbard Chart of Attitudes and Concept Run- along the lines of the wellness in the dynamic,
ning, I-275 II-109
of the professional to psychotics, I-56 and Ethics, X-46
to environment, I-152 and TRs, X-136
audience, animals, I-338
acceptance level of, II-1 54 animating a pc is not auditing, II-247
art for self-satisfaction vs. audience, VIII-196 ARC break and auditing; see ARC break
basics of appearing before, VIII-293; IX-498 ARC formal auditing, description of, III-242
different, for Scientology material, II-86 ARC in auditing, III-3 11
handling of, II-265 aspirin can produce havoc in auditing, VI-445
in rapport is different than audience of spectators, as reach and withdraw, IX-64
VIII-298; IX-500 assist; see Auditing Assist

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


audit(ed)(ing) (cont.) audit(ed)(ing) (cont.)
attitude, IV-6 comm cycle (cont.)
auditing failures, how to handle [1956], II-464 always in use, VII-235
audit perfectly, what it means, IX-66 ARC break assessment isn’t auditing because it
audit the case one is auditing, III-312 doesn’t use auditing comm cycle, V-469
availability of different grades and levels, VIII-23 auditor who interrupts or changes an auditing
Awareness Scale and auditing, VI-33 comm cycle before it is complete is Q and
babies, I-337 A-ing, V-410
bad auditing, worse than bad publicity, II-1 58 basic tool of auditing, VII-238, 239
bad, running out, IX-251 case runs on cycles of actions: auditing comm
barriers to, III-244; see also auditing, gross audit- cycle, process cycle, program cycle, VII
ing errors 261
basic auditing, V-335, 336; VI-69 charge is removed from case only by comm
dirty needle, its cause lies in basic auditing not cycle pc to auditor, V-335, 414
in technique errors, V-384, 414 communication cycles which make up the
handling of pc as a being, auditing cycle, auditing cycle, VII-244, 246; IX-71
meter, comprise the segment of processing effect of fractured comm cycle on Ethics type
known as basic auditing, V-385 case, VI-49
is called basic auditing because it goes prior to is a cycle of action; it starts with auditor
the technique, IX-64 asking a question pc can understand, get
is necessary for technique to work, V-385 ting pc to answer it and acknowledging that
is prior to technique, VII-239 answer, V-410
basic freeing action of auditing, what it depends line pc to auditor is somewhat senior to comm
upon, IV-53 line auditor to pc, V-335, 336
basic rule of, is to start with something pc can do no additives are permitted on, IX-81
and then get him to do it better, III-161, 181, to perfect muzzled auditing comm cycle use
182 Mutter TR, VI-104
being interesting is not auditing, III-355 commonest error in, is failure to use correction
body, attention must come off, before anything lists, VIII-67
helpful usually occurs by way of auditing, completion, VII-371
VI-312 condition of, II-443, 446
breaks are not counted as auditing time, IV-145 covert auditing, V-491
by Lists; see Auditing by Lists cycle, basic error of auditing cycle (diagram),
by-passed charge assessment is auditing because V-337
you clean every tick of needle on list being cycle, communication cycles which make up one
assessed, V-469 auditing cycle, VII-244, 246; IX-71
by tone arm (except in rock slam), assess by cycle, get your pc trained into what auditing cycle
needle, IV-318 is, V-490
case failure, only alter-is of routine auditing can cycle, violations of, can bring about overwhelm,
cause, VI-27 V-400
case level as an index of ~ ability is discarded, it is Dianetic auditing; see Dianetic auditing
only an index of how-hard-to-train, V-3 16 difficulties are difficulties of the communication
case set-up for auditing, VI-283 cycle, IX-63
cases undergoing Ethics actions should not be difficulties, lie more with auditor than preclear,
audited until the Ethics matter is cleared up I-432
and complete, VII-31, 96 direct style auditing means straight, concentrated,
case that wants no processing, handling of, IV-178 intense, applied in a direct manner, V-502
code; see Auditor’s Code discipline is needed to make processes work,
“coffee shop auditing” described, V-505 V-263
cognition is of the highest importance in, II-255 disseminating, II-265
coma, auditing of person in, VIII-206 dissemination, best is good auditing results, II-171
command; see command don’ts, II-414, 455, 480, 489; see also Auditor’s
comm cycle, II-314, 443; V-340; VII-235, 248; Code
IX-69, 73; see also communication cycle; drive in pc’s anchor points by shoving things at
session; TRs or gesturing toward pc, IX-76
additives on, are any action, statement, ques- force auditing into physical healing, VI-3 13
tion or expression given in addition to TRs drugs and auditing; see drugs
0-4, VII-256; IX-81 dummy auditing, III-384; see also TRs
additives on auditing comm cycle not per- auditing procedures learned by, II-341, 396
mitted, VI-59 Step Two: Acknowledgement, III-349

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


audit(ed)(ing) (cont.) audit(ed)(ing) (cont.)
dummy auditing ~cont.) goes in two stages: form a communication line; do
Step Three: Duplication, III-354 something for the pc, IX-65
Step Four: Handling Originations, III-370 grade processes to EP, X-30
earliest stage of, consists in taking over control of grades; see grades
pc to restore to pc more control of himself gradient approach of auditing, III-312
than he has had, II-443 gradient of processes, II-247
effect point, don’t process pc at, III-518 gradient scale of ability regained, V-342
end product of all auditing is a floating needle gradient scale of auditing, V-493
[1965], VI-63, 68; see also end phenomena gradient scales is inherent in, VIII-116
environment, VIII-409 great deal of value of auditing lies in mechanics of
environment influences pc’s ability to confront, session itself, IV-56
VI-359 gross auditing errors (GAEs), IV-432; V-509
essence of auditing is not finding what is wrong five, VI-93, 361
with pc and hammering at it; it is ARC han- regarding metering, VII-177-78
dled and controlled by auditor, V-426 Group Auditing; see Group Auditing
Ethics and auditing, VII-31, 96 guiding style, VI-151
experimental ~ and standard techniques, III-282 guiding secondary style is steering pc toward
exteriorization, auditing trouble after, VII-27, 36, revealing something or something revealed
42,168, 208, 281 and handling it with itsa, V-506
exteriorize individual, one of goals of, II-429 guiding style auditing consists of two-way
failure, reason for, I-432 comm that steers pc into revealing a diffi
failures, there are no auditing failures, there are culty followed by repetitive process to
only errors in auditing, IV-58 handle what has been revealed, V-500, 506
false TA, auditing pc over, VIII-409 guiding style auditing is two-way comm and
falsified auditing report puts auditor at once at formal auditing, V-500
retrain, VIII-164 has no effect on pc or pc makes very slow gains,
faults present in the auditing if clearing did not what to run, III-497
occur [R3SC], V-355 Havingness, II-500; see also havingness
finding a preclear, II-443 Havingness scale, II-499
first auditing, what to run [1961 ], IV-214 help is key button which admits auditing, IV-85
first requisite of, is a communication line, II-53 HGC auditing should convert earlier auditing los
first rule of auditing is find something pc can do ses to wins, IV-108
and improve that ability, IV-65 High Crimes concerning delivering auditing, VII floating needles and auditing; see floating needles 80
flows, auditing additional flows restimulates miss- how it becomes a problem to pc, III-195
ing flows and stacks them up as mass, VIII- how to persuade a stranger to get audited, IV-72
274, 377 illegal auditing, VII-167
flows, auditing additional flows while earlier items illness and auditing; see illness
remain Single or Triple restimulates missing incidents, if you don’t run the incidents given by
flows and stacks them up as mass, VII-210 pc he doesn’t get well, VI-346
flubless auditing, a program for, VII-375, 376 individual, in a center, II-392
flubs in TRs are basis of all confusion in sub- inflexible regimen vs. experimental auditing,
sequent efforts to audit, IV-249 IV-38
flubs, what they consist of, VII-138 injured or ill people, auditing of, must be kept
formal auditing, fairly light, VIII-238
defn, controlby ARC, III-242 insane should get rest and then exercise before
different than Tone 40 auditing, III-242 auditing, IV-88
four points of auditing error, III-285, 292 intensives, II-3 19; see also intensives
fundamental auditing, VI-325 reason for, VII-261, 419
fundamental of ~ is communication cycle, IX- interesting, beinginterestingis not ~, III-355
64 in the role of games, II-366
gains vs. training gains, II-369 introduction to auditing; see Dn Today
getting auditing into an org, VII-209 is a game of exteriorization versus havingness,
getting pc to talk to you honestly, III-3 15 II-367
gives gains by deletion, V1416 is an exact science, not an art, V-59
goal of processing is to bring individual into such is as beneficial as it is real and factual to the pc,
thorough communication with physical uni- Il-207
verse that he can regain power and ability of is a team activity, IX-5
his own postulates, 11-67 is not a limited action, VII-3

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


audit(ed)(ing) (cont.) audit(ed)(ing) (cont.)
itsa line, when it is cut ~ ceases to work, V-337 no-game condition, never process a no-game con key-note of processing is to recover unknowns, dition,onlyagame condition, II-471
II-518 OCA/APA drop after ~, pc was out of valence,
law, auditor must reduce every engram contacted VII-330
or basic engram on chain before stopping offbeat processing, III-282
session, I-19 of staff and public, X-194
length of time used in processing [1959], III-447 okays to audit in HGCs, VII-233
level of auditing, each, controls pc’s attention a one doesn’t audit carefully, one audits with a
little more than last, V-371 relaxed competence that follows the rules,
listen style auditing, V-377, 498, 511 VI-149
listing is auditing, V-53 only auditing keys out bank, VI-107
listing is slightly contrary to early auditing philos- only safe way to audit is with E-Meter, I-435
ophy, V-160 OT, goal of all processing, III-161, 181
“loses”, keep at it until it is a win, VII-5 others can get gains when oneself is processed,
LRH Model Auditing Tapes, VIII-33 IV-45
make auditors by making them audit, IV-376 outnesses, fast way to handle, is to give free audit marriage, how to audit, I-310 ing check, VIII-194
masses are released off body and out of thetan’s out of session, auditing pc over, VIII-410
bank in auditing, V-256 overrunning auditing actions, VI-241
mass occurs when flows of items are by-passed participation of pc in session; see session, in
and then later restimulated by auditing them, part of auditing is recognition of fact that truth is
VIII-381 present, VII-258
maxims, IV-217 past a persistent F/N is waste of time, VII-145
find out what pc is doing and how he is doing pc doesn’t want auditing, handling of, VII-280;
it, II-415, 516 VIII-412
process which turns on a condition will turn it pc in front of you, not some other pc or general
off, II-100 ized object, V-47
meaning of things plays a secondary role in pro- pc unwilling to be audited, what to run, III-326,
cessing to forces, VII-76 468, 497; IV-175
misunderstoods on basic words, auditing pc over, pc who isn’t cogniting regularly is being processed
VIII-410 beyond his ability to do, III-181
muzzled, III-379, 440, 504 perfectly, what it means, VII-241
defn., auditor says only two things—gives personal, relation to group processing, I-347
command and acknowledges answer to that person on a TR cycle may not also be audited,
command; if pc says anything not an an- VII-260,261,262
swer to command, auditor nods his head postoperative auditing, VI-422
and awaits an answer before giving ac- pre-auditing steps, I-421
knowledgement [1959], III-441, 451 precise answers to auditing questions, II-119
defn., stark total of TRs 0 to 4 and not any- pregnant women, I-118
thing else added, V-499 present time problems and overts, other auditing
defn., using only TR 0, 1, 2, 3 and 4 by the is not possible in presence of, V-468
text, VI-59; VII-256; IX-81 presession; see presession
defn., stating only Model Session patter and previous bad auditing can be cured by L1C on
commands and TRs, VIII-160 previous bad auditing, VII-281
is remedy for rough auditing, III-397 primary and secondary auditing styles, VI-150
of engrams, III-416 procedure(s),
when muzzled auditing should be used, III-436 are learned by dummy auditing, II-396
necessity level and auditing, I-42 general model of how one goes about address
new mother, III-361 ing a preclear, II-443: see also Model
new preclear, Session; TRs
Dianetic C/S1, VII-225, 458;see also Dia- most elementary,VII-241
netics Today technique depends upon the procedure of au-
liabilities of auditing new pcs, V-491 diting, II-396
refusal to be audited, I-475 process, auditing a, is a simple A to B action,
R-factor to new pcs, V-490 VII-289
setting up, VII-14, 47 process lag, defn., length of time it takes to reduce
no-auditing, examples of, VI-323 all communication lag from a type of question
no auditing means “while seeming to deliver audit- or action in auditing, II-130
ing, actually get nothing done”, V-220 programming; see programming


CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


audit(ed)(ing) (cont.) audit(ed)(ing) (cont.)
psychos, VIII-264 rundown, one audits a rundown as itself, not as a
psychotic persons unwilling to be audited, what to botch of several actions run into it, VII-289
run, III-468, 497 running out bad auditing, III-419; VIII-276
purpose of auditing is healthy sane people, VI-403 scanning through all ~ preclear has received, I-111
quality, X-99 Scientology auditing is more delicate than Dia
quality is raised by getting in cramming, VII-209 netic auditing, VII-21
question, pcs can say whatever else they please, Scientology isn’t just processing, that’s only one
but they must answer auditing question or no use of fundamentals, VIII-202
auditing occurs, V-490 secondary styles, V-505
reach and withdraw, auditing as, VII-239 self-auditing, I-356, 419; IV-373; VII-191
reduces time of healing, VI-312 commonest reason for, VIII-96
remedy is something you do to get pc into condi- cure for, VIII-242, 256, 353; X-94
tion for routine auditing, V-485 manifestation of overwhelm, VII-85; X-35
repair; see repair reason for, X-220
report(s); see also Auditor’s Report symptom of session or study or life over
defn., report of session given, written during whelm, X-16-17
session, on the session, VI-112 session; see session
falsified auditing report puts auditor at once at set-up actions, VII-14
retrain, VIII-164 on new pc, VII-47
falsifying an auditing report, vilest trick that skills,V-218,314
can be played on pc, VII-362 by Scientology levels [1964], V-411
in correct ~ of failed session, answer as to why five basic auditing skills, V-326
it failed is neon light big and glaring, fourgrades of, III-83
VI-449 improvement of, between R6 and or III,
of whatever type of action are simply filed X-212
chronologically in current HGC folder, IX- is a discipline in living and a know-how of the
14 parts of life, III-236
required skills of processing and why, V-314 of any student remains only as good as he can
requires relaxed state of mind of auditor and do his TRs, VII-348
confidence that his use of Scientology upon pc smoother the auditing, the better pc’s havingness
will not produce a harmful result, II-443 stays up, IV-54
requires that you obtain a better reality on your sold by intensives, V-153
environment and all its drills are aimed at this, solids, II-550
III-514 Solo auditing,
restimulated charge that is then blown gives us the admin, VIII-85
action of auditing, V-290, 347, 416 C/S + pre-OT is greater than bank, VIII-86
result(s), difference between Solo auditing and self
are best achieved in a session and a session auditing, VII-61, 106,109,422;VIII-85, 86
depends upon a self-determined agreement D of P keeps tabs on all Solo pcs, X-214-15
to be audited, V-491 failure on, X-212
do not lead pcs to expect instant results every Grade Chart steps before, [1972], VIII-21
time, VII-6 ideal Solo program, VIII-22
how to get results, VI-69, 402, 412 pcs on lines, X-214
what they depend on, IV-64 set-up, VIII-20, 312; X-249
rightness, degree of rightness present must exceed sources of failure on Solo, VII-467
wrongness you are going to pick up, IX-83 standard, X-57
room, IV-43 TRs and Solo, VII-341, 466
TR 10 on, IV-194 Solo Grades, major cause of failure on Solo
rote style auditing, V-499 Grades is inability to audit, VII-467
rough auditing reduces havingness, V-225 Solo Grades, pc cannot confront doing Solo
rudiments; see rudiments Grades, reason will be found to be drugs, VII rules, 466
don’t demand more than pc can tell you or speed,VI-417
receive less than pc has to say, V-336 spritual approach vs. physical approach, II-212
get the pc through it; what turns it on will turn stages, auditing goes in two stages: form a comm
it off; the way out is the way through, line;dosomethingforthepc,VII-240
VI-43 stamina, auditing requires, III-107
of auditing, eight big, VI-76 states attained by, VI-61; see also Scn 0-8
of basic auditing, II-255 student auditing assignments, V-431


CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


audit(ed)(ing) (cont.) audit(ed)(ing) (cont.)
student auditing, inability to clean up needle is Vitamin E assists auditing, VI-123; see also
biggest hole in, V-214 vitamins
styles of auditing, II-314; V-377, 498, 505; see volume and quality, what brings about, VII-375
also individual styles by name watch pc’s eyes, don’t take auditing actions if pc
tape recording sessions, points to look for, V-378 is not looking at you, V-336
teaches pc that he can be at cause without having where the pc’s mind is, IV-43
to be because he doesn’t dare be at effect, whole track, II-195
III-160, 180 why mechanical action necessary, II-344
team activity, VI-145, 402, 403, 412, 450; VII- wins are not always fast, total and appreciated
365 volubly, VII-5
not a game whereby auditor opposes and seeks “without the person knowing anything about it”,
to defeat pc and pc seeks to defeat auditor, V-491
II-367,443 wrongnesses, auditing is only trying to find, in
team, husband-wife auditing team, why unsuccess- order to increase rightnesses, IX-83
ful, I-309 you are running a thetan and his bank while
technique depends upon the procedure of audit- helped and hindered by body, V-255
ing, II-396 Auditing Assist, VI-318; see also assist
techniques, an informal discussion on, I-1 96 Auditing by Lists, V-423 ; VI-41, 64, 76; VII-3 1 6
terminal improperly assessed, how to detect dur- L.l and L.4, V-423
ing auditing, IV-132 auditor(s)(‘s), IV-377
test line is check on auditing quality, VIII-3 1 defn., a person assisting a teammate to gain able
theory of, III-311, 312 co-operation and teamwork toward opponents
theory of charge erasure, V-291 in life, II-366
theta-mest theory, I-360; see also theta-mest defn., a person with enough gutsto do something
theory; SOS about it, II-393
things which one must avoid, II-448 defn., a person who makes people, at their choice,
three parts: basic auditing, technique and case do various exercises, and these exercises (pro analysis, V-385 cesses) bring about changes for the better in
time, it takes as long as it takes, VII-88, 91 intelligence, behavior and general competence,
time track, auditing itself is a sort of time track, II-405
earliest session blows later sessions, VII-210; defn.,aScientologypractitioner,II-405
VIII-274, 378 defn., listener or one who listens carefully to what
to assist dying, I-490 people have to say; person trained and quali
to get auditing into a state of perfection, know fied in applying Scientology processes to
basics, know practical, V-61 others for their betterment, IX-3
tone arm action, most vital necessity of ~ at any ability as auditor related to his case, VIII-110
level of Scientology is to get, V-369 Academy stable data: new auditors should be able
tone arm, audit with TA in normal range or repair to audit in HGC [1961 ], IV-329
it so it is in normal range, VII-197; see also accepts and acknowledges goals pc has for session,
tone arm life and livingness, IV-194
Tone 40; see Tone 40 auditing acknowledgement of the preclear, II-205
tools of auditing are the Grade Chart processes administration (admin), VII-96; see also Auditor
and the numerous correction lists, VII-387 Admin Series, IX-1
totality of successful processing consists of rebal- defn., IX-3
ancing freedom, barriers, purposes, II-418 actions, VII-180, 181, 182
training, get as well as auditing, IV-133 auditor falsifying report, how to handle, VII-
TRs; see TRs 229
two “A’s” of, anaten and agitation, II-396 cramming, IX-1 13
two-way comm; see communication, two-way forms and worksheets are never recopied, VII -
uses of auditing, VII-2 215
any human situation containing pain or mis- handwriting, illegible, how to handle, VII-433
emotion should be handled by auditing, out admin—liability,VII-96
VII-2 responsibility for admin, IX-3
fever, handling with auditing, VII-335 room, X-83
pc’s desire or complaint, no reason or excuse what it includes, IX-3
not to actually handle these with auditing, advantages of being part of group, VII-366
VII-4 all auditors talk too much, VIII-160
using Scientology to handle situations in life is a alter-is auditor, changes when pc changes, V-75
whole subject in itself and it isn’t ~, V-491 altitude, I-20; see also Science of Survival


CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


auditor(s)(‘s) (cont.) auditor(s)(‘s) (cont.)
and pc as group; see SOS case supervision and auditor,
and pc get into games condition only when audi- auditor accepting a C/S, VII-44, 356
tor refuses help to pc, IX-283 auditor accepting verbal C/S instruction is a
and pc, when they are cleared for session, only High Crime, VII-94
then begin on case, III-301 auditor-as-a-C/S, action of, VII-180, 205
ARC break assessment and auditor; see ARC auditor does not let a C/S C/S hopefully, he
break assessment refuses C/Ses until an FES is done and bug
ARC break in session, auditor not handling, re- found, VII-358
medy of, VIII-409 auditor may not C/S in auditing chair while
ARC breaks with auditors, III-430 auditing pc, VII-356
ARC with the preclear, II-237 auditor responsibility for C/Ses, VII-44, 355
asminister,II-262,355 auditor’s C/S, defn., sheet on which auditor
assess, auditor who can’t assess lists, results of, writes the C/S instructions for next session,
VIII-426 IX-10, 29
assessment weaknesses, remedy of, VIII-233 auditor should never take a verbal or written
assignment policies, VI-420 correction that is not in an HCO B or tape,
attitude, II-341; IX-5, 285; see also TRs VII-363
on Integrity Processing, IX-285 auditor who knows he goofed and yet gets a
required to confront the world, III-108 well done holds the C/S in contempt and
to pc’s data, IV-129 his auditing worsens, VII-398
toward self, VII-365 auditor who knows his tech is able to hold the
auditingalone willhave case failures, VI-402 line on any given action in auditing or
auditing by rote will make mistakes, I-129 C/Sing and not mix up, VII-289
auditing pc who is out of session, handling of, C/Sing in chair, handling of, VIII-411
VIII-410 C/S omits “Fly a rud” or “Fly ruds” does not
avoid use of “you” to pc, V-161 justify ~ auditing pc over out ruds, VII-357
bad “auditor”, V-32 C/S proving unworkable during session, audi
bad auditor talks too much to pc and stops pc tor has a right to end off, VII-44, 356
from properly answering, III-308, 544 C/S rein, even best auditors go bad when they
bad auditor vs. dangerous auditor, VI-149 no longer have a tight C/S rein, VIII-165
basic course for, II-368 HCO Bs and tapes are stable data that form
basic fundamentals, when they are securely the agreement between auditor and C/S, VII- auditor’s own there is no need for him to be 279
told what must be done, III-425 Case Supervisor actions regarding auditor; see case
basics, auditor out basics, VIII-409 supervising
basics: metering, TRs, understanding of Auditor’s causes a restimulation and then pc needs to an Code, basic theory of human mind, strict swer question to get rid of restimulation,
honesty and honor as an auditor, IX-91 VII-244; IX-69
become an auditor; see Dianetics Today CCHs and auditors; see CCHs
becomes an auditor when he or she finds out that certainty and results, I-357
it’s the basics that count, V-425 certainty, pc’s reaction to, I-357
being audited should be content to be a pc for the certificates, purpose of, I-400
term of the session, II-162 certified auditor, III-83, 84
Board, X-83 characteristics of, II-255
book auditor, III-83, 84, 85 checkout of Quad Dianetics, X-92
by-passed charge, indicating BPC is a necessary checkoutsarerequiredbeforeapplication,VI-156
auditor action which at first glance may seem classes of auditors [1961] , IV-385, 439
evaluative, V-465 classification and interneships, program of, [1972],
calling pc’s attention to meter or TA or his hands VIII-13
in session, handling of, VIII-410 classifications of, [1956], II-510
can assume that pc is in a native state, II-281 classifications [1965], VI-34
can be smoothed out as cases by running a Com- Class VI auditor, things he should know [1964],
munication Process on “an auditor” and “a V-412
preclear”, III-505 Class VIII; see Class VIII
can run courses in his living room, II-391 clearance (rudiment), IV-41, 194
can’t control pc, cure for, IX-80 clearing the auditor; see clearing the auditor
case, I-419 Code; see Auditor’s Code
auditors don’t have, VII-362 command, auditor must know when pc has finish
case of, depends upon his skill, II-122; VIII-110 ed answering, IX-73


CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


auditor(s)(‘s) (cont.) auditor(s)(‘s) (cont.)
commands, before auditor gives them, he makes E-Meter, ~ does not tell pc anything about meter
certain he has pc’s attention on him again and or its reads ever, except to indicate F/N, VII
off last question, III-296 259
comm breakdowns, auditor has to assume respon- E-Meter, don’t use distractingly, VII-22, 230
sibility for all comm breakdowns in session, E-Meter goes null on a gradient scale of misses by
VII-250, 428 auditor; the more misses the less meter reads,
comm cycle, auditor watches pc’s comm cycle; V-105
auditor’s own is perfect, VII-248; IX-73 end phenomena, remedy of auditor errors in han
comm cycle, roughness of auditor’s comm cycle dling, VIII-273
can prevent not only a release from occurring environment, auditor is responsible for session
but can prevent rehabilitation, VI-66, 76 environment, VIII-409
comm line to pc, auditor must keep in, VII-242, errors, VII-206; X-43, 90, 92-93, 97,122
243 acknowledging too little, V-292
comm line to pc, process doesn’t work until audi- acting like a spectator instead of being in con
tor has a, IX-66 trol, V-74, 273
competence depends upon auditor being able to asserting rightness, making others wrong,
receive and give forth a process as it has been V-327
found to work, II-53 auditor errors add charge; pc then is over
complete precision required of today’s ~, V-52 whelmed, V-401
confidence, III-379 auditor goofing, what it means regarding train auditor who inspires, VI-359 ing, VII-301
importance of, V-326 auditor has right to know what he did wrong,
increased by standardized sessions, IV-53 VII-48, 363
Confront a Preclear [process], II-545 auditors who begin to goof, how to handle by
control, cure for auditor who can’t control pc, two-way comm or earlier purpose, VI-306
VI-140 auditor who can’t get reads, how to handle,
controlling the pc, II-17 VII-273
control of session, IV-373 auditor who refuses to audit his quota of hours
course graduate becomes an ~ by auditing, VII- or sessions is subject to action, VII-44, 355
331 causing a null prepared list, VIII-213
Cramming and flubless auditors, X-183 cleaning a clean meter is asking for trouble,
cramming auditors, IX-90, 112 V-335
crimes, two biggest, are rough and choppy audit- come from inability to confront, faulty meter
ing and overestimating level of case, III-397 ing, misunderstoods or out-ethics, VIII-164
cycle of decline of an auditor and student, VI-273 consistently missing charge or consistently fail dangerous, VI-149 ing to anticipate missed charge, result of,
dangerous auditor, characteristics of and remedy V-286
for, V-32, 36 cure for auditor who can’t control pc, VII-255
data, X-147, 148 cure for auditor who is “letting pc itsa”, VII - Dianetic auditing is fundamental background of 254
auditor, VI-325 disagreement with data measures degree of un Dianetic auditor; see Dianetic auditor workability he’ll enter into processing,
dirty needle and auditor; see dirty needle V-326
dissemination of information to a pc is completely don’t gesture toward pc, VII-250, 251, 428
forbidden by the Auditor’s Code, 1954; this is failure to take pc’s data; you take pc’s data,
evaluation, II-161 never take his orders, V-292, 415
distracting pc, VIII-160 new auditor flubs, VII-93
does not grade his own session, IX-29 not intentional, II-394
does not invalidate, criticize or evaluate for pc, out TRs and no impingement get no reads,
VI-321 V-82
“dog pcs”, remedy for auditor with, VIII-147 Q and A, V-37, 74, 410
don’t drive in anchor points by shoving things at repeating what the pc said, V-161, 414
or gesture toward pc, V-161 establishing auditor with pc, III-314
don’t run thought out faster than havingness and establish the existence of the auditor, II-250
solids run in, II-489 ethical auditor, what he does, III-392
don’t talk to pc much during session, III-379 Ethics, auditor to, VI-50
don’t work with severely ill or insane, II-268 evaluation, VIII-160
duplicate, auditor willingness to, VIII-109 accidental evaluation may occur when auditor
education and, I-124 repeats what pc said, V-161, 414


CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


auditor(s)(‘s) (cont.) auditor(s)(‘s) (cont.)
evaluation (cont.) has more control over pc’s reactive mind than pc,
auditor never says what overt is, for that’s reasonwhy,IV-332
evaluation, V-464 has to be skilled on one process at least and know
auditor repeating what pc says, IX-75 all about it before he can do two, V-432
consists of telling pc what to think about his having low ARC, cause of, III-516
case, IV-129 havingness of pcs, II-501
failing to handle E-Meter, chief reason is TR fail- HGC Auditor’s Sec Check, IV-356
ures, IV-261, 264, 432 honesty of, determines his results, VIII-26
fail to make pc feel they are interested in pc when how auditor knows pc is exteriorized, II-12
they handle him with poor ARC, III-242 how to handle auditor saying “Process didn’t
falsifying report, how to handle, VIII-292, 386 work”, IV-1 18, 432
field auditor targets, V-432 how to increase pc’s willingness to confront past,
file clerk’s faith in, I-18 III-489
Find a Pc [process], II-250 impingement on pc, auditor has to have, to assess,
firefight is quarrel between auditor and pc, VIII- IX-224
291, 385 inexperienced, X-191
first should know tools before going in for artistic, interest in case, from auditor and pc, III-405
I-305 interneship, auditors must take interneship after
flaws show up glaringly only on rough pcs, IX-224 each course, VII-331, 332
flinching from pc,how to handle,II-500 invalidation and evaluation of pc is just plain
flunks a C/S instruction and can’t get it going, villainy, VII-230
remedy for, VI-282 invalidation of auditor by C/S, VII-128, 278, 379
F/Ning auditors, VII-412 is an individual, you can train individual auditors
F/Ning something else than question asked is Q not a mass of auditors, VIII-12
and A, VIII-222, 223 is a real auditor when his or her pcs don’t overtalk
handling of, VIII-410 or undertalk but answer auditing question and
forcing pc, why auditor mustn’t, VI-369, 442 happily now and then originate, IX-79
fully responsible for session, IV-43, 373 is in absolute control of bank—it always does what
games condition, auditors and pcs get into, only you tell it to do,V-413
when auditor refuses help to pc, VIII-180 itsa, a silent auditor invites itsa, V-370
general working rules for, I-62 job of auditor is to free thetan by digging him out
get the preclear through it, example, II-31 of his time track, V-288
getting and keeping pcs, II-443 judgment, V-316
getting into communication with pc, II-20, 500, leaving Cramming go through Examiner, X-193
553 legal attacks on an auditor, how to handle, II-156
getting pc in session, II-16, 217 length of time to become an auditor, III-329
getting pc sessionable, II-17 “letting the pc itsa”, cure for, IX-79
give pc nothing but wins, II-443 levels of auditors and processes [1957], III-84
giving pc full hours, IV-145 line to the pc, what’s-it line, IX-68
goal(s)of,II-121,487 list of auditor’s efforts, emotions and thoughts
auditor and pc, VIII-110 related to processing which must be run, I-216
stack up on a gradient scale between thetan lists, auditor who can’t get reads on, consequences
inoperative and thetan who can operate, and remedy of, VIII-233, 234
III-155, 175 make auditors by making them audit, IV-376
to discover an ability in pc and improve it, making pc physically well without pc finding out
III-5, 159,178 about it, III-182
to help pc re-establish confidence in his ability may only take advice on cases from C/S, VI-49
to confront thetans, thought, time, life, means”alistener”,V-335
energy, matter and space, III-311 minimum hours of, X-85
good auditor, actions of, V-426, 427 misunderstoods on basic words, auditing pc over,
goofing, what it means regarding training, IX- handling of, VIII-410
398 morale depends on honest completions, X-180
group, advantages of being part of, IX-6 morale, what it depends on, VII-380
hand cream, applying during session is wrong, must be able to duplicate, III-355
handling of, VIII-411 must be interested not interesting, VII-230
handling pc who is not co-operative, III-159, 178 must be perfect on a meter, defined, V-104
handwriting, how to handle, IX-44 must check out on materials before application,
handwriting, poor, illegible worksheets, VIII-412 VII-173, 378
has initiative, II-393


CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


auditor(s)(‘s) (cont.) auditor(s)(‘s) (cont.)
must know basic laws and mechanics of time track plus pc versus bank is a lot more than the bank,
in order to run engrams, V-273 when auditor is part of a third dynamic, IX-6
must know Dianetics to understand mind and poorer he is, the simpler actions he’s assigned,
aberration, VI-160 V-217
must look at rightnesses of pc, not just wrong- practice, it isn’t “talent” that makes good auditor;
nesses, VII-257; IX-82 it is practice, VIII-426
musts to make pc gain and cognite, VII-230 processing of, I-216
natural auditor and dangerous auditor, difference purpose of, is to give pc certain and exact com between, V-32 mands which pc can follow and perform, II- necessity for auditors to review entire process of 441
evolution of the science, I-489 Q and A, VIII-222, 223
needs his periodic drills and exercises or he goes change in pc causes auditor to stop or change
sloppy, VIII-165 process, IV-218
need subjective reality on bank, IV-374, 376 questions, asking odd non-process questions while
negative criticism undermines auditors, VI-409 “doing a process”, VIII-160
nerve, essential ingredient of auditor, II-27 questions, the less specific and sequitur the better
never repeats anything pc says after him, no the results withpc, II-144
matter why, VII-250, 428; IX-75 raising cause level of, V-434
new auditors, VI, 413, 420 real auditor’s pcs don’t overtalk or undertalk but
not in comm with pc means no cognition, answer auditing question and happily now and
VII-241; IX-66 then originate, VI-139; VII-254
not understanding what pc said or meant, how to reality vs. pc’s reality, IV-129
handle, V-161, 414 reason for hatred toward, I-438
object is to get pc to look so that pc can tell the reasons why some auditors cannot run engrams on
auditor, V-23, 335, 415 pcs, V-287
observation of pc, V-357, 360 recovery, VIII-60
on staff, [1956] procedure for putting, II-519 recruiting staff auditors, VIII-12
Operating Thetan, only goal worthy of auditor’s refusing to audit is in fact an admission, in most
attention, III-176 cases, of feared inability to audit, VIII-149
opinion, X-171 relaxed attitude to pc, II-346
orders, auditor giving orders that are not part of remains at cause in all sessions without forbidding
any process is very bad, VIII-160 pc to be at cause, III-161, 181
OT Zero and TR 0 are routine action for auditors, Repair Programs, new auditors shouldn’t do, VII
VIII-164 93
overrunning due to false TA, handling of, VIII- repeating not only does not show pc he heard but
411 makes him feel auditor is a circuit, IX-75
overwhelming pc, II-399 report; see Auditor’s Report
pc actions all have an exact auditor response, V-59 research worker in the field of illness, II-353
pc and auditor as two pole system to as-is mass, response when he doesn’t understand pc, VII-250,
VII-238; IX-63 428; IX-75
pc exterior and good win, auditor carrying on past responsibility, X-1, 228
and asking “say or ask”, handling of, VIII-410 responsible for session, V-161, 414, 425, 426
pc finding the auditor, II-444 results, auditor isn’t getting results means either
pc gain, auditor unhappy about, III-454 he or pc is doing something else, VI-91
pc plus auditor is greater than the bank, auditor results, auditors are not gauged by results, but by
plus bank is greater than the pc, pc minus flawless application of standard tech, VI-273
auditor is less than the bank, VI-359 results, auditor who doesn’t consistently get re
pc red tag, auditor action, VIII-320 sults is going to have his own case cave in on
pc’s attention, don’t pull over to auditor, VII-21 him, VIII-110
pc’s reality, what auditor believes has little to do retraining of, II-163
with, VI-345 Review auditors, VI-126, 399
pc’s somatics, auditor doesn’t get, IX-63 rights of auditor, VII-44, 355; X-1, 9; see also
perception of pc, V-357 Dianetics Today
personal reputation of, II-346 abuse of, X-225
pictures, auditor always has more control over addition revised, X-227
pc’s mental image pictures than pc does, VI- and correction lists, X-227
342 modified, X-225
plus pc is greater than pc’s bank, VII-230, 366; right to choose pcs modified, VIII-149
VIII-86 right to reject or accept pcs he is given,
VII-44,355


CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


auditor(s)(‘s) (cont.) auditor(s)(‘s) (cont.)
role of; see also Advanced Procedure and Axioms touching the pc, II-553
rudiments of auditor, trainees come under Interne Supervisor, VIII-12,
auditors who have PTP of how to get case gain 13
for their pcs, VII-326 trainees, personnel pools for, VIII-12
auditor who goes sad is auditing pcs over his training; see also training
own ARC break, VII-362 and skill of, I-365
auditor worried about his pc is working over a is not only for professional auditors, IX-434
problem, VII-362 sending auditors to upper orgs for, VIII-13
overts and withholds on pcs, VII-277, 289, stages,VII-152
345, 362 treating pc as a victim, III-516
running the preclear’s machinery, II-218 trouble with an ARC breaky pc or no gain, how to
session, auditor is responsible for session, VII-235, handle auditor who has, V-58
250, 428; IX-75 TRs and auditors; see TRs
session, ending session is totally up to auditor, two-way comm, auditor doing without C/S, handl VII-44, 356 ing of, VIII-411
skill, V-315, 326 two-way communication, not using can cause fail
by case level [1963], V-314 ed pcs, II-146
is directly measured by amount of TA he can unable to produce good results, cause and handl
get, V-373, 413 ing of, III-~85, 292
mark of skilled auditor is ability to remedy a understanding of pc’s answer, VIII-395
case and then get on with routine auditing, unusual solutions, VI-49
V-485 upper level auditors, VIII-376
somatics, auditor doesn’t get pc’s somatics, VII- using a process on which he has high reality will
238 obtain high results with a pc, III-60
speed, VI-417, 420 validated auditor [1957], III-84
error can also stem from, VIII-273 vision, auditor is expected to see meter, pc and
staff auditor(s)(‘s), III-83, 84 worksheet all at one time, VII-178, 464
advices, VI-49 what an auditor should know, I-368, 488
groove in for wins and TA action, V-327 what he is working to do, I-245
grounds on which to refuse to process or re- what is required to get bonuses, VII-1 84
lease a pc, III-51 what it takes to make a real auditor, VIII-426
requirements, VIII-12 what LRH thinks of auditors, II-393
responsibilities, IV-214, 219 who can audit an uneducated pc is a jewel, VII
trainee programming, VIII-12 225, 458
training of, [1961], IV-389 who cannot audit, whose TRs are out, whose
statements, permitted auditor statements, V-464 metering is bad and who never keeps the Code
statistic of auditor, VII-129, 147; VIII-150 always says his pcs are dogs, VIII-147
steering pc, IX-283 who can’t do his TRs can’t audit, VI-138; IX-78
students in Academy are auditors, not pcs, III-250 who chops up pc with bad TRs may see TA go
suffer from association with psychologists and below 2, VI-419
psychiatrists, II-389 who have no pcs write procurement letters, VII survive better than other people, II-393 184
takes pc’s data, never his orders, V-415 who reports “it didn’t work”, handling of, VI-7,
taking order from pc causes pc to ARC break, 28
IV-373, 374 who sets himself up to be resisted will fail, II-17
target of auditor is pc’s reactive mind, IV-428 who tries to make pc guilty is violating Clause 15
target of the auditor, II-41 of Auditor’s Code, IX-272
technician and artist, I-305 who won’t hear what pc is saying, VI-22
tendency to invent new processes, II-345 why auditor mustn’t force pc, VII-414
test of, VIII-427 will always be senior to Clears, III-237
supreme test of an auditor, VII-289, 290 willingness to duplicate, II-121
three hats of, V-387 with low hours needs TRs, IX-102
time track obeys auditor; time track does not wonderful, withpooradmin could flop, II-387
obey a preclear (early in auditing), V-274 working alone, decline of, VII-366; IX-6
tone arm and auditor; see tone arm worksheets, IX-44; X-196
tone level of auditor necessary to handle case; see writing up C/Ses, X-200, 201, 202
Science of Survival Auditor Correction List—auditor recovery, VIII-
tools, auditor has to know his tools very well to 60
be able to observe pc, VI-90 Auditor Integrity List, IX-300


CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


Auditor’s Code, I-62; see also DTOT; NOTL; SOS; auto-control, no-confidence induces a sort of ~ in
CDN; Scn 8-80; Dn 55!; COHA; CMSCS session which induces a dirty needle, V-93
defn, governing set of rules for general activity of automatic actions, II-409
auditing, II-441 automatic answers, II-235
addition to the, III-82 automatic bank,
basic auditing rules, II-255 defn., when a pc gets picture after picture after
bogged-down case due to ~ breaks, I-18 picture all out of control, VI-343
breaks in running SOP 8-C, II-13 cause of, how to handle, VI-343
change [1958], III-306 automaticity, automaticities, II-541
dirty needle, breaking Auditor’s Code causes, VI- defn, fact of taking pictures automatically simply
375 by putting out flitter, I-416
dissemination of information to pc is completely defn, something is going on and we do not know
forbidden by Auditor’s Code 1954; this is its cause, II-225
evaluation, II-161 defn., non self-determined action which ought to
is auditing tool, not just a nice idea, VII-227; bedeterminedbyindividual,II-541
VIII-289, 384 harm comes from automaticity only when people
is observed in giving an assist and auditing comm have forgotten that something has been put on
cycle is used, V-505 automatic, II-225
is to protect the pc and auditor, II-442 increasing learning rate by drill usually only in
No. 19, III-417 creases familiarity and automaticity, III-22
OCA/APA profile dropped, auditor code break, is discharged by indicating area of charge only,
handling of, III-285 V-282
out, prevents case gain, VII-230 of form, solution to, III-210
pc, challenged by an “auditor” who is breaking ~, of making pictures, II-231
gets solid reaction in reactive bank, reason randomity and, II-142, 533
why, VI-291 remembering and forgetting, greatest automaticity
processes do not work when administered outside in which anyone was engaged, II-221
Auditor’s Code and without skillfully prac- responsibilityand,III-167
ticed TRs, V-263 we take over automaticities only to rehabilitate
Scientologist operates within boundaries of Audi- ability of thetan, III-232
tor’s Code and Code of a Scientologist, III-281 Auxiliary Pre-Have 3D Scale, IV-434
when pc goes more anaten than when not being avalanches, outflowing and inflowing, II-39; VIII-106;
audited, he is in grip of real or affected code see also havingness
break and is out of session, II-322 awareness, VIII-406
1954, full description of each point, II-96 defn, ability to perceive existence of, VIII-182;
1956, II-442 IX-346
Auditor’s Report, VI-246, 363; VII-215; see also assessing the awareness levels on pc, VI-190
auditing report; auditor admin;DMSMH; CDN awareness change is the indication of effect, I-359
Crime to copy it, VI-247, 364 communication and, II-191
Crime to give any session or assist without making description of, II-191
an ~, VI-247, 364 E-Meter locates charged areas below awareness of
Form, IX-39, 40 pc and verifies that charge has been removed,
defn., outline of what actions were taken dur- V-334, 416
ing session, made out at end of each ses- E-Meter measures awareness depth of pc, VI-358
sion, IX-10 healing, restoration of awareness is often neces commands are written out in full on, IX-42 sary before healing can occur, VI-3 18
use of, V-444; see also Auditor Admin Series, IX-1 if one can confront he can be aware; if he is aware
authoritarianism, I-128 he can perceive and act, VIII-182
a graded scale, I-178 inability to differentiate is a decline in, IV-122
anessayon,I-173 increased, is only factor which offers any road
concept of, I-178; see also suppressive person out, III-107
discovered readily in psychometry, I-180 is certainty, I-359
is little more than a form of hypnotism, III-424 item which does not read on meter when assessed
or authority exists in ratio to amount a curtain is is beyond pc’s level of awareness, VI-357
lowered across ARC lines, I-179 level of awareness, I-356
authorities, field containing the most ~ contains least level of awareness—that of which a being is aware,
codified knowledge, VI-83; IX-489 VI-33
authority and preponderance of agreement ordinarily scale of, I-378; II-191; see also Scn 0-8
make man accept things, III-420 Scientology addresses improved ~, VI-329, 378
authorship, mis-responsibility is miscalling of, III-98 triangle of certainty of, I-378


CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


awareness of awareness unit, I-379; II-211; see also Bachelor of Scientology and Hubbard Advanced Au thetan; Dianetics ‘55! ditor Course, II-339, 345, 559; see also B.Scn.
builds space to cut down knowingness, II-176 backlog, don’t allow a backlog of pcs, VII-5
has no mass, meaning or mobility, position or backtrack, pcs who won’t go, reasons and remedies
movement in space, has qualities and poten- for, VIII-276, 388, 389; IX-251; X-7; see also
tials, II-143 past lives
postulate made by ~ is higher manifestation than backwards C/Sing (towards significance), X-29-30
any energy-space manifestation, II-215 bacteria, bacterial,
thetan, , is understanding, II-137 illness caused by recognizable bacteria and injury
Awareness Scale, I-378; II-191; see also Scn 0-8 in accident are best treated by physical means,
Axiom(s); see also SOS; AP&A; HFP; COHA; A&L; II-153
PXL; Scn 0-8; Dn Today infection, accidents and illness are predetermined
defn., self-evident truth as in geometry, II-435 by spiritual malfunction and unrest, II-153
as valid today as they were, I-345 intestinal bacteria, VIII-408
known cold at HAA level, II-296 structure and, I-431
not-isness (Axiom 11), how to bring under pc’s bad action,defn., I-293
knowing control and to reduce the not-isness bad acts, defn., those acts which cannot be easily
in pc’s bank, III-489 experienced at the target end, III-432
of Dianetics, survival is basic, I-6 bad auditor; see auditor, bad
of Scientology, first ten, are the most fundamen- bad Exam Reports, X-96; see also Exam Reports
tal truths, II-436 bad indicator; see indicator, bad
of Scientology, 1-10 explained, II-435 bad, people are never as bad as they think they are,
of SOP 8-C, II-13 IV-24
primary Dianetic; see Original Thesis balance, Chloro- and Aureo- families of antibiotics
psychology is in actual use a dramatization of can affect sense of balance, VIII-406
Axiom 10, wholly reactive, III-499 bank; see reactive mind
Scientology as a science is composed of many, barbarianism, violence leads to, III-343
II-435 barbarism,
Scientology Axiom 58, III-393 how to cure, III-252
Scientology, principles and axioms of, are con- whatitis,III-251
siderations agreed upon and from which stem barrier(s); see also game conditions
this universe and livingness, III-344 defn., sp, .e, energy, object obstacles, or time,
therapeutic processes easily derived from, I-242 II-15
thetanisdefined in Axiom 1, III-223 defn., composed of inhibiting (limiting) ideas,
Axiom 10, space, energy, masses and time, II-422
becomes confused by thetan with cycle of action, absence of, is the trouble with pc when pc is
III-539 having trouble, II-499
cycle of action, Axiom 10 and communication auditing is that process of bringing a balance bet formula become identified, IV-35 ween freedom and barriers, II-366
psychology is in actual use a dramatization of causing few barriers one loses control over them,
Axiom 10, wholly reactive, III-499 II-439
Axiom 11, III-489 freedom and barriers, workable balance between,
Axiom 28, II-422
amended, VIII-185 how they can trap a man, II-423
relationship to process workability, IV-155 losing control over, II-423
Axiom 51 and Communication Processing, II-240 mest universe is a game consisting of, II-15
Axiom 55: create, change, destroy, II-3 13 problems of ~ or their lack, how resolved, II-15
Axiom 58, III393 space is the first barrier of knowingness, II-11
Azimuth meter, VI-388; VII-178 basic,
use of, to see reads, X-80 disability of the pc, I-361
dynamic principle of existence is: survive!, I 167
B goals, I-187
impulse is to produce an effect, I-482
personality; see personality, basic
baby, babies; see also child purpose, I-37; X-11, 22
at birth, is not perceptive beyond first dynamic, reason—basic principles, I-148
II-412 unit of this universe is two not one, IV-62
auditing of, I-337 Basic Affinity Process, “What would you like to con
how to feed and handle, III-361 front?”, III-536


CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


basic area, be, being, beingness (cont.)
defn., I-25 above havingness there is doingness, and above
engrams, I-17 doingness there is beingness, and above being most vital area in case,I-17 ness there is communicatingness, and above
unconsciousness, reason for removal of, I-25 communicatingness there is knowingness, and
basic auditing; see auditing, basic above knowingness there is postulatingness, II-
basic-basic, I-468 183
defn., first engram on the whole time track, V-274 assumed by oneself or given to oneself, or is
defn., most basic basic of all basics and results in attained, II-410
clearing, VI-343 assumption of beingness, III-257, 258, 271, 272;
basic course(s); see also HAS; HQS see also valences
for auditors, II-368 basic escape is into another being, thus one ac
give people the tools to live better, II-369 quires beingnesses to escape, IV-368
give precise definitions, II-391 be, do and have depend on communication, III-92
in Scientology, II-76, 352 be—do—have coordinated, IV-206
all qualified auditors should run, II-416 be, have and do, relationship to space, time and
materials of, II-368, 382, 391 energy, I-295
need to teach everybody a ~, II-369 being [the person]; see being
with before and after Scientometric tests, II-451 being, having, doing—triangular interrelationship,
basic of chain, I-296
defn., first incident (engram, lock, overt act) on beingness is more involved with havingness than
any chain, V-274 with confront, IV-122
defn., first experience recorded in mental image cause and effect, and beingness, I-406
pictures of that type of pain, sensation, VI-343 Certainty Processing and, I-406
blowdowns indicate a basic has been reached, communication, space, synonymsin action, I-326,
VII-I 352
chain is held in place by basic for that chain, condition of, II-410
VI-400 course creates a beingness, not imparts data, III - charge is held in place by basic on chain, V-41, 464
290 covert theft of beingness, III-257
engram contains pain and unconsciousness; its decision to be, I-375
basic would be a physical duress not a symp- reason behind, I-358
tom resulting from that duress, VI-352 DEI Scale on beingness, III-271
first incident of any chain is fully or partially doingness, havingness and ~ must be balanced;
unknown to person, V-28, 41 each must be flexible in pc for a stable gain,
floating needle always occurs when basic on chain IV-207
erases, VII-117 Goals Processing finds beingness and mind’s doing incidents, later than basic incidents are run either ness toward it (Prehav Scale) and results in
to uncover more basic (earlier) incidents or to havingness, IV-207
clean up chain after basic has been found and granting of, II-69, 247
erased, V-290 auditor must be willing to grant beingness to
relation to Technique 80, I-300 the pc, II-100, 255
running somatic permits you to get to a basic, highest of human virtues, ability to assume or
VII-9 to grant (give, allow) beingness, II-411
somatic chains go quickly to basic and are the increase in ability of pc to grant life to others
important chains, VI-394 and environment, II-255
Basic Program, defn., laid out in Classification and Help [process] handles problems of beingness,
Gradation Chart, IX-27; X-11 , 22 IV-110,119
basics, ideal state of; see Handbook for Preclears
list of out basics and references to correct them, increasing by doing without having, I-296
VIII-409 in life experience space becomes beingness, II-13
tech basics are not cancelled by later develop- of child, increased by Scientology, I-320
ments, VII-100 preclear who assumes aches of another wishes to
B complex, Bland C, VI-422; see also nutrition be that other; he is short on beingnesses, III-272
BD, see blowdown Six Steps to Better Beingness, I-424
be, being, beingness, VIII-118; see also being [the space could be said to be Be,I-295
person]; Beingness Processing states of, attained by processing, VI-20, 61
defn., assumption (choosing) of a category of struggle of people to be themselves, II-416
identity: role in a game; example of beingness thetan tends to move from source beingness to
—one’s own name, II-410 effect beingness, IV-131


CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


be, being, beingness (cont.) between lives (cont.)
valences are mocked up other-beingnesses a person implants, V-333
thinks he is, IV-104 series, III-226
beams, pressor and pulling, I-290 big mid ruds; see rudiments, middle
“beating the meter”, IV-421 Big Tiger Drill, V-196
beauty; see Scn 8 - 80 biochemistry and nutrition, VIII-204, 205; see also
beefing up the bank, cause of, IV-35 nutrition
been after, PTS RD step, VIII-343 lie below spirit and mind and could be loosely
Before and After Solids [process], II-488 considered to be undercut as they do impede
beggars, philosophy of, I-476 spiritual gain, VIII-203
begin Dianetics with Pc Assessment Sheet, X-168 may not work at all until stress is relieved by
beginning of incident, erasure depends in some meas- processing, VIII-206
ure on pc getting to, VI-376 “Biolactyl”, dosage of intestinal bacteria, VIII-408
beginning rudiments; see rudiments, beginning bio-physics, founded by Scientology, II-431
behavior, birth,
dynamics of and prediction of; see SOS and “assumption”, I-439
human, I-473 auditing of, VI-379
mannerisms as an index to change, X-35 do not run prenatal or birth engrams unless they
Tone Scale gives a prediction of human behavior, come up naturally, VI-163
II-413; see also SOS engrams; see Original Thesis
two types-that calculated to be constructive and ideal conditions for, III-361
that calculated to be disastrous, V-407 interiorization occurs at birth, that’s an engram;
underlying facts in odd human ~, VI-292 exteriorization occurs at death, that’s an en
Behavior and Physiological Scale; see Scn 0-8 gram, VII-28
being; see also be; thetan prenatal experience and; see also DMSMH
at different lifetimes is good and evil, V-408 prenatals and conception are a bounce from a
basically prosper only when they are self-deter- death, III-411
mined and can be pan-determined to help in running out delivery, VII-2
prosperity of all, VIII-130 trauma, II-466
basic certainties of, I-359 within a few minutes after it, assumption occurs,
insistence on rightness is a last refuge of, VIII-257; III-226
IX-249 birth control pills, VII-389
recognition of rightness of, IX-82 black, blackness, I-360, 399
spiritual being, timeless and deathless, proof that defn., simply pressing on things to push them
individual is, VII-27, 168 away, II-497
when you add something to the being he gets cases, II-473; IV-9
worse, VII-257; IX-82 resolution of, 1I-217
who is something cannot observe it; being who desire to be effect and inability to be cause, I-395
looks at something ceases to be it, V-50 field, III-191, 256; VIII-124
Beingness Processing, I-416; 1144, 53; see also be defn., some part of mental image picture
apathy on Universe or Beingness Processing, cause where pc is looking at blackness, VI-342
of and remedy, II-44 handling of, I-361
is best solution to valences, III-257, 271 indicative of scarcity of viewpoints, I-433
belief or faith, Scientology demands no, and thus is itself is only a picture, II-229
not in conflict with faith, III-514 probable cause of “all black” on Green Form,
betrayal, VI-258
defn., action of having things pounded in and held screens,
against one, I-361 how to resolve, I-437
defn., help turned to destruction, III-219 purpose of, II-178; VIII-114
defn., to be disloyal or faithless to, VIII-102 tremendous saturation abilities of, II-22
Danger RD step, person to work out how out- types of, II-547
ethics situation is betrayal of group, VIII-103 black and white, phenomenon of, I-445; see also Scn
medicine considering man a body is a sort of 8-80
betrayal, IV-86 Black Dianetics, I-280
relationship to help; see help black five, II-178
better, defn., negative gains; things disappear that is so far gone he can’t even see pictures any
have been annoying or unwanted, III-428 more, he only sees blackness in front of him,
between lives; see also History of Man II-229
areas, might have passed at one time or another blackmail and punishment are keynotes of all dark
for heaven or hell, II-433 operations, IV-28

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


blame, blow up,
defn., arbitrary election of cause, I-210 item, X-131
and regret, I-213 F/N item, X-141
blaming pc, VII-277 of low TA, rule only applies to C/S Series 37R,
blanketing; see History of Man VII-272
blank periods, X-156 blue sheet, the Return Program is on, X-14, 21
blindness, III-38 bodhi,
cases, I-434 defn., one who has attained an ideal state of
is anextreme unawareness, III-96 intellectual and ethical perfection by purely
blind repair, when no FES is done, X-66 physical means, II-72
blinking, TR 0 notes on, VIII-369 is evidently our “Clear”, III-217
blood leveling time and antibiotics, VIII-403 body(‘s), bodies, III-530
blow(s), defn., a solid appendage which makes a person
defn., unauthorized departure from an area, usual- recognizable, III-151
ly caused by misunderstood data or overts, defn., identifyingformornon-identifiableformto
VII-141, 286; IX-312 facilitate control of, communication of and
as an effort to exteriorize, VII-42 with and havingness for thetan in his existence
by-passed charge can cause person to, V-346 in mest universe, III-480
cause of, IV-217; VI-22 defn., a carbon-oxygen engine running at a tem
five main reasons for student blows, VIII-193 perature of 98.6 degrees F, VI-124
from Scientology orgs [1960], IV-1 1 defn., physical object, it is not the being himself,
handling blown student or pc, VIII-193, 194 VIII-129
improvement of conditions often worsens the defn, a complexbiological carbon-oxygen engine,
amount of blow-off, III-557 running at an operating temperature of 37°
justification for, III-558 Centigrade and, being biological, has ability to
major cause of, VII-42 establish and repair itself, VIII-401
misunderstood words can cause blows, VII-162, anchor points of, III-151
198, 294, 390 and E-Meter; see E-Meter
off session, cause of, II-246 and mest vs. analytical mind, I-420
only reason anyone has ever left Scientology is and mind are part of gradient scale of creation,
because people failed to find out about them, I-419
IX-282 and TR 0, VIII-369
overts are a primary cause of, V1142 assists on body by Communication Processes, III reason for, III-555, 557, 558 547
reason for pc blows, VIII-179, 194 big PTP a thetan has is his body, VI-339
student is slow or blows, reason for lies in failure body control comes before control of thinking to understand words used in his training, ness, III-479
V-45 1 body part run on Communication Process, III students trying to blow do so only after matter 513, 519
has not been confronted and handled in rou- can’t change without changing mind, III-1 51
tine supervision; left unhandled, situations be- care of, I-404
come blows, V-43 1 communication terminal, using body as, II-276
blowdown(s), control of body by pc, III-184
defn., when auditor has to move TA from right to death of body and handling of, III-224, 227
left to keep needle ondial and movement is .1 Dianetics addresses body, Scientology addresses
divisions or more then a BD is occurring, VI-69 the thetan, VI-338, 339, 351
defn, tone arm motion to the left made to keep discolors when mass from bank is brought in on it,
needle on dial, VI-357 V-255
and falls, X-20, 29 effect of running things in or close to body, I-361
and length of reads, X-149 effect of Vitamin E on body, VI-124; see also
auditor must not speak or move during ~, VI-69 vitamins
floating needle cannot be observed during ~, VI- effort to make something out of nothing, I-482
69 electrical field surrounding body monitors physi indicate a basic has been reached, VII-1 cal structure of body, II-432
is a period of charge blowing off bank, relief and electronic structure around body, III-151
cognition to a pc while it is occurring and for a exists in its own space created by anchor points,
moment after it stops, VI-69 II-432
listing and nulling item must BD and F/N, VIII-96 exteriorization proves that individual is not a
blowing engrams by inspection, VI-400, 407 body but an individual, VII-27, 168
blow-off; see blow first step to control of pc’s body, III-240

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


body(‘s), bodies (cont.) body(‘s), bodies (cont.)
fixation, VIII-203 robot’s inertia of body, VIII-129
GE is something that mocks up bodies, III-226 shut-off of memory actually occurs with pick-up
good process for, I-491 of new body, III-226
GPM, more advanced the GPM the more careful sick body is a PTP and inhibits attaining spiritual
you have to be of the body, V-256 freedom by Scientology, VI-347
havingness, relation to body; see havingness SOP 8-C Step II, pc discovering he can handle
how mind becomes fixated upon, I-419 body, II-l 3
hungry for motivators, II-333 structure of, can be changed by changing electrical
improperly fed, absorbs energy put out by thetan, field, II-432
II-97 sugar in abundance by-passes basic energy produc
in auditing, masses are released off body and out ing mechanisms of body, VIII-207
of thetan’sbank, V-256 theta clear can exist knowingly independent of
interaction of mind and body, I-209 bodies, III-155, 176
is a mass, a solid terminal, III-240 thetan,
liabilities of mest body, I-403 himself without body is capable of performing
life in, thetan puts it there, VIII-126 all functions he assigns to body, III-480
lives only about 70 years, it puts an awful limit on is senior to mind and body, II-432
man, VII-90 to be “sane”, must learn how he’s been caring
living in body makes a being vulnerable, VII-79 for the body, I-301
malnutrition is general breakdown of body func- vs. body, V-255
tions due to lack of adequate nourishment, underweight or debility is inadequate or lacking
VIII-207 foods, substances or gases which are needed
mind or spirit can predispose illness or injury, for activity, maintenance or repair of body,
VI-312 VIII-402
motion, V-394 was made to be worked, I-421
and E-Meter, I-230; IV-421 while a thetan can produce illness, it is the body
doesn’t count as TA, V-413 that is ill, VI-312, 338
TA conscious body-moving pc, how to cure, Body Confrontingness, commands and how to run,
V-373 III-319
TA is never touched during sneezing, body Body Mimicry, Full, III-6
motion, etc., and no recording is made, Body-RoomContact, CCH6, III-67
V-397, 443 body valence; see valence, body
TA shifts because of body motion, yawning, Bog Check by D of P [SOP Goals], HCO WW Form
asking questions, and particularly because CT6, IV-232
of protests do not count in reading TA bogged down case due to Auditor’s Code breaks,
position [R2, R3], V-241 current environment or painful emotion, I-18
must be handled to some degree before anything bogged, Qual tools to handle a bogged or failed stu helpful occurs by way of auditing, VI-312 dent, IX-452
nerves and pain, VII-I 10 boggy cases, X-86
nerve system, IX-502 boil-off,
not-ising body, II-208 boiling off pc equals missed withhold, V-59
nutrition is in field of physical treatment of body, “boil off” or dopey pc, cause and remedy of,
VIII-205; see also nutrition II-182; VIII-l 17
overweight is residual elements of food, sub- manifestation of unconsciousness, I-321
stances or gases which are not totally elimi- pc feels dopey: has either run too long on flow in
nated or utilized by body after ingestion, VIII- one direction, in which case reverse flow, or he
401 has reduced havingness down to a point where
pain, person could feel pain only as himself he feels tired or sleepy, II-44, 182
(thetan plus body), V-176 to arouse pc from this state, I-321
parts of man—thetan, mind, body, III-129 bonuses, what is required to get auditor ~, VII-184
pc assigns ~ to his case or case to his ~, VI-3 12 bonus package (BP), V-l 89
pc exterior, handling body, VII-79 book (s),
physical universe undercuts the body, III-129 books answer people’s questions, IV-78
Q and A, VIII-23 I C/S must know well, VII-l 03
cure for, is objective processes, VIII-232 dissemination fails without books distributed,
reactive mind can impinge itself directly on body, IV-78
II-431 distribution and selling, II-320; see also dissemina reason for holding on to body, III-186 tion
responds badly to forces, VII-86 Word Clearing Method 4 of, VIII-166, 305; IX-466

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


Book and Bottle; see Opening Procedure by Dupli- buttons (cont.)
cation never ask the meter after a pc volunteers a button,
book auditor; see auditor, book V-285, 415
Book Mimicry; see CCH 4, Book Mimicry order of big mid rud buttons [1963], V-248
Book of Case Remedies used by person himself to suppress and invalidate buttons, VII-50; X-3
spot by-passed charge, VI-13 using restimulative materials to push someone’s,
Book One addressed the psychotic, I-301 X-95
Book One Clear, a relative not an absolute thing, way of clearing, IV-87
I-357; see also Clear, mest we want flat on everybody in Scientology: victim,
boredom, money, III-508
and game conditions, VIII-I 13 which depress clearing if pc has erroneous defini described in terms of games condition, II-177 tions for them, III-321
borrowing; see History of Man by-passed case and “no interest” items, X-236
bouncer, I-17 by-passed charge(s), V-417; VII-63
throws pc backward, forward, up or down from defn, earlier charge restimmed and not seen, VIII the track and so makes it apparently unavail- 144
able, V-275 defn., one handled later charge that restimmed
BP; see personality, basic earlier charge, VIII-144
BPC; see by-passed charge ARC break and BPC; see ARC break
bracket (s), assessment,
defn., I-393, 397, 462; see also Scn 8-80 and ARC break assessment, two different
defn., for pc, for another, others for others, others actions, V-470; see also Book of Case
for self, another for pc, pc for another, II-16 Remedies
“brain” at each joint, IX-504 is auditing because you clean every tick of
brain is a shock cushion, IX-502 needle on list being assessed, V-469
brainwash(ing), II-312, 530 on an ARC broken pc, never do, V-469
manual, “psychopolitics”, II-309, 328 blowdown of tone arm is meter reaction of having
original brainwash thetans did to one another, found correct by-passed charge, V-346
II-474 can cause person to blow out of session, or out of
Breuer, Freud’s co-worker, II-478 an org or a course of Scientology, V-346
bridge, the, VI-34 case is the whole sum of past BPC, V-347
briefing tape is a tape designed for a special and in- does not always = ARC break, but ARC break al formed audience, VII-436; IX-366, 438 ways = by-passed charge, V-417
“Bring Order”—the motto of HCO, III-391 E-Meter is invaluable in locating by-passed charge
broad shooting, C/S can give alternatives in a C/S, andcuringanARCbreak, V-418
X-l 89 how charge can be by-passed, V-281
bronchitis, example of case analysis on chronic bron- indicating BPC, relationship to evaluation, V-465
chitis, V-388 is explanation for violence of M/W/Hs, V-285
B.Scn., D.Scn., I-372 is in some degree a missed withhold, missed by
B.Scn./HCS [1958], III-366 both auditor and pc, V-306, 417
B.Scn./HCS [1 961 ], IV-26 1 list goes wrong = BPC = handle or do L4A at once,
B.Scn. and HAA Course, II-339, 345, 559 VI-146
Buddha, Gautama, II-210; III-217; see also Hymn of lists designed to find by-passed charge and repair
Asia faulty auditing action or life situation, VII-51
Buddhism, II-72 never audit ARC broken pc for a minute even but
Scientology’s relation to, VI-195 locate and indicate by-passed charge at once,
why it won, III-134 VI-91
bug, C/Sing and finding the case bug, X-112 of last session, X-18, 19
building unit of a great society is the individual, pc antagonistic = BPC = assess proper list (suchas
IV-45 L1C) and handle, VII-46, 359
bullbait that uses actual processes or implants should pc’s subjective reality on gain will not compare to
be stamped out hard, VII-192 TA action, if charge by-passed, until BPC lobullbait using processes or implants forbidden, X-95 cated, V-368
bullfight, analysis of, I-417 pc will feel better moment right type of by-passed
bullfight, physical aspect of, II-492 charge is identified by assessment and indi
“business” people in first org, II-458 cated by auditor, V-418
buttons, prepared lists, missing items on, leaves by-passed
help is key button which admits auditing, IV-85 charge on pc, VIII-426
needle reaction starts to occur a fraction of a sec- reading items not F/Ned leave pc with ~, VII
ond after you utter the button, IV-332 196

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


by-passed charge (cont.) case(s) (cont.)
Repair Program, exact BPC of last session is ARC breaky case, communication becomes a con always first action, VII-63 test of overts in, IV-120
roller-coaster can also be caused by, VIII-339 assessments of a case on lower rungs of processin&
several can exist and be found on one list, V-418 using Know to Mystery Scale, III-460
by-passed flows; see flows, by-passed assessment using dynamics graph, I-293
by-passed item defined, V-182 auditor and pc when they are cleared for session,
by-passing, how to handle compulsive ~, VI-126 only then begin on case, III-301
B1 and restimulation, I-421; see also nutrition auditor’s, 1419
auditor’s ability as auditor related to his case,
II-122; VIII-1 10
C auditors don’t have cases, X-8-9
audit the case one is auditing, III-312
cable, don’t phone, III-508 average case, processes for, [1960], IV-168
CADA, defn., California Association of Dianetic bad off and good condition case require special
Auditors, II-200 handling, III-159, 160, 179, 180
calcium, muscular spasms are caused by lack of, VIII- bad off case does not register on E-Meter, why,
354 VI-405
California Test for Mental Maturity, psychometry, basic area, most vital area in case, I-17
I-40 basic difference amongst cases lies in ability to
Cal-Mag, formula and effect of, VIII-354, 355, 369 knowingly cause, III-160, 180
canceller, lock scanning can perform duties of, I-111 betterment, without TA motion, no charge is
cancer, III-52 being released and no actual case betterment is
cannibal, cleared cannibal step, VIII-260, 261, 263 observed, V-329, 335
cannibalism, I-387 big withhold case, IV-178
cans; see E-Meter cans black case, formula to handle, III-405; IV-9; see
can squeeze, setting correct sensitivity on E-Meter, also black
IV-32 black five, II-178, 229; see also black
can’t have(s), II-416 bogged case, VIII-11
Games Processes demand that all can’t haves be bogged-down case due to Auditor’s Code breaks,
run on something else than the pc, II-516 current environment or painful emotion, I-18
havingness and, II-486 bogs, how to repair, X-220
subject of engram is subject of ~, II-497 can be repaired, X-137
valences are all “can’t haves” so when valence is Case IV or V, I-360
off havingness of pc comes up, IV-110 Case V,
waste what you can’t have, III-141 defn, no mock-ups, only blackness, I-392
Can’t Have Processes, II-415, 416; III-10 keynote of processing, I-341
Can’t Have Rundown, VIII-141 solution of a, I-363
capability and cause, wide difference between, I-28 what is wrong with him, I-363
capability of theta, I-293 central aspect of case is desire to experience, I-184
carbohydrates, result of heavy intake of, is to feel change, accurate test of case change, I-351
tired all the time, VIII-207 charge is removed from case only by comm cycle
case(s); see also preclear pc to auditor, V-335, 414
defn, whole sum of past by-passed charge, children are usually very burdened cases, VIII-388
V-347 children with rough cases, III-554
abandonment of, II-479 circuit case, characteristic of, II-19
actions, off line, X-94 Co-Audit, how it stalled cases, IV-185
advance of, is amount of charge you get off it, complete cases, VII-131, 276
VII-187 completed, X-63
“afraid to find out” type of case, V-36 condition of case day to day, what it depends on,
all react to same actions, they differ in amount V-290
of “charge”, VI-28 1 confront case, III-405
alter-isness in case handled by auditing Problems, continuous overt case commits antisocial acts
IV-354 daily during auditing, VI-23
analysis, III-428; V-385 “corpse case”, solution to, VIII-119
establishes two things: what is going on with deadliest faults on cases are running same action
case and what should be done with it, twice; this drives TAs up through roof, VII
V-386 276
health research and case analysis, V-388 delusory or dub-in cases also sometimes trace to
steps, V-386, 388 chemical “releases”, VI-258

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


case(s) (cont.) case(s) (cont.)
destimulation of case can produce some astonish- entrance to case is not on level of technique, but
ing changes in beingness [1963], V-373 is on level of comm cycle, VII-239
Dianetic “oddity” case, V1410 errors, study folder back to where pc ran well and
different cases, there are no, VI-386 then come forward and you’ll find error every
difficult case, VI-395 time, VII-278, 358; X-4
difficulties, Ethics, case undergoing Ethics actions should not
case does not run well means (a) resistive, (b) be audited until Ethics matter is cleared up
errors have been made in auditing, VII-407 and complete, VII-31, 96
case isn’t responding normally, C/S must Ethics type case, effect of fractured comm cycle
suspect off-line action, VII-I91 on, V149
case not advancing has problems, VII-58 experience case, III-405
case not handled, VII-46, 360 failed case, defn, case in which thought can
case running badly, don’t go on hoping, get alwaysbeoverpoweredbymest, III-118
data, VII-358 failed case can’t confront overts, IV-5
cases who flinch at remembering anything at “failed cases” are medically ill or injured cases,
all, handling of, VII-65 VI-313
case trouble, “might be anything” use GF, “failed cases” or “dog cases”, causes of, VII-376;
VII-388 see also preclear, dog
C/Sing towards significance produces non- “failed cases”, prepared lists clear up, VIII-426
advancing cases, VII-77 “failed” cases, there are no failed cases; there are
does not advance, six reasons why, VI-91; see only failed C/Ses and auditors, VIII-426
also case, resistive failure in, chief cause is unhandled or only partial drug case having trouble with M1 Word Clear- ly handled drugs, VIII-300
ing, handling of, VIII-163 failure, only alter-is of routine auditing can cause,
Exam non-F/N cases, errors to look for, VI-27
VII-217 fast case considered a bad case when it is just a
points that bog a case, VII-260 fast case, VII-406
twelve things that can foul up a case, VII-218 fast, slow and no-gain case, VI-103
what’s really wrong lies in field of mass, ener- figure-figure case,
gy, space, time, form and location, VII-84 defn, somebody who will not ever admit hav Director of Processing’s case checking hat, IV-228 ing done something or anything to any discussing cases, don’t impart personal secrets of body, III-519
pc, II-162 figure-figure-figure, source of, II-47
disturbance and Whys, X-220 figure-figure mechanism about a situation,
does not know what is wrong with it or it would III-404
as-is and wouldn’t be wrong, VII-345 not-ising by figure-figure, result of handling,
dog case; see preclear, dog III-405
do not improve with havingness neglected, Il-396 pc who figure-figures his answers, III-516
don’t “solve” by altering data, VI-387 what he is doing, II-349
drug case having trouble with Method 1 Word finding the engram necessary to resolve case,
Clearing, handling of, VIII-163 III-352
drug cases, characteristics of, VI-377; see also fixated attention case, VIII-262
drugs folder; see folder
dubbing in a high tone, II-518 foreign language cases, GF on, VII-185
dub-in case, III-405; see also dub-in former therapy case is apt to be the roughest, VII
has a wholly one-sided flow and is trying to 449
run the other side, VI-279 fundamental entrance to, IX-64
imaginary—recall, I-79 gain and no case gain,
or delusive case, I-79, 436 ability gain, defn, pc’s recognition that pc can
or delusory cases also sometimes trace to now do things he could not do before,
chemical “releases”, VI-258 III-428
should be running ARC Processes as case is any level is capable of giving a stable case gain,
over-charged for engrams, V-293 VI-310
dynamics and cases, relationship of, IV-166 auditing above pc’s level gives no gain, VII Dynamic Straight Wire, cleverly done, takes a case 85
apart, starts almost any case, III-453 auditing gives gains by deletion, VI-416
energy, starvation for, is keynote of any case auditing over a withhold and PTP = no case
which maintains facsimiles in restimulation, gain, VII-123
I-38 auditor unhappy about preclear gain, III-454

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


case(s) (cont.) case(s) (cont.)
gain and no case gain (cont.) gain and no case gain (cont.)
cases progress in exact ratio to amount of pc’s itsa on and on and on and on with no
charge gotten off, VI-424 gain, cause of, VII-252; IX-77
cleaning up an old session will give all the pcs who do not hold their gains are PTS, VII latent gain in that session, V-21 452; VIII-330, 338
cognitions are the milestones of case gain, VII- pcs who roller-coaster (regularly lose gains) are
230 PTS, IX-136
continuing overts hidden from VI-ew are cause pc who complains that auditing has no effect
of no case gain, VI-91, 102 on him or who makes very slow gains, what
criminals get no case gain, VI-102 to run, III-468, 497
discharged process no longer gives TA and pc who makes no case gains is suppressive,
gives case gain, VII-77 VI-75, 76, 103; see also case, resistive
drugs fog up student and prevent any case pc who makes no gain is pc who will not as-is,
gain, VII-319, 327, 425; VIII-137, 311; whowillnotconfront, V-36
IX-325; X-156 physical, X-26-27
fast, slow and no-gain case, VI-103 rapid case gain, X-3
gain, X-151, 161 rock slammer is a slow-gain or non-gain case,
gain depends on taking responsibility, III-555 V-185, 187
handling of auditor or student who has trouble rough TRs, rough metering, out code and dis
with an ARC breaky pc or no gain, V-58 tractive auditor make no case gain, VII-230
holding, X-218 running engrams produces most case gain,
intelligence gain, defn., loss of restimulation of VI-278
stupidity by reason of attempts to confront study gives case gain, X-138
or experience problems of life; intelligence tone arm action, amount of, per session is
appears when stupidity is keyed out or index of gain, VII-77
erased; intelligence is a confronting ability, unstable gain, cause and handling of, III-285,
III-428 292
lack of, how to handle, VII-33 getting grief off a case, I-16
lack of TA action means no gain for pc, V-325 getting special cases to participate in session,
lack of training means more trouble for pc in III-159, 178
making his gains stably, VII-60 good case condition is knowing games condition,
morale, case gain and, IX-275 II-558
negative gain, X-31 Grade 1, Problems, is usual reason for no case ad defn., things disappear that have been vance, VII-101
annoying or unwanted, III-428 gradient scale of, 1435
no case gain can be created by lack of comm grind case, the audit forever case, is an afraid to
cycle in an auditor, lack of an action cycle find out case, V-37
in processes or messing up a program cycle, handling,
VII-262; X-138 case has many things to be handled, not one,
no-case-gain, slow-case-gain, sickie and “failed VII-69
cases”, handled bybasic lists, VIII-426 case must be completed on an action before
no case gain then it’s GF 40X, VII-388 starting a new one, VII-261
no gains occur in presence of PTPs or overts, part of handling cases is handle N-O-W, VII-4
V-468, 470 to handle case one keeps at it, VII-5
Objective Havingness established and used has somatics, X-22
often is necessary for stable gains, IV-167 havingness run as process stabilizes case, IV-168
others can get gains when oneself is processed, heavily charged case, symptoms of, VI-281, 426
IV-45 Help and Step 6 do not work on low level cases,
pc audited a bit below or at his level of aware- III-322
ness gets case gain, VI-33 Help, running cases with, IV-109
pc becoming more himself, X-162 HGC case, tips on how to crack, [1960], IV-154
pc gains measured in terms of charge dis- high case, how you tell, III-159, 179
charged, V-325 high TA cases; see tone arm, high
pc not getting gains, causes of, VI-91, 315, histories, official, II-406
324, 429, 435 how case behaves as we raise confrontingness on
pc’s gain is directly proportional to TA action, mental image pictures, III-447
V-367 how to get information on, VIII-11
pcs hiding general illness may show up as no how to handle cases that self-invalidate between
case gain, VII-191 sessions, III-504

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


case(s) (cont.) case(s) (cont.)
hung up case, running Help is necessary, III-239 no one grade solves the whole case; that’s why
hyper-critical case, IV-178 there are grades, VI-252
incomplete cases, VII-130 no responsibility case, IV-98
interest in case, from auditor and pc, III-405 not advancing under auditing, has a PTP, II-447
invisible case, III-405 not handled, X-6
invisible case, cannot see mock-ups, how to crack, not-ising by figure-figure, III-405
III-400 not-isness on case, indicators of, III-485
keep up co-audit pc’s interest in case, III-550 not responding normally, suspect off-line action,
key to all cases is inability to have, IV-150 VII-191
key to all cases is responsibility, IV-18 not to run on victim process, III-519
level(s), obsessive change, high-critical cases shouldn’t be
as an index of auditing ability is discarded, it is on staff, II-387
only an index of how-hard-to-train, V-316 occluded case(s), I-150
auditor skills by case level [1963], V-314 and sight, I-434
percentages of case levels, V-331 and wide-open case, difference between, I-301
sanity and case level, relationship to training, characteristic of, I-435
V-327 entrance to, I-433
time sense compared to case level, V-330 has to know before he can go, I-434
I-8 [1963], V-289 is doing all possible to stop or absorb motion,
levels of, I-490 I-435
low case, processes for, [1960], IV-169 is too fixed, II-23
low graph case, IV-139 Short 8A and, I-410
low TA cases; see tone arm, low two types, I-410, 445
low-toned case, how to recognize, IV-26 use of Step VII of SOP 8 upon an, I-433
low-toned case, overt manifestations on, IV-26 use Science of Survival and later 1951 tech major action, don’t use to repair a case, VII-47, niques, I-303
360 why occluded, I-360
major action, set up case before starting, VII-14, will run efforts and counter-efforts, I-303
277 off-line actions, VII-191
major processes are done to improve case, VII-57 opening, I-419
make-or-break point of case, III-129 and running engrams, I-15
most aberrative thing on case is association with OT cases on Dianetics, VI-395
mest, III-189 out of valence case, VI-426
most of pc’s case will be found connected with out-points, case is collection of, VII-69
some general terminal, IV-49 pc interested in own case, IV-66, 450
must not be run without TA action or with pc’s case isa composite of PTPs, II-295
minimal TA action, V-331, 413 people talking about their cases, VII-192; X-95
mutual out ruds can stall cases, VIII-259 percentage of cure, II-51
natural auditor and dangerous auditor, difference points of case address; see also Scn 0-8
between is not case level but a type of case, poor case, processes for, [1960], IV-168
V-32 post flubs, do not buy case reasons as Whys, IX nervous-dispersed case, there is no real gain in run- 117
ning significance until hellos and okays are present time problem, relationship to case; see
run, III-235 present time problem
neurotic, ARC Straight Wire can crack, VI-261 programming cases [1963], V-331
“no auditor” case, IV-325 programming of cases; see also programming
no case gain; see also case gain and no case gain progress marked by rock slams, V-212
no case gain in auditing, case has withholds or PTP, person in PTP is often current clue to case,
PTPs, IV-207 IV-61
no case gain or failed case, handling of, VIII- reality of case is proportional to amount of charge
427 removed, VII-450
no “case gain”, relationship to fixed attention, relativeenthetaon; seeSOS
III-428 Release is a person whose case “won’t get any
no case progress, persons with heavy overts on worse”, III-444
Scientology make, V-185 remedies, III-468, 497; VI-282
non-exteriorized, II-42 remedies, The Book of Case Remedies, V-495
non-F/N, X-112 repair, V-67; see also repair
non-gain or slow-gain cases, V-185, 187 don’t use major action to repair, VII-47, 360
non-persistence case, II-22 how to C/S, VII-62

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


case(s) (cont.) case(s) (cont.)
repair (cont.) starting cases (cont.)
many cases have to begin processing with a re- reVI-sed case entrance [1960], IV-167
pair, VII-65 state of case and ability to follow a command line
worse the condition, lighter the remedy requir- are co-ordinated, VI-126
ed, VII-63 state of case, how to establish, II-518
resistive cases, II-19; VII-101 State of Case Scale; see also Scn ~8
an VIII development now on GF, X-51 State of Case Scale, Levels 1 to 8, V-289
case does not run well means (a) resistive, (b) straight memory case scouting, I-24
errors have been made in auditing, VII-407 student, case of a, III-309
drugs or alcohol in most instances make a resis- study, find the right Why, X-112, 113, II-4, 147
tive case, VII-320, 327, 328 supervision errors, gross, X-47
former therapy, VII-449 symptoms of case with overts and withholds, IV handling, VII-406 4, 5
rundown [GF 40] is an VIIl development to TA action, relationship to case progress, IV-144,
handle those who cannot make the grades, 207, 225
VII-101 tagging cases, VII-406
seven types of resistive cases, VI-310; VII-449 tech errors on a, X-59
found in GF 40X, VII-388 tests for types of, I-82
Green Form, No. 40 GF is “7 resistive tests give idea of how charged up case may be,
cases”, VI-410 VI-281
person who has been on drugs is one of the that can’t get into or run past lives, VI-424
“seven types of resistive cases”, VII- that couldn’t remember, handling of, II-220
319, 327 that don’t run well, X-II-4
taggedbyC/S, X-189 “theetie weetie case” (sweetness and light), IV
won’t make case gains until drugs are handled, 325
X-156 there are no cases in the Academy, III-309
Resistive V, I-487; II-19 tone arm, rather than needle, is foremost in ana Short 8A is a rote process for the resolution of lyzing case, IV-18
the Resistive V, I-410 trouble and W/C errors, X-247
results, what a result is, III-428 trouble and Word Clearing, VIII-304
“roller-coaster” case, VI-109 two biggest auditor crimes are rough and choppy
roller-coaster is a slump after a case gain, VIII- auditing and overestimating level of case, III-
330, 338 397
rudiments, don’t run a case by, IV-274, 363 types of, I-79; see also individual type by name;
running well, never repair, VII-48, 362 NOTL; AP&A
runs on cycles of actions: auditing comm cycle, UK case, control is more easily inverted on,
process cycle, program cycle, VII-261 IV-202
run the case, I-20 unburdening, VIII-389
run well when moderately well programmed, unburdening case brings up confront, VII-110
C/Sed and audited, VII-219 undercutting cases, III-404
R3R, which cases can run, V-331 unmoVI-ng case, IV-4, 178
scale of deterioration of case, III-390 unusual cases, do the usual, VI-73
Selected Persons Straightwire on Overts will bring upset: wrong list item or wrong list, VIII-97
up responsibility of case to a point where he wants no processing, handling of, IV-178
can be trusted to run engrams, III-453 ways to bog a case, X-136-37
setting up cases, VII-14, 47, 51, 277 way to solve a case, X-145
set-up for auditing, VI-283 what gets the case moVI-ng, II-322
somatics, case has, equals Dianetic level unflat, what makes cases advance, IV-68
VII-70 which do/do not have sonic recall, I-79
special cases, VI-430 which maintains facsimiles in restimulation, key stalled; see also Notes on the Lectures note of, II-38
standard tech alone resolves all cases, VI-242 which runs shallow and F/Ns easily, VI-424
startingacase [1959], III-402 who answers with generalities, LRH session, II- starting cases, I-15; IV-175 256
entrance point of case determined by ability to who do not resolve easily, address in them prob remedy objective havingness, IV-155 lem of havingness, II-52
Formula is a method of getting a case started, wide-open case, I-150, 436; III-447; see also SOS
IV-179 defn., case that has pictures and everything
how to start an old case, IV-108 and is impatient to get on with it but does

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975

case(s) (cont.) case supervising (cont.)
wide-open case (cont.) auditors handling psychos, C/S takes it easy on,
not markedly alter the bank with thinking VIII-264
alone is not a high case but an old “wide auditors, standard handling of, VIII-164
open case” of Dianetic days, III-159, 179 auditorswritingup, X-201
actually a psychotic who duplicates continu- auditor who doesn’t grasp a C/S gets help from
ously and psychotically, II-19 Cramming, VII-183
and occluded, difference between, I-301 auditor, 1 flub, 1 retrain in Cramming on that
can observe but thinks poorly or shallowly, point, VII-153
I-433 backwards C/Sing, VII-77
nceds first-book procedure until he gets out of towards significance, X-29-30
incident he is stuck in, I-305 basic facts of case supervision, VII-56
processing in the first book designed for, I-301 basic rationale behind C/Sing, VI-425
run Responsibility, I-305 basic tech, use of, VII-58
withholds, as case progresses it becomes conscious broad shooting C/Ses, VII-406
of more, IV-204 cases, how C/S gets information on, VIII-11
withholds, case with, will not clear, IX-270 cause and effect in C/Sing, VII-58
worsened, do not abandon, II-480 Chart of Human Evaluation, use of in C/Sing,
worsening is caused only by a PTS situation, VI- VII-85
114 checklist, VIII-11 ; X-203
worsen when audited over an ARC break, V-470 chronic somatic, VII-139
worse off the case, lighter you handle it, VI-281 Class VI (SHSBC) tapes and bulletins are all valid
“You’re working too hard” case shouldn’t be on and vitalto C/Sing, VII-103
staff, II-387 Class VIII C/S-6 list, VIII-276
7 resistive cases; see case, resistive co-audit, C/S must check routinely for mutual out
Case Assessment, IV-214; see also Preclear Assess- ruds in, VIII-259
ment Sheet cramming cycles, X-199
case folder; see folder Cramming Officers, X-233
Case Progress Sheet, IX-17 C/S can err by being too critical of auditors or
defn., sheet which details levels of processing and worse, by agreeing about what dogs the pcs
training pc has achieved; lists incidental run- are, VIII-147
downs and set-up actions pc has had, IX-9, 16 C/Sing auditor-C/Ses, VII-205
case supervising, case supervision, C/S, case supervise; C/S instruction must be written, VII-94
see also Case Supervisor C/S mentally tags the easy cases and tough cases,
accepting a C/S, VII-44, 356 VII-406
action of C/S is reduction of forces, VII-77 C/S proVI-ng unworkable during session, auditor
actions, VII-102 has right to end off, VII-44, 356
adept Scientology ReVI-ews against Dianetic audit- C/S should know exactly what is wrong with a
ing, VI-410 case, VII-405
against standardness of application, not against re- C/S who assesses pc to higher levels to solve lower
sults, VI-424 ones is really asking for a wreck, VII-275
and auditor admin, X-82 C/S 53, use of, X-230
and Exam Reports, X-96 data, X-44
and overload, reduction of refunds, X-252-53 declare, it is C/S’s responsibility that a pc or pre
and publics, X-194 OT is sent to declare, VII-285
and tech courses, X-233 Dianetic C/S, four possible actions to take, VI-409
anyone that flubs that affects the C/S gets a cram- Dianetic C/S programs the case from Assessment
ming chit, VII-377 Form, using drugs or medicine first and rest by
auditor; see also auditor, Case SuperVI-sor and largest reads first, VII-340; see also Dianetics
auditor-C/Ses, X-96-98 Dianetic C/S 1, VI-368, 409; VII-225, 458; X-117;
auditor C/Sing in chair, handling of, VIII-411 see also Dn Today
auditor falsifying report, how to handle, VIII-292, Dianetics, VI-336, 366, 409, 411, 428; VII-186
386 Dianetics is its own field of C/Sing, VII-190;
auditor flunks a C/S instruction and can’t get it VIII-285
going, remedy for, VI-282 don’t let others decide what’s to be run, VII-83
auditor may not C/S in auditing chair while audit- don’t look for the process to handle, use a gra
ing pc, VII-356 dient scale, VII-89
auditor opinion is not a study of case, VII-345 don’t wander off known tech points, VII-279
auditors, even best go bad when they no longer easy, X-234
have a tight C/S rein, VIII-165 errors, X-98, 223

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975

case supervising (cont.) case supervising (cont.)
errors, gross case supervision errors, VI-254; VII- mental masses, forces, energy are what C/S han
97 dles, VII-77
“Examiner! Ask pc what auditor did in session”, must be sure all Why finding and Word Clearing
VII-274 papers and worksheets get into pc’s folders,
expertise, X-144 VIII-96
failure, X-39 must put a yellow tab marked PTS on PTS pc
failure, primary cause of, X-24445 folder, VIII-92
false auditing reports, C/S’s response to, VI-50, must watch ethnics (customs) oddities and chang 450 ing fashions, VI-253
fast flow basis, C/Sing on, VII-205 newly trained auditors, VII-152, 410, 411
FES, failing to call for, when C/S doesn’t know next, X-81
after a failed rundown, VIII-413 only variable a C/S has is how charged up is a case,
firm rule for, X-45 VI-281
first lesson, X-14 opinions, C/S does not take opinions as a source
flubby auditors, handling of, X-233 of data on pc, VII-345
F/N, obtain before starting next C/S action, VII- pc gets into Ethics trouble, C/S should have folder
260 reVI-ewed, VI-251
folder, biggest error for C/S is not to read through pc illness must be reported to C/S before new ses
the pc folder, VI-254 sion, VII-191
folder handling, VI-49, 254, 268; X-4546 pc in psychotic break, handling, VIII-353
folder handling, C/S only with all folders to hand, pc not responding normally, suspect off-line ac
VII-95 tions, VII-191
folders, how C/S can tell if he has all, IX-14 pc remarks, use of in C/Sing, VII-83, 406
form, VII-180 pc running well, let roll; pc not running well,
for new auditors or veterans, X-191 repair, VII-278
for non-veterans, X-191 pc’s demands for next grade despite all contrary
genius, X-10, 19 indicators, C/S agreeing with, handling of,
glossary of terms, X-48 VIII-412
grading of sessions, VII-127, 180; X-59, 81 points on, VI-248
grosscasesupervisionerrors, VI-254; VII-97 pre-OT haVI-ng a Solo and auditing folder, C/S
handling auditors, X-61 must look at both before C/Sing, VII-95
handling auditors, 3 rules, X-186 pre-OTs don’t, X-214
handling of auditors, standard, VIII-164 prepared list is C/S’s main tool for discovery and
hard work, X-77 correction, VIII-234
High Crime for a C/S not to write in apc’s folder prepared lists, C/Sing from, VII-280, 281, 405,
what the case superVI-sed instructions are, VI- 410, 465
245 PTS Rundown, X-216
hopeful C/Sing, VII-358 purpose, X-31
how C/S gets data on case, VII-388, 405 Q and A, X-27, 32-34, 243
how it goes non-standard, VI-449 Q and A, results from, X-243
insane, ways for a C/S to detect, VII-155 Q and A, to abruptly C/S everything the pc has
instructions are always written, VII-94 just said is a Q and A; but worse, it can lead to
in the chair, VII-356; X-2 evaluation, VII-406
Int RD, C/Sing, VII-388, 460; X-77 Quad Dianetics, X-91
invalidation, X-60, 147 Quad Dianetics, how to C/S a case for, VII-188;
invalidative remarks should not be made by C/S, VIII-374, 376
VII-128 quality, X-99
Ivory Tower, X-170; see also Dianetics Today Registrars’ Advice Form informs C/S what pc
key points C/S looks for on Integrity Processing, wanted and expected, VII-7
IX-289 repair and handling of bogged cases is finest skill
key points on case supervision, VII-94 of, VIII-11
listing, points a C/S must be alert to regarding, repair, ingenuity is required of C/S only in area of
VII-392 repair, VII-64
lists prepared by C/S, assessed by auditor, VII-405 repairing pc instead of auditor, handling of, VIII long, X-87 412
long C/Ses, advantages of, VII-186, 187 RepairPgmsession, procedureforrepairing, VII-92
long programs save time, VII-87 request for Review, VI-74
maxim “when in doubt order a 2-way comm”, responsibility and checking interest on drug items,
VII-41 evil purposes or intentions, X-229

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


case supervising (cont.) Case Supervisor(s)(‘s) (cont.)
Review C/S looks over the sessions, X-83; see also auditor(s) and C/S, VII-129, 152, 153, 398
review auditors, flubby, are ones who consume C/S
rights of auditor with relation to C/S, VII-48, 363 time, VIII-164, 165
rules, VII-276, 278, 284; X-145-46, 147-48, 152 auditors like a business-1ike accurate C/S, VII rules—programming from prepared lists, X-149-50 399
rules—the sequence of programs, X-151 auditors may only take adVI-ce on cases from
rundown, one C/Ses rundown as itself, not as C/S, VI-49
botch of several actions run into it, VII-289 C/S correcting auditor must refer to HCO B or
sessions, personally C/Sed by LRH; see Dn Today tape, VII-279
short, X-87, 88 C/S correcting auditor should do it positively
stable datum, X-II-4 and refer to HCO B; negative criticism un
stale dated C/S means it is too old to be valid, dermines auditors, VI-409
VII-356 C/S giving a daily auditors’ conference, VII standard handling of auditors, VIII-164; X-233 153
standing order to auditors, X-213 C/S is really not just Case Supervisor, he is also
supreme test of a, X-154-55 auditors’ handler, VII-129
TA, amount per session is C/S’s index of gain, C/S is responsible for auditors’ ability to audit,
VII-77 VII-1 52
thorough C/Ses, VII-187; X-88 C/S must insist on good legible handwriting of
three golden rules, X-186 auditors, VII-433
tips, X-142-44 C/S must interne his auditors for each interne
to get results on pcs must handle auditor’s ability ship missed on way up, VII-331
to get reads on lists, VIII-233 how to make auditors flubless, VII-375
tools of, X-183 secret of how LRH as a C/S makes star audi towards significance produces non-advancing tors, VII-284
cases, VII-77 test of C/S in auditor’s eyes, VII-398
Triple Dianetics, how to C/S case for, VIII-284; books a C/S must know well, VII-103
X-89 case gain, how to handle C/Ses who have PTP of
troubles C/S islooking for, VII-205 how to get case gain for their pcs, VII-326;
trying to fix “no EP” on one rundown by trying X-161
to run another rundown, handling of, VIII-413 Cramming, C/S has to straighten out, VI-II-164,
twenty-four hour rule, X-194 233
two variables: auditor fault, or pc in overwhelm, cramming C/S l/T, IX-113
VII-63 cramming cycles and the C/S, IX-108
two-way comm, VII-40, 46, 104, 360, 405; cramming, if there’s no Cramming, C/S can fully
X-54-55 afford to do cramming himself, VII-161, 461;
unworkable C/S, VII-44, 356 VIII-281
use Summary Sheet to get auditor’s attitude, VI- Cramming Officer to report the real Why to C/S,
268 IX-108
variables, X-144 cramming Supervisor and C/S, IX-90
Via, X-143-44 D of P, C/S not using, to get data after failed ses vital action, X-153 sion, handling of, VIII-412
wander on repairing a repair, X-42 D of P does not have to be a C/S or to know C/S
watch for Ethics record of pcs who have been ing, VII-462
C/Sed, VII-96 establishment and purpose of, V-395
win, C/Sing a win is Q and A, VII-83 expertise, VII-275
with all folders to hand, X-45 folder-C/S line, VII-181
worksheet must communicate to C/S what actions handles post fast flow, X-96
were taken during session, IX-42 handling cases on the VI-a of an auditor, VII-274
worksheet, never try to C/S an illegible worksheet, HCO Bs and tapes are stable data that form agree
VII-96 ment between auditor and C/S, VII-279
worksheets, C/S not reading, handling of, VI-II-413 HGC, two chief seniors, C/S (for tech) and Direc written induplicate, VII-94 tor of Processing (for auditors and bodies),
written instructions, X-44 VII-183
Case Supervisor(s)(~s); see also case supervising is a training of ficer of auditors and of other Tech
as a training officer, X-176 Qual personnel as well, VII-375
attitude of C/S, VII-365; IX-5 is friend of pc, VII-344
auditing materials, HCO Bs and texts, C/S has to is there to make certain that pc makes gains and
know, much better than auditor, VII-275 attains actual abilities of level, VII-79

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


Case Supervisor(s)(‘s) (cont.) casualty contact, “I will talk to anyone”, illness re limited by what his auditors can do, VI-282 searches: three methods of dissemination, 11 lines of C/S and Senior C/S, VII-182 351
lives in an Ivory Tower, VI-145 catastrophes from and repair of “no interest” items,
makes sure tech courses are taught well, VIII-164 X-236
misunderstoods from worksheets, VII-433; IX-44 causability, degree of knowing, III-160, 180
most successful when he superVI-ses in seclusion, causative, action is, I-209
VII-344 cause(s), causation, I-375; see also effect
must be confident he could crack case as auditor, defn., potential source of flow, II-14
VII-275 defn., emanation, II-437
must insist on good legible handwriting of audi- defn., for purposes of communication, source
tors, IX-44 point, II-437
mustn’t tolerate missing materials, VII-378 able to admit causation, able to withhold from, is
opinions, C/S has no political or personnel opin- anatomy of responsibility, IV-14, 19
ions, VII-344 always precedes effect, I-208
org C/S, duty of, VII-205 blame is arbitrary election of, I-210
overloaded, results of and how to detect, VIII- capability and ~, wide difference between, I-28
318, 319 cause and effect; see cause and effect
postings, VIII-318 evaluation on a cause basis, III-166
postings, irreducible minimum, X-252 group goals and national, I-142
primary cause of C/S failure, VIII-234 havingness, running Havingness restores pc at
purpose, VII-76, 79 cause over matter, IV-53
Q and A, VII-75, 82, 92; VIII-222, 223 human mind is ~ and human body is effect, I-209
quality is raised by C/S study of cases and Qual inability to duplicate is also inability to be cause
Sec cramming the C/S, VII-209 and inability to be effect, II-15, 172
Qual Sec, Cramming Officer and Interne Super- individual is representative of cause on all eight
VI-sor are close technical links with C/S, VII- dynamics, I-208
377 knowledge and causation, II-435
remedy for C/S who is agreeing there are “dog lastditchwayofbeingcause, lll-518
pcs”, VIII-147 life becomes serious when man becomes less cause
responsibility, VII-152, 228, 375, 411; X-121, andgreatereffect, l-212
125 only those things which others are able to ex responsibility for training, X-69 perience easily, III-43 1
responsibility of, regarding programs, IX-27 other people’s causation is not aberrative, IV-19
retraining is an ineVI-table part of C/S’s job, VII- overts give highest gain in raising cause level, why,
1 52 VIII-370
standard tech and C/S, VI-449 pc has as much bank as he has denied cause, IV-I 9
stat of, VIII-150 pc has creation tangled up with cause and cause
supreme test of a C/S, VII-289 tangled up with overt-motivator sequence, IV
Tech and Qual terminals and lines, C/S must co- 35
ordinate, VII-375 pcs who are insufficiently cause in their daily lives
tech, C/S who knows his tech is able to hold the cannot as-is bank, V-433
line on any given action in auditing or C/Sing people who get things done are at cause; when
and not mix up, VII-289 they are not, they Q and A, VIII-225
tech, why C/S C/Ses for exact tech application prevailing anxiety is to be effect, not to be cause,
and not exclusively for result, VII-284 II-438
terms, glossary of C/S terms, VII-98 run the pc always at cause, IV-44
test of, VIII-427 (Secondary Scale level), IV-316
time, VII-88 state of high ~ is also keyed-out Clear, V-435
tips, VII-273 success depends upon being willing to be ~ equal tools of a C/S, VII-387, 388, 465 ly in ratio to being willing to be effect, II-440
training officer, C/S as a, VII-375 terminals, run always causative terminals never
troubles, where most of a C/S’s troubles come effect terminals, IV-132
from, VII-228, 410 thetan cannot withhold, then compulsively causes
trouble, what it comes from, VIII-292, 386 things that are bad, IV-19
trying to obtain volume, quality and VI-ability, VII- thetan is at obsessive cause while trying to do
375 overts or get motivators, IV-191
types of C/Ses, VIII-318; X-252 cause and effect, I-208, 393, 397, 438; see also cause;
who begin to goof, how to handle, VI-306 effect; AP&A
beingness, relation to, I-406

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


cause and effect (cont.) CCH(s) (cont.)
imbalances between, II-437, 440 originations and CCHs (cont.)
necessarily inter-operate as a person experiences as though it were an origin by pc and query
life, I-208 it, V-46, 47, 49
postulates lie at root of, I-211 preclear kept in two-way comm, V-46
Processing, I-211 produced tone arm action while higher level pro
Tone Scale, relation to, I-436 cesses did not, V-43
understanding laws of, I-213 producing change do not go on but flatten that
Cause ARC Straight Wire, IV-5 1 CCH, V-127
run to give pc win on getting audited, IV-48 psychos, run on CCH 1, 2, 3, 4, III-502
Cause Elementary Straight Wire turns on recall in pc, purpose of the CCHs, V-47, 50
IV-52 repair of CCHs, V-67, 168
cause level of auditors, raising, V-434 Routine 1 and CCHs, IV-334
cause level of pc, raising, V-434, 436, 438, 439 running CCHs, III-183, 482; V-44, 46, 127
cause point and effect point, bridge between, on any run wrong can drive pc out of PT, V-50
subject, III-359 Tactile Havingness is a CCH type of process, V-43
cause points, degree to which person becomes aber- thinking at command is a sort of CCH on think rated, III-466 ingness, IV-121
Cause/Withhold version of Responsibility, IV-17, 19 to handle accident proneness, VII-58; X-12
CCH(s), III-5, 278, 394, 400; IV-325; V-310; VI-40, Tone 40 auditing, III-480
118, 257 training and CCH processes, [1957] III-61, [1959]
defn., stands for Communication, Control and 394
Havingness, III-33 Upper Indoc attitude makes CCHs grim, V-47
defn., is really C for Control, D for Duplication, C use of, III-379
for Communication, ct for Control of Thought when to run CCHs before SOP Goals, IV-255
= Havingness, III-128 when to use CCHs, V-43, 44
alternated with Prepchecking [1962], V-51, 127 when verbal commands fail, CCH 3 and CCH 4
ARC and CCH, III-92 can be used, IV-155
are “familiarization” processes that permit pc to wrong idea that they are for nuts, IV-334
confront control and duplication, V-43 CCH 0, III-157, 205, 294, 314
are good on auditors, V-34 defn, a collection of mechanical aids to assist pc’s
are processes, not drills, VI-40 participation in session and to assist the audi background theory of CCH, III-130 tor in ARC, III-158, 178
case history, III-249 is firstly establishing the rudiments of session,
commands and how to run, III-312 discussing the goals of pc for intensive, han correct: no antagonism to pc, Tone 40 not shout- dling PTP and clearing auditor for pc, ITI-238
ed, no endurance marathon in progress, V-45 purpose of, III-239
correct version of CCHs, V-127, 310 rudiments, goals and present time problem, III-65
correct way to run CCHs, IV-347 starting session, III-296
Course [1957] , III-58 CCH Ob—Help in full—starting session, III-219
curriculum of CCH [1957] , III-121 rules governing the running of, III-220
does not work unless each command is in a sepa- Step 6, Mock-ups and Help, CCH Ob, two pro
rate unit of time, III-354 cesses that clear a pc, III-243
done right flatten CCHs done wrong, V-68 CCH 1,
flatness, forget the 20 minute test, 3 times equally commands and how to run, VI-1 18-20
done are enough to see a CCH is flat, V-46, “Don’t give me that hand” version, III-483
127 “Give me that hand”, commands and how to run,
gains vanished when the ARC ran out, V-46 V-310
goal of CCH, III-5, 129 “Give me that hand”, Tone 40, III-240, 313,
Joburg Sec Check and CCHs, IV-348 480
long form, III-267 “Give me your hand”, Tone 40, III-65
must be taught exactly as they are used in session, Reality Scale and CCH 1, III-240
complete with two-way comm, V-79 running of CCH 1, III-183
Opening Procedure by Duplication different than session, III-53
CCHs, V-45, 68 use only right hand, V-127
originations and CCHs, V-126 what it does, III-240
handling originations, V-47 CCH 1 and 2 used for bad-off child, III-526
pick up a physical origination when it happens, CCH 2, Tone 40 8-C, III-66, 313, 481
V-126 commands and goal of, III-247
take up each new physical change manifested commands and how to run, V-311; VI-119

CUMULATIVE INDEX—1950/1975


CCH 3, Hand Space Mimicry, III-66, 314, 481 CECS, defn, Committee of Examinations, Certifica Book Mimicry and ~ are not Tone 40, III-400 tions and Services, II-115, 164
CCH3 was Book Mimicry in 1958; see CCH4, cells and the organism; see DMSMH
Book Mimicry center centerness of all thinking, I-443
commands and how to run, V-312; VI-119 center, exact plan of a, III-500; see also franchise
Hand Contact Mimicry, III-5, 136, 140 center, small amount of money needed to start one,
Hand Space Mimicry was called CCH 4 in 1958, II-377
III-248 central organization(s), II-456; see also organization
how to run, III-248, 249, 401 and field auditor relationship, II-458
CCH 3(c), S-C-S on a person, III-317 and field auditor targets, V-432
CCH 3 & 4, only valid if they heighten ARC, III-174 can succeed as far as it can service, III-515
CCH 4, Book Mimicry, III-66, 314, 482 fees, what they go for, II-460
Book Mimicry was called CCH 3 in 1958, III-248 function, training professional auditors, II-384
commands and how to run, V-312; VI-120 necessary for surVI-val of the subject, II-457
CCH 4 was Hand Space Mimicry in 1958; see purpose of, II-307
CCH 3, Hand Space Mimicry certainty, certainties, I-342; see also Certainty Pro- .
Hand Space Mimicry and ~ are not Tone 40, cessing
III-400 as a gradient scale, I-356, 378
IQ changes produced by CCH 4, III-247 auditor certainty,
motions are the commands, III-401 and results, I-357
product, purpose and procedure of Book Mimicry, pc’s reaction to, I-357
III-247-48, 400 clarity of observation, I-377
CCH 5, Location by Contact, III-67 formula of, I-349
commands and how to run, VII-408 is awareness, I-359
CCH 5, Tone 40 Locational Processing, purpose, pro- itself is knowledge; datum is secondary knowl cedure and commands of, III-254 edge, I-349, 376
CCH 6, Body-Room Contact, III-67 knowledge is certainty, I-356
commands and how to run, VII-408 most certain certainty is perception, least certain
CCH6, Opening Procedure by Duplication [1957], ty evaluation, I-349
purpose, procedure and commands of, III-254 of awareness, triangle of, I-378
CCH 7, Contact by Duplication, III-68 of impact, I-379
commands and how to run, VII-409 sanity and ~, parallel between, I-376, 377
CCH 7 [1958]: Tone 40 8-C—”Keep it from going theory of certainty, I-341
away”, III-255 this is Scientology—the science of ~, I-374
CCH 8 [1958]: Tone 40 8-C—”Hold it still”, III-255 triangle of certainty, I-349
CCH 8, Trio, III-68; see also Trio Certainty Processing, I-3 50, 367, 393, 397; see also
CCH 9, Tone 40 “Keep it from going away”, III-69 certainty; Scn 8-8008
is a withhold process, III-230 basic technique, I-394, 395, 398
CCH 9 [1958]: Tone 40 8-C—”Make it a little more beingness and, I-406
solid”, III-255 report on, II-27
CCH 9, 10 & 11, why they are run, III-233 SOP 8, Appendix No. 2; see COHA
CCH 10, Tone 40 “Hold it still”, III-69 certificates,
CCH 11, Tone 40 “Make it a little more solid”, III-69 auditor, purpose of, I-400
CCH 12, Limited Subjective Havingness, III-70 cancellation of auditor’s certificates, reason for,
commands of, III-256 IV-30, 96
CCH 13, Subjective Solids, III-70 provisionalcertificates, I-52
commands of, III-256 requirements for permanent certificates, I-65
CCH 14, Then and Now Solids; see Then and Now restoration of certificates, IV-34
Solids suspension, line for, I-66
CCH 15, Rising Scale Processing, III-72; see also Ris- why all begin with word “Hubbard”, III-288
ing Scale Processing Certification Board,
CCH 18, III-99 duties and responsibilities, I-65
CCH-50, processing number of ARC Break Straight purpose of, I-66
Wire, III-363 certification, student, I-372
CCH 88, Enforced Nothingness, III-246 chain(s),
CDEI cycle with Lower Scale; see Scn 0-8 defn., series of incidents of similar nature or simi
CDEI Scale, lar subject matter, V-28
Expanded, VI-200 defn, series of similar engrams, or of similar locks,
goals listing using Create ~, V-143 V-274
on inflow and outflow, V-16 defn, chain of incidents, makes up a whole

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


chain(s) (cont.) chain(s) (cont.)
defn. (cont.) when cognitions occur with very good indicators
adventure or activity related by same subject, chain is almost always gone, VI-373
general location or people, understood to take will not go null until its basic is reached, V-41
place in a long time period, weeks, months, withhold chain behaves exactly like any chain,
years or even billions or trillions of years, V-28
V-275 Word Clearing a chain of words, all must F/N,
defn, series of recordings of similar experiences, VIII-303
VI-343 change(s), II-143; see also Change Processes; Start—
are held together mainly by somatics, VI-352, 394 Change—Stop
basic of chain; see basic of chain ability to, II-304
can be overrun, how, VIII-385 Axiom 55: create, change, destroy, II-313
Dianetic chain, how to rehab, VIII-289, 384 basic curve of change compares to cycle of action,
Dianetic chains preVI-ously flubbed, how to han- IV-258
dle, VIII-290, 384 belongs at “inverted control” on Prehav Scale,
Dianetic chains run a second or third time, how to IV-320
handle and indicate to pc, VIII-291 fear of, I-355
Dianetic EP, cognition could simply be “the chain individual who is bent mainly upon surVI-val is
blew”, VIII-272 intent upon changing things, II-433
Dianetics, EP of chain is erasure, accompanied by is essentially the redirection of energy, I-296
F/N, cognition and good indicators, VIII-272 is “ought to be—should be” postulate, III-88
engram chains, X-28, 56-57; see also DTOT; Model Session is designed to avoid unpredictable
DMSMH; SOS; Dn Today changes, IV-54
engrams which go solid when you try to run no change = Level I is out, VII-70
them are too late on chain, VI-227 obsessive, III-130
go into restimulation on overrun in life, prior confusion to self-determined change, V-116
VII-18 Problems Intensive and ~; see Problems Intensive
engram running by chains; see engram running; rapidity of change of state, unpredicted, defini R3R tion of surprise, death and forgetfulness, IV-54
erased chain can be overrun: what happens isthat resisted change is basis of all mass in physical
pcs try to cooperate and put something there, universe and every stuck point on track, IV
VII-228; VIII-291 256
erasure; see also erasure turning points are simply self-determined changes
failed to flatten, X-69 in pc’s life, IV-401
floating needle on chain can be called end of that two things which will create change: postulates
chain, but not of Dianetics on case, VI-349 and communication, II-258
flubbed, X-119, 123 unpredicted change lessens havingness, IV-54
Full Flow Dianetic chains that did not F/N when when attention is fixed, ability to reach and with originally run, how to handle, VII-211 draw decreases, therefore ability to change de grinding occurs because incident is too late on~, creases, III-428
VI-360 Change of Space Processing, II-42; see also COHA
it takes more than one chain of engrams to build Change Processes, I-445, 453; IV-253, 256; see also
up an ill area, VI-337, 416 change; Start—Change—Stop
narrative chain; see narrative Change brackets and commands, IV-258
of incidents has only one basic which is earliest clarification of, IV-320
engram received from or overt act committed commands of, IV-256
against subject, location or beings which make make a release, IV-261
it a chain, V-275 tendency of pc to alter-is commands, and ~, IV
overt chain; see overt 256
reduction of lock chains, I-110 5-way bracket, IV-258
rehabbing chains, VII-227 ; X-118, 119, 123 15-way bracket, IV-259
R3R and chains; see R3R changing the pc, X-36
somatic chains go quickly to basic and are impor- chaos is created by two opposing creations, II-408
tant chains, VI-394 character of person, determining by observing his
somatics, run one chain at a time, VI-343 intent concerning communication, III-105
two types of chains: story or narrative, and feel- Character Processing Chart, I-495
ings, VII-9 charge, V-290, 416; see also auditing; by-passed
unflat engram ~ and high TA, VII-18, 76, 122, charge
123; X-28, 56 defn., stored quantities of energy in time track,
unknown incident pins chains, V-41 V-289, 416

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


charge (cont.) charity, mercy, kindness are the highest and kingliest
defn, stored energy or stored or recreatable qualities there are, II-237
potentials of energy, V-290 chart, Classification Gradation and Awareness Chart;
defn, electrical impulse on case that activates see Classification Gradation and Awareness
meter, VII-50 Chart
advance of case is amount of charge you get off it, Chart of Attitudes, application of, VII-148
VII-187 Chart of Human Evaluation, VII-85, 86; X-35; see
all after charge is based on prior ARC, V-442 also SOS; SA
all cases react to same actions, they differ in applicationof, VII-148
amount of “charge”, VI-281 chart of processes, where they are on the ARC Tone
ARC break and charge; see ARC break Scale, II-131, 138
automaticity is rendered discharged by indicating chart, Scientology Process Chart, II-483
area of charge only, V-282 Chart, Standard Procedure, I-21
blowdown is a period of ~ blowing off bank, checklist,
VI-69 defn, list of actions or inspections to ready an
blows off bank to degree that it’s confronted and activity or machinery or object for use or
this is represented by itsa line, VII-243; IX-68 estimate needful repairs or corrections, VII
by-passed; see by-passed charge 140, 286; IX-3 11
cases progress in exact ratio to amount of charge mandatory C/Sing, X-200
gotten off, VI-424 checkout, VII-447; IX-3 11; see also training
chronic, V-29 1 defn, action of verifying a student’s knowledge of
E-Meter and charge; see E-Meter an item given on a checksheet, VII-140, 286;
erasure, auditing theory of charge erasure, V-291; IX-311
see also erasure check for application in checkouts, VI-205
gains on pc can be measured in terms of charge High Crime checkouts, IX-99
discharged, V-325 must consult student’s understanding, V-480, 488
how it reacts on needle and TA, V-290 on materials by auditors, X-179
is held in place by basic on chain, V-290 star-rated,
level still charged, reliable indicators are TA action defn., 100% letter perfect in knowing, under
and cognitions, VII-78 standing, demonstrating and being able to
overwhelms; auditor errors add charge; pc then is repeat back material with no comm lag,
overwhelmed, V-401 VI-157
postulates at time of incident contain ~, V-349 required before application, VI-156
reality is proportional to amount of charge off, zero rate, defn, material which is only checked
VI-227, 281 out on basis of general understanding, IX-3 12
reality of case is proportional to amount of charge checksheet(s), V-227; VII-447
removed, VII-450 defn, list of materials, often diVI-ded into sections,
removed from case only by comm cycle pc to that give theory and practical steps which,
auditor, V-335, 414 when completed, give one a study completion,
showsnotonlythatanareahassomethinginit; ital- VII-140, 286; IX-311
so shows that pchas possible reality on it, VII-50 High Crimes concerning checksheets, VII-80
slows down responses, V-400 is translated and printed in local language, IX-350
stuck TA is always caused by running pc above material, defn, policy letters, bulletins, tapes,
pc’s tolerance of charge, V-350 mimeo issues, any reference book or any
study blows charge, VI-281 books mentioned, VII-198
symptom of heavily charged case is F/Ning too never delete data from checksheets or assign part
quickly to be processed well, VI-426 of it “background” data, VII-115
TA slows down when pc goes into more charge sequence, VII-448; IX-356
than he can itsa easily, V-374, 413 tape course checksheets, IX-381
terminal chosen must be real to pc and must show use in training, IV-329
charge on E-Meter, III-550 chemical assist, I-40
tests give an idea of how charged up case may be, child(‘s), children; see also baby; Child Processing;
VI-281 Child Dianetics
time track and charge; see time track accessibility of, I-45
tone arm motion, without, no charge is being acknowledgement of, III-110
released and no actual case betterment is ob- and help, IV-85
served, V-329, 413 application of Scientology to children, VI-30
where there is charge (motion) E-Meter needle is as cases, VIII-388
in motion, and where pc is stuck needle will attention is badly scattered, I-45
freeze, II-528 attention span of, is short, III-553

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


child(‘s) (cont.) Child Processing (cont.)
attitude towards; see also SOS demands more perfect auditing than adult process communicating with, I-325 ing, needs very formal session, III-553
condition of, III-109 education of parents, I-46
Dianetics, I-120; see also CDN effect of processing on, I-327
preventive, I-47 for use in public schools, I-328
dignity and purpose are native to the, I-324 game for processing, I-215
education of the, I-47; III-30 give the child the dignity of real sessions, III-526
goals, importance of giving goals to ~, I-47 grief and locks, I-45
high IQ and mock-ups, I-328 group processing of, I-319
high IQ, yet low quality work, I-328 how it is done, I-327
how to handle children, III-81, 105 results of, I-321
how to live with; seeNSOL much time is used to flatten things on ~, VI-32
increased beingness and potentialities of beingness never tell the child that any part of any situation
of, I-320 is imaginary or a delusion, I-49
independence, what undermines it, I-48 parent as auditor, I-44
in present time, I-325 processes for different types of children, III-526
instilling confidence in children, III-554 process given to groups of, I-321
interpersonal relations with, I-189 routine child processes, III-554
is a thetan in usually rather bad condition, III- shifting enVI-ronment, I-46, 48
34 short sessioning works very well with a child,
is dependent on exterior evaluation, III-166 III-526, 553
is full of affinity, I-98 technique for entering a lock, I-49
is suffering from death shock, III-109 theory underlying, I-323
misunderstoods of, I-47 three major steps in, I-44
must be permitted to contribute, VIII-80 “You do something you think I’ll like” [child
natural sense of dignity, I-45 process], III-540
never talk over child’s head to his parents, I-45 Children’s Security Check, ages 6-12, IV-378
not capable of sustained concentration, I-49 chilled pc almost always has a high TA until he gets
not permitted to work, III-214 warm, VII-438
or foreign language persons or semiliterates, use Chinese School, IX-318, 319
Word Clearing Method 7, IX-463 chiropractor, I-206
originations of a child, III-371; VIII-183 choice, power of, III-81
out of present time, I-325 is senior to responsibility, IV-24
perception inhibitions, I-322 choice, thetan’s power of choice, how it has been
processing of; see Child Processing overthrown, VII-257
psychosomatic difficulties, I-322 cholesterol, role of in body, VIII-204
reactive bank, language in the, I-44 choosing pcs, X-225
reality, I-48 chopping pc’s communication, VII-245; IX-70
requires understanding and assistance in control- Christ, II-211
ling the enVI-ronment around him, III-110 goals set for man by, II-152
role in the home, I-325 identification with, II-9
routine of, III-81 intended for man: wisdom, good health and im Scientology, I-319 mortality, II-159
should own his own mest, I-190 promises of, II-156
special problems, I-49 Christianity,
Streptomycin can cause pregnant mothers to give is based on the VI-ctim; compulsion of overt act birth to children who have impaired hearing, motivator sequence, III-494
VI-II-404 why it won, III-134
third party action, I-48 chronic,
three classes of, I-321 aches and pains, I-183
unburdening, VIII-389 arthritic, processing of, I-272
using good 8-C on children, III-82 high TA; see tone arm, high
with rough cases, III-554 illness, suspected, send pc to medico, I-421
childhood illnesses, I-46 low tone, anxiety, insecurity, can stem from pro
Child Processing, III-553; VI-30, 31; see also child longed physical illness, I-420
age of child, I-44; III-34 psychosomatic illness pc has usually counterfeit of
aim is not a “normal” child, I-322 illness suffered by ally, I-19
assists on children, III-554 somatics; see somatics, chronic
auditing a 10-year old child, III-53 churches used mechanism of confession, IV-12

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


church, how to handle ministers of other churches, Class VIII (cont.)
II-158; see also religion high TA handling (cont.)
Church of Scientology; see also religion tions to list “What has been overrun” are can Creed of; see Scn 0-8 celled, VII-269
Scientology is a religious practice in that the how a Class VIII gets in standard tech, VIII-391
Church of Scientology conducts basic services invalidation can crash stats, VII-23
such as sermons at church meetings, christen- purpose of, VI-242, 273
ings, weddings and funerals, VI-195 six zones of action in, VI-252
why it has come into existence, II-72 take care not to invalidate junior auditors, VII-23
circuit(s); see also Science of Survival clay, causes and handling of a pc just doodling in
all valences are circuits are valences, V-6; VIII- clay, V-496, 497
181; 1X-284 clay demos, how to make, V-452, 453; VII-163, 164;
case, characteristic of, II-19 see also clay table
cases, cycle of the explosion on, I-469 clay, physical handling of, V-455
demon; see demon circuits clay table, VII-447; IX-355; see also Clay Table Pro
key out, I-426 cesses
with knowingness, V-6; VIII-181; IX-284 any part of mind or any term in Scientology can
mechanism of, I-391 be demonstrated on a, V-452; VII-163
somatics, circuits, aberrations and problems are art is no object in clay table work, VII-164
postulate-counter-postulate situations, IV-414 construction of clay tables, V-451; VII-162
thetan accumulates circuits, mental mass, pictures, everything is labeled, VII-163
ridges, to degree that he misassigns responsi- goofs, V-476
bility, IV-18 IQ increased by HGC use of ~, V-454
circuitry; see Notes on the Lectures label each clay object, V-452, 477, 509
civilization, education isnecessaryto have a~, II-439 mass parts are done by clay, significance or
civilizations, past ~ have vanished, III-126 thought parts by label, V-452; VII-163
Class Chart; see Classification Gradation and Aware- thin-edged ring of clay with a large hole in it is
ness Chart usually used to signify a pure significance,
classes of minds, I-76 V-452; VII-163
Classification Gradation and Awareness Chart, VI-33; training, VI-205
VIII-311, 313; X-21, 49, 211, 232, 248-51 use, V-452, 487
Basic Program is laid out in, IX-27 work,
basic program of any case, VII-56, 57, 99; in training and processing, V-451, 453; VII VIII-311, 313 162, 163
critical band of, VII-466 is Level III, V-466
ineveryfolder, X-14 is not for cases who get no TA in general,
master program, X-10, 250 V-486
pc must attain full ability on each level before on definitions, V-451
going on, VII-56 pc must label everything made in ~, V-509
tools of auditing are the Grade Chart processes what clay table workhandles, V-466
and the numerous correction lists, VII-387 Clay Table Auditing, importance of getting auditing
classification of psychotics, I-57, 473 questions answered in ~, V-490; see also clay
Class II Model Session [1964], V-398, 428 table
Class IV and V, VI-308 Clay Table Auditing, two actiVI-ties of, V-456
Class VI, Clay Table Auditing, who may use, V-487
auditor, things he should know, V-412 Clay Table Clearing, V-456, 457, 475, 483, 484; see
Saint Hill HGC staff auditor is not the same as a also clay table
Class VI Saint Hiller, VI-34 auditing cycle vitalin , V-497
tapes and bulletins are all valid and vital to lower auditor is handling chief urges of pc, not trying to
grade auditing and C/Sing, VII-103 teach pc, V-457
Class VIII, Clay Table Healing and ~ are different, V-472
actions, VII-100; X-50 direct style auditing, V-502
auditing, VII-73, 101; X-51 does not go into physical ills, V-458
Case Supervisor, the basic processes, VI-278 errors, V-475, 476, 477, 483, 493, 496
Course, VIII-391 is Level IV, V-487
principles, VI-276 is used to achieve pc’s rehabilitation and raised IQ
what it has been slowed by, VII-165 in various fields, V-456
C/S-6 list, VIII-276; IX-251 pc should have TA action on lower levels first,
handling of lower level auditors, VIII-391 V-486
high TA handling, Class VIII- Course recommenda- process of clearing words and symbols, V-474

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


Clay Table Clearing (cont.) Clear(s) (cont.)
representing the word, V-496 being Clear gives one the potential of being and
steps of Clay Table Clearing, V-458 makes the being rather easy, and fun; makes it
was called Clay Table IQ Processing, V-454, 456 possible to continue to be something, III-236
Clay Table Healing, V-453, 472; see also clay table bodhi is evidentlyour “Clear”, III-217
abridged style auditing, V-501 Book One Clear, a relative not an absolute thing,
Clay Table Clearing and ~ are different, V-472 I-357; see also Clear, mest
don’ts, V-473 checks and re-Clear checks, VI-203, 204
goof, VI-29 clear bracelets [1958], III-341
is Level III, V-487 confidence regained makes Clears, not quantity of
steps, V-472 stuff run, IV-44, 65, 66
used to get rid of physical discomfort of psycho- Dianetic, VII-98; X-48
somatic origin, V-457, 474 length of time to achieve, I-82
Clay Table IQ Processing, V-454, 456; see also Clay doesn’t react on E-Meter because he is able to be
Table Clearing conscious, IV-331
clean hands make a happy life, IV-387 don’t try to make an OT before you make a Clear~
cleaning cleans; see E-Meter, cleaning cleans V-260
clean needle, dynamic clears, IV-416
defn, responsive to instant reads only, V-84 false clear read, IV-26
defn, one which flows, producing no pattern or Fifth Stage Release, VI-87
erratic motions of smallest kind with auditor first Clears made easily by others were done with
sitting looking at it and doing nothing; not just meter assessments and five-way Help brackets
something that doesn’t react to particular on terminals, IV-92
question; a lovely slow flow, usually a rise, “firstgoalclear”, stateof, V-112, 316
most beautifully expressed on a Mark V at 64 Grade VII-—Clear, VI-95, 142
sensitiVI-ty, V-224 has no VI-cious reactive mind and operates at total
is vital in order to null a list, V-224 mental capacity, VI-19
medium clean needle, defn, offers many prior and is best described in DMSMH, IV-80
latent reads, but reads instantly when a ques- keyed-out Clear, VI-19, 20, 51
tion is asked, V-84 know-how in auditing to Clear, III-286
Clear(s), I-25; VI-61, 86, 141; see also clear; mest clear,
DMSMH defn, a Book One Clear; clear in terms of
defn, somebody who does not have any engrams facsimiles, III-155, 175
in present time with him; by actual practice a defn, can see facsimiles with sonic present
Clear would have tobe a stable thetanexterior lifetime, has no psychoses or neuroses,
since the body itself is composed of energy upper part of OCA/APA graph, above 135
masses which unfortunately contain engrams, IQ [1957], III-156, 176
II-228 defn., freedom from keyed-in engrams, III-375
defn, in an absolute sense would be someone who defn., thinks of himself as a body and is sub could confront anything and everything in ject to one; all engrams are effectually
past, present and future, III-II-4 keyed out without being examined; has ex defn, a thetan who can knowingly be at cause cellent recalls, III-375
over life, matter, energy, space and time, sub- defn, preclear is mest clear when no terminal
jective and objective [1957], III-172 selected is, when run by Communication
defn, a person at willing and knowing cause over Process, productive of variation of tone
his ownlife, hisbody andhis surroundings and arm from male or female clear reading,
without a reactive or subconscious mind III-504
[1958], III-217 defn, IV-137
defn., somebody with no “held down fives” in clearing processes for, III-377
this lifetime (see E~olution of a Science), difference between mest clear and theta clear,
V-353 III-376, 445
able to confront the physical universe, other from mest clear to theta clear requires an
bodies, his own body, other minds, his own address to sixth dynamic with Help Pro
mind and other beings—without trimmings, cesses, IV-174
III-101 Help is flat on mest clear, IV-116
are the lucky, III-153 is a way station on the road to theta clear or
attainment of “Clears” [1958], III-217 OT, III-376
auditors will always be senior to Clears, III-237 method of making, I-485, 491
basic personality capable of all attributes of Clear, Procedure [1958] , III-205
III-284

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


Clear(s) (cont.) Clear(s) (cont.)
mest clear (cont.) theta clear(ing) (cont.)
process package which makes mest clears, produced by SOP 8-C, II-12
theta clears and OTs [1960], IV-133 route theta clear, list of processes, III-439
what makes the state unstable, III-446 schedule [1959] , III-468
needs training, III-237 singular attribute of, I-296
no responsibility case, a mockery of Clear, how to Standard Operating Procedure for, I-289
check this out, IV-98 three grades of Clear [1959] , III-375
one’s first duty is to be Clear, III-153 Training 0—Confronting, first step on the road to
one-shot; see Dianetics ‘55! Clear, III-101
“one-shot clear” is impossible, VII-69 valence, if pc were in no valence, but was himself
Operating Thetan vs. Clear, VI-51, 56, 86 completely, he would be wholly Clear, IV-102
postulates of Clear read as a surge, VI-220 various roads to it described, V-275
Power will not need repair after pc has gone Clear, what are Clears, III-375
VII-143 why Clear would go unclear, IV-443
procedure for certifying Clears [1958], III-289 you cannot stay Clear unless you solve things by
Project Clear processes, how to run, III-144 the greatest good for the greatest number of
Release—Clear-OT, VI-86, 141 dynamics, III-237
road to Clear, VI-19 clear(ed)(ing), [1947-1949] III-273, 318; V-316; see
R6 bank, VI-62 also Clear
state of high cause is also keyed-out Clear, V-435 defn, a gradient process of finding places where
steps to make a Clear [1963], V-354 attention is fixed and restoring ability of pc to
test [1963], V-259, 353 place and remove attention under his own de theta clear(ing), III-375; IV-133, 174 terminism, III-428
defn., person is clear of his body, engrams, altered goal wording prevents clearing, V-150
facsimiles, but can handle and safely con- assembly line, V-1 53
trol a body, II-10 assessment for clearing intensive, V-166
defn., a Clear obtained by Clear Procedure buttons which depress clearing if pc has erroneous
[1957], III-155, 175 definitions for them, III-321
defn., can exist knowingly independent of by SOP Goals, IV-217
bodies [1957] , III-155, 156, 175, 176 by Valences, III-274
defn., has no obsessive engrams; can put back LRH session, Clearing by Valences, III-276
at will his reactive bank or any engram in it cleared cannibal, VIII-260, 261, 263
and blow it off again at a glance, III-376 cleared Zulu is a cleared Zulu, III-236
defn., person at cause over his own reactive clear(ing) the auditor, III-122, 123, 301
bank and can create and uncreate it at will; best way of, III-326
person who is willing to experience, III-447 commands of, III-239
defn., preclear is theta clear when he can han- with the pc after D of P InterVI-ew, III-307
dle engrams without producing a change commands; see commands
from clear reading [1959] , III-504 completing clearing, V-355
defn., a Case Level 2 that is exterior, V-3 17 curriculum for Clearing Courses [1961], IV-374
and aberration, what LRH is trying to do, difficulty of clearing, V-317
I-315 Earth, III-501
attained by handling sixth dynamic to attain a fields, clearing of, III-209, 210
straight seventh, IV-166 free needles and clearing, V-112
attention units, as case progresses toward HGC clearing [1962], V-152
Clear, I-26 in Dianetics vs. in Scientology, III-270
auditing formulae to make a theta clear, I-278 lies in confronting, not escaping, IV-374
auditor needs good command of DMSMH to materials used for clearing [1961], IV-370
understand ~, I-315 mest clearing is shortcut clearing, III-446
Clears made in 1947 that were stable were in reality, III-235
reality theta clears, not mest clears, III-445 responsibility, basic clearing process using, III-321
made by gradually raising their confronting- staffclearing, lll-291
ness of mental image pictures, III-445 theta clearing is faster than mest clearing but not
mest clear and ~, difference between, III-376 faster than releasing, III-447
Operating Thetan and theta clear, road to, things that prevent clearing, IV-217
V-213 to clear pc give him series of realized wins, IV-65
procedures for, I-289; see also exteriorization up a goal, III-327
processes on gradient scale from unconscious up states of mind and psychosomatics, III-302
pc to theta clear [1959] , III-436 valences key to clearing, IV-368

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


clear(ed)(ing) (cont.) co-audit(ing) (cont.)
words; see Word Clearing HAS Co-Audit (cont.)
why it works, V-493 allowed process, III-469
why some people are unwilling to clear people, Comm Course and HAS Co-Audit [1959], III-
III-454 456; see also Communication Course
Clear Check by D of P [SOP Goals], HCO WW Form Course [1959] , III-451
CT8 [ 1961 ], IV-233 ended, IV-176
Clearing Course, do not run Power on anyone who finding terminals, III-513
has run CC materials, VI-203 how to run a co-audit, III-452
Clearing Success Congress in Washington, V-137 is for people “trained” on a PE Course, IV-188
Clear Procedure, Clearing Procedure, III-296, 382 Overt-Withhold Straight Wire better than
ACC Clear Procedure, III-311, 322, 369 Comm Process on HAS Co-Audit, III-550
auditing the pc on Clear Procedure, III-243 processes, III-439, 498, 550
definitions, goals, III-155 Process I and 11, IV-189
HGC Clear Procedure outline [1958], III-219 resumed, IV-185
Scientology: Clear Procedure Issue One, III-172 terminals, one of most effective light terminals
Step One: Participation in session by the pc, and one of best Comm Processes particu
III-157, 176 larly for HAS Co-Audit is a body part,
Step Two: Placing the preclear at cause, III- III-519
182 untrained person can go release on, III-444
Step Three: Establish control of pc’s body by 6th London ACC tapes tell how to run an HAS
pc, III-184 Co-Audit Course, III-474
Step Four: Find the auditor, III-188 how Co-Audit stalled cases, IV-185
Step Five: Pc versus mest, III-189 husband-wife co-auditor team, unlucky as a gener Step Six; see Step 6 al rule, V-37
Step Seven (Optional): Establish pc’s control in groups, IV-64
over his “bank”, III-191 instructor audits each case through the co-auditor,
Step Eight: Make some time, III-191 IV-70
Standard Clearing Procedure [1958] , III-274 listen style co-audit, V-511, 521
standardization of Clear Procedure, III-285, 292 O/W dropped on Co-Audit, V-25
what Clear Procedure consists of, III-285, 292 PE Co-Audit process, III-552; IV-70
close terminals, people who, II-159 retain co-audit pc’s interest in case, III-538, 550
closing terminals, phenomenon of, II-I 89 student intensives and co-auditing processes, III-75
coach(es)(ing); see also training team should run O/W [1960], IV-21~ 25
defn., a student who is standing in the role of urgent change in all co-audit courses [1959], III “pc”, III-42, 462 551
blows occur when coach gives too few wins, III- Code, Auditor’s; see Auditor’s Code
116 Code of a C/S, X-197-98
coachless training, use of a doll, V-103 Code of a Scientologist, II-115, [1954] 116, [1956]
definitionandpurpose, VII-288 442; [1957] LI-1; see also CMSCS; COHA;
Drill [ 1963 ], V-272 Scn ~8
E-Meter drill, VII-10 Scientologist operates within the boundaries of
rules of, VI-122, 233, 234 the Auditor’s Code and ~, III-281
theorycoachingisnotexamining, V-489 Code of Honor, an ethical code, II-104; see also
to a no win, IX-91 COHA; Scn 0-8
TRs done solo in absence of good coaches, except codes of conduct mutually agreed, IV-388
TR 04, V-103 co-existence, superior to ARC triangle and mechanics
what coaches should look for, V-194 of living, II-136
co-audit(ing), coffee shop auditing, VII-191; X-94
ARC Break Process, V-319 described, V-505
ARC Break Straight Wire is very useful in hus- cognition(s), II-240, 254; VI-373; VII-117
band-wife co-auditing teams, III-364 defn, awareness of awareness, II-254, 255
C/S must check routinely for mutual out ruds in, defn, unknown confronting or not confronting,
VIII-259 when uncovered, gives us the phenomenon of
difficulties, II-162 cognition, III-311
formula, III-475 defn, something pc suddenly understands or feels,
Formulas and Regimens were never for co-audits, IV-42
IV-176 defn, pc origination indicating he has “come to
HAS Co-Audit, III-380, 449, 498, 524, 527; IV- realize”; it’s a “What do you know. I ______”
188; see also HAS; HQS statement, VI-373; VII-117

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


cognition(s) (cont.) command(s),
defn, as-ising aberration with realization about adjectival, beware running, IV-50
life, VII-230 alternate commands, how to avoid making mis
a major cognition resulting from any process is take in giving correct next command, IV-140
generally a flattening of that process, II-255, alternate commands, how to run, II-516
328 altitude is the factor that makes a pc receive and
and flattening of process, IX-67 execute an auditing command, IV-134
and havingness, II-334, 336, 372; VIII-123 anaten ensues when one direction of command is
auditor not in comm with pc means no cognitions, run too long, III-220
VII-241; IX-66 are written out in full on Auditor’s Report Form,
blowdown is a period of relief and cognition to pc IX-42
while it is occurring and for a moment after it auditor must know when pc has finished answer stops, VI-69 ing the command, VII-248
chopping, abuses indicator of F/N, X-30 auditor’s command restimulates charge in pc; only
chopping off cognitions, effect of, VII-22, 78 way this charge can be blown is by pc telling
cognition lag is the most important communica- auditor, V-335, 415
tion lag, II-255 before auditor gives them, he makes certain he has
don’t prevent by cutting when F/N appears, VI- pc’s attention on him again and off last ques 275, 362 tion, III-296
don’t use “I will repeat the auditing command” CCH 3 and CCH 4 can be used when verbal com
after a cognition, IV-42, 164, 222, 455 mands fail, IV-155
example of, II-254 clearing commands, [1956] II-449; [1957] III- flattening off a process and cognition, VII-242 122, [1958] 298, 301, [1959] 430; VI
F/N occurs most often after a big ~, VI-145, 147 110, 265, 284, 305
goal of any process, II-255 auditor must clear each and every word of,
how pc gets, VII-76 VIII-93, 94
invalidation of pc’s, V-418 never let pc off cans while clearing commands,
is rather quick, not an hour’s maundering, VI-162 VI-284
master cognition, “I knew it all the time”, III-88 dangerous auditor misses withholds and refuses to
method of fishing for, VIII-301 permit pc to execute auditing commands, V-33
milestones of case gain, VII-230 effect of accusative auditing commands, V-442
no cognition soon becomes overwhelm, V-401 engram, I-31
of Dianetic EP could simply be “the chain blew”, failing to give the next command, VI-413
VIII-272 give them crisply and definitely and get them
pc who doesn’t cognite, cause of, V-36 executed, V-501, 502
show that thought is releasing from force, VII-77 is pc ready to receive it, VII-245; IX-70
significance recovered or realized by the pc only itsa line, don’t use new commands to cut, V-338
shows up as cognitions, VII-77 mis-acknowledgement is only and always a failure
Training 13, Fishing a Cognition, III-73, 240 to end the cycle of a command, III-543
TRs, in presence of rough TRs cognitions do not modification of auditing question for process that
occur, VII-230 dives backtrack fast, III-529
usually occur immediately after an erasure, VI- never let any auditing command go unanswered,
373 IV-44
waiting for F/N to broaden to cognition, VII- new auditor does not realize how serious it is to
22 flub a command, VI-413
when they occur, VII-117 no auditing command is ever let go of until that
cold(s); see also illness actual command is answered by pc, V-490,
(common), cause of and handling, VI-18 501
loss can cause, VIII-237 no auditing command must depend upon any
process to cure, III-246 other auditing command or it won’t be in
vitamin C is excellent for helping, VIII-407 present time, III-354, 355, 384
cold pc sometimes has a falsely high TA, VII-424 pc’s ability to follow, IV-134
collective thought agreement, result of, VI-6 phrase, II-497
collect (Secondary Scale level), IV-308 preclear not running, II-77
color flashes, preclear folder tape, IX-13 repeated commands, IV-42, 164, 222, 455
coma; see also anaten; unconsciousness repeating commands, theory of, III-355
auditing a person in, VIII-206, 238 reversal of in sub-zero tone scale, I-289
person in a coma, how to handle, VII-323 rudiments, important to clear the commands, VI-comanome, defn., I-7; see also engram 265
combined terminal; see terminal, combined tendency of pc to alter-is commands, IV-256

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


command(s) (cont.) communicate, communication(s) (cont.)
terminals, beware running adjectival commands, administration is a form of communication, II-386
IV-17, 50 affinity and reality exist to further ~, I-381
Tone 40, giving a command and just knowing that and the Scale of Awareness, II-191
it will be executed despite any contrary ap- area of enturbulence ceases to exist as soon as
pearances, III-240 communication is leveled into it, II-292
un-doable commands, III-467 art and communication; see art
use of symbols to keep track of ~ given, VI-238 auditing and withdrawing communications, I-368
value of action phrases; see SOS auditing comm cycle; see auditing comm cycle
words not to use in auditing commands, V-439 auditor has to assume responsibility for all comm
command line; see also HTLTAE breakdowns in session, V-161, 414; IX-75
case state and ability to follow a command line basic clue to successful marriage, I-309, 310
areco-ordinated, VI-126 becomes a contest of overts in the ARC breaky
must exist in an organization so people know who case, IV-120
is boss, II-386 be, do and have, III-92
Comm Course; see Communication Course beingness, communication, space, I-326
Committee of Evidence, when to use, VIII-100 synonyms in action, I-352
comm lag; see communication lag between men and women, I-406
communicate, communication(s); III-104; see also breaking a solid communication line, III-140
affinity; ARC; ARC triangle; Communication can create spaces, II-467, 492
Process; presession; reality; 4th London ACC change also means perception change, I-351
Lectures, II-270; SOS; Scn 8-8008; Dn 55!; change, measure of progress, II-16
CMSCS; NSOL character of person, determining by observing his
defn., use of those sense channels with which the intent concerning communication, Ill-105
individual contacts the physical universe, I-206 chopping pc’s communication, IX-70
defn., more important than affinity or reality, for effect of, VII-245
it is the operation, the action, by which one common denominator of ~ and aberration, III-28
experiences emotion and by which one agrees, communicate so it can be duplicated, II-137
I-350 communicatingness, VIII-I 18
defn, the handling of particles, of motion, I-351 communication ability proceeds from control,
defn., volume of flow or lack of flow, I-381 III-24
defn., any ritual by which effects can be produced Communication—Control—Havingness; see CCH
and perceived, I-406 component parts of, VIII-1 85
defn., shift of a particle from one part of space to consequences of cut communication, III-148
another part of space, I-464 control + duplication = communication, III-248,
defn, duplication of the receipt point of that 355
which emanated at a cause point, II-14 cycle(s),
defn., interchange of ideas about something, II- defn, cause, distance, effect with intention,
247 attention, duplication and understanding,
defn, cause-distance-effect, II-413 VII-246; IX-71
defn., essentially something which is sent and additives, VI-59
which is received, II-413 auditing comm cycle; see auditing comm cycle
defn., energy or recognition, VI-261 auditor’s; see auditor’s comm cycle
defn., interchange of ideas between two terminals, difficulties of auditing are difficulties of the
VII-291 communication cycle, VII-238
defn., consideration and action of impelling an E-Meter drill coaching, flunking out comm
impulse or particle from source-point across a cycle keeps needle clean, VII-1 0
distance to receipt-point, with intention of fundamental of auditing is communication
bringing into being at receipt-point a duplica- cycle, IX-64
tion and understanding of that which emanat- in auditing, II-314, 443; IX-73; see also TRs
ed from source-point [Axiom 28], VIII-185 magic of, IX-63
aberration, earliest button susceptible of aberra- must exist before technique can exist, VII-239;
tion was apparently communication, III-518 IX-64
aberration is caused by cut communication with pc’s results will go to hell on an additive comm
the mass, remedy of, III-147 cycle, IX-81
ability to communicate precedes ability to handle, six comm cycles which make up one auditing
VII-264; IX-314 cycle, IX-71
acknowledgement, its general use is putting a use of in Touch Assist, IX-505
period to the communication cycle, III-349, whichmakeuponeauditingcycle, VII-244, 246
350 within the auditing cycle, IX-69

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


communicate, communication(s) (cont.) communicate, communication(s) (cont.)
cycle of action, communication formula and lag (cont.)
Axiom 10 become identified in the mind with defn. (cont.)
one another, IV-35 or talk or incorrect answers occurred in the
depends upon certainty of despatch and receipt, interim, II-68
I-388 defn., length of time, whether verbal or silent,
depends upon duplication, II-15 intervening between the auditor’s asking of
deVI-ces useless with no formula for communica- a specific question and the specific and
tion, II-401 precise answer of that question by pc,
dirty needle phenomena usually traced to auditor II-119; VIII-108
haVI-ng cut pc’s communication, V-364, 447 defn., length of time intervening between the
do not force a person who is low on havingness to asking of the question by auditor and reply
communicate, II-480 to that specific question by pc; question
duplicative factors of, III-355 must be precise, reply must be precisely to
eccentric genius is a problem in, I-130 that question, II-128
Factors, The, I-375 defn, interval of time between the moment of.
failure keys in by-passed charge, V-417 auditor’s asking the question and the reply
first discoverable ability of a pc is , III-5 to that exact question by pc, II-234, 449
formula, II-136 always reduce every encountered by contin affinity embraces the distance part of, II-136 ued use of same question or process, II-99
formula of: cause, distance, effect, with intention, direct index of sanity, I-310, 466
attention and duplication with understanding, explained, II-449
VIII-185 flat question is when ~ has been similar for
formula of, is cause, distance, effect with inten- three successive questions, II-234-35
tion and attention and a duplication at effect handling of, I-352
of what emanates from cause, VII-232 how to measure, II-128
fourth dynamic problems solved with ~, II-292 index as test of aberration, I-351
getting into communication with basic personality is inverse to amount of space a person has,
through affinity, I-60 I-465
getting into communication with preclear, II-20 is known to be flat when the replies are readily
graph of, II-42 given without pause or hesitation and with
has power of eradicating spaces and masses, II-467 out any comment on pc’s part, II-216
havingness drop and communication, III-138, 177 most important ~ is the cognition lag, II-255
havingness is result of withheld ~, II-41 5 no-comm-1ag reaction, process above pc’s level,
how to communicate to a group, III-336 II-218
idea that communication could be harmful, III- of aberrative personality, I-475
5 1 8 physical ~ just another kind of ~, II-68
inhibited communication, III-466 physiological, II-130
intention communicates, III-338 position on the Tone Scale established by,
interest, communication, control, help, sequence II-128
of breakdown in aberration, IV-120 process lag is length of time it takes to reduce
is a familiarization process based on reach and all communication lag from a type of ques withdraw, VII-239 tion or action in auditing, II-130
is an anchor point, I-465 questionable answers and repeat of question
is as exact as it approaches duplication, II-1 5 do not reduce the ~, II-1 28
is-ness and communication, III-146 use in selecting a marriage partner, I-310
is part of the triangle of affinity, reaiity and whatittellsyou, ll-129
communication, II-136 language, main tool of, I-99
is raised by holding things in, III-231, 232 levels of, I-351
is simply a familiarization process based on reach line(s); see also HTLTAE
and withdraw, IX-64 all lines should have a purpose, II-400
is the heart of life, I-351 are not command lines, II-386
itsa isn’t a comm line; it’s what travels on a comm collapsed, I-367
line from pc to auditor, if that which travels is cut comm lines in marriage problems, I-310
saying with certainty “It IS”, V-370 depend upon reality and communication and
lag; see also Dianetics ‘55.’ affinity and where an individual is too de defn., length of time between the moment the manding the affinity tends to break down
auditor poses the question and moment slightly, VII-240; IX-65
when that exact question posed is answered how severed, I-139
positively by pc no matter whether silence is first requisite of auditing, II-53

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


communicate, communication(s) (cont.) communicate, communication(s) (cont.)
line(s) (cont.) speed, I-368
itsa maker line, itsa line, what’s-it line, VII-243 success level of a person is his ~ level, III-92
jealous person afraid of hidden ~, I-310 tends to as-is mass, III-138
management, keeping wide open all ~, I-139 terminal(s),
of Scientology, II-92 is a live mass or something that is capable of
process doesn’t work until auditor has a comm causing, receiving or relaying communica line to pc, VII-241 tion, III-II-4, 164
three important, IX-68 keeping certain communication terminals in
worse off case, the less person can follow a ~, place and making sure that the proper par
VI-126 ticles go to and through the proper termi
live , postulates, will always create change, II- nals is administration, II-386
258 using the body as a, II-276
location, to communicate one must be able to The Factors, I-375
hold to a location, VII-264 theory of affinity, reality and ~, I-98
low-havingness person withholds ~, II-415 theory of communication, I-464
machines which reverse ~, handling of, II-53 thetan communication the best, I-352
magic of, IX-63; see also Dianetics Today third dynamic activity, highest level of, and earli mechanisms of, II-48 est instant of it is and was communication,
mimicry, entering wedge of ~, II-138 III-518
mind is a communication system, II-429 third dynamic, how it violates the communication
misuse and withhold of~ is aberrative, III-518 formula, III-336
more important than the other two corners of the to a specific indiVI-dual, III-336
triangle, II-413 to communicate one must be able to hold to a
OCA/APA drop in comm level caused by double location, IX-314
acknowledgementbyauditor, lll-334 two-way communication, II-136, 314, 449; III
of material, I-402 122, 136; VIII-107; see also Dn 55!; PXL
one-way ~ is a first dynamic operation, II-138 applied to a mass will as-is mass without par
other forms of, I-99 ticularly depleting havingness of pc, II-196,
outranks by far affinity and reality, I-334, 464 197
over-communication, II-467 as a process, III-160, 179
O/W is junior to various laws of communication, auditor doing without a C/S, VIII-411
control and help, IV-186 auditors must make notation of auditing essen parts of communication, III-5 tials in 2-way comm as of senior impor
pc is as well as he can originate a communication, tance to pc’s text, VII-104
III-370; VIII-183 can be too much in auditing session, II-449
performer purpose is basically ~, VIII-293 Course Supervisor use, VII-146, 175, 299
person who is jealous has something ~rong on the explained, IX-396, 397, 399
subject of communication, I-3 10 vs. auditor two-way comm, IX-396
persuasion and ~, differences between, III-82 C/Sing two-way comm, VII-46, 104, 360, 405
point past which communication is bad and short four main reasons for 2-way comm C/Ses,
of which lack of communication is bad, Ill- VII-40
177 reasons for C/S errors in C/Sing 2-way
Prehav Scale command for Communication, IV- comm, VII-104
211 does not mean invalidative or evaluative ques Processes; see Communication Processes tions or comments by auditor, III-484
Reality and Communication Scale; see Scn 0-8 don’t use a listing question in, why, VIII-
reason for, I-380 270
refusing to communicate is a crime of omission E-Meter, two-way comm done on, VII-41
for an organization, II-165 end phenomena, VII-41, 104, 105, 126
rehabilitation of communication, III-93 evaluation in auditing two-way comm is a
relationship to obsessive games condition, III-104 deadly sin, VII-40
Release; see Grade 0 follows all rules of auditing, VII-104
responsible as one can communicate, I-351 how to get to F/N, VII-105
role that ~ plays in game called existence, I-350 in repair, X-16
Scale, II-192 Interiorization Rundown is followed by two Scarcity, Remedy of, II-291, 325 way comm session, VII-36, 52, 126, 159,
(Secondary Scale level), IV-287 460; VIII-280
solvent for all things; it dissolves all things, II-413 is not conversation, it is a highly specialized
sound in communication, III-138 thing, III-122, 161, 181

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


communicate, communication(s) (cont.) communicate, communication(s) (cont.)
two-way communication (cont.) withholds and communication, III-93, 201
maintain it, do not begrudge preclear few mo- with hurtful things, III-104
ments’ discussion of incident just recalled, word of mouth, II-92
or discussion of phenomena he has sudden- communication bridge,
Iy noticed, II-145 to get from one process to another, II-449
mass can be disintegrated, no matter what type use of, IV-5 1
of mass it is, by ~, II-197 what it is, III-373, 536
must be used sparingly, II-467 Communication Course, [1957] III-58, [1958] 335,
must remain “two-way”, III-196 451, [1959] 456; see also Co-Audit, HAS;
not using can cause failed pcs, II-146 HAS; HQS
on BD items in repair, X-87 ARC in Comm Course, III-242
one-way communication as-ises havingness, HAS Comm Course, III-449, 451, 456, 527
two-way doesn’t and actually raises the PE becomes a dissertation in Scientology and a
tone of pc, III-195 Comm Course, IV-182
part of every process, II-138 Communication Process(es), III-5; see also communi
pc upset, look into two-way comm processes cation
in folder and treat them as L&N processes defn., any process which places pc at cause and
where pc has answered with items, VIII- uses communication as the principal command
270 phrase [1959], III-503
prepared lists, two-way comming reading assists for PT location and on body by~, III-547
items, VII-411 auditors can be smoothed out as cases by running
Prepcheck, two-way comm is lighter than, VII- a ~ on “an auditor” and “a preclear”, III-505
93 avoid pinning the process in present time, III-531
process, II-118; VII-176 basic ~, “Recall a time you communicated”, III- prolonged, reduces havingness, II-414 463
questions, improper, VII-105 body part run on ~, “From where could you
questions must be limited to feelings, reac- communicate to a (name of body part)”, III tions, significances, never ask for terminals 513
or locations, VIII-270 cautions regarding ~, III-505
recalling pc’s secrets, II-250 Comm Recall Process, III-536
right amount of, II-234 DEI Scale and ~, III-534
rudiment going out in two-way comm session don’t self-audit with a ~, Ill-505
must be put in by auditor, VII-105 end phenomena [1959] , III-504, 513
ruds in, X-54-55 essentials of use of ~, III-503
rules of C/Sing, X-54-55 Grade 0 Release, VI-95, 96, 98; see also Grade 0
sessions, do not go into long ~, II-417 how to run Comm Processes on assessment, III- sessions, mark all reads, VIIbS, 75 524
sessions which do not end in F/N, how to illnesses, process with Communication Processes if
handle, VII-105 illness is in the way of session, III-505
subject chosen must be tested for read, VII- increases havingness by damping out excessive in 104-105 dividuation, III-531
subject of major processes, don’t use, VII-105 Locational Communication relieves face pressures
third-dynamic operation, II-138 and terror stomachs, III-466
two ways to err: permit two-way comm to a on body part, IV-70
point where the pc’s havingness is injured; on Universe: separation process fromalluniverses
chop communication to such a degree that the thetan is anxious about, III-524
havingness is injured, III-157 restimulative nature of ~, III-502
use of two-way comm, VII-bS terminals employed in command should be gener what it consists of, III-125 alized, III-503, 513
what it is, II-296 terminals to which ~ are addressed must be real
worksheets are detailed as to what pc says, terminalsneversignificances only, III-503
VII-40 use of E-Meter [1959], III-504
war, how it can come about by lack of ~, III-423 “What could you say to your father?”, II-194
what makes communication work in processes is why pc doesn’t do it, III-519
duplication part of communications formula workbest on obvious and visible terminals, III-531
(Axiom 28), IV-155 Communication Processing, Axiom 51, II-240
withheld, single and sole reason for accumulation communism, cult of, based upon only one life, II-428
of ridges and barriers, II-415 communism, fascism, socialism are bad management,
withhold ~, ability to, advances IQ, III-201 I-143

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


communists try to convince people that you’re guilty computational psychotic, defn , I-57
of their overts, IV-321 computer, mind as, I-70
Comparable Magnitude, Problems of; see Problem Concentrate—Shift Attention Process, run on stuck
Process, Problems of Comparable Magnitude needle, IV-218
Comparison [process], I-329 concentration, child not capable of sustained, I-49
compartmenting the question, IV-322; V-77, 78 concept(s),
compete (Secondary Scale level), IV-292 defn, abstract general notion or conception, I-275
complete, completed, completing, completion, concept symbolized by word, VIII-316
defn., completing of a specific course or auditing conditions and positions and states run as, I-276
grade, meaning it has been started, worked how to run, I-275; seealso Rising Scale Processing
through and has successfully ended with an inprocessing, l-311
awardinQual, VII-141, 288; 1X-313 of authoritarianism, I-178; see also suppressive
defn, to make whole, entire or perfect; end after person
satisfying all demands or requirements; act or Running; see also Scn 8-80
action of completing, becoming complete or Hubbard Chart of Attitudes and, I-275
making complete, VIII-93; X-218 routine for, I-276
audited ~ must be paid and have attested with an Concept Help, IV-121
F/N VGIs and written a success story, VII-371 Confront straightens out any “mugginess”
cycles on a case, X-145 churned up by Concept Help, IV-122
list; see listing, complete list two-way ~ on general terminal, IV-117
pc completion points, VIII-214 conception, running of, I-17
quickie, X-218 conceptualization of meanings, VIII-316; IX-485
student completion must be paid, must have conceptual level running of motivators, overt acts,
passed examination and must have acceptable DEDs and DEDEXes, I-275
success story, VII-369 conceptual understanding of word, VIII-317
visual idea of completing actions, VII-262 condensation, tendency of physical universe is con
what makes it quickie, VIII-93 densation and solidification, V-276
complete list; see listing, complete list condition(s),
complexity, complexities, defn, is a circumstance regarding a mass or
basic law on complexity, IX-309 terminal, III-164
degree of complexity is proportional to the degree all conditions are postulated conditions, II-240
of non40nfront, IX-309 assignment, wrong, can turn on somatics and is
non-confront, any complexity stems from an ini- kind of suppressive, IX-166-67
tial point of, IX-310 difference between terminals and conditions, II- postulates go from simplicities to ~, III-34 516; III-164
study—complexity and confronting, IX-309 ethics; see ISE
surrounding any subject or action is derived from game; see game condition
a greater or lesser inability to confront, VII- how to get pc over any unwanted ~ or aberration
266; IX-316 that he is agonizing to get rid of, IV-44
compliance, degraded beings refuse to comply with- process that turns on bizarre or unwanted condi
out mentioning it, VI-193 tion will always turn it off, IV-218
composed, OCA/APA drop in, cause of, III-334 Scientology points out what can be seen or chang
compulsions and obsessions, assessment of, I-294 ed from a person’s own viewpoint to bring
compulsive outflow, how to stop a, III-350 about a change in his own condition, II-438
compulsive position precedes compulsive thinking, II-13 terminals should be run, not ~, II-323, 332, 354
compulsively talking, II-467 “conditioning’~, Pavlov’s school of, VI-391
computation(s), I-202; see also AP&A conditioning, randomity contains the idea of, II-536
defn, ability to resolve problems, I-69 Conditions by Dynamics, VIII-81
effective ~ to be run, I-440 conditions of existence, II-410; see also alter-isness;
imagination is vitalto, I-76 as-isness; is-ness; not-isness; NSOL; PXI,
of aberrative personality, I-475; see also sup- conditionsofsuccess; seeProblemsofWork
pressive person conduct, codes of, mutually agreed, IV-388
of workability of techniques, I-456 conduct, good conduct—do only those things which
processes of, I-72, 75 others can experience, III-432
run regret, blame and sympathy and preclear will conduct, regulated by sense of ethics, I-294
give central computation, I-204 conference, daily auditors’, X-70
secrecy, I-475 confession(s), III-551
service facsimile is a ~ generated by the being not and IQ, III-201
the bank, VI-173 mechanism used by churches, IV-12
steps to find, I-204 religious—historical precedence, IX-262

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


Confessional(s); see also Integrity Processing; Secu- confront(ed)(ing), confrontingness (cont.)
rity Checking complexity and confronting; see complexity
Exam Report is required after any ~, VII-167 concepts are more in kind with confronting than
on students, VIII-173 with creating, IV-121
Confessional List, Johannesburg, VIII-419 confronting mental mass, gradient scale of, II-227
confidence, create and confront, IV-35
ability to predict equals confidence, V-93 Dianetic item that reads guarantees pc will be able
auditor confidence, importance of, V-326 to confront and erase chain, VI-357
auditor confidence increased by standardized ses- drama, III-213
sions, IV-53 effect, person at effect is confronted by life, he
it’s confidence regained that makes Clears, not does not confront it, VIII-231
quantity of stuff run, IV-44, 65, 66 eyesight and confronting, III-37; see also eyesight
only thing wrong with pc is his lack of confidence failed case can’t confront overts, IV-5
in handling himself without hurting others, first step of handlinganything isgaining abilityto
IV-67 face it, III-113
scale of increasing confidence, IV-8 glib student, what he can confront, VIII-99
confidential materials, reason for, VI-105 gradient of confronting study, VII-264, 265
confidential, why OT materials are confidential, VIII- havingness is an objective and somewhat obscure
23 method of confronting, IV-122
conflicts are usually remedial by conference unless a havingness is proportional to pc’s ability to con third party is promoting conflict, VI-290 front in session, V-225
confront(ed)(ing), confrontingness, III-100, 116, if one can confront he can be aware; if he is aware
211, 318; VII-264; VIII-182; see also Confront he can perceive and act, VIII-182
Processes; presession; TRs, TR 0; NSOL “If you can’t stand it, confront it”, III-100
defn, ability to be there comfortably and per- incidents, end goal of running incidents is increas ceive, VII-265; IX-315 ing ability to confront, III-419
defn, to face without flinching or avoiding, VIII- irresponsibility and confronting, III-96
182; IX-346 less a pc can confront two things, the more he
defn, to stand facing or opposing, especially in fixes on one, IV-62
challenge, defiance or accusation, VIII-182; level, III-212
IX-346 mental image pictures and ~, III-114, 447; see
ability to confront pc and session and parts of also mental image pictures
session permits one to accurately go from A to mest clear has not been through a total ~, III-446
B, VII-289 misunderstoods, confusions, omissions, alterations
ability to confront the future without restimula- of a subject begin with failures or unwilling
tion, III-488 ness to confront, VII-264; IX-314
Affinity Process, “What would you like to con- not-is, when a person can confront something, he
front?”, III-463 no longer has to not-is it, III-413
an HCO B or HCO PL (drill), IX-3 17 obsessive confronting, III-3 19
auditing enVI-ronment influences pc’s ability to on a VI-a (using a relay point), IX-3 15
confront, VI-359 pc; see TRs, TR 0
auditing restores confidence in confronting and pc ability to confront force, VII-79
undoes necessity to confront, III-311 pc’s past, how to increase willingness to confront,
auditor errors come mainly from an inability to III-489
confront, VIII-164 pc who makes no gain is pc who will not as-is,
auditors failing to handle E-Meters, chief reason is who will not confront, V-36
mainly confront, IV-261 present time, III-96
beingness is more involved with havingness than Process; see Confront Process
with confront, IV-122 PTP is basically inability to confront dual terminal
body and TR 0, VIII-369 nature of universe, IV-61
bullbaited; see TRs, TR 0 Bullbait Q and A and confront, VIII-224
case; see case, confront rising needle means pc can’t confront it, IV-333
CCHs are “familiarization” processes that permit rock is confrontingness on a VI-a, III-320
pc to confront control and duplication, V-43 Scale of Confront; see Scn 0-8
charge blows off bank to degree that it’s confront- student only fails by not confronting, duplicating,
ed, IX-68 absorbing and using the materials before him
charge blows off bank to degree that it’s confront- exactly like it says, VII-237
ed and this is represented by itsa line, VII-243 surVI-val represented best by “continuous con
charge prevents pc from ~ time track, V-290 fronting” at a process level, III-S39
clearing lies in confronting, not escaping, IV-374 surVI-ve and ~ are of same order of thing, III-539

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


confront(ed)(ing), confrontingness (cont.) confusion(s); see also prior confusion
symptoms of haVI-ng trouble with, VII-265; IX- defn, random knowingness and not knowingness
315 create, when unaligned, a confusion, II-282
TA “drift up”, pc’s refusal to confront, V-48 defn., motion unexpected above the tolerance
“talent” and “native ability”, related to ability to level of person VI-ewing it, II-538
confront, VII-264 ability to live depends to a marked degree upon
theta clears were made by gradually raising their ability to shift consideration of what is confu confrontingness of mental image pictures, III- sion, what is motionlessness, II-540
445 anatomy of confusion, III-14
things which are worth confronting, III-213 and glee, VI-257
time track, unavailability, cause of, V-275 at length becomes a mystery, II-154
TR 0; see TRs, TR 0 blows off when order is put in, III-378
unburdening case brings up confront, VII-110 fixed ideas follow a period of, VIII-237
unhappiness is inability to ~ that which is, III- flubs in TRs are basis of all confusion in subse 431 quent efforts to audit, IV-249
unknown confronting or not confronting, when how disseminating Scientology can result in con uncovered, gives us the phenomenon of cogni- fusion, II-1 54
tion, III-311 how to handle confusion, III-262; VII-417
via, confronting on, (using a relay point), VII- istheantithesisofaflow, II-154
265 minus randomity is the opposite of ~, II-538
work, III-214 misunderstood word exists at the bottom of a
you have to be able to hold the position in the confusion, VII-373; VIII-29
face of something, III-232 of earlier philosophies, II-395
Confront Processes, IV-15 1, 154; see also confront of workaday world, handling; see POW
aimed at further confront, X-31 prior confusion; see prior confusion
Alternate Confront, IV-121 problem consists of two opposed stable data and
commands of Alternate Confront, III-547; IV- therefore two confusions, IV-354
140 somatics, handling by sec checking area of con
Body Confronting, commands and how to run, fusion, IV-409
III-31 stable datum and confusion, IV-62
can be run as a prelude to any and all Responsi- student, why he may experience somatics and
bility, IV-50 confusions, III-344
commands for Presessions II-X, IV-142 TA motion is caused by energy contained in con commands in order of test for pcs, IV-152 fusions blowing off case; confusion is held in
Confront a Preclear [process] , II-545 place by aberrated stable data, V-375
Confrontingness and RecallProcesses, II-526 teaching of basic data restimulates confusions,
Confront is a Responsibility Process, IV-35 VI-276, 365
Continuous Confront, IV-123 (two or more opposed VI-ews or actions) stays in
survival is translated for processing as Con- position because it is hung on a single fixed
tinuous Confront, IV-127 point, IV-62
Failed Help as the Confront Process, IV-171 Connectedness [process] , II-517, 554; III-97, 317
Havingness is a Confront Process and can also be run outside, III-191
straightens out the create factor, IV-35 clears stuck needles, III-243, 297
Havingness Processes and ~, finding; see EME commands of Connectedness, III-297
order of test of Havingness and Confront com- commands of GP-3, Connectedness, III-318
mands, IV-151, 152 command with “you” added, III-229
Responsibility is confront and is very senior to Control Connectedness, III-205
Confront as a process, IV-35 control version, III-294
standard Confrontingness Processes, III-215 earliest commands of, III-190
straightens out any “mugginess” churned up is the basic process on association of theta with
by Concept Help, IV-122 mest, III-163
Subjective Confrontingness, commands and how most basic of spotting processes, III-189
to run, III-319 used to bolster havingness, III-317
Confrontingness Scale, III-489; see also Scn 0-8 why it works, III-189
Confrontingness Scale of Reality, III-447 connect (Secondary Scale level), IV-286
is a parallel to Responsibility Scale, III-446 conqueror, world, operates with a perverted dynamic,
Confront Scale is the scale of disintegrating reality, I-35
III-404 conquest of mest, I-188
confused ideas stem from misunderstoods, IX-421 by theta, I-173
confused scene, inechanics of taking over, III-262

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


conscience, control (cont.)
bad, ~III-559 acknowledgement is a control factor, III-349
uneasy lies the head that wears a guilty ~, IV-27 anatomy of ~ is start, change and stop, II-433,
consciousness, 52 1
banishment of, by too much agreement under and creation of mental images utilizes and disci duress, I-350 plines energy, I-324
on death of; see NSOL auditing, earliest stage of, consists in taking over
reactive mind acts below the level of, II-430 control of pc to restore to pc more control of
consequences and prediction, related to overts, VI- himself than he has had, II-443
404, 405 bad control, no such thing, II-522
Consequences of Solutions [process], III-I 1 body control comes before control of thinking
Consequences [process], II-251; IV-57 ness, III-479
consider, consideration(s), body, control of by pc, III-184, 240, 267
aberration, totality of, is basically considerations a by ARC is taught in Comm Course, III-242
thetan is making, II-437 by Tone 40 is taught in Upper Indoc, III-242
all things are as one considers they are, II-447 center; see AP&A; Handbook forPreclears
and is-ness; see Phoenix Lectures change belongs at “inverted control” on Prehav
and mechanics; see Scn 0-8 Scale, IV-320
and postulates, III-139 children, using good 8-C on, III-82, 110
in the form of significances, II-68 communication ability proceeds from control,
principles and axioms of Scientology are consider- III-24
ations agreed upon and from which stem this Communication-Control-Havingness; see CCHs
universe and livingness, III-344 communication is reached by control plus duplica take rank over mechanics of space, energy and tion, III-248, 355
time, II-67 cure for auditor who can’t control pc, VI-140;
consistency of theory, I-300 VII-225
constructive and destructive people, difference be- difference between good and bad control, II-213
tween, V-408 effected by introducing uncertainties and hidden
constructive ideas are individual and seldom get broad influences, I-389
agreement in a human group, VI-6 facsimiles are control mechanisms, III-23 1
consultant, defn, an instructor who is on duty factor(s),
sporadically or from time to time but not asking for missed withholds isa totally accept routinely in any one place, III-42, 462 able control factor, V-59
Consultant, Hubbard; see Hubbard Consultant available to the auditor, III-23
consulting ministers, society of, II-353 Find the Auditor is part of Control, III-204
consulting Scientologist, II-262 Formula 20 is an effort to run control on thought
Contact Assist, VII-322; VIII-191; X-159; see also level, IV-213
assist game, requisite to playing is ability to control,
described, VI-318 II-446
EP—pain gone, cog, F/N, VII-322 good control is positive control, II-522
interrupting a general course of auditing, VII-191 interest, communication, control, help, sequence
Touch Assists and Contact Assists mandatory of breakdown in aberration, IV-120
when any injury occurs, VII-167 is more easily inverted on UK case, IV-202
when possible make persons hold things they were mind (attention), control of, III-267
holding, if any, while doing, VII-323 parts of control, III-6
Contact by Duplication; see CCH 7 pc, control of, II-17; III-204
Contact (Step VII- of SOP8), I-424, 426 pc is out of session when he starts to control
continue is the reverse action to overrun; continue session, II-524
equals survival, VII-269 pc, rehabilitation of, in terms of control, II-518
Continue Process, X-128 pc under auditor’s control to extent of doing the
assessing and listing, VII-282 process, IV-66
Continuous Confront, surVI-val is translated for pro- person, control of, III-267
cessing as ~, IV-127 reason, I-153
continuous missed withhold; see missed withhold, religion used as bad control, II-212
continuous (Secondary Scale level), IV-289
continuous overt; see overt, continuous session without proper rudiments is a session with
Contra-survival and Pro-surVI-val Processing, I-192 out control, IV-56
control, III-9, 204; see also presession; Start— situation, howto control, III-261; VII-416
Change—Stop; CMSCS thinkingness, control of, III-119, 255, 267
absence of control is sickness itself, II-213 whole track, control of, III-454

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


control (cont.) course(s) (cont.)
8-C, good and bad, III-212 slow course, speeding up, IX-409
8-C on students, III-90 students who drift off of courses or who are very
Control Connectedness [process], III-205 slow lack somebody to talk to, VIII 75
Control Processes, characteristic, purpose, stable da- Study Tapes, only piece of technology you use on
tum of, III-479 a course, VII-302
Control Process, tactile 8-Cb, II-553 supervision, it is out tech to fail to know and use
Control Trio, III-119; see also Trio tudy tech, VIII-41
commands, III-111, 278 tapes are never played to a group of students,
how to run, III-278, 279 VII-435; IX-365, 437
is a three-stage process on a heavy spotting con- translation to tape, IX-349
trol, III-190 use of clay table on courses, VII-163
conversation is not two-way comm, III-161 what is a course, VII-198
cope, way to get out of, is to organize, VII-380 with no materials, X-178-79
copperplate longhand, VII-433; IX-44 Course Administrator,
copying lists or worksheets, X-5 defn., course staff member in charge of course
Corners of the Room, Holding, [process] , I-472 materials and records, VII-140, 286; IX-311
“corpse case”; see case, “corpse” actions of Course Administrator, VII-199
correction, Course Supervisor; see also course; instructor
lists; see prepared lists, correction lists defn., instructor in charge of a course and its
Qual’s function is, VIII-188 students, VII-140, 286; IX-311
usually cannot be accomplished without Ethics actions, VII-198, 301; IX-398
back-up, VIII-66 checking students for misunderstoods on E-Meter,
corrective actions, when done, X-250 VII-300; IX-397
Corrective Word Clearing, Word Clearing Method 9 is, checkout, defn., checkout done by Supervisor of a
IX-473 course or his assistants, VII-140, 286; IX-311
correspondence courses, frailties of, III-331 Code and stable data; see Scn 0-8
coterm; see terminal, combined Correction List, VIII-52
counselor, course is slow, Supervisor uses Word Clearing
attitude of, I-242; see also auditor Method 4, IX-409
Scientologist as a counselor, IV-II-4 cramming, IX-95
counter-effort(s), I-215 dialogue of a Supervisor, VII-299
acceptance of, I-169 don’t cut affinity lines to data, II-163
occluded case will run efforts and ~, I-303 don’t give experimental data, II-163
counter-policy and counter-tech, IX-89 duty, VI-272
counter-postulate; see postulate expected to be efficient, not kind, II-345
courage, failure, cause of, VIII-41
level; see Science of Survival handling of student asking technical questions,
that we can observe what we observe and say what VII-236
we have observed, IV-203 has to know study tech, not necessarily subject
course(s); see also Course Supervisor; training taught, VIII-41
available, I-408 Integrity List, IX-303
can be wrecked by lack of study materials, VI-406 is not an “instructor”, VII-198
containing TRs 04, 6-9 or Admin TRs is a major is there to get student’s confront up on materials
program in itself, VII-261 not to lessen it by “explaining”, VII-236
fast courses, VII-165 is tough, VII-198
secret of, IX-389 minimum requirements of Supervisor, VII-232
fast flow student passes ~ by attestation, VIII-162 must show that he is interested in progress of his
final valuable product of any course, VII-199 students, VII-146
graduate becomes an auditor, X-163 outnesses make slow courses, VI-437
by auditing, VII-234, 331 primary tech, VIII-42
Group Auditor’s, I-312 product of Supervisor, VIII-43
how to translate a course, VII-441 remedies; see BCR
materials, VII-198 should have an excellent grip on the exact audit misunderstood word tech is the sole course tech ing procedure, II-418
when course admin is in and materials are skill, what it is, VII-198
available, VII-303 student doping off, looking upset or blowing,
outnesses which must be corrected, IX-90 Course Supervisor actions, VII-146
retread course, illegal to give away, VII-165 student is going along well, Course Supervisor
Scientology course, what it consists of, VII-198 does not act to correct, VII-146

CUMULATIVE INDEX— 1950/1975


Course Supervisor (cont.) cramming (cont.)
student queries, handling of, VIII-42, 302; IX-451 log book, IX-104
supervisingat abelow F/Nlevel, IX-402 maxim of: handle the hell out of it, VIII-335;
total dialogue of, IX-396 IX-120
two-way comm; see communication, two-way most cramming cycles reveal a broader area of
use of Remedy A and B, VI-150 situation which must also be handled, VIII
use of Word Clearing Method 4, VIII-29, 302; 334; IX-119
IX-451 must exist in any org which sells auditing, VII-233
cramming, VII-183, 207, 282; VIII-188; IX-87, 93, must have a library of all materials, VII-279
109, 362 normal procedure even for Class XIIs, VII-379
defn., section in Qualifications Division where order, X-199
student is given high pressure instruction at his always includes TRs, VIII-164
own cost after being found slow in study or how to write up, IX-52, 107; X-204
when failing his exams, VII-141, 287; IX-312 over out ruds, VIII-334; IX-119
actions, VIII-66 Primary Correction Rundown (revised), VIII-65;
done in Qual must be done on a meter, VIII- see also Primary Correction Rundown
397 purpose of Cramming, IX-87
and excellent checkouts, X-84 raises auditing quality, X-99
and the C/S, X-234 red tag pc report must lead at once to cramming
auditing quality raised by getting in cramming, of auditor, D of P, C/S and Tech Sec, IX-105
VII-209 retread and retrain, VIII-164
auditor(s), IX-90, 112; X-233 Section issues okay to audit, VII-233
auditor goofs, always find and handle, by standard Cramming action when correction list
cramming, VII-153, 206, 273, 412 said to be blank, VII-464
auditor leaVI-ng Cramming goes through Exami- success, what it depends on, VIII-335; IX-120
ner, VI-14 i 2 Supervisor and C/S, IX-90
auditor must complete cramming on action tech as good as Cramming Officer can cram,
before doing action again, VII-379 VII-184
auditors who flub, send to Cramming, X-142 to get flubless auditors, X-183
let them complete programs on pcs even tools, IX-88, 112, 117
though going to Cramming, VII-380 TRs in Cramming, IX-102
can assess correction lists, VIII-66 why it’s VI-tal, VII-207
chit, X-178 Word Clearing in Cramming, IX-104
C/S, X-164 Cramming Officer(‘s),
C/S, anyone that flubs, as it affects the C/S in any areas of expertise a ~ has to have, IX-93
way, gets a cramming chit, VII-377 check for basics, IX-92
C/S does cramming himself, if no Cramming Offi- close technical links with C/S, VII-377
cer, VII-161, 461 C/S makes sure Qual has one, VIII-164
C/S has to straighten out Qual cramming, VIII-233 flubs, IX-119
C/S, if an auditor doesn’t grasp a C/S he has is not bound to accept any cramming order,
received he gets help from Cramming, VII-183 IX-107
C/S I/T, IX-113 must report the real Why to the C/S, IX-108
cycle(s), IX-108, 112 post requirements, IX-104, 110
and the C/S, X-199 procedure for handling auditors, IX-93
compliance reports on cramming cycle should statistic, IX